The Ancient World Edit

Kama Sutra The Kama Sutra (or Kama Shastra) is one of three ancient Indian texts written in the Sanskrit language that describe the permissable goals of life. It is devoted to the pursuit of karma, a legitimate goal but less exalted than the goal of artha (power), while the pursuit of dharma (moral law) was considered the most worthy. Since creating the next generation is a vital task in ensuring the stability of society, all adults should know methods of achieving it effi ciently and pleasurably. According to tradition, the companion of Shiva, Nandi, who overheard the god making love to his wife Parvati and was consequently inspired, wrote the original Kama Sutra. The scholar Vatsayana redacted this version, sometime in the early centuries of the Common Era, possibly the fourth century. Vatsayana was an important commentator on the sutras, or aphorisms that were given by Gautama Buddha to humankind for assisting them in their spiritual development. However, Vatsayana’s version seems to incorporate works from other scholars and his own observations according to the accepted Indian tradition. Although the Kama Sutra has become widely known as a semipornographic work of erotica, this is not the sole topic of its content. The acts of love or sexual congress are divided into eight different methods, each of which may be performed in one of eight different positions. There are, therefore, 64 different arts of love. Both heterosexuality and homosexuality are addressed, as well as female sexual satisfaction. These sections may be seen as strengthening the bonds between people because they include details not just on how to create the next generation but also on how to provide pleasure and variety to each other without seeking a new domestic situation. The remainder of the 35 chapters also cover methods to attract a spouse and how to be a good wife, among a variety of other topics. Many people continue to follow the precepts of the Kama Sutra in the modern world, and some self-help manuals were inspired by it. Further reading: Burton, Sir Richard. Kama Sutra. Available online. URL: (March 2006); Daniélou, Alain. The Complete Karma Sutra: The First Unabridged Modern Translation of the Classic Indian Text. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions, 1993; Kakar, Sudhir, and Wendy Doniger, trans. Kamasutra. Philadelphia: Running Press Book Publishers, 2003. John Walsh Kanishka (2nd century c.e.) Kushan emperor The greatest of the emperors of the Kushan Empire, which stretched through modern-day Afghanistan, Pakistan, and parts of northern India, Kanishka reigned for 20 years from about 127 c.e. During his reign the Kushan Empire reached its zenith as a major military power and also was to play an important role in redefi ning K 235 Buddhism in the region. The Kushan emperors were of Yuezhi (Yueh-chih) ethnicity, tracing their origins back to China. In about 174 b.c.e. the Huns had driven them westward and southward from China, taking over the Greco-Bactrian kingdom in 135 b.c.e. and establishing their rule over a large part of Central Asia. The empire they created controlled important trade routes, and the aims of the Kushan emperors had been to try to control trade between Rome and China. There is evidence of contact with the Roman Empire at Pompeii and with China. Kanishka’s major achievement was convening the Fourth Buddhist Council, held in Kashmir. Most historians argue that Kanishka embraced both Buddhism and also the Persian religion of Mithras, which later became popular among Roman soldiers. Followers of Theravada Buddhism criticized the Fourth Council, which led to the rise of Mahayana Buddhism. In spite of this opposition some 500 bhikhus (Buddhist monks) made their way to Kashmir at the request of Emperor Kanishka. Their task was to edit the Tripitaka, which was reported to have taken 12 years, resulting in 300 verses and 9 million statements. The entire Buddhist scriptures, which had been in the Gandhara vernacular of the Kushan Empire, were translated into Sanskrit. The new ideas that emerged essentially started to bridge the differences between Hinduism and Buddhism with the Lord Buddha portrayed as a god. Some of these developments can be traced on the very few surviving coins of Emperor Kanishka’s reign, which have an image of Buddha. Some Buddhist texts go as far as acclaiming Kanishka as a second king Ashoka whose kingdom was, by definition, a second holy land for Buddhism. Kanishka also launched wars against neighboring countries, extending the empire from the borders of China to modern-day Bengal in the east and to the basin of the Ganges in the west. It is not known exactly how Kanishka died, although popular accounts have him being smothered by his enemies. See also Buddhism in China; Buddhist councils; Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism. Further reading: Hallade, Madeleine. The Gandhara Style and the Evolution of Buddhist Art. London: Thames and Hudson, 1968; Hargreaves, H. Handbook to the Sculptures in the Peshawar Museum. Calcutta: Government of India, 1930; Seckel, Dietrich. The Art of Buddhism. London: Methuen, 1964. Justin Corfield Kautilya (350–275 b.c.e.) prime minister of India One of the earliest political thinkers of ancient India, Kautilya (Chanakaya), the celebrated author of the Arthasastra, was prime minister of the emperor Chandragupta (r. 326–301 b.c.e.) of the Mauryan Empire (326–200 b.c.e.). According to some historians, he is dated around fourth century c.e., belonging to the Gupta Empire (320–500 c.e.). He was educated in the famous University of Takshasilâ (Taxila) and afterward taught politics there. Repeated Greek invasions forced him to migrate to Pataliputra, the capital of Magadha (presently Patna, the capital of Bihar Province). He soon fell out of favor with the ruling king Dhana Nanda (r. 334–322 b.c.e.) because of his outspoken and blunt nature. Indian legends speak of a meeting of Kautilya and Chandragupta, both of whom had an ax to grind against the Nanda dynasty. Dhana Nanda had humiliated Kautilya and had ousted Chandragupta from the army. Chandragupta deposed Dhana Nanda with the help of Kautilya and thus the first unified empire, covering most of present-day India and Pakistan, was created. The Mauryan Empire had a wellorganized administration, thanks to the Brahman pundit Kautilya. When Chandragupta renounced his kingdom to become an ascetic, Kautilya remained as prime minister, but jealousy of some of the ministers put his life in danger. According to Indian legends, a jealous minister named Subandhu burned him to death in 275 b.c.e. The most important of three books attributed to Kautilya is the Arthasastra (Science of material gains). Written in Sanskrit, the Arthasastra is a work on practical politics and covers topics on statecraft, the duties of a king, information pertaining to social life, the plant kingdom, the animal world, agriculture, minerals, and metals. The Arthasastra came into the limelight in the beginning of the 20th century and has been compared with The Prince, written by Machiavelli (1469–1527). Kautilya covers in detail conduct of diplomatic affairs and policies to be followed with neighboring states. Kautilya speaks about preparation for war, methods for defeating independent kingdoms, and occupation of an enemy capital. The safety of the king was the first priority. There should be secret escape routes, the residential complex should be fireproofed, and there should be female guards armed with bows. We know from chapter five of the Arthasastra that Indians had a sound knowledge of metals, such as arakuta (brass), vrattu (steel), kamsa (bronze), and tala (bell metal). He talked of manidhatu (gem materials), different stones and jewelry, and kachamani (artificial gems) imitated by coloring glass. 236 Kautilya Although not widely known in the world as compared to Confucius (551–479 b.c.e.), Sunzi (Sun Tzu) (sixth century b.c.e.), and Machiavelli, his exposition of strategies of a well-planned economy, warfare, details of administration, and diplomatic games placed him as a top political theorist. He is known as the Indian Machiavelli, and the diplomatic enclave housing foreign embassies in the Indian capital of New Delhi is named after him, Kautilyapuri. Further reading: Boesche, Roger. The First Great Political Realist: Kautilya and His Arthashastra. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2002; Kangle, R. P. Kautiliya Arthasastra. New Delhi, India: Motilal Banardisass, 1997; Majumdar, R. C., ed. The Age of Imperial Unity (600 BC–320 AD). Bombay, India: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1989. Patit Paban Mishra and Sudhansu S. Rath Khosrow I (r. 531–579 c.e.) Sassanid king Khosrow I, also known as Anushirvan, was the son and successor of Kavadh I and one of the most powerful kings of the Sassanid Empire. He led Persia into a glorious age after a long period of rebellion and civil wars. Although not the oldest son of Kavadh I, the terms of his father’s will and the support of aristocrats and Zoroastrian clerics led to him being crowned in 531 c.e. In the second year of his reign Khosrow agreed to an “eternal peace” with the Byzantine emperor Justinian I. By the terms of the agreement the Byzantine government subsidized the defense of the Caucasus Pass, which had been used by Berber tribes to attack Persia and Byzantium. Byzantine support for rebellions in Armenia and Georgia against Persians convinced Khosrow to break his peace agreement and begin a second war with the Byzantine Empire in 540. After establishing another peace, Khosrow successfully fought the Romans in Lazicia on the Black Sea and in Mesopotamia until 562, when a 50- year peace was established. Using the peace between Persia and Rome, and with a coalition of Turks, Khosrow defeated the Hephathalites, a permanent threat for Persia. Khosrow made many reforms while king and continued Kavadh’s attempts to reform the taxation system by abandoning the annual taxation calendar, introducing instead a constant system of taxation that was based on a survey of property and annual income. Changing the taxation policy gave Khosrow the ability to make longterm plans for the country. Because of his attempts to establish social justice, Khosrow became famous for his just rule.Khosrow I organized a permanent army whose discipline was superior to that of the Romans. He was also the fi rst Sassanid king to pay a salary to soldiers and provide weapons. In order to minimize the risk from plots against him Khosrow divided the empire into four regions, each of which was ruled by a military leader. During this time Ctesiphon, his capital, became a metropolis, and he developed his famous palace, Taq-e Kasra. In addition to founding new towns, Khosrow constructed buildings, canals, and strong fortifi cations in frontier towns to protect his empire. Although Khosrow was an orthodox Zoroastrian, he was tolerant of other religious beliefs. Because of Khosrow’s interest in philosophy, seven Greek Neoplatonic philosophers immigrated to Persia after the Academia of Athens was closed in 529 by Justinian I. With his support, many books from India, Greece, and Syria were translated into Pahlavi. One of these books, Kalileh and Dimneh, remains one of the most famous works of Persian literature. In his last years Khosrow extended the boundaries of his territory to Yemen. The Romans stimulated the Turks to attack the eastern boundaries of the Persian Empire, and then attacked Mesopotamia, part of Persia. Despite his old age Khosrow personally led the Persian army and defeated the Romans. He went on to conquer Armenia, Syria, Cappadocia, and the fortress of Dara on the Euphrates, before forcing the Byzantine emperor Tiberius II to sign another peace treaty. In 579, while negotiating the peace contract, Khosrow died, and his son, Hormozid IV, succeeded him. See also Byzantine-Persian wars; Zoroastrianism. Further reading: Christensen, Arthur. “Sassanid Persia.” In The Cambridge Ancient History. London: Cambridge University Press, 1956; Frye, Richard N. The Heritage of Persia. Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda Publishers, 1993; Yarshater, Ehsan. “The Political History of Iran Under the Sassanids.” In W. B. Fisher, ed. The Cambridge History of Iran. London: Cambridge University Press, 1983; Ghirshamn, Roman. Iran, from the Earliest Times to the Islamic Conquest. New York: Penguin Books, 1954. Mohammad Gharipour and Faramarz Khojasteh Kija (c. 12th century b.c.e.) Chinese prince, ruler of Korea Kija is the Korean rendition of a semilegendary man named Qizi (Ch’i Tzu) in Chinese transliteration, who Kija 237 lived in the 12th century b.c.e. and played an important role in advancing civilization in Korea. The Korean peninsula is located in northeastern Asia, adjoining China. The ancestors of the Koreans moved into the peninsula from the Manchurian region of present-day China and belong to the Mongoloid family of peoples, akin to the Chinese and Japanese. The early Koreans lived in tribal units, fi rst by fi shing and hunting, gradually developing agriculture. Korean mythology has Tan’gun, the fi rst ruler of Korea, as born of a union between a female bear and the son of the divine creator, in 2333 b.c.e. Another legend has a prince of China’s fi rst historic dynasty, the Shang (or Yin) dynasty, migrating to Korea c. 1122 b.c.e. with his followers and founding a state, called Choson, with a capital city near modern Pyongyang in northern Korea. The last king of the Shang, reputedly cruel and vicious, listened only to the advice of his evil advisers and his wicked concubine. In despair his kinsman Qizi, or Lord of Qi, decided to leave the Shang realm before its inevitable fall. He led his followers across Manchuria to Korea and founded a dynasty. Korean legends have Kija ruling Korea for 40 years, cite several locations as his grave site, and credit him as the founder of a dynasty that ruled for generations. Archaeological evidence indicates a gradual fl ow of cultural infl uence from northern China into Manchuria and Korea during the fi rst millennium b.c.e. The wars that led to the fall of the Shang and consolidation of the Zhou (Chou) dynasty in China did propel refugees to seek safe new homes, both to the northeast and south of the Yellow River. Coming from the Yellow River, where the most advanced civilization in East Asia had developed, the dispersal of peoples did bring development to regions where they settled. See also Anyang. Further reading: Gardiner, K.H.J. The Early History of Korea. Canberra: Australian National University Press, 1969; Weems, Clarence N. ed. Hulbrert’s History of Korea. Vol. I. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1962. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Kingdom of God The Kingdom of God is central to the message of Jesus (Christ) of Nazareth. The idea that God is king of the world is a concept that every ancient nation utilized for its propaganda purposes, and the Jewish people were no exception. However, the precise expression is not used at all in the Jewish scriptures but is found only in the deuterocanonical book of Wisdom and the New Testament. Divine kingship is found in a few books of the Bible: Psalms, the latter half of Isaiah, Daniel, Exodus 15. The idea is closely knit with the idea of God’s intervention to bring history to an end and to inaugurate a new age of direct divine rule. It is in this context that the idea meshes with the themes of apocalyptic literature. The literature between the Old Testament and the New Testament, called the Pseudepigrapha, more often give attention to the existence of God’s kingdom, though it is not a prominent theme in the literature of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Jesus uses the term uniquely both in its precise expression and in its general meaning. In its usage prior to Jesus it almost always means something that is going to happen in the future. But in the New Testament Jesus also means that it is already present, a concept that theologians call “realized eschatology.” Most often, Jesus intends the Kingdom of God to be a future event (“may your kingdom come”), but there are times in his speeches when he means that the kingdom has partially arrived in the exercise of his preaching and miracles. One notable line from the Gospels suggests this new dimension: “The kingdom is in your midst.” By this he does not mean that the kingdom is an interior and mystical state; this would be a form of Gnosticism that is simply not present in the Gospels. Rather, he means that the kingdom manifests itself through the actions of faith. God, in effect, is taking control, and the kingdom is present. Realized eschatology is most commonly found in the last and most theological Gospel of John. Here the term Kingdom of God is less often used, but the effects of the kingdom are experienced in this present time and space. When Jesus says, “I am the resurrection and the life,” he collapses all of time and creation into himself. His very presence is the sign that the kingdom has come, and his ongoing presence abides in those who believe, such as the church. Questions arise about the realized eschatology of the Gospel of John because it is debated how authentically it represents the historical life and teaching of Jesus. In order to understand Jesus in any of the Gospels it would be better to translate the Kingdom of God as the reign of God: The stress is thereby on the power of God to act, more than on a physical, spatial, or political dimension. It is activated through faith and manifested through divine interventions in space and time, phenomena that are called miracles. The kingdom is thus present in part but is mainly imagined as future oriented. The future orientation of the term led the way for later Christians to speak more and more of heaven as the Kingdom of God. Later fathers of the church such as Eusebius thought that the Kingdom of God was a political idea 238 Kingdom of God that was fulfi lled in the reign of Emperor Constantine the Great. The emperor then became the king over state and church, an idea that later was called Caesaropapacy. This idea took hold in the Byzantine Empire, the Holy Roman Empire, the Russian “Third Rome,” and among the military religious orders of the crusades. See also apocalypticism, Jewish and Christian; Christian Dualism (Gnosticism); Christianity, early; Judaism, early (heterodoxies); Torah. Further reading: Keel, O. The Symbolism of the Biblical World. New York: Seabury Press, 1978; Meier, J. P. A Marginal Jew. New York: Doubleday, 2001; Viviano, B. T. The Kingdom of God in History. Wilmington, DE: M. Glazier, 1988. Mark F. Whitters King’s Highway and Way of the Sea There were two main highways in ancient times between Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the lower Arabian Peninsula: the King’s Highway and the Way of the Sea. The King’s Highway largely skirted the desert and served desert peoples. It ran from Damascus to the Gulf of Aqabah, and from there it forked into a route that crossed the Sinai to Egypt and a route that ran the eastern coast of the Red Sea into the Hejaz, or western Arabic coastal region. While the term appears often in historical records, it may have originally meant simply “royal road” or “principal highway,” with no connection to a particular king or kingdom. The King’s Highway has always been an important road for pilgrims, traders, and conquerors. The Bible records it as the route that Moses and the “children of Israel” might well have taken after they fl ed from ancient Egypt. Most likely it was the path that Abraham used to pursue the desert kings who had taken his nephew Lot as hostage. Throughout later history the King’s Highway was a crucial resource for kings and generals. On this highway David and Solomon secured trade and leverage over their eastern neighbors, Moab and Edom. When the Aramaeans arose under Ben-Hadad I and Hazael, they expanded southward by controlling this highway. The people of Assyria took Damascus and the Transjordan by means of it, and centuries later the Nabataeans used the King’s Highway to ship their spices and luxury goods from their hideaway refuge in Petra to the markets of Damascus and beyond. Around the turn of the millennium Rome entered the area and subjugated Nabatea a century later. The Romans made the King’s Highway a part of their imperial road system, especially using it as a means of transport through the forbidding Arab deserts. They called it the Via Nova Traiana (Trajan’s New Way) because of Trajan’s sponsorship. Its strategic value did not end when the area was traded off between Byzantines, Arabs, Persians, and Muslims. Because of the requirement for pilgrimage (hajj), the road became even more important for Bedouins and northern Arab Muslims for travel to Mecca and Medina. Only in the 16th century did the Ottomans develop an alternate route. The crusaders fortifi ed the highway at the turn of the next millennium, and their castles are still imposing landmarks in the modern Jordanian villages along the way. Today the route is called Tariq es-Sultani (Way of the Sultan). Ancient road builders left traces along the highway, from the Roman milestones to the crusader castles. Even today villages of the modern state of Jordan mark its path. The King’s Highway follows the highlands and ridges east of the Jordan and the Dead Sea, and some of the most spectacular desert scenery in the Middle East greets travelers. Freshwater springs fl ow at various places and so explain the popularity of the King’s Highway. The Way of the Sea was the principal coastal highway and the one most chosen by traffi ckers between Mesopotamia and Egypt. The reasons are simple: It was close to water, food sources, and towns and avoided the highlands. Damascus was the northern junction, and the path went from there to the Sea of Galilee, then through Jezreel Valley and Megiddo, reaching the Mediterranean coast and following it until Zoan in northern Egypt. Various parties controlled the Way of the Sea. At fi rst it fell under the infl uence of the Egyptians (and was called the Way of Horus in ancient sources), then under the Philistines (called the Way of the Land of the Philistines in the Bible), and fi nally under the Romans (who called it Via Maris, Way of the Sea). There were three main sites of strategic importance along the Way of the Sea: Gezer along the southern section of the road in the area contested by the Egyptians and the Philistines; Megiddo in the central section guarding the fertile Jezreel Valley, and Hazor in the north, where the road forked toward the city-states of the Phoenicians in the northwest or toward Damascus in the northeast. See also Egypt, culture and religion. Further reading: James, G. P. The King’s Highway. Whitefi sh, MT: Kessinger Publishing, 2004; Rollin, Sue, and Jane Streetly. Jordan: Blue Guide. London: A and C Black, 1998. Mark F. Whitters King’s Highway and Way of the Sea 239 Kush The Kushite kingdom fl ourished in the northern part of present-day Sudan (called Nubia by the Romans) and southern Egypt. From their capital at Napata, the Kushites controlled the trade between Egypt and East Africa and developed into a major military power. Under the leadership of Piy, Kush forces moved into Upper Egypt, conquering Thebes and, in spite of strong resistance, Memphis. Under King Shabako (r. 721–706 b.c.e.) the Kushites established their own dynastic rule over Egypt but retained many of the old Egyptian customs, particularly regarding burials, and adopted the Egyptian pantheon of gods. The Kushites developed their own written language based on Egyptian hieroglyphics, but as this language has yet to be deciphered, much remains to be learned about Kushite history and customs. As the Assyrians conquered the eastern Mediterranean and moved into Egypt, the Kushites were forced to retreat southward into the Sudan where they built a new capital at Meroë, north of modern Khartoum. Controlling the valuable gold mines in the Sudan and acting as middlemen in trade between East Africa and the eastern Mediterranean, as well as Greece, the Kushites grew wealthy. The numerous ruins of temples, tombs, pyramids, and palaces at Meroë and environs are evidence of the prosperity and artistic complexity of the Kushite kingdom. The Kushites also produced high-grade iron for the manufacture of weapons. They may have transmitted their skills in iron smelting and the lost-wax process for bronze casting to West Africa, or that knowledge may have emerged independently in that area. By 300 c.e. the Kushite kingdom had begun to decline as its trade in iron and other products with Egypt diminished. Attacks from the newly emerging kingdom at Axum in present-day Ethiopia further weakened it, and it fi nally fell to Axum rule in the fourth century c.e. See also Egypt, culture and religion; Ethiopia, ancient. Further reading: Shaw, Ian, ed. The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000; Török, Laszlo. The Birth of an Ancient African Kingdom: Kush and the Myth of the State in the First Millennium BC. Lille, France: Université Charles-de-Gaulle, 1995; Wildung, Paul, ed. Sudan: Ancient Kingdoms of the Nile. Paris: Flammarion, 1997. Janice J. Terry Kushan Empire The development and consolidation of the Han dynasty in China, particularly in terms of the expansion of population and agriculture, had an impact on the nomadic tribes along its northern border. In 135 b.c.e. the Han Chinese emperor sent his emissary Zhang Qian (Chang Ch’ien) to fi nd the Yuezhi (Yueh-chih) for a joint offenssive against the Xiongnu (Hsiung-nu). Zhang found the Yuezhi, now calling themselves Kushans, in modern-day Afghanistan but failed to persuade them to renew their emnity against the Xiongnu. Earlier the Xiongnu had been forced to move west, and they in turn had displaced a confederacy of settled tribes who then came to occupy a wide swath of land across northern India, Bactria, and Gandhara, which are now part of Afghanistan. These people were known to the Chinese as Yuezhi and to others further west as Indo- Scythians. One branch of the Yuezhi was known as the Kushans, or Kusana, probably as a result of the connection with the Chinese province of Gansu (Kansu). The Kushans established themselves as the dominant force in the north of the Indian subcontinent, parts of Central Asia, and Afghanistan during the fi rst three centuries of the Common Era. The expansion of the Kushan Empire is most usually ascribed to the leader Kanishka. The Kushan Empire controlled long stretches of the Silk Road and this served to provide rulers with considerable revenue and power. Under Kaniska, the Kushan Empire was considered an equal of both Rome and China. Trade goods passed through Kushan territory from both the east and the west, infl uencing Kushans with trends and ideas from around the world. It was through Kushan territory that Central Asia received early Buddhist ideas and knowledge. The emperor Kaniska welcomed ideas from other countries and scholars debated Zoroastrianism, Brahmanism, and Greek religious concepts. A lasting memorial to this is seen in the Gandhara school of art. The Kushan culture declined as independent forces in India and, particularly, the Sassanid Empire in Iran began to attain more infl uence. See also Buddhist councils; Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism. Further reading: Foltz, Richard C. Religions of the Silk Road. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000; Rosenfi eld, John. Dynastic Arts of the Kushans. Delhi, India: South Asia Press, 1993. John Walsh

The Expanding World 600 CE to 1450 Edit

