Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 16, 2024

For everyone interested in military and geopolitical strategy

 

Editor Jeremy Black, already a well-known expert in military strategy, has curated a large number of articles by numerous authors into a collection titled "The Practice of Strategy: A Global History".  The articles include:

  • Grand Patterns of Strategy, old and new
  • Escalation Dominance in Antiquity
  • Powers in the Western Mediterranean.  A Strategic Assessment in Roman History
  • A Kind of Strategy: Carthage’s confrontation with Roman soft power during the First Punic War
  • Understanding a Different World of War:  Strategic Practice in Medieval Europe and the Middle East
  • Ukrainism of Mālum Discordiæ:  Strategy of War and Growth,  Setting up the strategic scene
  • War, Strategy, and Environment on  South Asia’s Northwestern Frontier
  • Imperial Chinese strategy, A Play in Three Acts
  • Spanish Grand Strategy c. 1479/1500-1800/1830
  • Confronting Russia at Sea; the Long View (1700-1919)
  • How to deter or defeat Russia – the maritime historical experience
  • ‘New Paths to Wisdom’: Clausewitz: From Practice to Theory,
  • Trade War, War on Trade, War on Neutrals
  • Napoleon and Caesar: comparing strategies
  • Hitler and German Strategy 1933-1945
  • Stalin as Protean Strategist?
  • Cold War Strategy and Practice
  • Russian strategy across three eras:  Imperial, Soviet, and contemporary
  • Swedish Strategic Practice
  • India’s Strategy from Nehru to Modi: 1947-2022
  • China’s Military Strategy from Mao Zedong to Xi Jinping
  • Strategies for the New Millennium

Best of all, you can download a full PDF copy of the entire book free of charge!  That's the best value in this field I've seen for a very long time.  Don't let some early pages in Italian put you off:  the full English translation of them follows.

Highly recommended to all military strategy and strategic planning buffs.

Peter


Saturday, July 13, 2024

Saturday Snippet: The day the Mississippi ran backwards

 

As mentioned in a blog post a couple of weeks ago, I've been reading about the New Madrid earthquakes of 1811-1812.  Among other sources, I found "When the Mississippi Ran Backwards: Empire, Intrigue, Murder, and the New Madrid Earthquakes".



It's a long (sometimes over-long) but very interesting account of the earthquakes, based upon survivors' reports and post-earthquake investigations.  I'm still busy with it, and finding it very informative.

For today's Snippet, I thought I'd pick a chapter describing the Mississippi River itself during and immediately after the earthquake.  Remember that at this period in history, steamboats had not yet become commonplace, so many living near the river had never seen them or even heard of them - hence their reactions to this strange critter of the waters.


ABOUT 125 miles northeast of Rocky Hill, the steamboat New Orleans was resting quietly on the evening of December 15 [1811]. Apart from not having been able to recruit any investors for the Ohio Steamboat Navigation Company, the voyage of the New Orleans was going as well as Nicholas Roosevelt could have hoped. The boat had performed admirably at the Falls, and she was on a reasonably timely schedule. And now Roosevelt was the proud father of a son.

 Like everybody else within a three-hundred-mile radius of New Madrid, those aboard the steamboat were awakened by the 2:15 a.m. shock. With the shakes continuing throughout the night, they passed the rest of the anxious time without sleep. Yet they may have been the most fortunate of everyone in the area—because of the size and stability of their boat, the water was safer than land.

As soon as it was light enough to travel, the New Orleans was able to get under way. Moving downstream, the vibrations and noise of the engine kept the people on board from feeling the impact of the ongoing shocks, including the powerful aftershock that morning. But the Roosevelts’ Newfoundland dog, Tiger, felt the tremors and alternated between whining and growling as he prowled around the deck, and laying his head softly in Lydia Roosevelt’s lap, which indicated to the humans that “it was a sure sign of a commotion of more than usual violence.”

Insulated from the quake’s effect by this awesome new vehicle of a dawning age, those aboard the steamboat calmly ate their breakfast, but as the New Orleans continued downriver, signs of the quakes became more readily apparent. The passengers saw trees swaying as if in a high gale although, in fact, there was no wind blowing. They watched as an enormous section of riverbank suddenly tore away and dropped into the river. As the boat grew closer to the epicenter, it was lifted by quake-induced waves, and many on board the New Orleans were struck with seasickness.

The boat’s pilot, Andrew Jack, who was on intimate terms with the river, found the channel altered to the point where he was forced to concede he was lost. New hazards lay everywhere, and heretofore reliably deep water was now filled with uprooted trees. Without the familiar channel, Jack chose to stay in the middle of the river and hope for the best. It slowed him down, but it was a much safer way to proceed.

As the big boat passed the small settlements along the lower Ohio, the evidence mounted. Henderson, Highland Creek, Shawnee Town, and Cash Creek all showed earthquake damage. All along the route, banks were caved in and trees were down, and the shapes of familiar islands were changed.

The following night, the New Orleans put up about six miles above the junction of the Ohio and Mississippi, and not more than twenty-five miles from the Rocky Hill plantation. Not long after the crew and passengers had retired, there were urgent cries for help from the forward cabin. Assuming an Indian attack, Roosevelt jumped out of bed. He quickly grabbed the ceremonial sword from the outfit he wore for official receptions, and flew out the door of the family’s sleeping quarters.

Reaching the forward cabin, Roosevelt found not Indians but flames. Roosevelt’s mind jumped to the worst conclusion—an engine explosion, the most dreaded hazard on steamboats. But as he glanced around the room, he saw the real cause. In anticipation of the following day’s needs, the crewman who had been assigned to tend the fire had stacked up a pile of green wood near the heating stove to dry it out. Exhausted by the stress of the past two days’ events, the man had fallen asleep, and the wood caught fire. The flames quickly jumped to the finely crafted wood of the cabin walls, and suddenly the whole boat was imperiled. Roosevelt regained his wits and took command, urgently barking out orders. With Roosevelt encouraging his men all the while, the blaze was soon extinguished, but not before the exquisite paneling of the forward cabin was all but destroyed.

The following day, when the New Orleans reached the confluence of the two rivers, the water level in the big river was unusually high and the current had slackened, an unmistakable indication of flooding. When the big boat arrived at New Madrid that afternoon they found the place in a shambles. The entire town had dropped fifteen feet, down to the level of the Mississippi. A huge chunk of the riverfront, including the city cemetery, was gone, carried away by the river. Many chimneys and fences were down; others fell before their eyes. Houses were damaged. What had been a large plain behind the town was now a lake. The earth’s surface was rent by hundred-foot-long chasms. People and animals wandered about in a state of somnambulance.

As the huge boat approached, many of the townspeople fled in terror. The braver among the inhabitants, however, hailed the boat and begged to be taken aboard. Their frantic pleas for help threw Roosevelt into a quandary. There were far more people wanting to board the New Orleans than the boat’s store of provisions could possibly accommodate. Moreover, these refugees had no place to go, and when they were put ashore at Natchez or New Orleans, they would have no means of support.

The Roosevelts looked at the heartrending scene, and despite their instinct to take the refugees aboard, they knew they had no choice. Sadly, “there was no choice but to turn a deaf ear to the cries of the terrified inhabitants of the doomed town.”

* * * * *

As bad as the damage was on land, conditions were worse on the river. The New Orleans had been protected by her weight and size. The rest of the boats on the Mississippi were tossed about like toys in a bathtub.

 Firmin La Roche, a sailor by trade, was the captain of a small fleet of three boats transporting furs from St. Louis to New Orleans in December 1811. (After the Battle of Tippecanoe, riverboats increasingly tended to travel in groups as protection against Indian attack.) There were eleven other men on the three boats; on La Roche’s vessel were a crewhand named Henry Lamel, a slave named Ben, and Fr. Joseph, a French priest who had been a missionary among the Osage and was now returning to France. The convoy left St. Louis on December 8 but twice in the first week was delayed en route for repairs.

