Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2020 15:12:15 GMT
Here i will post some articles i have written about different historical periods or subjects that i find interesting. I wrote them in swedish of course but have been translating them to english so i could post them here. Please comment. Hope you'll like them. The first is about ancient Egypt.
Egypt's Pharaohs
Introduction
Egypt is probably the one of the ancient high cultures that we know best. It is also the most long-lasting. Egypt and the Pharaohs span a time frame of about 3100 years. And that is a little bit of the problem when we're talking about ancient Egypt. One gets the impression that this is a period that did not change all that much. But the Pharaohs lived in different times, with different conditions and different goals to strive for. What I will try to describe here is progress through the various dynasties. Some Pharaohs and phenomena I will talk more about as they were important for their time but I won't be a namedropper so I will name some and pass over others. Egypt has a fascinating history. It deserves to be told in a simple way so that non-experts can take part of it. Before we begin the story of dynasties, we must mention some conditions. Egypt was not the first high culture. They had borrowed some stuff from Mesopotamia (present Iran and Iraq) to get started. Irrigation canals that made the fields fertile and was the basis for the country's prosperity was an idea taken from there. Similarly, the crops they sowed. They didn’t grow wild in Egypt but was imported and proved to thrive well in the Nile Valley. Another thing that came early was Scripture. Even today scientists are arguing about which scribture was the first one; Cuneiform or the Egyptian hieroglyphs. Both appeared before the first Pharaoh ruled Egypt. All dates listed are BC. I have chosen to keep the most traditional name forms but sometimes put an option in parentheses. One should keep in mind that the names are usually made more Greekish by the ancient historians. Cheops real name was for example Khufu.
Early Dynastic period 3150-2686
This time is usually divided into two dynasties. Before the first Pharaoh enters the stage there had been kingdoms. Some kept in Lower Egypt (the Nile Delta where the Nile flows into the Mediterranean Sea) and the other in Upper Egypt (Nile Valley). Menes (Narmer) unites Egypt about 3150 BC. Egypt becomes the second high culture and he initiates the first dynasty. Menes came from the Valley, married a princess from the Delta and conquered it later, but he was careful to stress that he did not conquer the Delta but that he united Egypt. He called himself "ruler of the two countries", a title which all subsequent Pharaohs kept. It was also he who chose to put the capital in Memphis. It was a wise investment. Memphis is located just south of the Delta, on the border on the Nile Valley (not far from modern-day Cairo). For a King who united the country that shows that he cared about both parts of the country. Memphis remained the capital throughout the Old Kingdom.
That he succeeded where others failed had much to do with him, besides being a capable commander, also was a talented politician. He did not suppress the gods of Lower Egypt, he made them his and treated them with the same respect as he treated the gods of southern Egypt. He wore neither the crown of Lower Egypt nor the crown of Upper Egypt. Instead he wore a specially designed combination, It was perhaps not the most aesthetic or practical Crown but it proved to everyone that the wearer had equal respect for upper and lower Egypt. The titles he introduced, the ruler of the two lands, King of upper and lower Egypt, Protected by the two ladies, would remain central to all subsequent Pharaohs and their way of thinking. All these titles points out that there are two equal parts that make up Egypt. Later rulers would make up new titles but the foundations were laid for what was to come. We have actually found the graves after some of these early Pharaohs. They are buried in Abydos, a city that was known for its cult of the dead and it was considered that the God of death himself, Osiris, was buried here. When archaeologists dug there they didn’t find Osiris but they found the earliest tombs of a pharaoh known to us. Menes tomb has not been found but his successor, Aha’s, tomb was found in Abydos.
The Old Kingdom 2686-2181
The Old Kingdom comprises four dynasties. Already at the beginning of the third dynasty (ca. 2670) the architecture takes an enormous step. It went from building things of small brick pieces to building huge structures of large boulders. The first pyramid is not what we today would call a pyramid, it has no smooth sides, and are instead moving in steps up towards its tip. But it is the oldest building dating from antiquity that still stands. It has stood where it was built by the Pharaoh Djoser (2686-2658) and his vizier and Chief Architect Imhotep for almost 4700 years. Earlier the Old Kingdom Pharaohs had been burying themselves in the so-called Mestabas, a kind of huge shoe box thing shape wise. Imhoteps basic idea was to start with a big Mestaba in the bottom and then add smaller on top. It became the Step Pyramid at Saqqara, the first of all the pyramids. Imhoteps vision would become the basis for how a grave would look like for the next 1000 years in Egypt. Unlike the later pyramids this one was solid through and through. The tomb was below the pyramid and was reached by a long passage. Under the next dynasty, the fourth, the building of pyramids reached its peak. The first Pharaoh Snefru (about 2613-2589), the good King Snefru, as he is called in all sources. He was no great conqueror, he spoke as an equal with his people and loved the pyramids. He built at least 6 pyramids. He started with the step pyramids but his architects were not as good as Imhotep. He thought he saw cracks in them. (Doubtful since they have been inside his 2 unfinished pyramids and passageways and chambers works today). Then he built the first true pyramid. His son's name is well known. He was called Cheops (Khufu) (c. 2589-2556) and he built the largest pyramid the world have ever seen and the only one of the ancient 7 Wonders of the world that are still to be seen. In an effort to try to understand how big it is an European can imagine adding up the surface covered by the cathedrals of Florence, Milan, St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, St. Paul's Church in London and Westminster Abbey in London. However, the pyramid cover a larger surface. Chephren (Khafre) (c. 2560-2532) was the younger son of Khufu and built the second largest pyramid and his grandson Mykerinos (Menkaure) (approximately 2532-2503) built the third of the three great pyramids at Giza. The last of the major tourist attractions, the Sphinx, was also built by Khufu who liked size. There are many more Sphinxes in Egypt but his is without a doubt the biggest.
The Old Kingdoms new competence
Architecturally the Old Kingdom was extremely high standing. But now when they mummified the dead bodies, they learned a lot about medicine. Where the Sumerians talked about demons the Egyptians described in detail heart, liver, kidneys, lungs, etc. and described the diseases related to them. They analyzed in detail how blood veins ran and which went where. They described how the wounds should be sutured and discussed the different parts of the skull. Recommended sleep mode if you settled in your head and how to stop the bleeding and infections. They had no modern medicines (antibiotics) but they had a modern view of how the disease could be stopped. That they made such progress was due to the fact that for the mummification to succeed was required, in addition to lubricating it with ointments, etc., that you took out the intestines and the brain.
But why did the Egyptians, as the first culture, start to mummify their dead? Earlier, all had either been burned or they had buried them. it was due to their big fascination with death. The Egyptians had several gods, but of their central myths the myth about how Osiris dies and how his wife Isis miss him so much that she goes down to the Kingdom of the dead and raises him to life again is one of the most important. He becomes King of the underworld. Horus, Isis son of Osiris, becomes King of the living. Every Pharaoh is the incarnation of Horus. When a man dies, his Ka, or life-force goes with him. But it is still hungry and requires the same things that the body called for in life. Hence all grave gifts. In addition, the body includes Ba, a sort of spirit soul. Before it can rejoin Ka and form a whole body again it must be judged. Therefore, the body is preserved so that it can be used again when the Ka and Ba reunites. This perception of death remained common in Egypt although the rituals were changed a bit over time. This stuff is described in one of the most famous Papyri found, known as the Book of the Dead. The time when the fourth dynasty ended was also the time when the great pyramid building era ended. They were still being buried in newly built pyramids but because by now a then still new God had gained great significance in Egypt, the Sun God Re (Ra), they put more effort on the magnificent Sun Temples. They have unfortunately not survived as well.
The art also reached high altitudes. The tomb paintings and sculptures that adorned the graves the grave robbers didn’t bother to take with them. The paintings was extremely stylized. They were always painted in profile and yet the face always painted from the front. They did so because they did not care about how something really looked like, but what it really was. The paintings had strict Rules. Depending on the position, the color of the painting, etc. was shown if the person is alive or dead, or whether it was a man or a God. We who live in a modern world can have a bit of difficulty to enjoy these stylized paintings but the sculptures are not suffering from such requirements but can look extremely vibrant and alive. They're probably very close to what the person really looked like because they had no rules, possibly the sculptor flattered his object slightly but not more. An example of how alive they can be is the excavation of a Grand Vizier and his wife. When the excavation made it into the Tomb the light fell on the statues of the two and the digger dropped the lamp and ran out screaming. He believed they were alive. The art skill of the sculptors from the Old Kingdom has perhaps been surpassed only by the few sculptors, from Greece onwards, which managed to get the material to move around under the onlookers’ eyes. All this had its peak during the fourth dynasty, but continued during the next two dynasties under competent rulers.
The Division into provinces
Under the 6.th dynasty, the last of the Old Kingdom, Egypt had grown, stabilized and become accustomed to power. But Egypt was large now. The result was that provinces began to take shape and they were ruled by princes. It resembled a feudal rule in the Middle Ages where the Dukes could do exactly what they wanted in his Duchy but was tied to the King/Pharaoh with many bands. It is a system which, as Western Europe showed many examples of, works well under a strong ruler but easily lead to division under a weak. One of the more interesting provinces of Egypt's was situated at Egypt’s southern border with Nubia. That was Elephantine. It was roughly where modern Aswan is located today. There was a magnificent granite quarry which today is a tourist attraction but then supplied Egypt with building materials to its many monuments. This was also the first cataract of the Nile, which means waterfalls. There was a lot of trade and exploration that started from this spot. There are many famous stories of explorers from this time. Harkhuf, Sebni and Enechmet was that eras Christopher Columbus or Captain Cook. They explored Nubia, Sudan, Punt and Yam. Scientists have never really agreed on where the latter two was situated. They became countries that would give much wealth to Egypt. The whole dynasty was dominated by two competent and long-lived rulers who was father and son, Pepi I (2332-2283), and Pepi II (c. 2278-2184). Pepi II is said to have been 100 years before he finally died. He became Pharaoh as 6-year-old. For Egypt's part perhaps it would have been a good thing if he had died a little earlier. During his last 20-25 years in power he was, with the right of old age, not as powerful as before. After his death the Old Kingdom began rather quickly to fall apart.
First intermediate period 2181-2040
The Central Government collapsed and the country was ruled by several dynasties during this time, but no one had control over all of Egypt. The time is usually divided into 4 dynasties; 7-10. The central government in Memphis collapsed and the local Princes got greater power. There are laments from this time that recalls the laments of the prophets from the Old Testament to its tone despite the fact that they are written about 1500 years earlier. "I will show you the son as an opponent, his brother as an enemy and a man who kills his own father. Wild beasts of the desert are drinking the water of the Nile and is fearless. Men seize weapons and there is chaos". So wrote Neferti, who lived at that time, about Egypt during this period. Just like the old testament prophets he complained before the Pharaoh. They were unfortunately weak and pretty powerless during this time. A result we see is that doubts starts to be expressed about life after death, about the gods, on the meaning of life. A concept that was important in Egypt was Maat. That means approximately the divine order and is reflected by the fact that it goes well for Egypt and is reasonably quiet and stable. The lack of Maat is expressed in many poems, and more from this period. There were still fine tombs but the texts in the tombs had changed character. One text said: I saved my house from the Terror of the Royal House ". That was totally unthinkable during the Old Kingdom. But there is also something that was missing in the Old Kingdom, an assessment of morality more than material prosperity. "I gave bread to the hungry, water to the thirsty, clothing to the naked. I buried the old and was a father to the orphan and a spouse for the widows ". This was subjects that was discussed for the first time during this period, and although they did not reach any answers the Egyptians was the first people who asked these kind of questions in writing. But this thinking on the Interior led to some high-quality poetic outburst. There is one about how unbearable it is to live where the pros and cons of suicide are examined that is poetry at high level. There is another about how the gods and the famous men are gone and that their sites no longer exist. Therefore, you cannot take things with you. The Person who leaves will never return. Lots of new ideas would emerge as a result of the internal crisis and hostilities. Issues that was totally alien to the Old Kingdom, questions that a little later would become important in the Middle Kingdom. Where the Old Kingdom had envisioned and boasted about material progress and career successes the sovereigns now bragged about good deeds and that they stood up against the Royal House.
Around 2160 the dust begins to settle after the collapse of the Old Kingdom, and we can discern people again. It is now that a series of rulers, which is centered around Fayum, South of the Delta, rises up. They form the ninth and tenth dynasty. Their capital was Herakleopolis and everything seemed prepared for that they would lead to reunify Egypt. But those who succeeded with the reunification came from the South, from Thebes (modern Luxor). They were named alternately as Mentuhotep and Intef and the person who started the war was Intef II (2117-2069) but he who eventually won the war and reunited Egypt was Mentuhotep II (2060-2010).
Middle Kingdom 2040-1782
The Middle Kingdom is counting its starting date from the year in which the war was won. That’s why the eleventh dynasty is divided between two periods. To commemorate the victory Mentuhotep II built a temple at Deir-el-Bahari. There are small remnants remaining but the most intriguing about it is a mass grave at the temple where 60 common soldiers who died during the final victory are placed, a ceremonial commemoration that it is unusual for a Pharaoh to give to the people. The New capital became, of course, Thebes. From the South, they had also brought a new God, Amon, which merged with the Sun God Re and became Amon-Re, the rest of the Eleventh dynasty was peaceful. the war was over, and when the last Mentuhotep died his army Chief of staff took over and declared himself Pharaoh. He was named Amenemhat (1991-1962) and initiates the twelfth dynasty. Amenemhat had understood one thing that previous rulers forgotten. It is difficult to govern Egypt from a capital city in the South. Consequently, he moved the capital to Ittawi more in the middle of Egypt. He subdued the Princes and restored order to Egypt in earnest. The Middle Kingdom's heyday had begun.
Tomb models and pyramids
This was also the time of Tomb models. That means that if one was a man of the high nobility they took small models of all the houses they owned with them. The models are small but extremely detailed and give a good picture of what their houses looked like, same thing with his subjects. A selection of them was also in miniature. In addition there were many different types of boats. These Tomb models have taught researchers much what life was like during that time. We, in the present day, maybe think about these things as a magnificent Dollhouse but for the nobleman it was a necessary thing for him so he could get a happy life on the other side of death. In the Old Kingdom they had taken their favorite pets and animals with them in the grave. Now, in a little more humane Middle Kingdom they instead did models of them. That is why the details just like the features was very important. It had to be a good likeness of the living image. That can also be seen in how the statues looked. While the Old Kingdom statuary was solemn, almost godlike, the Middle Kingdom's statues were serious but often sad with wrinkled foreheads. The king was now not only a God's descendant, but also, perhaps more important, a responsible leader of the people. It was only proper to show some concern.
Middle Kingdom reused extensively the Old Kingdom's inventions. But some knowledge was clearly on the decline. Pyramids from this time are considerably less well constructed than during the Old Kingdom. In addition, they often took the material from the Old Kingdom temples and reused. Amenemhats pyramid is today more or less a heap of ruins. Researchers have even talked about tearing it down. The reason is the knowledge they think they can get about the old Kingdom temples and faith by the inscriptions and paintings that are still in the pyramid. During the Middle Kingdom very finely wrought jewels has been found. The art of processing the gemstones were at a high level during this period, in contrast to pyramid building.
Apogee and fall
Old Amenemhat lived long and was assassinated by daggers while he was sleeping. His son, Sesostris, who was in the field rushed back to the city and managed to crush the conspiracy. The most prominent of the pharaohs during this time was Sesostris III (Senusert) (1876-1860). He extended the Kingdom to the south of Egypt, and fought several successful wars in Nubia. During his time fortifications were built throughout Nubia. Nubia had long before been under Egyptian guidance but was now totally a part of Egypt and it is now that the Kingdom of Kush begin to emerge south of the Egyptian border (that is, south of Nubia). They would eventually get their own Pharaohs. Sesostris III also made sure that a channel was built in at the first cataract of the Nile, which meant that one could go by boat all the way. Today the Aswan High Dam has caused that much of the area in which Sesostris did his campaigns are under water. Lake Nasser is located there today. His son competently carried on what he had begun and died in 1815. But his grandson died young and without descendants. The last Pharaoh during the Middle Kingdom was a woman, Sobekneferu (ca 1807-1802). She was the last of his line for if there had been any potential male candidate he would have been elected. She didn’t rule long, maybe 5, not more than 10 years, and her tomb has never been found. It is believed that she was the sister of the last Pharaoh (and thus the granddaughter of Sesostris III) but it is not certain. If we knew more about her, you would also know more about why the Middle Kingdom fell apart. There are many theories but they are really more guesswork because there are no facts. After the lonesome Queen's death the Middle Kingdom fell apart into sections.
The Second intermediate period 1802-1570
The period consists of five dynasties, the thirteenth to the seventeenth. The thirteenth and the fourteenth had its seat in the Delta and further south. and was partially concurrent. This weakness and lack of powerful monarchs would have consequences. About 1720, probably, Egypt was attacked and conquered by a foreign people. They are usually called Hyksos but it is actually a kind of generic term for several different groups. What is fair to agree on is that these Hyksos (the name means "ruler of foreign lands") came from the East but wherefrom is not clear. The Egyptians themselves called them Aamu meaning Asians which did not say very much. Just like all those who come to power in Egypt from abroad they were rapidly egyptified. They form the fifteenth dynasty. They used hieroglyphics and clung to old traditions. They moved the capital to Aravis, modern-day Tell el Daba. If you want to put any credence to the story in the Bible about Joseph, Abraham's grandson, sold by his wicked brothers to Egypt and there become a man of importance, it was probably during this time. Hyksos, just as Joseph's people, spoke a Semitic language. They had common roots, and one can understand that the Hyksos chose one from roughly the same area as they themselves in front of an Egyptian.
It was probably the Hyksos who brought the horse and tank to Egypt whose armies had mainly been foot soldiers in the past. In addition, they had a new type of bow that revolutionized warfare with the tank. For Egyptians, this was a trauma and they wouldn't forget it; they had lost battles in the past and they had fought each other but to be conquered! But the trauma would also become the basis for the successful unification later on. After the Hyksos conquered the capital cities and crushed dynasties 13.14 and 16 the Princes of Thebes launches the seventeenth dynasty ca. 1650. The Egyptians are beginning to rebel against the now somewhat weaker Hyksos kings. A successful leader in many battlefields, Sekenenre, revolts but his skull is beaten to bits on the battlefield about 1610. His son Kamose continues and is besieging the capital. He did not take it. That honor would his younger brother, Ahmose (1570-1541), get. Thus was the Hyksos grip broken. Ahmose liberated Egypt and founded the Eighteenth dynasty. Thus the New Kingdom had begun.
The New Kingdom, 1570-1070
Ahmose was the first Pharaoh during the New Kingdom. His role was the Liberator but he didn't manage to retake the entire Egypt again. The work was completed by his son, Amenhotep I (1541-1520). He became the Reconquerer. He made the Egyptian Empire as large as it had been before. From the fifth cataract of the Nile in the South to the Euphrates in the East. His successor was Totmes I (Tuthmosis I) (1520-1492) and he is remembered for an unusual insight. Pyramids were very nice but they were also very obvious. Looters had easy to find them. Therefore he chose a remote Valley in the vicinity of Thebes, and started secretly to build a tomb chamber there that would not to be visible from outside. Thus, he founded the Valley of the Kings which would be for the New Kingdom what the pyramid had been for the Old and Middle Kingdoms . With the New Kingdom the pyramid was out as a place of burial. They were too obvious and easy to loot. Totmes's intentions were good but if he hoped that the secret would be preserved, he was wrong. Almost all of the tombs in the Valley of Kings were looted but it was a good idea. He is also remembered for being the father of Hatshepsut, perhaps the most successful female Queen throughout ancient history, regardless of the Kingdom, of which we are aware.
The Mighty Queen
Hatshepsut (1479-1458) is the first woman history knows of that took power with the intention of taking the reins and control a large Empire and she also controlled it well. Her husband (Totmes II) died young and she just had a daughter with him, therefore not a likely candidate for the throne. Her dead husband had a son by a mistress, a baby who could not yet govern (the future Totmes III). What is so unique about her is that she was declared no regent or Queen, which would have been possible, but King. She also took all the titles that belonged to the King, as well as the attributes that belong to kingship, among other things. the fake beard and male costume. In depictions of her she are sometimes dressed in Royal (male) clothes and sometimes as a Queen in a dress. Same thing in death. It was built one tomb for the Queen and one for the King. But she must have had a very powerful personality because she was in power for over 20 years and ruled well. When you consider that what she did was basically a coup but there was never shown any signs of anxiety during her time. Her successor (Totmes III), who actually had the right to the throne, was satisfied to be Army Commander-in-Chief and kept quiet.
Even today, it is difficult to understand how she managed it. She understood the value of good propaganda. She brought two allegations forward that were completely untrue but which made her look very good. She said that her father taught her to be a pharaoh, and she said she was the God Amon-Res daughter. She is also responsible for the most magnificent of all Egypt's temple, at Deir el Bahari in the Valley of the Kings. Without doubt one of the ancient worlds more fantastic monuments. It is usually compared to the Parthenon and in both can be seen that total harmony that is so rare in a building. She built many more temples, among others. at Karnak where her large obelisk still stands up. She led the successful trading expeditions and appointed successful generals for her military campaigns in Nubia and Syria. These trade routes were important. If earlier Pharaohs during the new Kingdom were those that United the country again and made it strong so was Hatshepsut the one who opened the trade seriously again. Wealth flowed into Egypt during her time. It was during her time as Egypt became, not only impressive and mighty, but rich and prosperous as well. They have analyzed what they believe is her mummy, and the result was that she died of bone cancer.
