Author: Hrothsige Frithowulf

  • Roza Shanina: One of the Finest Female Snipers of World War II

    Roza Shanina: One of the Finest Female Snipers of World War II

    Roza Shanina was one of the few female snipers in a special Soviet Union platoon during World War II. She was the first female sharpshooter and a recipient of the Order of Glory for her service on the 3rd Belorussian Front. At that point, she had more than 20 kills to her name. Roza Shanina gained notoriety for her skill at doublet shooting, in which two rounds are fired in a single breath in quick succession at moving targets. Roza Shanina was killed in combat in January 1945, months before the war’s official conclusion, and she was just 20 years old at the time. Roza is still remembered as a national hero in Russia today.

    Roza Shanina

    A sniper’s invincibility, patience, persistence, and capacity to withstand cold, starvation, immobility, and agony can demoralize any adversary. Although it is about ending people’s lives, a sniper’s job is still an art form in which they master skills that most people don’t have.

    A sniper’s major weapon is ruthlessness. Roza Shanina’s desire for vengeance against her brothers, who had perished in the war, drove her to become one of the best snipers in World War II at the age of 20. The Nazi authorities were so afraid of this young woman that Canadians dubbed her “the unseen terror of East Prussia” (source). She almost made it to the end.

    Roza Shanina’s Early Life

    On April 3, 1924, Roza Shanina was born in the little town of Ed’ma in the Velsky District of the Vologda Oblast. The Shaninas were a typical, big family; in addition to her sister Yulia, her five brothers Sergei, Pavel, Fyodor, Lassalle, Mikhail, and Marat all grew up there. They also took in and cared for three orphans: Elena, Stepan, and Razum Butorin.

    The flamboyant Marxist revolutionary Rosa Luxemburg inspired Roza’s name in the first place. Yegor Shanin, the father, was an active party member and Soviet activist. The mother, Anna Shanina (Ovsyannikova), was a milkmaid in the commune where she raised her family.

    After serving in the Black Sea Fleet, Grandpa Mikhail Shanin was honorably discharged and helped form the Bogdanovskaya commune, which brought together a total of five families to achieve that. Yegor Shanin, Roza’s father, was named the commune’s first chairman.

    Roza Shanina ww2 female soviet sniper
    One of the lesser-known pictures of Roza Shanina.

    Roza Shanina’s life story was pieced back together using information from her journal as well as the narratives of locals and newspaper articles. Roza attended the seven-year Eden primary school in the little town of Bereznik and graduated. To achieve that, Roza and her brothers walked over 6 miles (10 kilometers) to school every day.

    Roza Shanina started her career in pedagogy after completing seven courses. Her parents strongly disagreed with her choice, but Roza had always stood out due to her determination and perseverance. She left her home with a note and settled in with her brother in Arkhangelsk. Roza was eventually assigned a bed in the dorm.

    Roza made a lot of close friends once she joined the school’s Komsomol (The All-Union Leninist Young Communist League). They enjoyed themselves, taking leisurely strolls around the park and trips to the movies, blissfully unaware that their tranquil existence would soon come to an abrupt end.

    Roza had to work to help pay for college expenses after World War II broke out. Her professional history started as a kindergarten teacher. The adoration of her little friends and the respect of their parents made her job satisfying.

    Roza Shanina Became One of the First Female Snipers

    The Soviet government planned to train a team of women to be snipers in early 1942. Before that, both of Shanina’s older brothers had enlisted in the military on their own. Roza had already decided to join the front lines when one of her brothers was killed during the war in 1941. After some time, two of her other brothers were also killed.

    Roza Shanina and other World War II Soviet female snipers.
    Roza Shanina and other World War II Soviet female snipers.

    Sergei, Mikhail, and Fyodor were her three elder brothers, and they were among the first to go to the front. Mikhail passed away in 1941, Fyodor in 1942, and Sergei in February 1945.

    Following her completion of the general education program in 1942, Roza reported to the Arkhangelsk municipal military registration and recruitment office that she wanted to be one of the women snipers.

    The Soviet Union had started sending out female shooters because of their flexible bodies and the general consensus that they were more patient, meticulous, and clever than their male counterparts.

    Shanina was admitted into the Vsevobuch program for universal military training on June 22, 1942, when she was still a resident of the dormitory. One year later, in June 1943, Shanina submitted her application to the Central Women’s Sniper Training School and was accepted. In that year, she enrolled in a sniper training academy, where she continued her education among other future women snipers.

    The friendly, outgoing Roza had no trouble making close connections with others in this new environment as well. Aleksandra “Sasha” Yekimova and Kaleriya “Kalya” Petrova, two of her other sniper friends, were all around her in her later years.

    Roza Shanina and her friends Aleksandra Sasha Yekimova and Kaleriya Kalya Petrova.
    Roza Shanina and her friends Aleksandra Sasha Yekimova and Kaleriya Kalya Petrova.

    Joining the Front Line

    After displaying great skills and accuracy in sniping, Roza was given a position as a teacher at the sniper school. But despite that, she chose to serve on the front lines instead. After being drafted, Roza began to serve her country by fighting for the 338th Infantry Division.

    In the spring of 1944, when Operation Bagration (a Soviet Belarusian strategic offensive operation) initially got underway, Roza shot her first target. It’s not like she had it easy; she subsequently stated that she couldn’t stop her hands from shaking and that she felt chilly all the way through.

    Eventually, Shanina got indifferent to death and found purpose in her work, as she recorded in her journal. Roza now became a ruthless sniper who never lost her cool, even when she was in the direct line of fire from a massive piece of artillery. Shanina displayed amazing bravery and heroism as the number of her victims climbed daily.

    ww2 Russian female snipers in before leaving for the front, 1 April, 1943
    Russian female snipers of World War II before leaving for the front, April 1, 1943.

    In April 1944, the valiant shooter received her first award, the Order of Glory. Roza was also promoted to the rank of corporal in the army. At this time, Roza Shanina had killed 18 soldiers and officers.

    Following the battle of Smolensk, Roza was given the responsibility of leading a team of female snipers. It was no surprise since Roze’s positive attitude and candor had endeared her to her teammates.

    One edition of the military newspaper detailing the fighting on the Belorussian front included a profile and photograph of Roza Shanina. The same publication also included testimonials from her superiors, friends, and subordinates, all referencing that she was a hero.

    Taking Initiatives

    At a later time, the infantry and the sniper unit were to stay in the rear guard for a massive offensive assault. Roza, however, was not content with the situation as it was, so she hastened to the front lines and took part in the action with scouts while her group remained in ambush.

    Since the beginning of June 22, 1944, when the Soviet Union launched its massive assault operation Bagration, Shanina’s unit was given orders to advance westward on the second round, to avoid endangering the lives of snipers. The women snipers were exhausted after a month and a half of intensive warfare, so they were told to take advantage of any breaks to rest and not to join the fighting of infantry detachments.

    The Soviet Union’s armed forces decided in June 1944 to stop using female snipers at the front. Shanina ignored the command and kept fighting with her fellow women soldiers to help the Red Army advance.

    Shanina wanted to be a rifleman in a battalion or a reconnaissance company, despite the command to the contrary. But the higher-ups were against it since any fighter could take Roza’s position in the infantry but not in an ambush.

    Roza disobeyed the commander’s instructions during the Vilnius offensive for the city and charged into the front rather than waiting in an ambush. Although such insubordination could have resulted in a tribunal, she got away with a disciplinary penalty from the Komsomol. Only by taking captives and getting them to the commander did Shanina manage to escape severe punishment.

    At this time, even the TsZHSHSP (Central Women’s Sniper Training School) leadership had recognized Shanina’s exceptional sniping skills, praising her for her ability to fire doublets (two bullets in rapid succession) at moving targets.

    After the fourth hunting sortie in the sniper logbook of Private Shanina, the number of eliminated soldiers became two-digit, and in the distance column from the ambush to the target, the observer noted “200 m” twice.

    Her Signature: The Doublet

    The female Russian snipers in WW2, including Roza Shanina.
    The female Russian snipers in WW2, including Roza Shanina.

    After World War II, publications detailing the experiences of Soviet women soldiers were released; one of these books recalled Shanina’s go-to tactic, the doublet. Roza fired two rounds practically simultaneously in the span of a single breath, showing that she was adept at engaging a moving enemy. Her “signature” move was widely regarded as a mastery of the greatest quality for a long time.

    Just a few short months into her service, Roza Shanina had already amassed evidence of achievement in the form of a sniper book. It had already reached the double-digit mark in terms of the number of opponents vanquished. Superiors acknowledged this twenty-year-old sniper’s accomplishments and gave Roza a Medal for Courage.

    She was one of the first female snipers to win the Medal of Courage, and her exploits earned her fame in propaganda booklets.

    Separate platoons of women snipers were needed for several missions. They took part in a large-scale operation in Lithuania to wipe out the enemy near the Belarusian city of Vitebsk. Shanina’s hard work and bravery were recognized, and she was awarded the second degree of the Order of Glory.

    The move to East Prussia occurred in September 1944 for Shanin. Another 26 enemy units were added to the list of those that were taken down. The enemy snipers that hide in a tree, or “cuckoos,” as they were dubbed, were Roza Shanina’s main objective. After the war, Lt. Col. Nikolay Krylov mentioned this in his memoirs.

    Roza detested the Nazis with a passion, and she knew that her two brothers, Fyodor and Mikhail, had never returned from the front. She could not bear to wait on the sidelines, and she was always impatient to join the fight.

    In recognition of this young female sniper’s bravery, Shanina received the “For Courage” medal as well as many honorary orders. After being mildly injured in one of the fights, Roza was taken to the hospital to recover.

    Her Personal Life

    Roza Shanina's diary.
    Roza Shanina’s diary. (Image)

    The Great Patriotic War erased generations of people’s lives. So many young men and women gave up their lives at home to fight for their country against an enemy they despised. Roza was no different; she kept studying at the pedagogical school, pursued science after work, and taught in a kindergarten during the day.

    Despite being in love with a boy called Misha Panarin, the famed woman sniper did not organize her personal life. When the young man passed away, Roza wrote in her notebook that she was struggling to accept that Misha was no longer with her. The log was created on October 10, 1944.

    Later in the same diary, Roza revealed that, in addition to Misha, she had developed an affection for a man named Nikolai. But Shanina didn’t give marriage a second thought since she didn’t think it was the proper moment for her.

    Roza planned to go to university after the war. But if she didn’t make it, she’d just spend the rest of her life taking care of abandoned children.

    Death of Roza Shanina

    The unit in which Shanina served was involved in fierce fighting at the start of 1945 in the Prussian city of Reichau. On January 17, she wrote in one of her letters that she had little hope of survival since 72 of her battalion’s 78 troops had been killed and she couldn’t leave the self-propelled gun due to heavy enemy artillery fire.

    Rose joined a new fight ten days after sending this letter. She ran to defend the wounded commander of the artillery unit during another barrage, but shrapnel struck her fatally.

    A page from the 144th Infantry Division's inventory of irretrievable fatalities from January 25 to February 10, 1945 (Rosa Shanina No. 16).
    A page from the 144th Infantry Division’s inventory of irretrievable fatalities from January 25 to February 10, 1945 (Rosa Shanina No. 16). (Image)

    Two troops discovered Shanina on January 27th, disemboweled and with her chest split open by a shell piece. The doctor at the hospital was unable to save Senior Sergeant Shanina.

    On January 28, 1945, the famed sniper girl passed away following massive blood loss. Roza’s final words were said to her caregiver, Ekaterina Radkina, as she lay dying in her arms.

    There was just one thing the sniper girl was sorry about, and that was not doing enough for her country. One of the first and arguably the best female snipers in history died just months before the end of the war. After going through possibly four years of hell, she almost made it to the end.

    According to Rosa’s sniper book, she killed 59 German troops and commanders, including 12 snipers. Other sources mention 54, and current researchers estimate Roza killed 62 soldiers.

    None of the four Shaninas children who enlisted to fight came back.

    As soon as Roza Shanina died, she was laid to rest in the town of Reichau. Her body was relocated to the settlement of Znamensk, Russia, after the war, where a marble memorial still stands today.

    Memorial

    According to the Krasnaya Zvezda newspaper of 1924, many of Shanina’s “colleagues” lacked the shooting precision that she had, which made her one of the finest snipers of World War II.

    The Allied press, notably the American publications of 1944–1945, highly praised this Soviet sniper woman. The youngster, however, showed no signs of reaction to her fame and even said that others had overrated her.

    Roza Shanina has a boulevard named after her in the city of Arkhangelsk (named after Archangel Michael), and she is also honored at professional shooting contests.

    She died in the area of Kaliningrad, and a monument was also built there. There is also a military museum at the school where she attended. With blue eyes and fair blonde hair, Roza Shanina was a patriotic Russian girl with a rare talent for sharpshooting.

    References

    1. Soviet Sniper: The Memoirs of Roza Shanina by Roza Shanina – 2020
    2. Roza Shanina Russian Sniper by Robert Corrigan – 2015
    3. Lady Death: The Memoirs of Stalin’s Sniper by Lyudmila Mykhailvna Pavlichenko – 2018
    4. “Unseen terror of East Prussia:” Ottawa Citizen – Google News Archive Search
  • Throne of Charlemagne: A Rather Dull Throne with Great History

    Throne of Charlemagne: A Rather Dull Throne with Great History

    The Throne of Charlemagne is one of the historically most important pieces of furniture in the Aachen Cathedral in Germany. It is remarkable that such a simple-looking throne could garner so much interest. Even though it is known as the Throne of Charlemagne, its provenance as the seat of the legendary ruler is still up for debate. The throne is said to have the qualities of a relic, although its unassuming look leaves much to the imagination. There are so many mysteries around the Throne of Charlemagne.

    What Made the Throne of Charlemagne Special?

    A Myth or Relic

    Napoleon Bonaparte and the Throne of Charlemagne in Aachen by Henri-Paul Motte (1846--1922). Napoleon prayed at the tomb of Charlemagne before his coronation and never sat on the throne out of respect for the man.
    Napoleon Bonaparte and the Throne of Charlemagne in Aachen by Henri-Paul Motte (1846–1922). Napoleon prayed at the tomb of Charlemagne before his coronation and never sat on the throne out of respect for the man.

    There is no evidence to suggest that the throne ever belonged to Charlemagne. The name “Throne of Charlemagne” is never directly mentioned in the sources. The throne’s minimalist form begs the question of what it represents and whether or not its construction gives it reliquary overtones.

    The Throne of Charlemagne is often referred to as a myth or religious relic. According to the story, all Holy Roman monarchs wanted to be crowned at Aachen, and only the one who sat on the king’s throne was king. And, although it is not directly confirmed, Charlemagne was on the throne at the time.

    The throne from its left side. The overall design elements of the Throne of Charlemagne are actually lacking in quality and detail.
    The throne from its left side. The overall design elements of the Throne of Charlemagne are actually lacking in quality and detail. (Image: Torsten Maue – Flickr)

    But why would monarchs choose to sit on this throne while others were more prosperous? Because even Charlemagne wasn’t crowned king in Aachen but in Noyon in 768. And he most likely attended the masses held in the Palatine Chapel on this throne.

    But this is where the throne really shines as a religious relic. The material evidence and the fact that Charlemagne’s canonization occurred in 1165 lend credence to this idea and the throne’s status as a “secondary relic“.

    The overall design elements of the Throne of Charlemagne are very lacking in quality and detail. The German chronicler Widukind von Corvey’s 936 account is the only one that specifically mentions a throne in the gallery.

    No Contemporary Reference

    The exhibition model of the Throne of Charlemagne at the Centre Charlemagne.
    The exhibition model of the Throne of Charlemagne at the Centre Charlemagne. (Image: Kleon3)

    On the occasion of Otto the Great’s coronation at Aachen, a mere 122 years after Charlemagne’s death, a throne is mentioned. However, the fact that the throne is not mentioned in Einhard’s (d. 840) “The Life of Charlemagne” raises serious issues regarding whether or not it existed during Charlemagne’s lifetime and whether or not Charlemagne actually sat on it.