Kaifeng (K’ai-feng) Kaifeng became the capital city of the Northern Song (Sung) dynasty c. 960–1126, when it was also called Bian (Pien) and was located south of the Yellow River on a rich agricultural plain in modern Henan (Honan) Province. Kaifeng was close to the Grand Canal, which made the wealth of the south easily accessible. The down side to its location was that it had no natural defenses and had to rely solely on massive city walls for protection. Kaifeng was wealthy and cultured, with a population of around a million people. It had China’s oldest synagogue and Jewish community, immigrants from Persia, whose descendants survived as a distinct group until modern times. The Song dynasty was never militarily powerful; it lacked good horses for its cavalry and was surrounded by strong and hostile neighbors. One was the nomadic Khitan from Manchuria who ruled northeastern China as the Liao dynasty, with a capital city at modern Beijing. After defeating it in war the Liao extracted heavy tribute from the Song as condition for peace. In time the Liao were threatened by new nomads from farther north called the Jurchen, who established the Jin (Chin) dynasty. In 1118 the Song formed an alliance with the Jin and they jointly attacked and destroyed the Liao. Soon the Song-Jin alliance collapsed over the division of spoils. Jin forces then besieged Kaifeng, until famine forced it to capitulate in 1126. Song was forced to cede territory, pay an immense indemnity, and agree to other onerous terms; then the Jin army withdrew. When Song could not pay its indemnity, Jin attacked again, this time thoroughly pillaging Kaifeng and carrying off Emperor Huizong (Hui-tsung), his heir, and 3,000 men and women of his court to exile in northern Manchuria. The loot from the government treasury amounted to 54 million bolts of silk, 15 million bolts of brocade, 3 million ingots of gold, and 8 million ingots of silver. Another son of Huizong escaped and eventually established a court in Hangzhou (Hangchow) in southern China; it was called the Southern Song dynasty. Hangzhou soon became the premier city in China. Within a quarter-century the leaders of the Jin dynasty had become so Sinicized that they had abandoned their original capital in northern Manchuria and established two new capitals in the heartland of China, one in modern Beijing, another in rebuilt Kaifeng. In the early 13th century Jin was attacked by the Mongols, the most terrifying conquerors the world had seen. In 1132 the most powerful Mongol general, Subotai, besieged Kaifeng. The siege was notable in the history of military technology as the fi rst time that gunpowder in grenades and fl ame throwers was used. After terrible privations Kaifeng surrendered. Subotai demanded the right to destroy the city and massacre its inhabitants. Fortunately Grand Khan Ogotai Khan was dissuaded from allowing it on the advice of Yelu Chucai (Ye-liu Ch’u-ts’ai), who had himself been a prisoner of the Mongols but had risen to high offi ce under them because of his skills as an astrologer. Yelu calculated that if spared, the people of Kaifeng and surrounding lands could produce more wealth for their Mongol masters. Thus the people of Kaifeng suffered looting and massacre, but most were spared. Kaifeng never became a capital city again. Further reading: Liu, Laurence G. Chinese Architecture. New York: Rizzoli International Pubs., 1989; Sickman, Laurence, and Alexander Soper. The Art and Architecture of China. Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1971; Steinhardt, Nancy S. Chinese Imperial City Planning. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1990. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Kamakura Shogunate The Kamakura Shogunate was a government established by Minamoto Yoritomo at the end of the Gempei War, which had lasted from 1180 until 1185. The shogunate lasted from 1185 (or 1192, when it was formally recognized by the emperor) until 1333. Because the Minamoto family lived at Kamakura, the new order was called the Kamakura Shogunate, although many sources refer to the period as the Minamoto Shogunate, after the founder’s surname. MINAMOTO CLAN The Minamoto clan emerged during the 12th century as a challenge to the Taira clan, who controlled Japanese politics. After a series of wars, the Minamoto clan had been defeated, and when the Gempei War broke out, the Taira were certain of their eventual victory. They launched a series of preemptive strikes against the Minamoto and easily defeated them. However because of their easy victory, the Taira did not follow up all their military advantages and this allowed the Minamoto to rally their depleted forces. They also managed to get other smaller clans to support them, and, worried that the Taira were about to become too powerful, the Minamoto gradually gained support, which allowed them to defeat the Taira. At the naval battle of Dannoura on April 25, 1185, the Minamoto attacked their outnumbered opponents and killed the six-year-old emperor, whose grandmother was a member of the Taira clan. This fi nal victory over the Taira ensured that Minamoto Yoritomo, the leader of the Minamoto clan, and the victor of the Battle of Dannoura, would take control of Japan. He created shogun (general who subdues barbarians), which established a military rule over Japan called bakufu (tent government) whereby the emperor and regents held civil authority, but military affairs were conducted by the shogun under the authority of the emperor. This made Minamoto Yoritomo dictator of the country. The Minamoto clan descended from Saga, the 52nd emperor (r. 809–829). As with their rivals, the Taira, sections of the imperial family were cut off from the imperial line and took surnames. The Minamoto include descendants of the younger children of Saga, but most of them were descendants of Prince Sadazumi, the son of Seiwa, the 56th emperor (r. 858–876). Minamoto no Yoritomo (1147–99) was the great-grandson times 7 of Prince Sadazumi. In January 1160 his father had taken part in an unsuccessful coup attempt against the Taira and was then exiled to eastern Japan, where he stayed with Hojo Tokimasa, head of the Hojo clan, allies of the Taira. While there he married Hojo Masako, a daughter of Tokimasa, who tied the Minamoto to the Hojo. During the Gempei War the Hojo provided much support for the Minamoto, and when Yoritomo became the shogun, the Hojos were the second most important family. Minamoto Yoritomo made his supporter Kujo Kanezane (1149–1207) the sessho (imperial regent) and soon faced challenges from his family. He began to feel threatened by his brothers, especially Yoshitune. Yoshitune fl ed to the north of Japan where he took refuge with Fujiwara no Hidehira. Yoritomo threatened to attack Hidehira, who decided that the easiest solution was to get Yoshitune to commit suicide. This death did not, however, prevent Yoritomo from attacking Hidehira’s lands, which were destroyed. On his return south, Yoritomo offi cially became shogun and established the system of government that was to dominate Japan until the Meiji Restoration in 1868. MINAMOTO NO YORIIE AND SANETOMO The stability that Yoritomo brought to Japan was brief. He was shrewd, but ruthless, and was responsible for the deaths of two additional half brothers, Yoshiie and Yoshinaka. When Yoritomo died in 1199, his eldest son was only 17. In 1202 when Minamoto Yoriie was 20, he became shogun. However the Hojo clan usurped his power in the following year when they established the head of the Hojo clan as the shikken (hereditary regent), a system that operated until 1333. In 1203 Yoriie became ill and his lands were divided between his infant son Ichiman and his brother Sanetomo. Angered by the power of the Hojo clan, in spite of his mother’s being Hojo Masako, Minamoto Yoriie tried to reassert himself. He started conspiring with Hiki Yoshikazu, who was, in fact, the adopted son of Minamoto 228 Kamakura Shogunate Yoritomo, making him Yoriie’s brother by adoption, as well as being his father-in-law. Unfortunately the plot between Yoriie and Yoshikazu was discovered, the Hojos attacked, and Yoshikazu was assassinated. Yoriie’s son, Ichiman, was murdered and Yoriie was replaced by his more compliant brother, who acquiesced in the domination of the political scene by the Hojo. Yoriie was confi ned at Shuzenji on the Izu Peninsula and was murdered in the following year by his grandfather. Minamoto Sanetomo (1192–1219) became the third shogun of the Kamakura Shogunate. He was aged 11 and because of the nature of his coming to power, he would never wield any real power. Instead he devoted himself to cultural matters. He had started writing poetry from the age of 14, and when he was 17 he sent 30 of these poems to Fujiwara no Teika, one of the well-known court poets of the period. Teika disliked them as they were too close to the Japanese poems of the seventh and eighth centuries, but some were included in an anthology, now held in the Imperial Collection in Tokyo. Sanetomo was also involved in promoting kemari (kickball), a game involving eight players who kick a deerskin ball around a court, ensuring that it never touches the ground. In 1219 Kugyo, the son of Yoriie and nephew of Sanetomo, assassinated the shogun. HOJO CLAN AND THE SHIKKENS In spite of the political problems that ensued from the death of Minamoto Yoritomo, the Kamakura Shogunate resulted in a shift of political power away from Kyoto to Kamakura. In spite of the Hojo regency, by the middle of the shogunate, the importance of Kyoto had waned, although it retained its reputation as a place of sophisticated culture and the location of the residences of most of the nobles. In contrast, Kamakura, farther north, was a center that revolved around the Minamoto clan, even if not the actual nominal head of it. The fi shing port, which had existed when Yoritomo was young, had become an important city where some 2,000 gokenin (housemen) swore fealty to the clan. As a result many of the emerging Buddhist sects of the period started erecting temples in the town. For the rest of the Kamakura Shogunate, the Hojo clan curiously chose not to take up the shogunate but operated the regency with the head of the Hojo clan being the shikken. In 1221 Emperor Go-Toba decided to use the demise of the Minamoto family as an opportunity to try to restore direct imperial rule. In 1221 he issued a message to ask warriors loyal to him to rally and attack the Hojo clan. However few were willing to take on the Hojos and very few supporters made an appearance in what became known as the Jokyu disturbance. On those who did, the wrath of the Hojo clan descended with a large Hojo-fi nanced army taking over Kyoto and arresting Go-Toba. He was exiled to the island of Oki, and the Hojo, in the name of the shogunate, moved their headquarters to Kyoto, which became the legal and administrative center until the end of the shogunate in 1333. The lands of the nobles who answered the call of Go-Toba were seized and redistributed to supporters of the Hojos, who emerged as the unchallenged rulers of the whole of Japan. With all of the killings in 1219, the line of Minamoto Yoritomo was extinct and therefore the Hojos decided to appoint Kujo Yoritsune in 1226, a scion of the Fujiwara clan, and a distant relative of Yoritomo, as the next shogun, with Hojo Yoshitoki actually controlling the government. Kujo Yoritsune (1218–56) was eight years old at the time of his appointment and was deposed when he was 26. Kujo Yoritsugu (1239–56), who was only fi ve years old, replaced him, and was deposed seven years later. For the next shoguns the Hojo clan chose members of the Japanese imperial family with Prince Munetaka (1242–74) as shogun from 1252 until 1266, Prince Koreyasu (1264–1326) as shogun from 1266 until 1289, Prince Hisaki (1276–1328) as shogun from 1289 until 1308, and Prince Morikuni (1301–33) as shogun from 1308 until his death. All were appointed shoguns when they were children, and most were deposed as young men. They were all puppets of the Hojos and were chosen only out of regard for their lineage. In 1232 the shikken, Hojo Yasutoki, drew up the Joei Shikimoku (Joei Formulary), which laid down 51 articles defi ning, for the fi rst time, the legal powers of the shogunate that ruled through the Hyojo-shu (Council of State). Some 17 years later a judicial court was established to allow legal decisions to be made more quickly and with greater fairness. With the Kamakura Shogunate effectively controlled by the Hojos, and with the very easy quelling of the Jokyu disturbance, the greatest challenge to the whole system of government in Japan was not any internal force but the emerging threat of a Mongol invasion, which took place in 1274. MONGOL INVASIONS AND SOCIETY DURING THE KAMAKURA SHOGUNATE The Japanese managed to prevent the Mongols from encroaching too far inland and were saved when a storm destroyed many of the Mongol ships, forcing them to retreat. The invasion in 1281 was more serious, with the Mongols sending two fl eets to Japan. However these Kamakura Shogunate 229 faced not only a much stronger Japanese force behind entrenched positions at Hakata Bay, but also a typhoon, which destroyed much of the Mongol fl eet, again forcing them to quickly withdraw. The defeat of both Mongol invasions did show the military supremacy of the Japanese, but also the intervention of the weather on both occasions was seen as a divine message. However concern about future invasion resulted in vast expenditures on weaponry and defensive positions, as well as a move to isolate Japan from China and Korea, from which the invading Mongol navies had sailed. The importance of the Kamakura Shogunate was certainly not in the political power that was wielded by the shoguns—for most of the time they were puppets— but in the societal changes, or to some extent the lack of them, that occurred in Japan. The Japanese feudal system was entrenched with warriors—the samurai class—ruling unchallenged, spending their time in training, military exercises, occasional fi ghting, and for a small number, in learning and the arts. The samurai ruled unquestioned over villages where peasants labored in the fi elds to produce the crops, and a small number of skilled artisans made the implements necessary for agriculture and war. Any move to create a large middle class in Japan was quashed, and there was no real incentive for innovation. Samurai were occasionally rewarded with extra land, but as the fi ghting ceased, less and less land was redistributed by the shikken. It was only in times such as the Jokyu disturbance that the shikken managed to confi scate enough land to placate ambitious samurai. There were regular disputes between the samurai and the farmers and hence the legal codifi cations of the Hojos during the 1230s and 1240s managed to establish rules for dealing with these problems. The only other development from the Kamakura Shogunate was the increase in the belief in Zen (or Ch’an) Buddhism and also Neo-Confucianism ideas that had come from China. These led to great changes in religion and the emergence of a large number of Buddhist sects, some of which preached extreme asceticism. See also feudalism: Japan; Mongol invasions of Japan; Taira-Minamoto wars. Further reading: Sansom, George. A History of Japan to 1334. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1958; Shinoda, Minoru. The Founding of the Kamakura Shogunate 1180–1185. New York: Columbia University Press, 1960; Turnbull, S. R. Samurai: A Military History. London: George Philip, 1977. Justin Corfi eld Kanem Bornu By 1200 c.e. the earlier African kingdoms of Ghana, Mali, and Songhai had passed. The dominant power in western Africa was Kanem Bornu. Another term for this region, since it encompasses part of central Africa, is Sudanic Africa. The fi rst major leader of these kingdoms was Hummay, the diwan or mais of Kanem Bornu. (The term diwan attests to the Islamic and Arab infl uence since later on in the Ottoman Turkish Empire, diwan or divan came to mean the seat of government.) Hummay ruled around 1075 and marked the appearance of Islam as a major force. In Africa as in Southeast Asia, particularly Indonesia, Islam was fostered as much by traders and wandering imams, or clerics, as it was by holy war, or jihads of conquest. Living in a semiarid region, trade, as seen in the use of vast caravans, was the way to wealth, since agriculture in this forbidding climate was a challenge at best. Therefore Hummay, and the following kings of his Sefuwa dynasty, carried on a protracted struggle to gain control of the caravans and trade routes from their capital at Njimi, northeast of Lake Chad. Of course, waterborne trade on the lake was also an object of their mercantile ambitions. Trade in gold grew to become a major source of wealth—and confl ict—in the entire region. It was fi rst spurred by Arab traders, who shipped it to North Africa, where a mint to make dinars had been opened in Kairouan in today’s Tunisia. Later, as John Reader wrote in Africa: The Biography of the Continent, “the trans-Saharan trade [in gold] was further boosted when Europe began minting gold coins for the fi rst time since the disintegration of the Roman empire” in the 13th century. During their struggles for trade, the Sefuwa kings, especially in the region of the Fezzan, in what is now southern Libya, came into confl ict with the Berber warriors from the Sahara. However while pursuing trade, the rulers of Kanem Bornu also realized that making alliances with more sedentary, agricultural peoples would provide them with a steady source of food and thus kept good relations with the farming peoples of the Lake Chad region. Another source of wealth for the Sefuwa kings was in the form of slavery, which under them became a major part of their economy. The height of the power of Kanem Bornu came in the reign of Hummay’s descendant Dunawa Dibilani (r. 1210–48). There had been a diluting of Islamic infl uence in the decades following Hummay, and Dunawa set about restoring Islam. He also carried out a series of jihads between the Fezzan and Lake Chad, which not only increased the power of the kingdom, but 230 Kanem Bornu also provided him with a lucrative income from the sale of slaves in the Muslim markets to the north. The death of Dunawa brought with it nearly two centuries of internal unrest and external invasions, at the same time as the Hausa peoples from what is now Nigeria attempted to expand their territory in the same general region. Ali Gaji (c. 1497–1515) fi nally succeeded in establishing the old Kanem Bornu kingdom again, with a new capital at Ngazargamu. The kingdom would fl ourish for nearly 300 more years until, as the Hausas, it fell under the power of the imperialistic Fulanis. See also Berbers; Hausa city-states. Further reading: McLeave, Hugh. The Damned Die Hard: The Colorful, True Story of the French Foreign Legion. New York: Saturday Review Press, 1973; Oliver, Roland, and Brian M. Fagan. Africa in the Iron Age c. 500 b.c. to a.d. 1400. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975; Packenham, Thomas. The Scramble for Africa. New York: Random House, 1991. John F. Murphy, Jr. kanji and kana The Japanese language supplanted that of the Ainu and is considered part of the Altaic group of languages. It is similar to Korean and may contain elements of Southeast Asian languages. Until the fourth century Japanese had no written form and the introduction of written Chinese provided an early model. Buddhist monks probably traveled to Japan with Buddhist texts that had been originally obtained in India, and then translated them into Chinese. The use of Chinese characters to represent Japanese words or syllables is known as kanji. Since kanji do not represent various markers for tenses and prepositions required by Japanese, hiragana markers often accompany them, fulfi lling this purpose, and they may also indicate the pronunciation of kanji. Only later were kanji introduced to represent distinctively Japanese words. The manyogana writing system adopted Chinese characters on the basis of sound rather than meaning. Subsequently, kanji were developed that were similar in meaning (kokuji) or else different in meaning (kokkun) from Chinese originals. Many kanji have multiple pronunciations and contextual meanings, which may be broadly divided into native-derived (kunyomi) and foreign-derived (onyomi) words. Over the next centuries two additional systems were developed to help with portraying Japanese words for which appropriate kanji did not exist. These are the hiragana and katakana systems that, together, are referred to as kana. Hiragana symbols are written in a cursive script that was known at the end of the fi rst millennium as onna-de or woman’s script. Its function is primarily grammatical and hiragana symbols frequently accompany and modify kanji symbols. Katakana symbols tend to be more angular in style and are used for foreign words, for children’s books, or for large public notices. Both types of kana were based on Chinese characters, simplifi ed to represent sounds. Foreign loanwords were initially converted into kanji characters, but in the modern age have been converted into katakana symbols on a mostly onomatopoeic basis. Both kana and kanji have the virtue of conveying meaning from the sounds and meanings associated with them, but also within the shapes used to make them. Literature, especially poetry created using them, has a tendency to convey multiple meanings from minimal word usage. Poetry such as the haiku, which is a development of earlier forms and for which the 17th century poet Basho is perhaps the best-known exponent, combines strict limits on numbers of syllables while offering considerable ambiguity and multiplicity of meaning. Various attempts have been used to rationalize the kana and kanji systems, which pose some problems because of the different mental requirements of the systems and because of the sheer number of characters. Although some streamlining has been made, the Japanese people and state have so far resisted wide scale change. The many foreign words integrated into the system demonstrate its fl exibility and ability to respond to change. See also Murasaki Shikibu. Further reading: Kess, Joseph K., and Tadao Miyamoto. The Japanese Mental Lexicon: Psycholinguistic Studies of Kana and Kanji Processing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2000; Takeuchi, Lone. The Structure and History of Japanese: From Yamatokotoba to Nihongo. New York: Pearson Books, 1999. John Walsh Kemmu Restoration In 1185 the young Japanese emperor Antoku, some seven or eight years old, was drowned in the Battle of Dannoura in the Inland Sea by his grandmother, rather than be captured by their enemies. The power of the Taira clan, with which he was allied, was destroyed, Kemmu Restoration 231 and the victors were the Minamoto clan. Their leader, Minamoto Yoritomo, saw the death of the emperor as an opportunity to establish the fi rst shogunate, or military government, in Japan. Although the Minamotos would still pay lip service to the institution of the emperor, which was considered divinely inspired by the Japanese, there was no doubt that Yoritomo was the real ruler of Japan. Prudently Yoritomo enlisted the support of the retired emperor, Go-Shirakawa, to give his blessing to the new regime that has been called the Bakufu, or tent government, because the samurai, the military class, controlled the country. When Yoritomo died in 1199 his widow, Masako, having two weak sons, was able to transfer the power of the shogunate to her own clan, the Hojos. The Hojo clan proved capable military rulers and in 1274 and 1281 fought back the Mongol invasions of Kubilai Khan from China. In 1281 the second invasion fl eet (lacking a maritime tradition, the Mongols had to rely on Koreans for their navy) was destroyed by an immense typhoon that entered Japanese history as the kami-kaze, or “divine wind,” which saved Japan. In struggles fought within Japan, like the war between the Taira and the Minamoto, there had always been the wealth of the vanquished to be dispersed among the followers of the victors. However because both Mongol operations were amphibious landings, there was no real booty to be disposed of among the victorious samurai. The discontent among the samurai, and their daimyo, or lords, grew over time. With the growing antagonism of the samurai warrior class, the bonds of loyalty to the shogunate and its tent government began to loosen. In 1318 a new emperor, Go-Daigo, ascended the throne. A fully grown man, unlike the hapless Antoku, Go-Daigo was determined to be emperor. Luckily for him, the Hojo shogun at the time was more in favor of pleasure than power, and the new emperor was able to quietly make his plans. As Turnbull remarks in The Book of the Samurai: The Warrior Class of Japan, “by the 1330s resentment against the Hojo began to come into the open . . . and the unifying force proved to be, of all things, the emperor, in an anachronistic attempt to restore the long-lost prestige of the throne.” In a bid for control, the retired emperor Go-Uda helped Go-Daigo. In 1331 Go-Daigo attempted an uprising against the Hojos, but he was taken prisoner by the Hojos. He was exiled but managed to escape, most likely with the help of followers in the Hojo camp. Within a year, in 1332, Go-Daigo was ready to make another attempt. The Minamoto triumph in 1185 had set a dangerous precedent in Japan. Any feudal daimyo could ascend to the shogunate, if he proved he had enough military force and could secure the support of the emperor. The Hojos sent their best commander, an ambitious daimyo named Ashikaga Takauji, to Kyoto to try to make Go-Daigo cower before a show of force. But following in the footsteps of the Minamotos and the Tojos, Ashikaga Takauji now proclaimed himself the defender of Emperor Go-Daigo. Ashikaga, with the help of Nitta Yoshisada, was able to attack the seat of the Hojos at Kamakura and topple their Bakufu. The era that followed is known as the Kemmu Restoration. Once the Hojo power was broken, Ashikaga revealed that supporting Go-Daigo was only a means to an end. Rather than restoring the emperor to his rule, Ashikaga had only coveted the shogunate for himself. The era that has become known as the Ashikaga Shogunate opened in Japan. However Go-Daigo, the 96th emperor of Japan, had no intention of sharing power with Ashikaga Takauji. As a result Ashikaga drove Go-Daigo out of the imperial city and found a more pliant member of the imperial family who dutifully appointed him as the shogun. Rather than surrender Go-Daigo fl ed into the mountains of Yoshino south of Kyoto, determined to continue the fi ght. The period that ensued was known as the Nambokucho War and would last for 60 years, the longest single war in Japanese history. While some daimyo and their samurai followed Ashikaga, others remained loyalists to Go-Daigo. Among these was Kusunoki Masashige, who died fi ghting for Go-Daigo in the Battle of Minatogawa in 1333. Although there were two imperial courts, the northern one with Ashikaga in Kyoto and the southern under Go-Daigo in the mountains, after 1337, Ashikaga Takauji was really in control of Japan. In 1392 the southern court returned to Kyoto, and the period of two imperial capitals ended. Ashikaga established his own shogunate, which would rule for less than a century. Further reading: Leonard, Johnathan Norton. Early Japan. New York: Time-Life Books, 1968; Newman, John. Bushido: The Way of The Warrior. London: Bison Books, 1989; Turnbull, S. R. Battles of the Samurai. London: Arms and Armour Press, 1987; ———. The Book of the Samurai: The Warrior Class of Japan. New York: Bison Books, 1982; ———. Samurai: The World of the Warrior. Oxford: Osprey, 2003. John F. Murphy, Jr. 232 Kemmu Restoration Khmer kingdom Until 802 the Khmers were organized into a number of warring independent kingdoms. They often fought among themselves and against foreign enemies such as the Chams located in present-day central Vietnam. King Jayavarman I, also named Parameshvara posthumously, united these disparate kingdoms. He fi rst appeared in historical sources in 709. The Khmer empire was to span most of present-day Cambodia and had vassal states in parts of Thailand, Laos, and Vietnam. JAYAVARMAN I, II, AND III According to text inscribed on a stela (stone or wooden slab) King Jayavarman I originated from Java, though the Malay Peninsula has also been suggested by scholars as a possible place of origin. From his initial base in Indrapura, most likely situated northeast of Phnom Penh, he launched attacks across the Mekong and on Sambhrapura, Wat Phu, and onward to Phnom Kulen, a sacred place for the Khmers, where he settled in 802. At the time it was known as Mahendravaparta. It was here that the sacred rites were performed on Jayavarman by Brahmin priests of the Shivaite sect proclaiming him the universal monarch of the world, or chakaravartin, a rite based on Hindu tradition from India. The system of dynastic succession within the Khmer kingdom was highly complex. Both men and women could become rulers. More importantly, kingship was passed through other family members of the same generation rather than to sons upon the death of a ruler, although there was often strong opposition to this. The next king, Jayavarman II, was responsible