Egypt's Napoleon
Hatshepsut was a unique figure in Egypt's history but the New Kingdom was richly equipped with colorful personalities as Pharaohs. Totmes III (Tothmosis)(1458-1425), Hatshepsut's stepson, is called Egypt's Napoleon and is, here everyone agrees, Egypt's greatest Conqueror and commander of all time. He fought among other things. successful wars against the Hittite Empire and Phoenicia. It is now that Egypt reaches its biggest expansion ever. In addition, he received tributes from Assyria, then a young Kingdom that was not yet the force it would become. He spread the borders of Egypt all the way to what is now Syria. He took many foreign princesses as secondary wifes and often showed mercy toward those he defeated. During his time, you see a transformation of the army. They are now a standing army, constantly prepared to fight. Earlier it had in principle been enlisted together for each war.
He was satisfied with standing in the background during Hatshepsut's regime even though he was legally the legitimate Pharaoh which says quite a lot of her charisma and power. He is accused of trying to wipe out his stepmother, Hatshepsut, from history by destroying every painting of her in for example. Deir-El-Bahari. This was, probably, at the end of his time on the throne. If he did it, it would have been more sensible that he did so shortly after Hatshepsut's death but that he would wait for 25 years and then make it seem a little strange. But he must have known about it even if he was not the initiator of the multitudinous destruction of paintings and statues that was the result.
His successor was competent but had a lot to live up to. His son was a forceful man but far more ruthless than his father had been. After beating down some uprisings, he spent a lot of time to have fun but he was known as an excellent Archer. Being athletic apparently went in the family for the same is said about his grandson, Amenhotep III. He is called the magnificent, not so much because he was a great military man but because he lived in an Egypt that harvested the fruits of Hatshepsut's and Totmes III's efforts. Wealth flowed into the country and Egypt was at its peak. Foreign rulers wrote beggar's letter to Egypt and asked for money. There are more statues and images of him than any other Pharaoh, around 250.
The Religious revolution
The next great personality is Amonhotep the Magnificents son. His name was Amenhotep IV but he speedily changed the name to Echnaton (Ahkenaton)(1352-1334). He introduced drastic changes in religion, society and art. Religiously, he is the first person who tries to make a monotheistic religion, The Atonism, the State religion. He wanted to simply replace Re and Osiris and Amon and all others against Aton. Aton was a kind of Sun God, his symbol was the sun disc. Echnaton moved the capital to Amarna, present Tell El-Daba, So that Aton would get a town where there were no traces of ancient gods. He had not invented Aton. Aton had existed previously and had slowly grown in importance under his father and grandfather but he was still a minor divinity among Egypt's many deities. The priests who had played an important role in society in the past was now almost inconsequential. Echnaton went very far in order to establish that Aton was the only God. He deleted other gods name, among others. Amon and erased out the -s in the word gods. All in order to conclude that there was one God.
The new art that followed in the footsteps of the revolution is called the Amarna art, and meant that the characters are portrayed differently. The art got brand new rules. Often more lively, less rigid, family scenes can show feelings which were not done previously. A famous example is a painting by Echnaton with Nefertiti, his queen, sitting in his lap. That was extremely inappropriate before he changed all the traditions. The portraits had rules. For some reason, usually heads are extended, necks are narrow, the shoulders are sloping and the hips are wide. His Queen was called Nefertiti and was thought to have been very beautiful. She shared her husband's faith, one of the few things we know about her, she was not of Royal lineage which was unusual. One of Egypt's most famous works of art, The Amarna bust of Nefertiti, comes from this time and is considered to represent the Amarna art at its peak.The art also contains much more images of the beauty of nature than before.
Unfortunately for Echnaton the priests did not like the change. Exactly how he died, we do not know but there are suspicions of murder. His line didn’t survived him for long. After a bit of confusion took his son-in-law, Tutanchamon, (1333-1324), over the throne. He was an extremely insignificant Pharaoh who died young before he could do anything permanent. Under the auspices of the priests he reintroduced the old religion. The only important thing about him is that his tomb is the only one of all the pharaohs tombs that Tomb robbers didn’t find. It was extremely rich with coffins of solid gold and a magnificently sculpted Golden mask. It gives us a vague idea how wealthy some of the more prominent Pharaohs tombs must have been and how prosperous Egypt during the new Kingdom were. The few Pharaohs that remains of the Eighteenth dynasty wanted to forget that the Amarna period had ever been. The dynasty ends when Horemheb, who started his career as a general under Tutanchamon. He dies in 1292.
The Slow decline
The remainder of the new Kingdom aimed to achieve greatness like under Hatshepsut and Totmes III without ever succeeding. The Nineteenth and Twentieth dynasty, which completes the New Kingdom are dominated by a large number of Pharaohs named Ramesses. Ramesses II (1279-1213, called the great) was not a great personality but he was ambitious. He also wanted to defeat the other great powers just like Totmes had done. His ambition was to destroy the Hittites just like Totmes but he reached a draw as best and he had to go on and sign an unsatisfactory peace deal. The peace agreement at Kadesh 1258 is the first peace agreement known to history. For Egypt, it was a failure and Egypt's power over its neighbors began to be diminished. Ramesses, however, lived a long life and built numerous temples, so one cannot help but be reminded of him. The most famous are those in Karnak and Abu Simbel with its four giant statues of Ramses at the entrance. They are still impressive creations although they can't really be compared with the best of the old and the new empire in quality though they can in quantity. He died at the age of 90, leaving about 75 sons so the succession was never a problem. Ramesses even married some of his daughters but when you have 75 of them it is entirely possible that he forgot that he was the father. Yet the nineteenth dynasty would end up with a female, Tausret (1191-1190) who probably was the wife of the last Pharaoh.
Ramesses II's experience with his foreign policy made his followers strive to defend the borders, not to extend them, which was a novelty in Egyptian politics. But the first threat came not from the East and the Hittites but from the West and South where the Libyans and Nubians started moving. Ramses III (1186-1155) fought many times against these enemies, and managed to hold the borders (he was a much better general than Ramesses II) and believed that he had averted the threat for good when he was laid to rest with his fathers. He is considered the last great Pharaoh. What neither he nor any other Egyptian did really understand was that they did not represent any State but more of a migration wave. It was not the armies he met but the first wave of a flood of people who wandered around and was looking for a home. Egypt was in the way. The similarity with the migrations that eventually caused the fall of the Roman Empire are clear. For every Pharaoh Egypt's influence was reduced and corruption grew. The last Pharaoh of the new Kingdom became Ramesses XI and when he died in 1070 BC. the New Kingdom died with him and the third intermediate period begins.
Third intermediate period 1070-672
During this period, it was messy in Egypt. The last Ramesses had left the country in a state of civil war and many claimed the throne. Overseas small kingdoms began to emerge in the vacuum left by Egypt. Babylon, Assyria, and Persia later became major powers. One of these small kingdoms was Israel, which got its first King (Saul) during this period (ca. 1050). The Kingdom's development is closely linked with the fact that the two major powers in the region, Egypt and the Hittites, collapses at this time and left a power vacuum that, among others, Israel filled. Many different foreign interests became Pharaohs in Egypt during this time. 21,st dynasty was, however, Egyptian although it was rather weak and never reigned supreme throughout Egypt. It died out about 950 and was succeeded by a Lybian dynasty. The founder was a Shishonk and he was a capable man. He is mentioned with horror in the Bible where he is called Shishak because he sacked Jerusalem during Rehoboams time on The Throne. Rulers was called variously Shishonk, Osorkon and Takelot, but none had the power that the first Shishonk had had. The Dynasty didn't end until 728 but was contemporary with the 22,nd dynasty who was also lybian.
The Lack of forcefulness of the various dynasties are now becoming increasingly apparent. 23,rd and the 24,th dynasty are so short that they are barely noticeable. The 25,th Dynasti on the other hand, had power and mettle behind it. It came from the South from Nubia and conquered Egypt around 730. For about 50 years they ruled but then came the Assyrian superpower. In 671 they crushed the Egyptian army. They didn’t bother to put a new Pharaoh in place. Instead they left Egypt and went home. The Egyptians were pretending that nothing had really happened. This action was not approved by Assurbanipal, King of the Assyrians, who got annoyed and let the army crush Egypt a second time. This time the looting was very thorough. Thebes was devastated. The survivors of the 25th dynasty, crawled home to Nubia again where the Assyrians didn’t bother to follow. When the Assyrians headed back home they left a person named Necho as their representative to rule Egypt. He had to sign oaths, and promising to govern in Assyrias interest. Necho quickly broke his promise and it is he who initiates the 26,th dynasty. His son Psamtik somehow manages to unify the nobles and thereby unify Egypt after the Assyrians, Nubians and Lybians left the country.
The late period, 672-30 BC
It is customary to call the 26,th dynasty for a Renaissance in Egypt. It was not that they invented some new things but they looked back and imitated their own heyday. They wrote contemplative wisdom writings where patience received a completely different value than in the past. The Assyrians stayed away and eventually fell to the Babylonians who in turn fell to the Persians. But Egypt was a juicy booty to be left alone. Cyrus the great, the Persian great King, had been so successful so that the Persians ruled over the whole known world except Egypt. Cambyses, son of Cyrus the great, made so that Persia ruled over the whole of the known world, and at the battle of Pelusium in 525, he broke the back of the Egyptian independence. They did not make the mistake that the Assyrians had made but let a Persian dynasty take over. The 27,th dynasty initiated by Cambyses himself. He was admittedly only there for 4 years before he handed over the task to someone else, but the Persians remained. 404 the Persians left Egypt after urging them to rule in Persia's interest. But Persia and Egypt were very far apart, so after a while the Egyptians dared to revolt again. Persia was the superpower. In 343 they stroke down, in the same absentminded way that we might hit a fly, the Pharaoh who had seized power in Egypt. He was named Nectanebo and was the last Egyptian Pharaoh who sat on the throne. Over the 60 years that the Persians had been absent three dynasties had gone by.. Therefore, the number of the dynasty that Artaxerxes III, initiated is 31. It was short. In 332 Alexander the great came and crushed the Persians on battlefield after battlefield. He put a Macedonian Pharaoh in place and went on. Finally a disease managed to overcome Alexander. He never lost a battle. He died in 323
His trusted men then decided to split up this gigantic empire between themselves. Ptolemeus got Egypt on his lot. He became Ptolemy I (305-285). Alexander did, however, have time with the founding of Alexandria which would become the Ptolemeic capital. They considered themselves as quite superior to Egyptians, an attitude they took with themselves; for example, they did not bother to learn the language. In the beginning they were quite powerful but more and more they became dependent on the major powers ' approval to remain in Office. And soon it became clear that the power to be friendly with was Rome. There was just one of those Pharaohs that cared about learning the language, she was also the last of them and is also one of the most famous Pharaohs, Cleopatra (51-30). She was Cleopatra VII, but the whole history ignores the number so I do that too. She had a younger brother who she was married to (Ptolemeus XIII) but wanted to be the sole ruler. The brother was ruled by a faction in the Palace who disliked her. She fled Alexandria, was told that Ceasar was going there to make up with Pompey in the Roman civil war's final phase. Her brother had welcomed Pompey and then chopped the head of him to give as a gift for Caesar. Cleopatra was much more intelligent than her brother and realized that such a gesture would earn his disgust rather than gratitude. She let herself be smuggled into his house and got him to fight on her side. She became sole Pharaoh, with the support of the people and the best general of the time at her side. Caesar got assurances that Egypt would keep quiet and deliver bread to Rome at a steady pace. In addition, she let her siblings go in Caesar's triumph in Rome and where they subsequently was killed. She sat safely. Egypt was at peace for the first time in a long time. Everything looked good. Then Caesar died. Soon a new civil war between Caesar's adopted son, Octavian, and Mark Antony started. As soon as they had killed Caesar's murderers, they were at loggerheads. She choose to support Antony. She had to choose one of them . She choosed wrong. At the battle of Actium in 31 BC Cleopatra and Antony's forces were defeated by Octavian. Both committed suicide that evening. They didn't want to go in a triumph. That was the end of Egypt's last Pharaoh.
Afterword and sources
This was slightly more than 3000 years of history summarized in a personal way. A lot has been skipped. There are interesting disputes within the scientific community about the problems and Conundrums but they are for the most part also being skipped. For anyone who knows that he or she wants to learn more, see the sources. The ones I thought to mention are the ones I mostly used. One consequence of this is that books with lots of pictures, and relatively little text is not included.
Mertz, Barbara: Temples, Tombs and Hieroglyphs (2007 revised edition)
Gardiner, Sir Alan: Egypt of the Pharaohs (2006, revised edition)
Shaw, Ian: The Oxford history of Ancient Egypt (2000)
Romer, John: A History of Ancient Egypt - From the first farmers to the great Pyramid (2012)
Romer, John: A History of Ancient Egypt - From the great pyramid to the fall of the middle kingdom (2016)
Clayton, Peter A.: Chronicle of the Pharaohs (1994)
All of these can be recommended. Mertz is the most readable and popularized book and she's also the best Narrator of them. the others are a bit heavier but well structured and for those who already know some of egypts interesting history maybe some of them would be preferred. Romers books are the first two parts of a planned trilogy. The third part has not yet been published. In addition to these, which treats the entire Egypt's history, there are numerous books that deal with a particular epoch or episode in detail, such as. Echnaton. These I won't mention. What I tried to give here is an overview, not a detailed sketch. The works I mentioned are also overviews but a bit more detailed. What they have spent about 300-600 pages for I have tried to squeeze in at 14. If you are interested you should think of this article as an appetizer.
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Sept 18, 2020 16:48:43 GMT
Swedish Indie! This is great. I really like this, @kurben .🙂 WUITIIQGUyMrvFxIgkNw
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2020 19:07:43 GMT
OK, Here is another article i have written, and translated, and the subject is a bit closer to home for most of you. Hope you like it!
North American Natives
Before the Europeans arrived
What would become America's various Indian tribes originally came from Siberia. They walked across a land bridge that existed for several thousand years. The probable date is about 18,000 to 15,000 BC. They spread over both North and South America and their culture was called Clovis culture. From them all the different Indian cultures stem. These Clovis people were skilled hunters. Besides the buffalo most large mammals became extinct by man. The animals in America had never learned to fear humans like the animals in Eurasia and Africa had learned, and they had to pay an expensive price for it.
From these people grew up some mighty cultures around North America. There were some great agrarian cultures in the south. Mogollon (about 500-1250 e.kr) who had learned the value of corn from Mexico's high cultures were maize growing and was situated in today's New Mexico-Arizona, in the forest and meadow environment that existed there. Hohokam, who were masterful farmers and flourished between 200-1400 AD. They got the Sonora Desert in New Mexico (west of Mogollons homelands) to prosper through complicated irrigation channels. Hohokam means "Those who have gone away," and was named by the Navajo Indians. North of them the largest of these cultures developed, the Anasazi (meaning "The ancient ones", also named by the Navajos). They began modestly about 300 AD but from 500 AD dominated the area where Colorado, Utah, Arizona and New Mexico meet (the Four Corners). In southern Colorado and northern New Mexico their ruined cities are still standing today and are impressive creations. Corn and cotton were their plants. Why these cultures died out is not certain but it is believed that it was due to a major drought that occurred frequently during the years 1300-1400. Their descendants today are mainly the Pima (Hohokam) and the Pueblo Nations (Anasazi).
Early Indian cultures
In the southeast there was a tradition of building tombs in the form of piles. The most important of these is Hopewell (100 -500 AD). Hopewell was the Indians who started the tradition with pipes and tobacco. It would eventually spread to lots of different Indian cultures and from them to the White man. They kept to today's Ohio and east toward the Atlantic coast. Hopewells followers were the Mississippi culture. Their capital was Cahokia (today's St. Louis, Missouri on the Mississippi river). They had a big trade and large cities in Alabama, Georgia and Oklahoma as well. A part of their culture meant to torture captured enemies (if they were warriors) to the glory of God. The culture died out about 1400 AD and the Mississippian culture was split in several Native tribes, some of which are Cherokee, Chickasaw, Creek, Seminole and Natchez. They retained some of the original culture and met about 200 years later the white man.
A very different culture lived in the northeast, in forested areas where New York is now. It was the Iroquois who was really a union of five nations. The members were Seneca, Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga and Cayuga. They inherited their property by the mother and each clan was headed by a female leader. They had written down their laws which gave everyone the right to vote on important decisions regardless of status or gender. Their laws impressed the colonists and had some influence when the Senate and House of Representatives were created in the US a few centuries later. They lived in about 50 meters long houses and cultivated corn, squash and beans. But they had their dark sides too. They were very aggressive towards their neighbors and was, if they chose to be, very inventive when it came to torture. Their laws were written down in 1450. When the whites came the Iroquois would be both the most democratic Indian society but also the one that gave them the most resistance.
Another very different culture was the Plain Indians. They were not living in one place but lived by hunting buffalo. Prominent among these were, from north to south, Blackfeet, Shoshone, Crow, Sioux, Cheyenne, Pawnee, Arapaho, Kiowa, Apache and Comanche. The plains stretched from Lake Winnipeg (located just north of the border between the United States and Canada) to Texas. Many of these tribes was before the white man arrived farmers. But when the horse came (extinct in America before the Spanish arrived) to America they soon abandoned the agricultural way of life and began hunting full time. They were masterful riders and the horse became a part of their culture. Typical of these cultures, both before and after they received horses, was the utilization of the buffalo, warfare as a way to raise their status, the Sundances, Shamans (medicine men) and the tepee. It was a mobile home made of buffalo hide that was easy to set up and take down. They were rivals and fought constantly with their neighbors but it was these Plains Indians who were the last to give up the armed resistance.
Before Europeans arrived estimates has been made of how large the population was. A figure mentioned is 18 million people. The country that Columbus discovered in 1492 was full of people. But the country that first interested Spain was not North America but South America and Mexico. Beside some occasional Spanish expeditions in New Mexico and Florida colonization in earnest did not begin until the early 1600s. The first Spanish expeditions brought not only the Natives in contact with the horse and merciless brutality, but they also brought with them smallpox, measles and cholera. Indians had no resistance and between 80 and 90% of Indians died. When a new count was made in 1800, there were 600,000 left ..., of 18 million.
The first contacts
On 12 th October 1492 Columbus encountered one of the Bahamas Islands, believed himself to be in the East Indies, that is, he thought he had discovered an island in today's Indonesia. Therefore, he named the inhabitants Indios (Indians) and founded one of history's great misunderstandings. The Natives there, Arawaks, were peaceful and of a benevolent disposition and one of their gifts were unfortunately made of gold, probably traded from Mexico. He quickly decided to enslave these peaceful Arawaks. The Spaniards set up its first base in today's Haiti (Hispaniola), and used the Indians as a workforce in their quest for gold. It was an explicit policy among Spaniards to be cruel to the Indians so they would be prevented from feeling like people. Those who did not die in slavery died of the diseases Spaniards brought with them. In 1492, there were perhaps about 2 million Arawaks, 1520 there were 20,000 and in 1535 they were extinct. They were the first, but far from the last to meet a similar fate.
The first blood on North American soil was spilled in 1513 when the conquistador Ponce de Leon came to Florida (baptized by him, means flower or blossom) in search of gold. He found nothing, so he wanted the next best thing, and that was slaves. But the Calusa Indians were great traders, among other places they sailed to Cuba, and had heard about the deeds of the Spaniards outside their coastal waters and were prepared. They attacked and forced him away from Florida. He returned in 1521 and tried to build a fort but was wounded by a poisoned arrow and died.
But the myth of Cibola, the city built of gold, had had time to spread, and the Spaniards were ruthless in its pursuit of a city that did not exist. 1539 Hernan de Soto landed in Florida and enslaved tribe after tribe. In 1540, they came to South Carolina and Georgia. Then he came to the remains of the Mississippi culture and one of its tribes, Choctaw, who lived in their capital Mabila. After a nine-hour long battle there were thousands of bodies that covered the city streets. He came to Arkansas but found no gold, and his wrath over this insult expressed itself in its usual way, slaughter and burning of cities. Then he became ill and died, and his men returned home under constant attack from various Native Americans. 1542 the survivors sailed away from Florida. What they left behind was diseases. When the Spaniards came again about 20 years later, the entire southeastern North America was a wasteland. Very few people lived there and most fields had grown back.
Another who searched the city made of gold was Francisco de Coronada. According to his sources, the Zuni-town Hawikuh was the right town. Having slaughtered the inhabitants, he discovered that Hawikuh was a small village built of sun-dried claybricks. No gold as far as the eye could see. He now went to the Pueblo town Tiwa in New Mexico instead. After further slaughter and rape a rebellion broke lose that was put down by burning the inhabitants alive. Many similar things happened before he returned home to Mexico in 1541. In five decades Spain left the Pueblo Indians alone but in 1598 Juan de Onate had the task of forming a colony but was told to be gentle with the Indians. The Acuma tribe did not want to give them food because they needed it themselves in order to survive the winter. Onates punishment was to kill 800 men, women and children and to amputate a foot on all surviving men. That seemed reasonable to him. In 1610 he was himself punished for excessive cruelty and stripped of his command but New Mexico remained a Spanish area.