    This is similar to other objects that are said to belong to Charlemagne, such as the Talisman of Charlemagne, the Crown of Charlemagne, or the Sword of Charlemagne.

    It is not evident from the records that there was ever a throne in Aachen Cathedral during Charlemagne’s reign between 768 and 814. A plethora of probes have been carried out to answer this question.

    In 1899, the architect Joseph Buchkremer was the first to investigate the origins and design of the Throne of Charlemagne. Modern researchers, archeologists, and architects still use Buchkremer’s findings as evidence in their arguments for the throne. Some of their views were diametrically opposed to Buchkremer’s, while others confirmed certain aspects.

    The Design of the Throne of Charlemagne

    The original flooring still presents around the Throne of Charlemagne.
    The original flooring is still present around the Throne of Charlemagne. (Image: Torsten Maue – Flickr)

    Even though it is kept very basic for a mighty king, the Throne of Charlemagne still manages to make quite an impression visually.

    The throne itself is constructed out of marble slabs, while the lower construction includes a stairway. There is also an altar on the back of the throne dedicated to Nicasius of Rheims, but it has little significance to the throne since it was added later in 1305.

    The altar of Nicasius of Rheims, on the back of the Throne of Charlemagne.
    The Altar of Nicasius of Rheims, on the back of the Throne of Charlemagne. (Image: Berthold Werner)

    The Throne of Charlemagne has a limestone base. A smaller eastern half and a bigger western half make up the base plate. A riveted cross holds up four stone pillars that support the structure. The pillars are supported by profiled plinths that are placed immediately on top of the slabs. The stairway is just in front of them. These stairs have six steps and lead to the throne.

    The six-step structure is comprised of four antique column drums. The real royal seat has a wooden framework within it and is topped with four marble slabs. The marbles, along with the steps, are believed to have been imported from the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, c. 800.

    However, owing to air raid shelters and other factors during World War II, the Parian marble’s surface is now darker, discolored, and covered with vertical drip tracks.

    Six bronze brackets, bent at right angles, hold the plates in place; these are riveted to the plates themselves. Two vertical support boards and a seat plate make up the hardwood interior structure. The throne’s marble panels have seen better days; their original place of use was not the throne. Wear and tear, such as scratches, provide evidence of this.

    The throne from its right side. The Nine Men's Morris board game on the Throne of Charlemagne.
    The throne from its right side. The Nine Men’s Morris board game on the Throne of Charlemagne. (Image: ACBahn)

    Those slabs were probably used as flooring. Moreover, they are completely covered with graffiti. Writing on the floor was a common practice during lengthy waits in medieval and ancient times. Especially discernible are images of the Nine Men’s Morris board game and a crucifixion scene.

    However, the crucifixion scene is controversial. Some researchers identify this graffiti, while others point out that it’s lacking two key elements. Included in this are the feet, the cross trunk, and the hint of a head, complete with an aureole (a religious halo).

    The Throne of Charlemagne in the Aachen Cathedral reflects a rather alternative conception of a throne, one that is not associated with lavish ornamentation.

    Was the Throne of Charlemagne Real?

    Historians do not fully endorse the throne due to a lack of supporting evidence. The throne may not have been in existence during Charlemagne’s lifetime, although there are still several claims that it was in use by Charlemagne.

    The setting of the throne might provide information about its age. Joseph Buchkremer inspected the throne in 1899. Behind the throne is the Nicasius Altar, which Buchkremer removed so that it could be restored. After removing the ruined altar, he discovered a worn surface underneath. Buchkremer explained the deterioration of the stairwell by pointing out that it had previously been modified.

    The medieval archaeologist Sven Schütte deduced subsequently that the actual throne was being constructed on brand-new foundations. The floor’s Carolingian-era date is another evidence of the throne’s tremendous antiquity. The pink Carolingian mortar, which was broken due to an earthquake, lends credence to this theory. Buchkremer uses more evidence to prove that Charlemagne occupied the throne.

    According to him, the fact that most of the monarchs who succeeded Charlemagne wished to be crowned at Aachen, on Charlemagne’s throne, explains why the throne was possibly there throughout Charlemagne’s lifetime.

    The use of an ancient column drum method to build the steps is potential evidence that they were built during Charlemagne’s reign. This theory is based on the fact that Charlemagne imported several pieces of Italian marble. The foundation stones also have a similar composition. Stones are identical in profile and proportions to those used in St. Mary’s Church.

    Similarly, the dovetail structure of the throne was already commonplace in antiquity but was extensively employed throughout the Carolingian era.

    Since Charlemagne went about building his Aachen Cathedral and St. Mary’s Church with great care and precision, historian Lobbedey concludes that the cathedral’s technical flaws disprove that the throne was built under the emperor’s supervision.

    References

    But the bronze lattice door in front of the throne might be a convincing proof of the throne being in the gallery since it was built and Charlemagne’s usage of it, as claimed by Buchkremer. The bronze lattice is fairly elaborate or ornamented, and this door would be unnecessary if there wasn’t a royal artifact seen through it.

    Both Einhard and Buchkremer referred to Charlemagne’s palatine chapel in Aachen as a “porticus” (a chapel or burial place in a church). This reference points to another entrance, and this entrance, like the throne, would be located in the same gallery. The porticus potentially served as a passageway between Charlemagne’s private quarters and the throne, potentially providing him with an unobstructed view of the octagon below.

    The throne was installed in the church’s central octagon, which serves as the palatine chapel’s main area.

    In this light, Einhard makes specific reference to the “porticus” in the “Vita Karoli Magni,” but never once brings up the throne. It’s possible that the “porticus” served different purposes as well. Therefore, this text cannot prove that the throne in the gallery existed in Charlemagne’s reign.

    The Throne of Charlemagne also missed out on opportunities to be more luxurious and impressive. Some historians conclude that this “extraordinary simplicity” indicates the monarch’s advanced years, instead of Charlemagne’s reign. So, calling the throne “Charlemagne’s Throne” might be a stretch.

    Radiocarbon Dating

    The internal wooden construction, which is on display at the Rheinisches Landesmuseum Bonn, formerly had a marble sitting plate that has since been lost. St. Stephen’s Purse and other Imperial Regalia were housed under it on a shelf. This oakwood panel was dated to about the year 800 using radiocarbon technology.

    The tree, whose wood was used to construct the throne, was cut down somewhere between 760 and 824, most likely in 798. This corrects the earlier assertions that the wood used in the throne was of Carolingian origin (800–888).

    Some historians argue that it is not possible to conclude that the complete throne was constructed in the year 800 based on the dating of the wood alone. Given the present level of knowledge and technology, an absolute date is still not attainable.

    Since the throne was not mentioned at all in contemporaneous sources, the conclusions of the dating of the wood of the throne might be misleading, even if they do match within the lifetime of Charlemagne.

    The Throne of Charlemagne at a Glance

    What is the significance of the Throne of Charlemagne?

    The Throne of Charlemagne is a historically important piece of furniture in the Aachen Cathedral in Germany. While its connection to Charlemagne is still debated, it holds mythical and religious significance as a relic associated with the legendary ruler. It is believed that sitting on the throne symbolized kingship, and it is considered a secondary relic due to its association with Charlemagne’s canonization.

    Is the Throne of Charlemagne confirmed to have belonged to Charlemagne?

    There is no direct evidence to suggest that the throne actually belonged to Charlemagne. The name “Throne of Charlemagne” is not mentioned in historical sources, and it is not mentioned in Einhard’s “The Life of Charlemagne.” Its association with Charlemagne is based on legends and traditions surrounding the coronation rituals at Aachen.

    What is the design of the Throne of Charlemagne like?

    The Throne of Charlemagne has a simple design. It is constructed of marble slabs with a limestone base. The structure includes a stairway and features an altar dedicated to Nicasius of Rheims at the back, which was added later. The throne itself has a wooden framework inside and is topped with marble slabs. The surface of the marble has been discolored and damaged over time.

    Are there any contemporary references to the Throne of Charlemagne?

    There are no contemporary references to the Throne of Charlemagne during Charlemagne’s reign. The first mention of a throne in Aachen Cathedral comes from Otto the Great’s coronation, 122 years after Charlemagne’s death. The lack of contemporary references raises questions about its existence during Charlemagne’s lifetime.

  • Talisman of Charlemagne: An Old Relic with a Possibility of Truth

    Talisman of Charlemagne: An Old Relic with a Possibility of Truth

    The Talisman of Charlemagne is a 2.9-inch (7.3-cm) long, golden talisman in Carolingian style, set with pearls and red and green stones, perhaps rubies or spinels, and emeralds. It is an encolpion, or portable reliquary, that dates back to the 9th century. This talisman is one of the pieces from the Reims Cathedral Treasury in France that has been kept in the Palace of Tau in Reims. The Talisman of Charlemagne is the only artifact that can be reliably linked to the Frankish king, unlike the Crown of Charlemagne and the Sword of Charlemagne.

    The Talisman’s Origin

    The Talisman of Charlemagne is on display in the Palace of Tau, Reims, France.
    The Talisman of Charlemagne is on display in the Palace of Tau, Reims, France.

    Charlemagne is supposed to have received this talisman in 801 as a gift from Harun al-Rashid (d. 809), the Caliph of Baghdad. The caliph also sent a water clock, the white elephant Abul-Abbas, and Chinese silk to the emperor.

    The goldsmithing of the talisman is not in Arabic style. In 1166, when Charlemagne’s coffin was opened at Aachen in Germany, the talisman was supposedly discovered on the emperor’s chest.

    It is made of gold using a highly intricate casting technique that was challenging during the Early Middle Ages. It is adorned with precious gemstone cabochons of round and rectangular shapes, as well as pearls. The absence of any figural or animal ornamentation is seen as further evidence of the talisman’s Arabic origin.

    Design of the Talisman of Charlemagne

    The Charlemagne's talisman.

    On one side of the Talisman of Charlemagne is a central sapphire of roughly 190 carats (1.34 oz; 38 g), opaque and of quite coarse size, concealing a relic of the True Cross that was transparently apparent through a glass cabochon that was definitely substituted in the 19th century.

    Two pieces of wood, shaped like a cross, are housed in this talisman’s cabochon “heart.” These wood pieces are said to have originated from Jesus’ crucifixion on Calvary Hill. This inclusion has been believed to increase the talisman’s enchantment.

    The True Cross inside the Talisman of Charlemagne. The glass cabochon is filled with air bubbles, visible in both reflected and transmitted light (left and right, respectively). The wooden cross and silk thread can be seen clearly in both pictures.
    The True Cross inside the Talisman of Charlemagne. The glass cabochon is filled with air bubbles, visible in both reflected and transmitted light (left and right, respectively). The wooden cross and silk thread can be seen clearly in both pictures. (Image credit: G. Panczer).

    Gold is worked in filigree and granulation techniques, and all the precious stones are mounted in bezel settings. We can make out pearls, garnets, and emeralds set at the four corners of the jewel’s face and its edge.

    The stones on the Talisman of Charlemagne are cabochon-cut and polished, bringing out their color rather than their shine. The 53 gems and pearls have been carefully placed in a harmonic pattern that takes into account their form and color.

    Contradictions Regarding the Talisman of Charlemagne

    the Talisman of Charlemagne

    The talisman itself is from the 9th century, but the gold chain is more modern. It’s possible that one of Charlemagne’s successors, not the emperor himself, ordered the talisman. During the late Middle Ages, many items were eventually linked to Charlemagne, despite having been created between the seventh and eleventh centuries.

    The art historian Jean Taralon claimed that the Talisman of Charlemagne originally contained the Virgin Mary’s hair and milk. But it was later replaced with a piece of the holy cross in 1804 and then by the stone in 1870. However, this idea is at odds with the testimony that Marc-Antoine Berdolet, Bishop of Aachen, presented to Napoleon Bonaparte on 23 Thermidor, Year XII (or 1804).

    According to that, the reliquary “contains a small cross made of the wood of the holy cross, found on the neck of Saint Charlemagne when his body was exhumed from his sepulcher in 1166.” Berdolet was testified to under penalty of excommunication, and his description excludes any substitution of the Talisman of Charlemagne.

    Two engravings, published by Gerhard Altzenbach (left, 1664) and Jacobus Harrewijn (right, 1711), both representing the treasury of Aachen Cathedral.
    Two engravings, published by Gerhard Altzenbach (left, 1664) and Jacobus Harrewijn (right, 1711), both represent the treasury of Aachen Cathedral. The Talisman of Charlemagne appears in the center of both engravings.

    A few historians mention an engraving by W. Hollar that features a reliquary bearing the Virgin Mary’s hair. The engraving displays a part of the Treasury of Aachen from the 17th century. According to that, the Treasury of Aachen did not include the Talisman of Charlemagne.

    Gemological Analysis of the Talisman of Charlemagne

    the Talisman of Charlemagne

    Under the direction of the gemology professor Gérard Panczer, two campaigns (2016 and 2018) of on-site gemological analyses employing spectroscopic methods were conducted on the Talisman of Charlemagne for the first time. Geoffray Riondet, an expert in antique jewelry and a lawyer, was of particular assistance.

    In particular, they allowed the provenance of the colored gemstones to be identified. Ceylon (present-day Sri Lanka) was formerly known for its sapphire mines. The center sapphire, which did not have any enhancement treatment by heating, was one of the biggest sapphires known in Europe before the 17th century.

    Bernard Morel claimed that the relics with such large gemstones could not be produced until Philip II of France returned from the Third Crusade (1189–1192). Because gemstones of this size were very unusual in Europe at the time of Charlemagne and could only be obtained from the East.

    This theory of origin also holds true when examining the remarkably large gemstones adorning the Crown of Charlemagne.

    The blue cabochon made from glass is doped with cobalt, which supposedly reveals a relic of the True Cross, and it had originally replaced a stone. Garnets were mined in southern India and Sri Lanka for the most part.

    The emeralds have a similar chemical fingerprint to those found in Egypt’s Djebel Zabara. During the 1964 repair of the Talisman of Charlemagne, one of the stones was replaced with an emerald that currently displays the features of the Habachtal deposit in Austria.

    History of the Talisman of Charlemagne

    Felix Cottreau’s 1834 portrait of Hortense de Beauharnais, wearing the Talisman of Charlemagne.
    Felix Cottreau’s 1834 portrait of Hortense de Beauharnais, wearing the Talisman of Charlemagne.

    Caliph Harun al-Rashid supposedly sent this reliquary to Charlemagne of the Frankish Kingdom as a gift in 801. The keys of the Holy Sepulcher, the flag of Jerusalem, an ivory hunting horn, a saber from Damascus, and finally the Talisman of Charlemagne were all stored in the same treasury collection.

    After being preserved in the Aachen Treasury until the early 19th century, the Talisman of Charlemagne is said to have been found at the exhumation of Charlemagne’s remains, either under Emperor Otto III in 1000 or under Frederick Barbarossa on January 8, 1166, but this is rather speculative.

    According to others, the Talisman of Charlemagne was really crafted much later, in the 12th century. The earliest documentation of the talisman dates back to the 12th century; however, it wasn’t given the name “Talisman of Charlemagne” until 1620.

    Charlemagne’s ownership of the talisman is not attested to in any historical records. Still, the scholar-abbet Alcuin (735-804), a contemporary of Charlemagne, wrote of the growing practice of carrying reliquaries with bits of saints’ relics around one’s neck.

    This practice caught on and persisted in Catholicism for centuries, leaving room for the possibility that such a talisman was created much later.

    During her coronation in 1804, Napoleon’s wife, Empress Joséphine, wore the Talisman of Charlemagne. It was later inherited by her daughter, Hortense de Beauharnais, who passed it on to her son, Napoleon III.

    Later, Napoleon III gave it to Empress Eugénie de Montijo, who donated the talisman to the city in 1919 to help restore the cathedral in Reims, which had been bombarded during World War I.

