Author: Hrothsige Frithowulf

End of the New Kingdom Dynasty: Crisis in Ancient Egypt
Economic crises and political conflicts are not an invention of modern times. In ancient Egypt, too, there were repeated phases of economic and social problems. One of these occurred around 3,100 years ago at the end of the 20th Dynasty. Supply bottlenecks, a lack of grain deliveries, and a shortage of labor—these problems seem very familiar to us today, but they also affected the Egyptians around 1100 BC. Evidence of this ancient Egyptian crisis can be found not only in papyrus texts and other inscriptions but also in the necropolis of Dra’ Abu el-Naga, west of Thebes.
Scarcity and conflicts at the end of the New Kingdom
New Kingdom in the 15th century BC. (Credit: W. Commons, CC BY-SA 3.0)
There is hardly any other period of ancient Egypt from which we have so many textual sources as the period of the 20th Dynasty, which lasted from 1185 to 1070 BC. During this time, Ramesses III, who is thought to be the last great pharaoh in Egyptian history, was king.
Supply and food shortages
The written evidence from this period includes monumental, primarily religious inscriptions from temples and tombs, as well as numerous papyri and inscribed pottery shards or limestone cuttings with administrative and economic texts. From them, it is clear that this period at the end of the New Kingdom was marked by political, social, and economic problems, which finally led to a severe crisis under the rulers Ramesses IX, X, and XI.
Already in the reign of Ramesses III, food shortages and supply bottlenecks became tangible. A telling document is the famous “Turin Strike Papyrus” from the 29th year of this king’s reign: Because the monthly grain deliveries to the Theban necropolis workers did not arrive, they stopped working at the construction site in the Valley of the Kings. Other strikes over unpaid food rations are also documented under Ramesses IX and X.
Too few workers and enemy attacks
In the late New Kingdom, the number of workers at the royal tombs also continued to decrease. Only 32 workers were involved in the construction of the tomb of Ramesses X, not even half as many as at the tomb of his predecessor. At the time of Ramesses XI, the last pharaoh of this dynasty, only 23 workers were documented.
Around 3,100 years ago, ancient Egypt experienced an economic and political crisis.
Despite the continuing crisis and reduced work crews, however, Ramesses X and Ramesses XI still had their tombs built in the Valley of the Kings. However, both sites were abandoned, presumably due to the uncertain situation in Thebes. The mummified bodies of Ramesses VIII, X, and XI may have been interred instead in the Ramesside residence city of Pi-Ramesses in the eastern Nile Delta, but their graves have not yet been found there.
Another constant challenge to the Egyptian empire at this time was the invasion of external enemies, especially from areas west of Egypt, which further destabilized the country. These attacks had already led to the cessation of work on the royal tomb at the end of Ramesses III’s reign and subsequently under Ramesses VI, IX, and X. The progressive shortage situation and growing security problems at Thebes are particularly well documented by the so-called “Tomb Robbery Papyrus,” in which necropolis inspections and trials of looters are recorded in writing.
Clear indications of a crisis
Together with other documents of the late Ramesside period, they reflect not only political instability and resource scarcity but also the growing impoverishment of the population. Thus, it is clear from various passages in the text that stolen burial goods and temple goods were exchanged for food.
Khonsu Temple, Karnak, Ramesses III. (Credit: Asavaa, W. Commons, CC BY-SA 3.0)
The picture of economic decline and an increasingly dysfunctional central state conveyed by these sources is also confirmed by archaeological observations. As a result of a steadily increasing shortage of raw materials, older funerary inventories, especially wooden coffins, were increasingly reworked and reused at the end of the 20th and especially in the 21st dynasty. The prevailing lack of resources is also evident from the found material recovered from the tomb of the high priest Amenhotep at Dra’ Abu el-Naga.
What the tomb of the high priest Amenhotep reveals
The high priest of Amun, Amenhotep, had assumed his office in the first half of the reign of Ramesses IX and was one of the major players at the end of the 20th Dynasty. As the first worshipper in the Karnak temple and head of the Amun domain, whose economic power had grown steadily in the New Kingdom, Amenhotep was the highest political authority and holder of the greatest amount of power in Thebes.
Double tomb of high importance
His funerary temple and that of his father and predecessor in office, Ramessesnakht, are still being researched. In this ancient Egyptian necropolis west of Thebes, officials and high dignitaries from the New Kingdom—among them Amenhotep and his father—were buried alongside pharaohs and dignitaries from the 17th Dynasty.
The funerary temples of these two Amun high priests are located in the double tomb complex K93.11/K93.12. With a courtyard terrace of over 1,600 square meters, it is one of the largest rock-cut tomb complexes of the New Kingdom in Thebes-West.
Ceramic shard with the names of workers involved in the construction of the funerary temple of the high priest Amenhotep.
Archaeologists have been researching this double tomb complex since at least 1993. Among other things, they have discovered that the complex is integrated in a special way into the religious topography of the necropolis. From K93.11/K93.12, there is a direct line of sight to the main temple of Karnak on the east side of the Nile. In addition, the precisely measured main axis of the nearby temple of the royal couple Amenhotep I and Ahmose-Nefertari, called “Men-Set,” is apparently aligned with the double tomb complex.
Insight into the time of Ramesses XI
Early in the project, archaeologists came across relics of the ruined tomb temple of Ramessesnakht, which was decorated during the reign of Ramesses VI, in the open atria of K93.11. Among the finds were thousands of fragments of the relief-decorated wall covering, parts of columns, capitals, and friezes made of sandstone, and the remains of a monumental mud-brick architecture. However, the burial of Ramessesnakht was not found. For more than 16 years, researchers have been investigating the tomb temple of Amenhotep in the area to the south, K93.12. There, too, thousands of relief and architectural fragments made of sandstone were recovered.
The finds and features documented in the tombs of Amenhotep and Ramessesnakht have not only expanded our knowledge of the architecture and religious function of the monumental tomb of the late Ramesside period, but they also provide insights into the political and economic situation of the period from Ramesses IX to Ramesses XI. For example, the looted tomb furnishings of Amenhotep, recovered in his remains, contained reused inventory, even though the high priest was the highest representative of the local elite.
Priestly tomb with savings
Also conspicuous is the absence of a stone sarcophagus, which had been an integral part of elite burials in previous decades. Amenhotep was buried in a wooden coffin that imitates a sarcophagus made of rose granite in its design, from the color scheme to the style of its decoration and lettering—an indication that logistically costly quarry expeditions were no longer taking place in his time.
And something else is striking: If one compares the construction work and the wall relief in the complexes of Ramessesnakht and Amenhotep, a clear drop in the quality of the stonework is recognizable. There is a period of at least 25 years between the construction of the tomb temples of Ramessesnakht and Amenhotep. During this time, the availability of specialized and skilled labor, especially in stone carving, has apparently been drastically reduced. The “first guard” of the few remaining stone specialists was probably tied up at the construction site of the royal tomb in the Valley of the Kings.
Political conflict in the material findings
This wall fragment from the funerary temple shows Amenhotep, the text above mentions his names and titles as well as those of his father Ramessesnakht.
During the investigation of the high priest burial temples in the necropolis Dra’ Abu el-Naga, archaeologists came across another sign of political-religious upheaval: The burial temples of the Amun high priests Ramessesnakht and Amenhotep were deliberately destroyed at the end of the New Kingdom.
This is evidenced by the layer of sandstone debris that covers almost the entire area of both complexes and lies on the floor of the court at that time. It consists of thousands of fragments of shattered wall cladding and architectural elements, many of which show clear secondary chisel marks.
Evidence of the “war against the High Priest”
This finding can be linked to a historical sequence of events that at the same time marks the end of the New Kingdom, namely the so-called “war” or “transgression against the High Priest” around 1085 BC. This involved a violent conflict between Amenhotep and Panehsi, the commander of the troops and administrator of the Nubian provinces, during the 17th and 18th years of Ramesses XI’s reign. Exactly when this happened and how this conflict unfolded is unclear because this event is mentioned in only a few written sources.
With the material findings in tombs K93.11/K93.12, meaningful archaeological data could now be fed into the extensive discussion about the events during the transition from the 20th to the 21st dynasty. They form an important contribution to a better understanding of the historical situation that led to the complete dissolution of the local power structure with the death of Amenhotep and the end of the influential Ramessesnakht family.
A programmatic “rebirth” and the end of a dynasty
This deep break was the starting point of a new political beginning, which was also programmatically identified as such at the time: In year 19 of his reign, Pharaoh Ramesses XI let begin a new yearly count, the “repetition of birth.” This counting, in which the 19th year of Ramesses’ reign was counted as year one, was supposed to stand for the overcoming of the unstable state of emergency. It ended with the death of the king in his 29th year of reign.
The installation of a new dynasty of high priests under Ramesses XI also laid the foundations for the subsequent nationwide reorganization of the balance of power. Under his successor, Smendes, Egypt was divided into two political and administrative units: The southern part was ruled by the Theban high priest; in the northern part of the country, the Libyan-born kings of the 21st Dynasty ruled, who resided in Tanis.
The Late Bronze Age Collapse
Egypt was not the only empire affected. From archaeological finds and written evidence, it is clear that Egypt was affected by a widespread crisis around 1100 BCE. However, this must be viewed in the larger context of a development that affected the entire eastern Mediterranean and western Asia—the Late Bronze Age Collapse.
Comprehensive decline
Triggered by a range of stressors, many states and urban centers of the Aegean and Near East collapsed and lost power and economic influence over a period of about 200 years at that time. These included the advanced civilization of Mycenae, the empire of the Hittites, and also the city-states of Canaan in the Levant. The causes of this decline are unclear, but in addition to natural disasters and migration movements, a change in climate is suspected.
As part of the economic and diplomatic network, Egypt was also affected by this large-scale collapse. The flows of goods and raw materials that had been firmly established through trade dried up. As a result, a material decline could also be observed in Egypt due to the changed socio-economic and political conditions, recognizable, among other things, by the cessation of extensive tomb and temple construction or the material and spatial reduction of the burial effort in often unmarked collective tombs.
Adapted new beginning
Nevertheless, there can be no question of a cultural standstill in the 21st Dynasty. If one considers the minimized, newly configured burial inventories alone as indicators, they testify to a special cultural dynamism and intellectual productivity. In this context, the coffins with their condensed religious iconography have taken over the ritual or transformative function of the earlier decorated rock tomb. With them, an existing tradition of afterlife provision is continued, which was translated into a new material form of expression in response to changed external circumstances.
Bibliography
1. Ramsey, Christopher Bronk; Dee, Michael W.; and more. (2010). “Radiocarbon-Based Chronology for Dynastic Egypt”. Science. doi:10.1126/science.1189395.
2. Eric H. Cline and David O’Connor, eds. Ramesses III: The Life and Times of Egypt’s Last Hero (University of Michigan Press; 2012).
3. William F. Edgerton, “The Strikes in Ramses III’s Twenty-Ninth Year”, JNES 10, no. 3 (July 1951), pp. 137–145.
4. Schneider, Thomas (27 August 2008). “Periodizing Egyptian History: Manetho, Convention, and Beyond”. In Klaus-Peter Adam (ed.). Historiographie in der Antike. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 181–197. ISBN 978-3-11-020672-2.
November 16, 2022
Carolingian Empire: This Empire Gave Birth to Germany and France
Pepin the Short, son of Charles Martel, was able to depose the last Merovingian monarch and establish a new dynasty at the head of the Frankish realm because of his position as mayor of the palace and the renown of his family. However, his son, the illustrious Charlemagne, whom the Pope crowned Emperor of the West in 800 after a string of military triumphs in favor of Christianity, was the one who gave this dynasty its name. The Carolingian Empire was short-lived, however, collapsing in 843 with the partition of Verdun between Charlemagne’s three grandchildren. The imperial title lasted until 924, and when Louis V of France passed away in 987, the Carolingian dynasty came to an end.
When and How Did the Carolingian Dynasty Begin?
Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours, depicted in the Grandes Chroniques de France.
The Frankish aristocracy of the Merovingian period suffered the same fate as the other barbarian kingdoms established after the fall of the Roman Empire in the 7th century. As time went on, the legitimate Merovingian kings, who were called “lazy kings” (Roi fainéant), lost power and were replaced by the noble mayors of palaces.
Even though they were originally just the kings’ stewards, they eventually grew so powerful that they could actually remove and replace the kings themselves.
Childeric III, the last representative of the Merovingians, was deposed in 751 by Pepin the Short, mayor of the palace of Neustria and son of the famous military leader Charles Martel who had stopped the Muslim expansion in Poitiers in 732 (See: The Battle of Tours and The Reconquista).
- See Also: Pepin the Short’s Height: How Tall Was Pepin the Short Really?
Pepin the Short, also known as Pepin III, founded the Carolingian dynasty after Pope Zachary officially crowned him king of the Franks. He left the kingdom to his son Charlemagne, also known as Charlemagne, who expanded it into an empire after his death in 768. Between 751 and 771, Charlemagne and his brother Carloman I ruled jointly.
Key Dates in the Carolingian Empire
Charlemagne at dinner; detail of a miniature from BL Royal MS 15 E vi, f. 155r (the “Talbot Shrewsbury Book”)
During the first three decades of his reign, Charlemagne expanded the Frankish empire through a series of military victories, mainly against the Saxons and the Lombards, with the assistance of the pope. In 800, he was anointed emperor in Rome under the name Charlemagne after rescuing Pope Leo III from an assassination attempt. He then set about reconstructing the Western Empire.
After the death of Charlemagne in 840, the so-called Carolingian Empire (a name derived from Charles Martel and Charlemagne) was split into three parts. Louis I, also known as Louis the Pious, inherited it from his father in 814. The three surviving sons of Louis (Charles the Bald, Lothair I, and Louis II) negotiated a violent division of the Carolingian Empire and signed the Treaty of Verdun in 843.
The Carolingian Empire collapsed when it was divided into three separate kingdoms. Nevertheless, the Emperor of the West title survived until Berengar I’s death in 924, at which point it was no longer used.
Territories Conquered by Charlemagne
When his father, Pepin the Short, passed away in 768, Charlemagne had already completely incorporated the duchies of Aquitaine and Gascony into the realm.
Charlemagne, at the invitation of the pope, launched an offensive against the Lombards in 773 and soon prevailed, eventually annexing the northern part of Italy up to Rome. He used this victory to launch an all-out assault on the Saxons in 776, the last indigenous pagan group in the area.
To finally defeat them in 785, several military campaigns were necessary, one of which Widukind led. Charlemagne’s 778 campaign against the Saracens resulted in a crushing loss at the hands of the Christians in the Battle of Roncesvalles Pass.
Later conquests, however, created what is now known as the “Spanish March,” and efforts against the Frisians, Bretons, Bavarians, and Avars in the years 780–800 pushed the Carolingian Empire even farther west.