The First colonies
The first colony was founded in 1607 at Jamestown, Virginia. The city was named after the English king, James I. Although it was not the brutal war of extermination that Pizarro and Cortez had brought against the Inca- and Aztek Indians it was not peaceful. This in spite of the fact that the colony would not have survived its first few years if they hadn’t been given corn from the Native tribe. What the colonists had brought from Europe was their way of looking down on the natives. They were savages and they were denying their culture, which gave them an excuse to just take without wanting to give something back. They said that the Indians did not live in the neighborhood but only wandered through it, which meant that they did not own it. For Indians the whole idea of owning land was totally alien. They used it in various ways, hunting, farming, housing, and they grew a surplus of corn which they shared with the newcomers. These contradictions led to a war in 1609. The war went on until 1613 when both sides had suffered losses. Then the British succeeded in kidnapping Powhatans (the Chief) daughter, Pocahontas. Peace was sealed through her marriage to an English colonist. That she was already married to a native and had children nobody cared much about. She was renamed Rebekah and died of illness in England in 1617, where she was shown to the court.
1620 Pilgrims came to America aboard the Mayflower. They founded a colony in Plymouth in present day Massachusetts. The diseases had preceded them by way of slave traders, so they met with a lot of dead Indians, both buried and not buried. After a hard first winter where nearly half the colonists died, they met an Indian, Tisquantum (Squanto) who had escaped from the slave traders and gave them tips on how to survive. He told them what to grow and how to grow it in this new environment. With him as an interpreter, they managed to get into a pact with the local Natives (Wampanoags) which said that they would help each other. In the autumn the Pilgrims gave a Thanksgiving feast to celebrate their survival. The Wampanoags were invited and agreed to make it an annual feast. Thanksgiving is still one of the most important celebrations in America. But there came ever more colonists. And they needed ever more land. In the 1630s, they advanced into Connecticut and there they found the Pequot Indians.
The war against the Pequot Indians was short-lived. They had not only Englishmen against them but also the Wampanoags and their neighbors the Narragansetts who were traditional enemies of the Pequot. It was not much of a war but it got a great importance. Wampanoags and Narragansetts saw, for the first time, how bloodthirsty and willing to kill everyone the white men were which horrified them. It was definitely not the way to wage war on according to their way of seeing things. Pilgrims (Puritans) saw the overall victory as a sign that God felt that the white man should rule over the Natives. It was God's will. This caused the pact that had been signed 15 years earlier to slowly fall to pieces. Its prerequisite had been to help each other without one dominating the other. The pact still held because there still existed both English and Natives who had gained friends in the other camp and did what they could to prevent an open conflict. Masoit, Wampanoags chief was one of these people but he died in 1662 and was succeeded by his son.
King Philips war
King Philip, or Metacom as his real name was, was Masoits son. He reacted strongly against the fact that the respect for the natives that had existed when his father was younger was not there anymore. He was tired of giving more and more land to more and more colonists. His patience ran out in 1671 when the English demanded land just outside his capital. He had also learned that to face the English in an open battle was a bad idea but conducted a guerrilla war and siege. He burned many cities to the ground, took prisoners and had before he started the war entered into secret alliances with many other tribes, totaling about 75% of all Natives in the area. Narragansett remained neutral until the Englishmen slaughtered 300 of them in a village. Then they joined forces with King Philip. To the Englishmens surprise the Indians had learned to make firearms in their own smiths. The Puritans had about 90 cities and about 50 of them were attacked. The first year the Indian coalition had success but then the English militia started to spread havoc.
It was during this war that the British began paying for scalps. They were evidence of a dead Native. Metacom, King Philip, held out for five years, but the decisive battle came in summer 1676 when his camp was ambushed and he was killed and in addition his head was slashed off and put up on a pole in Plymouth. Ironically in the same place as his father had welcomed the Englishmen 50 years earlier. The Puritans saw the victory as a sign of God but the truth was that there were many more Puritans than Natives because they were suffering from diseases. During these 5 years about 50% of New England Indians were killed. During the same period, about 5% of the whites died. A consequence of the war was that a large percentage of Indians who survived became slaves. Slaves became a staple trade of the English economy, but as the Indians started to die out they shipped in people from Africa instead. They encouraged the Natives to make raids against each other and then they bought the captured and used them as slaves. 1730 had almost all the natives of the east coast died of either slavery, war or disease.
The Iroquois meets their fate
North of New England (Maine) was the basis for the most powerful Indian coalition, Iroquois. From Maine to Michigan and far into Canada the Iroquois were a large power factor. Therefore they also worked also as a buffer between the two colonial powers. England in the states and France in what is now Canada, but which was then New France. Thanks to the coalition which meant that the 5 nations that formed the Iroquois Nation did not fight between themselves, they had remained strong after the arrival of the colonialists. French mingled much more with the Natives than the British did and became more kindly treated. The French arrived in the 1530,s and were more friendly towards the Natives than both the British and the Spaniards. Mixed marriages were common and suspicions low. This changed radically in 1609 when Samuel de Champlain (Father of Canada, Founder of Quebec) led a mixed squad of whites and Natives (mostly Hurons and Alconquins) and ran into a group of Iroquois. The battle was a big win for de Champlain but the result was that all the Iroquois from now on saw Frenchmen as enemies and allied themself with the English against the French in their conflicts. This was how a 150 year long war between the Iroquois and the French started. Champlain won a battle but lost a continent. The Iroquois had a long memory.
For a long time there was strife between the French and English where the Iroquois under a written agreement sided with the English, who guaranteed their independence against help and support in fighting. A decisive war (the French and Indian War) began in 1753 when the French penetrated southward and demanded land in the Ohio valley and built a fortified fort there. One of these forts is Pittsburgh today. A 21 year young George Washington led the English forces. He had Iroquois allied with him. When he saw how well fortified the French were he built his own fort, Fort Necessity, and waited. When the battle took place later Washington lost, mainly because he ignored his Iroquois allies advice, and barely escaped with his life. Iroquois signed up yet massively, they claimed to have been offended by the French, and together they won their first battle in the war of 1755. The decisive battle took place in 1759 when the British and the Iroquois captured Fort Niagara from the French. Quebec and Montreal was captured by the British and in 1763 the French gave up their claims on New France and Canada was now British territory. But for the Iroquois, this would mean that the role they had played with great success for 150 years or so was no more. Now there were no longer two superpowers, now there was only England and how would their relationship look like in the future?
The answer soon became clear. Now the Iroquois were not needed anymore. All payments, treaties and other things that had been common practice were canceled. The Natives were not happy. And it was all Natives, not just the Iroquois, that reacted in that way. Pontiac, chief of the Ottawa tribe, led a large force which, among other tribes included Huron, Delaware and Shawnee. At the same time, he managed to attack every single English fort in the area around the Great Lakes and Ohio. Such great organization is unique in the history of war between Indians and whites. Of the 11 fort that was attacked on the same day 8 fell. Three managed to hold out despite a siege of nearly a year which is a record in American history. About 2,000 white were killed in one month. This war, Pontiac's War as it is known, led to that a hatred against all Indians regardless of whether they were warlike or not spread in the States. It is also in this war that biological warfare is used for perhaps the first time. With intention the Englishmen infected some gifts with smallpox germs to get an advantage. But the result of Pontiac's War was important. 1763 declared the British official that the white settlements could only take place east of the Appalachian Mountains. The land west of the mountain range was a hunting ground for the Indians under the royal decree.
Colonialists become Americans
The Indians here, Iroquois, Delaware, Cherokee and Shawnee, among others, soon found that no one cared about what the king said. After a war against the Shawnee tribe in 1774 the colonists found themselves more and more embroiled in a conflict against the British. It would lead to the American Revolution or War of Independence. The Iroquois became involved in this, and their destruction has much to do with the War of Independence. The Iroquois was the most powerful Indian tribe, and therefore both the British and Americans sought support among them. Theyandenega, known for colonialists as Joseph Brant, was chief of the Mohawk supported the British with the argument that the Americans has treated us badly and with him went most of the others in the Iroquois union. But the split was a fact and for the first time the Iroquois did not act as a unit. The unity had been a big part of their strength, and now it was gone.
Brant proved to be a capable guerrilla leader and spread havoc among the Americans. It was only in 1779 that Washington felt he could spare the troops to fight him properly. He sent troops with the instruction to spread total devastation to the Iroquois. The general who carried out Washington's orders was called Sullivan and he burned over 40 towns with corn fields and orchards so they never reappeared. The troops would even pull the skin of dead Indians to make breeches. Brant were not captured, however. A similar treatment were given to Brant's ally, Shawnee chief Blackfish by General Clark, but it took until 1782 before they got control of the Shawnee tribe. The Indians lost everything in the war. If the Americans won their liberty then the Indians lost theirs. The Iroquois who remained fled to Canada where their descendants still live. All land rights they had had disappeared, and the Indians were not mentioned in the treaty between the United States and England which governed the United States Independence (it was signed in 1783).
Tecumseh and the Trail of Tears
1787 the newly formed Congress reacted to the loud Indian protests and declared that it was not allowed to just take the land from the Indians without payment or permission. It did not work so well, but instead began the long American tradition of fooling the Indians to sign over land and to break treaties. The Americans began investigating country around the Ohio River to sell to settlers and completely forgot about the Miami and Shawnee Indians who lived there. The government built in 1789 Fort Washington (Cincinnati today) there to mark its right to the area, which led to USA,s first Indian war. Led by the two chiefs Blue Jacket (Shawnee) and Little Turtle (Miami), the Indians began to attack the settlers and even the boats on the river. Washington, the new republic's first president, sent first one and then two generals against them. Both failed. General Harmar troops were shot to pieces in an ambush, the second general did not know much about Indians and were surprised during the night in his camp in the summer of 1791. 850 soldiers were killed in a man to man kind of battle and the General himself escaped on a donkey. That is the Americans' biggest defeat against Native Americans in history. Peace negotiations ensued that soon stranded but now the Americans took the Indians seriously. Now they sent out their war hero "Mad Anthony" Wayne. In the Battle of Fallen Timbers in 1795, he won the decisive battle. As a result, Ohio, and a bit of Indiana were no longer Indian territory.
An important person did not sign the Treaty. He was named Tecumseh and was Shawnee and in 1805 he got a vision of how the Indians should resist the white man. He walked from north to south, and insisted that all Native tribes would unite against the white man. He dreamed of an Native federation as large as North America and said that his vision came from the creator of everything. He was a good speaker and his message was spread. The governor mocked him and told him that if he really were a prophet, he must make a sign. Words he wished he had never uttered. Tecumseh predicted a solar eclipse, and his reputation grew. Tecumseh was probably the greatest Native American rhetorician of all time. In city after city he gathered in thousands to listen to him with their faces painted in war colors. His city was burned down but he bided his time, and when war broke out between England and the United States in 1812, he said that this was the Natives' chance. "Should we let them plow up our ancestors' graves, let them take our land and wipe us out without a fight? Land given to us by the Great Spirit”. As a result, a large amount of the tribes, but far from all, entered the war on England's side. The final battle was in 1813 in a marshy forest where Tecumseh was killed. His friends hid his body so that it would not be debased. With Tecumseh died also the dream of a united Native nation.
In the south there was a confederation of Native tribes, a kind of counterpart to the Iroquois in the north, and they were the last remaining in eastern America. Egged on by Tecumseh's words part of the Creek entered in the war of 1812. After some initial successes a young, ruthless and Indian hating Andrew Jackson (a future president) struck down the rebellion in 1814. It was Jackson who in this war pulled the skin off Indians to make bridles for the horses. In 1828, Jackson became president and in 1830 he instituted the Indian Removal Act. With the support of that act the Choctaw, Chickasaw and Creek were deported to what is now Oklahoma (Indian Territory). They went all the way and many died on the way. The Cherokee Nation went to the Supreme Court in protest, and won their case. President Jackson ignored the judge’s decision (What can they do? he is reported to have said) and the Cherokee were forced off anyway. Eyewitnesses who later participated in the civil war have described what happened during these forced marches as the cruelest thing they've ever seen. Between 1832 and 1838 many tribes walked in these death marches. It has been estimated that between 20-30% died during these 3-4 months long marches. They died from starvation, sicknesses and cold. It became known as The Trail of Tears.
Natives and settlers in the West
In 1840 there were perhaps 400,000 Indians left in the whole of North America. In the east they were almost completely wiped out, either by forced displacement or dead. But the Indians of the west would have their land forever. No sooner had the words been put down on paper before settlers began to move west. The final death blow to the thought that the Indians could have the west came in 1848 when gold was discovered in California. Between 1850 and 1863 the entire Indian population in California were enslaved, including women and children. For some it was a pleasure to chase the Indians as animals, something they boasted of. They resisted but were hopelessly outnumbered. Best known is the Modoc chief 'Captain Jack' (real name Kentipoo) and his war against US troops in 1873 (led by the hero of the Civil War, General Sherman). But in California the Indians had never really any chance. On the prairie, the conditions were different.
In the prairie the whites had not yet come to stay. They were vulnerable, which the Indians took advantage of. Many demanded a fee before they let settlers pass their land, a sort of toll. That was something that the white man found to be against the natural order of things and was extremely reluctant to pay. In 1851 a big meeting was called where tribes met with representatives of the US government. The Sioux were there, Crow, Arapaho, Cheyenne, Arikara and Shoshone were there. The agreement was that they would get a great replacement in weapons, food and money to let the settlers travel undisturbed across their lands and to stay within the generous areas assigned to them. The first real reserves even if they did not realize it. Two years later the Comanches and Kiowas signed a similar agreement. These agreements were broken quickly, for two reasons. The first was that an Indian chief did not have the political power to decide for his entire tribe, and the second was that the US Congress quickly broke the agreement. It was considered too expensive. So began a nearly 40-year war with the Indians of the Great Plains. As the Natives did not get their supplies, they had to go out and get food and raids occurred which led to that the army sent troops.
The first 'battle' started over a cow in 1855. The Sioux had found an abandoned cow and butchered it. The owner later demanded compensation. The Sioux offered two cows which were refused. The army was called in, and in the midst of negotiating a lieutenant got tired of waiting and started shooting. The Sioux killed all the 31 man big delegation in a rage at having been shot at while they negotiated. This started the long tradition of punitive expeditions which the army did against Indian villages. Next year the army wiped out a village and killed 86 Sioux. A small Sioux boy saw it all from a safe distance. He did not forget. He grew up and became Crazy Horse, the winner from Little Big Horn. But now, when the white began to quarrel among themselves, they got other things than disorderly Natives to worry about. In 1860 seven states (later 11) from the Union left to form a new Union (the Confederate states) and a year later the North and the South were in war with each other. The Indians who were affected the most were the ones who were living in Oklahoma. Many of them saw a chance to give back for The Trail of Tears and joined the South which also held their promises of officers’ rank in the army and seats in the congress. The North had given similar promises in treaties but never held a single one. The Tribes felt they got better treatment from the South. They were given seats in Congress and became officers of the South's army. Stand Watie (Cherokee chief and Confederate General) was the last Confederate officer who put down his arms. But while the civil war was going on in the east the Indians in the west saw an opportunity.
The Apache war
Apache means enemy. The Apaches called themselves for N'de, meaning people. But for everyone else the name is very apt. They were essentially hunters and gatherers but were able to adopt new practices. Navajos, a branch of the Apaches, were farmers and Lipan had learned from Comanches in their hunt for buffalo. But the most famous grouping were the Chiricahua Apaches. For every Apache the raid lay in the blood, and they were the scourge of both Mexican and US authorities for a long time. Their endurance is best described by saying that for 200 years they had been on the border of a European superpower without being captured or giving up their way. But they quarreled mostly with Mexicans. Geronimo, perhaps the most famous Apache in the world, hated Mexicans because they had killed his family. One day in the late 1850s some miners captured and tortured Mangas, a Chiricahua Apache, by whipping him unconscious. Mangas went on the warpath, and asked his son in law, Apache chief Cochise, for help. So began Cochises long war against the white man.
It was a good time for war. The white disappeared into their own war in the east, and with Cochise as their leader the Apaches spread havoc among the wagon trains, the miners, the ranchers and small settlements. Soon, they had to face the soldiers and it became tougher. Mangas was wounded and decided to take the offer of peace. He was captured and tortured to death by angry soldiers. Mangas death made Cochise even more determined to never give up. Cochise also learned that the best way to hurt the white man is a guerrilla war, strike and then quickly disappear. The war lasted a decade and resulted in a kind of draw. The fights were innumerable, but none managed to achieve a decisive victory. Cochise could not be captured or killed, but he complained that he kills ten white men and a hundred will come instead. The war had cost more than 1,000 American lives, and the people wanted peace. Such a peace was concluded between Cochise and a negotiator in 1872. Member of Cochises bands and regarded as a great warrior was Geronimo. The war was over for now.
There were Apaches, Navajos, who learned from the Pueblo Indians and became farmers. In the 1850s, for the first time, they and US troops began to disagree. This was because the United States won the country in the war against Mexico in 1848. The settlers complained and Navajos offered 130 sheep and 5 horses in compensation. Eternal peace promised from both sides. Then the White demanded an extra horse, got no way for an answer, and opened fire. 7 Navajos died. Navajos war had begun. When the Civil War broke out, they were for a short while masters of the area. In 1863 Kit Carson, famous scout in the US army, was appointed to take care of them. He was very effective. He used scorched earth tactics and their houses and fields went up in flames. In 1864 they gave up. They were placed in the reserve where they lived in great poverty. 1868 they made a deal which they had held since. They were allowed to return but never have any weapons and put their children in white schools and recognize the United States as their true masters. As a result they are today the United States largest Indian Nation with about 200,000 Navajos and the largest reserve.
The Sioux rises
Most Sioux had moved westward, but some were left in the east, in Minnesota, where the Santee Sioux lived in their tiny sanctuary. In August of 1862 they no longer got the food and the money that they needed, and had been promised them, not to starve to death. Under the leadership of Little Crow they began to attack under the slogan “Kill the Whites!”. During the first day, when the Whites were taken by complete surprise, they killed 400 whites. During that first day only one Indian died. After about a month of raiding the Indians lost a decisive battle, packed their tepees and fled west. Those that remained had not taken part in the raids. The lust for revenge was great and it condemned over 300, mostly innocent, to death but Lincoln intervened and 'only' 37 received the death penalty. Little Crow was captured and killed a year later but it was only a whisper against what was coming.
In Colorado had a certain Colonel Chivington received command. He had acquired a taste for killing Indians in New Mexico and felt that the only good Indian is a dead Indian. In June 1864, he began attacking peaceful villages and kill everyone regardless of who they were, man, woman or child. Soon, the local tribes Cheyenne and Arapaho were on the warpath. Ranches were attacked and all transportation to Denver was cut off with the result that the city soon found itself on the verge of starvation. In September the Cheyenne chief Black Kettle managed to negotiate a peace which made Chivington furious. Cheyennes and Arapahos were told to set up camp at Sand Creek, which they did. In November Chivington attacked the camp with orders to 'kill and scalp all' directly from Chivington. All were mostly women and children. About 150 Cheyennes died, of them were perhaps 25 warriors. The incident became known as the Sand Creek Massacre, and was launched as a great military success. Sand Creek shocked the tribes and also made so that they could agree. Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapahos agreed to fight as a unit against the White Man
The raids they launched killed a lot more people than Chivington had succeeded to do. They made raids along the Platte River far up into Wyoming. But in April 1865 the Civil War ended and many army officers were released and the number one of all the problems to take care of was the Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapaho uprising. General Connor was sent west to defeat the Indians. His instructions were to kill every Indian over 12 years of age. The Indians had learned. They led a successful guerrilla war and avoided open battles. The only thing he succeeded in his time was to build a fort, Fort Reno that would protect 'The Bozeman Trail' which was the trail to the gold fields in Montana. Around that trail would the next big battle stand.
Red Clouds war
In 1866 a meeting between the army and several Chiefs was held in Fort Laramie. It was about things to do so White men could travel on the trail in safety. The problem was that it went right through the last great hunting grounds that the plains had left. The conversation had just begun when the first wagon train with soldiers arrived in the fort. Red Cloud wondered where they were going and was told that they were on the road well into Sioux territory to build two more forts. Red Cloud was furious that they had not even waited for his yes or no. He had not agreed to anything. He said that it was not your land to do what you want with, it is our land! He said he did not want to talk anymore. He planned to defend their hunting grounds and was prepared to fight for them. Most Indians followed him and negotiations that had started promisingly ended in disaster. Red Cloud left the meeting with a pledge to fight with the white man. He kept his promise.
Red Clouds tactic was not new. There were ambushes and guerrilla attacks. He came with some news, however. He did dress some of his men in blue uniforms so they were mistaken for real soldiers until you got close. The Whites managed to build their fort along the "Bozeman Trail" but they were under constant siege by the Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapaho. In December 1866 the Indians were preparing for a strike and as the leader of one of the vanguard was elected a young and new, warrior, Crazy Horse. His task was to lure the 80 men strong army troops into a trap. He did well. They pursued him and his few followers and was then attacked from an ambush by the rest of the approximately 2,000-strong Indian attackforce. The slaughter at the Lodge Trail Ridge had begun. It is called 'The Fetterman Massacre' after the officer who had command. None survived. Red Cloud was serious.