On the evening of December 15, the convoy tied up about eight miles north of New Madrid, at a landing near the home of La Roche’s cousin, John Le Clerq. The boatmen ate supper and retired for the night.

At about 2:15 a.m., La Roche was jolted awake by a thunderous crash that turned the boat on its side. Lamel, sleeping in the next bed, was flung on top of La Roche, and the two men landed hard against the side of the boat.

La Roche, Lamel, Ben, and Fr. Joseph scrambled to the deck to see what had happened. The impenetrable darkness was filled only with sounds—an unidentifiable crashing and grinding, and booming explosions and ominous rumblings emanating from the depths of the earth. For almost an hour, they had no reference point until, at around 3:00 a.m., the haze cleared enough for La Roche to see thousands of trees crashing down and huge sections of shoreline tumbling into the river.

With the boat pitching and rolling, Lamel managed to cut the rope that was tied to a log near the bank. The boat had just begun to float away from shore when it was lifted by a monstrous rush of water from downstream. “So great a wave came up the river,” wrote La Roche, “that I never have seen one like it at sea.”

The four men grabbed on to whatever part of the boat they could and held on for dear life. Trying to row or steer was futile—not capsizing or being thrown overboard was the best they could hope for as they were swept along by the gigantic wave. The river rose to as high as thirty feet above its normal level, and the boat was carried upriver, toward St. Louis, for more than a mile. The mighty Mississippi was running backwards!

The angry river was surging and roiling. John Weisman, a flatboat pilot who was transporting Kentucky whiskey, reported that “if my flatboat boat load of whiskey had sprung a leak and made the ‘Father of Waters’ drunk it could not have committed more somersaults. It seemed that old Vesuvius himself was drunk.” Vessels were tossed about so violently that experienced boatmen had trouble staying on their feet.

Sandbars and the points of islands dissolved into the furious waters, taking countless numbers of trees down with them, thereby creating new hazards for already beleaguered riverboat pilots. Great quantities of long-submerged trees were also dislodged from the river bottom, freed from the depths “to become merciless enemies of navigation,” as one later report so aptly phrased it.

One man whose boat was wrecked on a planter climbed onto its trunk as his vessel went down. Grateful at least for his life having been spared, he soon realized to his dismay that the snag was slipping down into the raging river. Over the course of the next few hours, he desperately clung to the trunk, calling for help as several boats passed by. Finally, a skiff managed to row a short distance upstream of the man and float down alongside the planter. As it passed under him, the exhausted fellow let go of the trunk and tumbled into the boat.

Neither of Firmin La Roche’s other two boats was in sight; one vessel and its crew would never be seen again. “Everywhere there was noise like thunder,” wrote La Roche, “and the ground was shaking the trees down, and the air was thick with something like smoke. There was much lightning … I do not know how long this went on, for we were all in great terror, expecting death.” La Roche, Lamel, and Ben knelt and received absolution from Fr. Joseph.

Finally, the great wave began to subside, and the river gradually resumed its normal direction. Near New Madrid, several boats that had been carried up a small stream just above the town were left high and dry, several miles from the river.

As La Roche’s boat was carried back downstream, the sky began to lighten. On the Kentucky side of the river the boatmen saw two houses burning. When they reached New Madrid, there were several more buildings in flames, and a crowd of about twenty terror-stricken people crowded together on the high bank, crying out and cringing in fear. The crewmen tied up to the shore, but before anyone could disembark, a nearby hickory tree suddenly cracked and came crashing down on the boat. A branch whipped into La Roche’s left arm, splintering the humerus like a toothpick. Ben was pinned beneath the tree trunk. The others rushed to his aid, but when they managed, with some difficulty, to pull his body out, it was limp. Ben was dead.

The tree had also damaged the boat, which began taking on water. Thinking they would be drowned, the men frantically climbed onto the shore, dragging Ben’s lifeless body with them. When the people on land saw a priest among the group, they all knelt, and Fr. Joseph gave them absolution as well.

La Roche’s boat did not sink, however, and the townspeople loudly urged the boatmen to return to their craft, believing they would be safer on the water. Having already experienced several terrifying hours on the river, however, the crew were of the exact opposite opinion, and they chose to stay on land. They hurriedly dug a shallow grave and buried Ben.

All the while, the shocks continued, accompanied by constant sounds issuing from the earth. As soon as it was light enough, the crew set about repairing the boat. When it was mended to the extent that they could continue, the people onshore began crowding on board and dumping the cargo of furs into the river in order to lighten the load. (La Roche later estimated his losses at $600.) Finally, when no more souls could safely fit aboard, they pushed off. Unfortunately, the boat leaked badly, and the overloaded vessel was in danger of sinking. Lamel bailed furiously, but finally La Roche insisted that the passengers be deposited back onshore.

As they made their way toward New Orleans, the boatmen saw evidence of earthquake damage for 250 miles south of New Madrid. Concerning the loss of life, Fr. Joseph wrote, “We made no effort to find out how many people had been killed, although it was told us that many were. We saw the dead bodies of several and afterwards drowned persons we saw floating in the river.”

* * * * *

Earthquakes in themselves do not usually kill people. People are killed by the secondary phenomena associated with earthquakes, which include tsunamis, landslides, fires, falling structures, soil liquefaction, and land fissures.

Fires are one of the greatest hazards in an earthquake. In modern quakes they can be caused by exposed electrical wires or broken gas lines. For example, in the 1906 San Francisco quake, for which death toll estimates range from seven hundred to three thousand people, the greatest number of casualties was caused by the resulting fire that swept through the city. In the New Madrid quakes, the burning buildings witnessed by La Roche were a result of candles or overturned woodstoves that still held embers of the previous evening’s fire.

The wave that carried La Roche and his crew upriver and created the impression that the river had reversed its flow was another deadly secondary effect. It was similar in cause and result to a tsunami. Two factors most likely were responsible. First, a large piece of land somewhere near Little Prairie was thrust up and temporarily dammed the river—quite possibly the “great loaf of bread” recorded by Michael Braunm, who observed that after the “loaf” burst, the river was running retrograde. When the water upstream, pushed along by the current, hit the wall of land, it had no place to go but back in the direction from which it had come, causing a huge wave, just as deformation of the ocean floor during an earthquake at sea displaces vast quantities of water that can result in a tsunami. In addition, enormous sections of riverbank were caving in all around—a Captain John Davis recorded seeing “30 or 40 acres” fall—and when they did, they displaced huge volumes of water, adding to the size of the wave. When the land that had dammed up the river began to erode away, which happened relatively quickly because of its soft character, the current once again flowed naturally.

* * * * *

John Bradbury, a Scottish naturalist engaged in an extensive collection of North American plant specimens, was on a boat about a hundred miles south of New Madrid when the first quake hit. He had been entrusted by a friend with delivering a cargo of a ton and a half of lead from St. Louis to New Orleans; on board with him were a passenger named John Bridge and a crew of five French Creoles, including M. Morin, the boatmaster or patron. On the night of December 15, the boat was tied up to a sloping bank on a small island near the second Chickasaw Bluff, near present-day Memphis, about five hundred yards above a shallow stretch of river so treacherous that it was known as the Devil’s Channel or the Devil’s Race Ground. Through this channel, the river rushed so ferociously that the roar of the water could be heard for miles. With the sun already having set, Bradbury determined that the channel was too dangerous to attempt and decided to wait until morning.

When the quake hit, Bradbury and the others were awakened by the noise and “so violent an agitation of the boat that it appeared in danger of upsetting.” They rushed onto the deck. The caving banks had caused such a swell in the river that the boat nearly capsized and sank.

Morin, the patron, was beside himself with fear. “O mon Dieu!” he cried, continuing in French, “We are going to die!” Bradbury tried to calm him, but Morin ran off the boat crying, “Get onto land! Get onto land!” The deckhands followed him onto the island.