for laying the spiritual foundations within the Khmer Empire. After the death of Jayavarman II in 834, Jayavarman III succeeded him. Harihalaya became his capital, southeast of Angkor. The civilization of Angkor was unique as it was a mixture of two infl uences—Indian and Javanese. INDRAVARMAN I The second king built many shrines, but the next ruler, Indravarman I, also called Isvaraloka, was credited for contributing the most to the religious environment within the Khmer empire. Indravarman laid the foundations for the now centralized Angkor state. Indravarman II ascended to the throne in 877 and ruled until 889. His period of rule was relatively peaceful, even though he succeeded in extending the borders of the Khmer Empire. An ancestral temple, Preah Ko, was built in the imperial capital of Hariharalaya and was consecrated in 880. It was a shrine consisting of a set of six brick temples dedicated to his ancestors and past kings. The temple is considered a piece of art with beautiful male and female divine fi gures, structural elements such as colonnades, and other embellishments. Another major building project was the state temple, south of the ancestral temple. This temple, known as Bakong, resembled a stepped pyramid and symbolically was regarded as a mountain. Hindu temples in the Khmer kingdom were often built as mountains as they were seen as earthly representations of the divine mountain, Mount Meru, home of the gods in Hindu mythology. A precursor to the spectacular Angkor Wat and Angkor Thom, the temple had a complex structure and was surrounded by a huge double moat, a feature of Angkor Wat as well. At the same time Indravarman set into place a system of irrigation for cultivated rice fi elds. Large agricultural projects were undertaken, such as building a huge reservoir. YASHOVARMAN AND SURYAVARMAN II King Yashovarman, who ruled from 889 to 900, established the city of Yasodharapura (also known as Angkor) as the new capital. Between 900 and 1200 Angkor achieved great prominence because of the rise of impressive temples in Angkor, including the famous temple that became known as Angkor Wat. It was built in the 12th century during the reign of Suryavarman II. who ordered it to be built. Suryavarman II, dubbed one of the greatest Khmer kings, was a warrior-king and launched many attacks on the Dai Viet, which was highly resilient and resisted subjugation. Suryavarman had gained the throne through the violent means of killing his great uncle, King Dharanindravarman. The architecture of Angkor Wat is in classical Khmer style. It was also a temple-mountain surrounded by a wide moat, crossed by a causeway on the east side. The state temple was dedicated to Vishnu, whom Suryavarman II considered the Protector of the Khmer empire, a departure from earlier rulers, who regarded Shiva as the protector of their kingdom. The 11th century witnessed a general rise in Vaisnavite thought in religious and philosophical life in India, and since travel between India and Southeast Asia was frequent, Angkor Wat could have been a refl ection of the contemporary trends in Hindu philosophy. The external appearance resembles descriptions of Mount Vaikuntha, home of Vishnu. JAYAVARMAN VII The city of Angkor Thom was built by another great king, Jayavarman VII, in 1181, after he defeated the Chams who had captured Angkor in 1177. Instead of Khmer kingdom 233 reclaiming the old Khmer spirituality before the Cham defeat, Jayavarman pursued a course of reinvention. He enacted a major change in the Khmer Empire by replacing Hindu religion with Mahayana Buddhism as the offi cial state religion. The power of the Hindu aristocracy within the empire was seriously undermined. It is said that Jayavarman VII was following the example of Ashoka, the model for all Buddhist rulers. The imposition of Buddhist cosmology led to an extensive reworking of religious, political, and military organization within the Khmer kingdom. Jayavarman VII was responsible for organizing the capital, Angkor Thom, into a mandala, which is a symbol of the universe and its energy. The construction of Angkor Thom, based on this highly regulated pattern, took about a decade. It was an awesome feat as the mandala was extremely diffi cult to replicate in the form of a city. The new capital city was known as Angkor Thom Mahanagara, or simply Angkor Thom. The site of the city coincided with that of an earlier city, Yasodharapura, built more than two centuries before. Right in the middle of the city is the Bayon, the state temple built by King Jayavarman VII, in the exact center of his capital of Angkor Thom. Every road from the city gates leads directly to the Bayon. The Bayon, which was covered in gold and orientated toward the east, according to a Chinese account, was also known as the Assembly Hall of Gods. According to the concept of the mandala, the gods would gather there on certain days. Jayavarman VII was at the peak of his reign, and he assumed supreme rule. INDRAVARMAN II AND JAYAVARMAN VIII The decline of Angkor began soon after Jayavarman’s death. His son, Indravarman II, who ruled from 1219 to 1243, withdrew from many provinces previously conquered from the Champa kingdom. Their neighbouring rivals, the Thais, were also gaining more power, strengthened by the establishment of the kingdom of Sukhothai. The Khmer once again lost their hold on Thai provinces. Angkor Wat is a temple at Angkor, Cambodia, built for King Suryavarman II in the early 12th century as his state temple and capital city. It has become a symbol of Cambodia, appearing on its national fl ag, and it is the country’s prime attraction for visitors. 234 Khmer kingdom Soon, the Thais emerged as the chief rivals of the Khmers, replacing their former enemies, the Chams. The Mongols under the leadership of General Sagatu also presented a threat to the Khmers, but the Khmer rulers were careful not to go to war against such a powerful force. Jayavarman VIII ascended to the Khmer throne in 1243. He was a Hindu rather than a Buddhist like his immediate predecessors. He was a violent anti-Buddhist and went on to destroy many Buddhist sculptures and converted the Bayon temple into a Hindu temple. His son-in-law, Srindravarman, who usurped his throne in 1295, was a Buddhist, though he was a follower of Theravada Buddhism. Later Khmer kings were adherents of this faith. The Thai Ayuttaya kingdom replaced the Sukothai kingdom in 1350 and succeeded in diminishing Khmer power through several attacks. By 1431 the Thais had conquered Angkor. Despite being weakened, a line of kings managed to rule from Angkor and a separate line of Khmer kings continued to rule in Phnom Penh. The latter line achieved more prominence because of the rise of Mekong as an important trade center, leading to the fall of Angkor. See also Siamese invason of the Khmer kingdom. Further reading: Coe, Michael D, Angkor and the Khmer Civilization. London: Thames & Hudson, 2003; Dumarcay, Jacques. The Site of Angkor. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998; Legendre-DeKoninck, Helene. Angkor Wat: A Royal Temple. Weimar: Verlag und Datenbank fur Geisteswissenschaften, 2001; Raveda, Vittorio. Sacred Angkor: The Carved Reliefs of Angkor Wat. London: River Books, 2002. Nurfadzilah Yahaya Kilkenny, Statutes of In 1366 c.e. the Anglo-Irish parliament met in Kilkenny and produced a body of royal decrees that became known as the Statutes of Kilkenny. The statutes aimed to prevent English colonists living in Ireland from adopting Irish culture and mandated that the Irish conform to English customs before they could obtain certain social, legal, and religious rights. In particular, the statutes prohibited marriage between English and Irish; ordered the English to reject Irish names, customs, and law; prohibited the Irish from holding positions in English churches; and limited the mobility of peasant laborers. The statutes also sought to prevent the colonists from waging war without the consent of the English Crown. Penalties for noncompliance were severe and included death, loss of property, and excommunication. Although they were not ultimately successful, the Statutes of Kilkenny foreshadowed the continuously troubled relationship between England and Ireland in the following centuries. England’s involvement with Ireland followed from the Norman (French) defeat of the English at the Battle of Hastings in 1066. After occupying England the Normans’ proximity to Ireland naturally led to involvement with their neighboring country. Ironically an Irishman helped pave the way for English occupation. In 1166 the defeated Irish leader Dermot MacMurrough fl ed to England to seek allies. To gain support, Dermot offered his Irish inheritance to an Anglo-Norman lord, Richard de Clare, earl of Pembroke, known as Strongbow. Strongbow consequently invaded and defeated the Irish high king, Rory O’Connor. King Henry II of England arrived in 1171 and gained the allegiance of Strongbow and many of the Irish rulers. However before returning to England he was unable to ensure a peaceful coexistence between the Irish and the colonists from England. By 1360 Dublin and the surrounding areas (later called the English Pale) were under the control of the descendants of En glish colonists, the Anglo-Irish; land beyond the Pale was generally free from direct English control. Lionel of Clarence, son of King Edward III and lieutenant of Ireland, summoned the 1366 parliament in an effort to reclaim English lands in Ireland. The Statutes of Kilkenny dealt with three distinct groups: the Anglo-Irish colonists known as the “English by blood” or “middle nation”; the “English by birth,” often either imported English administrators or absentee lords who ruled their Irish estates from England; and the native Irish. In addition to revealing aspects of the relationship between the ruling English and subordinated Irish, the Statutes of Kilkenny show internal divisions between the English groups. In the two decades prior to 1366 rebellious Anglo-Irish colonists had become an increasing problem for England. English taxation, absentee English lordship alongside demands for protection of English interests, and close contact with Irish culture lessened Anglo-Irish allegiance to the Crown. The Black Death of the mid-14th century and the Hundred Years’ War with France may also have greatly reduced the infl ux of English immigrants, making the colonists more susceptible to Irish infl uences. The statutes’ attempts to uproot Irish elements in the Anglo-Irish sought to create not only distance from Kilkenny, Statutes of 235 the native Irish, but also a greater sense of connection between the Anglo-Irish and those born in England. The statute prohibiting England-born colonists from discriminating against Anglo-Irish colonists shows that such divisions must have often occurred. The statutes also placed restrictions on native Irish living in English-controlled areas: Irish men and women were not allowed to participate in English churches, Irish minstrels were forbidden among the English, and common laborers were forbidden to travel without permission. Yet in order to promote peace in lands under direct English control, the statutes also granted limited protections to loyal Irish. English authorities mandated a warning period before enforcement of selected statutes, forbade the English to war against the Irish without consent of the Crown, and warned against unlawful imprisonment of the Irish for another man’s debt. In this way, English forces could focus their military presence on the greater threat of the outlying Irish. Statutes concerning the native Irish followed a long line of prior legislation. In 1297 one of the earliest Irish statutes ordered English colonists to shun Irish dress and hairstyles; in 1310 religious houses were told to deny entrance to Irishmen; a 1351 ordinance prohibited Brehon law and Irish-English alliances; and in 1360 limitations were placed on Irish holders of municipal and religious offices. Yet the Statutes of Kilkenny did not prevent Anglo-Irish colonists from being affected by Irish culture and custom. They instead showed the inability of the English colonists to subordinate Ireland successfully. Although the statutes remained in effect for centuries, historical records indicate that Irish and English alike overrode them in the decade following the 1366 parliament. The Statutes of Kilkenny now form part of both the historical record of colonization and the English-Irish conflict that continues into the 21st century. See also English common law; Norman Conquest of England; Norman and Plantagenet kings of England. Further reading: Cosgrove, Art, ed. A New History of Ireland: Volume II: Medieval Ireland 1169–1534. New York: Clarendon Press, 1987; Curtis, Edmund, and R. B. McDowell. Irish Historical Documents: 1172–1922. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1968; Frame, Robin. English Lordship in Ireland: 1318–1361. New York: Clarendon Press, 1982; Otway-Ruthven, A. J. A History of Medieval Ireland. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1980. Jennifer M. Hunt and K. Sarah-Jane Murray Knights Templar, Knights Hospitallers, and Teutonic Knights At the time of the First Crusade (1096), Christian monasticism had been in existence since the third century after Christ. What developed out of the crusade, however, was a unique melding of Christian monasticism with the idea of crusade against the Muslims. The most spectacular result was the founding of the three most famous orders of “warrior-monks,” the Knights Templar, the Knights Hospitallers, and the Teutonic Knights. The Knights Templar (originally the Poor Knights of Christ and the Temple, which is in Jerusalem) were founded around 1118 to help the newly established kingdom of Jerusalem defend itself against its Muslim enemies and to protect the large numbers of Christian European pilgrims traveling to Jerusalem. The Templars were organized as a monastic order, following a rule devised for them by Bernard of Clairvaux and taking the traditional threefold vow of poverty, obedience, and chastity. Nonetheless, the Templars were primarily a military order, living under a grand master (elected by the members and serving for life) who was directly responsible only to the pope. It did not take long for the Templars to become a powerful religious and secular movement in medieval society. They were granted several extraordinary endowments by popes, including the ability to levy taxes and control tithes in the areas under their direct control. Contributions of money and property from members joining the order, along with loaning funds to pilgrims, ensured that by the end of the 11th century the Templars had extensive wealth in money and land holdings stretching from the Holy Land to England. By the 13th century they were the most successful bankers in Europe. Recognized by their white surcoats with the distinctive red cross on the heart or chest, they were in many ways the most powerful force in Europe until the beginning of the 14th century. The fall of the Templars was probably the result of the animosity harbored against them by the king of France, Philip IV (the “Fair”), when the order refused to make him a loan to finance his wars. Philip pursued them with a bloody vengeance, eventually persuading the pope, Clement V, to excommunicate the order. The dissolution of the Templars in 1312 effectively broke the order, and much Templar property was transferred to the Hospitallers. The Knights Hospitallers (or Order of the Knights of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem) began as a Bene- 236 Knights Templar, Knights Hospitallers, and Teutonic Knights dictine nursing order founded in the early 12th century about the same time as the Templars. As the Templars, they were originally conceived as a protective and medical force for pilgrims to the Holy Land. They, too, were a monastic order, adopting a black surcoat with a white cross, and would eventually compete with the Templars for prestige and infl uence throughout Europe. After the fall of Acre in 1291, the order moved to the island of Cyprus. Diffi culties there forced the Knights to move to the island of Rhodes, which, after two years of campaigning, they captured in 1309. Based on Rhodes, the Knights (now known as the Knights of Rhodes) did signifi cant damage to Muslim shipping and Barbary pirates. Nonetheless, the Knights withstood two invasions by the Turkish empire, one in 1444 by the sultan of Egypt, and a more impressive attack by the Turkish sultan Mehmed II in 1480. In the summer of 1522 however the Turkish sultan Suleiman the Magnifi cient besieged Rhodes with a force of over 200,000 men against some 7,000 Knights. After a six-month siege the Knights eventually capitulated. The remaining Knights were allowed to leave Rhodes, eventually settling on the island of Malta. Now known as the Knights of Malta, they were attacked by Ottoman Turkish forces, eventually destroying the Ottoman navy at the Battle of Lepanto (1571). When Malta was captured by Napoleon in 1798, the Knights lost their island stronghold. In 1834 the order established a new headquarters in Rome, known today as the Sovereign Military Order of Malta. The Teutonic Knights were founded in 1190 at the time of the Third Crusade by German lords fi ghting in the Holy Land. Like that of the Templars and Hospitallers their original purpose also included the care and welfare of pilgrims. It was not long, however, until they transferred their interest from fi ghting in the Holy Land to fi ghting Muslims in Germany’s eastern frontier. Wearing a black cross on white surcoats, the Teutonic Knights fought equally against Christians and heathens in eastern Europe and were essentially a state in the guise of a religious order, conquering Prussia from the Slavs and pushing into Lithuania, Estonia, and Russia. In 1410 at the Battle of Grunwald (Tannenberg), a Polish-Lithuanian army defeated the order and effectively ended its military power. In 1809, Napoleon dissolved the order and it lost its last secular holdings. The order operates today primarily as a charitable organization. Further reading: Cantor, Norman F. The Civilization of the Middle Ages. New York: HarperCollins, 1993. Read, Piers Paul. The Templars. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999. Seward, Donald. The Monks of War: The Military Religious Orders. Hamden, CT: Archon, 1972. Phillip A. Jackson Kojiki and Nihon Shoki Kojiki means Record of Ancient Matters and Nijon Shoki means Chronicles of Japan. They were written in 712 and 720, respectively, and are the earliest works of Japanese myth and early history based on ancient oral traditions. They were produced on orders of the government to exalt the ruling imperial line that claimed descent from the sun goddess through the Yamato clan that ruled Japan. These two works are the earliest extant works on early Japan, from the creation of the cosmos, the mythology of the deities and the beginning of Japanese history, working forward toward verifi able history. Their background is the massive borrowings from the advanced Chinese civilization beginning in the sixth century. They included the introduction of Buddhism from China via Korea in the mid-sixth century and accelerated under the leadership of Prince Shotoku Taishi (r. 596–622), who was an enthusiastic Buddhist and also an admirer of Confucius and the great Chinese empire under the Sui dynasty and Tang (T’ang) dynasty. He sent three embassies to China to learn its ways and ideals, which included great reverence for history. Since there was no indigenous written Japanese, Japan adopted the Chinese written script. The advantage is that educated Japanese gained access to nearly 2,000 years of Chinese literary and historic tradition. Prince Shotoku reputedly began to compile the fi rst history of Japan in 620, but that work was lost during a political upheaval after his death; hence another effort was ordered late in the seventh century, with two simultaneous works as a result. Both works begin with creation, which they divided into three stages. The fi rst stage involved the creation of heaven, earth, Japan, and the fi rst kami (deity). The second stage saw the birth of the sun goddess Amaterasu, who was the ancestor of the imperial clan, and her unruly brother (ancestor of a rival clan). The third stage dealt with Amaterasu’s dispatch of her grandson to rule Japan with instructions to pass the throne to her descendants thus linking the imperial clan to the sun goddess. The Kojiki is the shorter of the two, with only three volumes, and ends in 628 with the death of Empress Suiko. It is mainly devoted to mythology and Kojiki and Nihon Shoki 237 ancient history and interestingly used a mixture of Chinese and Japanese syntax. On the other hand the Nihon Shoki is an offi cial history and it is much longer—30 volumes. It was written in the tradition of Chinese dynastic history, chronicling events that began with mythology and giving a detailed genealogy of the Yamato line as descendants of the sun goddess, ending with the abdication of Empress Jito in 697. It was written in literary Chinese and included numerous quotations from Chinese literature. It also recounted the introduction of Buddhism to the Yamato court by an envoy sent from Korea. The Nihon Shoki set an example of history writing in the Chinese tradition. Just as China had its dynastic histories (there were 24, one for each legitimate dynasty beginning with the Han dynasty, 202 b.c.e.–220 c.e.), fi ve more offi cially commissioned histories were written of Japan. Together they are called the Six National Histories. Further reading: Brown, Delmer M., ed. The Cambridge History of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993; Packard, Jerrold M. Son of Heaven: A Portrait of the Japanese Monarchy. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1987. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Koryo dynasty The kingdom of Koryo (or Goryeo) in Korea was named after the dynasty that ruled from the fall of the Silla dynasty in 935 c.e. until the Yi dynasty overthrew it in 1392. The English name Korea is derived from the word Koryo. The kingdom of Koryo was an empire until it was forced to take the status of a kingdom when dealing with the Yuan dynasty (1279–1368) in China. The kingdom of Koryo traces its origins back to the weakening of Silla during a civil war in the early 10th century. Major rebellions against the Silla rulers had been led by Kung Ye, Ki Hwon, Yang Kil, and Kyon Hwon, with Kung Ye forming the kingdom of Hugoguryo (the Later Kingdom of Koguryo) and Kyon Hwon establishing Hubaekje (the Later Kingdom of Paekche). It was the fi rst of these, the Later Kingdom of Koguryo, that would emerge as the kingdom of Koryo. When Kung Ye led his rebellion against Silla, he wrested from their nominal control much of central Korea and established his capital at Kaesong (Songak) in 901. Soon afterward another rebel, Wang Kon (or Wanggeon, or Wang Kien), emerged to help the rebellion. He was from a merchant family and drew support from nobles who had watched the stagnation of the Silla with horror. Kung Ye recognized the leadership qualities of Wang Kon and appointed him the prime minister of the new government based at Kaesong. However in 918 Wang Kon overthrew Kung Ye and placed himself at the head of the rebellion. Wang Kon obviously realized that even though the Silla were weak, he did not initially have the military force capable of defeating them. As a result it was not until 934 that Wang Kon decided to attack the Later Kingdom of Paekche at Hongson (Unju). Wang Kon’s victory was quick because in 935, Kyon Hwon surrendered to him. The Later Paekche king had designated his fourth son as his heir and this had annoyed his eldest son, Sin-gom, who drove him from the kingdom. Wang Kon easily overcame Singom’s army and the Later Kingdom of Paekche became a part of the emerging kingdom of Koryo. In December 936 the Silla king, Kyongsun, realizing that his forces would be unable to defeat Wang Kon in battle, also surrendered and Wang Kon became the king of the Korean Peninsula, ruling from Kaesong. Wang Ko, better known by his posthumous title, King T’aejo, decided to be magnanimous and gave exking Kyongsun the highest position in his new government, marrying a daughter of one of the Silla rulers, which helped legitimize his rule in the minds of many nobles. Furthermore he left most of the nobles in charge of their lands. When he died, after a reign of only seven years, his son became King Hyejong (r. 943–945), and succession was unchallenged. For many people, their connection with the court was through a Buddhist hierarchy that controlled much of the countryside. The fi rst external challenge faced by the new Koryo dynasty was a series of invasions by the Khitan peoples to the north and the west of Korea. They controlled many of the lands on the north of the Yalu Rover and claimed to be descendants of the original leaders of Korea. The Koryo tried initially to conclude an agreement with the Khitan but soon realized that this tribe actually wanted nothing less than control of most of the Korean Peninsula. In China, the new Song (Sung) dynasty was entrenching itself in power and sought an alliance with the Koryo. Realizing that they would soon have enemies on both sides of them, the Khitan attacked in 983, 985, and 989 in a series of raids across the Yalu River. They decided to invade the Korean Peninsula before the Chinese could conclude an alliance with Koryo, and in October 993 238 Koryo dynasty a large Khitan army, estimated by some historians as being 800,000, led by Hsiao Sun-ning, attacked Koryo. The Koryo king, Songjong, took command of his soldiers at Pyongyang and held up the Khitan advance. Recognizing that the Khitan would not be able to win a long and protracted war in enemy territory, the Khitan negotiated a peace agreement and withdrew. A similar problem arose in 1115 with the Jurchen (Manchu) tribe in Manchuria. The Jurchen leader had occupied southern Manchuria and proclaimed himself the emperor of China. They attacked the Khitan kingdom of Liao, and with help from the Sung, managed to destroy the threat of the Khitans sacking Liao in 1125. The Jurchen then attacked the Song, who were forced to retreat to southern China. With the Koreans uncertain who was going to win this war, and worried the Jurchen might become too strong and decide to annex Korea, the Koryo kings were more careful in not getting involved in the war in China. In 1126 there was a major dispute over the focus of the kingdom. One group wanted to keep the capital at Kaesong and preserve the status quo. The other, led by Myo Cheong, wanted the capital moved back to Pyongyang, which would allow Korea to expand to the north. In 1135 the Myo Cheong rebellion failed. However 35 years later Jeong Jung-bu and Yi Ui-bang launched a coup d’etat against King Injong, who was exiled, and Myongjong became the next king, reigning until 1197. For much of that time he was a puppet who served the interests of contending generals such as Kyong Taesung (r. 1177–84). In 1197 Choi Chungheon, another general, deposed Myongjong, and replaced the king with Sinjong (r. 1197–1204). He then ousted Sinjong and put Huijong on the throne. However Choi Chungheon deposed Huijong in 1211, and a new king, Kangjong, ruled for two years. Choi found the next king, Kojong, more compliant, and he outlasted Choi, reigning until 1259. In 1202 Genghis Khan was elected leader of the Mongols and attacked fi rst the Jurchen and then the Chinese. Mongols chased some escaping Khitan refugees to Pyongyang and in 1279, having conquered China, established the Yuan (or Mongol) dynasty, moving the capital of China to Beijing. The Koryo kings decided not to challenge the power of the Mongols and tried to maintain some semblance of independence but at the same time dispatched tribute to the Mongols, sending royal hostages to Beijing, and some of the kings had to marry Mongolian women. Three of the later Koryo kings, Chungnyol, Chungson, and Chungsuk, spent most of their time at the Mongol court, leaving little time to manage their own kingdom. It was a diplomatic balancing act but did ensure that the Mongols, with their well-known bloodthirst and penchant for revenge, did not pillage Korea in the way that other areas were destroyed by them. However when the Mongol emperor of China, Kubilai Khan, wanted to attack Japan in 1274 and again in 1281, the Koreans had to provide many soldiers and use their manpower to build the Mongol navy. The fi rst attack was launched from Happo (Masan) on the southern coast of Korea. The fl eet of 900 ships carrying 40,000 soldiers sailed to Tsushima, and then onto Kyushu, where they fought the Japanese in Hakata Bay. The second invasion force, also including many Koreans, involved two fl eets, one of which left from Korea—a total of 4,400 ships and 142,000 soldiers. Tens of thousands of Koreans were killed by the Japanese during these futile attacks or died when the ships in both attacks were hit by freak typhoons. With so many of the soldiers having been Korean levies, the loss struck a major blow against the Korean economy and on the Koryo dynasty, which had, in name, supported the attack. Many of the later rulers of the Koryo dynasty were young, with six of the last nine being teenagers or younger when they became king. King Chunghye (r. 1330–32, 1339–44), and King U (r. 1374–88) spent most of their reigns chasing wild animals in hunts, being involved in drunken parties, or having affairs with countless women. King Kongmin (r. 1351–74) was the only one of the latter Koryo kings who provided any stability to the country. However after the death of his wife, he spent much of his reign obsessed with fi nding an auspicious place for her to be buried, and where he could also be interred. He eventually settled on a spot about nine miles west of Kaesong where, on a steep hill, he built two matching burial mounds, one for himself, and the other for his wife. It is said that several astrologers were killed for displeasing Kongmin in his search for an auspicious site, including those who actually found the chosen location—slain in error by royal guards after Kongmin spent so long on the mountainside that they thought he had once again been taken to a location he did not like. The tombs of Kongmin and his wife were pillaged by the Japanese during their invasion of Korea in 1592 but have since been restored. Although the Mongols dominated the kingdom of Koryo, when their power in China declined, it was a nervous time for the Koryo rulers. In 1382 the Chinese Ming dynasty started and the remnants of the Mongols and Koryo dynasty 239 the other tribes that had supported them fl ed north, with some making their way to Manchuria with Ming armies following them. In equipping an army to hold off any moves across the Korean border, the Koryo rulers put a large armed force under the command of General Yi Song-gye. Rather than securing the border, Yi Song-gye moved on Kaesong and seized the kingdom for himself, ushering in the Yi dynasty. Further reading: Hulbert, Homer. History of Korea. Ed. by Clarence Norwood Weems. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1962; Kim Yong Suk and Sin Song Hui. The Tomb of King Tongmyong. Pyongyang: Cultural Relics Publishing House, 1993; Ri Ju Yop, “Kaesong—the capital of Koryo,” Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Magazine (v.437/9, 1992). Justin Corfi eld Kosovo, Battle of (1389) The Battle of Kosovo was a turning point in Ottoman control over the Balkans and a major defeat for the Serbs. As the Muslim Ottoman army moved deep inside Balkan territory, The Serbian ruler Lazar I, with the solid backing of the Serbian Orthodox Christian Church, formed a coalition with other Balkan peoples including Bosnians and Albanians to raise an army that was equivalent in size to the Ottoman forces. Lazar then challenged Sultan Murad I, who, ever eager to take the offensive, met him on the Kosovo battlefi eld in the summer of 1389 c.e.. Lazar and Murad commanded their troops from the centerlines. Murad’s son Bayezid I led the left fl ank and his other son, Yacoub, led the right. Lazar’s nephew and the leading feudal Serbian knights led the Serbian cavalry charges. Initially the Serbs gained against the right fl ank, but Bayezid’s left fl ank held fi rm. In the midst of the battle, Miloš Obilic´ (Milosh Obilich) pretended to be a deserter; he gained access to Murad’s tent and stabbed the sultan. Murad’s guards then killed Obilic´. On the battlefi eld the tide turned in favor of the Ottomans and Lazar was captured. Although fatally wounded, Murad lived long enough to pronounce a death sentence on his enemy, who was then beheaded. Bayezid I was proclaimed the new sultan and to prevent any rival claims to the throne, he promptly had his brother assassinated. Following a custom practiced by many conquerors over the ages, Bayezid I then married Olivera, the daughter of his vanquished foe Lazar. Serbia was formally annexed as part of the Ottoman Empire in 1459. Many Serbian knights, including Bayezid’s new Serbian brother-in-law, fought side by side with the Ottomans in subsequent battles, particularly against Timurlane (Tamerlane). The Battle of Kosovo had a catastrophic impact on Serbia and marked the end of medieval Serbian knighthood. The battle also became a major event in Serbian historiography and numerous folk ballads, known as the Battle of Kosovo cycle, have been passed down through the centuries to the present day. These poems celebrate the Serbian heroes of Kosovo and keep the battle, characterized as the forces of Christianity against Islam and good against evil, very much alive in the popular Serbian national imagination. Further reading: Matthias, John, and Vladeta Vuckovic, trans. The Battle of Kosovo: Serbian Epic Poems. Athens: Swallow Press/Ohio University Press, 1987; Imber, Colin. The Ottoman Empire 1300–1481. Istanbul: Isis Press, 1990; Sugar, Peter F. Southeastern Europe under Ottoman Rule, 1354–1804. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1977. Janice J. Terry Kubilai Khan (1215–1294) Mongol leader Kubilai or Khubilai was born in 1215, the second son of Tului Khan (youngest son of Genghis Khan) and Sorghaghtani Beki, who was a Kerait (a tribe that Genghis had conquered) and a Nestorian Christian (his principal wife, Chabi, was also a Kerait and Nestorian Christian). His mother was very infl uential in all her four sons’ upbringing; she had them learn to read Mongol (but not Chinese) and to administer as well as ride, hunt, and fi ght. When Ogotai Khan (Tului’s elder brother) became khaghan (grand khan), Sorghaghtani Beki obtained appanages (fi efs) for both herself and Kubilai in north China. While his elder brother Mongke Khan participated in the great Mongol campaign to conquer Europe that began in 1236, Kubilai remained behind, learning to administer his appanage and learning about Zen (Ch’an) Buddhism and Confucianism from prominent scholars in both fi elds. These experiences marked him as a different kind of leader from most of his relatives. He also realized the harm that the wars and Mongol plundering armies had done to 240 Kosovo, Battle of the Chinese economy and society, and how granting appanages to Mongol lords harmed the authority of the central government. The election of Mongke as the fourth khaghan in 1251 became Kubilai’s stepping-stone to power. In his quest to expand the Mongol realm, Mongke appointed one brother, Hulagu Khan, to conquer the Middle East, and Kubilai to conquer a kingdom called Nanchao or Dali (T’a-li) in present day Yunnan province in China. Kubilai completed his task in 1254, and Dali was put under Mongol control. In 1258 Mongke launched his main campaign against the Southern Song (Sung) dynasty in which he and Kubilai each led a wing of the invading army. Mongke’s death in the next year precipitated a succession crisis. Traditionalist Mongols and supporters of Arik Boke, Tului’s youngest son, convened a khuriltai or council that had representatives from the other branches of Genghis Khan’s clan, which elected him khaghan. Kubilai also convened a khuriltai, in his appanage, attended by his supporters that elected him to the same position. In the ensuing civil war Kubilai had the support of Hulagu and also the greater resources of China. Arik Boke surrendered in 1264 and died two years later under Kubilai’s supervision. Kubilai’s ascension marked his transition from Mongol khaghan to emperor of China. In 1254 he had chosen a site in northern China located 200 miles north of present-day Beijing as his capital, arguing that it was logical to be located where he governed. It was called Shangtu meaning “supreme capital” in Chinese. It became the secondary capital in 1264 when he moved the seat of his government to the former Liao and Jin (Chin) capital, which he rebuilt and renamed Datu, or Tatu (“great capital” in Chinese); its location is present day Beijing. As a result Karakorum, built by Ogotai Khan as capital of the whole Mongol Empire, was relegated to the backwaters. From this time on Kubilai chose a Chinese reign name, proclaimed a calendar, adopted many Confucian rituals of state, and in outward form at least became a Chinese-style ruler. In 1271 he proclaimed himself the founder of the Great Yuan dynasty (1279–1368) and claimed that it had received the Mandate of Heaven as the latest in the succession of Chinese dynasties. Between 1267 and 1279 his forces fi nished off the Southern Song, capturing its capital Hangzhou (Hangchou) in 1276. Several campaigns occupied the remainder of Kubilai’s reign. One was to subjugate Korea, whose king had been subservient until a coup in 1269 brought in an independent leader. It ended in 1273 with Korea back in the Mongol fold. Kubilai also launched two expeditions to force Japan to accept tributary status. The fi rst one in 1274 landed at Hataka on the eastern coast of Kyushu island and met with resistance and disaster because of a gale-force storm. A huge second expedition, two armadas of 140,000 men, mostly Koreans and Chinese plus a Mongol cavalry, were devastated by a typhoon. A naval expedition against Java in 1292–93 was also a fi asco. Land invasions of Burma and Vietnam were more fortunate and secured their vassalage. The wars against Kaidu Khan (1235–c.1301) were more diffi cult and refl ected the division between the different branches and ideologies among Genghis Khan’s descendants. Kaidu was Ogotai Khan’s grandson and his cause showed the resentment of that branch of the family on its eclipse. Kaidu’s allies were princes from the Chagatai and Tului families who objected to Kubilai’s identifi cation with his sedentary Chinese subjects. Their causes failed but they continued to be troublesome. Kubilai needed to be accepted as sovereign of China while remaining leader of the Mongols. Therefore he continued the shamanitic practices of his ancestors Marco Polo presenting a letter to Kubilai Khan. Kubilai’s ascension marked his transition from Mongol khaghan to emperor of China. Kubilai Khan 241 while turning to Tibetan Buddhism and ordered the creation of a new alphabet based on Tibetan for writing the Mongolian language (an earlier script was based on Uighur). While favoring non-Chinese Central Asians in top posts in his government, he also honored Confucius and continued Chinese traditions such as authorizing historical writings and cultural activities. Kubilai Khan’s administration was by Mongols and for the benefi t of Mongols. The death of his wife Chabi in 1281 and son and heir Prince Zhenjin in 1285 was a personal and dynastic loss, because Zhenjin had been given a good Chinese education and had he lived there might have been improved relations between Mongols 242 Kubilai Khan and Chinese. Kubilai increasingly took to feasting and heavy drinking in his last years and died in 1294. See also Polo, Marco. Further reading: Franke, Herbert, and Denis Twitchett, eds. The Cambridge History of China, Vol. VI Alien Regimes and Border States, 907–1368. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994; Rossabi, Morris. Khubilai Khan, His Life and Times. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988. Haw, Stephen G. Marco Polo’s China: A Venetian in the Realm of Khubila Khan. London: Taylor & Francis, Inc., 2005. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur

The First Global Age 1450 to 1750 Edit

Kaikhta, Treaty of The Treaty of Kaikhta in 1727 between China and Russia defined the boundary between Russian Siberia and Chinese Outer Mongolia. The Treaty of Nerchinsk of 1689 between China and Russia drew the boundary between the two empires between Russian Siberia and Chinese Manchuria in the northeast but left the boundary between Chinese Outer Mongolia and Russia undefined. Thus another treaty was needed to complete the border between these two empires and to settle other issues. The first treaty with Russia allowed Qing (Ch’ing) emperor Kangxi (K’ang-hsi) to defeat the Olod Mongol chief Galdan in 1697, thus extending his domain to Outer Mongolia in the north and Hami in the northwest. However, China was still not completely secure from the Olod threat and feared plotting between them and Russia because the Olod had earlier become vassals of the Russian czars. Russia was also anxious to negotiate with China over trade and the establishment of an Orthodox religious mission in Beijing (Peking). Meanwhile both rulers who had negotiated the Nerchinsk Treaty (Kangxi, emperor of China, and Peter the Great of Russia) had died, succeeded by Yongzheng (Yung-cheng) and Catherine I, respectively. In 1725, Empress Catherine I sent envoy Sava Vladislavich Ruguzinski to China, ostensibly to congratulate Yongzheng on his accession to the throne. The Russian negotiations with China’s chief delegate Tulisen used Jesuit missionaries as interpreters. They reached agreement in 1727; it was called the Treaty of Kaikhta, named after a frontier town where the signing took place. It provided for a commission to settle on the spot the border between the two countries from the Sayan Mountain and Sapintabakha in the west to the Argun River in the east. In addition to existing trade at Nerchinsk, another trading station would be opened at Kaikhta and every three years a Russian caravan of 200 men would be allowed to go to Beijing to buy and sell goods without duties. Russia would be allowed to establish a religious mission and church in Beijing, and deserters and fugitives from each country to the other would be extradited. Russia gained 40,000 square miles of territory between the Upper Irtysh and the Sayan Mountains and land south and southwest of Lake Baikal, trading concessions, and the right to open a religious mission in Beijing. China gained security by cutting off Mongol tribes from access to Russia. A follow-up embassy from China to Russia in 1731 won for China the right to pursue the Mongol into Russian territory. This provision would be important in China’s quest to consolidate its northern border. Both Treaties of Nerchinsk and Kaikhta were negotiated between two equal empires and to their mutual benefit. Unlike in relations with all other European nations, whose ambassadors to China were treated as tribute bearers from vassal states, the Russian envoys were regarded as representatives of an equal nation. While Russian envoys performed the kowtow to the Chinese emperors, likewise the Chinese envoys to St. Petersburg kowtowed to the Russian monarchs. The Russian religious mission in Beijing that trained students in Chinese would give Russia an advantage in the 19th century in negotiations with China. See also Qing (Ch’ing) dynasty, rise and zenith. Further reading: Mancall, Mark. Russia and China: Their Diplomatic Relations to 1728. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971; Peterson, Willard J., ed. The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 9, Part 1: The Ch’ing Empire to 1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Kangxi (K’ang-hsi) (1654–1722) successful Chinese emperor The Kangxi emperor’s personal name was Xuanye (Hsuan- yeh). He became the second emperor of the Qing (Ch’ing) dynasty when barely eight years old on his father’s death, chosen because he had survived smallpox. His 61-year reign would be one of the greatest, and the longest in China since the first century b.c.e. Thus he deserved the posthumous title Shengzu (Shengtzu), which means “sagacious progenitor.” At his accession, the Qing dynasty (1644–1911) was by no means secure, and a council of four regents governed in his name. At 13, Kangxi got rid of the regents and assumed personal power. Kangxi was an extremely energetic and conscientious ruler who studied history and philosophy under Chinese tutors, military arts under Manchu officers, and Western sciences, music, mathematics, and Latin under Jesuit teachers. He followed a prodigious work schedule that began before dawn and ended late at night. He personally read and answered memorials and reports, writing with the left hand when the right became cramped. His leisure hours were spent practicing calligraphy and writing poetry and essays. He also enjoyed the outdoors, personally leading his troops in maneuvers, military expeditions, and hunting. He set high standards for his personal conduct; for example, he fasted before he reviewed capital cases, saying that a life ended cannot be restored. Kangxi’s greatest military accomplishment was the suppression of the Rebellion of the Three Feudatories, 1673–81, led by Wu Sangui (Wu san-kuei), who invited the Manchus to help him oust the rebels whose occupation of Beijing (Peking) had ended the Ming dynasty. Wu and two other allies of the Manchus were granted autonomous princedoms in southern China as reward. Their revolt jeopardized the Qing dynasty and was defeated after arduous campaigns. Two years later another Qing expedition conquered Taiwan, the headquarters of a Ming loyalist force under Zheng Chenggong (Cheng Ch’eng-kung) and his son. Next he dealt with the Mongol threat, conquering both Outer Mongolia and the northwest. Then he extended Qing authority over Tibet by installing a friendly cleric as the seventh Dalai Lama (1708–57) and the leader of the Yellow Hat sect of Tibetan Buddhism. In addition he defined China’s northeastern border with Russia at the Treaty of Nerchinsk in 1689. Domestically, Kangxi instituted a number of important reforms. He stopped Manchu abuses in the treatment of the majority Han Chinese, reformed the practice of collecting revenue, cracked down on corruption, and repeatedly reduced taxes, finally fixing the tax quota on the basis of population count of 1712 regardless of later increases. The emperor was a patron of many fields of learning. He appointed a board of 50 historians to write a history of the preceding Ming dynasty, following a 2,000-year-old tradition that each dynasty sponsored writing a comprehensive history of its predecessor. The work was published in 1739 when Kangxi’s grandson was on the throne. Other boards of learned men worked on multivolume works including the Kangxi Dictionary and a 5,020-volume work comprising ancient and modern published books. Kangxi fathered 36 sons (20 of whom reached adulthood). His empress bore him one son and died in childbirth. He was proclaimed heir and despite his father’s love and care, the youth grew up dissolute and unstable, became involved in a conspiracy to assassinate the emperor, and was finally demoted and arrested. The troubles with his heir clouded Kangxi’s last years. He refused to announce another heir until his deathbed, when his last will proclaimed his fourth son, Yinchen (Yin-chen), the next emperor. Kangxi inherited an unstable empire and left it splendid, in large part through his conscientious, frugal, and efficient administration. See also Jesuits in Asia; rites controversy in China. Further reading: Kessler, Lawrence D. K’ang-hsi and the Consolidation of Ch’ing Rule, 1661–1684. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976; Spence, Jonathan. Ts’ao Yin and the 200 Kangxi (K’ang-hsi) K’ang-hsi Emperor: Bondservant and Master. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1966; ———. Emperor of China, Self-Portrait of K’ang-hsi. New York: Vintage Books, 1975; Wu, Silas Hsiu-liang. Passage to Power: K’ang-hsi and His Heir Apparent, 1661–1721. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Kepler, Johannes (1571–1630) German mathematician and astronomer Johannes Kepler, founder of celestial mechanics, was born December 27, 1571, at Weil der Stadt, Stuttgart, Germany. His grandfather was lord mayor of the town, but his family had many hardships; his father, Heinrich, was a mercenary who abandoned his family and his mother, Katharina, was an innkeeper’s daughter tried for witchcraft. Kepler amazed travelers with his mathematical knowledge. Kepler embraced his studies and proved a bright student. After studying in the Protestant seminary at Adelberg in 1584, he entered the University of Tübingen. He joined the mathematics faculty of the Protestant seminary at Graz, Austria, in 1594. Kepler studied Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543) in depth and wrote the Mysterium cosmographicum (The Sacred Mystery of the Cosmos, 1596), a work defending the Copernican system, which postulated that the Sun—not the Earth— was the center of the universe, and that planets moved in circles in their orbits around the Sun. Kepler is known for his three revolutionary laws of planetary movements, which explained the organization of the solar system. He observed that the orbit of Mars was an ellipse and found similar deductions for orbits of other planets. He realized there was a mathematical explanation, and his first law states that the planets moved in elliptical paths around the Sun. The second law stipulates that the path the planet travels around the Sun comprises equal areas in equal times as the planet moves its orbit. The first two laws were published in his book Astronomia nova (New Astronomy) in 1609. His third law of planetary movement states that the square of the time it takes for a planet to revolve once around the Sun is proportional to the cube of planet’s distance from the Sun. The third law was published in 1619 in a book titled Harmonices mundi. The three laws made a seminal contribution to the study of planetary motion. Kepler made great progress in the development of modern astronomy by abandoning theories held for two prior millennia. However, the reasons behind the laws were discovered by Isaac Newton, who demonstrated that they were the result of the law of universal gravitation. Religious tensions in Europe forced Kepler to move on more than one occasion. In 1599, he left Graz because of religious persecution and went to Prague at the invitation of Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe (1546–1601). Kepler became the imperial mathematician after Brahe’s death in 1601. Kepler held the post until 1612, when Lutherans were being driven out of Prague. He went to Linz to continue his work in mathematics and stayed there until 1626. After years of hardship, Kepler died at Regensburg, Bavaria, on November 15, 1630. Kepler the mathematician, astronomer, and astrologer was one of the dominating figures of the scientific revolution that swept Europe. See also Counter-Reformation (Catholic Reformation) in Europe; Reformation, the. Further reading: Baumgardt, Carola. Johannes Kepler: Life and Letters. London: Gollancz, 1952; Caspar, Max. Kepler. London: Abelard-Schuman, 1959; Koestler, Arthur. The Sleepwalkers. London: Arkana Books, 1989; ———. The Watershed: A Biography of Johannes Kepler. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, 1960; Kozhamthadeam, S. J. Discovery of Kepler’s Law: The Interaction of Science Philosophy and Religion. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994; Martens, Rhonda. Kepler’s Philosophy and the New Astronomy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000; Rosen, Edward. Three Imperial Mathematicians: Kepler Trapped between Tycho Brahe and Ursus. New York: Abaris Books, 1986; Stephenson, Bruce. Kepler’s Physical Astronomy. New York: Springer Verlag, 1987; Tiner, John H. Johannes Kepler: Giant of Faith & Science. Fenton, MI: Mott Media, 1977; Voelkel, James R. Johannes Kepler and the New Astronomy. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Patit Paban Mishra King Philip’s (Metacom’s) War (1675–1676) King Philip’s War was one of the bloodiest conflicts between English colonists and Native Americans in history. Incited by growing colonial population, the war confirmed white domination of New England and significantly weakened Indian presence in the region. King Philip’s (Metacom’s) War (1675–1676) 201 From the settlement of Plymouth in 1620, the colonial population of New England grew rapidly and displaced many coastal Indians. By 1670, the 52,000 colonists of southern New England outnumbered natives by three to one. As colonial populations grew, they pressed farther inland, seizing Indian land through dishonesty and allowing unfenced livestock to spoil Indian crops. At the same time, Puritan clergy sought to convert Indians to Christianity by placing them in “praying towns” where their beliefs and behaviors could be closely monitored. Led by the Reverend John Eliot, the praying towns held 1,600 natives by 1674. In March 1675, the colony of Plymouth accused three Wampanoag Indians of the murder of a praying town Indian and colonial informant. When the three were tried and hanged three months later, the Wampanoag sachem Metacom (known to the colonists as King Philip) retaliated against the town of Swansea. Throughout the summer of 1675, the conflict escalated from an isolated incident into a regional war. Massachusetts and Connecticut came to the aid of Plymouth and launched indiscriminate attacks on a number of native peoples, which caused the powerful and previously neutral Narragansetts to ally with the Wampanoags. Over the next few months, the Indians gained the upper hand, using flintlock muskets to launch a total war. Before the end of 1675, Indians had attacked 52 of the region’s 90 towns, destroying buildings, murdering entire families, and obliterating 12 entire settlements. In early 1676, colonial leaders forged an alliance with the Pequots and Mohegans and gained the advantage by turning the conflict into an Indian civil war. The colonists also became increasingly aggressive in their warfare. In late 1675, they trapped 300 Narragansetts in the Great Swamp and set them on fire. The colonists also attacked women and children, selling the captives as slaves in the Caribbean. After one battle, Benjamin Church noted that Indians who surrendered “were carried away to Plymouth, there sold, and transported out of the country; being about eight score persons.” True to their Puritan nature, the colonists saw the Indian attacks as God’s punishment for their transgressions. As Mary Rowlandson remarked after several weeks in Indian captivity, “I see the Lord had his time to scourage and chasten me.” By the summer of 1676, the Indians had run out of supplies and when Metacom was killed in battle in August, the rebellion collapsed. King Philip’s War brought about the death of 1,000 colonists and 3,000 Indians. It also resulted in the abolition of most of the praying towns, as angry colonists attacked, imprisoned, and even sold the Christian Indians into slavery. Their hegemony over the region secured, the colonists drove the remaining Native Americans to the frontier. After King Philip’s War, Indians became largely invisible in New England, causing many whites to declare mistakenly a number of tribes extinct. See also natives of North America. Further reading: Calloway, Colin G., ed. After King Philip’s War: Presence and Persistence in Indian New England. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 1997; Lepore, Jill. The Name of War: King Philip’s War and the Origins of American Identity. New York: Knopf, 1998. John G. McCurdy Knox, John (c. 1513–1572) religious leader The country of Scotland is well known for its fiery, individualistic spirit, which is combined with a deep loyalty to the Scottish people and their religion. John Knox, the “thundering Scot,” was no exception to this tradition. Knox is best known as the founder of Scottish Presbyterianism, and he lived during a tumultuous time in the history of Scotland. Not known for his tact, Knox viewed himself in the style of an Old Testament prophet, being God’s “trumpet,” blasting against every king and queen reigning during his lifetime. John Knox was born around 1513 in the region of Lothian, Scotland, to a middle-class farmer. Little is known of his upbringing or education. It is likely that he studied at St. Andrews University in St. Andrews, Scotland. Knox was listed on the rolls in 1540 of St. Andrews as a papal notary, leading most historians to believe that he was ordained to the Roman Catholic clergy by that time. Unlike England to its south, which became Protestant in 1533 under King Henry viii, Scotland had remained Roman Catholic. However, many lairds and nobles of Scotland were increasingly influenced by Protestant preaching and thought. In 1543, Knox became a tutor to the two sons of a Protestant-leaning laird named Hugh Douglas. During this time, Knox became a convinced Protestant. In 1544, Knox became a bodyguard for a fiery theologian and preacher named George Wishart. Wishart preached against Catholic cardinal Beaton and Scotland’s queen mother, Mary of Guise, who were aligning themselves with Roman Catholic France against the military might of England under King Henry VIII. Wishart was eventually captured by the Roman Catholics and strangled 202 Knox, John and burned in March 1545. The death of Wishart was a turning point for Knox, making him determined to continue the work of Protestant reform in Scotland. In 1546, men conspired successfully to murder Cardinal Beaton and take over his Castle of St. Andrews. Knox was not involved in the initial conspiracy but came into the castle in 1547, simply as a tutor for three boys. Soon after, he was asked to take over the spiritual leadership of the people in the castle. Agreeing reluctantly, Knox preached his first sermon in the castle church in 1547. The castle was eventually forced to capitulate later in 1547 to a fleet of French galley ships and Knox was captured. Knox served two years as a galley slave, then was freed in 1549, and moved to northern England, where he began to preach in Newcastle. In 1553, the Catholic Mary I ascended the throne of England, forcing Knox to flee to Frankfurt, Germany, and eventually to Geneva, Switzerland, home of John Calvin. Knox greatly respected Calvin’s thought and writing and their meeting in Geneva led to a long period of friendship and correspondence. Knox became increasingly convinced that the only way for England and Scotland to have freedom for Protestant worship was by military intervention. He began writing pamphlets, the most controversial of which was entitled “A Faithful Admonition to the Professors of God’s Truth in England.” In it, he called the preachers to rebuke more aggressively those leading sinful lives, but then went on to thunder against Queen Mary I of England, who at the time was considering marriage to the Roman Catholic king Philip II of Spain, charging her with usurping the government and handing it over to a foreign ruler. This pamphlet proved influential in strengthening the Protestant resistance to Mary I, which continued to her death in 1558 when her Protestant half sister Elizabeth I took the throne of England. In 1557, Knox published his most famous pamphlet, entitled “The First Blast of the Trumpet against the Monstrous Regiment [unnatural reign] of Women.” Arguing from the Old Testament, Knox contended that it is wrong for a woman to be the head of state, especially turning over the reign of a country to a foreign husband. While there were exceptional times when a woman could reign, he felt that the normal result was disaster. In 1559, Knox returned to Scotland via England, where he received a frosty reception from Queen Elizabeth. By this time, Scotland had several influential Protestant nobles who could protect Knox. Knox was called to serve in St. Giles, the most important church in Edinburgh, where the queen mother, Mary of Guise, and her daughter, Mary, Queen of Scots, lived. In 1560, a treaty was signed by England, Scotland, and France, and as a result, Scotland became officially Protestant, though Queen Mary remained Roman Catholic. Thus began 12 years of conflict between Knox and Queen Mary, often resulting in public rebukes on both sides. From 1560 till his death in 1572, Knox did much to establish the Protestant church in Scotland, from which the current Presbyterian Church takes much of its form. He was a tireless preacher but also organized a system of discipline for both pastors and church members. Knox was against any practice not found directly in the Bible (such as kneeling during communion or devotion to the saints). He also organized a system of financial help for the poor, out of funds raised for the churches. Knox married his wife, Marjory (Bowes), around 1555. Marjory bore him two sons (Nathaniel, Eleazer) but died in 1560. He married a second wife, Margaret (Stewart), in 1563, who bore him three daughters (Martha, Margaret, Elizabeth). He died November 24, 1572. Further reading: Reid, W. Stanford. Trumpeter of God, a Biography of John Knox. New York: Charles Scribner, 1974; Schaff, Philip. The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol. VI: Innocents–Liudger. Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library, 2001; Wilson, Douglas. For Kirk and Covenant: The Stalwart Courage of John Knox. Nashville, TN: Cumberland House, 2000. Bruce D. Franson Knox, John 203 John Knox reproving the ladies of Mary, Queen of Scots’ court, painting by W. T. Roden; Knox helped establish Protestantism in Scotland. Kongo kingdom of Africa The kingdom of the Kongo (Kongo dya Ntotila) flourished along the Congo River in the west-central coast of Africa from about the 14th century. The kingdom covered a large part of what is now the Democratic Republic of Congo, but the king (the manikongo) lived in what is now Angola. King Nimi, from near present-day Boma, conquered the Congo Plateau. He and his followers married into the local elite and he was accepted as ruler of the region. The wealth of Kongo was based on trade in ivory, hides, and slaves, and it also used a shell currency popular in western Africa. In 1482, King João II of Portugal sent an expedition, under the command of Diogo Cão, to explore the west coast of Africa, and they reached the Congo River in the following year. Diogo Cão sent a delegation to see the fifth king of the Kongo, Nzinga-a- Cuum (or Nzinga Nukuwu), who was living at Mbanza (São Salvador do Congo). Nzinga-a-Cuum asked Cão to take charge of a young relative, Caçuto, and others, and take them back to Lisbon to receive a Christian education. Caçuto learned Portuguese and much about Portuguese and European history, also converting to Christianity. At Bela in 1489, he was baptized and took the name João Silva, after King João II of Portugal, and Pire Silva, a court official who had served as his godfather. Caçuto then returned to Mbanza. Nzinga-a-Cuum had become wary of the Portuguese. Possibly worried about Portuguese military power, Nzinga- a-Cuum converted to Christianity, becoming King João I of the Kongo. However he had long practiced polygamy. After his baptism, he returned to his many wives and disowned his son, who, with his mother and other members of the family, sought the protection of the Portuguese. When his father died in 1506, Afonso returned to Mbanza, was crowned, and then set about converting his people to Catholicism. He regularly corresponded with King Manuel I of Portugal and sent over more of his subjects to Lisbon to receive a European education. When Afonso I of Kongo died in 1542, his son and successor Pedro I became the next king; he was succeeded briefly afterward by Francisco I (Mpudi a Nzinga Mvemba). Pedro became king again briefly. A nephew, Diogo, disputed these two rulers and staged a rebellion against Pedro and then Francisco and then Pedro again. He forced Pedro to seek sanctuary in a Catholic church, where he wrote and pleaded for help from King João III the Pious of Portugal and from the pope. Diogo came to the throne at a time when some Portuguese traders were eager to expand the slave trade, and Diogo was eager to profit from this. When he died in 1561, his illegitimate son, Afonso II, succeeded him, and a violent succession crisis broke out. While he was attending Mass within months of becoming king, Afonso II was murdered by his brother Bernardo. Bernardo I reigned for six years. His successor, Henrique I, was king for a year before being forced to flee when the neighboring kingdom of Jagas invaded Kongo. Henrique was succeeded by Alvaro I, who reigned for 19 years and brought some stability to the country. Alvaro I also stepped up the slave trade and sent as many as 14,000 slaves annually to Brazil. Finally Antonio I, who became king in 1661, quarreled with the Portuguese over control of the slave trade. In 1665, he gathered his supporters and met the Portuguese in battle at Mbwila. He was wounded in the fighting, captured, and subsequently beheaded. After 1678, after a violent internal civil war, the kingdom of Kongo rapidly fragmented into a number of warring states. The kings of Kongo—descended from Afonso I—did, however, continue to hold court and conduct ceremonial functions. Henrique III, Afonso Nlengi, reigned from 1793 until 1802, and the male line continued until Pedro VII, Afonso, died in 1962, whereupon Isabel María da Gama became the regent. Although some people wanted to restore the Kongo monarchy, when Angola gained its independence in 1975, the new government refused to recognize its existence. See also slave trade, Africa and the. Further reading: Birmingham, David. Trade and Conflict in Angola: The Mbundu and Their Neighbors under the Influence of the Portuguese 1483–1790. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1960; Duffy, James. Portugal in Africa. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1962; Núñez, Benjamin. Dictionary of Portuguese-African Civilization. London: Hans Zell, 1995. Justin Corfield Koprülü family Four different members of the Koprülü family served as grand viziers in the Ottoman Empire during the 17th century. Of obscure Albanian origins, Mohammad Koprülü had a fairly inauspicious career in the vast Ottoman bureaucracy until 1656, when he was appointed grand vizier. He soon distinguished himself as an able, efficient, and honest administrator. Mohammad removed corrupt officials from office and oversaw the defeat of major 204 Kongo kingdom of Africa rebellions in the Anatolian Peninsula and the Balkans. He also reinstituted rigorous adherence to the law. Before his death in 1661, Mohammad recommended that his son Ahmed (Fazil Ahmed Koprülü) succeed him as grand vizier. Ahmed (served 1661–76) proved to be as able an administrator as his father and continued to strengthen the empire. Led by Kara Mustafa, Ahmed’s brother-in-law, the Ottomans moved in 1683 to regain their ascendancy in Hungary and lay siege to Vienna, the city Suleiman I the Magnificent had failed to take in 1529. Reinforced with troops from Poland, the Habsburgs, now equipped with heavy artillery, defeated the Ottomans, who were forced to retreat to Belgrade. Upon the sultan’s orders, Kara Mustafa was then assassinated. In 1689, Ahmed’s brother Mustafa was appointed grand vizier and continued the family tradition of honest administration; Mustafa reduced some taxes—a popular policy—as well as instituting other economic reforms. Although a devout Muslim, Mustafa was also known for his religious tolerance and fair treatment of the large Christian minority populations in the empire and he became known as “Koprülü the Virtuous.” However, his tenure as grand vizier was short as he died fighting with Ottoman troops in the Balkans in 1691. In 1697, Sultan Mustafa II sought to restore Ottoman power by appointing Husayn Koprülü as his grand vizier. His tax policies enabled the Ottomans to raise and equip a large army and fleet to protect territory in the Balkans; Husayn served as vizier until 1702 and another Koprülü became vizier for a short time in 1710. But even the reforms and efficiency of the Koprülü viziers failed to halt the decline of the Ottoman Empire and the gradual loss of territory to Russian and other European enemies. See also Habsburg dynasty. Further reading: Itzkowitz, Norman. Ottoman Empire and Islamic Tradition. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1972; Kinross, Lord. The Ottoman Centuries: The Rise and Fall of the Turkish Empire. New York: William Morrow, 1979; Shaw, Stanford. History of the Ottoman Empire, 1280–1808. London: Cambridge University Press, 1976. Janice J. Terry Korea, Japanese invasion of Japanese warlord Toyotumi Hideyoshi dreamed of conquering China and launched two invasions of Korea, in 1592 and 1597, in order to do so. Although he ultimately failed, the wars inflicted terrible devastation on Korea. Because as its overlord the Ming dynasty in China sent a large army to aid Korea, the war also considerably weakened the Ming dynasty. In the 16th century, Japan underwent constant civil wars as the Ashikaga Shogunate weakened and various feudal lords sought supremacy; in fact this period was called the “Warring States” era in Japanese history. Hideyoshi was an ambitious general who rose from obscurity. By 1590, he had destroyed all rival lords and unified Japan, freeing him and his large army to conquer new lands. His target was China and to reach China he needed passage through Korea. When Korea refused his demands he led an invading army of 160,000 men, landing on the southern tip of the peninsula and advancing northward. The inferior Korean army was overwhelmed, King Sonjo abandoned his capital city Seoul and fled, and his two sons were made captives. The Korean cause was saved from complete ruin by the emergence of Admiral Yi Sun-sin, who built a fleet of “turtle ships,” the world’s first wooden ships with steel plating, which repeatedly defeated the Japanese navy, thus disrupting their supply lines. Meanwhile, China responded with 200,000 troops, who captured Pyongyang and pursued the Japanese forces southward until they only held the southern tip of the peninsula. Peace negotiations proved fruitless and were broken off because China demanded that Hideyoshi acknowledge Chinese overlordship while Hideyoshi demanded a part of Korea to be ceded to him, the marriage of a Ming princess to the Japanese emperor, and Korean princes as hostages. Undaunted, Hideyoshi launched a second invasion in 1597 but proceeded no farther than Korea’s two southernmost provinces because both the Koreans and the Chinese relief army were prepared. When Hideyoshi died in 1598 his army quickly returned home. In 1606, Tokugawa Ieyasu, the new shogun of Japan and Hideyoshi’s successor, made peace with Korea. The two Japanese invasions inflicted terrible sufferings on the Koreans. Whole areas were devastated and depopulated and many historical sites and libraries were burned. The Yi dynasty of Korea never fully recovered its authority and the country its prosperity. The retreating Japanese moreover took many looted treasures and took as prisoners men with skills, most notably Korean potters, who built up Japan’s ceramics industry. Hideyoshi’s dream of ruling Japan died with him because his son was too young to rule, allowing Korea, Japanese invasion of 205 another feudal lord, Tokugawa Ieyasu, who had not participated in the Korean campaigns, to seize power. Finally the cost of the war weakened the already declining Ming dynasty in China. Additionally, the sending of a large army to Korea denuded southern Manchuria of Ming garrisons and paved the way for the rise of the Manchus. See also Ming dynasty, late; Qing (Ch’ing) dynasty, rise and zenith. Further reading: Berry, Mary E. Hideyoshi. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982; Park, Yune-hee. Admiral Yu Sun-shin and His Turtle Boat Armada. Seoul: Hanjin Publishing Company, 1978; Twitchett, Denis, and Frederick W. Mote, eds. The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 8: The Ming Dynasty, Part 2, 1368–1694. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur

Age of Revolution and Empire 1750 to 1900 Edit

Kader ibn Moheiddin al-Hosseini, Abdul (1808–1882) Algerian leader Abdul Kader (Abd al-Qadir) was born into a religious family. His father was the sheikh of one of the major Sufi orders in Algeria, and he had a religious education. Abdul Kader led the armed resistance to the French occupation of the country from 1832 to 1847. The leading sheikhs pledged allegiance to Abdul Kader, who was known as Amir al-Monenin (Prince of the Faithful). Abdul Kader was able to unify the Algerian tribes based on the rule of Islam. He levied taxes, minted coins, and supported education with the advice of a council of notables. Abdul Kader successfully employed guerrilla warfare tactics to defeat the better armed French forces. He defeated General Camille Trézel, who was subsequently replaced by General Bertrand Clauzel. Although Clauzel managed to extend French control over Algerian cities, he was defeated by Kader’s forces and removed from command in 1837. The French and Abdul Kader then signed the Treaty of Tafna, whereby the Algerians controlled the territory in the hinterland and the Kabylia in the east, and the French retained control over Algiers, Oran, and Constantine. In 1839 the French renewed the war. From 1841 to 1847 the new commander, General Thomas Bugeaud, used surprise hit-and-run tactics with superior armaments to put the Algerians on the defensive. Abdul Kader attempted to carry on the struggle from neighboring Morocco, but the French retaliated by attacking Moroccan ports and land forces. The Moroccan ruler then pledged to limit Abdul Kader’s movements. In 1847 Abdul Kader surrendered to the French. The French had developed a grudging respect for Abdul Kader, who was released after several years in prison and given a French pension. He traveled to Istanbul, where he was well received by the Ottomans, before moving to Damascus, Syria. There, he notably saved many Christian lives by granting them safe haven in his own home during the 1860 confessional riots. Abdul Kader died in Damascus in 1882. See also Algeria under French rule. Further reading: Ali, Abdul. The Shaik and His Sufi sm: Shaik Abdul Kader Jilani. Madras: Diocesan Press, 1955; Danziger, Raphael. Abd Al-Qadir and the Algerians: Resistance to the French and Internal Consolidation. New York: Homes and Meier, 1977. Janice J. Terry Kang Youwei (K’ang Yu-wei) (1858–1927) Chinese scholar and political reformer Kang Youwei (K’ang Yu-wei) came from a scholarly family in Guangdong (Kwangtung) Province in southern China. A child prodigy, he distinguished himself in classical Confucian studies. Deeply impressed with the orderliness and effi ciency of the British colonial administration in Hong Kong and Shanghai, he was inspired to take up Western K 209 studies through reading all available translations; they helped him form views on how to strengthen China against the threat of foreign encroachment. Kang wrote two books, the Datong Shu (or Ta-tung Shu, The Great Commonwealth) and Confucius as a Reformer. A utopian and syncretic thinker, he redefi ned the Confucian way to include Western methods to legitimize the inclusion of Western institutions inside the Confucian framework. He also established a school to teach his unorthodox and controversial ideals. In 1895 Kang went to Beijing (Peking) to take part in the triennial metropolitan examinations. The date coincided with China’s disastrous defeat at the hands of Japan and the humiliating Treaty of Shimonoseki that ended the Sino-Japanese War. In response, Kang and his student Liang Qichiao (Liang Ch’i-ch’iao) coauthored a long memorial to the throne to protest the peace treaty and to urge the Qing (Ch’ing) court to initiate institutional reforms. It was cosigned by 603 of the candidates also gathered in Beijing to take the exams. Kang passed the exams with fl ying colors and was appointed to a government position in Beijing. Between 1895 and 1898 he and his friends established a number of study societies throughout China that sponsored public lectures, translated foreign books into Chinese, published newspapers and magazines, and established libraries and museums. He also continued to submit memorials (a practice he had begun in 1888) to the court with specifi c recommendations for reforms. Despite objections from conservative high offi - cials, the young Emperor Guangxu (Kuang-hsu) was impressed with his arguments and granted him an audience on January 24, 1898. Many more followed that culminated in the appointment of Kang and his allies to important positions. For 103 days, between June 11 and September 20, more than 40 decrees were promulgated that mandated thorough reforms in government administration, the military, and education. Inevitably, they aroused strong opposition from inside and outside the court and served as the pretext for the emperor’s aunt, the dowager empress Cixi (Tz’u-hsi), to retake control in a coup d’état, put the emperor under permanent detention, and rescind all the reforms. Kang escaped arrest with the help of British diplomats and continued to write, raise funds and recruit followers against Cixi during his long exile. He never wavered in his belief that a constitutional monarchy was a necessary transition stage from autocracy to democracy in China. As leader of the Constitutional Party, he opposed the 1911 republican revolution led by Sun Yatsen and was critical of the political system it established. He was involved in the abortive attempts to restore the monarchy in 1917 and 1923, which tarnished his reputation as a utopian and reformer. But he never abandoned his vision that China could be peacefully transformed into a model democracy by combining the best of both Western institutions and Confucian ideals. See also Hundred Days of Reforms. Further reading: Hsiao, Kung-chuan. A Modern China and a New World, K’ang Yu-wei, Reformer and Utopian, 1858–1927. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1975; Lo, Jung-pang, ed. K’ang Yu-wei, A Biography and a Symposium. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1967. Jiu-fong L Chang Khayr al-Din (1810–1889) Tunisian and Ottoman reformer Khayr al-Din was one of the foremost reformers within the Ottoman Empire during the 19th century. He was of Circassian Mamluk origin and had been brought to Istanbul, where he entered the service of Ahmad Bey, the de facto hereditary ruler of Tunisia. Khayr al-Din was given a religious and secular education; he studied French as well as Arabic. He was impressed by Western technology, particularly in the fi elds of transportation and education, which he observed serving as an envoy in France. Like other Arabic reformers of the age, Khayr al-Din believed that Muslim society could assimilate modern technological developments while remaining true to religious tradition and practice. He also supported the earlier Tanzimat reforms of the Ottoman Empire. While in the service of both the bey of Tunis and the Ottoman sultan, Khayr al-Din sought to balance French, British, and Italian imperial ambitions in North Africa with the survival of the Ottoman Empire. His diplomacy demonstrated that the Ottoman Empire was not only a passive subject of the diplomatic maneuverings of the 19th century but an active participant seeking to thwart European designs to take territory and establish economic control over the empire. To prevent French incursions into Tunisia, Khayr al-Din negotiated with a reluctant sultan to affi rm Tunisian autonomy under the Husaynid family, who, as in the past, would continue to pay the annual tribute to the sultan. After being rebuffed several times, Khayr al-Din’s proposals regarding Tunisian autonomy were reluctantly accepted. 210 Khayr al-Din In 1860 Khayr al-Din was largely responsible for the promulgation of a constitution in Tunisia whereby the bey became responsible to an appointed council. This was the fi rst constitution to be implemented anywhere in the Ottoman Empire or Southeast Asia. He served as the fi rst president of the council. Conservatives and political enemies opposed the reforms, however, and the constitution was soon abrogated. Nonetheless, in face of mounting economic problems, Khayr al-Din was appointed prime minister in 1873. A political pragmatist, he did not call for the return of the constitution but did succeed in implementing much-needed fi scal reforms in an attempt to avoid indebtedness to European powers. He also established the Sadiqiyya College with a Western curriculum of sciences and European languages. Many of its graduates later became the leaders of the Tunisian nationalist movement. When he thwarted their imperial designs, the French and Russians both pushed for Khayr al-Din’s dismissal, and he was ousted from Tunisia. He then entered the service of the sultan in Istanbul and served as the vizier for a short period. Again, enemies within the army and among religious conservatives forced Khayr al-Din out of government service in 1879. He lived in retirement in Istanbul until his death in 1889. A devout Muslim, Khayr al-Din wrote a memoir and long political statement, “The Road most Straight to Know the Conditions of the State,” in which he discussed the importance of political accountability and the need to integrate Muslim belief and Western ideas. Like other Arab reformers, Khayr al-Din argued that the two were not incompatible. See also Arab reformers and nationalists. Further reading: Hourani, Albert. Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age 1798–1939. London: Oxford University Press, 1962; Perkins, Kenneth. A History of Modern Tunisia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Janice J. Terry Korea, late Yi dynasty During the reign of Chongjo from 1776 until 1800, there were major changes in Korea, the fi rst involving the rapid spread of Christianity. When Chongjo died, his 10-year-old son Sunjo became king. The boy’s great-grandmother harbored a passionate hatred for Christianity, which was gaining many converts. She arrested many Christians, with the fi rst ordained Roman Catholic priest in Korea, Chou Wen-mu, giving himself up to the government to try to prevent further persecutions. He was executed, but the repression continued. In 1801 all male government slaves were freed, although slavery in Korea was not abolished until 1897. King Hongjong (r. 1834– 49) was only seven when he became king, and the regency council continued the anti-Christian persecution, executing, in 1839, the fi rst Western resident missionary, who had lived in Seoul for several years unharmed. When Honjong died, there was a succession crisis, and he was initially succeeded by Choljong, who was his father’s second cousin. Choljong reigned until his death in 1864. As he had no male heir, there was another succession crisis. A compromise was reached, and Choljong’s second cousin once removed became King Kojong, reigning from 1864 until 1907. By this time trouble began again from traders who wanted to open up commerce with Korea. Occasionally the traders brought missionaries with them. In 1866 massive local hostility against foreign priests saw the French Catholic missionaries go into hiding or try to fl ee the country. Subsequently, the French sent a naval expedition to seek redress for the murder of some French priests. However, the French admiral who arrived off the coast of Korea was worried about landing his soldiers. Coinciding with the French taking control of southern Vietnam—also after attacks on missionaries —the French were not eager to spread themselves too thinly in Asia. However, 1866 was important for Korean history for two additional reasons. The American vessel Surprise was wrecked off the Korean coast in that year. The American sailors on board were well treated and allowed to leave the country through Manchuria. However, in August 1866 the General Sherman, an American trading ship with a missionary on board, traveled down the Taedong River toward Pyongyang. Just before it reached the city, at Mongyongdae, it ran aground and some of the crew were quickly involved in a dispute with local farmers. The rest of the crew managed to rescue them, but the farmers then attacked the ship and killed everyone on board. One of the men involved in this attack was a local resident, Kim Eung Woo, who was the great-grandfather of the Korean communist leader Kim Il Sung. There is a monument on the site commemorating the role of the Koreans in this event. In 1871 an American expedition was sent to Pyongyang to try to determine the fate of the General Sherman and also to rescue any prisoners who might have survived. The Korean government refused to enter into Korea, late Yi dynasty 211 negotiations with the Americans, who, after destroying forts at Kianghwa, withdrew. Soon after this the prospect of war between Korea and Japan was raised. The Japanese had sent an expeditionary force to Formosa (Taiwan) in 1872. Three years later, Japan demanded a trade treaty with Korea and also sent another delegation to China with a similar request. On February 26, 1876, to avoid a confl ict, the Koreans signed a treaty of amity and trade with Japan, granting Japan some extraterritorial rights in Korea. However, a phrase in the treaty affi rmed that “Korea being an independent state enjoys the same sovereign rights as Japan.” Japan sent a copy of the document to the new Chinese foreign ministry, which did not raise any objection to the phraseology. Although the Koreans were initially happy with the wording of the phrase, it would come back to haunt them. As Korea was essentially declared totally independent of China, it would allow Japan to interfere in Korean affairs without China being able to raise any objections. By this time many Japanese politicians and the military were eager to take over Korea. When the British managed to get a concession at Port Hamilton, small islands off the southern coast of Korea, the Japanese prepared their plans for war with China. This broke out in 1894–95 when a rebellion led by the Tonghaks broke out in Korea. To safeguard their property and civilians in Korea, both the Chinese and the Japanese sent in troops. The Korean government quickly put down the rebellion, but neither the Chinese nor the Japanese would withdraw their soldiers. On July 20, 1894, the Japanese, in control of Seoul, seized control of the government. They used their navy to prevent Chinese troopships from bringing in reinforcements. Both sides declared war on August 1, 1894, with the Chinese quickly building up their defenses in northern towns and cities. The Japanese acted quickly, sending their soldiers north, and on November 15, at the Battle of Pyongyang, 20,000 Japanese soldiers drove 14,000 Chinese soldiers out of the city. The Chinese then withdrew back across the Yalu River, the northern boundary of Korea. At the same time the Japanese drove the Chinese fl eet out of Korean waters, and in October, Japanese soldiers crossed the Yalu River with the result that much of the rest of the fi ghting took place in China, especially in Manchuria and around Weihaiwei. Hostilities continued until the Treaty of Shimonoseki on April 17, 1895, when China was forced to concede territory and also to fully recognized Korean independence, leaving Korea open to Japanese invasion. In October 1895, Queen Min, who was believed to have led the anti-Japanese faction at the Korean court, was assassinated, and the Japanese were immediately blamed. King Kojong, fearing that he also might be in danger, fl ed to the Russian legation in Seoul. He made an alliance with the Russians, offering them mining and timber concessions. By this time there was agitation Yi Un, heir to the Korean throne in the early 20th century, was the last Yi emperor on the Asian peninsula. 