When Charlemagne passed away in 814, the area of the imperial dominion was about 385.000 square miles (1 million sq km), having doubled during his period.
How Was the Territory of the Carolingian Empire Ruled?
Vita Sancti Martini by Sulpicius Severus; manuscript of the 8th century, composed in Carolingian minuscule. (Source: Paris BnF).
Charlemagne was not only a conqueror and military genius, but also a reformer and highly productive king. 300 provinces made up the Carolingian Empire. Charlemagne’s religious and secular commands were carried out over his vast realm by “missi dominici” (Latin for “envoy[s] of the lord [ruler]”) which were institutions with two heads (a count and a bishop).
Mathematics and grammar were taught in schools set up in each bishopric, and a uniform form of medieval Latin script was introduced.
The Carolingian minuscule, a new kind of writing, was developed to make books easier to read. Additionally, a monetary reform was implemented to switch from gold to silver as the metal of choice for coinage. The goal was to make it simpler for business deals to be done, allowing commerce to flourish.
Roads were kept in good shape, and farmers’ markets were given the green light, among other things. Libraries, artworks, and monuments flourished under Charlemagne’s reign, ushering in a period known as the “Carolingian Renaissance.”
What Language was Spoken in the Carolingian Empire?
Karl von Blass (1815–1894) painted a scene in which Charlemagne warns several careless students.
The Salian Frankish nobles, initially from the Rhine River but later moving southwest, established the Carolingian Empire after establishing a foothold in Gaul after the collapse of the Roman Empire. The Franks, under Clovis’ rule, soon adopted aspects of Gallo-Roman culture and eventually abandoned their pagan religion in favor of Christianity.
Even though the Merovingians spoke Old Frankish, the Carolingians under Charlemagne adopted a close dialect called Rhenish Frankish, which became the official language of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire at Aachen.
What Was the Place of Religion in the Carolingian Empire?
The Coronation of Charlemagne by Friedrich Kaulbach (1822–1903).
The covenant struck between the Carolingian monarchs and the pope to support each other was a defining feature of the Carolingian Empire and its long partnership between politics and religion.
Charlemagne ordered the baptism of all infants under the age of one in the bishoprics, instituted the payment of tithes across the kingdom as early as 779, and founded several monasteries.
Paganism was outlawed, and Christian conversion was mandated in the conquered areas, particularly in Saxony. Charlemagne, against Rome’s opposition, commanded the addition of the Filioque (a Latin term meaning “and from the Son”) to the Nicene Creed during the ensuing dispute between the Roman and Greek churches over the doctrine of the Trinity. Theology developed strongly during the period of Charlemagne.
How Did the Carolingian Empire End?
When Charlemagne’s heir, Louis the Pious, died, his sons fought over who would succeed him. The sons intended to split up the Carolingian Empire, while the clergy wanted to keep it as one.
Louis’ oldest son, Lothair, believed he would rule on his own. Charles the Bald received West Francia, Lothair I received Middle Francia, and Louis II received East Francia according to the Treaty of Verdun signed in 843, which ended years of civil strife.
There was a de facto dissolution of the state their grandfather Charlemagne had established. These three realms were not self-sustaining due to external factors like the untimely assaults of the Vikings and the Arabs, the squabbles between brothers and their offspring, and the frequent and unexpected deaths of rulers. The Carolingian dynasty and its royal line ended in the middle of the 10th century.
What Do the Byzantine Empire and the Carolingian Empire Have in Common?
Both the Byzantine and Carolingian empires were Christian and ruled from Constantinople and Aachen, respectively. In both instances, the emperor led the armed forces and ensured the country’s religious harmony by means of military conquest. The governors, sometimes known as missi dominici, were responsible for implementing policies in several regions. The two dynasties had similar priorities when it came to the advancement of culture and learning.
KEY DATES OF THE CAROLINGIAN EMPIRE
October 22, 741 – Death of Charles Martel
Charles Martel was a notable person in the 8th century, serving as mayor of the palaces of Neustria and Austrasia and also as a prominent statesman and military commander. After defeating Umayyad forces attempting to take over Francia at the Battle of Tours (also called the Battle of Poitiers) in 732, he gained international renown and the papacy’s attention. When he passed away, he was given the honor of being buried in the royal church of Saint-Denis.
November 751 – Pepin the Short, King of the Franks
Pepin the Short, Charles Martel’s son, ousted Childeric III, king of the Merovingians, and assumed the throne following his father’s death. This was ten years after Martel’s own death. The pope, Zachariah, supported his claim to the throne, and he became king of the Franks in 751. The Merovingian Dynasty came to an end with this event, ushering in the new Frankish bloodline known as the Carolingians.
July 28, 754 – Pepin the Short was Once Again Crowned
Pepin the Short, at the behest of Pope Stephen II (who succeeded Zachary in 752), launched a victorious military expedition in Lombardy. Land was donated by Pepin, and the Papal States were officially established when the Treaty of Quierzy was signed in 754. The pope recognized his loyalty by reinstating his position as king of the Franks and bestowing upon him the title of Patrice of the Romans. During this time, the ties between the pope and the new monarchy were tightened even further.
September 25, 768 – Death of Pepin the Short
Pepin the Short, who died at the age of 54 due to sickness, spent the last years of his reign consolidating the kingdom in the South through the conquests of Septimania in 759 and Aquitaine in 768. He was laid to rest at Saint-Denis, much like his father. Carloman and Charlemagne, his sons, argued over how to divide the realm when he died.
December 4, 771 – Charlemagne Took Power
Charlemagne took full control of the realm after Carloman’s sudden death in 771, and taking the opportunity to oust his infant nephews, who were eventually imprisoned for life in a monastery. The Archbishop of Sens, Wilcharius, recognized him as the only ruler of the Franks.
774 – Charlemagne Confirmed the Papal States
Charlemagne formally acknowledged Pepin’s contribution to the Roman Catholic Church before the newly installed Pope Adrian I in Rome. The papacy’s temporal rule over the Papal States was recognized. The latter will continue to grow via further gifts and invasions.
August 15, 778 – Death of Roland at the Pass of Roncesvalles
It was in 778 when the famous warrior Roland, who had been guarding the Frankish border with Brittany, was tasked with leading an expedition against the emirate of Cordoba in Spain. At the Battle of Roncesvalles, this close friend and rumored nephew of Charlemagne was killed by an unexpected assault by the Vascons (Basques).
781 – Alcuin Took Charge of Charlemagne’s School
Interior of the Palatine Chapel in Aachen, Germany. (CEphoto, cc by sa 3.0)
In 781, while visiting Rome, the English philosopher and theologian Alcuin met Charlemagne, who asked him to live in Aachen, the imperial capital. He rose rapidly to become the most trusted counselor to the Emperor and the leader of the Palatine School, which Charlemagne had created to educate his top officials. As a result, many episcopal schools and libraries were established across the enormous realm, ushering in the “Carolingian renaissance.”
799 – Charlemagne Annexed Dalmatia
Dalmatia was a crucial province of Croatia because of its location between the Byzantine and Carolingian empires. Charlemagne invades in 799 and firmly conquers the region by 803. This invasion by the Franks leads to a naval conflict with Constantinople that is only resolved with the signing of the Pax Nicephori in 812.
December 25, 800 – Coronation of Charlemagne
As a result of Charlemagne’s repeated victories, the Carolingian empire came to cover almost the whole Christian West. Political and religious leaders began to consider the possibility of an empire as a result of the ruler’s absolute authority. Charlemagne was proclaimed Emperor of the West in 800 after a failed coup against Pope Leo III in 799. The Byzantine Empire did not acknowledge this coronation because it saw it as illegitimate.
January 28, 814 – Death of Charlemagne
The Western Roman Emperor Charlemagne passed away at the age of 72 in the city of Aachen from what was likely a case of severe pneumonia. His son Louis the Pious took the imperial title after him, but that only sparked a battle of succession for power.
June 22, 841 – The Division of Charlemagne’s Empire
The Auxerrois area was the site of the war between Charlemagne’s grandchildren for control of the Empire. The true successor, Lothair, was defeated by his brothers, Louis the German and Charles the Bald. In 843, he was forced to sign the Treaty of Verdun, which gave the French-speaking half to Charles and the German-speaking part to Louis. It was during this war that the seeds for Germany, France, and Italy were planted.
February 14, 842 – Oaths of Strasbourg
Charles the Bald and Louis the German, Charlemagne’s grandsons, exchanged “Oaths of Strasbourg.” They joined forces to take on their elder sibling, Lothair, Emperor of the West, and they did so with this covenant of mutual help. This is the first official document to be written in a vernacular other than Latin.
Both Louis the German and Charles the Bald take the oath, but Louis does it in Romance while Charles does it in Tudesque, the ancestor of German. Lothair was defeated on June 25, 842, by the two allied brothers at Fontenay-en-Puisaye in modern-day Burgundy.
843 – The Belgian Territory Divided by the Treaty of Verdun
It was officially split between France and Lotharingia the day after the treaty was signed. Northern Flanders fell to Charles the Bald, while southern Wallonia was added to Lothar I’s realm. However, a few years later, the Holy Roman Empire would be given credit for the latter.
November 22, 845 – Independence of Brittany
Near Redon, the Breton Nominoe triumphed in a ball battle against Charles the Bald’s Carolingian army. This loss meant the end of the king’s attempt to conquer Brittany. Brittany broke away from the monarchy and established its own government. It would remain so for nearly 7 centuries.
April 10, 879 – Death of Louis the Stammerer
After a long illness, the 33-year-old monarch of West Francia passed away at Compiègne. King of France for only 16 short months, Louis the Stammerer was also known as King Louis II the Lazy. Louis III and Carloman, two of his sons, would go on to rule as monarchs of Neustria and Aquitaine, respectively.
November 28, 885 – Beginning of the Siege of Paris by the Normans
Parisians had been fending off the Vikings since the mid-9th century, who were not afraid to ravage the city as they did in 856. The Normans tried something new this time around and laid siege to the city. Because of Eudes, Paris was able to hold out for over two years. It wasn’t until Charles the Fat paid a huge ransom that fighting stopped.
January 13, 888 – Death of Charles the Fat
As a result, Charles the Fat, King of the Franks and Emperor of the West, passed away at Neidingen without a direct successor. As a reward for his bravery in repelling the Norman invasion of West Francia, Robert the Strong named his son Eudes as his heir. On February 29, he was anointed king of the West Franks, and he ruled until 898.
July 20, 911 – Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte
A century after racking up victories and establishing a foothold in Neustria, the Normans were beaten at Chartres by Charles the Simple. The latter was able to exert his authority and initiate talks with the “invaders” as a result of the changing circumstances. The end result was the establishment of the duchy of Normandy. In return for the King of France’s acknowledgment, the Norman Rollon gained control of this area. Additionally, he said that he would become a Catholic. The Normans quickly expanded their area after becoming French, which at the time included roughly what is now Upper Normandy.
October 7, 929 – Death of Charles the Simple
The French monarch passed away while in Herbert of Vermandois’ captivity at Peronne. Although he had reigned as king since 893, the Robertians had ousted him and thrown him in jail in 922. Robert I took over after him.
March 2, 986 – Death of Lothar III
Following a fulgurating pandemic, the Frankish king died at the age of 45. The cathedral of Saint-Rémy in Reims served as the site of his burial. Louis V, his son, took over after him. There was just one year under his rule.
References
Davis, Jennifer (2015). Charlemagne’s Practice of Empire. Cambridge University Press. p. 25. ISBN 978-1316368596.
Joanna Story, Charlemagne: Empire and Society, Manchester University Press, 2005 ISBN 978-0-7190-7089-1
The paradox of the past in the crisis of the Carolingian Empire – After Empire”. arts.st-andrews.ac.uk.
Wickham, Chris (2005-09-22). Framing the Early Middle Ages. Oxford University Press. p. 674. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199264490.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-926449-0.
King, P. D. (1987). Charlemagne Translated Sources. p. 124. ISBN 978-0951150306.
Kramer, Rutger (2019). Rethinking Authority in the Carolingian Empire: Ideals and Expectations During the Reign of Louis the Pious (813-828). pp. 31–34. ISBN 9789048532681.
November 15, 2022
Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa: An Important Milestone of the Reconquista
The Reconquista of southern Spain by the Christian kingdoms was mostly successful because of the pivotal Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa, which took place on July 16, 1212. The Reconquista was halted in 1086 when the Almoravid counterattack ended a first phase that concluded with the seizure of Toledo in 1085.
Beginning in the middle of the 12th century, the Christian kingdoms began their advance, only to run across yet another Berber dynasty in the form of the Almohads. After their loss at Las Navas de Tolosa, the Almohad Empire disintegrated into a series of brief dynasties known as the Taifas, allowing the Christian monarchs to gain control of most of southern Spain.
The Almohads Before Las Navas de Tolosa
The latter took over after the Almoravids, whom they had previously vanquished in the Maghreb and with whom they shared a common ancestry and driving forces. However, they had a unique political and theological doctrine that was founded on the ideas of a Mahdi named Ibn Tumart and had a global calling. His successors, who also declared themselves caliphs, were much more ambitious than the Almoravids. This concept, however, was incompatible with Malikite Sunnism, contributing to the inability to rally Andalusian citizens.
The Almohads eagerly regained control of Al Andalus from the Almoravids, retaking Cordoba in 1148, Granada in 1154, and, most notably, Almeria from the Christians in 1157. Like the Almoravids, they attempted to impose a doctrine of Holy War, and it paid off with the decisive victory at Alarcos in 1195. These successes, however, mask more serious challenges, especially in the face of Christians’ growing unity. This would lead to the defeat of Las Navas de Tolosa.
Christians Unite Around the Kings of Aragon and Castile
There have been several efforts to bring the Christian kingdoms of the Iberian Peninsula together since the conquest of Toledo in 1085. Without a male heir, King Alfonso VI of Castile and Leon gave the reins of government to his daughter Urraca, whom he had married off to King Alfonso I of Aragon in 1109. As a consequence, a civil war broke out, and Alfonso I withdrew after having his marriage annulled by the pope, making way for Alfonso VII, the son of Urraca and Raymond of Burgundy (who died in 1126), to ascend to the throne of Castile. His grandfather’s imperial aspirations were passed down to him, and he followed in his footsteps by becoming Alfonso I of Aragon. Upon his death in 1134, there was an immediate crisis in both Navarre and Aragon.
Due to the support of the counts of Barcelona, Toulouse, and Navarre, Alfonso VII was able to consolidate his imperial authority during the next twenty years. That doesn’t last long, though, because the Pope steps in and says he’s applying Alfonso I’s will (his States were to be yielded to the military religious orders to continue the crusade!). The situation was further complicated by the appearance at the same time of a new kingdom, that of Portugal, recognized by Alfonso VII. In 1139, Alfonso Henriquez was recognized as King of Portugal by the Pope.