Bradbury decided to go ashore as well. As he was preparing to leave the boat, another shock was unleashed. When Bradbury reached the island, he found a frighteningly large fissure. With his candle, he walked the length of the fissure and concluded that it was at least eighty yards long; at either end, the perpendicular banks had crumbled into the Mississippi. With a shudder he realized that had his boat been moored to a perpendicular bank rather than a sloping one, he and his companions would have been goners.

As the sky lightened, the horrors began to emerge. “The river was covered with foam and drift timber, and had risen considerably.” As Bradbury and his party waited for enough light to embark, a pair of empty canoes came drifting downstream on the faster-than-normal current. These canoes were of the type towed by boats and used for getting ashore and boarding other vessels, and Bradbury took it as “a melancholy proof” that some of the boats they had passed the previous day had perished along with their crews.

The shocks continued; while on the island, Bradbury counted twenty-seven more by dawn. At daybreak, he gave the order to embark, and everyone returned to the boat. Two of the deckhands were loosening the ropes when yet another powerful shock hit. In terror, the two men ran up onto dry land, but before they could get across the fissure that had opened in the night, a tree came smashing down to block their way. The bank of the island was rapidly disappearing into the river. Bradbury called out to loosen the ropes, and the two hands ran back to the boat.

Now they were once again on the river, but as the boat approached the Devil’s Race Ground, Bradbury saw that the channel was chocked with trees and driftwood that had floated down during the night. The passage appeared blocked. Equally distressing, Morin and his crew appeared to be in such a state of panic that Bradbury concluded they were incapable of getting the boat safely through the channel.

Bradbury thought it prudent to stop once more to give the men time to get their emotions under control. Spying an island with a gently sloping bank, the boat moored again, and the crew began preparing breakfast. Bradbury and Morin went ashore to get a close look at the channel and determine where the safest passage might be. As they stood and talked, the 7:15 aftershock arrived, nearly knocking them off their feet. Another tremor hit while they ate breakfast, and as they prepared to reboard the boat, there was still another, which nearly pitched John Bridge into the river, as the sand suddenly gave way beneath him.

Before giving the order to push off, Bradbury noticed that the deckhands were still in a state of fearful paralysis, so he proposed to Morin that the patron give each of them a glass of whiskey to bolster their courage. After they had drunk up, Bradbury gave them a spirited pep talk, reminding them that their safety and the safety of the boat depended on their efforts.

Finally, the boat untied and was once again on the water. Their confidence buoyed by the whiskey and Bradbury’s exhortations, Morin and the hands successfully threaded the boat through the perilous channel, making several instantaneous changes in their course in order to avoid disaster. When they had passed the danger, the men threw down their oars and crossed themselves, then gave a loud cheer and congratulated one another on having come through the Devil’s Race Ground in one piece.

Bradbury’s summing up of the total effect of the December 16 quakes was that they “produced an idea that all nature was in a state of dissolution.”

* * * * *

The crews of countless boats either drowned or abandoned their crafts to take their chances on land. The misfortunes of these men proved a source of salvation for the residents of New Madrid. In the days following December 16, the river deposited manna at their shores, as boat after unmanned boat floated down into the New Madrid harbor, bringing a bounty of meat, flour, cheese, butter, and apples. The town was still a disaster zone, but at least the people had enough to eat.

The shaking went on—as Jared Brooks wrote on December 16, “it is doubtful if the earth is at rest from these troubles 10 minutes during the day and succeeding night”—persisting throughout the course of the following days. Three days later, Stephen F. Austin—later known as “The Father of Texas”—landed at New Madrid and recorded his impressions. “The Philanthropic emotions of the soul are never more powerfully exercised,” he wrote, “than when called on [to] witness some great and general calamity … throwing a hitherto fertile country into dessolation and plunging such of the unfortunate wretches who survive the ruin, into Misery and dispair.”

“These emotions I experianced when on landing at N. Madrid the effects by the Earthquake were so prominently visible as well in the sunken and shattered situation of the Houses, as in the countenance of the few who remained to mourn over the ruins of their prosperity and past happiness.”

Several days afterwards, the camp of Little Prairie refugees received word that New Madrid had survived and that food was available there. Led by George Ruddell, the two hundred Little Prairie survivors immediately set out on a three-day march and reached New Madrid on Christmas Eve.

* * * * *

As the New Orleans chugged its way down the hazard-choked river, keeping to the middle as much as possible, those on board continued to witness the aftermath of the earthquake’s wrath. Earlier in the voyage, the steamboat had always made fast to the shore at night, but with so many sections of riverbank caving in without warning, that was no longer possible. Instead, pilot Andrew Jack now anchored to any of the larger islands that dotted the river.

One night soon after passing New Madrid, with the shakes continuing, the steamboat put up on the downstream side of one such island, identified by Zadok Cramer in The Navigator as Island 32 (the islands were numbered consecutively, beginning at the mouth of the Ohio), about fifty miles below Little Prairie. In the night, the passengers were awakened by the sounds of scraping and banging against the sides of the boat. Several times, the vessel was shaken by severe blows. Conferring with Jack, Roosevelt concluded that the sounds and jolts, which would continue all through the night, were caused by driftwood that was being swept downriver. They passed the word to the other passengers and then returned to bed.

When the people of the New Orleans got out on deck the next morning, they were stunned. They were no longer anchored to the island—it appeared that the steamboat had slipped anchor and floated downriver all night.

But Pilot Jack, with his encyclopedic knowledge of the river, looked around and pointed out to the others the landmarks that showed they were in the same spot at which they had dropped anchor the previous day. The boat had not moved at all—instead, the island had broken up in the night and been carried away by the current! The sounds and jolts they had heard and felt throughout the night were caused by pieces of the disintegrating island floating up against the boat.

Island 32 was not the only one to disintegrate. Island 94, known as Stack Island or Crow’s Nest Island, about 450 miles below New Madrid and 175 miles above Natchez, also disappeared.

A tale published in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat in 1902 purported to tell the story of “The Last Night of Island Ninety-Four.” According to this account, on the evening of December 15, a Captain Sarpy was en route from St. Louis to New Orleans in his keelboat, the Belle Heloise, with his wife and daughter and a large sum of money. At nightfall, the keelboat tied up at Island 94. This island had been a long-standing lair for river denizens of every stripe, including Samuel Mason, the notorious river pirate who had been apprehended in Little Prairie a decade earlier, only to escape while being transported on the river. Two years before Sarpy’s trip, however, a force of 150 keelboatmen had invaded the island and cleaned out the den of thieves, after which the island became a safe haven, and now, Sarpy thought to use the island’s abandoned blockhouse to lodge his family and crew for the night.

As Sarpy and two of his men explored the island, however, they overheard talking in the blockhouse and, peering in the windows, listened as a group of fifteen river pirates discussed plans to fall upon the Belle Heloise the following morning. Sarpy and his crewmen hurried back to the boat and quietly pushed off, tying up at a hidden place in the willows on the west bank about a mile below Island 94.

The following morning, after weathering a night of earthquakes, Sarpy looked upstream to see that Island 94 had disintegrated—the entire landmass was gone, and presumably, its criminal inhabitants along with it.

Whether or not the story is true, Island 94 did indeed disappear.


That must have been an amazing and very frightening experience for all concerned, particularly because the science of that day was not sufficiently far advanced for the ordinary person to understand what was happening.  It must have felt to many like Divine vengeance was being visited upon them for their sins.

If an identical earthquake were to happen in that area again today, with its vastly greater population and much more developed infrastructure, I shudder to think how many would be killed.  It would probably be the single biggest natural disaster to strike the USA since the Declaration of Independence.

Peter


Wednesday, July 10, 2024

"The blunder that changed chickens forever"

 

I was interested to learn that today's enormous US chicken industry started with a simple ordering error.  This video was originally on the BBC, but this copy has been posted to YouTube.