212 Korea, late Yi dynasty among many Koreans who wanted an end to Japanese interference. A political group called the Tongnip Hyophoe (Independence Club) was formed by a nationalist called So Chae-p’il. King Kojong returned to the palace and declared himself the emperor of the Tae Han empire. During the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–05, the Koreans tried to prevent the warring parties from using Korean territory but eventually had to allow the Japanese to use bases in Korea to attack the Russians. With the end of that war at the Treaty of Portsmouth, on September 6, 1905, the Western powers accepted Japan’s rights over Korea and, in November 1905, Korea was declared a Japanese protectorate. Emperor Kojong tried to get the European powers involved by sending a secret mission to an international peace conference being held in the Netherlands. The Japanese found out and forced Kojong to abdicate in favor of his son, Sunjong, who assumed the throne in 1907. However, this was not enough for the Japanese, who faced guerrilla attacks from Korean nationalists. Japan eventually forced Sunjong to abdicate in 1910. The Korean army was then disbanded, and Korea was annexed by Japan. The Japanese then ruthlessly crushed any resistance against them, controlling Korea until 1945, when the country was partitioned. The former emperor Kojong died on January 21, 1919, and the former king Sunjong died on April 25, 1926, both in Korea. As Sunjong had no children, his half brother, Yi Un, was made heir to the throne. From 1908, when it was clear that the Japanese would take over the whole of the Korean Peninsula, many Koreans went into exile in Manchuria, Siberia, and Hawaii. One of these was a distant member of the Korean royal family, Syngman Rhee, the direct lineal descendant of the third king of the Yi dynasty. In exile, he was president of the provisional Korean Republic from 1919 to 1945. He would become president of South Korea from 1948 until 1960. Further reading: Choe, Ching Young. The Rule of the Taewongun 1864–1873. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972; Kim, C. I. Eugene, and Han-Kyo Kim. Korea and the Politics of Imperialism 1876–1910. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967; Niderost, Eric. “Fighting the Tiger,” Military Heritage, August 2002. Justin Corfi eld

Crisis and Achievement 1900 to 1950 Edit

Karakhan Declaration, fi rst and second Immediately after the October Revolution in 1917 the Soviet government of Russia had focused its efforts on instigating revolutions in Europe, but with little success. After establishing the Third International in March 1919 in Moscow, one of whose divisions was in charge of promoting communist revolutions in Asia, China became a prime target of the world communist movement. Leo Karakhan (1889–1937) was assistant foreign affairs commissar of the Soviet government. On July 25, 1919, he issued a declaration (which came to be known in retrospect as the fi rst Karakhan Declaration) that offered to renounce the unequal treaties that the czarist government had forced on China and further payments by China of indemnity that resulted from the Boxer Rebellion of 1900. This declaration sought to capitalize on widespread public anger among the Chinese about China’s diplomatic defeat at the Paris Peace Conference earlier that year, blaming it on the arrogance of the Western powers and Japan. However, due to a breakdown of communications, the text of the declaration did not reach China until March 1920. Some Chinese intellectuals saw this declaration as a herald of good relations with the Soviet Union. But it had no immediate effect because Great Britain, France, the United States, and Japan were hostile to the Soviets, and under their infl uence, China continued to recognize and support the defunct Russian provisional government. Additionally, the Chinese Eastern Railway had, since the Communist Revolution in Russia, been under the joint control of Britain, the United States, Japan, and China. In September 1920, Karakhan made a second declaration, in which the Soviet government repeated its offers of the previous year, except that it would now negotiate joint control of the Chinese Eastern Railway. China withdrew recognition from the provisional government in September 1920. In 1921 the two governments began negotiations. Several Soviet representatives came to China between 1921 and 1923 but failed to reach agreement, the stumbling block being control of the railway and the status of Mongolia. In July 1923, Karakhan was appointed chief Soviet negotiator to China; in May 1924, a Sino-Soviet Treaty was signed. It was based on equality: The Soviet Union renounced extraterritorial rights in China, its concessions in several Chinese cities, and its share of the Boxer indemnity, but it retained control of the Chinese Eastern Railway. Mongolia had already become a Soviet satellite state and was not mentioned in the treaty. From the fi rst Karakhan Declaration, when the weak Soviet government offered to return the privileges its predecessor had obtained, to the Sino-Soviet Treaty of 1924, Soviet foreign policy toward China had hardened. This is because by 1924 the civil war had ended in Russia, and the Soviet government was in unchallenged control. It thus did not need to K conciliate China. Leo Karakhan was executed by Stalin in the purge of 1937. See also Sun Yat-sen. Further reading: Leong, Sow-theng. Sino-Soviet Diplomatic Relations, 1917–1926. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1976; Whiting, Allen S. Soviet Policies in China, 1917–1924. New York: Stanford University Press, 1954. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Kato Takaaki (1860–1926) Japanese politician Kato Takaaki (also called Kato Komei) began his career in the firm of Mitsubishi after graduation from Tokyo University. His father-in-law was Yataro Iwasaki, founder of Mitsubishi, and throughout his political career, Kato was associated with Mitsubishi and its interests. Most of his career was spent in government service, beginning with a post in 1887 as private secretary to Okuma Shigenobu, the minister of foreign affairs. He advocated strong ties between Japan and Great Britain as a step on the road to making Japan a world power and was a strong supporter of the Japanese-British Exhibition of 1910. Takaaki held numerous posts in the Japanese government over the course of his career, including director of the banking bureau in the finance ministry and member of the house of representatives and served three times as foreign minister. In 1913, while serving as foreign minister under Prime Minister Katsura Taro, he created the Kenseikai (Constitutional Party) through a reorganization of the Riekken Doshi-kai (Constitutional of Friends). He became chairman of the new party, which served as opposition to the Rikken Seiyukai (Friends of Constitutional Government Party), which was more conservative. In 1915, while serving as foreign minister, Kato played a major role in securing China’s approval of the Twenty-one Demands, in which China granted Japan a number of industrial and strategic concessions. Kato became prime minister in 1924, leading a coalition government. The following year, his party won a majority in the diet, and he instituted a series of democratic and other reforms. These reforms were partly influenced by his admiration for the British system of government, which he had observed while serving as ambassador to that country. The most significant reform may have been the Universal Manhood Suffrage Law, which granted the right to vote to all Japanese men over age 25; this law increased the number of Japanese voters from 3 million to 13 million. Kato also reduced the size of the government bureaucracy and reduced government expenditures on the armed forces. However, not all Kato’s legislation was progressive: His government also passed the Peace Preservation Act, the purpose of which was to suppress subversive activities. Takaaki died while in office in 1926. Further reading: Beasley, William G. The Rise of Modern Japan. 3d ed. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000; Hotta- Lister, Ayako. “The Japan-British Exhibition of 1910: The Japanese Organizers.” In Britain and Japan: Biographical Portraits. Vol. 1. Ian Nish, ed. Folkestone, UK: Japan Library, 1994; Kawamura, Noriko. Turbulence in the Pacific: Japanese-U.S. Relations during World War I. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2000. Sarah Boslaugh Kenseikai, later Minseito, and Seiyukai Parties The Seiyukai and the Kenseikai/Minseito were the two most powerful political parties in Japan in the first decades of the 20th century. Under the Meiji Constitution of 1889, sovereignty resided with the Japanese emperor, but considerable ambiguity existed in determining from whence the officials who would run the government were to be drawn. An oligarchic group of genro, or elder statesmen, dominated posts in the cabinet and determined who was to occupy the office of prime minister, but by the close of the 19th century there was rising impatience with oligarchic rule. This led to a period of political maneuvering at the turn of the century that helped bring political parties to positions of greater prominence in Japan. The base of power for the political parties was the lower house of the Diet, Japan’s parliamentary institution. The role of this body was limited, but it nonetheless provided an opportunity for elected representatives to influence affairs of state, most notably in the Diet’s power over the national budget. Originally, a tone of confrontation marked relations between the oligarch-dominated cabinet and the party-led Diet, but by the middle of the 1890s both sides increasingly 184 Kato Takaaki recognized the possible benefi ts of cooperation and compromise. The Seiyukai, a political party founded in 1900 by Ito Hirobumi—himself an elder statesman and one of the architects of the Meiji state—became the leading political party of the early 20th century in Japan. Internal divisions within his party led to Ito’s own resignation in 1903, and another elder statesman, Saionji Kinmochi, became the Seiyukai’s new president. Yet Hara Kei was quickly becoming the leading personality in the Seiyukai. It was he who struck a deal with Prime Minister Katsura Taro in 1904 whereby the Seiyukai, in exchange for its Diet members’ support for government expenditures needed to prosecute the Russo-Japanese War, gained future access to the offi ce of prime minister. Party president Saionji served two stints as prime minister, from 1906 to 1908 and from 1911 to 1912, and the intervening non-Saionji cabinets included party representatives. It was clear that the Seiyukai had become a fi xture in Japanese politics. Kai worked to strengthen the party by recruiting members of the civil bureaucracy into the organization, providing funds for local development, and seeking the support of leading industrialists. Each of these efforts was designed to further the Seiyukai’s fortunes in the Diet and to lead to eventual party rule in the government. In 1912–13 fi nancial constraints forced a showdown between the Seiyukai and the leadership of Japan’s military, the latter of whom wanted funding to add new army divisions, which the Seiyukai leadership was unwilling to provide. In December 1912, the army toppled Saionji’s cabinet by ordering the war minister to resign and refusing to replace him. Katsura resumed the post of prime minister, but discontent over these machinations within the government led a number of political offi cials, business leaders, and journalists to form a “movement to protect constitutional government,” which helped to spark mass demonstrations. Katsura resigned after just two months in an episode that illustrated the growing power of the political parties, especially the Seiyukai. Meanwhile, Katsura created a new political party, the Doshikai—this party was renamed the Kenseikai party in 1916 and then reorganized as the Minseito in 1927—in an attempt to build a rival party that could undermine Seiyukai dominance of the Diet’s lower house. Upon Katsura’s death in 1913, his new party was led by Kato Takaaki, and in the election of 1915 the Doshikai succeeded in relegating the Seiyukai to the position of second-largest party in the Diet. The Seiyukai, however, regained a plurality of seats in 1917 and won an absolute majority in 1920. As prime minister, Kai tried to build support for the Seiyukai through a “positive policy” of public spending on education and developing local infrastructure. Hara’s government expanded the franchise by lowering the tax qualifi cation for voting but did not act upon calls for universal male suffrage. Hara was assassinated in 1921, and following his death, party government was dealt a setback, as from 1922 to 1924 the post of prime minister reverted back to a series of nonparty offi cials. The last of these was ousted from offi ce by another “movement to protect constitutional government,” this one consisting of a Diet coalition that included both the Kenseikai (the name for the Doshikai after 1916) and the Seiyukai. Thereupon Kenseikai president Kato Takaaki, whose party had regained a plurality of seats in the lower house of the Diet, became prime minister in 1924. For the next eight years until 1932, the heads of these two major parties alternated as prime ministers. As early as 1920 the Kenseikai had sponsored, along with a number of smaller parties, a universal male suffrage bill in the Diet. At that time the proposal was voted down by the Seiyukai. With Kato Takaaki as prime minister, however, the Kenseikai was able to achieve passage of legislation guaranteeing universal suffrage for Japanese men aged 25 and older. The Kenseikai- led government took an approach more friendly to Japanese labor than their Seiyukai counterparts did. The new government legalized workers’ strikes, legislated improvements in industrial conditions, and provided for health benefi ts for workers. In the realm of economics, the platform of the Kenseikai/Minseito party emphasized the imperative of fi scal conservatism and balanced budgets in opposition to the spending programs of the Seiyukai, though both parties spent considerable money on pork-barrel projects. The foreign policy approach of the Kenseikai/Minseito party in the 1920s was based on conciliation with China and cooperation with the West. Yet this policy engendered discontent in some quarters, especially among the military, who were concerned about protecting Japanese interests in Manchuria, perceived as severely threatened by the end of the decade by Chinese nationalists and the Soviet military. Economically, as much of the globe descended into the Great Depression. Minseito-led cabinets tried to resolve Japan’s fi nancial diffi culties, such as imbalance of trade and the too-low market price of rice, which hurt Japanese farmers but could not mitigate Japan’s fi nancial situation. Kenseikai, later Minseito, and Seiyukai Parties 185 The era of party government was marked by an increase in public scandals and allegations of corruption that damaged the prestige of the parties, as did the occasionally unseemly conduct of rival party representatives on the fl oor of the Diet, including physical assaults. Party government also came under heavy criticism from rightist elements who felt that such a parliamentary system ran fundamentally counter to traditional Japanese values. With disenchantment toward party offi cials now spreading on all sides, popular acceptance or toleration of the existing system was tenuous in an atmosphere of national crisis, and military offi cials and members of “patriotic societies” were able to undermine the role of the parties in governance. In late 1931 the Seiyukai again gained control of the government from the Minseito, but it would prove to be a short-lived cabinet. The maneuvering of antiparty elements, culminating in May 1932 with the assassination of prime minister Inukai Tsuyoshi, resulted in the fall of the Seiyukai cabinet. The era of party rule suddenly ended, as so-called national unity governments headed by military leaders or nonparty elites eroded the infl uence of the parties, and party representatives in the cabinets declined. The parties continued to function in the Diet, but internal strife over how best to defend the Diet’s prerogatives in the face of increasing military authority may have prevented the parties from asserting themselves more strongly. As the 1930s progressed the Minseito tended to hold to its policy of supporting the nonparty cabinets, while the Seiyukai eventually took a more oppositional stance. The parties still managed to cling to their place in the Diet and even played a vital part in the ouster of multiple cabinets in the late 1930s and into 1940. In the latter year, however, Prime Minister Konoe Fumimaro’s government succeeded in formally dissolving Japan’s political party organizations in the name of creating a wartime new order. Former party offi cials continued to exercise parliamentary infl uence and as such to play a role in political affairs, albeit a considerably limited one. Further reading: Berger, Gordon Mark. Parties Out of Power in Japan, 1931–1941. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1977; Duus, Peter, ed. The Cambridge History of Japan. Vol 6, The Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988; Duus, Peter. Modern Japan. 2d ed. Boston: Houghton Miffl in, 1998; Hastings, Sally Ann. Neighborhood and Nation in Tokyo, 1905–1937. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1995; Najita, Tetsuo. Hara Kei and the Politics of Compromise, 1905–1915. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1967. Adam C. Stanley Kerensky, Alexander Fyodorovich (1881–1970) Russian revolutionary leader Alexander Kerensky played a key role in toppling the czarist monarchy immediately before Vladimir Lenin’s Bolsheviks seized power in 1917. Kerensky, the son of a headmaster, was born in Simbirsk (now Ulyanovsk), which was also Lenin’s birthplace. Kerensky graduated in law from Saint Petersburg University in 1904. In 1905, Kerensky joined the Socialist Revolutionary Party and became editor of a radical newspaper. He was arrested and exiled but returned to Saint Petersburg in 1906 and worked as a lawyer, demonstrating his political sympathies by his frequent defense of accused revolutionaries. In 1912, he was elected to the duma, imperial Russia’s central parliament, as a member of the Moderate Labor Party. He was nominated to the Provisional Committee as a leader of the opposition to Czar Nicholas II. Unlike many radical socialist leaders, Kerensky supported Russia’s entrance into World War I in 1914. However, he became more and more disappointed with the czar’s unsuccessful conduct of the war. Kerensky was dismayed by the weakness of the czar’s command of the Russian troops. When the February Revolution broke out in 1917, Kerensky urged the removal of Nicholas II. To Kerensky’s enthusiasm, he was elected vice chairman of the Saint Petersburg Soviet. When the czar abdicated on March 13, the duma formed a provisional government. Kerensky was appointed minister of justice and instituted a series of reforms, including civil liberties such as freedom of speech, assembly, and the press, as well as the abolition of ethnic and religious discrimination. He made plans for the introduction of universal suffrage. He became a widely known and popular fi gure among the revolutionary leaders. Handed the war and navy ministry in May 1917, Kerensky was determined to ensure Russia’s continued participation in the Allied war effort. He toured the front, where he made a series of inspiring speeches appealing to the demoralized troops to continue fi ghting. Kerensky subsequently planned a new offensive against Germany and Austria-Hungary. Encouraged by the Bolsheviks, there were mass demonstrations against Kerensky in Petrograd. The July 1 Offensive, 186 Kerensky, Alexander Fyodorovich also named the Kerensky Offensive, was an attack on the whole Galician sector of the front. Low morale, poor supply, and the arrival of German reserves quickly brought the advance to a halt. As a consequence of that defeat, the provisional government was compelled to reorganize. Kerensky, whose rhetoric still seemed to win him popular support, became prime minister. His essential problem was that his country was exhausted after three years of warfare. Kerensky, however, felt obliged by Russia’s commitments to its allies to continue the war against the Central Powers. He also foresaw that Germany would demand vast territorial concessions as the price for peace. For those reasons, Kerensky decided to continue the war. Lenin and his Bolsheviks were promising “peace, land, and bread.” There was a rapid increase in the number of deserters: By the autumn of 1917, an estimated 2 million men had left the army. Many of these soldiers used their weapons to seize land from the nobility. Kerensky was powerless to stop the redistribution of land in the countryside. Kerensky’s refusal to end Russia’s engagement in the war proved his undoing. He found himself increasingly isolated between the extreme revolutionaries on the left and those on the right. He forced Lenin to fl ee the country following the July Days demonstration and subsequently announced a postponement of constituent assembly elections until November. Despite his efforts to unite the whole country, he alienated the moderate political factions as well as the offi cers’ corps by dismissing the supreme commander, General Lavr Kornilov. In September, Kerensky took over his post personally. When Kornilov started a revolt and marched on Petrograd, Kerensky was obliged to request assistance from Lenin and distribute weapons to the Petrograd workers. Most of these armed workers, however, soon sided with the Bolsheviks. Kerensky publicly declared a socialist republic on September 14 and released radical leaders from prison. Lenin was determined to overthrow Kerensky’s government before it could be legitimized by elections. Kerensky’s fall was triggered by his decision on November 5 to arrest the leaders of the Bolshevik committee, which resulted only in bringing about their uprising. On November 7, the Bolsheviks seized power in what became known as the October Revolution. Kerensky escaped from Petrograd and went to Pskov, where he rallied loyal troops for an attempt to retake the capital. His troops were defeated. Kerensky lived in hiding until he could leave the country in May 1918. Kerensky, then only 36 years old, spent the remainder of his long life in exile. He lived in Paris, engaged in the quarrels of the exiled Russian leaders. When the Germans occupied France in 1940, he escaped to the United States. In 1939 he had married the Australian journalist Lydia Tritton. In 1945, Kerensky traveled with her to Australia and lived there until her death in 1946. Thereafter, he returned to the United States and spent much of his time at Stanford University in California, where he used the Hoover Institution’s archive on Russian history. He lectured at universities, wrote, and broadcast extensively on Russian politics and history as well as on his revolutionary experiences. When Kerensky died in 1970, he was the last surviving major participant in the events of 1917. See also Russian Revolution and Civil War. Further reading: Abraham, Richard. Alexander Kerensky: The First Love of the Revolution. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987; Fuller, William C. The Foe Within: Fantasies of Treason and the End of Imperial Russia. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2006; Lincoln, W. Bruce. Passage through Armageddon: The Russians in War and Revolution, 1914–1918. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1986; Strongin, Varlen. Kerenskii, zagadka istorii. Moscow: AST-Press Kniga, 2004. Martin Moll Khilafat movement The institution of the khalifa, the leader or representative of the Muslim community after the death of the prophet Muhammad, had been associated with the Turkish Ottoman Empire since the 16th century. At the time of World War I, the Ottoman emperor and khalifa headed the largest independent Islamic political entity in the world. When Great Britain declared war on the Ottoman Empire in November 1914, it promised the Muslim subjects of the British Empire in India that the confl ict would not involve attacking the Muslim holy places in Arabia. In return, the British asked for the loyalty of their Muslim subjects to British war efforts. During the course of the war, it became evident that the Ottoman Empire would be dismembered. Consequently, the khilafat question came to be of increasing importance to Muslims in India. On March 20, 1919, at a public meeting of 15,000 Muslims from Bombay, a Khilafat committee was formed. By November 1919 following widespread public demonstrations in support of the Khilafat movement, an All-India Khilafat Conference assembled in Delhi. The conference protest- Khilafat movement 187 ed the placing of former lands of the Ottoman Empire, such as Syria, Palestine, and Mesopotamia, under non- Muslim mandates on the grounds that dividing the Ottoman Empire and depriving its sovereign of his spiritual and political authority was an attack on Islam. The conference also called for a Muslim boycott of European goods if the peace treaty with the Ottoman Empire was unjust and jeopardized the khilafat. The efforts of the conference were supported by Mohandas K. Gandhi, who had at the time launched a movement of noncooperation with the British, and by the Indian National Congress. The leaders of the Khilafat movement were Maulana Muhammad Ali and his brother Maulana Shaukat Ali. Maulana Muhammad Ali was chosen to lead the Muslim delegation that traveled to England in 1919 to represent Muslim interests to the British, and the Ali brothers pioneered the Khilafat Manifesto, which they presented on March 17, 1920, to British prime minister Lloyd George. Meanwhile, the terms of the Treaty of Sevres were published in May, whereby the Arab lands were to become independent of the Ottoman Empire. Syria, Mesopotamia, and Palestine became French and British mandates, and the Straits were internationalized. When the Turkish government signed the treaty on August 20, 1920, the delegation was left with no option but to return to India. However, when Mustafa Kemal Atatürk rejected the Treaty of Sèvres and began resisting Allied occupation in Anatolia, Khilafat leaders avidly supported his cause. It was only when Mustafa Kemal wrested a new treaty of peace from the European powers in 1922, established the republic of Turkey, and himself abolished the Khilafat in 1924 that the Khilafat movement in India came to an end. While the movement did not succeed in its goal of protecting the sovereignty of the Ottoman khalifa, it came to represent in the history of India both a moment of Hindu-Muslim cooperation against colonial rule and the eventual articulation of a distinct Indian Muslim identity. Further reading: Hardy, Peter. The Muslims of British India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972; Hasan, Mushirul, and Margrit Pernau, eds. Regionalizing Pan-Islamism: Documents on the Khilafat Movement. New Delhi, India: Manohar, 2005; Jalal, Ayesha. Self and Sovereignty: Individual and Community in South Asian Islam since 1850. London and New York: Routledge, 2000; Minault, Gail. The Khilafat Movement: Religious Symbolism and Political Mobilization in India. New York: Columbia University Press, 1982; Qureshi, Naeem. Pan-Islam in British Indian Politics: A Study of the Khilafat Movement 1918–1924. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1999. Taymiya R. Zaman Kikuyu Central Association The Kikuyu Central Association (KCA) was an organization that took a central role in the Kenyan struggle for independence from the British Empire in the fi rst half of the 20th century. The KCA was dominated by the Kikuyu ethnic people and eventually provided in Jomo Kenyatta the fi rst prime minister and then president of independent Kenya. The Kikuyu were a tribal agricultural people whose territory at one time extended across much of what is now modern Kenya. At the time of the arrival of expansionist European powers, Kikuyu power was declining owing to disease, particularly smallpox. Kenya was brought into the British Empire, and British and British-sponsored settlers took over much of the best land. The Kikuyu leader Mbatian died at this time, and his people were divided. It was not until the 1920s and 30s that the Kikuyu were reunited and started to organize themselves to protest against imperial control. The KCA was shaped in part by the intensely decentralized and tribal nature of the organization of the people and was largely inspired by the desire to recover the lands lost to the primarily white settlers. In the early 1920s, the East Africa Association was founded as the fi rst expression of Kenyan independence. It was dissolved in 1925 owing to government pressure but then reconstituted as the KCA in the same year. Within a few years, the KCA came under the direction of Jomo Kenyatta, who became its general secretary. Progress in obtaining independence was slow and hampered by the outbreak of World War II. By the early 1950s, sentiment had hardened to the extent that the Kenyans were prepared to enter into violent struggle to ensure their independence. Those with this hard-line tendency came to be known as the Mau Mau, who were closely associated with the oaths that members of the KCA took to demonstrate their dedication to unity. The Mau Mau Rebellion took a decade to succeed, during which time many thousands of rebels were killed by the British, and thousands more were interned in concentration camps. Mau Maus pursued a policy of sabotage and assassination, and the attempts to suppress them were severe but considered acceptable by authori- 188 Kikuyu Central Association ties in the fi eld. The truth as to what happened during this period has only recently begun to become known widely. It was the Kikuyu people and the KCA who led the way in the Kenyan independence movement, and this enabled Kikuyus to take leading roles in the postindependence government. This led to subsequent political dissent. Further reading: Anderson, David. Histories of the Hanged: The Dirty War in Kenya and the End of Empire. New York: W. W. Norton, 2005; Kenyatta, Jomo. Facing Mount Kenya. Vintage, 1962; Kyle, Keith. The Politics of the Independence of Kenya. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 1999. John Walsh King Crane Commission (1919) The King-Crane Commission of 1919 was a delegation sent to the territories of the former Ottoman Empire after World War I. A champion of selfdetermination, U.S. president Woodrow Wilson proposed that an Inter-Allied Commission be sent to the region to determine the aspirations of local inhabitants. Wilson proposed the commission upon the conclusion of secret and contradictory negotiations between the Allied powers that did not consider the wishes of the natives. The agreements that most dramatically emphasized the confl icting self-interests of the British and the French for the Ottoman territories during World War I were the Sherif Husayn–McMahon correspondence, the Sykes-Picot Treaty, and the Balfour Declaration. The Sherif Husayn–McMahon correspondence was an agreement made between the British high commissioner in Egypt, Henry McMahon, and Sherif Husayn of Mecca between 1914 and 1916. The British promised to recognize and help establish Arab independence if the Arabs agreed to fi ght in the war alongside the British. The Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 defi ned areas of British and French control in Arab lands and in Turkey. Finally, in November of 1917 the British government publicly issued the Balfour Declaration, which stated British support for the “establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” The British negotiated the same territory on three separate occasions, making three distinctly different promises to three distinctly different groups of people. The commission was to determine whether the region was prepared for self-determination and to ascertain what nations, if any, the indigenous population wanted to serve as mandatory powers. Wilson appointed Henry Churchill King, president of Oberlin College, and Charles R. Crane, a Chicago businessman and trustee of Robert College in Constantinople, to serve as the U.S. representatives. The King Crane Commission visited Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, and Anatolia between June and August 1919. The King Crane fi ndings were fi rst published in 1922 but not offi cially released by the U.S. Department of State until 1947. The King Crane Commission began its inquiry on June 10, 1919, and traveled through Syria and Palestine for six weeks. The method of inquiry was to meet with individuals and delegations that would represent all the signifi cant groups in the various communities to obtain the opinions and desires of the natives. The commission received 1,863 petitions with approximately 19,000 signatures and heard from representatives from over 1,500 villages. The commission concluded that if a foreign administration came to Syria, it should come not as a colonizing power but as a mandatory under the auspices of the League of Nations. The recommendations further emphasized the preservation of Syrian unity and recommended that Syria be placed under one mandatory power. Despite previous French ambitions, the commissioners recommended that the United States undertake the single mandate for all Syria. If such an arrangement were not possible, the Syrians desired that Great Britain assume the mandate. Syria was proclaimed an independent republic in 1944. In Palestine, the King Crane Commission recommended serious modifi cation of the Zionist program of unlimited immigration of Jews. King and Crane emphasized in their fi ndings the centrality of the Holy Land as important to Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike and recommended against the creation of an entirely Jewish state. A number of factors, including President Wilson’s incapacitating stroke, prevented the fi ndings and recommendations of the King Crane Commission from ever being implemented. See also San Remo Treaty (1920). Further reading: Howard, Harry N. An American Inquiry in the Middle East: The King-Crane Commission. Beirut: Khayats, 1963; Smith, Charles D. Palestine and the Arab- Israeli Confl ict. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1996. Julie Eadeh King Crane Commission (1919) 189 Kitchener, Horatio Herbert (1850–1916) British general Herbert, fi rst earl Kitchener of Khartoum and of Broome, was born near Listowel in County Kerry, Ireland, to English parents, Lieutenant Colonel Henry Kitchener, a retired army offi cer, and his fi rst wife, Frances Anne. He attended the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, graduating in 1870 and receiving his commission in the Royal Engineers the following year. He spent his early years in the army engaged in survey work in Palestine and Cyprus before accepting an assignment in Egypt in 1882, where through hard work and dedication he earned rapid promotion. In 1898, as sirdar (commander in chief) of the Egyptian army, he completed the reconquest of the Sudan by destroying a Mahdist army at Omdurman with a force half the size of the Mahdi’s. He soon learned that a small French expedition under Major Jean-Baptiste Marchand had cut across central Africa and planted the French fl ag at Fashoda. Loading fi ve gunboats with soldiers, Kitchener headed upriver and confronted Marchand, forestalling his efforts to establish French sovereignty over parts of the Sudan. Returning home, Kitchener was raised to the peerage as Baron Kitchener of Khartoum and appointed governor of the Sudan. After a series of losses by British forces in the Boer War, Kitchener was sent to South Africa in 1899 to serve as the chief of staff to Lord Roberts. The following year Roberts, having defeated the main Boer armies, turned command over to Kitchener. But the war was far from over, as the Boers adopted guerrilla warfare; Kitchener responded by adopting drastic measures that wore down the Boers, who accepted peace terms in 1902. Back in England, he was created viscount and took up the post of commander in chief of the army in India. Although bitterly disappointed that he had not been appointed viceroy of India, he accepted the post of British agent and consul general in Egypt in 1911. As virtual ruler of Egypt, Kitchener devoted himself to developing its economic resources and protecting and improving the interests of the fellaheen (peasants). For his services he earned an earldom in 1914. When it appeared that war with Germany was imminent in August 1914, Kitchener was appointed secretary of state for war. As he was the most acclaimed soldier in the land, his cabinet colleagues stood in awe of him and in the beginning allowed him to run the war as he saw fi t. Kitchener alone believed that the war would last at least three years and that to win Britain would need to place a million-man army in the fi eld. To that end, he would need to depend on patriotic enlistment, not conscription, which would not be adopted in Britain until the spring of 1916. Aiming for 70 divisions, as compared to the six available in 1914, Kitchener’s recruitment campaign, highlighted by his famous poster “Your Country Needs You,” drew in nearly 2.5 million volunteers. His second great service was to prevent Sir John French, commander in chief of the British army, from quitting the battle line in September 1914, a move that would have led to the piecemeal defeat of the Allies. The onset of trench warfare at the close of 1914 gave rise to many unprecedented problems. Exacerbating the diffi culties were the politicians, who intervened repeatedly in the conduct of the war, dragging the country into three disastrous expeditions in 1915: Gallipoli, Salonika, and Mesopotamia. Coinciding with the 190 Kitchener, Horatio Herbert Posters such as the one above, featuring Lord Kitchener, encouraged young men to enlist and support the armed effort against the Central Powers. ill-advised sideshows were the French’s badly bungled operations on the western front, with each defeat contributing to the erosion of Kitchener’s once immense reputation. Though they were hardly his fault, he was held responsible as the supreme warlord when things went wrong. An infl uential section of the cabinet came to see his methods as the principal cause of the defeats, rather than the outcome of their own interference, and gradually stripped him of much of his authority. Late in May 1916, Kitchener accepted an invitation to visit Russia in the hope that he could use his infl uence to bolster the waning enthusiasm of the Russian armies. On June 5 the cruiser HMS Hampshire, carrying Kitchener to Archangel, hit a mine and sank, and practically everyone aboard, including Kitchener, were lost. Recent scholarship has refuted many myths about Kitchener that his detractors circulated after his death. That he made mistakes is undeniable; he refused to admit his cabinet colleagues into his confi dence, was unable or unwilling to delegate authority, and tended to ignore the Imperial General Staff. That said, his accomplishments greatly overshadowed his errors. He not only singlehandedly kept Britain in the war when the French wanted to cut and run, but also built a formidable army, which sustained the Allies in the war, stepping into the breach left by the collapse of Russia and the exhaustion of France. When everything is said and done, it can be fairly claimed that Kitchener contributed more to the victory of the Allies than any other single individual. See also Afrikaners, South Africa; World War I. Further reading: Cassar, George H. Kitchener’s War. Washington, DC: Brassey’s, 2005; Magnus, Philip. Kitchener, Portrait of an Imperialist. New York: Dutton, 1959; Pollard, John. Kitchener. London: Constable, 1998. George H. Cassar Konoe Fumimaro (1891–1945) Japanese politician Prince Fumimaro Konoe was born into the aristocratic Fujiwara clan and studied at Tokyo Imperial University and Kyoto Imperial University, graduating from the law faculty of the latter institution in 1917. In his political career he was a protégé of Saionji Kinmochi, a member of the court aristocracy who served two terms as prime minister. Early in his political career Konoe attended the Paris Peace Conference and later criticized the conference as an attempt by Western nations to preserve their already considerable spheres of infl uence. Konoe’s status as a prince allowed him membership in the upper house of the Japanese Diet (house of peers), where he served as vice president and then president. He fi rst became prime minister of Japan in June 1937 and would serve three times in that post. Konoe was a moderate like his mentor Saionji and was particularly concerned with tempering the power of the military. However, after the Marco Polo Bridge incident led to the outbreak of an undeclared war between China and Japan, Konoe’s unsuccessful attempts to end that confl ict contributed to the downfall of his cabinet in 1939. Konoe was reappointed prime minister in July 1940 and was involved in intense negotiations with the United States, hoping it could act as a mediator in the confl ict between Japan and China on terms favorable to Japan. He also negotiated a nonaggression pact between Japan and the Soviet Union in 1941. Konoe resigned as prime minister in October 1941 in favor of the war minister, General Hideki Tojo, and was not centrally involved in the Japanese government again until the conclusion of World War II. After Japan’s surrender in August 1945, Konoe served in the government of Prince Naruhiko Higashikuni. Konoe took his own life with potassium cyanide after it was announced by the American general Douglas MacArthur, supreme commander of the Allied Forces and supervisor of the postwar occupation of Japan, that Konoe would be tried as a war criminal. It allowed him to evade the disgrace of conviction and execution by hanging. Konoe’s grandson, Morihiro Hosokawa, served as prime minister of Japan from August 1993 to April 1994. See also World War I. Further reading: Oka Yoshitake. Konoe Fumimaro: A Political Biography. Shumpei Okamoto and Patricia Murray, trans. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1983; Tarling, Nicholas. A Sudden Rampage: The Japanese Occupation of Southeast Asia, 1941–1945. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2001; Morley, James William. The Final Confrontation: Japan’s Negotiations with the United States, 1941. Edited and translated by David Titus. New York: Columbia Press, 1994. Sarah Boslaugh Ku Klux Klan The Ku Klux Klan (KKK, or Klan) refers to two distinct organizations, separated in time by nearly half a Ku Klux Klan 191 century. The fi rst Klan, founded in December 1865 in Pulaski, Tennessee, by a handful of ex-Confederate soldiers, was only the most prominent among numerous white supremacist secret societies that formed in the U.S. South at the end of the Civil War in opposition to radical Reconstruction and dedicated to maintaining white supremacy through violence and terror. (Similar organizations included the Knights of the White Camellia, the Night Riders, the Order of the White Rose, the Pale Faces, and others.) Wearing white sheets, conical white hats, and white masks, KKK members and offi cers were identifi ed by a series of preposterous-sounding names (Grand Wizard, Grand Dragons, Hydras, Grand Titans, Furies, Grand Giants, Night Hawks, Grand Cyclops, Ghouls, and others). By the late 1860s, the Klan was active in almost every southern state and strongest in Piedmont districts where whites outnumbered blacks. Congressional investigations revealed that the organization was responsible for thousands of murders, burnings, lynchings, beatings, rapes, tar-and-featherings, and other acts of violence and terror. Weakened by the Enforcement Acts of 1870 and 1871, the organization played an important role in maintaining white supremacy in the South and was largely defunct by the formal end of Reconstruction in 1877. The second Klan, founded in 1915 by Alabamaborn salesman and preacher William J. Simmons, had only tenuous links to the fi rst. This resuscitated Klan was propelled into prominence in 1915 by D. W. Griffi th’s epic fi lm Birth of a Nation, in turn based on several novels by southern writer Thomas Dixon, Jr., most notably The Clansman. Griffi th’s blatantly racist fi lm, following Dixon, portrayed the Klan as a heroic organization devoted to redeeming the Union and saving white womanhood from savage Negro hordes bent on sowing mayhem and destruction in the aftermath of the Civil War. Despite the fi lm’s malicious misrepresentations, it was endorsed by President Woodrow Wilson as an accurate depiction of the Klan’s role in Reconstruction. In the late 1910s and early 1920s the organization grew rapidly in power and numbers. At its height in the mid-1920s, this second Klan had become a national political force, with as many as 6 million members from all walks of life and chapters in nearly every state. Women played an especially important role in organizing women’s chapters and spreading the Klan’s message. In practice, this meant antipathy not only toward blacks but also Catholics, Jews, immigrants, atheists, socialists, communists, gamblers, homosexuals, divorcees, “fornicators,” those opposed to Prohibition, and anyone not identifi ed as white, Anglo-Saxon, appropriately Protestant, and conforming to Klan-defi ned “traditional values.” Especially strong in the Midwest and South, in the mid-1920s the Klan became a major political player, electing thousands of its members to offi ces. Divided and weakened after 1925 by scandals, infi ghting, and public backlash—especially the murder and rape charges brought against Indiana Klan leader D. C. Stephenson—by 1930 national membership had dropped below 6,000, and the Klan ceased being a national political force. The organization survived through the 1930s and after, witnessing a resurgence with the Civil Rights movement (the “Second Reconstruction”) of the 1960s. In the 1980s, various civil rights organizations, most notably the Southern Poverty Law Center, used the courts to drive the Klan into bankruptcy and effectively destroy it as a national organization. In both its fi rst and second incarnations, the Ku Klux Klan used violence, terror, and other illegal means to advance its conservative, racist, white supremacist agenda. Further reading: Blee, Kathleen M. Women and the Klan: Racism and Gender in the 1920s. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991; Foner, Eric. Reconstruction: America’s Unfi nished Revolution, 1863-1877. New York: Harper & Row, 1988; Moore, Leonard J. Citizen Klansmen: The Ku 192 Ku Klux Klan Klansmen in costume: The second Ku Klux Klan rose to prominence in part thanks to D.W. Griffi th’s epic fi lm Birth of a Nation. Klux Klan in Indiana, 1921–1928. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1991. Michael J. Schroeder Kwantung Army Japan’s military presence in and domination of Manchuria in northwestern China received a major victory with the end of the Russo-Japanese War in 1905. Under the Treaty of Portsmouth, Japan was required to withdraw its troops from Manchuria proper but gained a leased territory of the Liaotung (Liaodong) Peninsula in southern Manchuria, renamed the Kwantung Leased Territory, which included the fortress and port of Port Arthur. The army unit assigned to garrison the area and the Japanese-owned South Manchurian Railway (SMR), as far as Changchun, was named the Kwantung Army. From this date this army became the spearhead of Japanese imperialism in China. With the railway administration working as a colonial power, running ports, harbors, tax collection, mines, and utility companies, the SMR turned the railway zone into a semiautonomous state, and the Kwantung Army was its security and police arm. After World War I, Japan gained control of former German holdings at Tsingtao in China’s Shandong (Shantung) Province and deployed 70,000 troops from the Kwantung Army to Siberia to support the Whites in the Russian Civil War. The Japanese sought to expand their empire in Siberia, failed to do so, and withdrew in 1922. In 1927, when Chiang Kai-shek’s troops were marching on Shandong to break the power of local warlords in the Northern Expedition, Japanese troops were sent to Shandong (Shantung). Soon Chinese and Japanese troops were clashing. Chiang withdrew his forces from the city of Tsinan, but the Kwantung Army attacked it the next day, killing 13,000 civilians. Chiang turned his troops away from confl ict with Japan. Tokyo, however, supported the Kwantung Army, issuing warnings to Chiang and Manchurian warlord Zang Zolin (Chang Tso-lin) not to attack Japanese forces or civilians. However, the new commander of the Kwantung Army, General Chotaro Muraoka, had other ideas, moving his headquarters in May 1928 from Port Arthur to Mukden, Manchuria’s main city, and preparing his troops to take control of the region. Ready to move, Muraoka and his troops waited, fi ring telegrams to Tokyo asking permission to move. When Prime Minister Giichi Tanaka refused, the Kwantung Army’s offi cers were stunned. Muraoka decided to kill Zang Zolin, blasting a bridge as the warlord’s train crossed it on June 4, 1928. The Kwantung Army reported to Tokyo that Zang had been killed by Manchurian guerrillas. The truth came out anyway, and Tokyo could do seemingly little to control the insubordinate army and its offi cers, who had a lot of support in Japan. But Tanaka was determined to punish the offi cers responsible for the assassination plot and recommended so to Emperor Hirohito, who agreed. But when the army as a whole objected, Tanaka temporized. He fi red Muraoka and told the public that there was no evidence the Kwantung Army had been involved in the plot. Then Tanaka resigned. The Kwantung Army’s offi cers had defi ed Tokyo and gotten away with it. As the Great Depression wore on, the Japanese economy continued to crumble. Many Japanese army offi cers, angered by the economic situation, joined secret societies like the Cherry Blossom League, and a group of offi cers plotted to use the Kwantung Army to seize Manchuria for its rich resources. One of the key men was Colonel Doihara Kenji, who prepared a “Plan for Acquiring Manchuria and Mongolia.” Chiang Kai-shek, meanwhile, had succeeded in unifying China under the Kuomintang, and Zhang Xueliang (Chang Hsueh-liang), Manchuria’s new warlord, supported the Nationalist, or Kuomintang, government. In 1931 clashes broke out between Korean farmers who were Japanese subjects and Chinese farmers over water rights. Doihara went to Manchuria and determined that a Japanese attempt to seize Manchuria would result in international condemnation. An “incident” had to be manufactured to make a Japanese occupation of Manchuria seem China’s fault. In 1929 the Kwantung Army began to plot an incident under their new boss, Lieutenant General Shigeru Honjo, with Doihara as mastermind. Japan’s civilian leaders did nothing to control the insubordinate Kwantung Army. The emperor, however, ordered Major General Yoshitsugu Tatekawa to bring a message from him on September 15, 1931, ordering the Kwantung Army not to take any unauthorized action. Unfortunately for Hirohito, Tatekawa’s assistant, Colonel Kingoro Hashimoto, was among the plotters, and he sent a message to offi cers of the Kwantung Army to let them know that Tatekawa was coming with imperial orders. When Tatekawa arrived in Mukden on September 17, Kwantung Army Kwantung Army 193 offi cers took the general to a party, where he became drunk. That night Kwantung Army offi cers blew up a section of track on the South Manchurian Railway 1,200 yards from a Chinese army that failed to derail the night express. Kwantung Army troops then attacked and shelled the Chinese barracks, killing many soldiers. By 10:00 a.m. on September 18, 1931, Mukden was under Japanese control, Chang’s headquarters were ransacked, and his banks and government offi ces were occupied, as were a dozen other cities in southern Manchuria in a coordinated attack by Japanese units. Some 12 hours after their blast, Kwantung Army offi cers displayed to Western reporters the “proof” that the Chinese had tried to destroy the railroad, which was bodies of Chinese soldiers shot in the back lying facedown, supposedly cut down while fl eeing the scene. The world was outraged by the political adventurism, and Tokyo was stunned. The emperor reminded Prime Minister Reijiro Wakatsuki that he had forbidden such action, and the foreign and fi nance ministers also objected. But Wakatsuki did not overrule his generals and colonels. The attack and subsequent conquest of Manchuria were accepted as a fait accompli. From October to December 1931, the Kwantung Army, now empowered by Tokyo and advised by units of the Japanese army in Korea, expanded conquest of Manchuria, even plotting a coup in October to overthrow the civilian government in Tokyo. This attempted coup was ended when the leading plotters were secretly arrested. In December Wakatsuki resigned. Ki Inukai became the new prime minister, but General Araki, leader of the Kodo Ha faction, became war minister, effectively providing the military’s endorsement to the Kwantung Army’s actions. The Kwantung Army now became an occupation force in Manchuria, and its offi - cers became heroes for all of Japan. The Kwantung Army continued to seize Chinese territory, taking Rehe (Jehol) province in 1933 and Chahar province in 1934. Offi cers of the Kodo Ha movement were assigned to the Kwantung Army, strengthening its radicalism; among them was Hideki Tojo, who would become Japan’s prime minister during World War II. In February 1936, the Kwantung Army showed its powerful infl uence when a group of Kodo Ha offi cers attempted a coup d’état in Tokyo. It failed, the ringleaders were shot, and the civilian leaders regained some control over the Kwantung Army. Leaving Chinese unity under Chiang Kai-shek’s leadership, the Kwantung Army set to create an “incident” between Chinese and Japanese forces on July 7, 1937, at a railway junction near Beijing (Peking) in northern China, called the Marco Polo Bridge Incident. This led to the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese War, in which Japan committed unspeakable attrocities, such as the Rape of Nanjing. It became World War II in Asia. The Kwantung Army promised Tokyo victory in three months. As World War II began and dragged on, the Kwantung Army remained in occupation of Manchuria, “Asia’s Ruhr,” against Soviet invasion. Over time, the army was stripped of most of its equipment and men, which were needed on other battlefronts. When the Soviet Union declared war on Japan on August 8, 1945, and invaded Manchuria, the Kwantung Army had 1 million men under arms equipped with 1,155 tanks, 5,360 guns, and 1,800 aircraft. On paper, this was a match for the Soviets’ 1.5 million men, but the Soviets also fi elded 26,000 guns, 5,500 tanks, and 3,900 planes. In addition, the Kwantung Army was short of gasoline, ammunition, and transport. Yet some of the Kwantung Army’s hotheaded leaders refused to surrender when Japan surrendered to the Allies on August 14, 1945. Commanding general Otozo Yamada refused to obey the Imperial Rescript to surrender, summoned his offi cers to his headquarters at Changchun, debated the news from Tokyo, and by a majority vote chose to go on fi ghting. In the end, the Kwantung Army did obey an imperial command and surrendered to the Soviet Army. Several of its leaders, including Doihara and Tojo, were tried, convicted, and executed at the Tokyo International Court. Further reading: Harris, Meirion, and Susie Harris. Soldiers of the Sun. New York: Random House, 1991; Hoyt, Edwin P. Japan’s War. New York: Da Capo, 1986; Toland, John. The Rising Sun. New York: Random House, 1970; Tuchman, Barbara W. Sand against the Wind: Stilwell and the American Experience in China. New York: MacMillan, 1970. David H. Lippman