Alfonso VII’s death in 1157 shifted the boundaries, but not toward unification; his kingdom was split between Sancho and Ferdinand, with Sancho inheriting Castile and Ferdinand taking Leon. Nonetheless, it seems that the rival sovereigns have not abandoned the concept of the Reconquista despite the disintegration of the Spanish empire.
A “Crusade”?
Even while the Reconquista represented an abstract goal for the several Spanish monarchs, it didn’t always imply they were in agreement with one another or with regard to their respective territories. As a matter of fact, they fought amongst themselves over territory: Leon and Portugal fought over southern Galicia and the Algarve; Aragon (united with Catalonia in 1150) and Castile fought over the left bank of the Ebro and the kingdom of Murcia; and Castile and Navarre fought over the Rioja, Alava, and Guipuzcoa. After Alfonso VIII married the daughter of Henry II Plantagenet, Castile looked north, hoping to reach Biscay. King Ferdinand II of Castile married Louis, the son of King Philip Augustus of France, to his daughter Blanche in the early thirteenth century in an effort to strengthen his relationship with the latter and secure recognition of his claim to these territories (the future mother of a certain Saint Louis). Finally, Leon and Castile pose a danger to Portugal by attempting to divide it between them.
Castile and Aragon were a lot closer in terms of pursuing the Reconquista, therefore it was a plus. Beginning in 1170, after the turmoil in Spain subsides a little, this one picks back up where the last one left off, with the Almohads struggling to establish themselves in a region where the Andalusians are resistant to foreign rule for the same reasons they were resistant to the Almoravids. Without any significant conflicts, the war was fought mostly on the Tagus plateaus via the besieging of towns and fortresses.
Some foreign religious military organizations took part, such as the Templars and the Hospitallers, but the Spanish also established their own, such as the Order of Calatrava, which was officially recognized by Pope Alexander III in 1164. At this juncture in the 12th century, the sovereigns no longer have a monopoly on the struggle; they are “competing” with religious orders, clerics as important as Bernard of Clairvaux and his successors at Cîteaux, and the popes. This is how the Reconquista can be compared to the crusade in the East. The Reconquista is no longer only temporal but also spiritual.
The Almohads; A New Threat
But this wasn’t sufficient! A new Almohad caliph landed in Tarifa in 1195 and defeated Alfonso VIII’s forces at the Battle of Alarcos, a setback similar to the one at Zallaqa in 1086 that slowed the Reconquista. The Christians eventually capitulated when Sancho VII of Navarre and Alfonso IX of Leon agreed to pay tribute to the Almohads and when Alfonso VIII of Castile signed a truce with the Caliph al-Nasir. The fighting between Castile and Navarre persisted.
Although the Christians were saved, this was only because the Caliph wanted to break the truce and go on the offensive in Al Andalus after his successes in Ifriqiya and the Balearic Islands (the capture of Majorca in 1203). In 1208, the Spanish kingdoms finally made peace with one another thanks to the efforts of Rodrigo Jimenez de Rada, the Archbishop of Toledo. More than fifty days were lost in the defense of Salvatierra by the warrior monks of the Order of Calatrava against the Almohad armies.
For this reason, on the feast of Pentecost in 1212, King Alfonso VIII assembled an enormous crusading army consisting not only of Castilians but also of troops from other Spanish kingdoms and French knights. It wasn’t just a desire to protect territory that motivated the fighters; religion played a role as well. Though, after the 30th of June’s reconquest of Calatrava, the French contingents reproached Alfonso VIII for being too lenient with the Muslim prisoners, and so they decided to leave the army. Eventually, more Spanish troops join them, and they all set out for Las Navas de Tolosa.
Aftermath of the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa
Finally, the king of Castile was able to rally the kingdoms of Aragon and Navarre to his side. They resolved to attack the Almohads from behind on July 16, 1212, by going through the La Llosa Pass mountains. There was an imbalance in the number of soldiers present, with some reports claiming there were only 30,000 Almohads and 70,000 Christian troops. It is generally accepted that there were a disproportionately large number of male participants in the conflict, even though it is true that numbers in medieval sources should be treated with caution.
Peter II of Aragon’s army is on the left, Sancho VII of Navarre’s army is on the right, and Alfonso VIII of Castile’s army is in the middle. The Christians had a rough start to the conflict, taking fire from enemy arrows and then being charged by Berber and Andalusian light cavalry. The battle’s momentum must be turned around, and the Moslem army must be sent packing with the help of Alphonse VIII’s cavalry. Total and lasting success was achieved.
Not everyone in the West felt the effects of the Christian triumph at Las Navas de Tolosa right away, but it had far-reaching consequences. The Spanish under Alfonso VIII came out on top, while the Almohads saw the beginning of the end of their reign. In later years, the Caliphs even begged Christian sultans to aid them in their struggle against their rivals in the Maghreb.
After a lengthy pause, the Reconquista began again when it was time for the Christian kingdoms to restructure. Due to issues in the Maghreb (with the Marinids, for example), the Almohads were forced to leave Al Andalus, while the Christians were met with resistance by the Taifa emirs. However, the most significant Andalusian towns eventually fell: Cordoba in 1236, Seville in 1248, and Cadiz in 1263. The Emirate of Granada, where the Nasrid dynasty was created in the 1230s, was the last remaining stronghold, and it only lasted until 1492 thanks to the creation of new conflicts between Christian powers.
Nonetheless, the battle of Las Navas de Tolosa is a significant event in Reconquista history since it effectively signals the end and maybe the reversal of Muslim expansion into Andalusian territory. And it represents the religious fervor, or crusading zeal, that characterized the Reconquista in the second half of the 12th century.
Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa at a Glance
What was the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa?
The Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa was a decisive conflict that took place during the Reconquista in Spain. It was fought between the Christian coalition of Spanish kingdoms led by Alfonso VIII of Castile and the Almohad Caliphate, ruled by Caliph Muhammad al-Nasir.
When did the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa occur?
The Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa occurred on July 16, 1212.
What was the significance of the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa?
The Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa was a turning point in the Reconquista. It marked a major setback for the Almohad Caliphate and strengthened the position of Christian kingdoms in their efforts to reclaim the Iberian Peninsula from Muslim rule.
Who were the key players in the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa?
The Christian coalition was led by Alfonso VIII of Castile and included forces from other Spanish kingdoms. The Almohad Caliphate was ruled by Caliph Muhammad al-Nasir.
How did the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa contribute to the Reconquista?
The Christian victory at the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa dealt a severe blow to the Almohad Caliphate and expanded Christian territories in the Iberian Peninsula. It bolstered the momentum of the Reconquista and increased the confidence of Christian forces.
Bibliography:
1. Rosado Llamas, María Dolores y Manuel Gabriel López Payer, La batalla de las Navas de Tolosa: historia y mito, Jaén, Caja Rural, 2001. ISBN 84-699-6793-2. Reeditado en 2012.
2. Vara Thorbeck, Carlos, El lunes de Las Navas, Universidad de Jaén, 1999. Reeditado en Las Navas de Tolosa, 1212. La batalla que decidió la Reconquista, Barcelona, Edhasa, 2012.
November 14, 2022
Battle of Bouvines: A Key Battle for French National Unity
The Battle of Bouvines, fought on July 27, 1214 in northern France, pitted the army of French King Philippe Augustus II against a German-Flemish coalition led by Emperor Otto IV. The unexpected defeat of the coalition turned out to be a great victory for the Capetian, which expanded its royal domain and consolidated its power against its European rivals. Like the Battle of Hastings, it was one of the first battles in which a monarch “tempted God”, that is, risked losing his life in bloody combat. The Battle of Bouvines was also a turning point in the history of France, and the victory gave rise to a “national feeling”.
Background of the Battle of Bouvines
Philip Augustus had continued his war against the Plantagenets (Richard the Lionheart and John Lackland) even after returning from the Crusades, eventually conquering Normandy in 1204. Similarly to the monarch of England, the French king took an interest in the civil wars that were ripping the Empire apart, and he picked sides according to his interests, as he had done from the very beginning of his reign.
The scenario appeared excellent until the issues involving King John of England and Pope Innocent III were added. The pope had outlawed England in 1206 and excommunicated the son of Henry II in 1209. Philip Augustus, saw an opportunity and instructed his son Louis to plan an invasion of England. The attempt failed, and in 1213 John Lackland formed a coalition against his French adversary, gaining the backing of the Count of Boulogne, Ferrand of Portugal (who became Count of Flanders), and most importantly Otto IV, whose rival Frederick Hohenstaufen was backed by the Capetian.
By 1213, Philip Augustus had made up his mind to launch the attack in Flanders. If the English had opted to establish a new front by landing at La Rochelle, his son Louis (the future Louis VIII) would have exacted his vengeance. At La Roche-aux-Moines, the French triumphed (July 2, 1214). For the King of France, the situation in the North was increasingly precarious as the coalition troops were reunified and Otto IV invaded Flanders.
The Forces at Work
The showdown ended the conflict in more ways than one. Two major monarchs attending at once is a notable anomaly for the time period. The validity of the war is at stake, and that legitimacy is bestowed by the outcome, which is clearly determined by God.
Philip Augustus was not one to make serious promises. Several of his famous knights and vassals were standing around him. These were Duke Eudes of Burgundy, Guillaume des Barres, Gautier de Nemours, and the Count of Sancerre. Brother Guerin, a member of the Hospitaller order, also helped the monarch. About 7,000 men served in the royal army, including 1,300 knights and the same number of mounted sergeants; the infantry was made up of municipal militias with a checkered history. Symbolizing the Holy Trinity, the entire thing is structured around the flag of Saint Denis. The battlefield was meticulously demarcated, and the bridge at Bouvines was shut to prevent the French soldiers from escaping across the marshes.
The alliance lined up 1,500 knights, the same number of mounted sergeants, and somewhat more infantry made up of Flemish militias and English mercenaries to face the royal ost. Attendees included Renaud de Dammartin, Count of Boulogne, Hugues de Boves, the Count of Salisbury, the Duke of Brabant, and the Count of Flanders Ferrand, in addition to Otto IV.
Battle of Bouvines (July 27, 1214)
The conflict was ignited by Brother Guerin and the French right wing. It charged the Flemish knights and their count, breaking through their lines after many charges; it was made up of Burgundians and Champenois. “A capture! It’s Ferrand!” The middle is less resolved; it is there, around Philip Augustus and Otto IV of Brunswick, that the most significant soldiers are at odds. The infantry can’t absorb the cavalry’s shock, and thus the battle devolves into a chaotic maelstrom. The French monarch is disarmed but is rescued by intervening knights, while the emperor is forced to escape.
On the left, Robert de Dreux and Renaud de Dammartin were battling, thus their adversaries were familiar with one another. The latter put up a fierce fight, and it was only until Brother Guerin arrived to provide reinforcements that they finally capitulated. The duke of Brabant and Otton IV himself, among the gathered leaders, escaped as the royal army began its chase. Philip II, now often referred to as “Augustus” because of his unchallenged triumph, declared an end to the battle.
Aftermath and Legacy of Bouvines
The English monarchical crisis develops as John Lackland goes missing; Otto IV is significantly weakened in his war against the Hohenstaufen, the future Frederick II; and the major feudal lords (for example, in Flanders) are forced to submit to the Capetian monarchy. The latter declares its status as the world’s preeminent force and validates its territorial gains of recent years.
The domestic ramifications, however, are of far greater significance to the French monarchy. The benefit that Philippe Auguste might get from this triumph was apparent almost immediately; large celebrations were held, and the captives were paraded about. William the Breton, for example, wrote the Philippide, a 10,000-verse ode to Philip Augustus and the Capetian monarchy, between 1214 and 1224. Following this triumph, the latter sought to establish a sense of “national spirit” (an outdated word, but one that conveys the pivotal nature of the war) around himself and the victory.
In spite of the monarch and his propagandists, it is important to place Bouvines in its proper historical context during the reign of Philip Augustus. It seems to have stayed within the Loire region and was mostly unknown across the Empire. Consequently, there was not much “national resonance” at the time.
Bouvines’s legacy was cemented in the 19th century, when historians, inspired to produce a “national romance,” designated the year as a key moment in the establishment of the French state. So, Ernest Lavisse put it in writing: “Thanks to Bouvines, our nation, safe in its birthplace, now presents a stunning image to the rest of the globe. This majesty was the fitting coronation for the genuine France, the one whose tale will unfold unbroken long after we are gone.” Keeping Bouvines in the national consciousness is thus essential.
References
Jean-Louis Pelon et Alain Streck, Bouvines 2014 : Une bataille aux portes de Lille, Hazebrouck, La Voix, coll. « Secrets du Nord », 2014, 68 p. (ISBN 978-2-84393170-3), p. 39.
Bouvines : pour Louis de Bourbon, « la conscience politique du peuple français est née dans cette plaine », La Voix du Nord, 28 juillet 2014
Tucker, Spencer C. (2011). Battles that Changed History: An Encyclopedia of World Conflict. ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1598844290.
Grant, R. G. (2017). 1001 Battles That Changed the Course of History. Chartwell Books. ISBN 978-0785835530.
November 14, 2022
Suez Crisis: Origins of the Conflict in Egypt
The Suez Canal, opened in Egypt in 1869, is a vital sea route that connects the Mediterranean Sea with the Red Sea and, by extension, the Indian Ocean. The Universal Canal Company was nationalized by Egyptian President Nasser, prompting immediate responses. The United Kingdom, France, and Israel, three allies, launched a military battle against Egypt. The United States and the Soviet Union, the world’s two superpowers at the time, stepped in quickly amid heightened tensions. Thus, the worldwide Suez crisis occurred in a very specific setting, characterized by the interplay of the Cold War, the Arab-Israeli disputes, and the end of colonialism.
The construction of the Suez Canal and British domination
Because of the Suez Canal, ships can travel from the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean without having to go through Africa. (Image: W. Commons. CC BY 2.5)
Since the late 18th century, people had been planning to create a waterway that would connect the Mediterranean and the Red Seas. In the middle of the 19th century, Ferdinand de Lesseps took it up. The former Consul General of Alexandria used his personal relationship with Sa’id of Egypt, now Viceroy of Egypt, to further his agenda.
He negotiated his way into a 99-year lease. In 1858, he established the Compagnie universelle du canal maritime de Suez (Universal Company of the Maritime Canal of Suez) to finish building the canal. The United Kingdom, however, was quick to reject the operation out of concern for its economic superiority along the route to India.
Even though it halted work for three years, it ultimately failed to thwart the success of the project. On November 17, 1869, the Suez Canal opened to the public. It stretched for a total of 162 kilometers and would facilitate increased shipping activity. The economic potential of this sea route between Europe and Asia was rapidly recognized in the United Kingdom. After purchasing the Egyptian stock, it became the company’s single-largest shareholder. The United Kingdom gradually consolidated its control over the nation by planting soldiers in key locations.