    The Talisman of Charlemagne at a Glance

    What is the Talisman of Charlemagne?

    The Talisman of Charlemagne is a 2.9-inch (7.3-cm) long, golden talisman in Carolingian style, set with pearls and red and green stones, possibly rubies or spinels, and emeralds. It is a portable reliquary dating back to the 9th century and is currently displayed at the Palace of Tau in Reims, France.

    What is the origin of the Talisman of Charlemagne?

    According to historical accounts, the Talisman of Charlemagne was supposedly gifted to Charlemagne in 801 by Harun al-Rashid, the Caliph of Baghdad. It is said to have been discovered on Charlemagne’s chest when his coffin was opened in 1166. However, there are contradictory theories suggesting it may have been crafted later, possibly in the 12th century.

    What is the design of the Talisman of Charlemagne?

    The Talisman of Charlemagne features a central sapphire of approximately 190 carats that conceals a relic of the True Cross. The talisman is adorned with pearls, garnets, and emeralds, and it is made of gold using filigree and granulation techniques. The gemstones are cabochon-cut and the overall design is devoid of figural or animal ornamentation.

    Are there any contradictions regarding the Talisman of Charlemagne?

    Yes, there are contradictions surrounding the talisman. While it is from the 9th century, the gold chain attached to it is more modern, suggesting a possible replacement. Additionally, there are differing accounts regarding the original contents of the talisman, with some claiming it contained the Virgin Mary’s hair and milk, while others suggest it held a piece of the holy cross.

    References

  • Crown of Charlemagne: History, Origin, and Design

    Crown of Charlemagne: History, Origin, and Design

    The Crown of Charlemagne is a crown worn by French kings upon their coronation. Many French kings simply named their imperial crowns the “Crown of Charlemagne,” just like Napoleon Bonaparte did in 1804. When the king’s crown was destroyed for some reason, the queen’s crown would be used in royal ceremonies, including the coronation of the new king. And there were two pretty similar crowns of Charlemagne, which were formerly part of the regalia of the French monarchy but were lost when the first one was melted by the Leaguers in 1590, and the second Crown of Charlemagne was destroyed during the French Revolution in 1793. Before that, it remained in use until the coronation of King Louis XIV in 1775, and the Treasury of Saint-Denis subsequently received it as a donation.

    History of the Crown of Charlemagne

    Michel Félibien's 1706 engraving of one of the Saint-Denis treasure boxes, with the Crown of Charlemagne at the bottom right and the Sword of Charlemagne on the left wall.
    Michel Félibien’s 1706 engraving of one of the Saint-Denis treasure boxes, with the Crown of Charlemagne at the bottom right and the Sword of Charlemagne on the left wall.

    The Origin of the Crowns and Their Gemstones

    Among the Ancien Régime regalia, the Sword of Charlemagne, Joyeuse, also survived to this day. There is no written evidence that would allow us to pinpoint when the first Crown of Charlemagne was made or even whether both crowns were a matched set or just two comparable pieces, of which one would have been a later replica.

    According to one theory, the origin of the Crown of Charlemagne lies with Charles the Bald (d. 877 AD), Charlemagne’s grandson. A simple circlet of four curving rectangular jeweled plates was crafted for the king in the 9th century.

    The Crown of Charlemagne by Albrecht Dürer (1471-1528)
    The Crown of Charlemagne by Albrecht Dürer (1471-1528)

    Given the significance of the gemstones and their quantity, Bernard Morel claimed that the crowns could not be produced until Philip II of France returned from the Third Crusade (1189–1192). In fact, at the time, stones of this size were very unusual in Europe and could only be obtained from the East.

    Therefore, the French king could not have had two crowns so lavish in gems, particularly valuable stones of various sorts, fashioned before the Third Crusade on the Levant (See also: Crusades).

    The Crown of Charlemagne Over Time

    The Crown of Charlemagne, also known as the Crown of Saint Louis. A painting by Dom Michel Félibien.
    The Crown of Charlemagne, also known as the Crown of Saint Louis. A painting by Dom Michel Félibien.

    Crowns worn during the coronations of Philip II of France and his Danish bride Ingeborg are almost indistinguishable from one another and have been variously referred to as the Crown of Charlemagne (or sometimes as the Crown of Saint Louis):

    The second marriage of King Philip II of France to Ingeborg of Denmark took place on August 14, 1193. It was a holy day the day after, so the king put on the Crown of Charlemagne. In 1223, Philip II left his and the queen’s crowns to the Treasury of Saint-Denis through a will, which also included the Sword of Charlemagne at the time.

    The two crowns were later presented to Louis VIII and Blanche of Castile shortly after their coronation at Reims in 1223. Instead of honoring his father’s request, the king chose to pay the monks a substantial quantity of money in exchange for the return of the two crowns.

    The Restoration of the Crowns

    The reign of Louis IX began in 1226. In 1261, he chose to permanently restore the two crowns to the Abbey of Saint-Denis, with a scroll explaining that they were created for the coronation of kings and queens and are displayed above the morning altar during solemn feast days.

    This is how the crowns of both the king and queen became part of the church’s collection. All kings and queens up to Henry III of France (d. 1589) were crowned with the Crown of Charlemagne. The only exceptions were John II (d. 1364), who had himself crowned with the holy crown, and Charles VII (d. 1461), who did not have the treasury when Joan of Arc took him to Reims.

    The Catholic League (1576) was funded in part by the dukes of Mayenne and Nemours, who in 1590 seized the throne and established it in their names. As time went on, the almost identical crown owned by the queen was used during coronations. Those two crowns were successively dubbed the “Crown of Charlemagne”.

    Originally crafted for the Holy Roman Emperor Otto the Great’s coronation in 962 at the imperial monastery of Reichenau, the Reichskrone was later recognized as the Crown of Charlemagne and featured prominently on the escutcheon of the Holy Roman Empire‘s Arch-Treasurer and atop the coat of arms of the Habsburg emperors, as seen in the Hofburg Palace in Vienna.

    The Design of the Crown of Charlemagne

    The exact description of the crowns of Charlemagne was recorded in an inventory conducted in 1534 by the treasury. The inventory noted in Latin that there was a striking similarity between two crowns.

    Circlets

    Both crowns of Charlemagne were made of pure gold, with the king’s weighing approximately 9 lb (4 kg) with all the stones of the cap and the silver chains. They were made up of a wide band and four rectangular plates joined together at the base by systems of hinges to form the base circle.

    The engraving of the crown by Dom Michel Félibien and a watercolor painting by Montfaucon allow us to determine that each of these four rectangular plates had a huge and exquisite fleur-de-lis at their center, the decorative symbol of French heraldry.

    The circlet and the fleurons comprised a total of 48 gemstones, distributed as 16 balas rubies (spinel), 16 emeralds, and 16 sapphires. Each element (a plate and a fleuron) was decorated in the same way.

    Three rubies framed the emerald-studded base of the fleur-de-lis. Each rectangular plate has four sapphires at its corners, a ruby in the middle, two emeralds on each side, and a third emerald positioned below.

    The two crowns of Charlemagne looked almost similar, with the exception that the queen’s was somewhat smaller, lighter, and adorned with smaller, less uniform jewels.

    Cap

    A 200-carat ruby and 112 pearls decorated the crown’s conical inner headpiece, which belonged to the king. King John II (d. 1364) ordered this regal velvet headgear, which had a crimson tint.

    The ruby was placed on a square pillar, and the headpiece had 12 strands of 9 rosette beads. The pillar’s collar was fastened to the cap using four gold bands and four more pearls, making a cross. Around the pillar’s base is an inscription in Latin that honors the benefactor of the crown.

    Henry II had the satin-lined velvet cap of the Crown of Charlemagne recreated in 1547.

    References

    1. Medieval Art: Treasures of Saint Denis:Crown of Queen Jeanne d’Evreux – Pitt.edu
    2. The History of Charlemagne – George Payne Rainsford James, 1833 – Google Books
    3. Charlemagne – Father of a Continent – Alessandro Barbero, 2004 – Google Books
  • Possible Look of Jesus Based on Historical Evidence

    Possible Look of Jesus Based on Historical Evidence

    Christians mark the day in 30 or 31 AD when the Romans crucified Jewish itinerant preacher Yeshua bar Yosef – “Jesus, son of Joseph.” But what does history know about the possible appearance of Jesus? The New Testament places the birth of Yeshua or Jesus (which came from Iesous in Greek), during the reign of the Roman Jewish client King Herod. Since Herod died in 4 BC, the birth of Jesus must have occurred earlier (contrary to today’s calendar system that would subsequently bear his name), most likely between the years of 7 and 4 BC. So, what did Jesus look like in real life?

    The Birthplace of Jesus

    Although the tale of his birth appears in two of the four canonical gospels, it may have been added as an afterthought to connect Jesus to the hometown of King David and the related messianic prophecy. Jesus’ hometown of Nazareth is a more plausible candidate for his birthplace (see also: Was the Star of Bethlehem Real?). There he was raised by his craftsman father Joseph (Yosef) and his wife Mary (Myriam), together with his [half] siblings, and Jesus was likely taught both the Bible and his father’s crafts.

    What Did Jesus Look Like?

    Christianity is the largest religion in the world today, but throughout the years many other sects and denominations have formed, each with its own canon of Scripture, rituals, festivals, and, of course, depictions of Jesus or the Christ figure. Jesus has been pictured in many ways, yet scholars cannot agree on a single one.

    Yeshua or Jesus, the Jewish rabbi, was already transformed by the Romans into a European figure with a short Roman haircut and a Greek philosopher’s beard in order to fit in with their society.

    Jesus was depicted as a shepherd with sheep to resemble Hermes, the herald of gods in Greek mythology. He also appeared as the ruler of the gods in splendid garments like Zeus or Jupiter.

    Another depiction of Jesus is as the sun god (like Helios or Sol Invictus) with a chariot and aureole, a radiant light around the head or body. Last but not least, the Romans even depicted Jesus as a Roman emperor in armor and a purple cloak.

    Various Depictions of Jesus

    Below are historical depictions of Jesus’ appearance, popular images, and paintings in art. Some of them are among the oldest drawings of Jesus.

    One of the earliest depictions of Jesus from the 3rd century AD, Dura-Europos, Syrian Desert.
    One of the earliest depictions of Jesus from the 3rd century AD, Dura-Europos, Syrian Desert.

    The above depiction is from the 3rd century AD, and it was discovered in the border city of Dura Europos, which was founded in 300 BC in the Syrian Desert. The city was used during Hellenistic, Parthian, and Roman times.

    One of the earliest depictions of Jesus is from the 3rd century AD, Dura-Europos, Syrian Desert.

    The drawing shows Jesus without a beard, with curly short hair, a garment, and sandals. His legs still show a darker skin color, which is in line with the Middle Eastern desert people of the time. Jesus with white skin is the work of European artists.

    Jesus as "The Good Shepherd" from the Catacombs of St. Callixtus in Rome, 3rd century AD.
    Jesus as “The Good Shepherd” from the Catacombs of St. Callixtus in Rome, 3rd century AD.

    From the Catacomb of Callixtus near Rome, the 3rd century AD depiction portrays Jesus as a shepherd with a long beard and carrying a flock of sheep on his shoulders.

    This depiction shows Jesus with a light skin color, European clothing, and body proportions that varied according to the artist’s origin. The purpose of this drawing was to align Jesus’ status with the ancient Roman god(s) of shepherds, Hermes or Pales.

    Jesus as a sun god on a mosaic under St. Peter's Basilica, 3rd century AD, Rome.
    Jesus as a sun god on a mosaic under St. Peter’s Basilica, 3rd century AD, Rome.

    The above mosaic from the 3rd century AD, found under St. Peter’s Basilica, depicts Jesus riding a chariot and wearing solar rays. In this mosaic, Jesus is depicted as the sun god Sol Invictus or Helios, which was the official sun god of the Roman Empire. He rides a chariot and scatters aureole lights around his head.

    Jesus with a philosopher's beard and toga on a Roman tombstone, c. 290–310 AD.
    Jesus with a philosopher’s beard and toga on a Roman tombstone, c. 290–310 AD.

    Approximately 290–310 AD, a Roman gravestone depicted Jesus dressed as a sage with a toga and beard. He is seen with the philosopher’s beard of the ancient Greek civilization, including their traditional clothing. Jesus is gesturing the hand of benediction with his right hand, which originates from Saint Peter and his ulnar nerve entrapment disease.

    Jesus from the Catacombs of Saints Marcellinus and Peter in Rome, 4th century AD.
    Jesus from the Catacombs of Saints Marcellinus and Peter in Rome, 4th century AD.

    Jesus has a short haircut and is dressed in a Roman toga in a 4th-century AD painting in the Catacombs of Saints Marcellinus and Peter, Rome. The catacombs date to the same period. Jesus looks similar to his sun god depiction from the 3rd century AD.

    The Catacombe di Commodilla near Rome, dating to the 4th century AD, depicts Jesus with long hair, a beard, and southern European facial features.
    The Catacombe di Commodilla near Rome, dating to the 4th century AD, depicts Jesus with long hair, a beard, and southern European facial features.

    Catacombe di Commodilla near Rome, dating to the 4th century AD, depicts Jesus with long hair, a beard, and southern European facial features.

    Jesus in the Roman basilica of Santa Pudentiana, c. 400--410 AD.
    Jesus in the Roman basilica of Santa Pudentiana, c. 400–410 AD.

    In the Roman basilica of Santa Pudentiana in Rome, about 400–410 AD, Jesus is shown enthroned as the ruler of the universe in the form of a god-king similar to Jupiter or Zeus in ancient Greek.

    The depiction of Jesus in the tomb of the Roman Empress Galla Placidia, 5th century AD.
    The depiction of Jesus in the tomb of the Roman Empress Galla Placidia, 5th century AD.

    From the tomb of the Roman Empress Galla Placidia in Ravenna (5th century AD) comes a depiction of Jesus as a young man with a flock of sheep. Jesus was often depicted as a god of shepherds in ancient Rome, similar to Hermes or Pales.

    Jesus as a Roman emperor with Byzantine armor and a purple cloak, 6th century AD.
    Jesus as a Roman emperor with Byzantine armor and a purple cloak, 6th century AD.

    Featuring Byzantine armor and a purple robe, this 6th-century AD mosaic from the Italian city of Ravenna depicts Jesus as a triumphant monarch. The wearing of a tyrian purple robe with gold thread detailing denoted a position of authority in ancient Rome. This is one of the rare depictions of Jesus with braided hair.

    The Look of Jesus Varied Around the World

    In response to the European Jesus, other nations crafted their own depictions of Jesus, tailoring his look to suit the norms of the local community in terms of clothes, hairstyle, traits, skin color, and facial features.

    Local “Jesuses” such as the Ethiopian, Persian, Chinese, Korean, Haitian, Indonesian, Afro-American, or Indian Jesus evolved alongside the standard European Jesus with a fair complexion and long brown/blonde hair, although they have nothing in common with the original model.

    Jesus of Byzantium in St. Catherine Monastery.
    Jesus of Byzantium in St. Catherine Monastery.

    St. Catherine Monastery’s (565 AD) Icon of Jesus of Byzantium in Sinai. This is one of the later depictions of Jesus, as it is from the 6th century.

    Chinese Jesus, 9th century AD.
    Chinese Jesus, 9th century AD.

    A 9th-century silk artwork of Jesus from China’s Mogao Caves. The Mogao Caves are a network of 500 temples in Gansu province, China. The nearby city of Dunhuang is an oasis at a religious and cultural crossroads on the Silk Road.

    10th-century Uyghur depiction of Jesus.
    10th-century Uyghur depiction of Jesus.

    10th-century Uyghur depiction of Jesus on a banner for a Manichaean sanctuary in Qocho or Kara-Khoja. Also known as Idiqut, it was a Uyghur kingdom created in 843.

    A 1220 painting of a northern European Jesus.
    A 1220 painting of a northern European Jesus.