Although he did not win another big victory and the introduction of the new Springfield rifle made the Whites became even more difficult to get hold of as they did not come to him. The war cost and after the Civil War the people in the east felt that the money could be used better. They tried to get a peace. Red Cloud refused. He had conditions that must be met. The three forts along the Bozeman Trail must be abandoned and all the White men leave. For the first time The White Man yielded to conditions set by an Native chief. The forts were abandoned in 1868 and were set on fire and after that Red Cloud signed a treaty that meant that the Indians kept the hunting grounds and the whites would no longer travel along the trail. In return, the Sioux agreed to live in a reservation if they could hunt on their hunting grounds. Red Cloud had won his war. In this feat, he is quite alone among Native americans. Further south, the Indians had similar problems but were not as successful.
The Comanches
In 1836 Texas became independent from Mexico and the colonists began to settle. They soon discovered that the Comanches did not leave them alone. Massacres and reprisals were common on both sides. A ranch, Parker's Fort, was attacked in autumn 1836, one of many, and a 9-year-old girl, Cynthia Ann Parker, was abducted. It was a small incident that would have major consequences. She grew up among the Comanches, and as a 18-year-old married with a chief and bore him three children. One of those children was Quanah Parker, the last Comanche Chief who resisted. Cynthia Ann was abducted by White people in 1860 and was returned to her family but did not like it. She tried several times to escape back to the Comanches, but people stopped her and she starved herself to death in 1864.
When many were talking peace in 1867 after many years of war Quanah refused to attend and looted Texas in the meantime. After a few years the Kiowas found that the Whites' promises were not worth anything and they left the reserve led by their Chief Satanta and joined with Quanah. Satanta were arrested in 1871, which made the whole Kiowa go to war. Satanta was their chief. In 1873, he was released in an exchange deal. The following year they learned, as Red Cloud had a few years earlier, that the new rifles the Whites had made a big difference. Quanah was never defeated but his assets were burned and horses were slaughtered. In June 1875, he led his men into the reserve, but he was still the leader and adjusted in part to the White way, but never abandoned the cultural values of the Comanche. He had fought against whites for 20 years and spent the rest of his life as a natural leader of his tribe. He died of pneumonia in 1911 and was buried next to his mother in full Comanche dress. Satanta, Kiowas chief, had not been so lucky. He received a prison sentence, for essentially the same offense as Quanah had done, and committed suicide in his cell. A prison was too crowded for him. While the unrest ended in the southern plains the Indians started to get restless again in the north.
Little Big Horn
Under the agreement of 1868 the Black Hills and surrounding hunting grounds would belong to the Indians as long as the grass grew. Many were furious about the agreement. Good land in Indian hands? Unthinkable! There were many conversations between President Grant and the Sioux with Red Cloud in the lead. The key to that the agreement of 1868 fell apart was that traces of gold were found in the Black Hills in 1874. In the end, they faced an ultimatum: Let the miners work in peace and sit down at Fort Laramie, or be prepared for war. Red Cloud told the Sioux that he was going to take the deal, that he was tired of fighting, but many did not share his position. As leaders emerged now Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull, and it was they who led the more warlike part of the Sioux. Crazy Horse was a warrior and leader on the battlefield while Sitting Bull was a medicine man, the spiritual leader with visions who did not participate in the battles. They were a good team. As the years passed, the war clouds became denser and buffaloes fewer. The Seventh Cavalry under George A. Custer was appointed to ensure that whites could feel safe. He had slaughtered Natives in the past and liked it while he still liked the Natives and their way of dress and even had a Native mistress.
The discovery of gold led to that if they were not on their reserves as of January 1876 they were regarded as hostile and could be shot. In February the whites began their war against the Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapahos again. It was a severe winter so they could not attack as many camps as they had expected to. The result was not long in coming. The Indians poured out of reserves and Crazy Horses and Sitting Bull's forces amounted to about 5,000 Indians. In mid-June, they held a Sun Dance, where Sitting Bull had a vision that many soldiers would fall for the Indians and explained that it was a gift from the Great Spirit. In the next week a 1,500-man strong force led by Crazy Horse managed to defeat a 1300 large force under General Crook. It was a chaotic battle, not organized, the kind which suited the Indians better. Crook retreated and kept quiet for the rest of the summer, which meant that he could not join Custer as planned. Crazy Horse continued towards Little Big Horn.
The General sent out Cavalry and Gibbons infantry after them with the idea of capturing the Indians in a double attack. On June 25, Custer's scouts saw (Crow indians who always had disliked Sioux) an enormous crowd of almost 5000 Plains Indians at Little Big Horn. A scout told Custer that we do not have the bullets to kill them all. Custer's response was typical: It is the largest Indian camp on the continent and I am going to attack it! Besides that mistake in judgment, he also made the mistake of splitting his troop in two parts. His men attacked and were in turn attacked from at least two directions. It took maybe an hour and then all of Custer's troops were dead. According to a Native, Two Moon, who was sent to count the dead there were 39 Sioux and 7 Cheyennes that had died in battle while 342 white were dead. Infantry arrived during the next day. Then the Indians were gone but the bodies remained. Little Big Horn was the Indians' greatest victory, but it was also the last. After the battle they split up and during the rest of the year, all the armies forces were looking for Plains Indians. In 1877 Crazy Horse rode into the reserve and explained that he wanted to keep an eternal peace. Four months later he was dead, stabbed by a bayonet in captivity. Sitting Bull and his band fled to Canada but returned and surrendered in 1881. He later met Wild West legend Annie Oakley, and they liked each other. In 1884 he formally adopted Annie Oakley as a daughter. Her name was 'Little Sure Shot' which she often used.
The small wars that followed
As the news of Little Big Horn were spread in the States all Indians, even those who had never gone on the warpath, became vulnerable to reprisals. The Nez Perce Indians had never killed a white man. They had reserves in Idaho and Oregon, but in 1877 they would be moved to smaller and poorer reserves. Some did so without a fight, but others under Chief Joseph and Looking Glass resisted when they noticed how lousy the land where they would stay was. They considered, probably quite correct, that so many Indians cannot live on land of so poor quality and so little size. They broke up from the reserve and aroused much admiration from some of the 2,000 soldiers they fought for their tactics and skill in fighting. One of these admirers was General Sherman, hero of the Civil War. They were chased while they were moving north from Idaho through Wyoming, Montana and Yellowstone. They were on their way to Canada, perhaps to join Sitting Bull, just a few km from the border they were overtaken and forced to surrender. The Nez Perce uprising had lasted for four months, but caused a lot of writings. Chief Joseph was called in the press for the Red Napoleon. It was mostly undeserved because in the Nez Perce, their decisions were relatively democratic and taken in council meetings and the most influential voice there was Looking Glass.
When the Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapaho uprising died out after Little Big Horn the Northern Cheyenne, who had participated in the uprising, needed a place to settle down. They decided to join their southern relatives, the Southern Cheyenne. They had not participated and called their relatives for fools and moreover lots of Cheyenne’s fell ill on this, for them, new country. In one year, 50 children died of malaria and they asked repeatedly to return to their homeland. In September 1878 a band of 350 Cheyenne’s, led by Morning Star (Dull Knife) and Little Wolf, broke out from the reserve to go home. When they arrived they split. Morning Stars band happened, by sheer bad luck, to run into the third cavalry. They had to settle at Fort Robinson, which they did not mind. They were on their own land. After a few months they were told to go home again. They refused. As a method to make them change their minds the soldiers began to starve them. The Cheyenne’s said to themselves that it was better to die in battle than of starvation. In January 1879 they made the desperate attempt which meant that the majority died or were severely wounded difficult. 11 soldiers died. But Morning Star got away. Little Wolf's band had more luck. After various adventures the majority were enrolled as Scouts of General Miles in his cavalry. The Cheyenne’s did not want to fight, they wanted to go home. A reserve was formed there specifically for the Cheyenne in the 1880s. Morning Star died there, at home, at last. But not all Indians were tired of fighting.
Geronimo
When Cochise agreed to go into the reserve and died there in 1874 the leadership passed over to his son because leadership was inherited among the Apaches. Geronimo was never a chief but a notorious warrior among the Apaches. He could never adapt to life in a reserve. Geronimo was not his Apache name (it was The One Who Yawns) but he had received it from Mexicans because he fought so terrifying battles against them that they prayed to St.Geronimo (Jerome) (an Italian saint active in the early 400,s) of salvation. The name stuck and was used by Mexicans, Apaches and white. When Cochise died Geronimo got greater influence and in 1875 he and his small band reopened the old Apache custom of making raids against both Mexicans and whites. Big protests and Geronimo fled to Mexico. In 1877 he was offered to talk, which he agreed to do. When he arrived and the conversation began, and conditions were discussed which Geronimo declined suddenly 80 men with raised rifles appeared until he was disarmed and taken to the reserve. It was the first time Geronimo was captured. It would also be the last time. He had learned his lesson.
In the future, he came and went like a wind. When the winter was severe, he could get into the reserve or else he lived often in the mountains or in the gullys and made occasional raids and hunted. 1881 something happened among the Apaches. A religious movement began to spread among some Apaches. The point was that it said that the end of the white man was close and it was time for revolt. Geronimo was skeptical. But clashes between the spiritual leader, and the Whites led to deaths on both sides. The army called in reinforcements and rumors went about that Geronimo would be captured and killed. He made himself unreachable. Many times he was chased, once by a group led by Western legend Wyatt Earp, but nobody found him. In 1882 he returned to the reserve, but not to stay but to say he was The Releaser and urged people to follow him. He managed to get a variety of men, women and children to follow him to Mexico. While the women and children crossed the river into Mexico Geronimo and his warriors held the army in check. The disaster happened on the other side of the river where totally unexpected a variety of Mexican soldiers showed up and killed most of the women and children. Geronimo and his men spent the next two years with a furious attack on towns and villages in Mexico. Sometimes he attacked ranches on the US side as well.
Geronimo met with General Crook, who had the Apache name Greywolf, in 1883 and promised to come to the reserve a few months later. It took eight months, but he kept his promise and he arrived in February 1884. Soon he became worried again. Crook kept his promise but the other whites he did not trust. The papers contained fabricated stories about his crimes, and urged people to hang him. In May 1885 he fled the reserve and took with him about 140 men, women and children and traveled towards Mexico. 2,500 soldiers pursued his small band but he got away again, something he became famous for. In 1886, he agreed to return under escort but escaped before it reached the reserve. Now 5000 men, a quarter of the US Army, hunted Geronimo. Raids continued and soldiers died in the ambush, but the soldiers did not see a glimpse of Geronimo. After 4 months of fruitless hunting the Army revised their tactics and invited him to talks by proxy. There, Geronimo got to know that the reserve had been moved to Florida and that all of his relatives were there. If they wanted to see them again they had to end hostilities. That argument, and that he had actually fought against Mexicans and whites for almost 40 years and was now 57 years old, was crucial. After a few years in captivity in Florida, whose climate he hated, he came finally to Oklahoma. He was homesick for Arizona but was not allowed to return even for a visit. He died in the wake of a riding accident in 1909, 79 years old.
The Ugly ending
The fact that Geronimo was now in the reserve, meant that all the great leaders of Indians were now held in reserves. Some, like Quanah Parker, tried to help his people by beating the whites in their own game. Politics and earn money. Sitting Bull appeared in Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show. Geronimo wrote an autobiography that was published in 1905. But in 1889 there was a major drought that hit the reserves hard and at the same time came a measles epidemic that hit extra hard when they were already weak and the resistance low. That is the background to that the shamans who preached the Ghost Dances had such an impact. This had its origin in a vision that the shaman Wowoka, a Paiute, had in Nebraska in December 1889. He had been visited by the Great Spirit who told him that a time would come when the buffalo would again run on the prairie, then their dead kinsmen would come again, and the white man disappear in the ocean. The conditions were for the Indians to refrain from violence, be true to the Great Spirit and implement the proper ritual (The Ghost Dance). Then this new and beautiful world would soon replace the old. It was a vision that came at the right time. It felt right to think of the good old days as none of the new ones were any good. It was a vision that gave hope and dreams of a future in a time where it was difficult to imagine a future at all..
A shaman named Kicking Bear introduced the Ghost Dances to the Sioux in the spring of 1890. He adapted the Ghost Dance to the Sioux sacred Sun Dance. In early autumn 1890, the Sioux was egged into something that can be likened to religious frenzy. Thousands took part in the dances. In October Sitting Bull invited Kicking Bear to his camp (Huncpapa Sioux) to explain and teach the new dance. Sitting Bull himself was skeptical but felt that if this new thing could give strength to his people then he was willing to try. This decision caused panic among the whites. He was still the winner of Little Big Horn, and they were keeping a sharp eye on him.
The result was disastrous. There was an Indian connoisseur who said, "Let them dance, it will pass and it doesn’t hurt no one but if troops comes here things could get out of hand" but no one listened. Instead it was decided to arrest Sitting Bull. Exactly for what is unclear. He had not done anything other than dancing a religious dance. Police came and woke him early one morning and he asked for time to get dressed, eat breakfast and asked them to go get his horse. Instead, they began pushing and shoving and Sitting Bull then refused to come. His people discovered that something was going on and fights broke out during which Sitting Bull was killed by a shot to the head. The cavalry had to step in to rescue the police force but six policemen (Sioux) died. Sitting Bull's body was taken away and buried in a poor man's grave. The Sioux was furious. They fled the reserve and decided to join Big Foot, another Sioux Chief in another reserve. He was appalled at the news and fled his reserve as he rightly thought that the soldiers pursued them. Now about 350 Sioux were on the march, men, women and children, on the way to Pine Ridge. There they intended to seek refuge in Red Clouds reserve, he was 68 years old now, but still the most respected leader among the Sioux, among both Indians and whites. They never arrived
The Army caught up with the Indians who gave up and agreed to set up camp at Wounded Knee under the cavalry orders. After that they were surrounded by guards so they didn’t try to flee. On the morning of December 29 all would be disarmed, which not all Sioux agreed to. A Shaman, Yellow Bird, said that the bullets would not hurt them, but was ordered to keep quiet. Then a warrior, Black Coyote, said that he would not surrender his rifle. Their leader, Big Foot, was ill with the flu and had no influence. Then 4 Sioux took up their guns from their blankets and the massacre began. From three feet away the cavalry shot straight into the mass of the Sioux. It was the signal for heavier grenade like weapon to shoot from a greater distance toward the tents where the women and children were. Now, the Sioux were fighting, those that still could, with everything they had, which was not much. Women and children who survived fled into a ravine but were pursued, overtaken caught up and killed. Later one would find killed women and children, as far as 5 km from Wounded Knee. It is still unknown exactly how many Sioux who died at Wounded Knee. If you're nice 'only' 153 but a more likely figure is between 250 and 300. The cavalry lost 26 men, many of them shot by their own in the frenzied shooting that broke out. The weather got worse so they left the fallen on the ground. When finally a funeral company arrived five days later, they were frozen in grotesque positions which made the civilians in the company horrified. All were buried in a mass grave. Just over two weeks later, Kicking Bear put down his weapons. The many Indian wars in the west had found its end in the form of a massacre.
Afterword and sources
This article deals with so many tribes that nearly everything can’t be said. Also numerous tribes are not mentioned at all. What I try to do here is to give a summary of the history of the Indians of North America from the beginning until the last armed resistance ceased. By necessity a lot of omissions have been made. Some things are more complex than this article show but the choice was either to write a book full of interesting details or to simplify. I have simplified. I try to give a context of how certain events are linked to or lead to other events and I try to keep a chronological order even many different locations are covered But the length means that much needs to be skipped. This does not mean that it is not interesting. It is. I can only recommend those interested to read further. In my sources, I have mentioned a few examples, but there are many more.
Brown, Dee: Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee (1999)
Gwynne, S. J .: Empire of the Summer Moon (2011)
Lewis, Jon E .: The Mammoth Book of Native Americans (2004)
Page, Jake: In the Hands of the Great Spirit (2004)
Roberts, David: Once They moved like the wind: Cochise, Geronimo and the Apache Wars (1993)
Plog, Stephen: Ancient Peoples of the American Southwest (2008)
Wilson, James: The Earth Shall Weep (1998)
Lewis, Wilson, Page and Brown are overviews of the whole history told in different ways but they are all very readable. Gwynne is a great retelling of the Comanches history focusing on Quanah Parker. Roberts gives us a good retelling of causes and actions in the Apache wars. Plog is about the early cultures like Anasazi, Hohokam and Mogollon.
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Sept 29, 2020 22:31:39 GMT
I am familiar with much of this @kurben , but most definitely not all of it. Really enjoy what you do and how you present it all! Excellent work, Kurbie! Beyond impressive. I love world history, and there may be times (when I have time) I might ask you to write somethings about times and regimes I'd like to know more about. If you don't mind, that is. 🙂 This is all great, please keep your articles coming, Swedish Indie! 🙂 Thank you!
.....whut do YOU think edwardjohn ?.......great stuff! Isn't it? 🙂
|
|
|
Post by edwardjohn on Sept 29, 2020 22:36:08 GMT
I am familiar with much of this @kurben , but most definitely not all of it. Really enjoy what you do and how you present it all! Excellent work, Kurbie! Beyond impressive. I love world history, and there may be times (when I have time) I might ask you to write somethings about times and regimes I'd like to know more about. If you don't mind, that is. 🙂 This is all great, please keep your articles coming, Swedish Indie! 🙂 Thank you!
.....whut do YOU think edwardjohn ?.......great stuff! Isn't it? 🙂 Yep, excellent. Well done, @kurben.
|
|
|
Post by spideyman on Sept 29, 2020 22:43:28 GMT
@kurben
Beyond textbook quality. Superior writing. Fantastic history lessons. Thank you!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2020 22:50:42 GMT
I am familiar with much of this @kurben , but most definitely not all of it. Really enjoy what you do and how you present it all! Excellent work, Kurbie! Beyond impressive. I love world history, and there may be times (when I have time) I might ask you to write somethings about times and regimes I'd like to know more about. If you don't mind, that is. 🙂 This is all great, please keep your articles coming, Swedish Indie! 🙂 Thank you!
.....whut do YOU think edwardjohn ?.......great stuff! Isn't it? 🙂 You are of course free to ask me anything you want, Wolfie. Just remember i'm a man, not a machine, and dont know everything! But i'll try!!
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Sept 29, 2020 23:09:31 GMT
@kurben Beyond textbook quality. Superior writing. Fantastic history lessons. Thank you!! I agree wholeheartedly with spideyman , @kurben .
Famous quote from Crazy Horse : "Poke a hay!" ....meaning "A good day to die!"....... (Spelled phonetically, been a lot of years since I've heard, or read that quote.) ......I wish SOMEONE would complete the sculpting of his monument.
Interesting fact about the Cheyenne....they were expert horsemen, impressive, and took pride in breeding very fine Appaloosas. Blanket Appaloosa and leopard Appaloosa. Can't remember all of the sources I have learned these things from over the years. Sorry for that. I am most certainly no expert on anything here. 🙂
Quannah Parker was a fascinating figure/hero in Native American History, a lawyer among other things.....lol, look up his "toll for protection" practices! 😄 It's pretty cool. 🙂
By no means am I criticizing Kurbie, but the generally accepted spelling is "Hunkpapa", I do believe.....the "Souix" are the Lakota People......made up of the Dakota, Nakota, Hunkpapa, Oglala, Brule and others. Those are just the ones I can remember right now.....thank you for reviving some of my older interests., Kurben. 🙂 It'sbeen awhile since I've gotten to think about these things again. cheers! 🙂
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Sept 29, 2020 23:10:37 GMT
I am familiar with much of this @kurben , but most definitely not all of it. Really enjoy what you do and how you present it all! Excellent work, Kurbie! Beyond impressive. I love world history, and there may be times (when I have time) I might ask you to write somethings about times and regimes I'd like to know more about. If you don't mind, that is. 🙂 This is all great, please keep your articles coming, Swedish Indie! 🙂 Thank you!
.....whut do YOU think edwardjohn ?.......great stuff! Isn't it? 🙂 You are of course free to ask me anything you want, Wolfie. Just remember i'm a man, not a machine, and dont know everything! But i'll try!! I understand, Kurbie! 😊 You do a fine job! 😊
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2020 16:55:17 GMT
OK. Another article. This time i decided to dig deep into the origin of humans.
The Human Evolution
Introduction
How man became human is a long story and encompasses many millions of years. Exactly how many depends on where you choose to begin. If you e.g. start with the first primate (monkey) you have to go very many millions of years back in time. In this article, we focus on man. Her closest relative is the chimpanzee. They parted for about 6 million years ago when their last common ancestor should have been living. One can discuss the exact year with an error of a million years or so at both sides but six million years is a good starting point for our purposes.
We will, in chronological order, go through various hominids that lived before us and where they belong in our family tree and what role they played. But it is difficult, almost impossible, to go through them all. No one, not even the experts agree on how many species there are and how they fit together. Some would like to see as few species as possible and merge multiple species into one with the motivation that they are variants of each other, not their own species. Others do the opposite. The result is that their family trees look quite different.