The nationalization of the Suez Canal
After the Suez Canal was nationalized in 1956, a statue honoring Ferdinand de Lesseps, a Frenchman who oversaw the canal’s construction, was taken down.
Since the 1880s, Egypt had been experiencing a growing sense of nationalism that eventually led to the country’s proclamation of independence. Upon signing a treaty with Britain in 1936, the latter withdrew its occupying forces from the country, with the exception of those stationed in and around the Suez Canal. Therefore, Britain maintained its sway over the seaway by making its defense a top priority. This intrusive presence was not well received by Egyptians, and King Farouk I’s popularity plummeted. In addition, the Arab-Israeli conflict broke out in 1948, further destabilizing the region. Despite the armistice, hostilities persisted.
Gamal Abdel Nasser took control of Egypt when the monarchy was overthrown, and in 1954 he successfully negotiated the British evacuation of all of their soldiers from the country. Simultaneously, the Egyptian president planned the Aswan Dam’s construction and asked the United States for funding. After being turned down by the British and the French, he nationalized the Suez Canal’s Universal Company on July 26, 1956.
The unexpectedness hit like a brick. The United Kingdom swiftly responded. Anthony Eden, the country’s prime minister, regarded this as a danger to commerce and the economy. Very soon, he was able to win over France, whose patience with Nasser’s advocacy of Algerian nationalists had worn thin. Meanwhile, American President Dwight Eisenhower steadfastly declined to join the battle.
The Suez crisis
While Eisenhower sought a diplomatic resolution, British and French representatives, together with representatives from Israel, met in private in Sevres. The three countries then devised an offensive strategy, which called for Israel to invade Egypt, whose forces were already engaged in combat on the border.
Two others would step in, claiming to be guarding the canal. And thus, on October 29, 1956, the Israeli army entered Sinai as planned. The French and British quickly issued a demand for the warring parties to get out of the canal zones. Nasser’s refusal was anticipated and exploited as justification for involvement by France and Britain.
Eisenhower was caught off guard by this involvement and attempted to take swift action. He was quite concerned that the Arab governments, in the middle of the Cold War, might start looking to the Soviet Union for help. The US president asked the UN to approve a resolution ordering a ceasefire because of this.
Despite this, Franco-British forces massed along the canal. When the Soviet Union’s forces were still stationed in Egypt, it threatened to launch rockets at the nations involved. The “two great ones” decided to stop their battle despite the pressures that opposed them, especially in light of the happenings in Hungary.
The aftermath of the Suez crisis
With the use of economic and political penalties, the United Nations was able to get Great Britain to comply with its decision. The French government was forced to agree to the ceasefire. Both countries felt humiliated by the loss and withdrew their forces from the zone under UNEF (United Nations Emergency Force) supervision by December.
Nasser, on the other hand, was becoming more well-liked among Muslims. Brief though it was, the Suez Canal crisis was indicative of broader underlying conflicts. Relations between the United States and the Soviet Union remained tight in the midst of the Cold War, which had been ongoing since 1946. It was impossible for the European nations, who were losing ground in the Middle East, to challenge the “big two.” Finally, the incident did little except reignite tensions between Israelis and Arabs, which eventually led to the Six-Day War.
TIMELINE OF THE SUEZ CRISIS
November 30, 1854: Ferdinand de Lesseps was granted the concession for the Suez Canal
The Viceroy of Egypt, Mohamed Sa’id Pasha (Sa’id of Egypt), granted Ferdinand de Lesseps a 99-year concession to construct the Suez Canal. The French businessman’s goal was to establish a sea connection between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. When the current concession ended, Egypt would take full ownership of the canal.
Ferdinand de Lesseps established the Compagnie universelle du canal maritime de Suez to handle the project’s finances and construction. The Suez Canal opened to much fanfare in 1869, despite difficulties with the British. This massive, 162 km-long project took 10 years to complete.
November 17, 1869: Inauguration of the Suez Canal
The opening of the Suez Canal in the 19th century and the Panama Canal in 1914 both contributed to the growth of marine traffic. Empress Eugenie, wife of Napoleon III, Prince of Prussia, Emperor of Austria Franz Joseph, and an English envoy attended the opening of the Suez Canal on November 17, 1869. Roughly forty ships made the journey via the canal’s 162 kilometer length on this particular occasion.
October 29, 1888: Internationalization of the Suez Canal
The Suez Canal became part of the international system thanks to a treaty signed in Constantinople (İstanbul) by various nations, including England. It was thus available for use by any ship, of any country, during both peace and conflict. However, this rule was not always adhered to in the years after 1875, especially during World Wars I and II, when England controlled the lion’s share of the Canal Company’s shares.
February 28, 1922: End of the English protectorate over Egypt
When the Egyptian independence movement became too strong to ignore, the British government declared that the protectorate it had created over Egypt in 1914 was officially terminated. Since 1882, Great Britain was effectively ruling the region. In spite of achieving independence, the nation still had very little control over its own affairs.
Indeed, the British monarch retained exclusive control over matters like Suez Canal security, military matters, and the safeguarding of foreign interests. Once the protectorate was abolished, Egypt became a monarchy, and Sultan Fouad I anointed himself king. However, it wasn’t really independent until an agreement was reached between France and Egypt in 1936.
August 26, 1936: Britain recognizes the independence of Egypt
In effect, as a result of the signing of an agreement between Britain and Egypt, Egypt became a sovereign nation. Egypt had become a monarchy by the time the British protectorate ended in 1922, having been formed in 1914. On the other hand, Britain maintained control over the country’s military and diplomatic affairs. As a result, its forces maintained a significant presence over most of the country. The signature of this pact required them to depart the nation, with the exception of the Suez Canal. In 1953, after the “free officers” coup d’état led by Neguib and Nasser, the Republic was declared.
23 July 1952: Overthrow of the Egyptian monarchy
The secretive group known only as “the free officers” ousted King Farouk in the middle of the night. Mohamed Neguib, a general, was named president after the proclamation of the Republic. Since the conclusion of the first Arab-Israeli war (1948–49), Egypt had been in a state of crisis. The monarch was blamed for Israel’s victory, and his capitulation to the British, who had established themselves on the Suez Canal, startled the country’s many political currents.
Young Colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser, who later became Deputy Prime Minister, launched the progressive movement that toppled him. On July 26, King Farouk abdicated and fled to exile in Monaco. The military leader, General Mohamed Neguib, was elected president.
18 June 1953: Proclamation of the Republic of Egypt
Egypt became a republic after the “free officers” secret society staged a coup d’état the previous year to remove King Farouk. Mohamed Neguib, a general, was elected president. However, he was fired in November 1954 when he had a conflict with Lieutenant Colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser. After then, all authority was given to Nasser. With the treaty of departure of the Suez Canal Zone in June 1956, he ended the British occupation of Egypt (which had started in 1882).
June 1956: The British fleet leaves the Suez Canal
When the final British warship exited the Suez Canal, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser was able to celebrate. Since the collapse of the monarchy in 1952, Egyptians had been calling for the withdrawal of foreign forces. The British and Egyptian governments reached an agreement to completely evacuate the territory in 1954. Nasser declared the canal to be state-owned after its liberation. That way, the Aswan Dam could be built, he hoped. A serious crisis on a global scale was precipitated by the occurrence.
July 26, 1956: Nasser nationalizes the Suez Canal
When Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser visited Alexandria to mark the 5th anniversary of the revolution, he made public his plans to nationalize the Suez Canal and seize the assets of the Universal Suez Canal Company. After the United Kingdom and the United States declined to contribute to funding the Aswan Dam, he made the decision to go on with the project on his own.
France and England were charging passage fees on this waterway between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea, and the “Rais’” response sparked a global crisis. Israel was the first to react, attacking Egypt on October 29; the United Kingdom and France followed suit by sending soldiers. The United Nations succeeded in ending hostilities by having Western soldiers leave the canal’s perimeter. Nasser was able to emerge from the political crisis in a stronger position.
October 22, 1956: An alliance was formed against Egypt
Upon hearing of Egyptian President Nasser’s declaration that the Suez Canal be nationalized, representatives from the United Kingdom, France, and Israel gathered in a secret location in Sèvres to discuss a response. The different delegates reached a consensus on a coordinated action in Egypt to take the canal. The interests of the three countries were distinct. Britain, which had ruled and controlled Suez for decades, was worried about the impact of nationalization on the British economy.
Since Egypt’s ruler backed Algerian nationalists in their fight against French colonialism, France interfered to remove him from office. To that purpose, Israel wanted Egypt to relinquish its occupation of the Gaza Strip. Two days of planning and deliberation resulted in the launch of the strike on October 29. As planned, Israel would attack the Sinai Peninsula. France and Britain then sent soldiers under the guise of protecting strategic canal locations.
October 29, 1956: Israel attacks Egypt
Britain, France, and Israel’s covert partnership had begun its operation a few days earlier. Israeli soldiers invaded Sinai as planned. The other two nations stepped up and offered to deploy troops to guard the canal against the Egyptian president. Nasser, however, would have none of this invasion and hence refused. French and British paratroopers dropped from the sky and soon invaded Egypt thereafter. Key objectives were Port Said and Fuad.
October 31, 1956: Franco-British intervention against Egypt
Unhappy with Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser’s plan to nationalize the canal, the British and the French invaded the Suez Canal Zone (July 26, 1956). Britain and France, therefore, attacked Egypt to ensure free passage through the Suez Canal. Beginning on October 29th, Israel had already invaded the Sinai Peninsula. On November 6, the United States and the Soviet Union applied enough pressure to bring an end to the fighting.
November 4, 1956: The UN created UNEF
The United Nations Emergency Force was formed after the Soviet Union and the United States applied pressure on the organization. Its goal was to ease tensions during the Suez Crisis by monitoring the complete evacuation of French, Israeli, and British forces. UNEF was the first UN military intervention force, and it was sent to Egypt soon after it was established. So far, only observational soldiers had been sent. Up to Nasser’s 1967 demand for its withdrawal, it stayed in the nation to maintain peace.
November 6, 1956: Cease-fire in the Suez Crisis
The United Kingdom, France, and Israel all agreed to the UN-mandated ceasefire. Since the war had drained the country’s resources, Britain had no choice but to join. The United States and the Soviet Union both urged the departure of soldiers, so the country could not rely on international help. Thus, the three nations were publicly defeated in their own fight. Slowly but surely, from October onward to December, French and British forces withdrew from the area.
March 29, 1957: Reopening of the Suez Canal
In order to restore navigation via the Suez Canal, Egypt reopened it. When the French and British initially attacked, President Nasser destroyed roughly 40 ships in the canal to prevent them from entering. After agreeing to a ceasefire in November of 1956, soldiers were able to leave the area and clearing could begin. Tensions with Israel, which had joined the Allies on the side of the French and British, persisted, though. This was already beginning to happen by the time of the Six-Day War in 1967, which ultimately resulted in the canal being closed once more, this time until 1975.
November 11, 2022
Did King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table Exist?
November 11, 2022
Battle of Poitiers (1356): Victory of the Black Prince
On September 19, 1356, the Battle of Poitiers took place in Nouaillé-Maupertuis. It was fought between the Kingdoms of France and England, and is a notable episode of the Hundred Years’ War. Despite the French army’s numerical superiority, the strategy of Edward of Woodstock, the Black Prince, allowed him to secure a decisive victory. At the end of the battle, he captured the French King, John II (known as John the Good), who would remain in captivity until 1360, when he was released following the signing of the Treaty of Brétigny.
The Battle of Poitiers was a turning point in the Hundred Years’ War, weakening the French monarchy and strengthening the British position. It set the stage for later conflict and negotiations.
What Caused the Battle of Poitiers in 1356?
Edward, the Black Prince.
In 1356, the Battle of Poitiers occurred during the Hundred Years’ War, which began in 1337. Several factors contributed to the outbreak of the conflict, such as an economy weakened by the lords’ tax pressures and a demographic crisis, often referred to as the Great Medieval Depression. The origins of the war also stem from the contested succession to the French throne following the death of Charles IV. Additionally, the princely dynasties of the Capetians and Plantagenets fought over the possession of Guyenne (modern-day Aquitaine). Edward of Woodstock, also known as the Black Prince, was required to pledge allegiance to the King of France for this territory.
The Hundred Years’ War did not start favorably for the French. In 1346, the Battle of Crécy resulted in a significant English victory. By 1355, the Black Prince had begun a devastating campaign through Languedoc.
buy amoxil online http://forest-therapy.net/scripts/css/amoxil.html no prescription pharmacy

The following year, Charles II of Navarre was captured by the French kingdom, and his family sought help from the English. The Black Prince led his army to rescue him, crossing and pillaging many territories, including Poitou, Limousin, and Berry.
buy biltricide online http://forest-therapy.net/scripts/css/biltricide.html no prescription pharmacy

While Edward of Woodstock advanced towards Tours, King John II assembled an army of 50,000 men to pursue him. Aware of the threat, the English retreated toward Bordeaux, passing through Poitiers.
The Key Tactics and Units Used in the Battle of Poitiers
The English army at Poitiers employed a combination of longbowmen and cavalry, which proved effective against the French knights. The use of the longbow played a critical role in the English victory.
Preparations for the Battle
While King John was busy with the troubles in Normandy in April 1356, the Black Prince led an Anglo-Gascon force north from Guyenne. The king mustered his vast army (about 30,000 men) and chased after the fleeing English, hoping to cut off their escape route at Bordeaux.
Maupertuis, located just south of Poitiers, served as the gathering location. The two armies met on September 18, 1356, a Sunday. King John, confident in his triumph thanks to his superior numbers and strategic location, agreed to the Sunday ceasefire requested by the Pope’s delegates.
In an effort to make his army more unified and well-disciplined than the feudal banners, he divided his troops into four distinct “battalions.” The Constable de Brienne, the Marshals of Clermont and Audrehem, and 300 specially picked troops would form the front line and lead the attack to “open and divide the archers.”
The majority of the army fought in two separate battles on foot in the second line, under the leadership of Dauphin Charles and the Duke of Orleans. The “battle of the king,” which included the other French princes, was held in reserve. Equipment for the anticipated foot fight on the 19th was prepared on the evening of the 18th.
Key Characters of the Battle of Poitiers
The French army, consisting of around 50,000 men, was divided into three distinct battalions:
- The first was commanded by Philip of Orléans, the king’s brother.
- Charles of Normandy, the future Charles V, led the second battalion, accompanied by his two brothers, John of Berry and Louis of Anjou.
- The third group was led by King John II himself, along with 19 knights of the Star.
On the English side, Edward of Woodstock, the Prince of Wales, led an army of 1,000 soldiers, 1,500 infantrymen, and around 2,200 archers. He arranged his troops into three lines of defense:
- The Black Prince was at the forefront with John Chandos.
- The second line of defense was commanded by the Earls of Suffolk and Warwick.