    Bishop Conrad IV of Tann’s 1220 painting of a northern European Jesus for the Speyer Evangeliary. It is an illuminated gospel book dating back to the 11th century, also known as the Codex Aureus of Speyer or the Golden Gospels of Henry III.

    Christ Carrying the Cross by Niccolo Frangipane, 16th century.
    Christ Carrying the Cross by Niccolo Frangipane, 16th century.

    Niccolo Frangipane’s 1574 depiction of the European Jesus. The picture is owned by the Museo Carmen Thyssen in Malaga, Spain.

    Islamic Jesus, 1580.
    Islamic Jesus, 1580.

    One of the rare examples of an Islamic Jesus. This is a Persian miniature from about 1580 depicting Jesus and his followers eating together.

    Jesus, and John the Baptist, 1723.
    Jesus, and John the Baptist, 1723.

    This is a painting by Northern European artist Francesco Trevisani from 1723 depicting Jesus and John the Baptist. In this Italian painting, the appearance of Jesus is completely transformed into that of a European figure.

    African Jesus, the 1900s.
    African Jesus, the 1900s.

    Jesus and John the Baptist on the African continent, as seen in a 20th-century Ethiopian Psalter.

    20th century Afro-American Jesus.
    20th century Afro-American Jesus.

    In a picture from the 20th century, Vincent Barzoni depicts an Afro-American Jesus. Barzoni is known for many of his similar depictions of Jesus.

    Javanese Jesus, c. 1927--1930.
    Javanese Jesus, c. 1927–1930.

    The Javanese Jesus is located at the Sacred Heart of Jesus Catholic Church in Ganjuran, Indonesia. The statue is dated to c. 1927–1930.

    Chinese Jesus, 1930s--1940s.
    Chinese Jesus, 1930s–1940s.

    The Chinese painter Bai Huiqun’s picture from the 1930s or 1940s depicts Jesus Christ of China with two ladies.

    Haitian Jesus and John the Baptist in local dresses.
    Haitian Jesus and John the Baptist in local dresses.

    Haitian Jesus and John the Baptist in local dresses. A painting in the Cathédrale de la Sainte-Trinité of Port-au-Prince, Haiti, about the 1950s.

    Korean Jesus, 1962.
    Korean Jesus, 1962.

    Korean Jesus, as shown in a 1962 artwork by Korean artist Jang Un-sang.

    Native American Jesus, 1997.
    Native American Jesus, 1997.

    A painting by John Giuliani from 1997 depicts Jesus in Navajo garb as a Navajo Indian.

    The Real Appearance of Jesus According to Science

    Exactly how did Jesus really appear? We can’t say for sure since no one has ever painted a lifelike painting of him. However, it is possible to reconstruct the typical look of the ancient Jewish community in Galilee.

    The genetic and anatomical examinations of bone findings allow us to make judgments about the likely appearance of Jesus. He presumably shared his family’s light brown eyeswavy or curly black hair, and overall look with his close relatives.

    The only way to know for sure is to conjecture, but given his cultural background, a short beard is also a safe bet. There are two more recent depictions of Jesus that may not be too far off the mark when it comes to his real look:

    The look of Jesus according to an accurate reconstruction of a male Galilean.
    The look of Jesus according to an accurate reconstruction of a male Galilean.

    The more likely appearance of Jesus while he was alive. This is according to the reconstruction of a male Galilean from the 1st century AD.

    There is no way to tell for sure what Jesus looked like since neither his body nor any contemporaneous art has been preserved. Based only on bone discoveries and descriptions, all we can do is speculate on what an ordinary man from his native nation could have looked like in his lifetime.

    Bas Uterwijk, a Dutch photographer, created this artistic recreation of Jesus.
    Bas Uterwijk, a Dutch photographer, created this artistic recreation of Jesus.

    The above image, on the other hand, is more of an idealized look at Jesus by a Dutch photographer named Bas Uterwijk. It is still more accurate than the European Jesus.

    Egyptian mummy portrait of a bearded man from Faiyum, c. 161–180 AD
    Egyptian mummy portrait of a bearded man from Faiyum, c. 161–180 AD

    This antique portrait is likewise quite similar to the reconstructed image of Jesus. However, the man represented is not from Galilee. It is an Egyptian mummy portrait of a bearded man from Faiyum, Egypt, c. 161–180 AD.

    Evidence from Today

    The ancient Levantine culture was radically different from that of the present Western world. The ordinary ancient Israeli was significantly more brown than the average modern Westerner because they spent so much time outside working or traveling in the scorching Mediterranean heat.

    This was particularly true of men like Jesus, who traveled a lot, while King Herod, who most likely spent his time inside, had a significantly paler complexion. This is especially apparent in the looks of some modern-day Israeli shepherds, who live much as their ancestors did:

    A Jewish shepherd in the Judean Hills.
    A Jewish shepherd in the Judean Hills. (Photographer: SHP/Barry Searle)

    The Appearance of Jesus at a Glance

    What did Jesus look like in real life?

    The exact appearance of Jesus is unknown since there are no preserved contemporaneous art or physical remains. However, based on historical and cultural context, it is believed that Jesus had brown eyes, wavy or curly black hair, and shared physical characteristics with his close relatives from the ancient Jewish community in Galilee. He likely had a short beard as well.

    How was Jesus depicted in different cultures and eras?

    Jesus has been depicted in various ways throughout history and in different cultural contexts. In European depictions, he was often portrayed with fair skin, long brown/blonde hair, and European clothing. In Roman depictions, Jesus was depicted as a god of shepherd, a sun god, and even as a Roman emperor.

    Are there any scientific reconstructions of Jesus’ appearance?

    While there is no definitive scientific reconstruction of Jesus’ appearance, some attempts have been made based on genetic and anatomical examinations of bone findings and the typical look of the ancient Jewish community in Galilee.

    Is there any contemporary evidence supporting the appearance of Jesus?

    The ancient Levantine culture, including ancient Israel, had people with darker complexions due to spending significant time outdoors in the Mediterranean heat. Based on this, modern-day Israeli shepherds, who maintain a similar lifestyle to their ancestors, can offer some insight into the possible appearance of Jesus.

    How did the depiction of Jesus evolve over time?

    The depiction of Jesus has evolved throughout history as different cultures and artistic styles emerged. Early depictions, such as those from the 3rd century AD, showed Jesus with shorter hair, a garment, and sandals, reflecting the cultural context of the time. Later, during the Roman period, Jesus was depicted as a shepherd, a sun god, and even as a Roman emperor, incorporating elements from Greco-Roman mythology and imperial imagery.

    References

    1. What Did Jesus Look Like? By Joan E. Taylor · 2018
    2. Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People – By Harry Ostrer · 2012
    3. The Appearance of Christ in the Etheric Spiritual-Scientific Aspects of the Second Coming – By Sergei O. Prokofieff, Simon Blaxland-de Lange · 2012
  • Tiberius Claudius Narcissus Rose from Slavery in Ancient Rome

    Tiberius Claudius Narcissus Rose from Slavery in Ancient Rome

    Tiberius Claudius Narcissus rose from slavery to become a prominent figure in ancient Roman politics in about the 1st century AD. With the support of Emperor Claudius, Narcissus rose from the ranks of Roman slaves to one of the highest levels of government. He served as a powerful imperial secretary and advisor to the Roman Emperor Claudius and made up the backbone of the imperial government. Just like other former slaves, he adopted the surname (“Claudius”) of his former master.

    See also: The Price of a Slave in Ancient Rome in Today’s Dollars

    A Roman Emperor Who Put Emphasis on Merit

    Emperor Claudius coin portrait

    Many contemporary historians see Emperor Claudius as a “great prince.” He was very interested in politics, and he stressed the need for logic and change in government and the military.

    Furthermore, to ensure the efficient administration of the ever-growing imperial government, he believed that appointing people to crucial positions solely based on their aristocratic lineage was not ideal. He advocated for capable bureaucrats who had proven their loyalty to the emperor through their talents and achievements.

    As a “former slave,” Tiberius Narcissus was an ideal choice for Claudius. Because of his undying devotion to the emperor, Narcissus was given greater authority than anyone else. He gained a fortune through his considerable influence with the emperor.

    In ancient Rome, when an emperor released a slave, the former slave would be obligated to remain loyal to him out of gratitude and the customary sense of responsibility. Given their humble origins, it was also highly improbable for someone who was born into slavery and later freed to attain a prominent position within Roman authority.

    See also: What Was Daily Life Like in Ancient Rome?

    Ex-Slaves Ran the Roman Politics

    Quick-witted, skilled ex-slaves ran the Roman politics around the emperor throughout Claudius’ reign, increasing both their number and their influence unlike anything witnessed in history before.

    The political authority of the aristocracy was diminished, marking a transition from “emperor-bureaucratic centralization” to the establishment of absolute royal power.

    The Roman nobility was the primary group to resist this change. It was believed that slaves had “stolen” politics, which was formerly the domain of aristocrats.

    Cesare Maccari 1840 1919 CE painted this painting showing Ciceros denunciation of Catiline as a conspirator before the Roman senate. Cicero lived from 106 43 BCE. Romes Palazzo Madama

    During Claudius’ reign, various assassination plots by aristocrats were uncovered, and Claudius murdered many of them, causing even greater animosity among the aristocracy.

    See also: What Has Not Changed Since the Time of Ancient Rome?

    Claudius had physical disabilities, as described by Suetonius: “His knees were weak; he faced difficulty walking; he stuttered often; and he experienced hearing impairment. He also had a tendency to drool and had a runny nose.” Recent research has pointed to cerebral palsy as a likely cause of these symptoms.

    Although his intelligence was unquestionable outside of the realms of law and reform, many ancient nobles considered Claudius unsuitable to be emperor because of his infirmity.

    That’s why most Roman historians often had a dim view of Claudius. However, one explanation for this is that the nobility were the ones who had the leisure time and resources to document the past. That’s why current scholarship agrees that he was “a very good ruler.”

    See also: Was Julius Caesar a Good Leader? The Leadership of Caesar

    Tiberius Claudius Narcissus: A Notable Ex-Slave in Roman Politics

    The slave Tiberius Claudius Narcissus was a notable figure during the reign of Claudius. Tiberius Narcissus’ life is not well known, but we do know that Emperor Claudius bought him as a “former slave” and, after realizing his brilliance, set him free to work for the emperor as a government official.

    He was Claudius’ right-hand man. So much so that his role as “Secretary Liaison” for the emperor gave Narcissus considerably more authority than his job description implied. He was responsible for a wide range of political choices.

    For instance, Emperor Claudius’ greatest accomplishment, the “Roman Conquest of Britain,” included a tribute to Narcissus.

    When the Roman army in AD 44 refused to go on an expedition to Britannia, the emperor sent Narcissus as his deputy to deal with the rebels.

    Narcissus decided to taunt the soldiers and invoke the spirit of “Saturnalia,” a festival where slaves temporarily hold power over their masters. Witnessing a former slave now serving as their leader, Narcissus made the army put down the uprising and embark on the daring expedition in an extraordinary turn of events.

    As part of the program of clearing the land, Tiberius Narcissus was also given the massive task of canalizing Fucine Lake in Italy to reduce the water level.

    Britannicus and Nero in a Clash for the Throne

    Claudius had a significant “successor problem” in his old age. The first and second wives did not produce any offspring, whereas the third wife did have a son (Britannicus). Unproven rumors suggest Narcissus plotted with Claudius’s third wife Valeria Messalina to have a number of individuals killed. On top of that, doubts arose regarding the legitimacy of the child due to Messalina’s infidelity coming to light, which led to the disqualification of her claim.

    “Agrippina the Younger,” (15–59 AD) the emperor’s fourth wife, gave birth to “Nero,” who was a “candidate successor” in the lineage of the emperor since he was a fourth-generation descendant of Emperor Augustus via the maternal line.

    There were two camps within Claudius’ bureaucracy: the “Nero faction” and the “Britannicus faction,” with Claudius and Britannicus at odds and Nero seen as his heir apparent. Britannicus was retained as a backup in case Nero was assassinated.

    However, Narcissus did not have faith in the fourth empress and demanded that Claudius remove Nero’s inheritance, name Britannicus emperor, and install him.

    The Death of Narcissus

    Agrippina, Claudius’ fourth wife, is widely believed to have plotted with the nobility to poison her husband so that Nero might ascend to power. However, contemporary scholarship suggests that Claudius may have died of natural causes. Nero, being just 17 years old, became Emperor upon the unexpected death of Claudius.

    Agrippina, the emperor’s mother, had considerable power and quickly confronted Narcissus, the powerful leader of the Britannicus faction, whom the nobility despised. Without delay, Narcissus was arrested and sentenced to death, and within a few weeks of Claudius’ passing, he was executed by beheading in October, 54.

    Before his arrest and death, he burned all of Claudius’ letters to prevent Nero from exploiting their contents.

    Upon Nero’s ascension to the throne, Agrippina, who held significant influence, ruthlessly orchestrated a campaign to eliminate those who opposed Nero’s rise to power. As a result, Narcissus and numerous accomplished former slave officials appointed by Emperor Claudius met their demise, while Britannicus fell victim to poisoning.

    Nevertheless, as time passed and Nero reached adulthood, he grew increasingly dismissive of his mother’s involvement in political matters, leading to Agrippina’s diminishing influence. Moreover, due to her opposition to Nero’s mistress, Nero made the drastic decision to have his own biological mother executed.

    Nero had a disdain for advisers who offered dissenting opinions and systematically removed them from his circle. He surrounded himself with individuals who flattered him, and as a result, the empire’s finances rapidly deteriorated, cementing his name as one of the most notorious tyrants in Roman history.

    Eventually, a nobility-led uprising would result in Nero’s death. He was the last direct descendant of the Julio-Claudian dynasty to hold the title of emperor.

    Historians have long overlooked Claudius and Narcissus. Even though he was held in low regard by noble historians of the time, Claudius had his share of successes and shortcomings. To further his own interests, Narcissus ingratiated himself with the emperor, assumed political power, and became a man who rose from slavery in ancient Rome.

    Recent studies have shed light on the “prejudice” of early historians and led to a reevaluation of Claudius’ accomplishments, including his policy reforms, legal reforms, and conquest of Britannia. This reevaluation also sheds light on the ex-slave Narcissus’ life.

    The verdict of history remains enigmatic.

    In passing, it’s also widely believed that the influential Roman Emperor Diocletian (r. 284–305 AD) was himself the child of a slave.

  • Haitian Revolution: The First Black Supremacist Country in History

    Haitian Revolution: The First Black Supremacist Country in History

    Haiti was the first black supremacist country in history. Despite the severe circumstances, many Africans were forced to work on the sugar plantations of the “Island of Death,” or Haiti. Despite the terrible working conditions and high mortality rate among the blacks during the first decade, the slaves were brought in as though they were “disposable.” Slaves revolted against Napoleon Bonaparte‘s troops, achieved independence for Haiti, and founded a new country based on the principle of “black supremacy.” Yet, the international oppression the country suffered afterward at the hands of Western European nations would prove terrible.

    Saint-Domingue, the Crown Jewel of France’s Colonies

    France established colonies all over the globe in the middle of the 18th century, including North America, the Caribbean, and India. Nonetheless, there were colonies inside the large imperial domains that were far more lucrative.

    Saint Domingue and other french colonies
    Haiti (green circle), formerly known as Saint-Domingue.

    Sugar cane and coffee beans were gathered in great quantities in Saint-Domingue, processed into white sugar, and sent to Europe. The result was a huge payday. Saint-Domingue supplied 60% of the world’s coffee and 40% of the world’s sugar.

    The value of exports to France from Saint-Domingue at the time was comparable to that of exports to England from the original 13 American colonies.

    About one million French citizens out of 25 million were directly engaged in Saint-Domingue imports at the time, while another three million French citizens were in Saint-Domingue, reaping the economic advantages of the island indirectly.

    But the lives of African slaves were sacrificed to achieve this prosperity.