Just a minor mistake . . . or was that a poultry error?



Peter


Thursday, July 4, 2024

A tourist trap disappears

 

It seems an old sword has vanished.  It's deemed by locals (particularly those in the tourist trade) to be the original, real, cross-my-heart-and-hope-to-die, pinky-swear Durandal belonging to the mythically-enhanced, legendary Roland, one of Charlemagne's military governors during the 8th century AD.  The Telegraph reports:


It is southern France’s answer to Excalibur, the mythical sword that King Arthur legendarily pulled from a rock to obtain the British throne.

However, Rocamadour has no idea who managed to wrench its famed Durandal sword from the stone in which it had been embedded for centuries, particularly because it was 10 metres (32.5 feet) off the ground.

All the town knows is that one of its main tourist attractions has vanished. It is presumed stolen and an investigation has been launched.

Durandal was the sword of Roland, a legendary paladin (knight) and officer of Charlemagne in French epic literature. According to the legend, Durandal was indestructible and the sharpest sword in all existence, capable of cutting through giant boulders with a single strike.

Its magical qualities are recounted in the 11th-century epic poem The Song of Roland, the oldest surviving major work of French literature.

. . .

Medieval “myth” has it that before it was given to Roland, Charlemagne received Durandal from an angel. Before his death at the Battle of Roncevaux Pass, Roland is said to have tried in vain to break it on the rocks to prevent his enemies from seizing it. He finally threw it into the air to save it. Miraculously travelling hundreds of kilometres, it is said to have embedded itself in the rock face of Rocamadour.


There's more at the link.

I can't help laughing at the fuss and bother.  It's patently obvious to anybody with two working brain cells to rub together that Rocamadour installed a fake Durandal to attract medieval tourists, who were rather more credulous than their modern equivalents.  It's the same sort of fake as the "pieces cut from the sail of Saint Peter's fishing-boat!" that pedlars sold to pilgrims, or the fabled "Holy House of Loreto", the purported original home of the Virgin Mary.  It supposedly flew (powered by angels) from Nazareth in the Holy Land, via two other locations, until it landed in Loreto, Italy (which proceeded to make a fortune from pilgrims thronging there to see it).

(Perhaps Boeing might like to hire the angels concerned?  They need all the help they can get right now!)

So, a long-standing fake has been stolen.  So what???  Just whip up a convincing copy of it, put it back in place, and Bob's your uncle.  It's not as if the stolen fake has any value, intrinsic or otherwise.  "Flew from Roncevaux to Rocamadour", my fundamental jujube!

(On the other hand, if President Biden turns up wielding the stolen Durandal copy during his next debate with former President Trump, all sorts of things might get more interesting!  It might help his cutting remarks . . . )

Peter


Wednesday, July 3, 2024

What if this happened to the Mississippi River?

 

I was interested to read that an ancient course of the Ganges River in India, some 2,500 years old, has been discovered.


Earthquakes, caused by the shifting of Earth’s tectonic plates, have the potential to transform the face of the world. Now, for the first time, scientists have evidence that earthquakes can reroute rivers: It happened to the Ganges River 2,500 years ago.

. . .

In a July 2016 study, Dr. Michael Steckler ... had previously reconstructed the tectonic plate movements — gigantic slowly moving pieces of Earth’s crust and uppermost mantle — that account for earthquakes experienced in the Ganges Delta.

His models showed that the likely source of earthquakes in the region is more than 100 miles (160 kilometers) away from the sand volcanoes that Chamberlain and her colleagues found. Based on the large size of the sand volcanoes, the quake must have been at least a 7 or an 8 magnitude — approaching the size of the Great 1906 San Francisco earthquake.

. . .

About 50 miles (85 kilometers) away from the sand volcanoes, the scientists also found a large river channel that filled with mud at roughly the same time. This finding indicates that 2,500 years ago, the course of the river dramatically changed. The proximity of these events in both time and space suggests that a massive earthquake 2,500 years ago is the cause of this rerouting of the Ganges.


There's more at the link.

The now-demonstrated fact that a major earthquake can change the course of even a huge river like the Ganges, moving it 50 to 100 miles away from its previous course, made me think hard.  I don't know that we've ever seen the like in North America;  most of our rivers have changed course through a combination of erosion and silting (as far as I know, anyway).  However, what might happen if something like the New Madrid Fault let go in a big way?


Earthquakes that occur in the New Madrid Seismic Zone potentially threaten parts of seven American states: Illinois, Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, and to a lesser extent Mississippi and Indiana.

The 150-mile (240 km)-long seismic zone, which extends into five states, stretches southward from Cairo, Illinois; through Hayti, Caruthersville, and New Madrid in Missouri; through Blytheville into Marked Tree in Arkansas. It also covers a part of West Tennessee near Reelfoot Lake, extending southeast into Dyersburg. It is southwest of the Wabash Valley Seismic Zone.


Again, more at the link.

What's more, the New Madrid Fault runs slap bang underneath the Mississippi River.  If it really let go, it could easily produce an earthquake with a magnitude of 7 to 8 - it already has in the not too distant past.  If it were big enough, and lasted for long enough, what might that do to the biggest river on our continent?  If a waterway that big were to be displaced by 50 to 100 miles east or west, how much of our economy, our cities and our population would it take with it?  And what would happen to anything in the way?

It's a fascinating subject for speculation.  I wonder if it might make an interesting novel - perhaps set in older times, around the Civil War or Wild West period, as alternate history?  There were powerful earthquakes along the Fault in 1811-12.  What if they were repeated, say, 60 or 70 years later, at even greater intensity?

Hmmm . . .

Peter


Friday, June 28, 2024

Heh

 

A news report triggered a major flashback memory of my childhood.


The Hudson River Estuary Program fisheries staff reeled in a giant fish out of the Hudson River in New York last week.

The Atlantic sturgeon spreads six feet in length, weighing around 220 pounds, according to a Facebook post from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC).

It was caught near Hyde Park, about 80 miles from New York City.

. . .

The staff suspected the unique fish to be a female that had not yet spawned.

Atlantic sturgeons typically spend most of the year in the ocean, but the adults move in the Hudson during this time of year to spawn, the NYS DEC post said. 

Atlantic sturgeons are the Hudson River’s biggest fish, and New York State’s largest sturgeon species, the post said.


There's more at the link.

And the flashback?

Apparently, during World War II, American servicemen brought to the European theater a large number of songs from their homes.  My father, in turn, brought some of them home with him.  One of them, which my father used to hum (and, when my mother wasn't within hearing, sing), was "The Virgin Sturgeon Song".  The first verse is sort-of-suitable for polite company, so here it is:


Caviar comes from the virgin sturgeon.
The virgin sturgeon's a very fine fish;
But the virgin sturgeon needs no urgin' -
That's why caviar is such a rare dish.


There are many other verses, most less polite (and the lyrics at the link leave out all of the really "military verses" that Dad learned - he wouldn't sing those unless he was absolutely sure we kids were out of earshot!  I had to wait until I was in uniform myself before he'd share them.)  If you do an Internet search, you'll find several recordings of the song, some less... er... raw than others.  No, I'm not going to embed one here!  There are ladies among my readership!

It was weird.  As I read that report, I could literally hear my long-dead father's voice in my head, singing the Virgin Sturgeon Song softly to himself as he repaired a piece of furniture or worked on our car.  It was almost unconscious for him, a sort of meditative mouth music.  The song was also one of the less... ah... impolite pieces he brought back from the war, so if Mom caught him singing it (particularly in the presence of us kids), he wasn't in as much trouble as he would be if she caught him singing "The Rape of the Sphinx" or "The Old Bazaar in Cairo".  (An expurgated - highly expurgated - version of the latter may be heard here.)

Ah . . . memories!