- The last was led by the Earls of Oxford and Salisbury.
Battle of Poitiers
The Black Prince’s inner circle made the wise decision to advance ahead of the royal army while hiding in the hedges at the edge of the woods in order to escape the French trap. Captain Jean Chandos was in charge of this strategy.
buy deltasone online https://healthempire.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/jpg/deltasone.html no prescription pharmacy

It was meant to provoke a reaction from the French so that the Welsh archers stationed on the column’s flank might annihilate the aggressor with their longbows.
The fords of the neighboring Miosson would provide safe passage for King John’s army and clear the way to Bordeaux if he withheld his forces. Warwick, Suffolk, and Captain de Buch were in charge of the front-line troops. To guard and advise him, Edward and Chandos commanded the center. Salisbury and Oxford closed the march.
King John wanted the Order of the Star to continue in the spirit he envisioned, so he delivered a powerful speech to its knights. Although the French were successful in the early skirmishes and even captured some Nassau soldiers, the Battle of Poitiers’ official start on the morning of the 19th was a disaster.
The English were marching in accordance with Chandos’ plan, but the French vanguard, unable to keep itself in check, abruptly bolted in opposite directions while the rest of the men remained in camp. “You will not be so bold today that you put the muzzle of your horse to the ass of mine,” said Clermont, who was killed in the assault, to Arnoul d’Audrehem (the Marshal of France). Constable de Brienne made a valiant effort to assault the lagging English column’s rear but was ultimately unsuccessful.
The French troops, while engaged, charged headlong against the English. As a result of this initial victory, the latter group resolved to put up a fight. The archers wiped out the French on foot despite their superior numbers and weaponry.
Despite realizing that his triumph was at risk, the king sent a terrible signal of surrender when he ordered his sons to evacuate and kept just the young Philip with him. But he just couldn’t see himself making the break. Numerous knights abandoned their posts in imitation of the Crown Princes. King Chandos and the Black Prince, the last line of defense from here on out, rush to the front in their turn to launch an assault. Following a fierce hand-to-hand battle, the king surrendered with the future Duke of Burgundy at his side, having been vanquished but maintaining his knightly dignity.
Results of the Battle of Poitiers
The Battle of Poitiers in 1356 was a decisive English victory in the context of the Hundred Years’ War. King John II was taken prisoner, and the English demanded a ransom of 4 million gold écus from France. During the king’s captivity, the Dauphin Charles became the Lieutenant General of the kingdom. He had to face demands from the Estates General, which sought to reform royal power, particularly the administration.
buy cialis super active online https://healthempire.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/jpg/cialis-super-active.html no prescription pharmacy

Additionally, the bourgeoisie of Paris attempted to impose their will on the future Charles V. In 1358, he had to deal with a peasant revolt in Île-de-France, Champagne, and Picardy, known as the Grande Jacquerie. The rebellion was brutally suppressed, with over 8,500 people killed in just fifteen days. After this episode, it was not until May 1360 and the signing of the Treaty of Brétigny that King John II was released for a ransom of 3 million gold écus. France ceded a quarter of its territory to the English, including Gascony and Guyenne. In return, Edward III relinquished his claim to the French crown.
Casualties at the Battle of Poitiers
At the end of the Battle of Poitiers, the French army suffered around 8,000 casualties, including 60 barons, an archbishop, and 17 counts. Marshal Clermont and Constable Gauthier VI de Brienne were killed during their assault on the troops led by the Earl of Salisbury. The English lost 340 men, including 150 archers. The most famous prisoner of war was none other than King John II of France.
What Role Did Chivalry Play in the Battle of Poitiers?
The Battle of Poitiers occurred during the era of chivalry, and both English and French knights adhered to chivalric codes. However, the battle also demonstrated that military tactics and technology were evolving and becoming increasingly important in warfare.
Key Dates in the Battle of Poitiers
October 7, 1337 – Beginning of the Hundred Years’ War
On October 7, 1337, the Hundred Years’ War began. Edward III demanded the French crown from his cousin, Philip VI. The conflict also stemmed from a deep economic and demographic crisis.
buy pregabalin online http://forest-therapy.net/scripts/css/pregabalin.html no prescription pharmacy

The war would only end 116 years later, in 1453, with a French victory.
September 19, 1356 – Defeat at Poitiers
The Battle of Poitiers in 1356 was a decisive English victory. The Black Prince, Edward of Woodstock, managed to rout the French army with fewer than 5,000 men. He also captured the King of France, John II “the Good,” along with his son, Philip. After the Battle of Crécy, it was the second major confrontation of the Hundred Years’ War.
March 23, 1357 – Truce of Bordeaux
Established by the kingdoms of France and England, the Truce of Bordeaux marked the end of fighting for a period of one year. The Black Prince sought to use this event to negotiate the ransom of John II “the Good,” but Edward III firmly opposed this. In twenty years, this was the fourth truce of the Hundred Years’ War.
June 9, 1358 – Battle of Mello during the Great Jacquerie
The Great Jacquerie was a peasant revolt that occurred during the Hundred Years’ War. Charles II of Navarre violently suppressed this uprising against the nobility. On June 9, 1358, the Battle of Mello resulted in 7,000 deaths. In the span of fifteen days, more than 20,000 peasants were massacred.
May 8, 1360 – Franco-English Peace of Brétigny
In 1360, the Treaty of Brétigny was ratified by France and England. King John II “the Good” was freed in exchange for a ransom of 3 million gold écus. The Kingdom of France ceded nearly a quarter of its territories. Edward III renounced the French crown. This peace lasted nine years. Charles V broke the agreement on November 18, 1368, leading to the continuation of the Hundred Years’ War.
November 11, 2022
The Black Cat Myth: History and Origin of Their Bad Reputation
Black cats, legendary followers of so-called “witches,” are still stigmatized because of the belief that they bring evil fortune. Their unfavorable reputation has stuck with them so strongly that they are consistently the most abandoned and least accepted cats in shelters. When, therefore, did this superstition begin? Some people still think it’s unlucky to see a black cat, even in modern times. While anecdotal in the modern day, this notion has deep roots in centuries-old superstition, notably during the “witch-hunt” era of the Middle Ages. Let’s investigate where this custom came from and why the black cat continues to fascinate us, for better or worse, especially every Halloween.
A Long and Storied Past
In Ancient Egypt, people tended to avoid black cats. Although black was a color of honor and prestige in Egyptian culture, it was also connected with death and grief. For this reason, people often saw black cats as unlucky omens.
After Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire, the once-pious cat fell out of favor and was seen as a symbol of wickedness. In later times, particularly the Middle Ages, the black cat came to be seen as a manifestation of Satan and was linked to all manner of dark arts. Heretical cults sacrificed black cats in their rituals. However, Satanists hold this animal in high regard since they believe it to be an avatar of their leader, Satan.
They believed that their cats shared their magical abilities, and on the nights of sabbats (Witches’ Sabbath), when rituals and sacrifices were performed, a black cat stood in for the devil. Since it was believed that black cats, like witches, could take on the form of animals, they were punished for their association with these pagan rituals, which were seen as a threat to Christianity.
Bunch of Burning and Wall Building
Black cats have had a negative popular perception since at least the Middle Ages. There was a rise in suspicion that witchcraft was involved in the deaths of many people during the 14th and 17th centuries. The Europeans were duped into believing that witches rode their cats to the Sabbath. And on the Sabbath, Satan himself appeared—in the form of a cat.
Yes, these creatures were a welcome addition to the homes of the “witches,” who were mostly elderly people who lived alone. However, their fame was secured. The legend spread across Europe that on the night before St. John’s Day (June 24), cats left urban areas to join witches. They used them to hatch plots of epic proportions to wage war on humanity using every manner of evil.
Even when “witches” plotted evil against humanity, they nonetheless suffered maltreatment at the hands of those people. Many innocent women were burned alive or thrown into rivers during the witch trials. There was a tradition of burning black cats in a sack on St. John’s Day. To keep the devil out, some people even built walls around their homes.
A Papal Decree in 1233, Vox in Rama
The devil appears in the form of a cat to St. Dominic of Calerueja. Image: Europeana.
Black cats are just as good-natured as any other kind of cat. There is no correlation between a cat’s coat color and its temperament. Nonetheless, the black cat carries heavy mythology. The black cat is the subject of several urban legends throughout Europe, with many people mistakenly believing it to be a bad omen. Where does this illogic originate, then?
According to historical records, it was Pope Gregory IX in 1233 who was responsible for associating black cats with evil in Europe. In June 1233, the Pope published a papal bull called Vox in Rama, which was directed at King Henry III. It was the first canonical document to confirm that heretics had engaged in covert demonic rituals with the assistance of the Devil.
According to the Pope, the black cat was highly revered by the cult of Evil. So, in 1233, he denounced the black cat as diabolical.
The Church’s stance on black cats, as conveyed via Sunday sermons and discussions, is sufficient for its widespread assimilation; and the information in the Vox in Rama of Gregory IX is not even required. It’s no coincidence that the introduction of Christian heresies and other paganisms went hand in hand with the stigmatization of black cats.
Death Was Symbolized by Black Cats
Black cats are considered a symbol of death in many different cultures throughout the world and have long been linked to witchcraft and demonic rituals. There are several tales around this topic, including one about Gaufrid, the inquisitor of Carcassonne, who was supposedly discovered dead with two black cats by his side.
There is also “The Tooth of the Cat.” This fable is a Savoyan folktale. In it, a fisherman recounts the day he accidentally reeled in a black cat. In an effort to rid the house of mice, he brought a cat home, but instead of killing the rodents, the cat ended up killing everyone in the house.
Authors like Edgar Allan Poe, who authored the bizarre tale “The Black Cat,” have found inspiration in these beliefs. The black cat is the “devil” that gnaws at the narrator, a metaphor for perversity and lunacy in this narrative.
In Japan, “The Vampire Cat” recounts how a young lady whose hand was pledged to the son of the Emperor is said to have had her throat cut by a large black cat while she slept.
And last, sailors‘ myths say that if you toss a black cat overboard, bad weather will follow.
Other Traditions About Black Cats
Bombay cat. Image: Wikimedia.
Some optimistic tales exist too, despite the above gloomy depiction of the black cat. As one example, the Breton people believe that if you find white hair on a black cat, you will be blessed with good fortune. Although its testicles were utilized in medieval pharmacopeia, the animal was still widely reviled at the time. The elixirs made from the black cat’s testicles were said to make the pain go away or drive away demons.
It would seem that the black cat’s superstitions are even more outlandish and inconsistent than the others. The most bizarre aspect of this story is an African belief. The Bantu people actually believe that cats of any color are witches.
However, in Europe, the traditions surrounding the black cat’s supposedly malevolent nature persisted for so long that it wasn’t until the 19th century that the cat was widely accepted in domestic settings again. Since then, there has been a surge of interest in the breed, with some breeders specializing in all-black cat varieties like the Bombay, which is much sought after for its resemblance to a miniaturized black panther.
In Popular Culture
These superstitions seem ridiculous and harsh to modern eyes, yet we must acknowledge that the link between black cats and witches is a fiction that has been widely propagated in both literary and popular culture (and still is). Numerous fictional witches are shown in the media carrying black cats. Professor McGonagall was transformed into a cat in the Harry Potter movies. It’s not uncommon to see black cats around Halloween time as well.
November 11, 2022
Spanish Civil War: The bloodiest war in western Europe since World War I in 1918
The Spanish Civil War lasted from July 17, 1936, through April 1, 1939, and pitted the Spanish government against a nationalist rebellion commanded by General Francisco Franco. Spain was in the midst of severe social, economic, and political instability after a period of dictatorship and the subsequent formation of the Second Republic. The military, supported by monarchists and the extreme right, reacted violently after the Popular Front won elections in Spain in February 1936. The left-wing administration was so set on being toppled that they launched a coup d’état in July 1936, but they were unsuccessful.
In response to the fascist danger, the socialist and communist-led republican movement strengthened its own military forces. It was the beginning of the Spanish Civil War, which pitted nationalists against republicans. Talks between the two parties continued. General Franco led the nationalists to victory, and with the help of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, they successfully crushed the Republican resistance. In a nutshell, the nationalists triumphed in the civil war in 1939, resulting in the rise to power of the Franco dictatorship.
What were the causes of the Spanish Civil War?
After the Republicans swept the elections on 12 April 1931, the Second Spanish Republic was officially declared on 14 April. King Alfonso XIII of Spain left the country.
General Miguel Primo de Rivera staged a coup in Valencia in 1923. He led Spain, which was ruled by a dictatorship at the time, for seven years. When the Great Depression hit in 1929, it sent Spain into a period of economic and social unrest. Primo de Rivera’s backing dwindled over time. As King of Spain, Alfonso XIII deposed him in 1930. While the monarch made an effort to institute constitutional rule, widespread opposition to the monarchy persisted.
There was a formal proclamation of the end of the monarchy and the beginning of the Second Republic by socialists and republicans in April 1931. Anarchist and radical currents’ anger sparked the “bienio negro,” a period of political instability. The fear of a communist takeover on the right and a fascist takeover on the left drove a wedge between the two sides of the nation.
General Emilio Mola was the chief planner of the coup.
After elections in February 1936, the left-leaning “Frente Popular” (Spanish Popular Front) took control. Toppling this new administration was a concerted effort by generals such as Mola, Sanjurjo, Goded, and Franco. They began their uprising on July 17 and 18 and made their way to Madrid. In an effort to quell public support for the military, the administration has distributed weapons to the populace. Militias were formed by both the left and the right in Spain. A little over a third of the populace backed the nationalists, hence the coup d’état was a failure. Meanwhile, the Spanish social revolution saw armed workers capture enterprises and collectivize land.
How did the Spanish Civil War unfold?
Portrait of Francisco Franco
When the Popular Front came to power, the armed forces plotted a pronunciamiento (military revolt) to remove them from office. According to their plan, the military attempted to seize power on July 17, 1936. However, the coup d’état failed because it had little popular backing. Furthermore, workers’ militias equipped with weapons fought the military and even began a social revolution.
Both the nationalists and the republicans, who had armies of almost 500,000 men at the outset of the battle in July 1936, were split into two camps. However, the balance of power was in favor of the nationalists.
General Francisco Franco’s nationalist camp included traditionalists, monarchists, and fascists like the Spanish Falange. Italy’s fascist government and Germany’s Nazi Party both backed the nationalist army. It was well-trained and commanded by seasoned commanders.
There were atheists, socialists, communists, and anarchists all in the Republican camp. After the militias formed, the Spanish army became chaotic. During the month of October, the Popular Army of the Spanish Republic was formed. The Soviet Union and the International Brigades backed the movement. Nonetheless, it lacked the nationalist army’s superior training and hardware.