I have chosen a middle ground. Some species are skipped or only mentioned in passing when I thought that the arguments that they are a variation is much better than the arguments for a single species. But all the main players in the hominid evolution are covered. In addition one must, unfortunately, keep in mind the trend in this industry. To name a species, especially if it is an ancestor of man, is large and can mean a career while to find a variant is not quite the same thing. I will consistently use the abbreviation cc (cubic centimeter), which is the accepted measurement when it comes to brain size.
A Little Anatomy
Human evolution is characterized by both morphological and behavioral changes. How can one see such things from old fossil bones? Bipedalism, which is perhaps the most fundamental difference between ape and early man, can be seen in many ways. There are toe and foot bones and ankle and knee joint that tells us a lot. When you are walking on two legs, it means that you carry a greater weight on the legs. Therefore, ankles and knee joints become stronger. Your arms should be shorter. One can walk but to run well the arms need to form a good pendulum motion which is more difficult with long arms. The femur is changed so that it is more centered to the middle of the body to facilitate balance. The spine becomes a little S-shaped to better support the increased weight.
The pelvis is perhaps the most drastic change. It becomes narrower which is a prerequisite for true bipedalism but it also means that children need care a little longer. That in turn means greater cooperation between individuals. In the skull the foramen magnum, the hole in the skull through which the spinal column connect, moves slightly so that it sits on the bottom of the skull instead of at the back as in quadrupeds. And all this for bipedalism. We really wanted to walk on two legs but why? What was the big advantage? There is no agreement.
Enigmatic predecessors
Before we get to the species that played a certain role in human development, there are some species that are too little known to say anything certain about but interesting enough to be mentioned. Just outside the limit of our article is Oreopithecus (Monkey at the height) who lived around 7-9 million years ago in Tuscany in present Italy. We do not descend from her. She lived during a time when Tuscany was an island and had no competition. The interesting thing about her is that she walked on two legs, at least partially. She is an example of that bipedalism can be developed in other places but it was a different type of bipedalism than ours. When large predators came to Tuscany when it became part of the mainland again Oreopithecus became an easy target and went extinct.
Two species that maybe, just maybe, has with man to do is Orrorin and Sahelanthropus. They are found in Kenya (Orrorin) and Chad (Sahelanthropus) and could be close to the common link purely from a temporal point of view. Orrorin is believed to be about 5.7-6.2 million. years old. Sahelanthropus is believed to be 6.5-7.0 million. years old. They are the oldest known fossils that could be part of the human part of the pedigree. But it's a big if. Without more fossil finds it is impossible to say anything definite. Orrorin probably went upright but as we have seen in the case of Oreopithecus that it mustn’t mean anything. In the case of Sahelanthropus they have just found the skull and it's hard to say anything certain from it. Anyway, both discoveries are very important but exactly where they belong in terms of kinship we do not know yet. There's also the possibility that they did not have any descendants. That their branch of the family tree died out with them. We do not know.
There's a lot of finds of hominids (ancient man) but there is no ancient apes. We know roughly how a hominid looked 3 million years ago, but we do not have a clue how a chimpanzee looked like at that time. Therefore, we assume carelessly that the common ancestor should have been more like an ape than a human.. But it's really a guess. If we knew more about the evolution of ancient apes (Pongidae), we would also have a better idea of how a possible common ancestor could have looked like. It also explains the heated debate that flared up around these two (Orrorin and Sahelanthropus). It is easy to argue both for and against that one of these was the first step on the road to humans since we separated from the chimpanzee. The reason for this lack of apefossils is believed to be that they lived in the woods, where fossil is easily broken down because of the acidity of the soil. This is not a very good explanation because the first humans were also forest creatures even if it explains it partially.
Ardipithecus
Ardipithecus Ramidus, or Ardi as he is known more familiarly, and his predecessor Ard. Kadabba are two more interesting finds. Kadabba (the word means oldest ancestor in the local language of Ethiopia) has been dated to 5.8 to 5.2 million years old. The evidence that he walked on two legs is based on some toe bones found separately. It is likely that they belong to the same species as the other findings but it can’t be proved. If Kadabba was bipedal, he did not walk in the way that we do. He was a little roughly chimpanzee big creature that lived in the forest near open spaces and ate nuts, fibers and roots. His teeth suggests that, whether he walked on two legs or not, he was a hominid. The monkeys use their large canines to fight over females. Kadabba could not do that, suggesting that they cooperated which was probably necessary for survival.
Kadabba is followed by Ramidus (Ardi). Ardi means basic and Ramidus root in Afar, the local Ethiopian language. His bipedalism is also controversial but is likely and he also had another way to walk. His big toe is completely different than ours which affects the way he walked pretty much. The dated find gives us an age of 4.4 million years ago, but he probably lived both earlier and later. His teeth suggest a more varied diet than his predecessor Kadabba. A more human diet in which fruits and other more easily chewed foods were included. But Ardi was not a hunter. Ardi lived in the woods and is clear evidence that the theory that bipedalism arose in the savannah because of the need to stand on our feet to see far is incorrect. She was perhaps 1.20 m above the ground and weighed about 50 kg. Her brain was small, only 300 cc (our brain is about 1350 cc). So Ardi is also a proof that bipedalism arrived well before the brain becomes bigger.
But there are problems. When it comes to Ardi it has a lot to do with the extremely poor condition the type exemplar was in when she was found. How reliable are the findings? We need more finds of both species to be safe. Their kinship to man is extremely unclear. His successor, Australopithecus, have large differences in many aspects and the likelihood that they are a direct descendant of Ardi is small. Ardi has such great physical differences compared with the first Australopithecus that evolution would not only have worked overtime but in light speed to make all the changes in just 200,000 years. Did Ardi die out? Or are all Australopithecines (and there are many) just a sidebranch in the human family tree which the discoverers argues? It is not likely. During the following 2 million years, only Australopithecines are found and to dismiss them as ancestors without specifying an alternative is bad science, especially when the finds are few and in poor condition. Currently Ardi looks like a sidebranch in the evolution that led nowhere. New discoveries can quickly change it. But it creates a new problem. If not Ardi was the forerunner of Australopithecus then who was? From Orrorin to the first Australopithecus there is 1.5 million. years. Just more finds can provide answers.
Lucy's Predecessors
The first species of the large family Australopithecus (means southern ape) named Aust. Anamensis (Anam means lake in Afar). She lived between 4.2 and 3.9 million years ago. She is the first hominid we know that not only walks but also walks in the same way as we do. From the findings from the foot, ankle and kneejoint we can see that her bipedalism was very similar to our own. But there was much else that was different. Her lower jaw, for example, was more U-shaped than V-shaped as in more advanced forms. Her arms and legs were proportionately longer than ours which probably made her a good climber. She lived on the ground but could climb up into the trees for food and, above all, protection. .
Their teeth suggest that they ate quite hard chewed food. Nuts, vegetables and root vegetables and assorted fruits. They were probably small, 1.20 long, and lived in the forest. One thing, for once, everyone agrees on at in the scientific community is that they gave rise to Lucy (Aus. Afarensis). There is another proposed successor, a species so far only found in one copy, Kenyaanthropus (The Ape from Kenya). It is not at all impossible. But since that only found is in relatively bad condition, I will not go into it. What must be emphasized is that from now on there lived many hominid species simultaneously. It is a fact which makes it hard to say for certain what species gave rise to the next. That there is, as today, only one existing human species is an exception during human evolution.
Lucy (Aust. Afarensis)
Probably the most well-known finding in human prehistory was the discovery of Lucy in the 70s. It is also one of the best known species. They have found bones from well over 300 individuals, which is a lot for a single species. In addition there are footprints preserved from this species, at Laetoli in Tanzania they have discovered footprints of two individuals who have been preserved in volcanic ash. They tell us a lot. By studying the 27-meter long trace series, we can see that they walked as we do. That means they sat down their heel first and then pushed off with their toes. Just as we do today. We can also see that they took rather short strides and therefore probably could not run very fast. To be completely accurate ... One cannot of course be one hundred percent sure that it was Afarensis who left these footprints but she is the only hominid species that has left fossils in the same layer just a little bit from there. There is no credible other candidates for these 3.6 million year old footprints.
Afarensis (Afar is the name of the province in Ethiopia, where Lucy was found) was a very long-lived and successful species. She lived between 3.9 - 3.0 mill. years. That's more than four times as long as Homo sapiens has lived. She also lived through some climate changes, suggesting that she had the very human capacity to adapt. Since she lived that long there are variations within the species. One can see that the size of the brain begins to increase with time. From 400 cc to 550 cc. That is still a small brain size (ours is about 1350 cc) but it is a clear example of a trend towards larger brain size. It is the first time we see it within a hominid species. Her size on the other hand, had not undergone any major changes. She varies between 1.20 m and 1.30 m medium height. It seems to be the length that was the best. The length of human ancestors would not vary much over the next 2 million. years. Why this is so is debatable but personally I think it has to do with that it was easier to hide from predators (and climb trees) if one was not too big and heavy. It was not until man became an active hunter that she reached our lengths and more.
Thanks to that they have found so many examples of the species you can see that there is a strong Saxual dimorphism in the species. It simply means that men are significantly larger than the women. As an average one can say that the male is 1.50 m while the female is 1.10. That is not an unusual feature in a species. These differences in size are still with us today, although it is not so big.. Something you also can see is that Afarensis, just as chimpanzees, become adults much faster than humans do today. She then had a much shorter childhood than what man has today. Reasons for this, one can speculate in but I am inclined to think it has everything to do with the size of the brain. When the brain began to grow significantly in the human species we was forced to give birth when the child was in a more incomplete state than before so the skull could pass the pelvis. This meant that the brain had more development to recoup after birth than before, which led to a prolonged childhood. Lucy and her relatives had no long childhood but they were forced to cooperate to survive. She had no claws or sharp teeth so her survival was dependent on cooperation.
The type find is called Lucy (and is named after the Beatles song "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" because it was played when the discovery was made) and is the most complete skeleton of a single individual that has been found of a really old species. Over 40% of the skeleton was found and when we add the reflections (e.g. if we have the left ribs, we also know how the right ribs looked like) than that figure increases. Afarensis was also a bit more versatile than its predecessor. It ate basically what it came across even if it focused on vegetarian food. It is entirely possible that, like the modern chimpanzee, they used sticks and stones as tools. There is some evidence to suggest it but nothing can be proved. It is believed that as the species lived long it did have several followers.
Lucy's successors
Among the species that appear after Lucy there are two main directions. The time is now about 3 million. years ago and a savannah begins to spread on the forest's expense. There were those who found their way further into the forest and you see an adaptation of the teeth, jaw and muscular attachments to a more hard chewed food. The first of these probably stems from Lucy. They are called Robust australopithecines and has recently been transferred to a separate genus, Paranthropus (the name means beside man). More about them later. The others went in the opposite direction and adapted slightly to the changed circumstances. They are called gracile australopithecines and one of these was probably the one that gave rise to the first Homo species.
Aust. Garhi (Garhi means surprise in Afar) is one of them and found relatively recently. She was, as the name indicates, a surprise to the researchers. She is dated to 2.5 million. years ago. This means that she is much younger than the youngest afarensis. Unfortunately only a few finds of this species has been found but an intriguing detail is that they found extremely primitive stone tools nearby. Were those made by Garhi? If so, she is a strong candidate for an intermediate link between Lucy and the first Homo. The findings can also be interpreted as belonging to Afarensis because of the brain size (450 cc) and the body size is comparable even though it seems like Garhi had slightly longer legs than Lucy. But that would mean that afarensis existed as a species in nearly 1.5 million. year, which is extremely long. Therefore, many prefer to put her up as a separate species, while waiting for more finds.
Another candidate is Aust. Africanus. There has been many discoveries of him which means that he is a well-established species. He can be dated to approximately 3.0-2.1 million. years ago. He is a bit bigger (120-1.40 m) and has a little less Saxual dimorphism. Brain size is equivalent (450 cc) with Afarensis. All this goes very well with what we want from a predecessor to Homo. The problem with Africanus is another. It has only been found in South Africa. If it originates from Afarensis, which it from a purely anatomical point of view seems to do, how did that happen? All previous findings of early humans comes from East Africa. Some Afarensis near South Africa does not exist. Still it's very uncertain where, when and how the development of Afarensis to Africanus occurred. Additionally some scholars today sees it more as an intermediary towards the more robost variety that followed. They believe more in Garhi as Homos predecessor but since the first Homo has been found in both Eastern and Southern Africa, it is still possible.
The Robusts (Paranthropus)
This is a side branch of the human family tree. But they were a viable adaptation that lived alongside other types of people for at least 1.5 million years. The oldest type is called P. aethiopicus and lived 2.7-2.3 million years ago. It is very likely evolved from Afarensis and has only been found in East Africa but has been adapted to eating harder foods. This can be seen by a bonecomb that has emerged at the top of the skull where the very powerful jaw muscles were attached. Physically it was not bigger since the robustness lies in the teeth, the skull and the muscles. We have found too little of it to determine if it also, like Afarensis, had a big size difference between males and females.
Next is P. Robustus. It was the first robust man found. It is believed to have lived between 2.3 and 1.2 million. years ago. Here there are plenty of finds, and we know that, in addition to the traits that characterize all species from this genus, it had a rather big Saxual dimorphism. But it was a small creature. from 1.20 m in the males to about 1.0 m in females. Its brain size was much like a chimpanzee, 450-550 cc. It is believed that it evolved from Africanus because it is found almost exclusively in southern Africa. In this case, it could be an example of parallel evolution, because it is not directly related to Aethipiocus. Such an evolution is not uncommon in mammals, a good example is the so-called saber-toothed cats that have appeared here and there in the cat-familys evolution. Many of these are not directly related but examples of that similar circumstances can produce similar adaptations.
The third robust is only found in East Africa and has almost certainly evolved from Aethiopicus. He is called P. boisei. and lived between 2.3 and 1.2 million. He was larger than his cousin in South Africa, 1.40 for males and 1.20 for females while the brain capacity stood at 500-550 cc. He was also the most robust hominid that ever existed. His jaws were enormous. The teeth are significantly larger than in any other human. Probably for P. boisei roots, nuts and other hard materials were chewed Robusts had existed for 1.5 million years, but for 1.2 million years ago, they died out and left the stage free for Homo. But why did they die out? It was, quite obviously, a successful adaptation. The dominant theory is that it was due to climate change. One occurred at this time. These creatures were much harder adapted to a niche than their more allround human cousins. The more adapted you are the greater is also the risk of being severely affected by a change. To take the saber-toothed cats as an example again: it is believed that many of these died out just because their prey, which they were designed to kill, died out. This would mean, for the robusts, that perhaps some important food in their diet became very rare, maybe some kind of plant? Exactly what we will probably never know. Since they all have the same adaptation the researchers chose to place them in a different family than their last common ancestor, Afarensis. They are considered to be so different.
The Toolmaker
The first Homo, Homo habilis (the name means the handy man), was not big. The largest known specimen was about 130 cm. It lived between 2.4 - 1.4 million. years and thus existed throughout its existence side by side with the robusts. They'd probably lived a rather different way of life and therefore did not see so much of each other. Habilis had a slightly larger brain than his contemporaries, between 550-690 cc, and it certainly was the one who helped them make the many tools that can be found in connection with them. They were not the first tools but they were the first to be produced in big quantities. But the tools were limited. There was no hunting tool or tools to defend themselves with but they were made to get food. Habilis had, unlike the robust, started to adapt to the savannah. She played a similar role then as a hyena does in today's animal world. Using the tools she cut quickly and efficiently flesh of dead and injured animals. She was not a hunter but more of a scavenger. But it was also a dangerous way of life. Habilis was a common prey for the saber-toothed cat Dinofelis.
The thing that most clearly distinguishes Homo from Australopithecus in the early stages are brain capacity. It was a trend that began in Habilis although it had not gone so far that there are large differences yet. But why is it good to have a big brain? It had been good enough with the smaller brain in the past. According to the climate model the change in climate around 2.5 million years ago forced our previous mostly vegetarian ancestors to find a new food source, animals, and to find them and find a way to remove the meat from them required a larger brain. It is a tempting hypothesis, but nothing is certain. Another theory argues that the larger brain was needed for the early humans to interact within the group in a more efficient manner. A combination is also conceivable.
But there were also changes in the skeleton. The arms were slightly shorter and legs slightly longer and when they began to eat the relatively easily chewed meat the big teeth was no longer needed so they decreased in size. Meat is vastly more easily chewed than root crops and other vegetable food. If it is not cooked, of course, but the invention of cooking still lay in the future. All these developments started with Habilis even if they were refined in later Homo species. Habilis is the most suggested species from which all other Homo evolved but there was another contemporary species. It is only found in one find, H. Rudolfiensis, and is distinguished by a slightly larger brain, 750cc, than Habilis and the teeth and jaws, which is more reminiscent of Australopithecus. These contradictory traits makes it enigmatic. It can be dated to 1.9 million years.
The Pioneer
The next player is one of the great forerunners. Unfortunately, it's a little name confusion around him. In Africa he is called H. ergaster (worker) and in Asia H. Erectus (the upright man) but basically they are probably the same species. He brought humans out of Africa and spread them around the world, especially Asia. For some reason they do not seem to have been particularly interested in Europe. Ergaster shows up in Africa about 1.8 million years ago. That is 400,000 years before Habilis died out. Therefore, it is unlikely that Ergaster evolved directly from Habilis, especially considering the large differences. It almost have to be something, as yet undiscovered, intermediate. Ergaster is about 1.80 long as his longest and 1.40 as his shortest and studies of the skeleton suggests that she is adapted to run much more than before. This is probably an adaptation to facilitate hunting. She could run long distances while many of her prey was good for short distances but not so good in the long run. In addition to the hunt it is ergaster who is also the first to use fire. The fire had many uses. It was a shelter and it was a weapon, but it also meant that cooking became possible which helped tremendously. In addition, the warmth it gave and it was a natural focal point.
Almost instantly the species ventured out of Africa. It shows up in different places and if you heard the words Peking Man and Java Man, it's Homo Erectus we’re talking about. There is an early version in Georgia, H. Georgicus, which the discoverers want to be a separate species but everything indicates that it is Erectus who adapted to a colder climate and nothing more. In that Erectus is so widespread not only in time but also in the room that there are large variations within the species. Just as within our own species that occur in many different forms depending on where we find him. H. Erectus existed as a species between 1.8 million. year to 0.15 million. It is the longest any human species survived. Almost nine times as long as we have existed. It would have been strange if they had not developed variations. Their brain capacity varies between 800-1200 cc. They had therefore almost as big brains as we have. But while the species spread throughout Asia, things happened in Africa.
Ergaster, as the species is known in Africa, evolved into a new species in Africa. The branch of the species was probably quite isolated from the rest of the species so it is likely. The last reliable Ergaster is found for 1.4 million years ago. About 0.8 million years ago a new Homo species appears in Africa, Homo heidelbergensis. The name comes from the first discoveries that were made in Heidelberg, germany. There is a gap of 600,000 years in the fossil discoveries that are a bit disturbing. Did Ergaster live longer? Or Did H. heidelbergensis come before? Or is there room for a yet undiscovered species in the gap? All three variants are possible, but the most likely is a mixture of 1 and 2. Unfortunately, at that time the fossil finds are poor in Africa in general. Once the H. heidelbergensis evolved, he made just like its predecessor had done. He walked out of Africa.
What characterizes the species H. Erectus? There is evidence that it is the first species we know who really took care of the elderly and helpless individuals. They have found individuals who were completely toothless for many years and who must have had help with preparing food that did not need to be chewed. Likewise skeletal injuries that must have been a handicap but who still lived on. We also know that these behaviors show up early in the species' life when the brain size is still low at 800-900 cc. That is evidence that large brain capacity is not necessary to display complex, highly human behavior. Erectus could probably speak, not as good as we might, but they needed a well-functioning communication in groups and large hunting parties. They were very efficient hunters and the invention of cooking meant that it was easier to do mushes and soups which brought another kind of nourishment. Erectus is the first man who completely abandoned the trees, also as protection in case of emergency. She trusted the Fire.
The First man in Europe
When H. heidelbergensis evolved from Homo Erectus / ergaster she spread not in the same way as Erectus had done. She preferred Europe over Asia, perhaps because it was empty of people there and less competition and perhaps for some other reason. The earliest evidence of humans comes from Spain. It is dated to 1.2 million. years and is sometimes given a separate species, H. Antecessor. I have in this article chosed to treat them as early examples of H. heidelbergensis. The evolution of Ergaster to Heidelbergensis should then have taken place for approximately 1.3 million years ago. The differences lie in a bigger brain, 1100-1400 cc (just a little below our average), but also in an adaptation to a colder climate. They are heavily built, which saves heat for the body as opposed to the previously quite graceful human types including Erectus. Heidelbergensis is the first man who made that kind of adaptation which may also be the answer to why Erectus did not care about Europe. She is also the first to build protection for the elements of stone and wood. Erectus appears to have been satisfied with caves and animalfurs.