Peter


Wednesday, June 12, 2024

A giant of the Cold War skies bids farewell

 

It's been announced that Russia's Air Force will retire its last remaining Antonov An-22 strategic transport aircraft this year.  The photograph below shows the prototype aircraft at the Paris Air Show in 1965, the year it first flew.



The An-22 was a behemoth.  It could carry up to 80 metric tons (approximately 88 US tons) of cargo, roughly equivalent to today's Boeing C-17 Globemaster III and almost twice the payload by weight of the contemporary Lockheed C-141 Starlifter.  It was routinely used to ferry intercontinental ballistic missiles around the Soviet Union, as well as carry large, heavy cargoes to favored client nations.  It was the largest turboprop-powered aircraft ever built, using the same engines that powered the Tupolev Tu-95 strategic bomber.

The An-22 was regarded by the Soviet Union as a strategic asset due to its missile-ferrying duties, which led to a potentially serious incident back in 1975.  At the time, the Soviet Union was pouring armaments and surrogate forces into Angola to support its favored MPLA "liberation movement" (a.k.a. terrorist organization).  South Africa, with US encouragement, was at the same time intervening on behalf of another such organization, UNITA.  I'm informed by sources I consider reliable that in late 1975, some South African special forces were camped out within sight of the runways at the international airport in Luanda.  They managed to get their hands on a number of man-portable ground-to-air missiles (presumably taking them off MPLA forces that "no longer needed them"), and sent an excited signal back to South Africa saying that they planned to sneak up to the runway and shoot down as many as possible of the parade of An-22's arriving every day, filled with armaments.  They would have been "sitting duck" targets, having no alternative airport within range to which they could be diverted after their long flight down the African continent.

I'm told that this was mentioned in passing between a South African liaison officer and the US embassy in Pretoria, and led to seismic-level upheavals.  The CIA was convinced that if South Africa shot down some of the Soviet Union's scarce strategic transports (only 68 were ever built), the Soviets would react very harshly, escalating the war in Angola out of control, and would probably act against other important US client states around the world.  The reconnaissance forces near Luanda were duly told not to carry out their plan, but to allow the An-22's to arrive and depart undisturbed.  They were bitterly disappointed, and I was told that some of the signals they sent back to Pretoria were "sulfurous" - but they obeyed orders.  I've often wondered what would have happened if two or three of these monster aircraft had bitten the African dust . . .

As far as I know, there's only one An-22 flying outside the Russian Air Force, a privately-owned example operated by Antonov Airlines of Ukraine.  I don't know whether it's still operational.  To give you some idea of the enormous size of this plane, here are two video clips showing its arrival and departure at European airports.






So, at last, a giant of the skies goes to its rest.  It will not be forgotten.

Peter


Thursday, June 6, 2024

Four-fifths of a century ago, the turn of the tide became clear

 

Eighty years ago today . . .




My father was, at the time, in the process of returning from the Middle East to Britain after three years of fighting the Axis powers in the Western Desert and the Dodecanese campaign.  My mother, as she had been for the previous several years, was manning fire watch and incendiary patrols on the so-called "Home Front".  When I asked her, decades later, how she'd felt when the news broke that the Allies had landed in Normandy, she could only shake her head silently, while tears came to her eyes.

It was, for both of them, the sign that the war was now inexorably drawing to a close.  It still had a ways to run, but the Germans had grown so weak that they could not keep the Allied landing forces out.  Final victory seemed now to be assured.  They knew many long, trying days lay ahead;  both would lose friends and comrades in the last year of fighting . . . but the end was, at long last, in view.

Today, we remember.

Peter


Thursday, May 30, 2024

Recognize this plane?

 


If you said it was a Boeing B-29 Superfortress, you'd be wrong.  It's actually a Tupolev TU-4, an early Soviet-era carbon copy of a B-29, right down to a few combat scars that were slavishly copied from the three B-29's the Soviet Union had available when Josef Stalin ordered its development.

The story of how the Soviet Union copied the B-29 is a long and fascinating one.  You'll find all the details at the "WWIIafterWWII" blog.  Here's an excerpt.


The Soviet Union developed any number of highly effective fighters, ground attack planes, trainers, and twin-engined tactical bombers during WWII. One effort where the Soviets were far behind by the end of the war was strategic bombers. During WWII the USSR had only one (relatively) modern four-engined strategic bomber, the Pe-8.

Less than 100 were completed during WWII. They achieved little while suffering horrendous losses. By the time of Japan’s surrender in September 1945 there were only three dozen Pe-8s remaining. When NATO formed in 1949, they were considered so insignificant that they never even received a reporting name.

Throughout WWII, Josef Stalin sought to obtain American strategic bombers via Lend-Lease; with no success. As soon as Soviet intelligence became aware of the B-29 Superfortress, that type was requested as well. In 1944 the USA rejected the request, along with another attempt later that year and a third request in 1945. The USA considered the Superfortress such an advanced weapon that the requests were barely even given consideration.

. . .

The Soviet Union interned three B-29 Superfortresses during WWII. Until August 1945, the USSR had a non-aggression pact with Japan. Under international law, warplanes of warring parties landing in a neutral third country are required to be interned for the rest of the conflict.

“Ramp Tramp II” landed near Vladivostok on 29 July 1944, after taking an AA hit during a mission over Manchukuo. The damage was not severe but bad enough to make a return home impossible.

“General H.H. Arnold Special” landed at Tsentral’naya naval airbase on the USSR’s Pacific coast on 11 November 1944, after a storm blew it off course during a raid on the Omura aircraft factory in Japan.

“Ding Hao” landed at the same place ten days later after a Japanese AA round hit one of it’s engines. Of the three, it was the most significantly damaged.

All three of these B-29s were airworthy.

. . .

The idea for reverse-engineering the B-29 came not from Andrei Tupolev’s bureau, but rather from Vladimir Myasischchev, who ran his own aircraft design bureau. After the third B-29 was secured during WWII, Myasischchev suggested to Stalin that it would be both feasible and advantageous to reverse-engineer it. Stalin agreed, but for whatever reason, assigned the effort to his rival Tupolev in June 1945.


There's much more at the link, including many photographs.

I'd known about the TU-4 copy of the B-29 for a long time, but this article went into far greater depth than anything I'd read before.  It makes fascinating reading for aviation and military history buffs.  Recommended reading.

Peter


Tuesday, May 14, 2024

That's a lot of wind beneath their wings...

 

A report at The War Zone brought back many military (and other) memories.


After an extraordinary career spanning more than 80 years of service, and plenty of operational missions, the South African Air Force (SAAF) is preparing to retire its last C-47 Dakotas. Remarkably, the SAAF is moving to discard its C-47s while, at the same time, elsewhere around the globe, turboprop versions of the venerable transport continue to win orders.

The story of the Dakota in SAAF service stretches all the way back to 1943 when the service was fighting in World War Two. Most extraordinary, perhaps, is that among the very last Dakotas operated by the SAAF, most had been delivered during that conflict, having started life as C-47s manufactured for the U.S. Army Air Forces (USAAF).

By June next year the South African Air Force will have been operating C-47 Dakotas continuously for 80 years, albeit much upgraded. Even more astounding is that some airframes still in active service have been there from the start, with the oldest (6825) delivered in Feb 1944.

The SAAF’s Dakota fleet, however, saw its most extensive combat service during the long-running conflict in South West Africa (now known as Namibia) and Angola, supporting South African Defence Force (SADF) units during the so-called Border War between 1966 and 1989. The SADF relied heavily on the Dakota for troop transport, resupply, medical evacuation, paratrooping, and other missions, its importance was heightened by the sanctions on Apartheid South Africa that complicated the procurement of alternative equipment.