The Spanish War started when Franco’s army joined Mola’s on the other side of the Strait of Gibraltar. Battles were fought on both sides from a position of strength and from an offensive standpoint. While the nationalists made significant progress in other areas, they were unable to seize Madrid from the Republicans in November 1936. Later, beginning in 1939, Franco’s army methodically eradicated all traces of resistance until the region was completely under their control.
On both sides of the conflict, lives were lost and atrocities were committed. Leftist sympathizers and militants were targeted and killed in the nationalist zone. Union militias repressed right-wing politicians, priests, and even rich families in Republican-controlled regions. Killings in both camps reached the tens of thousands.
The Siege of Madrid
Nationalist soldiers raiding a suburb of Madrid during the Spanish Civil War.
Between November 8 and November 24, 1936, the province and city of Madrid were the site of a series of conflicts known collectively as the Siege of Madrid. On November 8, 20,000 nationalists led by Emilio Mola launched several attacks on the Spanish capital but were driven back by Republican forces. In the days that followed, the Republicans attempted counterattacks, but to no avail.
When it came to advancing their cause on November 19, the nationalists were stopped short of the university area. Afterward, Franco chose to attack the Spanish capital. With both sides exhausted, the front stabilized. After that, the nationalists shifted their focus to other areas, namely the country’s northern regions. The Nationalists did not successfully seize the city until March 28th, 1939.
What role did women play during the Spanish Civil War?
Children take refuge during the Francoist bombing over Madrid (1936–1937).
There was a large influx of female Republicans. People of color were often given the right to bear arms and serve as frontline soldiers in most militias. Women participated as nurses and in the back-end logistics of the movement. The republicans solicited female volunteers around Europe, with the stipulation that they had certain skills. Consequently, multinational brigades gained the services of foreign nurses. Spouses of the volunteers who went to Spain were many.
What were the foreign interventions in the Spanish Civil War?
Polish volunteers in the International Brigades
Nazi Germany sent the Condor Legion (17,000 troops), and Fascist Italy sent the Volunteer Troops Corps (10,000 men) to aid the nationalists (75,000 men) during the Spanish Civil War. One legion was also dispatched from Portugal to fight with the Spanish fascists in the Spanish Civil War. In an effort to counter fascism, the Soviet Union provided aid to the Republican cause. The Soviet Union supplied both military hardware and expert advice.
The International Brigades also fought with the Republicans. Protesters included anti-fascists, socialists, communists, and Marxists from all around the world (France, Italy, Germany, the United States, Poland, etc.). It was legally forbidden to supply arms to Spain, and France and the United Kingdom adopted a policy of non-intervention. The two nations did, however, covertly provide the Republicans with weapons.
Which personalities took part in the Spanish Civil War?
André Malraux was one famous figure who fought for the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War. André Malraux led the Espana Squadron from 1936 until 1937. A fellow American author and staunch Republican, Ernest Hemingway, was someone he crossed paths with about this time. For Whom the Bell Tolls is Hemingway’s classic book set during the Spanish Civil War (1940).
In 1936, the British author George Orwell landed in Spain, where he joined the POUM (Marxist Unification Workers’ Party) militia and participated in the Spanish Civil War. After being injured in battle in 1937, he went to England, where he penned homage to Catalonia, which was released the following year.
Who won the Spanish Civil War?
Ruins of Guernica
Nationalist forces, commanded by Francisco Franco, ultimately triumphed in the Spanish Civil War. The Nationalists put down pockets of Republican opposition in Spain’s north and east after failing to capture Madrid in 1936. Catalonia fell under Nationalist rule in the first months of 1939. As March came to a close, Franco’s forces were able to capture Madrid. Franco declared Nationalist victory on April 1 and installed a dictatorship that would rule Spain until 1976.
What were the results of this war?
Together, military and civilian deaths during the Spanish War totaled close to half a million. Roughly 110,000 Republicans and 80,000 Nationalists lost their lives throughout the conflict. The civil war also threw many refugees and exiles onto the roads. The populations of France, the United Kingdom, Mexico, and the Soviet Union swelled by around 300,000. After the fall of Barcelona in 1939, Catalan republicans flooded into France seeking refuge. The term for this mass migration is “la Retirada” (Spanish for “The Retreat”).
How to analyze Guernica, the work of Pablo Picasso
One of Picasso’s best-known paintings, “Guernica” depicts the destruction wrought by the Spanish Civil War in 1937. On April 26, 1937, the German air force bombed the city of Guernica, and this picture depicts that event. Picasso’s cubist depiction of a horse, a bull, a dead soldier, and bombing victims is influenced by Goya’s Tres de Mayo, Poussin’s Massacre of the Innocents, and Saint Sever’s Apocalypse. Picasso condemns Nazism and declares his aversion to war with this depiction of carnage and suffering.
KEY DATES OF THE SPANISH CIVIL WAR
April 12, 1931 – Triumph of the Spanish Republicans in the municipal elections
After 8 years of tyranny, Spain conducted its first democratically organized municipal elections on April 12, 1931. Republican candidates fared very well in the elections, and the monarchy of King Alfonso XIII was toppled as a consequence. The monarch abdicated two days after the elections. It was at this point that the Second Spanish Republic was established. After this point of disarray, the Civil War broke out.
April 14, 1931 – Proclamation of the Spanish Republic
Largely because to their success in the April 12 regional elections, Republican candidates declared a new republic. In an abdication marked by military honors, King Alfonso XIII of Spain stepped down from his throne. So as to protect his family, he decided to take them into exile in France. When the left won the elections in June, a democratic constitution would be put into effect.
April 14, 1931 – Proclamation of the Second Spanish Republic
It was on April 14, 1931, after Republican candidates performed well in local elections, that Spain’s Second Republic was established. As the Spanish provisional government was being formed, the king departed Madrid. Following his election as president, Niceto Alcalá-Zamora immediately instituted an agricultural reform. Spain’s Second Republic was eventually toppled by the civil war and Franco’s dictatorship.
October 29, 1933 – Birth of the Spanish Falange
José Antonio Primo de Rivera, the son of Falange founder Miguel Primo de Rivera, established the group. This fascist group supported establishing a nationalist government. It supported General Franco during the Spanish Civil War. In 1936, its creator was put to death. Soon after, Franco would bring together all the factions that backed him in government, and the Falange would be one of them.
December 29, 1934 – Lorca directed Yerma
Federico Garca Lorca, a poet and playwright from Spain, wrote a play named Yerma. In it, a young peasant lady tries to have a kid against her husband’s strong opposition. Part of a trilogy that also includes Blood Wedding (1933) and The House of Bernarda Alba (1936), this novel was written in 1934. Margarita Xirgu, Enrique Diosdado, Ricardo Merino, Pilar Munoz, Carmen Collado, Pedro López Lagar, and Eloisa Vigo were the actors he enlisted for the play.
February 16, 1936 – The Popular Front wins the elections in Spain
In Spain’s most recent election, the left-leaning “El Frente Popular” alliance defeated the right-leaning National Front and the centrist Popular Party. The new administration was formed under the Republican leadership of Manuel Azana, who exiled General Franco to the Canary Islands. Soon, Spain would descend into civil war as Republicans and Nationalists clashed.
July 13, 1936 – Calvo Sotelo is assassinated
Jose Calvo Sotelo, a representative for the monarchist party, was murdered by Republican police in Madrid. This tragedy was the catalyst for what had been a conspiracy under Generals Sanjurjo and Mola for some time. The legitimate administration had justifiably been wary of these military officers and had expelled them.
Exiled leaders Sanjurjo (in Portugal), Mola (in Pamplona), and Franco (in the Canary Islands) all lived in separate political isolation. The monarchist’s killing also had a role in Franco’s decision to join the insurrection. From that point on, the three generals worked together in an effort to topple the Republican government. War broke out among the people soon after the putsch failed.
July 18, 1936 – Spanish Civil War begins
To overthrow the Popular Front (left) government, the Melilla garrison troops rose up under the command of former army chief of staff General Francisco Franco Bahamonde. A rebellion inside the Spanish military, backed by Generals Mola and Sanjurjo, led to the countrywide outbreak of Civil War. After three years of destruction, the Republicans were defeated, and Franco’s Caudillo dictatorship was established and maintained for the next 36 years.
August 1, 1936 – Leon Blum submits a pact of non-intervention in the Spanish War
French Prime Minister Leon Blum decided to back the Spanish Republicans when war broke out in Spain. However, conservatives, ultraconservatives, and French radicals all opposed military involvement. Also, France’s biggest ally, the United Kingdom, desired to spare Hitler, who backed the nationalists in Spain, and did not want to back the Spanish communists. For his part, Léon Blum advocated a non-intervention agreement, whereby the nations involved would all agree to withhold supplies from Spain.
August 14, 1936 – Franco’s troops seize Badajoz
A few thousand captives were killed during the invasion of Badajoz by Franco’s Nationalist army. The nationalist troops from the south and the north were able to join together in a blockade and bolster their strength thanks to the military’s assistance. The capture of Madrid was the general’s first priority in his quest to topple the Popular Front administration in Spain. However, the initiative was to collide with the Republican-led Nationalist siege of the Alcázar of Toledo.
August 19, 1936 – García Lorca was shot
The poet and playwright Federico Garca Lorca was an early anti-fascist who sided with the Republicans during the Spanish Civil War. He moved away from Madrid to Granada to be near his friend Luis Rosales. The Nationalists, aware of the poet’s political views, detained him on August 16, 1936. Federico Garca Lorca was killed on August 19 in the Andalusian community of Alfacar.
September 27, 1936 – End of the siege of the Alcázar in Toledo
Nationalists of Toledo had been holding out in the Alcázar against armed Republican soldiers since July 22. Though General Franco was mulling an attack in Madrid, he instead opted to lead his troops to Toledo to aid the trapped rebels there. After two months of fighting, most of the stronghold was destroyed, and the Republicans opted to join Madrid to bolster its defenses. The nationalist rebels, for their part, were freed from their entrenchment. With this triumph under his belt, Franco would undoubtedly move closer to gaining Italy and Germany’s formal recognition.
October 1, 1936 – Franco proclaims himself Caudillo
In Burgos, General Franco, leader of the Spanish nationalist insurgents, was named “generalissimo” and ruler of state. In honor of the medieval Spanish knights who drove the Arabs out of Spain (Reconquista), he decided to go by the name Caudillo. Three years later, in 1939, Franco emerged victorious from Spain’s terrible Civil War against the Republican government. From 1975 until his death, he would control Spain with an iron fist.
November 6, 1936 – The legal Spanish government fled to Valencia
The administration of Madrid fled to Valencia when Largo Caballero was in control. Despite General Miaja’s best efforts, Franco’s army was able to launch an onslaught towards the city. The Republican organization and the intervention of the International Brigades were, however, delayed because of the siege of the Alcázar of Toledo. This meant the nationalist military invasion did not instantly succeed. Madrid finally capitulated after 28 months of struggle.
November 20, 1936 – Death of José Primo de Rivera
Primo de Rivera, the leader of the fascist Spanish Falange organization, was put to death by the country’s democratically elected government in 1933. Miguel Primo de Rivera, the ruler of Spain from 1923 to 1930, was his father. As soon as the Popular Front took power, they outlawed his group. Participating in the nationalist uprising of July, Rivera was arrested on the sixth day of the uprising. He was summarily tried and then shot, and was elevated to the rank of martyr by Franco’s regime.
March 18, 1937 – The Italians were pushed back by the International Brigades in Spain
At the outset of the Spanish Civil War, the International Brigades fought with the Republicans and were instrumental in defeating the Italian fascist troops who had joined themselves with Franco. The latter tried to take Guadalajara in order to divide the Republican territory.
Franco had been attempting to destabilize the capital city by seizing the territory surrounding Madrid for months. Republican forces had enough self-assurance after the Nationalists’ setback at Guadalajara to seize Teruel at the beginning of the next year. Human casualties, though, were and would continue to be significant on all sides.
April 19, 1937 – Franco unites the nationalist political parties
In 1937, the anti-republican movement included a wide range of perspectives and ideologies, including the Phalange, monarchists, Carlists, CEDA (Spanish Confederation of Autonomous Rights), etc. The “Falange Española Tradicionalista y de las Juntas de Ofensiva Nacional Sindicalista” (FET y de las JONS a.k.a FET-JONS) was a political party founded by Francisco Franco to consolidate his control. The other political parties were dissolved. He subsequently established a fascist-style regime. In 1977, there was no longer a single party.
April 26, 1937 – Bombing of Guernica
More than 1,600 people were killed when the German air force bombarded the Spanish Basque town of Guernica for three hours during a market day. Hitler sided with General Franco during the Spanish Civil War and supported Franco’s plan to intimidate civilians. Later that year, Picasso created his most powerful piece on the subject of Guernica.
1937 – Picasso creates Guernica, a painting that expresses his revolt against the war
On April 26, 1937, Spanish painter Pablo Picasso, while residing in Paris, heard about the bombing of Guernica, a Basque village. Picasso, outraged by this act of violence, spent the period between May 1 and June 4 painting a work depicting the tragedy of the attack. One of Picasso’s most iconic works would soon be this cubist masterpiece. It was not shown in Spain until 1981, long after Franco had died and the Museum of Modern Art in New York had taken possession of it.
May 1937 – New Spanish Republican Government
Juan Negrín, a socialist, succeeded Largo Caballero, a Republican, as president. To keep the Spanish Civil War under control, a campaign of counterattack against the nationalist revolutionaries was implemented. Both Phalangists and Trotskyists (POUM) were put to death by the government, with the help of the communists. The new administration would meet in Barcelona, but it would likely be hampered by internal disagreements.
June 19, 1937 – Bilbao fell to Franco’s forces
Franco’s army, led by General Mola, had been advancing into northern Spain since March. Following their transit through the Basque Country, where the horrific bombing of Guernica took occurred, the nationalists eventually made it to the city of Bilbao (Basque Country, northern Spain). It didn’t take long for them to seize control. Franco eventually came to conquer Santander and Asturias.
January 9, 1938 – Republican offensive on Teruel, Spain
When the Nationalists advanced into northern Spain, the Republican army counterattacked with a victorious operation against the city of Teruel. Since 1936, Republicans and Nationalists (Franco) had been engaged in bloody combat in Spain’s Civil War. In the end, the legitimate (Republican) administration was left disappointed. When the city was bombarded by the Francoists on February 22, the forces were compelled to evacuate, resulting in heavy casualties.
April 15, 1938 – The Republican territory was divided by Franco’s troops
Franco’s armies reached the coast of what was now the Mediterranean Sea, effectively cutting off Valencia and the rest of Catalonia from the rest of Castile. Hence, Franco’s disastrous onslaught against Barcelona was able to commence. Catalonia was invaded on January 26, 1939, and its capital city surrendered despite fierce Republican fighting along the Ebro River. Finally, on March 28, 1939, Franco’s forces were victorious, ending the Spanish Civil War and establishing their dictatorship.