    Every year, Haiti received the forced importation of over 20,000 additional African slaves. Their primary function was to ensure a sufficient supply of slaves.

    Slaves were subjected to deplorable working conditions and often little nourishment. Slaves were not permitted to be treated or educated if they were ill, and diseases like yellow fever and malaria were common.

    Thus, after a year, half of all black slaves perished, and by three years, only around 15-20% were still alive. The white slave owners believed that it was more profitable to labor their black employees to death and replace them with fresh slaves as soon as possible.

    Among the island’s 40,000 whites, 20,000 free blacks, and 450,000 black slaves, there was considerable racial discrimination, with whites at the top.

    However, in 1791, a massive uprising of African slaves occurred.

    A Massive Uprising of African Slaves

    Battle for Palm Tree Hill, Haitian Revolution (1791--1804).
    Battle for Palm Tree Hill, Haitian Revolution (1791–1804) by January Suchodolski (1797–1875), 1845.

    Slaves in northern St. Domingue staged a huge uprising on August 22, 1791, after months of planning. Black slaves with a vendetta led by Toussaint Louverture (1743–1803) killed numerous whites, but eventually, the uprising stalled.

    Both Britain and Spain engaged in the Haitian Revolution (1791–1804) because of the conflict that the French revolutionary government launched with them in Europe.

    However, due to concerns that their own slaves in the area could rise up if this revolutionary slave army were to win the uprising and gain independence, Britain and Spain decided to oppose the slaves of Haiti.

    Despite that, the slave army of Haiti defeated the armies of Britain, Spain, and Napoleon over the course of 13 years to achieve independence in 1804. It became the world’s first freed slave nation, or, in other words, the first country formed by slaves.

    The First Black Supremacist Country

    Louverture’s lieutenant and the head of the black army, Jean-Jacques Dessalines (1758–1806), took control of the government of the Republic of Haiti.

    As a former slave, Dessalines had a strong resentment against white civilization for its historically demeaning treatment of Haitian slaves. His first significant policy as dictator was the “1804 Haitian Massacre”, in which he ordered the death of all remaining white inhabitants on the island after he had won independence for Haiti.

    Nearly all of Haiti’s white population had been wiped out after an estimated 5,000 deaths, which was not comparable to the deaths of black slaves over the last decades.

    buy singulair online https://petlosshelp.net/memorialhalloffame/html/singulair.html no prescription pharmacy

    Jean-Jacques Dessalines made no special effort to cover up this slaughter, claiming:

    “We responded to these cannibals with force, matching crime with crime and sorrow with sorrow. I defended my country and sought retribution for the American nations.”

    Jean-Jacques Dessalines after the 1804 Haitian Massacre.

    A bill was passed prohibiting whites from holding citizenship or owning property in Haiti after the nation was designated a “black country.” This was with the exception of the small number of Germans and Poles who actually fought for Haiti’s independence.

    It was a governmental structure that blatantly promoted “black supremacy.”

    The Aftermath of the Events

    african slaves, enslaved by other africans

    However, due to its policies of black supremacy, the Republic of Haiti as a whole faced considerable discrimination from Western countries. Since nations like the United Kingdom, the United States, Spain, etc.

    buy aurogra online https://petlosshelp.net/memorialhalloffame/html/aurogra.html no prescription pharmacy

    had too many slave colonies, the fear was that if Haiti—a country formed by revolted slaves—established diplomatic ties with the colonizer countries, their own slaves would rise up in rebellion as well.

    The Republic of Haiti was unable to trade with any nation for a very long time, despite being the world’s leading exporter of coffee and sugar prior to gaining independence.

    As a prerequisite for establishing diplomatic ties, France imposed a demand for reparations, insisting Haiti settle outstanding obligations to France before granting France the role of mediator in international affairs. The requirement was to “compensate the white exiles from Haiti with the value of Haiti’s property.

    buy tetracycline online http://www.biop.cz/slimbox/css/png/tetracycline.html no prescription pharmacy

    ” The computation of “Haiti’s property value” included the worth of the emancipated slaves, which was a source of profound embarrassment.

    For emancipated slaves, this entailed being told, “If you want to establish diplomatic relations, you must pay the value of your former enslaved status.”

    A Short-Lived Black Supremacy

    The government of Haiti agreed to this stipulation and paid 15 million francs in reparations because the country realized that the island’s economy could not function without commerce. That was more than twenty years worth of tax money for Haiti.

    In addition to all that, in France, the payments were made via high-interest loans from major French banks.

    The government of Haiti was unrealistically optimistic when it assumed that resuming commerce and paying off its obligations would happen as soon as diplomatic connections were restored and sugar and coffee exports resumed at previous levels.

    However, since many sugar and coffee manufacturing facilities had been abandoned for almost a decade, rendering them useless, and the Haitian government was deeply in debt, the country’s economy quickly crumbled.

    More than 80% of the government’s tax income was supposed to be utilized to settle the debt after the reparations deal of 1825. Therefore, the island’s economy was highly taxed to collect the means to repay it, which made the island even more economically unviable.

    With the implied threat that “if you do not pay, you will be bombed,” the French government threatened to send military ships to Haiti if the payback was not made on time.

    The Haitian government kept making loan payments until 1947, by which time the country had fallen into extreme poverty.

    Haiti Today

    The current GDP per capita in Haiti is around $1120 as of 2023.

    In 2003, President Jean-Bertrand Aristide of Haiti voiced his strong opposition to the French government during a United Nations address, denouncing the 1825 reparations as unjustifiable. He emphatically called for Haiti to receive reparations amounting to 21 billion US dollars.

    buy stromectol online http://www.biop.cz/slimbox/css/png/stromectol.html no prescription pharmacy

    But the French government quickly shot down the idea.

    The former French president François Hollande and others have claimed that France has a “moral debt” to Haiti.

    buy kamagra gold online https://petlosshelp.net/memorialhalloffame/html/kamagra-gold.html no prescription pharmacy

    But in February 2010, French President Nicolas Sarkozy paid a visit to Haiti, the first by a French President, and brushed aside the idea of making reparations, declaring, “There is no legal obligation for compensation.”

    France maintains its stance, emphasizing that there is no liability for compensation.

  • How Long Did Europeans Consider Themselves “Romans”?

    How Long Did Europeans Consider Themselves “Romans”?

    The term “Romans” was often associated with a sense of connection to the Roman Empire and its legacy. Many Russian Tsars claimed themselves to be the successors of the Eastern Roman Empire, also known as the Byzantine Empire. Hence the Latin name for Roman emperors, “caesar”, is where the word “tsar” originates. This claim served as a legal and historical justification for Russia’s southward expansion and particularly its intervention in the Balkan Peninsula. The same can be said for the Ottoman Empire in Turkey: in 1453, Mehmed the Conqueror named himself “Kaiser-i Rum” or “Caesar of the Romans”.

    Do Romanians Consider Themselves Romans?

    How Long Did Europeans Consider Themselves "Romans"

    In the immediate aftermath of the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD, there was a decline in direct identification with Roman heritage. However, elements of Roman culture, law, and governance continued to inspire many European cultures that were once part of the Empire.

    There are still people who hold such beliefs: They are the Romanians. The Romanian national anthem Awaken Thee, Romanian (also the former national anthem of Moldova) contains the following lyrics:

    Wake up Romanians from your sleep of death
    Into which you’ve been sunk by the barbaric tyrants.
    Now or never, sow a new fate for yourself
    To which even your cruel enemies will bow!

    Now or never, let us show the world
    That through these arms, Roman blood still flows;
    And that in our chests we still proudly bear a name
    Triumphant in battles, the name of Trajan!

    “Deșteaptă-te, române!” The national anthem of Romania and the former national anthem of Moldova.

    During the reign of Emperor Trajan (r. 98–117 AD), the Roman Empire reached its zenith, and present-day Romania was part of its territory. Today, the Romanians still take pride in their Roman roots, which can be traced back to the empire. In fact, the name “Romania” itself means “Land of the Romans” in Latin.

    So, there are Europeans who still consider themselves “Romans” today. But even outside of Romania, there are remnants of Roman influence that persisted for a considerable period of time.

    The Last of the Romans

    The idea of a “Holy Roman Empire” developed throughout the Middle Ages, especially between the 8th and 15th centuries. Despite being separate from the actual Roman Empire, this group claimed descent from the city of Rome and saw its populace as “Romans,” while working to maintain and revitalize Roman customs.

    Its emperors, like Charlemagne, highlighted their ties to the Roman Empire, and its territory included portions of modern-day Germany, Italy, and Central Europe.

    In fact, Europeans continued to use the title “Holy Roman Emperor” up until 1806, when the Austrian Empire, which emerged in the wake of the Napoleonic Empire, formally dissolved the title.

    However, the actual use of this title was merely as “Emperor” or “Emperor of the Romans” (in Latin: Imperator Romanorum, in German: Kaiser der Römer). Whether the people of Germany and Austria truly considered themselves “Romans” is a separate matter, but the term “Roman Empire” remained longer than the original nation.

    Therefore, the name of the country governing the region now known as Germany continued to incorporate “Rome” until the 19th century. It is unclear how long the people in the present-day German region considered themselves “Romans,” but this formal designation endured.

    Moreover, Napoleon Bonaparte named his son Napoleon II the “King of Rome.” Napoleon himself sought coronation from the Pope in Rome, emphasizing the continuity with Rome. Thus, the title of Emperor of the French also symbolized a strong connection to Rome and the Romans.

    The Nations That Considered Themselves Romans

    The Russian monarchs, or Tsars, claimed descent from the Romans and founded a new concept of an empire they called the ‘Third Rome’. They considered themselves the inheritors of the Byzantine Empire, the Eastern Roman Empire, and claimed to be the rightful successors to the Roman imperial legacy. This concept was first formulated in the 15th–16th centuries in the Tsardom of Rus’.

    The Austro-Hungarian Empire, often known as the Habsburg Empire, always insisted that it was rightfully titled “Emperor of the Romans.” The Habsburgs ensured the survival of the medieval-era Holy Roman Empire. The Habsburg rulers retained the titles of Emperor of Austria and King of Hungary even though the empire was primarily symbolic by the time of World War I.

    The Ottomans, too, claimed they were the rightful heirs to the throne of Rome. The Ottomans considered Constantinople (today’s Istanbul) to be the legitimate continuation of the Roman imperial capital since they recognized themselves as the rightful heirs of the Eastern Roman Empire. By calling themselves “Kayser-i Rûm,” or “Caesar of the Romans,” they drew attention to the fact that their empire was descended from the Romans.

    In Italy, during the era of Benito Mussolini’s fascist party (until 1945), there was a serious political appeal at the national level to foreground the “Roman identity.” This appeal, however, came to an end. The term “popolo di eroi” (people of heroes), as mentioned in the fascist party anthem, referred to the Romans, who envisioned the revival of a new Roman Empire centered around the Mediterranean.

    Hail, people of heroes,
    hail, immortal Fatherland,
    your sons were born again
    with the faith and the ideal.
    Your warriors’ valour,
    your pioneers’ virtue,
    Alighieri’s vision,
    today shines in every heart.

    “Giovinezza” (Italian for ‘Youth’), official hymn of the Italian National Fascist Party,

    Adolf Hitler‘s Nazi Party (National Socialist German Workers’ Party) later adopted the raised-arm salute that the fascist party had previously borrowed from the Roman salute. This political symbolism aimed to evoke a sense of connection to the glorious and imperial past of ancient Rome.

    However, other European powers did not accept these claims. And this historical discrepancy regarding the European nations considering themselves “Romans” has been a source of various conflicts up to this day.

    When Did Europeans Detach from the Roman Identity?

    Up until the First World War, there were a few more countries vying for the title of Roman Emperor alongside Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey, regardless of whether other countries recognized them or not.

    However, the European powers, including Western and Southern Europe, which were once considered part of the so-called Roman world, gradually detached their countries from the Roman identity.

    This began as early as the time of Henry VIII, the former King of England, during the period of religious revolution when many peripheral countries shifted from Latin to their local languages as the court and church languages in the 16th century. The complete disintegration of the Holy Roman Empire, which had already become a mere formality, occurred around the Napoleonic Wars (1803–1815).

    The End of “Romans”

    The dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire during the Napoleonic Wars marked the disappearance of any entity in Western Europe claiming the title of Roman Emperor and their populace as “Romans”.

    During this period, the concept of nation-states emerged, leading to the complete abandonment of a conscious affiliation with Rome and the Roman populace. These underlying perceptions still contribute to the complex relationship between Western Europe and countries like Turkey and Russia today.

    Today, Romania and the Romanian people are the only European nation that openly and officially consider themselves “Romans,” who were once the citizens of the Roman Empire and ruled by the Roman Emperor Trajan (53 AD–117 AD).

  • What Has Not Changed Since the Time of Ancient Rome?

    What Has Not Changed Since the Time of Ancient Rome?

    What has not changed since the time of ancient Rome? Given the profound impact of ancient Rome on human civilization, it is possible that at some point in medieval Europe people held a strong belief that “civilization is in decline,” vividly recognizing the many changes that had occurred in ancient Rome. Visiting any ancient Rome exhibitions prompts you to contemplate, “Wasn’t the foundational aspect of human existence, ensuring comfortable living conditions, already well-established during the ancient Roman era?” This question serves as a poignant reminder of the remarkable advancements achieved during that time.

    Rental Housing

    ancient-roman-insula-house

    The Romans were not the first to realize the financial benefits of renting out their homes to tenants in return for monthly payments. The practice dates back far further than that. So many people rented their houses in ancient Rome because Plebeians (lower- or middle-class citizens) made up about 95 percent of Rome’s population. Typically, a family would pay a year’s worth of rent in advance to live on the insula’s first level since it was the costliest. Similar to current apartment complexes, landlords would rent out ground-floor spaces to businesses.

    Tenancy agreements: Several aspects of Roman rental housing from antiquity have survived to the present day. One such aspect was the availability of tenancy agreements, in which renters would make a monetary commitment to their landlords in exchange for the right to inhabit a property for a certain amount of time.

    Maintaining properties: Another feature that has endured is the responsibility of landlords to maintain rental properties. In ancient Rome, landlords were expected to ensure that the rented dwellings were in habitable condition by performing necessary repairs and upkeep.

    Dispute resolution mechanisms: Landlord-tenant disputes were prevalent in ancient Rome, mirroring the characteristics of today’s rentals. The rights of both tenants and landlords were protected by the law, just as they are today. Problems with rent payments, property maintenance, and the enforcement of contractual duties were resolved with the use of these procedures. Rental housing has always had a need for fair and reasonable remedies, and conflict resolution methods.

    See also: What Was Daily Life Like in Ancient Rome?

    Tableware

    ancient roman tableware
    Ancient Roman dishes, plates, serving platters, and more. (Image: MrJennings-Flickr)

    Plates and bowls: There were several characteristics of Roman tableware that have survived to the present day. The Romans used plates and bowls made of clay, bronze, or silver for their dinner tables. These containers were not only useful for serving food, but also added visual appeal to the dining experience. Ceramic and porcelain dishes and bowls are still widely used in modern households. The continued use of these basic pieces of tableware exemplifies the ongoing impact of ancient Roman tableware on contemporary eating customs.

    Utensils: Another piece of Roman dinnerware that has survived the test of time is the utensil. We still follow the ancient Roman practice of using cutlery like spoons, forks, and knives when we dine. Utensils have served the same essential purpose throughout history, despite variations in form and substance.

    Drinking vessels: There was a consistent theme running through the form and function of ancient Roman drinking containers. Wine, water, and other drinks were often consumed from cups and goblets crafted from pottery, glass, or precious metals. Glass, ceramic, and metal continue to be popular materials for drinking vessels in the modern period. These dishes’ longevity exemplifies how ancient Roman and contemporary cultures value similar qualities in their tableware: utility, beauty, and social importance.

    Decorative elements: Ancient Roman tableware is also famous for the legacy of its ornamental aspects. Their dinnerware was embellished with intricate engravings, patterns, and motifs. Even in modern times, tableware with detailed designs, exquisite patterns, or unique touches is highly prized.