By the 1980s, the SAAF operated the largest fleet of Dakotas anywhere in the world — close to 50 in total. However, the demise of minority rule in South Africa, and the end of the Border War, saw the Dakota — and the SAAF more generally — switch increasingly to peacetime missions, especially humanitarian work. At the same time, Dakota squadrons were rationalized, and the fleet was reduced in size.


There's more at the link.

The SAAF's C-47's flew in combat zones many times over the years.  They were the primary transport for secondary military air routes in South Africa and then-South West Africa (today Namibia), with C-130's and C-160's handling the busier routes.  During the Rhodesian War many SAAF C-47's and Alouette III helicopters were "loaned" to Rhodesia, supplementing that country's small Air Force for "Fireforce" anti-terrorist missions and cross-border operations into Zambia and Mozambique.  During South Africa's own Border War in the 1980's they were the shorter-range backbone of air transport operations, including one (shown below) that had an argument with a SA-7 Strela anti-aircraft missile and barely made it back to an airport in time to avoid crashing.



I flew many thousands of miles aboard SAAF C-47's, including one that was so old its logbook recorded it dropping paratroopers at Arnhem in 1944 as part of Operation Market Garden - the so-called "Bridge Too Far" airborne assault.  It was in remarkably good shape for an aircraft that had been "rode hard and put away wet" for almost 40 years by the time I flew in it.  That particular aircraft is still in service, having been converted to turboprop propulsion along with the SAAF's other surviving C-47's.  I also traveled aboard the civilian DC-3 transports of Air Cape, flying along the Garden Route to and from Cape Town.  Even in the 1980's, dirt and grass airfields were still in use at some of the small towns there, with no all-weather runways.  Things could get bouncy during takeoff and landing, and occasionally the pilot would have to make a couple of low passes to chase a cow or two off the runway before he could land!



The SAAF Museum still has a flying example of the C-47 as built, with its original Pratt & Whitney engines.  Here's its C-47 showing off at an air display.  It's not a very good video, but it's the best I could find on YouTube.




I wonder what the SAAF will buy to replace its C-47's?  There's no doubt that it needs a replacement, both for transport and for coastal maritime reconnaissance (both roles currently filled by the C-47), but the SAAF's aircraft fleet is in very parlous condition at present, with a minimal budget and very few skilled maintainers left to keep it flying.  The service is a pale shadow of what it was in the 1980's, when it was undoubtedly the premier air force in sub-Saharan Africa, with skills and operational experience on a par with most NATO air arms.

Despite its age and long overdue need for replacement, it'll be sad to see the last of the SAAF's C-47's take a final bow and retire into history.

Peter


Tuesday, May 7, 2024

Two hundred years ago today...

 

... Beethoven's Ninth Symphony was performed for the first time in Vienna, Austria.  It went on to become perhaps the best-known symphony in the classical music repertoire.  The anniversary is being celebrated there with all due pomp and ceremony.


The symphony, widely regarded as one of the great masterpieces of Western classical music and culminating in the Ode to Joy, was first performed in 1824 in Vienna, where the German composer lived and worked for most of his life.

Now the city is celebrating with a series of performances of the symphony, notably by the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra, conducted by famed Italian Riccardo Muti.

“It's the whole world to us to be able to sing this wonderful message of love,” Heidrun Irene Mittermair, an alto in the Vienna Singverein Choir, told the BBC. “You're lifted up at the end, when you're singing.”

Heidrun, like the rest of the singers in the Singverein Choir, is not a professional musician - she’s a schoolteacher. But her choir sings at Vienna’s famous Musikverein Concert hall, with the Vienna Philharmonic, one of the world’s finest orchestras.

Over the past few days, the choir has been singing the stirring Ode to Joy, the choral finale of Beethoven’s Ninth. Based on a poem by Friedrich von Schiller, it embraces a vision of universal brotherhood.

The musicologist Otto Biba said the symphony was revolutionary, partly because it culminated with singing.

“It was a symphony, but with something new in the fourth movement. There was a choir on the stage and the soloists were starting to sing," he said. "There were so many new details. It was very difficult for the musicians, and very experimental.”

“Beethoven opened the door to the future. It's a work left by Beethoven for the next generation,” Mr Biba said.


There's more at the link.

It's worth remembering that Beethoven composed this symphony while almost completely deaf.  At its premiere performance, conducted by Michael Umlauf, Beethoven was on stage as well, and tried to conduct his own work, but lost his sense of timing due to his deafness.  At the end of the piece: 


Beethoven was several bars off and still conducting; the contralto Caroline Unger walked over and gently turned Beethoven around to accept the audience's cheers and applause. According to the critic for the Theater-Zeitung, "the public received the musical hero with the utmost respect and sympathy, listened to his wonderful, gigantic creations with the most absorbed attention and broke out in jubilant applause, often during sections, and repeatedly at the end of them." The audience acclaimed him through standing ovations five times; there were handkerchiefs in the air, hats, and raised hands, so that Beethoven, who they knew could not hear the applause, could at least see the ovations.


For those who've never been to Vienna, and never heard the world-famous Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra or seen the Musikverein, here are both of them in a single video.




Timeless indeed, and well worth commemorating on this anniversary.

Peter


Tuesday, April 30, 2024

So did it ever happen?

 

I was intrigued to read an article at The Aviationist.


65 years ago today on April 24, 1959, legend has it that an aviation stunt so bizarre it defies belief actually took place in the Mackinaw Straits between the upper and lower peninsulas of Michigan.

A U.S. Air Force RB-47E Stratojet reconnaissance aircraft piloted by Strategic Air Command pilot Capt. John Stanley Lappo was said to have flown underneath the Mackinaw Bridge where Lake Michigan and Lake Huron converge. As history records the event, no photos of the aircraft flying under the bridge exist, but the stunt, if it actually did happen, created enough buzz that a legend was born.

According to the thisdayinaviation.com website and the Wikipedia page for the Mackinaw Bridge, fitting a Boeing RB-47E Stratojet under the Mighty Mac was a tight squeeze with little margin for error. The highest place between the water surface in the Mackinaw Strait and the bottom of the Mackinaw Bridge is 155-feet at the center. The tail of an RB-47E stands 27-feet, 11 inches off the ground. If you do the math, that leaves about 127-feet of space between the water and the bottom of the bridge to play with. Considering the RB-47E stall speed in these conditions may have been as slow as 150-190 MPH, the plane would cover that distance in altitude in just over a second or two.

As the story goes, and is told in several media outlets, Capt. Lappo was, “Reported by his navigator” to some higher authority after the bridge fly-under. The legend claims that Lappo was, “charged with violating a regulation prohibiting flying an aircraft below 500-feet”. No great aviation tale is complete without details, and the story is that Capt. Lappo was permanently removed from flight status by the Commanding General of the Eight Air Force, Lieutenant General Walter Campbell.

. . .

Most stories about the alleged fly-under appear on the internet after 2019. Before that, there is no verifiable report of the incident. Given these results, all the features of an urban legend exist here. This is not to say the story is impossible.


There's more at the link.

I can see a fighter or fighter-bomber flying under that bridge, just as has been done to other famous bridges around the world (for example, see the Tower Bridge Incident in London, England in 1968).  However, the much larger, less nimble and maneuverable B-47 bomber would be very difficult indeed to fly through such a confined space.  If it was done, one can only tip one's hat to the pilot in admiration.

The question is, did it ever happen?  There seems to be no conclusive evidence out there.  I would think an incident like that would have attracted attention and headlines from all over, so I'm confused.  Was there an orchestrated cover-up by Strategic Air Command, so as not to encourage any of its other pilots from trying the same trick?

If any reader can shed any further light on the subject, please let us know in Comments.  I'm sure I'm not the only one intrigued by this rumor.

Peter


Tuesday, March 26, 2024

A feel-good moment more than 80 years in the making

 

Courtesy of James Higham at Nourishing Obscurity, I came across this touching video.  It seems there's only one surviving airworthy Hawker Hurricane fighter from the Battle of Britain in 1940.  The mechanic who worked on that aircraft during the Battle is still alive, at 102 years of age, and was recently reunited with the plane.