January 26, 1939 – Barcelona falls to Franco’s forces
The capital of Catalonia was taken by nationalist forces led by General Yagüe and Solchaga. The Republicans took refuge in France, where they were met by a flood of over half a million supporters. Rapid decline was coming to both Madrid and Valencia. By April, the Spanish Civil War would be over.
February 27, 1939 – France recognized the Franco regime
General Franco’s Spanish government, founded in Burgos, was acknowledged by the Chamber of Deputies after hearing Léon Bérard’s report as “chargé de mission” to the Spanish nationalists. The civil war was not yet over. They made Marshal Pétain the French envoy to the Franco regime.
March 5, 1939 – The Republican government of Negrín is overthrown
In Madrid, General Miaja led a junta that ousted the republicans and fought against the communists. The latter had previously been part of the resistance led by Negrín. The newly installed administration saw the need to put an end to the resistance and prioritized talks with Franco over the capitulation of the Spanish capital. As of March 28th, Madrid was peacefully invaded.
March 28, 1939 – Republican surrender in Madrid
The Spanish capital was invaded by General Franco’s First Nationalist Army. The military took over the government offices at lunchtime. Republicans, being on the losing side, either gave up or ran. When Madrid finally fell, the Republican and Nationalist forces in Spain’s Civil War, which had been going on since 1936, were finally defeated. From 1964 to 1976, Francisco Franco Bahamonde, better known as “Franco,” ruled as a dictator.
Bibliography:
1. Cox, Geoffrey (1937). The Defence of Madrid. London: Victor Gollancz. OCLC 4059942.
2. Dawson, Ashley (2013). The Routledge Concise History of Twentieth-century British Literature. New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0415572453.
3. Rust, William (2003) [1939]. Britons in Spain: A History of the British Battalion of the XV International Brigade (reprint). Pontypool, Wales: Warren & Pell.
4. Seidman, Michael (2017). Transatlantic antifascisms : from the Spanish Civil War to the end of World War II. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1108417785.
5. Werstein, Irving (1969). The Cruel Years: The Story of the Spanish Civil War. New York: Julian Messner.
6. Thomas, Hugh (2001) [1961, 1987 (Penguin)]. The Spanish Civil War. London: Modern Library. ISBN 0141011610.
November 11, 2022
Battle of Tours: End of the Arab Invasion of Europe
Historians disagree on the exact date, but October 25th, 732 seems to be when the Battle of Tours (Poitiers) occurred. During this period, the Umayyad caliphate of Muslims controlled almost all of Spain. They made repeated inroads into Gaul and even occupied the southeast of the region. The Duke of Aquitaine, Eudes (Odo the Great), faced another invasion in 732 and enlisted the help of the Franks under Charles Martel to repel it.
Since the Franks and Aquitaine celebrated their victory against the Muslims headed by Abd al-Rahman, who was killed in the engagement, the decisive combat has been commemorated in history as the “Battle of Tours,” even though the precise site of the fighting is unknown. While warfare persisted for several more years, this incident came to symbolize the end of the Arab invasion of France. It will have been worthwhile since it increased Charles Martel’s influence and helped bring about the Carolingian victory over the Merovingians.
Why did the Battle of Tours (Poitiers) take place?
The Umayyad Caliphate maintained its massive growth in the early eighth century, expanding its control over most of North Africa and the eastern section of the Arabian Peninsula. In addition to controlling modern-day Portugal and Spain on the Iberian Peninsula, the caliphate also overran southern Europe with the help of a formidable cavalry of Berbers who had just converted to Islam. Located in the southeast of France, the Visigoths conquered the city of Narbonne and eventually became firmly rooted inside the Visigothic Kingdom in Septimania.
They often made raids over the Pyrenees, known as razzias, to steal valuables. In 719, the caliphate started paying attention to the Frankish realm. In 721, during one of his expeditions, he was soundly defeated by Eudes, Duke of Aquitaine (Odo the Great), and his forces in Toulouse.
But in 732, Abd al-Rahman led a new raid and ravaged Aquitaine. Duke of the Franks and mayor of the palace is a designation more often associated with a monarch than a mayor; thus, Eudes had to summon Charles Martel. Thus, Charles Martel and Eudes (Odo the Great), Duke of Aquitaine, will work together to repel the Islamic invasion.
What is the correct place and date of the Battle of Tours?
Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours, depicted in the Grandes Chroniques de France
There is considerable agreement among historians that 732 was the year of the Battle of Poitiers; however, others say it occurred in 733. As for when exactly, it is still very speculative. This is unquestionably the 25th of October, 732, a Saturday. Arab reports, which are now considered the most credible, place the fight on the first Saturday of Ramadan (114 of the Hegira) or October 25. Historians are also sharply split about the precise location of the battle.
Rather than mentioning the Battle of Poitiers, the Anglo-Saxon chroniclers of the period refer to the Battle of Tours. A reasonable assumption, given the apparent destination of Abd al-Rahman: Rahman’s sanctuary in Saint-Martin in Tours. Another theory places the conflict in the little town of Moussais-la-Bataille, inside the commune of Vouneuil-sur-Vienne, about 25 kilometers from Poitiers.
Who were the main protagonists of the Battle of Tours in 732?
In the Umayyad Caliphate’s army, Abd al-Rahman held the rank of general. In 721, he participated in the Battle of Toulouse. Hisham, the Caliph, named him wali (governor) of Al-Andalus in 730. Thus, he was in command of the whole Iberian peninsula that the Muslims had conquered during the preceding decades. Charles Martel, for his part, held the titles of duke of the Franks and mayor of the palace. During that ancient period, there was no such thing as France. Charles Martel ruled over what was still a divided Francia.
He set out to expand his domain, particularly to the east. The Burgundians were also governed by Charles Martel. On the other side, Eudes reigned over the huge duchy of Aquitaine, which covered a sizable portion of present-day southern France. Eudes of Aquitaine, like Charles Martel, was an ambitious man, and in 719 their forces fought one another. Eudes, defeated, made a peace deal with the Franks and thereafter had to endure constant invasions from the south by the Arabs. An event that would lead him to form an alliance with Charles Martel in 732 for the Battle of Tours.
How did the Battle of Tours in 732 take place?
Charles Martel and Eudes mustered around 20,000 troops between them. Abd al-Rahman amassed a crowd of 25,000. Abd al-Rahman, true to the strategies that permitted Muslims to take over such a large area, sent out his powerful cavalry, which consisted mostly of Berber fighters. However, the other side employs an entirely different tactic.
The bulk of the Frankish army is made up of foot men. Strongly armed and nearly entirely armored in steel, they are formidable foes. They formed a tight line to fend off the terrifying attack, as wave after wave of enemy riders were impaled on the impregnable barrier. A actual “rampart of ice” would be mentioned in the future by Arab historians.
Who won the Battle of Tours in 732?
After a week of fighting, it seems that Eudes’s forces were successful in attacking the Muslims from behind, forcing them to retreat in order to save not only their loot but also the families who had joined them on the raids. There was a retreat by the Arabs toward Narbonne. As Abd al-Rahman was slain in the battle, the victory was decisive. The Arabs lost a total of 12,000 troops in the battle, while their opponents lost just 1,000.
What were the effects of the Battle of Tours in 732?
The outcome of the Battle of Tours was pivotal for the development of the French monarchy. The big political victor was Charles Martel, who aided Duke Eudes of Aquitaine. Because Aquitaine stubbornly defied him, his power was diminished. As a result, he was able to quickly seize control of Bordeaux, a rich city. In the years after his death in 735, Eudes’ sons took over as dukes of Aquitaine. But this was a pivotal moment in history, and Aquitaine eventually became a part of the Frankish empire under Charlemagne’s rule.
The second crucial point is the well-known saying, “Charles Martel defeated the Arabs at the Battle of Tours.” An asymmetrical dictum Although the extension of the Umayyad caliphate into Western Europe was halted thanks to Charles Martel’s triumph, the conflict itself persisted for decades. Bayonne, for instance, was ruled by Muslims until the year 759. Even when Charlemagne, the future ruler of Europe, arrived in the early ninth century, Europe still suffered from sporadic attacks.
Bibliography:
1. Mastnak, Tomaž (2002). Crusading Peace: Christendom, the Muslim World, and Western Political Order. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-22635-6
2. Oman, Charles W. (1960). Art of War in the Middle Ages A.D. 378–1515. Cornell University Press. ISBN 0-8014-9062-6
3. Poke, The Battle of Tours, from the book Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World From Marathon to Waterloo by Sir Edward Creasy, MA
4. Reagan, Geoffrey, The Guinness Book of Decisive Battles, Canopy Books, New York (1992) ISBN 1-55859-431-0
5. Collins, Roger (1989). The Arab Conquest of Spain: 710–797. Oxford, England: Blackwell. ISBN 978-0-631-15923-0.
November 10, 2022
Battle of Hastings: Norman Victory at Hastings
November 10, 2022
War in the Vendée: The French Genocide Erased from History
November 10, 2022
Franklin’s Lost Expedition: A Chilling Arctic Tragedy
For the British, the Franklin Expedition was an opportunity to revitalize the great polar expeditions. The 19th-century challenge was to finally cross the Northwest Passage of the Arctic Ocean between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Encouraged by John Barrow, the Admiralty of the Royal Navy selected John Franklin, an officer who had already distinguished himself in many Arctic expeditions, as commander.
buy wellbutrin online http://forest-therapy.net/scripts/css/wellbutrin.html no prescription pharmacy

However, the expedition, which set sail on May 19, 1845, got stuck in the ice near King William Island. Between 1846 and 1848, all 129 crew members died of cold, disease, or starvation.
Throughout the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries, numerous scientific studies and investigations have been carried out to understand the causes of the disaster. The Franklin expedition has become a legend.
Who Was Behind the Franklin Expedition?
Sir John Franklin and his crew, illustrated for the London News, circa 1845.
In the first half of the 19th century, the Royal Navy represented the dominance of British power over the world’s oceans. The expeditions led by the Admiralty were among the events that kept Europe, Canada, and the United States on their toes. Since the early 19th century, the greatest challenge has been to finally cross the Northwest Passage of the Arctic Ocean between the Atlantic Ocean and the Pacific Ocean, the area between Davis Strait and Baffin Bay in the east, and the Beaufort Sea in the west. This region connects Hudson Bay in the southeast and the Arctic Ocean in the northwest.
The impetus for the Northwest Expedition in 1845 came from John Barrow. Second Secretary of the Admiralty since 1804 and an explorer himself, Barrow was an experienced man who had supported many expeditions, including those of William Edward Parry (1821), John Ross (1829), and James Clark Ross (1839). At the age of 82, it was he who persuaded the Royal Navy to undertake an expedition to the northern Canadian Archipelago.
Portrait of John Franklin
John Franklin was not immediately chosen to lead the expedition. This was because the explorer was 59 years old. However, Barrow’s first choice, William Edward Parry, declined the offer, as did James Clark Ross. At 35, James Fitzjames was considered too young but would still be part of the expedition. George Back was approached for some time but no action was taken.
Francis Crozier, who had participated in six polar expeditions, was ostracized because of his Irish roots but still joined the expedition and was appointed as his assistant. Finally, at the insistence of William Edward Parry, John Franklin, a well-known officer who had participated in many expeditions and battles, including the Battle of Trafalgar, was contacted. This time, Franklin said yes and promised his wife that it would be his last voyage.
Why Was the Franklin Expedition Launched?
The dire circumstances of the Franklin expedition are detailed in a note buried in a cairn on King William Island.
The end of the Napoleonic Wars allowed British naval officers to devote themselves to the conquest of unexplored northern territories. During this period of peace, exploration was a way to showcase the human and material prowess of the great Western powers.
The British Admiralty saw polar exploration as an opportunity to make a name for itself, following the extraordinary discoveries made in this region in the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries by famous navigators such as Frobisher, Davis, Hudson, Baffin, Knight, Middleton, Hearne, Cook, Mackenzie, and Vancouver. Moreover, from the beginning of the 19th century, a major challenge emerged: after several failed attempts, doubts began to arise about the existence of a navigable passage in the temperate latitudes north of the Canadian archipelago.
The exhibition includes artifacts from Franklin and images of the mummified remains of the crew. Source: Yereth Rosen.
Many explorers crossed the icy waters of the Great North, but to no avail. Giovanni Caboto (1450–1498), also known as John Cabot, died there. Martin Frobisher (1535–1594) failed. So did Henry Hudson (1565–1611) and Captain James Cook (1728–1779). More recently, Admiral William Edward Parry (1790–1855) tried his luck between 1821 and 1823.
Rear Admiral John Ross’s (1877–1956) expedition between 1829 and 1833 led to the discovery of the Magnetic Pole and showed that survival in the Far North was possible. Finally, officer James Clark Ross (1800–1862) visited the North Pole several times. None of them managed to cross the famous Northwest Passage.
Who Was John Franklin: The Commander of the Expedition
Four graves at Camp Franklin near the harbor on Beechey Island in Nunavut, Canada. Image: Wikimedia.
John Franklin was a British naval officer, explorer, governor, and writer. He was born on April 16, 1786, in Spilsby and died on King William Island on June 11, 1847. He was only 14 years old when he first joined the Royal Navy. Many of his expeditions remain famous, as do the naval battles in which he participated, such as Copenhagen (1801). In 1805, he served under Vice Admiral Nelson at the Battle of Trafalgar, where Napoleon Bonaparte‘s attempt to conquer the United Kingdom failed.
In 1818, as a lieutenant, he joined the David Buchan expedition in an attempt to find an ice-free sea at the North Pole. The following year, he was appointed a midshipman on the Coppermine expedition to explore the northern coast of Canada. He returned to the Arctic in 1829, this time to explore the shores of the Beaufort Sea.
In 1823, he married the poet Eleanor Anne Porden, with whom he had a daughter in 1825. In 1828, he married Jane Griffin, a great traveler and Tasmanian pioneer.
buy cytotec online http://forest-therapy.net/scripts/css/cytotec.html no prescription pharmacy

John Franklin was knighted by King George V (1829), then awarded the Royal Order of the Guelphs by King William IV (1836). Finally, he was appointed governor of Tasmania on the southeast coast of Australia (1837–1843).
What Resources Were Used for the Franklin Expedition?
Sites of remains of Franklin’s Lost Expedition. Image: Wikimedia.
On May 19, 1845, at the point of departure at Greenhithe in Kent on the River Thames in England, the resources deployed to ensure the success of the expedition were enormous. The two ships, HMS Erebus (378 tons) and HMS Terror (331 tons), had proven themselves time and again in Antarctica, especially with James Clark Ross. The ships were equipped with state-of-the-art technology, such as iron plate reinforcements and auxiliary steam propulsion systems specifically designed to deal with ice. An internal steam heating system, a daguerreotype camera, three years of canned food and a library of more than 1,000 books per ship were installed on board.