    See also: Since When Do Westerners Use Cutlery?

    Coinage

    denarius caesar
    A denarius coin with a portrait of Julius Caesar.

    Although coinage had been in use long before the time of the Roman Empire, the Romans did much to improve upon it and standardize it.

    Standardized denominations: Ancient Roman coinage shares several similarities with modern-day currency systems. Just as today’s coins and banknotes have standardized denominations, Roman coins were issued at fixed values. The gold aureus, silver denarius, and bronze sestertius were among the commonly used denominations, ensuring consistency and facilitating transactions.

    Portraits of national leaders: Secondly, similar to how modern currencies feature portraits of national leaders, Roman coins prominently displayed the likenesses of emperors and other influential individuals.

    Inscriptions and symbols: Additionally, both ancient Roman coins and modern currencies bear inscriptions and symbols. Roman coins contained important information such as the issuing authority’s name, denomination, and minting year, while modern currencies feature similar inscriptions denoting their country of origin and value.

    Luxury Homes

    Atrium interior ancient rome
    Atrium interior, Ancient Rome. Image: daheshmuseum.org

    While some of the features of luxury houses may have changed since ancient Rome, the desire for a pleasant place to live has not. Luxury homes and villas were available even in ancient Rome, with amenities such as heated floors, mosaic-tiled ornate walls, decorative floors, and even indoor plumbing, all of which still exist in today’s houses.

    Atrium: The hallmarks of a well-appointed Roman home have survived the centuries. Atriums are open areas in the middle of a home that often include a skylight or other opening to let in light and air. This architectural feature is still admired because of the positive impact it has on a home’s airiness and brightness.

    Plumbing system: The sophisticated Roman plumbing systems delivered flowing water to residences, allowing for the installation of luxuries like baths and toilets in individual bathrooms. The Romans’ innovative plumbing and widespread access to clean water for personal cleanliness attest to their awareness of the value of such amenities. There’s little question that this aspect of ancient Roman dwellings affected the evolution of plumbing systems in houses throughout history.

    Hypocaust system: This novel underfloor heating system was another standout. Hot air or steam that was circulating under the flooring heated the chambers. Because of its usefulness throughout the year, not only during the winter, the hypocaust has been a popular addition to homes for ages. Multiple heated rooms, such as the caldarium, tepidarium, and frigidarium, provided a luxurious bathing experience.

    Enclosed garden: The peristyle, an enclosed garden or courtyard framed by columns, enhanced the tranquility of the Roman outdoors. The idea of creating a personal sanctuary inside one’s own dwelling is still highly prized in contemporary design.

    Private rooms: The design of a typical Roman home, known as a domus, contained distinguishing features that continue to influence modern architectural layouts. Private dining areas like the tricliniums offered elegant spaces for reclining and enjoying meals in ancient Rome. These areas, furnished with couches and low tables, facilitated the Roman tradition of dining while reclining, creating a relaxed and sociable atmosphere for residents and their guests. This design element still exists today.

    An architectural principle that hasn’t changed much in modern home construction was how the Romans met their demand for solitude by clearly dividing their living space into public and private areas.

    Aqueducts

    The Segovia Aqueduct is an aqueduct that was constructed during the era of the Roman Emperor Trajan (98–117 AD) and is still in use today to transport water.
    The Segovia Aqueduct is an aqueduct that was constructed during the era of the Roman Emperor Trajan (98–117 AD) and is still in use today to transport water.

    The Romans built massive aqueducts to bring water from faraway areas to populated areas. While improvements in water transportation technology and materials have been made, the idea of using constructed buildings to provide potable water to urban centers has not changed.

    They were and still are crucial for transporting water from where it is abundant to where it is limited, whether 2,000 years ago in ancient Rome, Italy, or today in California. Engineers have created brand-new aqueducts to transport water over long distances, frequently hundreds of miles.

    Oldest running aqueduct: Some of Rome’s fountains even get their water supply from a Roman aqueduct that is still in use today. The Acqua Vergine, which was first constructed in 19 BC and has undergone several restorations, is still in use today. It is the oldest running aqueduct in the world today.

    Oldest survived aqueduct: The Segovia Aqueduct (also known as El Puente for “The Bridge”) is an aqueduct that was constructed during the era of the Roman Emperor Trajan (98–117 AD) and is still in use today to transport water from the Frio River to the city of Segovia in Spain, a distance of 10 miles (16 km).

    Although not exactly “today,” the Bogotá, Colombia, aqueduct, completed in 1955, stands out as one of the recently built, modern aqueducts.

    City Planning

    ancient rome city grid layout

    Grid layout: Ancient Rome’s gridiron or cardo and decumanus street plans used a grid pattern to partition the city into square and rectangular sections. Many contemporary towns throughout the globe still have this grid layout.

    Public spaces: The Romans placed a premium on the development of public spaces in urban areas. Civic, economic, and social life often converged in public gathering places like plazas and squares in ancient Rome. The public realm remains a focal point of urban planning in today’s cities.

    Infrastructure: Ancient Rome’s infrastructure was state-of-the-art and much admired for its extensive network of well-constructed roadways, aqueducts for water supply, and sewage facilities. Although these aspects of infrastructure have been upgraded throughout history, they still serve as the basis for contemporary urban planning.

    Zoning: The Romans were early adopters of zoning laws, which were designed to separate residential and commercial areas of a city. Partitioning land for different uses (such as residential, commercial, and industrial) is a tenet of today’s city planning.

    Monumental architecture: The ancient Romans built several very impressive buildings, including amphitheaters, temples, and public baths. Iconic structures and landmarks still stand as representations of cultural value in today’s cities.

    Focus on public health: Public health was a primary concern for the ancient Romans when designing cities. Public amenities such as latrines and water fountains were installed to encourage good personal hygiene.

    Transportation: Rome built an enormous network of roads, bridges, and docks, which aided commerce and communication. Cities today still spend money on transportation infrastructure like this.

    Legal Systems

    Cesare Maccari (1840-1919 CE) painted this fresco showing Cicero's denunciation of Catiline as a conspirator before the Roman senate. Cicero lived from 106-43 BCE. (Rome's Palazzo Madama)
    Cesare Maccari (1840-1919 CE) painted this fresco showing Cicero’s denunciation of Catiline as a conspirator before the Roman senate. Cicero lived from 106-43 BCE. (Rome’s Palazzo Madama)

    Codification: The Twelve Tables (450 BC) were only one example of the complex legal rules enacted by Ancient Rome. Many modern legal systems still heavily rely on this principle of codification.

    Precedent: The Roman legal system adopted the notion of precedent, wherein prior rulings provided a binding precedent for new cases. This tenet remains important to the common law system in use by many nations today.

    Legal professions: Advocates (the ancient Roman equivalent of lawyers) and judges also played an important role in ancient Roman society. The importance of attorneys and judges as experts in the law remains unchanged in today’s legal systems.

    Legal rights: The property rights, contract protections, and the guarantee of a fair trial are only a few examples of the individual liberties acknowledged by ancient Roman law. Legal safeguards in contemporary countries are still conceptualized in terms of these ideas.

    Legal procedures: The examination of witnesses and the presentation of evidence were two examples of the legal processes and norms that were strictly adhered to in ancient Roman judicial proceedings. Modern legal systems share a commitment to procedural fairness and due process with their historical precedents.

    References

    1. SPQR: A History of Ancient Rome by Mary Beard, 2015, Goodreads
    2. Daily Life in Ancient Rome: The People and the City at the Height of the Empire by Jérôme Carcopino, 2013 – Amazon Books
    3. History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire, by Edward Gibbon, 1776-88, The Project Gutenberg eBook
  • What Was Daily Life Like in Ancient Rome?

    What Was Daily Life Like in Ancient Rome?

    What was daily life like in ancient Rome? How did people spend their days in the Roman Empire? The Roman civilization was an unusual culture with some resemblance to our own. There are parts of life for the residents of the ancient Roman Republic in the 1st century BC that are somewhat comparable to modern living and others that are entirely foreign to our ears. The Romans were known for their daily routine of going to work, indulging in takeaway meals, and later enjoying summer festivals while savoring a bottle of wine. The Romans saw having sex with prostitutes in the temple as a holy act and burning animals as a means to curse their enemies.

    The Earliest Fire Brigade in Ancient Rome

    fire brigade in the daily life in ancient rome

    We now take it as a given that if there is a fire, the fire brigade will arrive to put it out. Fire was a major concern in ancient Rome because of the high concentration of wooden structures. For a long time, there was no fire brigade in Rome. If a fire broke out, people had to wait for citizens or soldiers to arrive and put it out.

    However, starting about the year 70 BC, fire crews were dispatched to the scene whenever a fire was reported. But this fire brigade wasn’t created for the greater good of society: Marcus Licinius Crassus, the wealthiest man in Rome and a supporter of Julius Caesar, had his own private fire brigade.

    Crassus would go down in history as an immoral businessman:

    Upon arrival at the fire scene, the fire extinguisher crew made an unexpected declaration: “We have the capability to extinguish the fire, but Crassus will only do so if he acquires this building.”

    Naturally, they were eager to make a trade. If they refused to sell, the fire brigade would wait until an adjacent structure caught fire before beginning negotiations.

    This filthy fire brigade marked the inception of the world’s very first organized firefighting unit.

    The Right to Vote in Ancient Rome

    voting and elections in ancient rome

    As a republic, Rome granted the right to vote to all free males who met the age requirement. Today, this creates the false impression of a somewhat democratic administration; however, it was not true.

    The Roman government’s bureaucrats were elected, but not with a majority vote. Citizens first elected a Centuriate Assembly, made up of 373 representatives (called centuries), who could vote for top government leaders.

    In these gatherings, everyone had the right to vote, but the representation was quite uneven.

    There were 35 distinct Roman tribes, and each tribe was further subdivided into five “classes.” The term “tribe” implied a hereditary tie, but in reality, people were grouped together based on where they resided. Therefore, “class” was the most significant.

    In the daily life of Rome, there was a significant demographic disparity between the wealthiest and lowest strata, with the “propertyless” plebians (commoners) comprising more than 70% of the total.

    The voting started with the electors from the highest class and proceeded until a majority of votes were cast, thereby preventing the common electors from voting. For this reason, the richest men, the top 0.1 percent or so, had a disproportionate influence in the so-called “republican government” of ancient Rome.

    There was also a law-making body called the Concilium Plebis (Plebeian Council), and an existing entity called the Senate that determined how the legislation should be applied. But the common Roman people lacked a say even in these official institutions.

    This meant that the vast majority of Romans could not influence the government at all. Even if they technically possessed the “right to vote,” it was mostly symbolic.

    Given the widespread unhappiness with the political system as a result of this structure, it was inevitable that certain politicians would resort to violence in an effort to subdue the opposition (such as the Brutus and Cassius brothers who conspired against Caesar).

    Patronage: A System of Favoritism

    In the Augustan Age, patronage of the arts was prevalent. One of Augustus' political advisors is seen in a painting by Giovanni Battista Tiepolo being given a gift of liberal arts.
    In the Augustan Age, patronage of the arts was prevalent. One of Augustus’ political advisors is seen in a painting by Giovanni Battista Tiepolo being given a gift of liberal arts.

    The Roman political system and society relied heavily on patronage. It was highly valued in Roman society to show allegiance to someone who had helped you out.

    As a result, there was an established norm wherein people who had significant resources and voting power would negotiate deals with politicians in return for financial gain and special interests. Bribery was an accepted part of politics in the daily life of the ancient Roman Republic.

    This master was called a “patron,” and the person who served was called a “client.”

    The level of special treatment a client received correlated directly with their prominence and power. But even commoners were considered clients if they could offer any form of assistance.

    Having a vast number of ordinary people as clients and a means to organize them allowed politicians like Julius Caesar to quickly create a violent mob when required.

    In this system, patrons were greeted early in the morning by a line of people waiting at their doors. These individuals would exchange greetings, make requests, and later respond to the patrons’ calls for assistance.

    It was intriguing to observe that some individuals chose to make a living solely by participating in this greeting ritual and welcoming members of important families every morning, rather than engaging in traditional business or labor. Meanwhile, others managed to sustain their livelihoods by establishing strong relationships with influential patrons.

    This intricate web of patronage created a unique dynamic where social connections and favors held significant value in the daily life of ancient Roman society.

    This system of patronage has been passed down as a tradition in Sicily among the Mafia: In the opening scene of the 1972 film “The Godfather,” we see members of the Mafia pay a visit to the Mafia don (boss) to say hello and beg for a favor.

    Family, Ancestry, and Women’s Rights

    marriage in ancient rome

    Pater familias (the father of a household) was the Roman family system that enforced stringent gender inequality and regulated the daily lives of Roman residents. In Roman law, the eldest male member of the family had almost full control, including the ability to murder family members who defied him. Different customs and laws, however, limited his influence, and it was uncommon to be “murdered legally” in ancient Rome.

    Although there were exceptional women who wielded political power (such as Cornelia, mother of the Gracchus brothers in the Late Republic, c. 146 BC–31 BC), Roman women were denied the ability to vote and could not occupy official government offices. However, some Roman women still gained financial freedom when they were granted the right to possess property in their own names, sign contracts, and file criminal charges.

    Males carried the torch in the daily life of the Roman family. However, it was normal practice for Roman women to keep their registration with their parents’ household even after marriage.

    The divorce process in the ancient Roman Empire was simple for all parties involved. A divorce was granted after the wife merely left the marital home and declared her intent to no longer live with her husband.

    The father often took custody of the kids, while the mother maintained her own property after the divorce since her assets were held in a different name throughout the marriage. This system did not require alimony.

    In the Late Roman Republic (c. 146 BC–31 BC), divorce was not bound by specific reasons or seen as a social taboo; rather, it was regarded as a natural occurrence.

    Education in Ancient Rome

    Ancient Roman children being educated.
    Ancient Roman children being educated.

    There were no public schools in ancient Rome, so pupils who were fortunate enough to find a teacher often had more than a dozen classmates in their small class.

    However, the vast majority of Roman children were not educated. It is believed that fewer than 20% of ancient Roman adult males and 5% of ancient Roman females could read and write.

    As a result, only a select few children from affluent households were able to attend school in the daily life of ancient Rome.

    After mastering the fundamentals of reading, writing, and arithmetic, students moved on to study the Greek language, as well as Greek poetry, literature, history, philosophy, and oratory.

    Slaves were mostly responsible for the upbringing of Roman children.

    Slavery in Ancient Rome

    slavery in rome

    During the Roman Republic, slaves were crucial to the economy and the daily life of society. There were several types of Roman teachers, farmers, bakers, housekeepers, nannies, craft workers, and slaves. Slaves made up the vast bulk of Rome’s prostitute population.

    There were Roman, Greek, German, and African slaves, among many others. Slavery in Rome was not founded on “racism” in the same way that it is in the history of the United States.

    Those who defaulted on their debts were sold into slavery, and the cycle continued. Educated Greek slaves were in great demand and sometimes sold for exorbitant sums to serve as private tutors to the affluent.

    However, captured people who were defeated in a war were by far the most prevalent kind. In his Gallic Wars (58–50 BC), Julius Caesar is said to have attacked a city in what is now France and sold all 52,000 of its residents on the spot to slave dealers.

    Rome amassed a significant slave population during her swift conquest of the Mediterranean from the 2nd to the 1st centuries BC. By the end of the 1st century BC, it was believed that around 20% of the whole population of Rome and 40% of the Italian population were made up of slaves.

    In ancient Rome, several percent of miners died annually from sickness, overwork, or accidents, making this occupation essentially a death sentence.

    On the other hand, secretaries of high-ranking government officials often enjoyed a lavish lifestyle and considerable independence if they could read, write, and think critically.