A WWII RAF veteran had the chance to fly alongside the aircraft he helped maintain during the heroic Battle of Britain in 1940.

Jeff Brereton, who celebrated his 102nd birthday earlier this year, took to the air in BE505, the world’s only two seat Hurricane, with R4118, the only remaining airworthy Mk 1 Hurricane to have taken part in the Battle of Britain, and the aircraft Jeff worked on, flying alongside.

Jeff, who lives in Evesham, Worcestershire, said: “I have great memories of the plane. Of all the aircraft I dealt with, that was the one that stuck in my mind. It was unbelievable to be able to see that aircraft again, that it had survived.”


There's more at the link.

Here's a video report, including mid-air images.




I found the story particularly moving because my father was also an aircraft mechanic during the Battle of Britain.  I wrote about his World War II service some years ago.

It's nice to come across a good news story like this in our turbulent, not-so-good world.

Peter


Friday, March 8, 2024

I think my mother would have had flashbacks galore over this...

 

I was interested to see that a new unmanned aerial vehicle, or drone, has just flown using pulsejet technology - the same used to power the Nazi V1 flying bomb during World War II.

The pulsejet actually stops and starts many times per second in order to generate thrust, opening a series of valves to let in air and push the exploding fuel out the back of the engine, then shutting them again to detonate the next dollop of fuel.  You'll find a detailed explanation at Wikipedia.  The result is a loud buzzing sound, as the explosions follow each other in very rapid succession.  Here's a recording of a World War II V-1 in flight.




My mother endured months of bombardment by V-1's during 1944.  She said that as long as one heard the engine, one knew one was safe, because it was still flying;  but if it suddenly cut out, one knew it had begun its "death dive" to explode on the ground, and one hunted for cover as fast as possible.

The new pulsejet-powered drone is much smaller than its infamous predecessor, but it's only a prototype.  Future versions will doubtless be much larger and heavier.  However, it still sounds very like the V1.




If my mother was still alive, I wouldn't dare send her a link to that video.  She'd have all sorts of things to say to me (none of them polite) if she heard that sound again . . .

Interestingly, the V1's engine was not powerful enough (i.e. did not generate enough thrust) for the flying bomb to take off under its own power.  It had to be launched up a long ramp using a rocket booster, shown in the first part of the video clip below.




Once airborne, the pulsejet engine produced enough power to keep it flying.  The new drone's engine is much less powerful than the V1's, but the drone itself is much smaller, so it can take off under its own power.  I daresay that by the time they develop it into a production version, the engine will have been scaled up to cope with the additional bulk and weight.

Peter


Saturday, March 2, 2024

Saturday Snippet: The Roman slide into dictatorship

 

Historian, classicist and author Mary Beard, well-known for her many books on Ancient Rome, tackles the institution of Empire and the rise of the Caesars in "Emperor of Rome: Ruling the Ancient Roman World".



She doesn't tackle so much the lives of the Emperors as the way in which their office came to be, how it developed, how they ruled (and how their subordinate bureaucracy managed the Empire), and some of their quirks in office.  To any history buff, it's a fascinating look at how the formerly republican and democratic Empire fell under the sway of unelected dictators and bureaucrats - a lesson, perhaps, not without its importance to our world today.

Here's how Ms. Beard describes the change from democracy to autocracy.


When Pliny, as a new consul, rose to speak in September 100 CE, Rome had been ruled by an emperor for more than a century. But the city of Rome itself was over eight hundred years old, and for the majority of that time, after a largely mythical series of seven early kings – starting with the founder Romulus and ending when Tarquin ‘the Proud’ was thrown out around 500 BCE – it was governed by a sort-of democracy, in what is now usually called the Roman Republic.

The ‘sort-of’ is important. To be sure, the major political officials of state, including the consuls at the top of the hierarchy, were democratically elected by all the male citizens, and those same citizens also had charge of making laws and taking decisions about war and peace. But it was a system dominated by the rich. Their votes in elections expressly counted for more than those of the poor, and they alone were allowed to stand for office and to command Rome’s armies. Meanwhile the senate, consisting of several hundred ex-office-holders, was the most influential political institution of the state. Even if its precise formal power is, and was, hard to define, the senate’s decisions were usually followed. It would be more accurate to call this government a power-sharing system rather than a straightforwardly democratic one. For apart from the senate, whose members sat for life, all political offices were temporary, held for just a single year, and always held jointly. There were always two consuls at any one time. Next below them in seniority were the ‘praetors’, concerned with the administration of law, among other things, who gradually increased in number so that there were eventually sixteen of them in post together each year. It was not simply that more officials were created in order to cope with a bigger workload, though that was a factor. The underlying principle of the Republic was: you never held power for long, and never alone.

This was the system of government under which – many years before it had an emperor – Rome gained its empire, dominating much of what is now Europe and beyond: ‘staining the seas with blood’, as Pliny put it. What drove them to this, and why they were so unnervingly successful in their conquests, especially during their major period of expansion between the third and first centuries BCE, has always been debated. The Greek historian Polybius in the second century was already wondering how Rome, a very ordinary mid-Italian town in the fifth century, had come to dominate most of the Mediterranean within a few hundred years.

It is too easy to put everything down to the Romans being aggressive and militaristic, or having superior discipline and expertise in battle. They were militaristic, but so were most of those they conquered. And the Romans also had their weaknesses in combat skills, their early inability in naval warfare, for example, being close to a standing joke. The best explanation (or guess) is that, somehow, aggression and militarism were combined with a hugely competitive ethos among the Roman elite in their hunt for military glory, with almost limitless resources of manpower at the Romans’ disposal once they had taken control of most of Italy, and, most likely, with an element of simply ‘getting lucky’ – all of it resulting in vast, rapid and violent imperial expansion. But what exactly the combination was, and which were the real deciding factors, is quite uncertain.

What is certain is that this series of conquests had an almost revolutionary effect on the politics of Rome itself, in addition to the more obvious consequences for the victims. Part of the disruption was caused by the enormous profits of empire, which destroyed the notional equality that had previously existed between the power-sharing elite and had acted to mitigate their competitive rivalry. For the commanders, there were personal fortunes to be made out of war, especially against the rich kingdoms of the Eastern Mediterranean, and an increasingly large gap opened up at the top of Roman society between a few super-successful ‘big men’ and the rest. When one of those big men, the tycoon Marcus Licinius Crassus, observed that he would count no man rich who could not raise an army out of his own cash, he obviously revealed the level of wealth commanded by the fortunate few (he himself had inherited one fortune and made another largely out of property speculation). But he also hinted at the uses to which that wealth might be put. As it turned out, none of this did Crassus much good himself. He was killed in 53 BCE on what had promised to be a lucrative campaign against the Parthian empire (stretching east of modern Turkey), his severed head allegedly ending up as a gory prop in the performance of a Greek tragedy at a Parthian royal wedding.

Equally important were the pressures put on the power-sharing structures of Rome’s Republican government by its growing imperial territory. Traditionally the same elected officials handled both the domestic business of the city and its external affairs – whether commanding the legions in front-line war, ‘peace-keeping’ or troubleshooting. To begin with at least, the Romans did not aim at much hands-on, direct control of what they had conquered, beyond taking the tax revenue, exploiting the local resources (such as the Spanish silver mines), and getting their own way when they wanted. But even so, all the different roles became more and more difficult to accommodate within the framework of shared, temporary, annual offices. It might, after all, take a few months of a single year’s office simply for a man to get from Rome to a trouble spot at the edge of the empire.