The men were maybe 175 cm and the women 160 cm. They have found a grave containing 28 bodies, but if it should be interpreted ritual, in a religious sense, or perhaps as a mass grave for getting rid of dead bodies at an epidemic is impossible to say. There is a population of this species in southern Africa about 500,000 years ago that did not need to think about adaptation to cold. There the usual length was 2.10 m. The longest humans discovered! But it was a local adaptation, in Europe, they were much shorter. They were also, as far as we know, the first real big game hunters among men. Erectus had hunted but the really big animals he seems to have left alone. But Heidelbergensis brought down even elephants and rhinos with several other large animals. On the basis of how the tools are made and how they are used, one can conclude that they, like us, were mostly right-handed. They also were the first people who came over to England, probably on a then existing landbridge.
Considering that it is not surprising that they evolved to the two most successful hunters among humankind. The most likely scenario is that a group, perhaps in Israel or in western Europe, evolved into the Neanderthal for about 350,000 years ago. Another group, in Africa, evolved into our species (Homo sapiens) for about 200,000 years ago. The last Heidelbergensis lived about 200,000 years ago. Heidelbergensis was in many ways the base of all the following humans but she and all the other Homo lacked the characteristic of our species; the small bony prominence that we call the chin and the high, almost straight forehead. In other species, the forehead is rounded. It's not brain size that is the difference anymore. The next man had a larger brain than we have today.
The Neanderthal
Most believe that she developed in Europe and then spread from there to Israel, Iraq and Syria to the south and to the east to western Asia as well. Neither heidelbergensis or H. neanderthalensis spread, however, as far east as Erectus had done before. It is the main reason why Erectus survived so long in the east. It had no competitors there. The Neanderthal never spread to Africa and is one of the few types of humans who have never been there. It is the human species with the largest brain that ever lived, 1300-1600 cc (an average of 1400), but it has retained some of the traits that we call primitive. For example, the eyebrow ridges. We do not know what they were good for really just as we do not know what our chin is good for. He was about 1.70 long which is a bit shorter compared to our own species. But the Neanderthal was like us. If we put on him a hat, so that the eyebrows and the low forehead wouldn’t be seen so much, and modern clothes we would perhaps think that he was very powerfully built and that he must have trained a lot, but not much more.
That he could speak is virtually certain. Neanderthal is the only species besides our own that we have found some tongue bones, a kind of very fragile bone or ligament that seldom is preserved. Since they are very fragile the absence does not mean much, but if they are present, it means that the tongue could move well enough to form words. He was stronger and probably much stronger than our species ever was. He hunted but used only stick spears They were probably not intended to be thrown. This meant that the hunt was from close range and accidents in terms of injuries was probably common. Especially considering that she hunted the biggest creatures that were, Mammoth and wholly rhino. But the Neanderthal took care of their wounded and carried out advanced operations on them. You can, in find material see broken bones which have been put right and even a few operations in the brain, known as trepanations. They made a small hole in the skull so that the brain could be seen. Why is unclear, but what is clear is that they have been good at it for the patients have miraculously survived even such interventions.
Thus it is clear that they took care of their own in life but what the Neanderthal is the first to do is to take care of them even after life. The first burials that surely indicates a present ritual and probably thoughts and ideas about the afterlife appears in Neanderthal findings. They are rare but they are there. He used red ocher, just as H. sapiens did later, at their funerals. Grave goods were few but were present in the form of simple tools but also in form of plants and flowers. It is the first secure trace on an abstract thought that humans exhibit. Neanderthal had almost certainly formed an opinion about life after death. Why should they otherwise give good gifts to the dead? They made no representations of any deity that Sapiens later did, but it is likely that they had beliefs about gods / spirits and how the world worked. How these beliefs looked like we can not know but because they lived in the wild by nature, and were dependent on it for survival, it is possible that it had similarities with the Mother Goddess cult that early Homo Sapiens displayed.
Neanderthal dominated Europe unchallenged until Homo sapiens made her entrance there about 40,000 years ago. Then she began to disappear. One of the great debates in the scientific community was how this happened. Where there many warlike meetings? Did the species mate with each other? Or was it a slow extinction more depending on the climate than the competition? There is genetic evidence that some of the Neanderthal DNA has gone over to our gene pool. So the species must have mated with each other. But there are many indications that this movement of DNA occurred shortly after Homo sapiens first moved away from Africa and met Neanderthal in Israel, Syria and Iraq. Where there is evidence that the two species lived near each other and had roughly equal tools. This should have taken place for maybe about 90,000 to 70,000 years ago. When our kind of man spread northward, the difference was larger and settlements were no longer close. Although there probably were a number of matings in Europe (rape has unfortunately always existed in human history) most of the DNA exchange between the two species probably took place previously. After having lived in parallel in Europe for more than 10,000 years the Neanderthal went extinct. The last specimens are found in Gibraltar about 27,000 years ago. But before we discuss our own species, we need to look at a rarity in human evolution. The Hobbit!
The Hobbit
He got his nickname from JRR Tolkien's books but his real name is Homo floresiensis (Flores Man). Flores is an island in Indonesia located east of the main island of Java. Before the Hobbit was found the Island was known mostly because it is one of three places where the big Komodo dragon is found wild. Before the islands split up into their present form they were a contiguous land area but Flores was early isolated by water. In 2002, a discovery that puzzled the whole scientific community, was made. A full grown female who shared many traits in the head appearance with H. Erectus. But her brain was about the size of a chimpanzee, about 400 cc, and she was only about 1 meter tall. But she made tools and hunted Stegodon, a now extinct elephant species. She was, in short, a mystery and she caused a huge brawl in the scientific community
The trouble was due to the size and on the localities where she was found which meant a threat to many existing development models of human prehistory. The size of the body is no big problem. There are pygmies in Africa that is not greater but the problem is that even if they are short the pygmies do have a modern skull that is just as big as a normal individual. Therefore, many wanted to see it as a modern skull suffering from some illness such as mikrocelography (Small brain). The problem was that the rest of the body also had primitive traits. No disease can explain, for example, that the wrist is of a type that is not found in more advanced types of people (like H.Heidelbergensis, H. Neandertalensis and H. sapiens). However, there is that kind of wrist in species like H. Erectus and H. Habilis. The size of the body is most reminiscent of Habilis or even an Australopithecus. Now there has been found 12 individuals, so we have to accept that it exists. To begin to talk about the disease, which some researchers still do, is unworthy and makes one remember how the first Neandertalfossils was interpreted in the 1850s. They were not ancient, they were modern but came from an individual suffering from a bone disease it was said. That the same argument is used now is, I think, a tragedy. We should have learned to accept evidence, not explain them away.
But how should one interpret this new evidence? That is a highly relevant issue. There are actually sensible explanations. First, we must accept that they got there. Either by boat, which would mean that Homo sapiens was not the first people with boats which is a blow to our pride and which some researchers have difficulty accepting. One can also imagine a kind of improvised raft. The currents in the area goes from the north to south so if you started from the big island of Sulawesi and drifted with the currents chances are decent that it would reach Flores. There are tools on Sulawesi reminiscent of the tools on Flores which agrees well with H. Erectus. When man had arrived to Flores (when we do not know) she was isolated. She must adapt to the island's small size and thus smaller selection of food to survive. A common adaptation that large and medium-sized mammals sometimes do in such cases is to reduce body size.
The great advantage of this is that you need to eat a lot less to maintain energy level, which for a man means fewer animals to kill. The same adaptation had the Stegodon found on Flores, and which apparently was one of the animals the Hobbit hunted, undergone. They were dwarfs compared to mainland Stegodon. The most famous, now living, example is the Borneo dwarf elephants that are endangered. There has been a reluctance to accept that also humans can adapt in this way. The idea was that we humans do not develop a thicker coat if it gets colder. We invent fire and sew clothes! It is a short-sighted mindset that seeks to deny that, even if we are the most intelligent animal, we are still animals and follows the laws of nature. This phenomenon is known by biologists as "Island dwarfism" and is common.
Some would rather see a development from Habilis or Australopethicin given the size but until there is no evidence that they ever existed outside of Africa, it is pure speculation without any supporting facts whatsoever. So how finds looks today is the absolute most likely that it evolved from Homo Erectus in isolation on Flores. From the discoveries made so far, one can date it to between 95,000 years and 17,000 years. It is thus the human species that is the latest to have coexisted with us. It is such a new discovery that more discoveries will probably eventually, both from Flores and surrounding islands, shed some more light on the Hobbits history. Something that lacks probative value but is fascinating is local, very old, stories from Flores talking about Apu Gawi. That was a creature that was only half as large as a normal human being and lived in the forest in caves. According to the stories they didn’t die out until the 1600s. Are The Hobbits the basis of that legend? We can only speculate.
The Sensible Man?
Our species is called Homo Sapiens (the sensible man) but if it's a fitting name can be discussed. But we are unique. We are the only one of the many variants of man that ever lived, that remains today and we dominate the world just like the Neanderthal once dominated Europe. What really happened? H. sapiens evolved from H. heidelbergensis in Africa about 200,000 years ago. And she walked out of Africa about 100,000 years ago and met his cousin H. neanderthalensis in Israel and Syria. The interesting thing about this meeting is that the rapid displacement that took place in Europe did not happen here. These H. sapiens leaves no artistic remnants behind which can be compared to what they later did in Europe. But for 60-50.000 years ago, something happens. Not a trend that can be seen in the bone material but can be seen in the artefacts. The tools are getting better and moving away from the Neanderthal technology. It seems that some kind of a development in the brain occurred that freed the creative forces that is the big difference between us and our predecessors. And 40,000 years ago, H. sapiens (Cromagnon-man as he is also called) enters Europe and Fine Art is created.
The cave paintings are perhaps the prime example of early human artistic talent but far from the only one. She makes figurines of animals and humans that are both beautiful works of art and showing how much time was spent on art. A common design is known as the "The Mother Goddess '. A female figure with large breasts and clearly marked vagina without facial features. But she's also practical. She invents javelin thrower (atlatl) that allows one to throw the spear from a greater distance, which means less risk for the hunter. But what did the cave art mean? The scenes depicted are often very vivid and you can still see which species they are portraying. That they have, at least many of them, a religious meaning is clear. Many of the caves are difficult to reach and not too many can be gathered in them. One interpretation that many propagate for is a form of early shamanism. It is based on that the nature they lived in had spirits. Each animal, river and trees has its own spirit that they live in harmony with. When they depict something, it is thus to pay tribute to the animal's spirit, humor it or honor it. Not to give the hunters good luck which is another, now a bit outdated, theory. The first theory explains, which the other do not, why there are also depictions of predators. It would then be due to perhaps if a lion killed somebody and that would then be seen as a manifestation of the spirit of the lion was dissatisfied. Therefore, it was humored by a painting. Food animals, however, are the large majority which is consistent with the theory. That people who lived by nature often developed a form of shamanism is a fact. The most famous example is perhaps the North American Indians. But this is a theory, not a fact. It is something you should always keep in mind.
About the same time that the brain evolved, H. Sapiens learned to build good boats and first discovered Australia and then through a land bridge from Siberia she entered North America and spread over both North and South America. The animals in Africa, Asia and Europe had evolved alongside humans and learned over many thousands of years that humans meant danger. The animals in the Americas and Australia did not have that experience. The mass extinction of large mammals which takes place shortly after the man's arrival is probably attributable to that animals that previously had counted on their size and speed as protection suddenly could not do it anymore. They had not learned to fear humans and became an easy prey. That is a tendency that goes a long way back in H. Sapiens short history. We are good at extinction.
Some question marks
Do we know everything about human development? Of course not! There are lots of question marks to ponder. I am going to mention some of the largest in no particular order. The first is H. Ergaster. When he shows up at 1.8 million years ago in Africa it is a bit amazing. Where did he come from? The former species, H. Habilis, lived alongside Ergaster in 400,000 years. That he would have developed directly from Habilis is unlikely partly because of the large anatomical differences but also because they coexisted for so long. For a new species to evolve a certain level of isolation is necessary so that the differences, in this case big differences, can develop.There must almost be an intermediary species and it must be at the beginning of Habilis existence and before Ergaster appears. For about 2.0 million years ago. But no finds exist. We can build theories but it's fieldwork that gives us our building blocks. Here there is a missing building block.
Ardipithecus and the early hominids is a big question mark. Ardi are the only species that exists within a certain time span, but the differences speaks against her as our ancestor. The foot and especially the big toe looks more like an apetoe when climbing the branches than human or even a chimps toes. An adaptation to a life that probably was spent at least as much, if not more, in the trees than on the ground. That means that if Ardi is a sidebranch it opens up an ocean of time between Australopithecus and Orrorin. Between them it is a 1.5 million -year gap in human evolutionary history. The time between 5.7 million. year and 4.2 million. is extremely poor in finds. Here are questions marks that need to be straightened out.
H. Habilis is found in both eastern and southern Africa. But where did she evolve? In Eastern Africa (A. Garhi) or South (A. Africanus)? And how did A. Africanus get to South Africa? Did she go there, evolved into H. Habilis and then walked back to East Africa? Or did A. Africanus first, and then H. Habilis wander south? Africanus has only been found south but he can not be have evolved out of nothing. A third option is that a small group A. Afarensis walked south, and evolved into A. Africanus in southern Africa. All variants are possible. How the spread of hominids from eastern Africa to the south took place is an unanswered question. It is also an important issue for understanding our early development. Africa is big and it is hoped we shall make finds somewhere between Eastern and Southern Africa. It would not solve all the problems but at least it would dispel some fogs.
Afterword and sources
First a few words about evolution models. The model that this article is based on is commonly called Out Of Africa model. This is in contrast to the multi-regional model. It claims that H .Erectus arose in Asia (the version I called H.Georgicus in the article) and spread to Africa. Where it later evolved into Heidelbergensis and Sapiens. The vast majority of scientists reject it and it does not try to explain from where Erectos should have evolved if it originated in Asia. And when you say out of Africa it must be realized that this was not a one-way traffic. and that people naturally migrated back and forth. Three types of people have migrated out of Africa; Ergaster / erectus, Heidelbergensis and Sapiens but they probably did it more than once. The year I mention in the article is the first time that the species move out of Africa.
A few words about my sources. Johansens and Wong's book is a personal coherent overview that focuses on Australopithecus although it deals with all species. Finlayson moves around Neanderthal and Heidelbergensis and how they are related to other people and why they died out. Stringers book is more a discussion of issues than an overview. It is very focused on Homo. Dawkins has, at the beginning of his book, some short articles that in a good way explains how the genetic clock works and where the numbers come from. He is mainly a biologist. The Smithsonian is a good website about human origin. Agusti & Anton is a good book on mammal evolution and everything associated with saber-toothed tigers come from him. Lewis-Williams is a great specialist on cave paintings and their meanings. Of course there are many others. These are just a small selection.
Sources:
Finlayson, Clive: The Humans who went extinct, (2009)
Lewis-Williams, David: The Mind in the Cave (2002)
Johansen, Donald & Wong, Kate: Lucy's Legacy (2009)
Stringer, Chris; Lone Survivors, (2012)
Dawkins, Richard: The Ancestors Tale (2004)
Smithsonian Museum of Natural History website see link below (2014)
Agusti, Jordi & Anton Mauricio: Mammoths, Sabertooths and Hominids (2002)
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Oct 18, 2020 22:42:48 GMT
Great work @kurben . Really enjoying what you bring. I've been really busy with work, but checking in everywhere I can. When I can. Haven't read all of the last articles yet, but I will.
And wanted to tell you that enjoyed the first "Egypt's Pharaohs" very much! Especially liked the part about the "Ptolemy's"......Cleopatra is a fascinating figure in Egyptian history. Somewhere I have a National Geographic, from a few years ago, about her and a lost tomb that they think my have been her's. One of these days I need to find that and read it again.
Keep them coming Kurbie! Please. 😊
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2020 16:15:14 GMT
Here is my next article. Hope you like it.
The Roman Republic
To try to understand the Roman Republic, its beginnings, its driving force and finally its fall, we cannot begin with the first year of the Republic. We must look deeper, to the beginning of Rome. And to do that, we need to look at myths, legends, and the few facts that survived Rome's first centuries as a city. I intend to try to tell about Rome from the first settlement to the collapse of the republic a few decades before the birth of Christ. As a result, all years are BC. A number of important people we will go a little deeper into, but most will just glimpse past, for reasons of space. A remark before we begin; up to about 300 bc, the sources are very uncertain, full of glorifications and pure myths about what happened. I have tried to peel away some of this without losing the narrative context that a story needs. The reader must decide if I have succeeded.
The Mythical origin
What do we know about the beginning of Rome? Traditional legend has it that two twin sons were born in the town of Alba Longa. Their uncle killed the twins' father, put the babies in the woods to die and seized power. However, the children were rescued by a female wolf who nursed them so they survived. Then they were raised by a shepherd. There are variants where their mother is a virgin who is raped by a god, usually Mars, as well. When they grow up, they kill their uncle and put their grandfather to rule Alba Longa. Then they leave and founded their own city. But who would rule? The twins Romulus and Remus start arguing and Romulus murders his brother and names the city, Rome, after himself. This is dated in the legend to 753 bc. Romulus becomes the first king of Rome. He attracts thugs, adventurers, escaped slaves and other loose people. He soon discovers a problem with this. To keep his people happy, he needs women. Almost no female has voluntarily come to Rome. So Romulus invited his neighbors to a big party, a peaceful festival. At a given sign, they take up arms and force as many women as they could to get back to Rome. Before the neighbors had time to reorganize and start marching towards Rome, the women were pregnant, married and even, in some cases, had given birth. The women, not the men, went out and begged fathers and brothers to lay down their arms. The Rape of the Sabine women, begins Rome's influence, and later dominance, over its neighbors.
What then is true in all this? Archaeologists have made excavations and found that human presence has been there for a long time, but the first actual settlements come somewhere between 760-740 BC. This agrees unexpectedly well with the legend and it is quite possible that the recent sources that refer to 753 as the year of origin go back to a now lost writing from around 400 BC. But the rest then? Romulus and Remus are probably, unfortunately, fictional. One sign of this is how Romulus just disappears from history. His death is never mentioned e.g. The most interesting thing about this creation myth is how violent it is. According to his own legend, the person the Romans revered, admired and almost worshiped was a brother-killer, serial rapist and kidnapper. In this way, it is an expression of the very Roman view that as long as you do nothing against a Roman, you can do almost anything you want. The story of the Sabine women is probably a big exaggeration, even though it may well be based on a historical event. From the very beginning, Rome had an aggressive policy towards its neighbors and it is indisputable that they concluded favorable agreements with their neighboring cities.
The Etruscan Influence
When Rome was founded, the absolute strongest power in Italy was the Etruscans. It is an enigmatic people whose origins are unclear. What we do know is that they came to Italy about 1000 BC and maybe even earlier. We have a lot of writings from them but unfortunately we have not been able to decipher their language. What is known is that it was a non-Indo-European language. Their base was northwest of Rome in Tuscany and they were a major influence on Rome for 250 years. Many "typical" Roman customs and practices originated with the Etruscans.
It was through the Etruscans that the Romans first came into contact with Greek culture. The Greek colonies that existed in southern Italy and in Sicily were not yet in contact with the Romans. Gladiator games that among the Etruscans were part of the funeral rites that they honored their dead with, the Romans thought was a good idea but for fun, not for a religious purpose. Fighting was fun! Later, gladiatorial schools would be developed throughout Rome's area of power. But some religious customs were taken without any change at all. Finding out the will of the gods by reading in the bowels of an animal or the flight of a bird was also an Etruscan idea. The first temple in Rome was dedicated to a trio of gods; Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. It was basically a Roman translation of the Etruscan gods Tini, Uni and Menvra. When Rome developed into a real city from a settlement about 600 it was very typically Etruscan. What the residential buildings looked like, with an open hall (atrium), banquet hall (triclinium) and bedrooms were taken straight from Etruscan cities. But also the town planning, the toga and the lictors (basically bodyguards) to which every consul under the republic was entitled came from Etruscan role models.
A Republic is Born
The last kings of Rome were of the Tarquini family, a typical Etruscan name. The last king was called Tarquinius superbus (Tarquinius the proud) and his way of governing was based on everyone fearing him. He was a tyrant of purest water and is the cause of Rome's fear, almost horror, of monarchical rule in any form. This fear of autocracy, of kings, lasted throughout the existence of the republic and was behind both its creation and its fall. This tyranny led to the Romans' revolt led by Lucius Junius Brutus, the ancestor of the Brutus who killed Julius Caesar. According to legend, the direct cause of the revolt was the rape of a noblewoman, Lucretia, by a prince. In any case, the kingdom fell 509 BC and the royal family was expelled from Rome. But now the rebels faced a completely different kind of problem: they had to invent a new way of governing themselves. How would one ensure that no person gained too much power in the future?
The system they came up with was completely unique, it had no role models and developed over time. To understand what drove the Romans forward, it is important to understand how the system is structured. Therefore, I will now describe the system briefly as it became over time, but remember that different records were added at different times. The Romans divided themselves into Patricians and Plebeians. The Patricians were the high noble families who ruled, Brutus was one, and only the Patricians had the right to hold a political or religious office. The Plebeians were the great mass that formed the vast majority of the army and supplied Rome with food. The antagonisms between these two groups would dominate Rome's domestic policy and lead to many fights resulting in deaths.