    Julius Caesar’s secretary, Publius Licinius Apollonius (also known as Apollonios), served as a secretary to Caesar and Crassus and participated in Caesar’s invasion of Gaul. He wrote a biography of Caesar and Crassus after receiving his freedom, which Cicero (b. 106 BC), the preeminent thinker of the day, praised. Many people believed it to be the best primary source on the two titans of the Roman Republic; however, this work has since vanished.

    One was not fully “free” in the daily life of Rome, even after being granted freedom. This was due to the fact that they were unable to break out of the aforementioned patronage structure. The recipients of “freedom” were expected to feel a deep sense of gratitude to their former masters to continue living as free citizens. But they were still entitled to a wage and civic rights.

    When a Roman slave achieved freedom, he or she was expected to adopt the surname of his or her former owner. It is believed that Publius Licinius Apollonius was granted his freedom by Publius Licinius Crassus (he was one of the sons of Marcus Licinius Crassus).

    The Daily Life of Ancient Roman People

    Houses

    City life in ancient Roman insula apartments (Latin for "island", plural insulae).
    City life in ancient Roman insula apartments (Latin for “island”, plural insulae).

    The typical Roman citizen did not live in one of Rome’s many marble or elegant timber homes located in the city’s historic center, as did the city’s richest families.

    The typical Roman residence was an insula, a low-ceilinged, three- or four-story house constructed of brick or wood. Multiple households or people shared a single level with little separation between rooms.

    Typically, a family or landlord would pay a year’s worth of rent in advance to live on the insula’s first level since it was the costliest. The lower floors had an advantage in terms of heating. It was easier to keep them slightly cooler in the summer but also warmer in the winter. In addition, the ground floors of many insulas housed a variety of shops.

    In contrast, upper floors often offered lower rentals, paid either daily or weekly. People slept on the floor, couches, and even on each other’s laps, while many shuffled between temporary homes.

    Extreme summer heat and bitter winter chills characterized the daily lives of the ancient Romans. The upper floors of many structures lacked even basic amenities like windows. Therefore, the lack of privacy was to be expected.

    Making a Living

    a mask seller in ancient rome
    A mask seller in ancient Rome.

    The vast majority of Romans originated in rural areas. Around the 1st century BC, the Italian provinces underwent a period of profound transformation. Slaves increased in quantity, allowing prosperous big farmers access to cheap or free labor, allowing them to prosper even more. It was becoming more difficult for small farmers to survive without the aid of slaves, and many of them were migrating to the cities.

    Nevertheless, even in the city, it was difficult to find a job. As previously stated, a significant portion of slaves were allocated not only to miners and farmers but also to craftsmen, educators, and various professions.

    This arrangement proved beneficial for those fortunate enough to possess slaves, but conversely, it resulted in a surplus of individuals struggling to secure stable employment. Consequently, the cities became crowded with individuals unable to find regular jobs.

    During times of famine or temporary scarcity, the Roman government maintained a policy of distributing cheap bread and wheat to the needy. For many Romans, this was an absolute requirement in their daily lives, especially given the reliable supply throughout the Late Republic.

    By today’s standards, many Romans subsisted on a diet of nothing more than bread, olive oil, a little cheese, and wine. Fruits and vegetables were sometimes offered in baked or boiled forms. It seems that wheat soup, similar to porridge, was the only fare of the lower classes of ancient Rome.

    The meat was often reserved for the gods and only made accessible to the common populace during important festivals.

    These vast supplies of wheat were imported from Sicily, a southern Italian island, as well as present-day Tunisia, known as the “African Province,” and Egypt, the world’s greatest wheat producer at the time.

    The Ancient Roman citizens who were able to find employment often worked full-time, and the majority of them performed physical labor such as constructing and operating businesses, sailing ships, and transporting commodities.

    The lowest class of people did not only consist of physical laborers but also included performers in the theater, prostitutes, and musicians.

    Stores were owned and run by more prosperous middle-class households. Thermopolium, a public fast-food restaurant with a fixed menu, was one of several businesses in ancient Roman cities, as were wholesalers of spices and retailers of tools and timber.

    Roman families with the highest riches were often families who had large farms or other sources of passive income, allowing them to devote their time and energy to politics and the arts rather than manual labor. Those seeking political office similarly prioritized their clients’ needs and aspirations while working to expand their own support base.

    Working in the Army

    roman legion army foot soldiers carrying a banner

    Joining the Roman army was one option for the destitute to improve their social standing in the daily life of ancient Rome. Many young Roman men living in poverty actively sought out military duty because of the prestige that came with it.

    For the most part, soldiers in the Roman army throughout the Early and Middle Republics were well-to-do free citizens since they had to pay for their own armor (see lorica hamata) and weapons.

    However, the number of free people able to purchase “middle-class aristocratic” armor and other things was steadily declining as a result of recurrent conflicts and the fast spreading of inequality, and the ancient Roman population was becoming permanently split between the extremely affluent and wealthy, on the one hand, and the impoverished, on the other.

    Therefore, a significant reform was instituted by the Roman general and statesman Gaius Marius (157–86 BC), who enlisted the help of impoverished Roman people as volunteer warriors and had the Roman government equip them with weapons and armor.

    The system Marius created allowed for progression in the Roman army based on merit rather than social status. A common soldier from a poor family could rise to the rank of centurion, and all Roman soldiers, regardless of rank, received a retirement pension and land after serving for 20 years. Even a regular soldier was given some land.

    In order to ensure that their troops were able to retire with the promised pensions, the great Roman generals carved up new regions and distributed the property of enemy rulers among the Roman troops.

    Both Caesar and Augustus played significant roles in shaping the transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire by winning over the royalty of their troops and thus earning the devotion of the Roman people over the government.

    Festivities and Worshipping in Ancient Rome

    Festivities and Worshipping in Ancient Rome

    The Romans had a polytheistic religion in which the Greek gods played an important role, although with Latinized names such as Jupiter for Zeus or Mars for Ares.

    However, the Romans had a somewhat different understanding of religion than we do now. While today’s people still pray for success and believe in religions defining the concept of “right and wrong” or bringing “spiritual enrichment,” the Romans, with the exception of the Jews and the early Christians, did not practice any organized religion.

    They still believed in deities whose power and influence were beyond human comprehension, but their gods were neither good nor wicked; they just existed.

    Therefore, the Romans saw religion as a “covenant” rather than a “necessity”. In hopes that the gods would stop disasters from befalling Rome and safeguard its citizens, the ancient Romans wished to pay tribute to their deities by burning animal artifacts and performing sacrifices.

    When the ancient Romans felt a god had violated their covenant, they often moved on to another god who was believed to be more “helpful.”

    Considering there was no such thing as a “weekend” in Ancient Rome, the actual number of Roman holidays was not that different, considering people now get 104 days off in a year, including Saturdays, Sundays, and around two weekends for Christmas. There were numerous holidays in ancient Rome, and the total number of off days was more than a hundred.

    Leisure Activities in Ancient Rome

    Leisure Activities in Ancient Rome

    In the countryside, ancient Roman people worked in agriculture and mining all day long, whereas in the city of Rome, people worked from daybreak until noon, and then they slept in the afternoons. Afternoons were reserved for leisure activities like baths, swimming, playing sports, and going to the theater. During that time, most stores and businesses remained closed, with the exception of a few pubs and restaurants.

    Sports enjoyed great popularity among men in ancient Rome. The city boasted impressive outdoor arenas where a wide range of athletic events took place, including wrestling, sprinting, long-distance running, javelin throwing, shot put, and many other traditional European sports that continue to be featured in the modern Olympic Games.

    It was customary for participants to compete in the nude, emphasizing the raw physical prowess on display. However, it’s important to note that during this era, women were not permitted to enter the stadium and partake in these sporting spectacles.

    After a demanding day of games, the Romans would often unwind by indulging in the baths. However, it is presumed that those who didn’t appreciate athletics might have been deterred by the obligatory bathing that followed each session.

    Public Baths

    ancient roman Public Baths

    Public Roman baths were accessible to almost every free citizen for the minimal payment of a single copper coin. The wealthy had their own private baths. Almost everyone in the country could afford the price of a bath on a regular basis. The baths’ operating costs were modest, and wealthy donors and tax revenue filled the gap.

    The culture of “bathing” was so integral to Roman identity that anyone who did not participate was called a “barbarian.”

    There were not any shared showers or tubs, but rather individual ones for men and women.

    In Rome, the public baths offered a range of amenities beyond just hot bathtubs. These bathing complexes featured cold baths, saunas, dedicated spaces for massages, rooms for applying soothing olive oil to the body, and an array of other facilities for a comprehensive bathing experience.

    Ancient Roman people often took long, relaxing showers, sometimes lasting several hours, since doing so was considered culturally appropriate.

    There were chairs and other seating options available in the open area next to the bathhouse. Having a public gathering spot where people from all walks of life could mix without regard to their social standing must have been a social boon.

    Moreover, the baths served as a bustling hub where individuals could purchase food, witness captivating theatrical performances, listen to passionate poets recite their verses, witness politicians endeavoring to elucidate their policies and garner support, access libraries, utilize diverse amenities, and witness the congregation of people from many classes.

    Sports and Gladiators

    Gladiator in ancient rome

    Last but not least, the Romans loved lavish spectacles on their most important festivals.

    The quickest charioteers, like today’s sports stars, attracted a large following of devoted supporters and were divided into teams of red, blue, green, and yellow.

    The arena also hosted large-scale gladiatorial contests, savage animal hunts, and simulated battles. Thousands of onlookers watched as rigorously trained slaves fought and killed each other.

    Hollywood is responsible for popularizing the misconception that all vanquished gladiators were summarily executed. In reality, gladiators were not always murdered after a fight. In movies, a down thumb implies “kill,” but in reality, it meant the opposite.

    A thumbs-up pointing to the chest signified the action of stabbing the sword into the chest of the defeated gladiator. Similarly, a thumbs-down represented the act of placing the sword on the ground or lowering it, sparing the gladiator’s life.

    simulated battle in ancient rome with a water-filled arena and floating warships

    Gladiators were subjected to both one-on-one duels and mass spectacles of simulated battle. Julius Caesar once staged a simulated naval battle by floating vessels in the arena (which was filled with water) and having hundreds of gladiators fight to the death.

    The prospect of stardom appealed to some gladiators, but many slave gladiators reportedly resented their circumstances, which is quite understandable.

    For example, in the Third Servile War (73–71 BC) instigated by Spartacus, as many as 120,000 slaves joined the uprising, including numerous gladiators, causing significant trouble for the Roman army, as is well known.

    Despite the harsh living conditions, it appears that this kind of “exciting” entertainment was one of the reasons why people continued to gather in the city of Rome. Because such large-scale entertainment was not available in the rural provinces. There were still some small-scale arenas in provincial ancient Roman cities.

    This is what daily life was like for the average Roman citizen.

    References

    1. Spectacles of Death in Ancient Rome – Donald G. Kyle – Google Books
    2. Historia Augusta, The Lives of the Thirty Pretenders, III et XXX.
    3. A History of the Later Roman Empire by J. B. Bury – Cambridge.org
  • Jelme: Genghis Khan’s Outstanding General

    Jelme: Genghis Khan’s Outstanding General

    Jelme, a member of the Uriankhai clan of the Mongol army, was a brilliant general under Genghis Khan. Jelme was the older brother of another outstanding general, Subutai, and he was also a close friend of Genghis. Rashid al-Din referred to Jelme in “A Compendium of Chronicles” by his nickname, “Uhe.” One Persian historian claims that this moniker means “daring [man], robber and hero,” which is interesting.

    Early Life of Jelme

    Jelme was the oldest child of the Uriankhai blacksmith Jarchiudai. Although Jarchiudai had wished to put him into the service even before the birth of Temujin (Genghis Khan), he got rejected due to Jelme’s young age. Jarchiudai later reintroduced Jelme to adult Temujin, before he became Genghis Khan.

    Jelme's statue at the entrance of the Genghis Khan Equestrian Statue.
    Jelme’s statue at the entrance of the Genghis Khan’s Equestrian Statue.

    Jelme quickly established himself as a trustworthy companion. He and his fellow nökör (“free companion”) Boorchu set out in pursuit of Temujin’s wife Borte when the Merkit tribe, who were at odds with the Mongols, abducted her. Therefore, he played a central role in the life of Temujin.

    Both Jelme and Boorchu were promoted to higher positions in the khan’s headquarters following Temujin’s ascension to power. Today, there is a statue of Jelme at the entrance of the Equestrian Statue of Genghis Khan in Mongolia.

    Jelme’s deeds have been recorded throughout history numerous times. In one instance, Jelme stayed up all night the next day tending to Temujin, who had been wounded in the neck by an arrow during the Battle of Thirteen Sides (also known as the Battle of Chakirmaut) in 1204.

    See also: How Many Wives Did Genghis Khan Have?

    Even after taking a poisonous arrow to the neck during the fight, Genghis Khan persisted in fighting until he passed out. Jelme stayed with Genghis and sucked the blood out of his neck for the whole night. (According to other sources, this happened in the Battle of Koiten in 1201.)

    Jelme

    Jelme risked his life to go to the enemy camp and return with a horn of sour milk for the khan when Temujin requested a drink after coming to his senses.

    “The Four Dogs of War”

    After three years, in the fight with the Naimans on Mount Nahu-Gun, Jelme stood out with Jebe, Subutai, and Kublai (not Kublai Khan) as the “Four Dogs of War.” Even Temujin’s foes acknowledged the bravery of his nökör forces.

    They are the Four Dogs of Temujin. They feed on human flesh and are tethered with an iron chain. They have foreheads of brass, their jaws are like scissors, their tongues like piercing awls, their heads are iron, their whipping tails swords. They feed on dew. Running, they ride on the back of the wind. In the day of battle, they devour enemy flesh. Behold, they are now unleashed, and they slobber at the mouth with glee. These four dogs are Jebe, and Kublai, Jelme, and Subotai.”

    — The Secret History of the Mongols

    Tolui, Temujin’s youngest son, had his life saved by Jelme once. After hearing a scream for aid, Jelme tracked down and murdered the fleeing Tatar of Qargil Shira who had sneaked his way into the Mongol camp and was about to butcher the infant:

    When Tolui was around five years old, a Tatar called Qargil Shira almost murdered him. Qargil Shira feigned to be a guest at Tolui’s tent when he really broke in. He seized Tolui as soon as he entered the tent and fled with him.

    Qargil Shira tried to stab the youngster, but Genghis Khan’s mother Hoelun‘s adoptive son Borokhul’s wife Altani pursued him and stopped the fugitive. To prevent the Tatar from escaping with Tolui, she clung to him until Jetei and Jelme arrived and murdered him. Aside from the deeds of both warriors, Genghis Khan hailed Altani as a baatar, or a Mongol heroine.

    See also: How Many Children Did Genghis Khan Have?

    The Legacy of Jelme

    Jelme was awarded one of the thousands of noyans distributed at the 1206 All-Mongol kurultai (“assembly”) for his devoted devotion to Temujin.

    It is unclear when precisely Dzhelme passed away; however, the “Collection of Chronicles” indicates it was somewhere during Temujin-Genghis Khan’s reign (between 1206 and 1227).

    Jelme was one of the noyans awarded to the thousanders (an honorable military rank) at the All-Mongolian Kurultai in 1206, in recognition of his many services to Temujin even before he turned into Genghis Khan.

    Genghis Khan made Yesuntei (or Yesuntege), son of Jelme, leader of the Kheshig. Kheshig were the elite military bodyguards of Mongol royalty, including Genghis Khan, which means “favored” or “blessed”.

    The “Collection of Chronicles” also mentions a Yesu-Buka-taishi, who is said to be a son of Jelme. It could be another name for Yesuntei, just like Yisun-te’e.

    Jelme’s Progeny

    There are people who trace their ancestry back to Jelme who are now residing in Mongolia, Inner Mongolia, and Buryatia (Russian Republic). The connection of those people with Jelme has been confirmed as recently as the early 2000s.