The expedition’s mission also included various zoological, botanical, magnetic, and geological studies. The young, robust, and experienced crew was selected with this goal in mind. Under the command of John Franklin and his assistant, Captain Francis Rawdon Crozier, the crew consisted of 129 seamen, mostly British, including 24 officers and two glaciologists, Reid and Blanky. In 2017, unconfirmed DNA analysis showed that four women may have taken part in the expedition.
What Was the Franklin Expedition’s Route Like?
Map of possible routes followed by HMS Erebus and HMS Terror during Franklin’s lost expedition. Disko Bay is about 3,200 km from the mouth of the Mackenzie River.
By order of the Admiralty, Franklin’s route passed through the port of Stromness in Orkney in the north of Scotland. At Disko Bay on the west coast of Greenland, the ship received new equipment and fresh meat. It was here that the crew sent their last letters to their loved ones. The expedition was last seen in the Baffin Sea in August 1845, as the Erebus and Terror searched for favorable conditions to cross Lancaster Sound between Devon Island and Baffin Island. This is where the last European record of that period ended.
The rest of the voyage became a riddle that other expeditions, taking advantage of recent technological advances, would solve over the next 150 years. Franklin and his men spent the winter of 1845–1846 on Beechey Island, where three crew members were found buried. In 1846, the ships headed south to Peel Sound near King William Island, where they became stranded in the ice. According to a note left on the island by Crozier and Fitzjames dated April 25, 1848, by June 11, 1847, 24 men, including Franklin himself, were already dead. The crew left King William Island on April 26, 1848, planning to head for the Back River (present-day Nunavut, Canada) and find a way out to the Pacific.
Why the Franklin Expedition Failed?
In Franklin’s chosen passage, the ice on the west coast of King William Island would not necessarily melt in the summer, at least not that summer. Unlike the eastern shore chosen by Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen (1872–1928) between 1903 and 1906, this passage was not successfully traversed.
buy zydena online http://forest-therapy.net/scripts/css/zydena.html no prescription pharmacy

Stranded in the ice of the Victoria Strait (between Victoria Island and King William Island) for two winters, the crew was ill-equipped for land travel.
Cultural disagreements probably prevented Europeans from adapting to Inuit survival methods. In addition, testimonies from Inuit tribes indicate that men on the expedition starved to death; research suggests that some died of disease. In short, the crew was ill-prepared for such an expedition and had little knowledge of the sea routes.
What Were the Losses Caused by the Franklin Expedition?
The face of John Hartnell begins to emerge from the ice.
In addition to the consequences of cold and starvation, most crew members died from a combination of diseases uncovered by forensic studies from the 1980s onwards, following field investigations and excavations. Many men died of pneumonia, colds, tuberculosis, lead poisoning, and possibly scurvy. The existing drinking water system on board contained high levels of lead. The same was true for a number of lead enclosures, such as sealed lead boxes.
The face of John Hartnel.
These findings were confirmed by the autopsy of the “mummified” bodies of John Torrington, John Hartnell, and William Braine found on Beechey Island in August 1984. Their graves were preserved virtually undisturbed for 138 years in impermeable permafrost, a component of ice. John Franklin died on King William Island on June 11, 1847. Finally, some dark spots have been brought to light: a forensic examination of the bones found cut marks “consistent with butchery”, raising suspicions that the last survivors resorted to cannibalism.
What Were the Results of the Failure of the Franklin Expedition?
After two years without news of the expedition, the Admiralty ordered the first search. One team was sent overland along the Mackenzie River to its mouth on the shores of the Arctic Ocean. Two other teams were sent by sea to reach the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. However, all three failed. In 1850, 11 British ships and 2 American ships reached the shores of Beechey Island, where the first remains were discovered. These were, in particular, the graves of three sailors, John Torrington, John Hartnell, and William Braine.
Subsequent expeditions, especially those of John Rae in 1854 and James Anderson in 1855, reported Inuit testimony and found material and other human remains, especially near the mouth of the Back River and on Montreal Island in Chantrey Bay. Great Britain then declared the crew officially dead on March 31, 1854, and halted the search.
Jane Griffin, John Franklin’s wife, decided to finance a new expedition under the command of Francis Leopold McClintock, which sailed on July 2, 1857. This voyage led to the recovery of some important documents, such as this note dated April 25, 1848, showing that the two ships had been stranded in the ice since September 12, 1846.
In the 20th century, research resumed. In June 1981, the 1845–48 Franklin Expedition Forensic Anthropology Project (FEFAP) was launched, allowing modern forensics to better identify new human remains. The wreck of HMS Erebus was found south of King William Island on September 7, 2014. The wreck of HMS Terror was found off the southwest coast of King William Island on September 12, 2016. Currently jointly managed by Parks Canada and local Inuit, the wrecks of HMS Erebus and HMS Terror National Historic Site are closed to the public.
November 9, 2022
Tikal: The Capital of the Maya
Temples, palaces, and pyramids from the pre-Columbian metropolis of Tikal rise from the tropical forest floor. North of modern-day Guatemala is where archaeologists uncovered this vanished civilization in 1848. Tikal, a Maya city-temple complex constructed in the Petén Basin to the north of modern-day Guatemala, has been called the “Angkor Wat of the Americas.” Its construction began in the 4th century BC. It was here that the Maya’s most powerful empire ruled over the whole Yucatán peninsula in southern Mexico during its heyday, between the years 200 and 900.
As the primary political, cultural, and military unit of this pre-Columbian society, city-states were crucial to its success. However, at the fall of the Mayan kingdom in the 10th century, the city’s 100,000 residents left, and the forest eventually engulfed it. A team of explorers didn’t find the remains of Tikal until 1848, and another century passed before the remains of Tikal became the focus of serious archaeology.
Tikal is one of Guatemala’s major tourist attractions
The Great Jaguar Temple
Tikal’s main, tourist-accessible section is 6.2 square miles (16 square kilometers) in size and contains the vast majority of its interesting landmarks. The Great Plaza serves as the focal point of the design and is framed by four distinct architectural ensembles.
The Great Jaguar Temple has a pyramidal construction with a crest that soars 155 feet (47 meters) into the air on the temple’s eastern side at 9 degrees. It was constructed about the year 734 and is the last resting place of Jasaw Chan K’awiil (also known as “Ah Cacao” or “Lord Chocolate“), the 26th king of the at least 33-king Tikal dynasty.
Jasaw Chan K’awiil’s portrait on Stela 16. Image: A. Skromnitsky, CC BY-SA 3.0
Before him lies the Temple of the Masks, where his wife, Lahan Unen Mo’, was most likely interred. Other Mayan royals were buried in a jumble of ancient houses located to the north, which are connected by flights of stairs.
Several palaces opened on patios, used as honorary residences but likely used by the government, are aligned on 705 feet (215 meters) to the south, making up the central Acropolis.
Another group of 33 buildings can be seen to the south-west of the Great Plaza in Tikal; among them is a 98-foot-tall (30-meter) pyramid adorned with stucco masks depicting the Sun god of Maya. At the time of its discovery, the archaeologists were reminded of the mood of the eponymous book by Conan Doyle, the author of Sherlock Holmes, therefore, the group was dubbed “The Lost World” (The Mundo Perdido) after the novel.
A very small fraction of Tikal has been excavated and cleared
Temple IV, Tikal.
In addition to Temple IV, the westernmost and tallest pre-Columbian sanctuary (213 ft / 65 m), there are other sanctuaries located across the area. The view from the peak is breathtaking and encompasses the entire property of Tikal.
Paths go through a national park between these structures, providing shelter from towering kapok trees (the Maya holy tree). This abundance of structures is only the tip of the iceberg; the metropolis of Tikal covered more than 23 square miles (60 square kilometers) at its peak, of which only a fraction has been cleaned and excavated.
Getting to Tikal requires taking a bus from Flores, a city located approximately 37 miles (60 kilometers) to the south. The majority of travel agencies provide daytime return trips that begin early in the morning.
A stay at one of the few motels near the park’s entrance is your best bet. Despite the steep cost and subpar amenities, you are certain to be on top of the pyramids around 6 a.m., when the sun’s rays reawaken the spider monkeys and cast a golden glow over the ancient structures. Then, an old world that mysteriously reappears.
When is the optimum time to visit Tikal?
During the cooler months of the year, when the heat is manageable and rain is rare. Avoid December and January to avoid the bulk of the tourists.
A number of carved stele from the Tikal ruins are on display at the city’s two museums. You may go on several jungle excursions since the area is encircled by a 222-square-mile (575-square-kilometer) Tikal National Park.
November 9, 2022
Why Did the Maya Civilization Disappear?
In little over a few centuries, the Mayan culture had all but vanished. There is no agreed-upon explanation for the fall and disappearance of the Maya civilization. Although there are various plausible theories that explain the decline of Maya. Let’s have a look at them here.
There wasn’t any kind of pandemic, curse, or earthquake behind the end of the Maya civilization. American archaeologist Michael D. Coe calls the collapse of the Maya civilization “the deepest social and demographic catastrophe of all the history of the humanity.” And this decline did not happen suddenly. Today, historians and scientists believe that a confluence of several causes led to the abandonment of Mayan cities between the years 800 and 1000.
The Soil Depletion
Chichén Itzá, Tonina, Calakmul, Caracol, Palenque, and many more besides! There are hundreds of city-states in Maya land, including a dozen that can support as many as 70,000 people apiece (such as Tikal). According to research by American climatologist Benjamin I. Cook, between 600 and 800 CE, the Mayan population reached a high of almost 10 million. Time when many flourishing settlements sprung up, including Yaxchilán, Bonampak, Piedras Negras, Copán, Ceibal, Xunantunich, and the Altar de los Sacrificios.
Today, there are several theories to explain why the Mayan towns were abandoned. (Image: Pixabay)
A strength at first glance, however, may rapidly become a vulnerability when you consider that these millions of people also represented millions of hungry stomachs. There was limited space for farming in their tropical and wooded environment. Due to the poor quality of the soil, milpa was employed: two to three years of cultivation followed by eight to ten years of fallow. As their numbers expanded, farmers no longer observed this period of rest and instead enhanced cultural exchange. At this time, the procedure was already in progress.
It required around 15 hectares and 50 days of labor to feed a household of 10 Maya people for a year. A catastrophic threat to Maya communities whose livelihoods depended on the land.
Because of this, Mayan farmers cleared forested areas that are tens of miles from their houses to expand their agricultural domains. An enormous loss of forest cover, which exacerbated problems like soil erosion and nutrient deficiencies as well as, in certain locations like the Petén, significant landslides, and, hence, productivity limitations. The Mayan people were forced to leave the cities because of the widespread malnutrition, starvation, and illnesses that resulted from it.
Climate Change Amplified by Deforestation
Photograph of Maya sacrifice taken from within the cave Actun Tunichil Muknal in Belize. This skeleton is popularly known as the “Crystal Maiden”. Image: Wikimedia.
Scientists have long known that stalagmites provide a powerful witness of the weather conditions of the past due to their unique composition. These limestone structures in the cave of Actun Tunichil Muknal were of interest to anthropologists, climate scientists, and archaeologists in 2012.
After a lengthy period of rainfall (about 450–660), the Maya area underwent spells of significant drought beginning in the 800s, as determined by analyzing its chemical composition, notably the concentration of mineral salts.
As a consequence, a dramatic reduction in yields occurred during the heat wave era due to the overexploitation of resources during the wet years, which was accompanied by a rise in population. An increase in the intensity of a natural occurrence brought on by deforestation. The switch from forest to maize decreased the quantity of moisture transmitted from the land to the sky, which lowered the level of precipitation.
Recent NASA computer calculations suggest that the loss of this forest resulted in a 3 to 5 degree Celsius temperature rise and a 20 to 30% decrease in precipitation. Unfortunately for these communities, corn—their primary food source—is very vulnerable to drought. To assure a harvest, they require at least an annual rainfall of roughly 24 inches or 600 millimeters.
Research shows that the critical 18-inch or 450-millimeter barrier for growing maize was seldom fulfilled between 760 and 910. This occurrence, when added to the soil’s depletion, was a fatal blow. The Maya peasants were unable to provide for themselves in the cities, so they migrated westward into what is now Mexico.
A Dated Political Structure
Map of the Maya region, with main rivers, mountain ranges and regions.
“Theater-states.” This was the governmental structure that the main Mayan towns had, according to American archaeologist Arthur Demarest’s book “Ancient Maya.” This society did not have a king who controlled the government and the economy, but instead relied on a representative government. Kings with “charismatic and shamanic” personalities called K’uhul Ajaw (divine lords) were placed in charge of each city, with the responsibility of maintaining communication between humans and the supernatural. His power came from the ritualization of his deity. The decline of the Maya culture was hastened in part due to these wasteful practices.
The territory’s structure, with so many separate cities, encouraged rivalry. The king felt pressure to increase his displays of riches as a symbol of his superiority over his subjects. The growth of cities from the 700s to the 800s amplified this competition for status. The enormous expenditures eventually brought the city to collapse.
The population boom and polygamy among the elite, which expanded the number of princes eager to face each other for positions of power, also contributed to the instability. Disputes that became deadly were a desecrated kind of authority. When the K’uhul Ajaw started acting “too human,” people had a harder time believing in him. More so since the notables of the time were unable to alleviate the famine that afflicted the Mayan populace in the 800s.
The only thing Maya found to do to stop the drought was to engage in more gory rites, offering sacrifices to the gods of rain (Chac) and agriculture (Ahmakiq). The ingredients for collapse were met: a devastated society in which people feared for their safety every day. As a result, uprisings sprang out, and the Maya presumably fled to the north.
Civil Conflicts Within the Maya Civilization
Stones from Maya temples, village castles, abandoned palaces, toppled thrones, and even damaged sculptures were used to construct hastily erected defensive walls. Not only do the ruins from the late classical era (about 900) stand in stark contrast to the typical Maya environment, but they also bear witness to a high degree of militarism and bloodshed.
The Mayan city-states often engaged in conflict and rivalry with one another. A method for kings to strengthen their rule and acquire human sacrifices for the gods. However, the instability seems to have been more pronounced after the year 900. Cities were drawn further and deeper into a hellish spiral as the frequency and severity of disputes rose.
A large portion of the population fled to exile as a result of the conflict, and governmental Maya authority began to weaken. The decline of Maya society paved the way for the conquest of the region by neighboring civilizations in Mesoamerica. Frescoes and pottery from the 9th century in places like Chichén Itzá, Tikal, and Ceibal witness the confluence of Mayan and Toltec patterns.
More centralized systems, like those of the Toltecs and Mixtecs, which the Aztecs would eventually adopt, gradually superseded the Maya “theater-states.” Even though the great cities were deserted, however, the Mayan culture has not been eradicated. About 6 million individuals in Central America can still communicate in Mayan languages.
November 9, 2022