The highest office was Consul. Each year, two were elected and they were the executive power and chairman of the Senate. They made laws and even led the army when needed. Every month they took turns being the leading consul. Each Consul had the right to veto the decision of the other Consul. To prevent a consul from becoming too comfortable in power, they were only allowed to sit for a year and not stand for re-election. It was not until after 10 years that they were allowed to stand in the election again. Under him, the consuls headed a number of lower offices that also were appointed annually by election. The highest of these was the praetor who handled certain civilian duties, as a judge, but could also lead armies. If both consuls were away from Rome, the Praetor was in control. Either a consul or a praetor must always be in Rome to govern. The Aediles were responsible for the maintenance of Rome; Streets, temples, food and water but also the annual gladiator game. The lowest office in rank was the Quaestors, who ran the treasury for both Rome and the army. In addition, there were Censors. They were appointed every five years for a census so that the taxes were correct and corrected the list of members of the Senate on an ongoing basis. After the Consul, it was the most glorious mission in Rome. All these offices could, at first, be held only by patricians. This was sharply disapproved of by the plebeians, many of whom were richer than the approximately 15 different patrician families. Therefore, in 494 BC a new office was established that only plebeians could have. A people's tribune existed to protect the rights of the plebeians. Therefore, he was a powerful person. He had a veto against laws that were unfair to plebeians and could lift unfair arrests made by other offices, including consuls, if a plebeian was involved.
A shaky beginning
A republic had been formed but the fact that it survived its first years is a small miracle. In 509, Rome was far from a great power. There were already rifts within the republic, but the external threats were just as serious. On the one hand, Tarquinius Superbus remained and wanted to be reinstated as king. He had gone north to seek the support of his Etruscan relatives. The Etruscan king Lars Porsena also led an army against Rome. Brutus, who had helped create the republic, died in the battle and the one who now led Rome was his colleague Valerius Publicola. The Etruscan army was much larger, so to end the war, Publicola gave her own daughter as a bride to Porsena, plus others as hostages. This gave Porsena a way to end the war in a glorious way. He was not really particularly interested in Tarquinius' well-being.
But central Italy was no peaceful place. South of Rome were the Latin cities, led by Alba Longa, Tosculum and Aricia. To the east of the city were the Sabine cities. The Latin cities (15-30 depending on how you define city) merged into a federation (The Latin League) and a war broke out about 505 BC. The decisive battle was fought 496 BC at Lake Regillus which the Romans won. 493 Rome and the Latin League concluded a treaty. All cities were obliged to contribute a certain number of men to the Roman army. They were entitled to a share in all the booty that the army took. There would be free trade between all the cities and if any city was attacked, the others were obliged to intervene. This treaty is, in essence, the explanation for how Rome was eventually able to conquer Italy. Thanks to that, Rome was no longer, like Sparta and Athens, a city-state that had a limit to how many men they could field. Rome did not receive any tribute from the Latin cities, but they did get a source of future armies that was much larger than any single city could achieve. The Latins would also prove to be loyal, which is not always the case. The treaty became the model for the future treaties Rome concluded.
A treaty was also concluded with the Sabine cities in the east, but 458 BC some of them rebelled against Romes rule. They defeated a Roman army and there was panic in Rome, the Senate appointed a Dictator. The word dictator then had none of the negative values we put in the word now. A dictator was not an electable office, but the Romans realized, despite their aversion to autocracy, that in real crisis situations, someone who ruled alone was needed. They were appointed for 6 months or as long as the specified crisis lasted, whichever was shorter. This time they asked Lucius Quintius Cincinnatus for help. He was an ex-consul and accepted the assignment. In just three weeks he had amassed an army, defeated the enemy and then ceased to be a dictator. In this way he became a role model the Romans looked up to for many hundreds of years in how a true Roman handles a dictatorship. He could just as easily have said that the crisis is not over yet to enjoy power. No one could have said anything against him. The Romans understood this and therefore honored him. The American city of Cincinnati would much later be named after him.
The Twelve tables
At the same time as Cincinnatus crushed the Sabine uprising, there was a riot in Rome. Since Rome had no written laws, the interpretation of them was quite arbitrary. The laws were made by patricians and interpreted by patricians, which made the plebeians feel neglected. They wanted to know what they had to stick to, which was impossible as the laws were not written down. This debate led to a commission of 10 respected people sitting down to solve the problem. They were the so-called Decemvirs. About 450 BC came the result, the twelve law books, which are by historians called the twelve tables. They defined the rights and obligations of a Roman citizen and the laws that everyone would follow. How debts would and would not be recovered, what the trial procedure looked like, how things were inherited among many other things. One thing that is clear from these laws is that the woman in Rome was in a constant state of dependence. First from the father and, at the age of majority either from the husband or the head of the family. What she herself thought was completely irrelevant and women were seen in the legal texts more as possessions than as persons.
But these legal texts would have a great influence. Even though they became obsolete and many changes were made over time, e.g. Cicero them by heart. But they also had influence outside Rome, after the Roman Empire had died and been buried. James Madison, one of America's Founding fathers has said that a major inspiration for America's Bill of Rights was The Twelve Tables. For its time, the laws were ahead of their time, especially in Europe where concepts such as justice, equality and criminal justice were new. By law, all Roman citizens were equally valuable (except women). The plebeians in Rome took one step towards equal conditions. Another, even bigger step, was taken in 367 bc when they managed to convince the senate that plebeians, if wealthy enough, were also eligible for all offices. It was an important decision for many gifted men had previously been excluded by birth from a political career. By the decision of 367 bc it was changed.
The Gauls are coming
In the early 300s BC, Rome had largely become masters over central Italy. In the north there were still Etruscans even though they were not as powerful anymore and in the south, south of the territory of the Latins, were the Samnites. But 390 a Gallic tribe made a raid down into Italy. They first defeated the Etruscans and then a large Roman army. And 387 BC they captured and plundered Rome. It was a shock to Rome's self-esteem and the event became the basis for without a doubt the greatest trauma in Rome's early history. The stories in Roman historiography are blood-dripping and there are plenty of picturesque images of a Rome on fire and women and children screaming in terror. These are exaggerations. It was looting and the Gauls took things and maybe also a number of slaves but Rome did not burn. Archaeological excavations show that no major disturbances are visible. If Rome had burned, there would be an ashlayer from this time, but it is missing. The number of deaths is also a great exaggeration; if so many had been killed, they would not have been able to wage the many wars they waged immediately afterwards.
But the looting had obvious consequences. Only a few years after the looting, the Romans began to build a defensive wall around their city, it is called the Servian Wall after the king that early historians attributed to the construction, but archeology shows that there was no wall until after the looting, which was an excellent motive for building a wall. . The incident also gave rise to the centuries-long aversion, almost hatred, that the Romans had against Gauls. And Roman historians would not be Roman if they did not understand how to turn a military catastrophe into a moral story. According to Livius, the Senate and the officials, consuls, pretor and others, decided to sit on their seats in full ceremonial attire and face death with dignity. There is a scene where the Gauls enter the senate and see the people sitting still until one of them hits a Gaul in the head with his staff and then all the senators are brutally murdered. The subtitle of the story is clearly that a Roman dies with dignity. With 99% certainty, that story is a total invention. The Romans spent the next 30 years repairing the influence they lost because of the gallic attack. Various uprisings by Latin cities, Etruscans, and Volsci, a people south of Rome, were crushed.
The Samnite Wars
South of the Latin cities, the Samnites were the dominant power factor. The Samnites were originally a tribe that belonged to the valleys of the Apennine mountains, but their influence spread across the plains of Campania, where i.a. The cities of Naples (Neapolis) and Capua were located. About 350 bc the Samnites made an attempt to conquer Capua. Capua asks Rome for help, which irritates the Samnites because only a few years earlier they had agreed with the Romans on where the line between their respective spheres of interest went. This leads to the first Semitic war (343-341 BC) which is more of a skirmish than a war but it has an important consequence. 338 BC Capua concludes an agreement with Rome that is very similar to the agreement the Latin cities previously received but not quite as generous (Rome is more powerful now so an annual tribute is included but also the right to have a share of war booty from wars where they contributed with soldiers). But civil rights are not included, which means that they lack influence and become a kind of second-class citizen. Later, when the republic became a world power, it would become the basis for many uprisings and one of the reasons for its fall.
The great show of strength came during the Second Samnite War (327-304 BC). It has its origins in the fact that the Romans founded a colony, Fragellae, on Samnite territory. The Samnites did not like this. They built an alliance with Etruscans and other Italian tribes. In the battle of Caudine Forks 321 BC, they won a great victory when the Romans were heavily defeated. This is where the strength of the Roman spirit shows itself. No matter how much defeat they are subjected to or battles they lose (and there are many), they shake this off and move on. Rome's strength lay not in their military superiority but in the unwavering belief in their own destiny. They were convinced that they were born to rule over the world around them and catastrophic adversity did not affect that belief. It just made it stronger. So Rome sent new armies and retaliated. Despite another major defeat in 315, the Romans won the decisive battle of Allifae 307 BC. Three years later, a peace agreement was reached that did not last very long. Riots broke out and 298 the third Samnite war broke out. The Romans won the decisive battle of Sentinum (near the modern Sassoferrato) in 295 BC. As a result, Rome was the dominant power in both Central and Southern Italy.
Pyrrhus and the Greek Colonies
Since the Samnites were now defeated, only the Greek colonies were not under Roman control. Some like Capua and Naples (Neapolis) had already allied themselves with Rome. The rest were divided. Some did not mind entering into friendly relations with Rome, while others were more hesitant. These were led by the city of Tarentum (present-day Taranto, Puglia) who sought outside help. The man they asked for help was Pyrrhus, king of Epirus (modern-day Albania), and he gladly obeyed the call. He was, in essence, the result of the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC and as a result his vast empire split into many small ones and the kingdom of Epirus was one of them. He was a professional soldier with a professional army that contained something the Romans had never seen before, combat elephants. As a result, the Pyrrhic War broke out 280 BC.
Pyrrhus' army was superior to the Roman in quality. For the first time, the difference between a professionally trained army and an army recruited by farmers and merchants who did their best but were not as skilled was clearly demonstrated. Pyrrhus won two major victories 280 (Heraclea) and 279 (Askolum) and it is these victories that gave rise to the concept of Pyrrhic victories. He had wiped out two Roman armies but at a great price. His own elite infantry remained for the most part on the battlefield after the second battle. This gave rise to his comment: "Another victory like this will destroy us completely". He was right. The Romans regrouped, gathered another army and 275 they defeated Pyrrhus at Beneventum (present-day Benevento) which caused him to give up the battle and return to Epirus. The last Greek colony became Roman 270. This led to the Romans coming into direct contact with the real superpower of the western Mediterranean: Carthage.
Carthage
Carthage (just outside present-day Tunis) was originally a Phoenician colony. According to Phoenician myth, Carthage was founded by Queen Dido, who tricked the Numidians into giving her an area to build a city on. Just as with Rome's creation myth, there is probably no basis for it and just as for Rome, on the other hand, the time Carthage is founded is fairly correctly stated. The legend states 814 bc and most suggest that a correct date is between 840-810 bc. The Phoenicians were a large trading people and their largest city was Tire (now Lebanon) and it was from there that Carthage had been colonized. As time went on, Carthage became more and more independent and about 600 BC there are signs that they are starting to pursue a policy independent of Phoenicia. They began to take over bases in the western Mediterranean and North Africa, Spain, Sicily, Sardinia and Corsica were, if not Carthaginian territory, then at least Carthaginian areas of interest. Their fleet was large and sailed across the Mediterranean, which had made Carthage the richest city in the Mediterranean when the Romans came in contact with them.
Carthage was an oligarchy, which meant that they and their allies were ruled by a small number of noble families. Carthage had passively watched while Rome defeated Pyrrhus, they had no direct interests on the Italian mainland but they took the opportunity to send a delegation to Rome where a treaty was concluded which defined both Rome and Carthage's areas of interest. Carthage recognized that the entire Italian peninsula was the territory of Rome, while Rome recognized that Sicily and the other islands were Carthage and no interventions were allowed. Rome was good at concluding agreements but worse at keeping them. Given the structure of Rome, with the importance all citizens attached to honor (Gloria) and dignity (Dignitas), things that could most easily be won through a successful military career. To make a career, a Roman needed war so it is not really surprising that the agreement was broken as soon as Italy was secured. 264 BC The first Punic war broke out.
The First Punic War (264-241 BC)
In the center of the first Punic (Punic comes from the Latin word for Phoenicians, Punes), the war was Sicily. Only a narrow strait separated the island from the mainland and closest to the strait was the city of Messina. Those who took it were a band of mercenaries who called themselves the Mamertines (children of Mars). They had no connections to Rome. When they began to plunder the rest of Sicily, Carthage retaliated and the Mamertins asked for help from Rome. It was Rome's excuse to break the agreement with Carthage and start the first Punic war. After initial success for the Roman army when they succeeded in persuading Syracuse to give up (which later led to the execution of the Carthaginian commander for treason), the war went into a stalemate. Carthage defended its coastal cities with its fleet. Rome did not have much tof a fleet and its army was not trained for sieges. Rome failed in its attempts to take Sardinia and Corsica where Carthage fought back with success while the Carthaginian fleet raided the Italian mainland. These things led Rome to make an important decision: an equally strong or stronger fleet was needed. Here Rome's organizational strength shows itself again. The short time that passed between the decision and the finished product was a great achievement and became decisive for the end of the war.
The first major naval battle was at Mylae 260 BC (present-day Milazzo, on the north coast of Sicily) where the Romans managed to surprise the Carthaginians with their new invention, the Corvus. A Corvus was an approximately 11 m long bridge that could be folded down to make it easier for the soldiers to board enemy ships. In this way Rome was able to use its army at sea and won a great victory. The Romans saw an opportunity and 256 BC sent a large fleet to Africa to threaten Carthage. After great battles, they managed to win a bridgehead in Aspis. Thereafter, the Romans raided Carthaginian territory until a decisive battle was fought 255 at Tunis, where the Carthaginians won a big victory. Rome was forced out of Africa and in addition 90% of their fleet sank in a storm. When they built their fleet, they had thought from an army tactical perspective and imagined close to land sailing, but their invention, the Corvus, made the ships sensitive to storms. On the high seas in a storm, they were life-threatening. A second fleet went below 253 in another storm. Rome had to build a new fleet and no more Corvus were seen.
During the last years of the 250's, the Romans tried to take Sicily through land attacks on various cities. Some succeeded, but most were able to hold out. Carthage tactic was simple by providing their cities with supplies and reinforcements through their fortified ports. So Rome called out its newly built fleet to gain an advantage. The naval battles at Drepana and Phintias (both 249 BC) were Carthage's greatest victories during the war. Both Rome and Carthage were now exhausted. The losses in human lives could be counted in the hundreds of thousands on each side. Financially, both bled but no one gave up. They were like two boxers who both hung on the ropes to stay on their feet. Rome chose not to rebuild its fleet once more. Carthage chose to send its own fleet home and have only a limited garrison in Sicily. The war went on slowly with only a few skirmishes. 243 the Roman Senate decided that a navy was needed. They had no money so they borrowed from the richest citizens who paid for a ship each. A fleet of about 200 ships fought 241 BC in the decisive battle of the Egadi Islands. Rome managed to surprise the Carthaginians and won a great victory. Carthage sought peace and conditions were harsh. Sicily was ceded to Rome and a penalty was agreed upon, to be paid in installments for 10 years.
Consequences
The first Punic war lasted for 23 years and cost so many lives that there was a shortage of people in certain age groups in both Rome and Carthage. It was the longest war in Roman-Greek history and the largest naval war in all of antiquity. It also opened the eyes of Greek historians to Rome. The first books on the history of Rome are written and the first Roman historians, inspired by Greek role models, begin to write their history. Rome was no longer a local power but its influence grew. Immediately after peace 241, the mercenaries of Carthage revolted against their masters, and it took a number of years, and a determined general named Hamilcar Barka, to put it down. Meanwhile, Rome took the opportunity to take Sardinia and Corsica while Carthage was busy with other things. It aroused bad blood in Carthage, which believed that Rome had betrayed the treaty and became one of the reasons for the Second Punic War. Hamilcar Barka was sent to Spain where he tried to expand the possessions Carthage had to compensate.
For Rome, the war meant that it got its first provinces. Sicily was transformed into a Roman province that had its own Praetor who ruled as Roman governor and a Quaestor under him who ensured that taxation was handled correctly. The island also received a garrison. Sardinia and Corsica also became a province. That pattern Rome would follow in the future when they only put the figure at the top, the governor, but otherwise let the local elite continue to rule. A simple and very flexible system that could easily be adapted to different regions. In Spain, Hamilcar Barka expanded Carthage's influence so that he gained control of the rich silver mines that were there. The silver paid Carthage's war debt to Rome but Hamilcar had not forgotten. He made his 9-year-old son swear to always hate Rome. His name was Hannibal and he later became known as the scourge of Rome. 226 BC, Rome began to be a little alarmed by the growing Carthaginian influence in Spain. A treaty was concluded with Carthage that the river Ebro was the border between their areas of interest. South of that was Carthage and north was Rome. 219 Hannibal captured the city of Sagentum in Spain, about 160 km south of Ebro and thus far into the Carthaginian area of interest, and Rome, which had friendly relations with the city declared war. 218 The Second Punic War breaks out.
The Second Punic War 218-201 BC
Rome had planned for the war before declaring it. They had intended to carry out a typical Roman offensive strategy with attacks in both Spain and Africa. Nothing went as planned. Before they knew it, Hannibal had left Spain, made the Gauls ally with him and marched across the Alps. In December he was in Italy and the first major battle was at Trebia 218 BC, near today's Piacenza, and it was a shocking loss for the Romans. Six months later, Hannibal crushed another Roman army at Lake Trasimene 217 BC in northern Italy and panic broke out in Rome. To curb the crisis, Fabius Maximus was appointed dictator and he drastically changed Rome's strategy. He had realized, what all historians and connoisseurs would later admit, that Hannibal was a military genius and one of the greatest military talents of antiquity. He considered it unlikely that Rome could win in a direct battle and chose to avoid battle and instead attack in small raids. He was always close to Hannibal's army, which caused Hannibal to move south in a movement around Rome. Maximus' tactics, as it contradicted Roman self-esteem, were not popular in Rome where he was called Cunctator (The Delayer). When his dictatorship was over, Rome gathered the largest army ever in the field and met Hannibal at Cannae (in southern Italy) 216. It became one of the greatest Roman military disasters of all time. In three years, Hannibal had won three battles and killed about 100,000 Roman soldiers. Maximus was reinstated, not as a dictator, but commander of the Roman army, and it was acknowledged that he was right in his tactics.
Hannibal had settled in southern Italy in what was more or less an invasion of Roman territory. Maximus avoided battles with Hannibal and had an army of 50,000 men to guard him. The rest of the army struck where Hannibal was not at the moment. Capua e.g. were severely punished as they allied themselves with Hannibal. Hannibal took Syracuse on an expedition to Sicily but when he was back in Italy the Romans attacked. It is during this war 212 BC when Syracuse is stormed by the Romans that Archimedes is killed by a Roman soldier. He was known throughout the Mediterranean for his genius and orders had been issued to capture him alive. Hannibal's brother Hasdrubal tried to bring reinforcements to Italy but he fell into a trap and was killed to the last man 207 BC. His head was thrown in as a greeting to Hannibal's camp. By this time, Italy was no longer the main arena of war for things had begun to happen in Spain.
The turning point of the war
When Hannibal came to Italy, two Roman generals were sent to Spain to take Carthaginian cities. They were not very successful and 211 BC they were both killed in one battle. Their successor became a man with no merit at all except that he was a good soldier and brave. He was too young, 24 years old, to have held any office or high posts in the army and his greatest merit was his family. He was the son of one of the dead generals. His name was Publius Scipio (later known as Scipio Africanus). The first thing he did was to reorganize the army in Spain. He introduced the classic Roman weapons Gladius (the Spanish short sword) and Pilum (the heavy spear), as well as a more flexible formation in the field. With his new army he went against the stronghold of Carthage in Spain, New Carthage (present-day Cartagena), and conquered the city 209 BC. This meant that Rome gained control of Spain's rich silver mines. Scipio continued his campaign and after further victories, especially the battle of Ilipa 206 BC, Carthage was forced to abandon Spain 205 BC.
Scipio realized that the best thing was not to return to Italy to fight Hannibal but to go directly to Carthage. In 204 BC, he led Rome's invasion of the Carthaginian mainland. This led Carthage to recall Hannibal and his men from Italy. Two years later, the decisive battle of Zama took place. It was a long and drawn-out battle, but the superiority of the Romans in the number of men decided and the victory was a fact. The conditions of peace were harsh. All land Carthage owned outside North Africa was ceded to Rome, an annual tribute to be paid for 50 years and that one was only allowed to have 10 warships and needed to request permission from Rome for acts of war against neighbors. Carthage's power was broken and Rome was from now on the great dominant of the western Mediterranean. In Rome, Scipio was presented with the greatest Triumph of Rome ever seen and was given the honorable name Africanus by the Senate.