    Today, on Mongolian soil, there are registered members with the following last names, which are the ancestral families of Jelme: Jelme, Hun Jelme, Uriankhai Jelme, Jelmen Uriankhai, or Kostya Jelmen.

    The carriers of these generic last names are known among the Khalkha Mongols (genus Zelme), and Khotogoids (genus Zelmen).

    The descendants of Jelme were represented by four khoshuns (the banners of Inner Mongolia) of the Josutu League, in particular, the right, left, and middle khoshuns of the Kharchin Mongols and one khoshun of the left wing of the Tumeds.

    The Uriankhais of the Jelme line, Aanchin, and Vaanchin clans migrated to the land of current Buryatia and established themselves in the Ichetui (Ichyotuy) River valley around the turn of the 18th century, after a catastrophic battle in Mongolia. Dede-Ichyotuy, in the Dzhidinsky area of the Republic of Buryatia, is where most of their descendants now reside.

    Four brothers from the Jelmen Uriankhai family fled to Buryatia on the banks of the Ichyotuy River during the conflict between Galdan Boshugtu Khan and Tüsheet Khan, according to a legend that V.V. Popov recorded in 1926.

    Jelme in Popular Culture

    Jelme is mentioned in many parts of popular culture today. Here are some examples from literature and movies:

    Books

    • “The Wolf of the Plains” (2007), a historical novel by English author Conn Iggulden.
    • “Cruel Age” novel by Isaak Kalashnikov (1978)
    • “At the behest of Genghis Khan” is a novel by Soviet writer Nikolay Alekseevich Luginov (2001).

    Movies

    • “Genghis Khan” (China, 2004); Bao Hailong as Jelme.
    • “By the Will of Chingis Khan” (Russia, Mongolia, USA; 2009); Pyotr Makarov as Jelme.

    References

    1. Genghis Khan’s Greatest General: Subotai the Valiant – Richard A. Gabriel – Google Books
    2. A Compendium of Chronicles – Rashid al-Din’s illustrated history of the world – Si.edu
    3. The Secret History of the Mongols – Francis Woodman Cleaves, Internet Archive
  • Ortogh: A Unique Trading System of the Mongol Empire

    Ortogh: A Unique Trading System of the Mongol Empire

    Ortogh, which translates to “companion,” “friend,” or “partner” in Turkish (“Ortak”), was the name of a joint venture trading organization under the Mongol Empire. Ortogh or ortoq was made up of Muslim aristocratic merchants and played a part in China’s political structure during the Mongol-led Yuan dynasty (1271–1368). Ortogh was one of the unique commercial forms that existed from the late 13th century to the mid-14th century, during the time when the Mongol Empire generated significant wealth. The Chinese word for Ortogh, “Wotuo” reflects the pronunciation of this Turkish term.

    Merchants and moneylenders who worked with the Mongol Empire were referred to as ortogh.

    Origin of Ortogh

    Through Ortogh, traders from all across Asia and Europe, including Marco Polo's family, partnered with the aristocracy of the Mongol Empire.
    Through Ortogh, traders from all across Asia and Europe, including Marco Polo’s family, partnered with the aristocracy of the Mongol Empire.

    Due to their wealth but lack of business acumen, the Mongols opted to work with Semu (people from Central and West Asia) businesspeople in order to share risks and reduce the cost of trade.

    In the Mongol Empire, a trader was called an ortogh if he worked with the Mongol state or nobility. The Ortogh system made it possible to pool resources, which reduced the risk of unsuccessful caravans and made long-distance trade possible at a much lower cost.

    The risk of participating in caravan commerce during the Mongol era was quite high. Over the course of a protracted expedition, it was necessary to feed, pay, and outfit as many as a hundred people with supplies, including food, clothing, camels, horses, and so on.

    Many caravans were in danger from things like natural calamities or robbery groups. Due to the high costs associated with such a catastrophe, a single failed caravan may completely wipe out a merchant’s wealth.

    The Mongols devised the Ortogh system, wherein merchants pooled their resources to sponsor a single caravan to reduce the cost of failure.

    It is believed that the original security relationship between nomads and merchants served as the basis for Ortogh. Nomads provided protection for merchants while they established contacts, transacted business, and gathered intelligence in their capacity as intermediaries.

    In the Ortogh system, merchants pooled their resources to sponsor a single caravan. Even if a whole caravan perished, not a single trader would go out of business. When the caravans were successful, everyone involved would split the spoils.

    Just like the word, the origin of the Ortogh system dates back to the Turkic tribes. Ibn Fadlan describes the relationship between the nomadic Oghuz Turks and Muslim traders under the Ortogh in his travelogue, which takes place in the 10th century.

    History of Ortogh in the Mongol Empire

    genghis khan
    Genghis Khan

    Genghis Khan created the practice of Ortogh by delegating authority over the distribution of gold and silver ingots for trade to members of his family and military leaders and suggesting they hire financial advisors from Muslims of Uyghur, and Central Asian Turkic.

    Muslim businessmen led the way in establishing Ortogh, a joint investment organization that oversaw trade, transportation, banking, and tax collection.

    Therefore, the ruling elite of the Mongol Empire relied on Muslim merchants who served as financial administrators due to their lack of expertise in areas like tax collection, which are essential to the administration of an agrarian society.

    Muslim businessmen led the way in establishing Ortogh, a joint investment organization that oversaw trade, transportation, banking, and tax collection.

    As long as the traders did not disrupt military operations, they were allowed generous commissions and access to official resting stations. Those stations were found every 20 to 30 miles with lodging, hot food, and rested horses.

    If a business owner belonged to an Ortogh, the Mongols would lend them money at a cheap interest rate. The Mongols, who prized skill above ethnic background, typically held Muslim merchants in high regard who got in touch with the Mongol court through commerce, and they ultimately acquired the confidence of Mongol nobles and emperors.

    Through Ortogh, traders from all across Asia and Europe, including Marco Polo‘s family, partnered with the aristocracy of the Mongol Empire.

    Ortogh (“Ortak/Partner”) is mentioned in writings before Möngke Khan’s time (grandson of Genghis Khan, r. 1251–1259).

    See also: How Many Children Did Genghis Khan Have?

    Comprehension of the Economy by the Mongol Empire

    The Mongol Empire often possessed a thorough understanding of the dynamics of the economy. Mahmud Yalavach (d. 1254), the Muslim finance minister in the Mongol Empire, argued that currency had worth if supply and demand were in balance since it was a property.

    To obtain silver, the international currency of the period, and to utilize it as an investment in commerce, the tax administration of the regions conquered by the Mongols specialized in collecting silver.

    Members of Ortogh comprised mainly Muslim merchants but also Uyghur merchants, and even some Han Chinese and Christians.

    The founder of the Yuan dynasty, Kublai Khan, had a diverse and multicultural staff that included Uyghurs, Khitans, Han Chinese, Jurchens, and others even before he became emperor in 1271.

    After the Yuan Dynasty was established in China, the populace was split between the MongolsSemu (mostly the speakers of Turkic languages), Han (northern Chinese, or Hanren), and Southerners (southern Chinese, or Nanren).

    Among them, intelligent financiers were placed in control of the financial department, namely Muslim merchants. Members of Ortogh comprised mainly Muslim merchants but also Uyghur merchants, and even some Han Chinese and Christians.

    Negative Effects of Ortogh

    Kublai Khan (1215–1294) granted concessions to the administrators of the Ortogh, and they became an official part of the Yuan Dynasty’s government. In 1268, Kublai set up an administration for the monitoring of Ortogh to help the members there have access to low-interest loans.

    In doing so, the members of the Ortogh frequently abused the local people economically through the imposition of commercial taxes and monopoly taxes, both of which went counter to the traditional Chinese understanding of banking and money in the Mongol-led Yuan Dynasty.

    Additionally, “royal edicts”—which means to proclaim the words of the emperor—were provided to particular people from ortogh, as well as Buddhist and Taoist temples.

    Those edicts were known as “protection imperatives” or “precise imperatives” and they were provided without going through the government. So, it became something that often messed with the system and broke laws.

    Therefore, Chinese people thought poorly of Ortogh businesspeople because of the preferential treatment they received from authorities and the exorbitant interest rates they charged on loans.

    Politician Wang Yun of the Han dynasty was not a fan of the ortogh’s unique rights, especially the ability to keep and carry weapons. By the time of the Ming dynasty (1368–1644), the name ortogh signified little more than “merchant.”

    Hanseatic League vs. Ortogh

    One may ask, how did the Hanseatic League compare to the Ortogh? The Hanseatic League and the Ortogh existed at relatively similar times but in different places.

    North German cities and German commercial communities overseas formed an association called the Hanseatic League to look out for each other’s economic interests. Between the 13th and 15th centuries, the League controlled much of the trade in northern Europe.

    In contrast, the Ortogh system consisted of traders who worked hand in hand with the Mongol empire and its many aristocratic citizens. Because merchants could combine their resources and lower the probability of unsuccessful caravans, long-distance commerce could expand and become much more cost-effective.

    So, although both groups and systems engaged in commerce, their aims and natures diverged significantly. Ortogh was concerned with lowering the danger of failed caravans and boosting long-distance commerce inside the Mongol Empire, whereas the Hanseatic League was concerned with preserving the mutual commercial interests of north German cities and merchant communities overseas.

    Ortogh at a Glance

    What is Ortogh?

    Ortogh was a joint venture trading organization under the Mongol Empire made up of Muslim aristocratic merchants. It played a part in China’s political structure during the Mongol-led Yuan dynasty (1271–1368).

    What was the origin of the Ortogh system?

    The original security relationship between nomads and merchants served as the basis for the Ortogh system. Nomads provided protection for merchants while they established contacts, transacted business, and gathered intelligence in their capacity as intermediaries.

    How did the Ortogh system help reduce the risk of caravans during the Mongol era?

    The Ortogh system made it possible to pool resources, which reduced the risk of unsuccessful caravans and made long-distance trade possible at a much lower cost. Merchants pooled their resources to sponsor a single caravan, and even if a whole caravan perished, not a single trader would go out of business. When the caravans were successful, everyone involved would split the spoils.

    References

    1. Ibn Fadlan and the Land of Darkness: Arab Travellers in the Far North – Ibn Fadlan – Google Books
    2. The Travels of Ibn Batūta – Ibn Batūta – Google Books
  • Fountain of the Fallen Angel: A Statue for Satan

    Fountain of the Fallen Angel: A Statue for Satan

    In Madrid, Spain, you can find the Fountain of the Fallen Angel in the city’s Retiro Park. The Fallen Angel stands on the site of the Royal Factory of Buen Retiro, which was destroyed in 1813 during the Peninsular War (1807–1814). Both the main figure (by Ricardo Bellver) called the “Fallen Angel”, and the pedestal (by Francisco Jareo) are original works. The statue is also known as the Statue of the Fallen Angel or originally as “The Fuente del Ángel Caído.”

    History of the Fountain of the Fallen Angel

    The Fountain of the Fallen Angel was created in plaster by the Madrid sculptor Ricardo Bellver (1845–1924) during his third year as a pensioner at the Spanish Academy of Fine Arts in Rome in 1877.

    At the National Exhibition of Fine Arts in Madrid the following year, he won the First Class Medal with the Fountain of the Fallen Angel by a margin of five votes to two.

    The third and fourth stanzas of Canto I of the English poet John Milton’s Paradise Lost serve as inspiration for the sculpture, as noted in the exhibition catalog:

    “For his pride he falls from heaven with all his host of rebellious angels, never to return to it. He waves his eyes around, and blasphemously fixes them on the empyrean, reflecting in them the deepest pain, the greatest dismay, the most dismal pride, and the most obstinate hatred.”

    Paradise Lost, Canto I by Milton

    After an evaluation by the Exhibition Jury, the government purchased the piece for 4,500 Spanish pesetas with the intention of sending it to Paris for the Universal Exhibition of 1878.

    Because the Paris exhibition only allowed sculptures made of marble or bronze, preparations were made to cast the Fountain of the Fallen Angel in one of those materials. Bellver suggested Rome as the location, but the Thiébaut Frères foundry completed the project in Paris.

    The Museo del Prado national museum eventually acquired the Fountain of the Fallen Angel (which did not have a fountain yet).

    Benito Soriano Murillo, its director, proposed an outdoor exhibition to the General Directorate of Public Instruction in October 1879.

    (… ) the statue of the Fallen Angel, for the boldness of its composition, for its original attitude, and also for the material in which it has been cast, perhaps does not produce all the desired effect, enclosed as it is in the narrow confines of a room, while placed in a public place, in the open air with more space and horizon, it would advantageously show off the merit of such a beautiful creation, serving at the same time as an ornament and thus initiating the public in the contemplation of the good models of plastic art that so powerfully contributes to its culture.

    Benito Soriano

    The City Council of Madrid graciously accepted the artwork as a gift to be displayed in a public area of the Spanish city. The vacant lot of the old Royal Factory of Buen Retiro in Buen Retiro Park was selected as the location for the monument.

    A pedestal for Bellver’s sculpture was commissioned by the architect in charge of the Ministry of Public Works, Francisco Jareño y Alarcón, in May 1880. The pedestal had the form of a fountain, with a big basin, and was built from granite, metal, and stone. In 1885, the statue celebrated its formal opening.

    A polyester resin on silicone mold reproduction of the Fountain of the Fallen Angel has been on display in the museum of the San Fernando Fine Art Royal Academy (Madrid) since the 1990s.

    The Fountain of the Fallen Angel’s Design

    Environment

    Several structures were originally located in the space that currently serves as the Fallen Angel’s circular plaza. The hermitage of San Antonio Abad, also known as San Antón, dates back to the Habsburg era and is the first of its kind.

    After its destruction, Charles III had a porcelain factory built that was modeled after the one at Capodimonte (Naples). After the factory burned down during the Spanish War of Independence (also known as the Peninsular War), the land where the Fountain of the Fallen Angel now stands was abandoned for a long time.

    The Paseo del Duque Fernan Nunez, Paseo de Cuba, and Paseo del Uruguay are three of the park’s paved roadways that now merge at the Glorieta.

    Fountain

    The overall dimensions of the statue are around 33 x 33 x 23 feet (10 x 10 x 7 m). Bellver’s Fallen Angel alone stands at an impressive 8.7 feet (2.65 m) in height.

    A circular parterre of boxwood surrounds the fountain. The granite water catchment area is octagonal in form and quite vast. The pedestal is highest in the middle. It rests on an octagonal granite foundation that slopes like a pyramid and has bronze panels on all eight of its sides.

    There are three water spouts in each of these devilish faces, which depict demons holding lizards and snakes. Two additional, less steeply inclined, truncated pyramidal bodies rest on this foundation. And finally, the major sculpture, the Fallen Angel, atop the monument sits on a third, much shorter body made up of three circular stairs.


    A big serpent wraps around the Fallen Angel’s torso as he rests on some rocks that serve as a foundation. Bellver’s composition of diagonal lines and expressiveness owes a great deal to the Baroque (particularly Bernini) and the Romantic (especially Michelangelo), as well as the Hellenistic (especially Laocoon and his sons).


    Curiosities

    In Madrid, at an official topographic height of 2,185 feet or “666” meters (one of the most widely recognized symbols for the Antichrist) above sea level, you’ll find the Fountain of the Fallen Angel.

    This striking similarity to the so-called Number of the Demon, together with the widespread but mistaken assumption that the monument is some kind of “homage” to Lucifer, evil, or the heretical, has piqued the interest of a number of those interested in esotericism.

    Averaging 666 meters above sea level is not an unusual occurrence in Spain’s capital, Madrid.

    Many people think that the Fountain of the Fallen Angel is the only memorial that references the devil, yet they couldn’t be more wrong.

    Tandapi (Quito, Ecuador) has a sculpture of Lucifer atop the Monument to the Traforo del Frejus, much like Turin (Italy). “El poder brutal” (the brutal power) is shown in the title of this piece. The Havana (Cuba) National Capitol also has the Statue of the Rebel Angel.

    Fountain of the Fallen Angel at a Glance