The Romans were not blind to this, and they made various adjustments in response. Office-holders, for example, began to serve in positions overseas for an additional temporary period, after their year in Rome itself. But, all the same, the crises generated by the empire sometimes required more radical solutions. If you wanted, say, to clear the Mediterranean Sea of ‘pirates’ (a word that had something of the ring of ‘terrorists’ to an ancient ear), you had to give authority and resources to a single commander on a potentially long-term basis, in a way that fundamentally flouted the temporary, power-sharing principles of traditional Roman office-holding. The empire, in other words, gradually destroyed the distinctive structures of government that had brought it into existence in the first place, paving the way for one-man rule. The empire created the emperors, not the other way around.

Prequels to autocracy

Through the early part of the first century BCE, Rome witnessed a series of prequels to autocracy. One of the big men of the 80s, Lucius Cornelius Sulla, marched with his army on Rome, installed himself as ‘dictator’ and imposed a programme of conservative political reforms, before resigning a couple of years later and then dying in his bed. It was, by all accounts, a very nasty final illness, but still perhaps a better end than he deserved, given the death squads he had let loose in the city. Just a decade later, Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus (Pompey the Great) took a slightly more subtle route to what was almost sole power. It was he who, by a citizens’ vote, was given charge of getting rid of the pirates, with a huge budget and seniority over all other Roman officials in the Eastern Mediterranean for a period of three years. (In the event it took him only three months, and he followed it up with an even longer-term mandate, a bigger budget and greater power, to confront other enemies of Rome.) He went on to be made consul on his own, without a colleague, a flagrant breach of Republican principles, however unremarkable it might sound now. He ploughed money into grand public buildings in Rome itself, much as later autocrats did, and occasionally saw his own head on coins minted by cities outside Italy, a key indicator of monarchical power in antiquity, as it has remained.

The turning point, however, came in the mid first century BCE with Julius Caesar, who stood on the cusp between Rome’s sort-of democracy and the rule of the emperors. Caesar’s career started in a fairly standard way for a member of the Roman elite, despite later writers imagining that he had secretly harboured overweening ambitions from an early age. One apocryphal story imagines him, in his early thirties, standing gloomily in front of a statue of Alexander the Great (from whom Pompey borrowed his name, ‘Great’), and lamenting his own slow start in comparison with the precocious Macedonian king. But after a successful (and shockingly brutal) military command in Gaul, which he managed to extend to eight years without a break, he followed the example of Sulla. In 49 BCE he marched with his army on Rome, ‘crossing the Rubicon’, the boundary of Gaul and Italy, en route, and making that a well-known phrase even now for ‘passing the point of no return’. In the civil war that followed, his enemies were led by Pompey, who was now, for a change, playing the part of the conservative traditionalist and ended up decapitated on the shores of Egypt where he was seeking refuge. Caesar used his victory to take what was effectively sole control of Roman government. He was appointed ‘dictator’ by the senate, and in 44 became ‘dictator for ever’.

Yet Caesar in some ways still looks back to the Republic. His career started within the framework of traditional short-term elected offices. Even his ‘dictatorship’ had at least tenuous links with an ancient temporary appointment designed to handle public emergencies, although, since Sulla, it increasingly meant something closer to our modern sense of the term. It is for those reasons that most historians recently have tended to treat Caesar as the last gasp of the old order. But when, in the second century CE, the biographer Suetonius (Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, in full) was composing his Lives of the first Roman emperors, he chose to begin with Julius Caesar, as number one of twelve, the ultimate founder of imperial dynasty. Even more to the point perhaps, all Roman rulers after him took ‘Caesar’, previously just an ordinary Roman family name, as part of their own official titles – in a tradition that continued down to modern Kaisers and Czars. And that is exactly how Pliny addressed the emperor through most of his vote of thanks: not ‘Trajan’ but ‘Caesar’ (which he used more than fifty times, compared with ‘Trajan’ just once).

It is easy to understand why Caesar was cast in this founding role. Although there were fewer than four years between his victory over Pompey and his own death in 44 BCE (and although he was rarely in the city of Rome itself for more than a month at a time as he finished off other pockets of the civil war overseas), Caesar managed to change the face of Roman politics in radical and controversial ways that established the pattern for later emperors. Like them, he controlled election to high office, nominating some candidates who were then simply given the nod by the voters. He went further than Pompey in having his own head represented on coins minted in Rome itself, not just abroad (the first living Roman to do so), and he set about flooding the city and wider world with his portraits, in numbers never seen before: hundreds, if not thousands, were planned. And he exercised unprecedented power, in new areas, apparently unchecked. Cicero’s wry quip about the stars in the sky being forced to obey him was a reference to his bold reform of the Roman calendar, changing the length of the year and of the months, and effectively introducing the ‘leap year’, as we still know it. Only all-powerful autocrats – or, as in eighteenth-century France, revolutionary cabals – claim to control time.

Caesar also set a pattern for the future in the manner of his death, assassinated in 44 BCE, shortly after he had been made ‘dictator for ever’. This became both a warning to his successors and a model for political murder lasting into the modern world. (John Wilkes Booth chose the date of Caesar’s killing – ‘the Ides of March’, the 15th of the month by our dates – as the code word for his planned assassination of Abraham Lincoln in 1865.) The truth is that, thanks to William Shakespeare and others, the assassins have been treated rather generously by history. They were a predictably mixed group of high-principled freedom fighters, malcontents and self-interested power seekers who ambushed and killed the dictator during a meeting of the senate, leaving him dead in front of a statue of Pompey. Marcus Junius Brutus, who emerges as an honourable patriot from Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, was probably one of the most self-interested of the lot. He had an appalling record of exploiting people in Rome’s empire. Notoriously, he lent money to a city in Cyprus at a 48 per cent rate of interest, four times the legal maximum, and he had his agents blockade the local council chamber to recover what was owed, starving five councillors to death in the process. And within a couple of years of Caesar’s assassination, despite his opposition to monarchy, he had his own head depicted on the coins that he minted to pay his troops.

But even more to the point, the assassins’ success in eliminating their victim (which is often the easy bit) was overshadowed by their lack of any plan for what to do next. More than a decade of civil war followed, in which the supporters of Caesar first of all turned on his killers, and then on each other. By 31 BCE, it had come down to a clash between two main parties: on the one side, Caesar’s henchman Mark Antony, now in alliance (and more) with the famous Queen Cleopatra of Egypt; and on the other, Caesar’s great-nephew, Octavian, who had also officially become his son, by posthumous adoption, in Caesar’s will (a not uncommon Roman practice). Their final battle was fought at sea off the coast of northern Greece, near the promontory of Actium, just south of the island of Corfu. The Battle of Actium, as it is known, was celebrated extravagantly in later propaganda as the decisive and heroic victory for Octavian, and the glorious start of a new era. In fact, it was won more by desertion and disloyalty than by heroism. Antony’s battle plans were leaked to the enemy by one of his generals, and, on the most plausible reconstruction, Cleopatra headed back to Egypt with her ships, and her treasure, almost before the fighting had begun, quickly followed by Antony. Quite how ignominious a departure it was is still debated, but many ancient writers were keen to paint Cleopatra as a cowardly queen who couldn’t take the heat and simply scarpered. Whatever the circumstances, though, Octavian was left as the sole leader of the Roman world, and soon to be the first emperor of Rome. To put it another way, the assassins had, indirectly at least, brought about the very thing they claimed to be fighting against: permanent one-man rule.


Many things worth noting there, including how politicians can be so lionized by their supporters (and their political parties, and the gray eminences behind the scenes who control those political parties) that they are elevated in public opinion to almost Caesar-like status.  Therein lies an immense danger to any constitutional republic like the United States.  If order should break down, and our politicians prove incapable of controlling it, many will demand a "strong man" to take charge, solve the problem, and "restore the Republic".  As we see in ancient Rome, such a "strong man", once in charge, seldom agrees to lay down the power he's arrogated to himself.  The Roman Republic was effectively destroyed by the Caesars.  Will our republic suffer a similar fate?  Only time will tell.

Peter