The first Warlord
Scipio Africanus had done something never done before in the history of the republic. For the first time, a man had appeared whose personal Gloria and Dignitas were almost greater than the Senate's. Rome's strength had always been the collective, but with Scipio emerges for the first time a person who could walk around all the rules. Scipio was a true Roman hero but his example was very dangerous and devastating for the future of Rome. He was the beginning of how great warlords gained greater influence over Rome's politics than the Senate itself. Without his example, it is highly doubtful whether Pompey the Great and Caesar ever would have reached the positions they did. He had never held an office and he was given command of older, more experienced military men such as Maximus. The consequent question that was unspoken and hung in the air was of course: If you could now do as Scipio did, why bother to go the long way at all?? Why not take a shortcut? His example, without it really being his intention, threatened to overthrow the whole system Rome was based on.
Scipio himself was not particularly interested in politics and refused to accept most of the honorable titles the people wanted to shower him with. A dictator for life was just one of them. He was a military commander who was equal to Hannibal in talent. Rome was lucky to have him but he never understood that he had made many enemies through his way of rounding the system. The foremost of these was Marcus Cato the Elder, who eventually took him to court. He was rdelared innocent but withdrew to his farm because he felt himself to be unfairly treated. He died there in 183 BC, completely unaware that his example, which saved the republic, 150 years later would lead to its downfall.
The wars in the East
To understand these wars, one must understand what the situation looked like. The Eastern Mediterranean was dominated by three kingdoms; it was Macedonia, the Seleucids (heirs of the Persians) and Egypt. All were former parts of Alexander the Great's vast empire. Around these three were many small kingdoms that tried to get along well with the giants without losing their independence. Philip V of Macedonia's decision, after the three initial defeats of the Romans against Hannibal, to ally with Hannibal aroused, for the first time, Rome's interest in the world east of Rome. The first Macedonian war (214-205 BC) really only consisted of small skirmishes and ended without any pronounced winner. While they were busy with Hannibal Rome could not afford any real serious army. But Rome did not forget. To the east, Macedonia and the Seleucids entered into an alliance to crush Egypt. This worried the many small kingdoms that asked Rome for help. A change in the balance of power was a major threat to their existence. Rome was happy to help and after failing to persuade Philip, the Second Macedonian War (200-196 BC) broke out. Philip was quickly forced to pray for peace and had to give up all his conquests outside his borders. Rome then withdrew all forces. There was as yet no interest in a permanent presence in the east. That would change.
Rome had hoped that this demonstration of strength would serve as a warning to the Seleucids, who instead saw it as an encouragement. As Rome withdrew, they saw only a weak Greece just waiting to be conquered. They attacked and again Rome answered their Greek allies' plea for help. Now Rome was a little more alarmed. The Seleucids were much stronger than the Macedonians had ever been. Rome sent a larger army and the Seleucid War (192-188 BC) broke out. The decisive battle in Greece was at Thermopyle 191 BC and then the Romans chased the Seleucids from Greece into Asia where the decisive battle was fought 189 at Magnesia (modern day Manisa, Turkey). It was the death knell for the Seleucid Empire. Although it remained for a few more decades, it weakened drastically and was eventually eaten up by its eastern neighbor, the growing Parthian Empire. When Philip V of Macedonia died in 179 BC, his son, Perseus, tried to restore Macedonia's greatness. This led to a third Macedonian war (172-168 BC) and although the war was short, the consequence was that Rome changed its mind. The Greek world (and by extension the rest of the world) could not do without Roman oversight. An uprising broke out, the so-called Fourth Macedonian War (150-148 BC), which caused Macedonia to cease to exist. There were now two Roman provinces, Epirus and Achaea.
At the same time, on another front, another enemy ceased to exist. The Third Punic War (149-146 BC) was less of a war than a punitive expedition. For many years, Marcus Cato (the Elder) had ended all his speeches with the phrase "By the way, I believe that Carthage must be destroyed." In 151 BC, Carthage defended itself against attacks by the Numidian chief Massinissa, who was allied with Rome. That was the reason for the war. In the beginning it did not go so well, the first two years of the war were filled with failed storming attempts. Carthage was besieged but refused to surrender. Then Scipio Aemilianus took over and success began to come. He was the grandson of Rome's great hero Scipio Africanus and very popular. In the spring, a well-planned storming succeeded and the Romans walked through the streets of Carthage with orders to kill everyone they met, regardless of age and gender. It has been estimated that at least 250,000 people, mostly civilians, died. The city was completely destroyed and all buildings were set on fire. The Roman province of Africa was formed (the northern parts of present-day Tunisia, Algeria and Libya) with Utica (near present-day Zana, Tunisia) as its capital.
The road to civil war
Rome was now not only a great power, they were the only great power in the Mediterranean. Carthage was wiped out, Macedonia as well, the Seleucids a shadow of their former selves and Egypt knew how to keep a low profile. Rome had an empire and benefited greatly from it, but the money and land it won went only to the already rich. The already large class gaps increased to enormous proportions. Rome's constitution was created with a city-state in mind, not for a large empire. Rome wanted the benefits of an empire but avoided the administrative side. This led to the system of client kings who, of course, eventually revolted, leading to new wars. Another important problem that was muttered about in many of Italy's cities was citizenship. Only Rome and the Latin cities, their first allies, had it while the rest of Italy lacked it. Most of Rome's armies came from such cities, but they did not get much out of it. Demands began to be made for all cities in Italy to have Roman citizenship.
Tiberius Gracchus was a Roman of noble family. He was elected to be People's Tribune 133 bc and immediately realized that reforms were needed. His proposal for a land reform meant that each person was only allowed to own a certain number of hectares. The few who owned more than the set limit (large) had to sell to the state, which would then divide the land between the poor and the homeless so that they could feed themselves. Despite strong opposition from the Senate and its noble members, he got the law through. The Senate chose to hire a gang of bandits and murder Gracchus in the open. For the first time since the republic was formed, a Roman had murdered a Roman for political reasons. It became an example that too many politicians would emulate. Tiberius' younger brother, Gaius Gracchus, tried to carry out further reforms and was also assassinated 10 years later. The Gracchis are proof that every attempt at change was seen as an attempt to overthrow the republic. Rome had become very traditional.
Numibia had been an ally of Rome since the Punic Wars, and when the king died, he wrote in his will that the kingdom would be divided between his two sons, Jugurtha and Adherbal. Rome agreed, but Jugurtha killed his brother and became sole king. He bribed senators and army commanders who willingly allowed themselves to be bought to support his cause. Finally, reluctantly, Rome declared war 111 BC. He bribed the commander to agree to a peace which meant that he kept Numibia in exchange for giving them two war elephants. The Senate became furious, refused to approve the peace and sent a new commander there and even if he could not be bought he was incompetent. Rome's armies were in disarray, allowed to have their own slaves and avoid training. They were simply lazy. Then came Gaius Marius. When he was given command in 107 BC, he sharpened the discipline, interrupted all negotiations and started a real war. 106 bc he won the decisive battle and the following year Jugurtha was betrayed by his own relative and led in chains before Marius. The war had shown two problems: 1, client kings could not be trusted and 2, the discipline in the army was terrible. Corruption was widespread.
Gaius Marius
After defeating Jugurtha, he was the hero of the people and was seen as Rome's chief general. Marius was a warlord, like Scipio, but he was the first not to be of noble birth. When he returned to Rome, the city was in a panic. Two rebellious Germanic tribes had won 4 straight battles against Roman armies (a total of about 200,000 men had died) and marched against Italy. He was appointed, completely against the constitution, as Consul 5 years in a row to respond to the threat. And he responded to the threat. After first training his army, he waited for the right moment and then beat the large (about 300,000 men) Germanic army in two battles, Aix-en-provence 102 bc and Vercellae (west of Milan) 101 bc. Now he was everyone's hero, but he was not a friend of the nobility. He is said to have said of them: “If they look down on me, they look down on their own ancestors. They, like me, were not noble until they deserved it. And if they are jealous of my Glory, they should think of the work and the dangers I have gone through to deserve it. ”
But Marius was not only an extremely capable general, he changed the army. At Marius' initiative, the armies now became semi-professional forces instead of being recruited by admittedly well-trained but still inexperienced soldiers. It is also Marius who divides the army into Cohorts and Legions where each legion consisted of 10 cohorts and each cohort of 600 men. Under him also emerges the attitude of the soldiers that makes them more loyal to their commander than to Rome. An attitude that would not only bring down the republic but also many emperors. It was probably not directly his intention, but since he was of the people, understood his men and was also a good soldier, he received respect and loyalty in return.
A certain Drusus in 95 in bc through a law that threw out all non-Roman citizens from Rome. It was the beginning of the Italian war. All non-Roman cities, the majority, turned against Rome. Not only did they not get anything back for everything they gave to Rome, they were not even allowed to stay in Rome !! Marius was in command together with a younger new star, Lucius Cornelius Sulla. Together they won several victories. The war had an unusual end because even though Rome won, the war ended 88 BC, the cities got through their demands. Rome did not want war at home. Now practically all of Italy was Roman citizens.
Sulla and the Civil War
It is a little sad that when a civil war finally broke out, one of the dominant reasons was that two men both wanted the post of commander in the impending war against Mithridates of Pontus (a country situated south of the Black Sea). The Senate gave Sulla the post. Marius, the other candidate, was upset and managed to get a people's tribune, Sulpicius, to withdraw the appointment and instead give it to Marius. That was technically legal but unheard of. Sulla became furious and did something no one ever did. He led his armies towards Rome! He took Rome, according to himself he restored order, He declared Marius and his followers as enemies of the state and then left for the war in the east. His action was very unpopular. Although what happened was unfair, everyone felt that he had gone too far when he invaded Rome on his own initiative for political reasons. While he was gone, Marius seized power in Rome. He murdered many political opponents, senators and others, without the slightest hesitation. Then, 86 BC, Marius became ill and died and a career that began as the hero of Rome ended as the butcher of the Senate. With the actions of Sulla and Marius, all the rules had ceased to apply. Now it was man against man.
In the east, Sulla was forced to end the war prematurely. He made peace with Mithridates 85 BC to go to Rome. When he finally arrived in Italy in 83 BC, he had his army with him and some of his minions were Pompey (later the Great) and Crassus (later the conqueror of Spartacus). He took Rome 82 BC and the last battle was outside the gates of Rome. Sulla was quickly appointed Dictator and began to execute his enemies. He published a list of about 500 names to be killed, the rest he would leave in his grace. The list was flexible, you could bribe either Sulla or one of his minions to get your enemy on the list or your friend from it. He elected new senators so that the number was correct again (there were not very many left after Marius and Sulla's purges). It was also a way to reward people who had supported him. He wanted to be remembered as the one who restored Rome's greatness but instead the saying "Sulla did it, Why can't I?" became usual. His true legacy to the Republic is the realization that any General with enough troops could rule Rome. He retired from the dictatorship 80 bc and died two years later.
Pompey and Crassus' rise
Sulla was dead but the Civil War was not over. In Spain, Sertorius, a supporter of Marius, and an extremely capable general fought. He had fled Rome when Sulla arrived but continued the fight in Spain. None of Rome's attempts to subdue him had succeeded. Therefore, the Senate appointed the young and promising (30 years) Gneaus Pompeius as commander in 76 bc. He was full of confidence and planned to beat Sertorius in a big decisive battle immediately. It was a failure. The battle of Lauron was a great victory for Sertorius and showed that it would take time. For the next two years, Pompey managed to get a draw at best in the battles that were fought. Then he began to send out signals that they were willing to pay to have Sertorius assassinated. In 72 bc he was murdered by his second in command Perpenna who then became an easy prey for Pompey the same year.
While Pompey wins his reputation in Spain, Crassus wins his at home. Crassus takes advantage of the chaos in Rome to buy up real estate and becomes Rome's richest man. When the slave revolt under Spartacus breaks out in 73 BC and wins several victories against Roman armies, Crassus offers to train, lead and pay the army himself. The Senate accepts the offer and in 71 bc beats Spartacus’ slave army. Along many kilometers of Via Appia, he crucifies them as a reminder to all who pass by. As a reward, they both became consuls for 70 bc.
For the next decade, Pompey celebrates major military victories in Syria, Judea, and in the war against Mithridates of Pontus, which ends with Mithradate's suicide in 63 bc. In Rome, Crassus makes the acquaintance with a young up-and-coming man, Julius Caesar. Since he was related to Marius (his father was the brother of Marius' wife) he had stayed away until Sulla was dead (Caesar had been on Sulla's list of people to kill but was bought free something that Sulla reluctantly agreed to) and then went in the army where he received excellent grades. With the help of Crassus as guarantor of his debts, he in turn became Questor, Aedile, Praetor and Pontifex Maximus (basically high priest) and his reputation grew. When Pompey returned from Asia 62 BC and wanted his agreements with kings, borders, the establishment of new provinces and more approved by the Senate, they refused. Pompey becomes powerless and angry. Instead, he seeks out Crassus and Caesar to discuss whether there might be a solution to their problems.
The first Triumvirate
From the beginning, one must understand that the agreement between these three, Caesar, Crassus and Pompey, is not based on having the same view politically. It was a way to get around the Senate so that everyone got what they wanted. Caesar wanted to become consul and after that Governor of Gaul. Pompey wanted to get through the agreements he made during his time in Asia, which would give him both money and glory, and Ceasar promised to do so as consul. Crassus wanted a future consul post and recognition for everything he did. The Senate looked down on wealth, there was no Gloria in being rich and defeating some slaves was not something to brag about. The agreement was confirmed by Pompey's marriage to Caesar's daughter Julia. Caesar became consul, fulfilled his promises and became 58 bc governor of Cisalpine Gaul (northern Italy) Gallia Narbonensis, (southern France, Marseille with coastline) and Illyria (parts of the Balkans).
He soon found an excuse to open war on the gauls because what he was looking for was a major military victory. His Gallic war began in Switzerland against the Helveti in 58 bc and continued in Belgium 57 bc. Then he went further west where he defeated tribes in today's Brittany 56. He made two detours to Britain which had a great impact in Rome. Caesar was a master of political propaganda and understood the significance it would have in Rome even if it was more raids than an invasion. In 52 BC came the great revolt in which several tribes united under the Arverni chieftain Vercingetorix. They won a great victory in the battle of Gergovia 52 BC where the Romans suffered a big defeat. Later that year, Caesar got his revenge when he forced Vercingetorix to give up after the battle of Alesia. After that, the uprising was basically over and Gaul was conquered.
The triumvirate was renewed after a hasty meeting in Lucca 55 bc. There they divided the Roman provinces among themselves. Caesar got Gaul for 5 more years, Crassus Syria and Pompey Spain. But 54 both Caesar and Pompey suffered from a death in the family. Julia died in childbirth and the person who most held the two together no longer existed. In addition, Crassus died in 53 BC when he opened war against the Parthians during his rule in Syria. This led to the catastrophic defeat at Carrhae (present-day Harran, Turkey) where Crassus died in the battle. This meant that the Triumvirate was over and that Caesar and Pompey began to drift apart.
Caesar's Civil War
After his governorship, Caesar wanted to be consul again. It was completely legal and he applied to be a candidate in absentio (year 49 BC), without being present. This is because if he left the army, he could not celebrate a Triumph, which he had earned through his victories in Gaul. The Senate replied that if he did not lay down his arms and come to Rome within six months, he would be declared the enemy of the people. Caesar knew that if he came to Rome he would be accused and put to trial by his enemies, who were many, and probably lose and be forced into exile. Caesar hesitated for a while but felt he had no choice if he wanted to continue his career. He led his armies over the Rubicon and a new civil war had begun.
It is actually surprising that the Senate was so surprised by what Caesar did. They had pushed him into a corner with very little room for maneuver. Did they expect him to just give up ?? In desperation, they appointed Pompey as dictator responsible for the city's defense. Pompey quickly realized, trained military man as he was, that with the forces available, it was impossible to resist Caesar. He left Rome and took the forces with him to the east, to Greece. Caesar quickly took Rome without bloodshed. The Senate had fled with Pompey. Caesar left Marcus Antonius to take care of Rome and Italy and followed Pompey to Greece. The decisive battle stood in 48 BC at Pharsalus and although Pompey had more men, Caesar's soldiers were more experienced. Pompey escaped again, this time to Egypt, where he was killed by Pharaoh's men.
Caesar avenged Pompey's death by executing his murderer and in the power struggle in Egypt he sided with Cleopatra. Probably because Pharaoh, her brother, had ordered the murder. 47 bc he wins the battle of the Nile and puts Cleopatra on the throne. After that, he defeats the leaders of the Senate (Scipio and Cato the Younger) in North Africa at Thapsos 46 BC and both commit suicide. He is appointed Dictator in Rome but Pompey's sons, Gnaeus and Sixtus, continue to fight in Spain. He finally defeats them in the battle of Munda 45 bc.
Caesar as dictator
If you compare with Sulla, the difference is big. Sulla killed his enemies while Caesar chooses to forgive them. Brutus, Cassius and Cicero are some examples of this. He also changed the Roman calendar, which had been out of step for a long time. Each year was 355 days and sometimes, at irregular intervals, they added an extra month to compensate. Caesar's reform became the basis for what our calendars look like today. He assumed that each year was 365.25 days long. Three years were 365 days long and then he introduced the leap year every four years which was 366 days. In addition, he determined the number of days in each month (also the same as we use today). Since a real solar year is 365.24219 days long, the Julian year wins one day every 128 years. The small error was corrected to 1528 AD when Pope Gregory introduced the Gregorian calendar which is really only a very small adjustment of the Julian.
In addition, he implemented land reforms that benefited those who did not have much and ensured that veterans of the army received a statutory pension. He extended Roman citizenship to include provinces that had been part of the republic for a long time. In order to be able to carry out all this quickly and efficiently, which he did, he had accumulated the combined power that the Consul, the People's Tribune, the Censor and the Dictator had. He realized the risk he was taking when it could be interpreted that he wanted to be king. To counteract this, he had Marcus Antonius offer him the title several times but refused each time. He was popular, for the first time in a long time it was relatively quiet on the streets of Rome. During the 50s BC, armed bullies, hired by senate politicians, had roamed the streets of Rome and fought with each other and many had gotten into trouble. The current state was a welcome change. A conspiracy with Brutus and Cassius in the lead was formed to save the republic. In Mars 44 bc. they knifed Caesar on an open street in Rome. It was the beginning of another civil war.
The second triumvirate
Brutus and Cassius had expected to be seen as the liberators of Rome and hailed by the people. They had never really understood how popular Caesar actually was with the lower and middle classes. They were soon forced to flee Rome, and set out, as Pompey had done, for Greece. Marcus Antonius allied himself with Caesar's heir Gaius Octavian (later Augustus) and Lepidus and formed 43 bc the second triumvirate. Unlike the first, which was more of a private agreement, this was formal, which brought the Senate's influence close to zero. Brutus and Cassius were defeated by Antonius and Octavian in the Battle of Philippi 42 BC. Both committed suicide shortly afterwards. After that victory, they divided the booty, the Roman Republic. Antonius received the rich eastern half and Octavian the western. Lepidus had to make do with Africa.
Octavian was a very good politician even though he was a bad commander. Now he was supported by Marcus Agrippa who, in addition to being an excellent military man, also had the rare quality of being loyal. Without Agrippa by his side, it is highly unlikely that Octavian ever would have became Augustus. In Rome he began to skillfully turn public opinion against Antony. He pointed out his way of living in luxury in the east, that he had taken a mistress in Cleopatra even though he was married to Octavia, Octavian's sister. The drop was when he showed Antony's will where Antony had given large sums to his two children with Cleopatra. He had become unroman, corrupted by the temptations of the East. A war began between the two and in 31 BC Antony and Cleopatra were defeated in the Battle of Actium by Agrippa. Both later committed suicide in Alexandria. The republic was dead and the empire had begun !!
Afterwords and sources
This is a short summary, there are so many good stories that did not fit and some people are not included at all. A little unfair but I wanted to show why things happened. As a result, I have been forced to extradite many culturally important people almost entirely. This is essentially a political and military summary of the rise and fall of the republic. I have treated certain periods and people more carefully because they have been crucial. You can't write about this period without giving close attention to the punic wars or the persons of Marius, Sulla, Pompey and Caesar. The important thing has been to get a context in the historical events that is understandable to non-specialists. If anyone wants to know more, he can look in the books I mentioned as sources. There is a lot written but these are the ones I used the most.
Beard, Mary: SPQR - A History of Ancient Rome (2016) Holland, Tom: Rubicon (2011) Goldsworthy, Adrian: In the Name of Rome (2016) Goldsworthy, Adrian: The Fall Of Carthage (2012) Goldsworthy, Adrian: Caesar - The Life of a Colossus (2013) Matyszak, Philip: Chronicle of the Roman Republic (2008) Gwynn, David M: The Roman Republic (2012) Miles, Richard: Carthage Must Be Destroyed (2011) Lomas, Kathryn: The Rise of Rome - From the iron age to the punic wars (2018)
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Nov 7, 2020 3:03:55 GMT
More great work, @kurben. Thank you!
|
|
|
Post by osnafrank on Nov 7, 2020 10:46:39 GMT
WUITIIQGUyMrvFxIgkNw
Great Work, as always.
|
|
|
Post by neesy on Nov 21, 2020 3:39:43 GMT
OK, Here is another article i have written, and translated, and the subject is a bit closer to home for most of you. Hope you like it! North American Natives
This is so great - we have the largest indigenous population in Canada here in Winnipeg
I will have to get back here later to read it over again - it's late and I need to log off
Thanks @kurben
|
|