The Contemporary World 1950 to the Present Edit

Karmal, Babrak (1929–1997) Afghan politician Babrak Karmal was an Afghan revolutionary figure, a politician, and an ambassador. He served as the third president of Afghanistan from 1980 to 1986 during the rule of the communist Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. An effective orator and an educated politician, Karmal is best known as one of the founders of the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) and for leading a puppet regime with Soviet financial and military support. Born in Kamari, a small village east of Kabul on January 6, 1929, Karmal came from a wealthy Tajik military family. His father, Major General Mohammad Hussain, had close relations with the royal family, especially King Mohammad Zahir and Prime Minister General Mohammad Daoud. After graduating from high school Karmal enrolled in law school, pursuing a degree in law and political science, at the Kabul University in 1951. While a student he was arrested and put in prison for five years for organizing demonstrations in support of an Afghani popular revolutionary figure, Abdul Rahman Mahmudi. In prison he befriended pro–Soviet Union leftist political figures like Mear Mohammad Siddeq Farhang. Karmal increasingly became a staunch supporter of the Leninist-Stalinist form of Marxism, identifying the Soviet model as the best way to modernize Afghanistan. After graduation Karmal continued his close relations with Farhang. The friendship enabled him to play a major role in establishing the PDPA on January 1, 1965, Afghanistan’s first major Marxist political party. Like many other PDPA members who aimed for parliamentary seats, Karmal became a candidate and was elected to the National Assembly from 1965 to 1973, where he was able to gain a reputation for his antireligious and anti-imperialistic communist viewpoints. Due to internal ideological differences the PDPA split into the Khalq (People) and the Parcham (Flag) factions in 1967. Karmal became the leader of the more cosmopolitan, moderate Parcham bloc. Karmal’s faction shared power with Mohammad Daoud’s regime after the coup d’état of 1973, when the monarchy was overthrown. Though the alliance was short-lived, since Daoud dismissed the Parcham faction from the presidential cabinet, Karmal was able to reunite the PDPA after much Soviet pressure. In April 1978 the PDPA gained power through a military coup. When Nur Mohammad Taraki, a member of the Khalq bloc, was pronounced the president of the new Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA), instituting a regime that had the full backing of the Soviet Union until 1992, the two factions of PDPA began internal fighting. Karmal and his mistress, Anahita Ratebzad, were sent into “exile” as ambassadors to Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, respectively, while Hifizullah Amin, another major Khalq political leader, became the prime minister on March 28, 1979. Karmal later left Prague for Moscow for fear of assassination or execution on his return to Kabul. On December 5, 1978, when the Taraki government initiated a major friendship treaty with K the Soviet Union, numerous uprisings spread around Afghanistan against the Soviet-backed regime. Taraki’s radical reform projects for transforming Afghanistan from a traditional religious to a secular modern society led the way to the rise of the mujahideen (or Muslim fighters), who opposed the Soviet-style westernization of the country. Tensions between Taraki and Amin factions within the Khalq bloc led to the assassination of Taraki on October 10, 1979, which eventually led to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan on December 27, 1979. Karmal, the leader of the Parcham faction, returned to Kabul with the full support of the Soviets and was declared the president. As the third president of the republic, Karmal’s most important accomplishments were his call for clemency for political prisoners, the change of the Marxist-style national flag, the promulgation of the basic principles of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, the recognition of the Muslim clerical establishment, and the compensation for the loss of property. Karmal’s poor leadership skills and his inability to bring an end to the ongoing guerrilla warfare between the Soviet-backed government and the mujahideen gradually made him a highly unpopular figure. With the full backing of Moscow throughout his presidency, Karmal was regarded as a Soviet puppet, both domestically and internationally. In May 1986 Karmal was replaced as the communist leader by Mohammad Najibullah, and in October 1986 he was relieved of the presidency. After a number of trips between the Soviet Union and Afghanistan after his presidency, Karmal finally settled in Moscow, where he died of liver dysfunction on December 6, 1996. Further reading: Edwards, David B. Before Taliban Genealogies of the Afghan Jihad. Berkeley: University of California, 2002; Kaplan, Robert D. Soldiers of God: With the Mujahidin in Afghanistan. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1990. Babak Rahimi Karzai, Hamid (1957– ) Afghan president Hamid Karzai was the first elected president of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. At the conclusion of the presidential election on October 9, 2004, Karzai was declared its winner, with 55.4 percent of the vote. On December 7, 2004, Karzai took the oath of office as the first democratically elected leader of Afghanistan. Hamid Karzai was born on December 24, 1957, in the village of Karz, near Kandahar in southern Afghanistan. His grandfather, Khair Mohammed Khan, was a key figure in Afghanistan’s war of independence. Karzai’s father, Abdul Ahad Karzai, was a popular national figure who was also an influential member of the parliament during the 1960s. The early education of Hamid Karzai took place in various Afghan schools, including Mahmood Hotaki Elementary School, Sayeed Jamaluddin Afghani School, and Habibia High School. Later, Karzai went to India, where he received graduate education in international relations and political science from the Himachal Pradesh University in Simla. After the formation of the mujahideen government in 1989, Karzai was made the director of the Foreign Relations Section in the Office of the President, Burhauddin Rabbani. He became a deputy foreign minister in 1992. When the civil war between the contending mujahideen groups engulfed Afghanistan in 1994, Karzai resigned from his official position. He strove for a free and open national assembly (loya jirga). In August 2000, when the fundamentalist Taliban regime was ruling Afghanistan, Karzai formed resistance groups and vowed to oust them from power. There was an element of personal revenge to his actions, as his father had been assassinated by the Taliban. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, Karzai, in coordination with U.S. forces, worked to overthrow the Taliban regime of Mullah Omar. On December 5, 2001, exiled Afghanistan political leaders representing various ethnic tribes gathered in Bonn, Germany, and named Karzai the chair of a 29-member governing committee and the leader of Afghanistan’s interim government. Karzai has traveled extensively around the world and has pleaded for donations in order to rebuild infrastructure and other facilities in his country. Karzai married Dr. Zeenat Quraishi in 1999. He has one sister and six brothers, including Ahmed Wali Karzai, who helps coordinate humanitarian relief operations in the province of Kandahar. See also al-Qaeda. Further reading: Evans, Martin. Afghanistan: A Short History of Its People and Politics. New York: Harper Publishers, 2002; Todd, Anne M. Hamid Karzai. London: Chelsea Publications, 2003. Mohammed Badrul Alam 236 Karzai, Hamid Kaunda, Kenneth (1924– ) first Zambian president Kenneth Kaunda, a Zambian nationalist, led the struggle for independence against the British and became the first president of independent Zambia in 1964. Kaunda was born in what was then Northern Rhodesia and, like many first-generation African nationalists, he was educated at Christian mission schools. He worked as a miner, as a teacher, and, for a short period of time, as an instructor in the army. Kaunda joined several African nationalist movements and in Lusaka became secretary- general of the African National Congress (ANC). He quit the ANC to form the Zambia African National Congress (ZANC); when the British banned ZANC in 1959, Kaunda was imprisoned. Upon his release Kaunda became president of the new United National Independence Party (UNIP) that replaced the banned ZANC; he supported demonstrations and civil disobedience against British control. Kaunda became president of newly independent Zambia in 1964 and held the presidency until 1991. During his tenure in power, Kaunda became increasingly authoritarian and, in a trajectory similar to other African rulers in the 1970s–1980s, declared Zambia a one-party state in 1972. As agricultural productivity faltered, Zambia’s economy became dependent on copper exports, and Kaunda was accused of corruption and responsibility for the economic problems. In face of mounting political opposition, Kaunda stepped down from power, and Frederick Chiluba replaced him as president in 1991. Chiluba maneuvered to prevent Kaunda from contesting further elections and, after being accused of involvement in an attempted coup d’état, Kaunda retired from politics in 1997. Further reading: Kaunda, Kenneth. Zambia Shall Be Free: An Autobiography by Kenneth D. Kaunda. New York: Praeger, 1963; Macpherson, Fergus. Kenneth Kauda of Zambia. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1974. Janice J. Terry Kennedy, John F. (1917–1963) U.S. president John F. Kennedy was the 35th president of the United States, serving from 1961 until his assassination in November 1963. Prior to that he had a prominent military career, served in the House of Representatives and then in the Senate from 1947 to 1960, and was the youngest person to be elected president. He is also the only Roman Catholic to be elected president. John Fitzgerald Kennedy was born on May 29, 1917, in Brookline, Massachusetts, the second son of Joseph P. Kennedy and Rose (née Fitzgerald). He attended Dexter School, Riverdale Country School, Canterbury School, and later Choate School. Graduating in 1935, he went to London to study at the London School of Economics but fell ill and returned to the United States where he attended Princeton University briefly. He then went to Harvard College, spending the summer holidays in 1937, 1938, and 1939 in Europe. John Kennedy was in Germany in August 1939, returning to London by September 1, 1939, when Germany invaded Poland. In 1940 Kennedy completed his honors thesis, “Appeasement in Munich,” which was subsequently published as Why England Slept. In May and June 1941 Kennedy went to South America. He volunteered for the U.S. Army but was rejected because of his bad back. However, using contacts in the Office of Naval Intelligence, he was accepted for the navy in September, and when war broke out with Japan in December 1941, he served in the Pacific. On August 2, 1943, the boat which Kennedy was in, the PT-109, was rammed by the Japanese destroyer Amagiri while on a night-time patrol near New Georgia in the Solomon Islands. He towed a wounded man to safety and was personally involved in rescuing two others. Initially, John Kennedy had some thoughts about becoming a journalist. The death of his older brother, Joe, in 1944, however, propelled him into politics and in 1946 he ran for a seat in the House of Representatives as a Democrat for Massachusetts, winning with a large majority. In 1952 he defeated the incumbent Republican Henry Cabot Lodge for the U.S. Senate, and served in the Senate from 1953 to 1960. His book, Profiles in to Courage, was published in 1956, winning the Pulitzer Prize for biography in 1957. Kennedy’s connections with Senator Joe McCarthy were to damage his standing in the liberal establishment, but he did support the Civil Rights Act of 1957. On September 12, 1953, John Kennedy married Jacqueline Lee Bouvier. They had four children: a daughter, stillborn in 1956; Caroline Bouvier Kennedy, born in 1957; John Fitzgerald Kennedy Jr., born in 1960; and Patrick Bouvier Kennedy, born in 1963. In 1960 Kennedy ran for president. What was particularly noteworthy was the first television debate that Kennedy had with his Republican opponent, Kennedy, John F. 237 Richard Nixon. Kennedy defeated Nixon in a tightly fought race, with the Democrats gaining 303 electoral college seats against 219 for the Republicans. An independent, Harry Byrd, picked up the remaining 15 electoral college seats. On January 20, 1961, Kennedy was sworn in as the 35th president. The first controversy of his presidency concerned the government of Fidel Castro, which had come to power two years earlier. The Eisenhower administration had allowed anti-Castro Cubans to be secretly trained in the southern United States, mainly in Louisiana and Florida, and they had planned to invade Cuba. The plan had been drawn up before Kennedy came to power, and on April 17, 1961, Kennedy approved it. However, he cancelled the air support that was to have been provided by the U.S. Air Force. When the Cuban exiles landed at the Bay of Pigs in Cuba, they were quickly overwhelmed by the Communists. The next major crisis, the Cuban missile crisis, took place from October 14, 1962, when American U- 2 spy planes photographed a Soviet Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile site under construction in Cuba. He decided that an attack on the site might result in nuclear war, but that inaction would be seen as a sign of weakness. In the end, he resolved to order a military blockade of the island and eventually came to an agreement with the Soviet Union’s premier, Nikita Khrushchev, that the Soviet Union would remove the missiles, and the United States would promise never to invade Cuba, and withdraw some missiles from bases in Turkey. Kennedy was interested in rapprochement with the Soviet Union, but he had to be perceived as “tough,” especially in Europe. On June 26, 1963, he visited West Berlin and addressed a large public crowd with the famous “Ich bin ein Berliner” speech. In August 1963 Kennedy was able to sign into law the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which prohibited atomic testing on the ground, in the atmosphere, and underwater, but did not prohibit testing underground. Another foreign policy problem that Kennedy faced was the increased fighting in Laos and Vietnam. In the former, the Kennedy administration backed a neutral government, and in the latter, the United States was heavily involved in supporting the anticommunist South Vietnamese government led by President Ngo Dinh Diem. By 1963 there were 15,000 U.S. military advisers in South Vietnam. Diem had ruled South Vietnam since late 1954 and was becoming increasingly authoritarian. Kennedy felt that it was Diem’s brother, Ngo Dinh Nhu, who was a major problem and wanted Diem to get rid of Nhu. Diem realized that Nhu was his most powerful supporter and refused. This led the Kennedy administration to give the go-ahead for Buddhist South Vietnamese generals to overthrow Ngo Dinh Diem, who, along with Nhu, was murdered. The new regime was inherently unstable, causing the United States to commit more combat soldiers, escalating the war. The domestic program introduced by Kennedy was known as the New Frontier. He tried to legislate to prevent the continuance of racial discrimination. He also proposed tax reforms and promised federal funding for education, more medical care for the elderly, and government intervention to boost the economy of the nation. Most of these measures were to be introduced by Kennedy’s successor, Lyndon B. Johnson. It was Johnson who, in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, introduced the measures that Kennedy had supported. John Kennedy is also well known for his commitment to the space program. With the Soviet Union managing to win all the first stages of the space race, Kennedy pushed for greater effort from the American people. The moon landing took place on July 20, 1969, during Nixon’s presidency. As John Kennedy had only narrowly won the 1960 presidential election, he began his campaign for reelection early. This involved trying to win support from the southern states. He went to Texas in November 1963, where, on November 22, in Dallas, at 12:30 p.m., he was assassinated. A loner, Lee Harvey Oswald, was arrested about 80 minutes later and charged with murdering a Texas policeman. He was then also charged 238 Kennedy, John F. Minutes before the assassination: Texas governor John Connally and his wife (seated, front); Kennedy and the First Lady (back). with murdering John F. Kennedy. Before Oswald could be brought to trial, two days later, on November 24, he was shot dead by nightclub owner Jack Ruby. There has been much written about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. On November 29, five days after the shooting of Oswald, Kennedy’s successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, created the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, known as the Warren Commission because it was chaired by Chief Justice Earl Warren. It concluded that Kennedy was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone, a view later endorsed by the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations reporting in 1979. Most people now view the Warren Commission report with disdain for the evidence that it missed. John F. Kennedy was buried at Arlington National Cemetery, Arlington, Virginia. The bodies of two of his children, his first daughter, and Patrick, his youngest son who died on August 9, 1963, were brought to Arlington and buried with him. Further Reading: Dallek, Robert. An Unfinished Life: John F. Kennedy, 1917–1963. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 2003; Freedman, Lawrence. Kennedy’s Wars: Berlin, Cuba, Laos, and Vietnam. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000; Giglio, James N. The Presidency of John F. Kennedy. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1991; Harper, Paul, and Krieg, Joann P., eds. John F. Kennedy, the Promise Revisited. New York: Greenwood Press, 1988; Hersh, Seymour M. The Dark Side of Camelot. Boston: Little, Brown, 1997. Justin Corfield Kenya Present-day Kenya is a mix of colonial struggle and capitalist vigor. The road to Kenyan independence began in earnest in October 1952. Kenya, under a state of emergency that would last seven years, began its march toward decolonization. The Mau Mau rebellion against British colonial rule prompted the successful request for a state of emergency. Britain rallied its own troops, in addition to African troops, to suppress the rebellion. With newfound intelligence data gathered during the integration of General China, Britain embarked on Operation Anvil on April 24, 1954, in hopes of ending a successful rebellion against them. Operation Anvil severely restricted the already limited freedoms of the citizens of Nairobi. Mau Mau supporters left in the capital were moved from the city to detention camps. Although the Mau Mau rebellion was not officially over until 1959, the capture of Dedan Kimathi on October 21, 1956, decreased the optimism of those fighting for the end of colonial rule. The end of the Mau Mau rebellion’s main military offensive in 1956 opened the door for voluntary British withdrawal. The first direct elections for Africans to the Legislative Council were in 1957. With moderates making up the majority of the Legislative Assembly, the British government had hoped that power could be passed to those who wished to see a minimal British presence in Kenya. However, the Kenya African National Union (KANU) and extremist Jomo Kenyatta formed the government shortly before Kenya became officially independent on December 12, 1963. Single-party leadership continued after Kenyatta’s death in 1978 with Daniel arap Moi. President arap Moi survived an abortive military coup attempt on August 1, 1982, masterminded by air force serviceman Senior Private Hezekiah Ochuka. Ochuka attempted to take the capital, but the coup was suppressed by loyalist forces led by the army, the general service unit, and later the regular police. Intimidated by the strength of the air force, arap Moi disbanded the Kenyan Air Force. Moi was unsuccessful in nurturing Kenya’s postcolonial economy. Sensing radical changes to Kenya’s governmental institutions, Moi enacted constitutional reform during the 1988 elections. Elections were opened to the mlolongo system, by which voters lined up behind their selected candidate. Over the course of the next years several clauses from the constitution were changed in order to reestablish Kenya’s failing political and economic systems. The first democratic elections were held in 1992. Moi was reelected and again in 1997. In the 2002 elections, Moi was constitutionally barred from running, and Mwai Kibaki was elected for the National Rainbow Coalition. With the absence of civil war in Kenya the country remained relatively stable, but it continued to be a single- party state until the 2002 elections. President Kibaki instituted long-needed reforms, but continued Kenya’s tradition of corruption at the highest levels. A draft constitution put forth in November 2005 was defeated by the Kenyan electorate when it was discovered it would only decrease transparency in government. In response, Kibaki dismissed his entire cabinet and appointed new ministers, many of whom belonged to political parties with which he was aligned. Natural disaster plagued Kenya in the late 1990s, compounding the already poor economic situation. Severe flooding destroyed roads, bridges, and crops; epidemics of Kenya 23 9 malaria and cholera overran the health care system; and ethnic clashes erupted. Desperate to win back International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank funding to assist the millions in need, President Moi appointed his high-profile critic and political opponent, Richard Leakey, as head of the civil service in 1999. A third generation white Kenyan, Leakey was fired by Moi two years later for apparently engaging in corruption. This prompted the ruling party to put forth an anticorruption law in August 2001, whose failure to pass ended Kenya’s chances for renewed international aid. Corruption continued under President Kabaki. His anticorruption minister, John Githongo, resigned in February 2005 over frustrations that he was prevented from investigating scandals. In early 2006 investigations showed that the government was linked to two corruption scandals. Economic devastation brought on by severe droughts compounded the systemic corruption. Elections in December 2007 sparked weeks of violence, resulting in more than 1,000 deaths. Former UN secretary-general Kofi Annan brokened a deal to form a new government, thus halting the possible threat of civil war. Further reading: Gertzel, Cherry J. The Politics of Independent Kenya, 1963–8. Chicago: Northwestern University, 1970; Hunt, Diana. The Impending Crisis in Kenya: The Case of Land Reform. New York: Gower, 1984; Oucho, John O. Undercurrents of Ethnic Conflict in Kenya. New York: Brill Academic Publishers, 2002. Rian Wall Kenyatta, Jomo (1889–1978) Kenyan president Jomo Kenyatta was born in Kenya and as a infant was named Kamau wa Ngengi; he took the name Jomo in 1938. Kenyatta was keenly interested in local traditions and social customs, particularly those of the Kikuyu. His study, Facing Mount Kenya (1938), remains one of the definitive works on the Kikuyu. As a youngster Kenyatta helped his grandfather, a traditional healer, but after being educated at a mission school he converted to Christianity. As a young man, Kenyatta worked for an Indian Asian merchant and in a European business firm. In the 1920s Kenyatta became the leader of the Kikuyu Central Association (KCA), which represented the Kikuyu in their land cases against the British, who had confiscated large tracts of Kikuyu farmland that was then taken by white, usually British, settlers. Kenyatta represented the Kikuyu on negotiating missions to England and visited the Soviet Union in 1930. Upon his return to England as a teacher, Kenyatta was falsely accused of communist ties. Kenyatta participated in the fifth Pan Africa Congress, which met in Manchester, England, in 1945. Upon returning to Kenya after World War II, he assumed leadership of the Kenyan nationalist movement. In 1952 he was arrested and accused of managing the Kenya nationalist armed movement, known in the West as the Mau Mau; he served nine years in prison or under virtual house arrest. The Mau Mau was accused of terrorist acts against the white, mostly British settlers. Although the Mau Mau revolt was responsible for violence and the murder of some settlers, the Western media exaggerated the levels of violence. Kenyatta became president of the Kenya African National Union (KANU) in 1961 and led a delegation to London to negotiate full independence, or Uhuru. In 1964, Kenyatta became the president of the independent Kenyan, republic. Known as Baba wa Taifa, father of the nation, Kenyatta maintained economic stability in Kenya, but his opponents also charged him with cronyism and corruption. He died while still in power in 1978 and was succeeded by Daniel arap Moi, who faced increased opposition to his mounting dictatorial powers. See also Kenya. Further reading: Clough, Marshall S. Mau Mau Memoirs: History, Memory, and Politics. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997; Gatheru, R. Mugo. Kenya: From Colonization to Independence, 1888–1970. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2005; Kenyatta, Jomo. Facing Mount Kenya. New York: Vintage Books, 1965. Janice J. Terry Khan, Liaquat Ali (1896–1951) Pakistani leader Born on October 1, 1896, in the United Provinces of pre-partition India, Liaquat became the first prime minister of Pakistan and a founding father when it became independent on August 14, 1947. He graduated from Aligarh College, and he became interested in the Indian nationalist movement. Afterward, he traveled to Britain to continue his education, obtaining a degree in law 24 0 Kenyatta, Jomo from Oxford University in 1921, and was called to the bar in 1922. Liaquat returned to India in 1923. He began to identify with the Muslim cause. He joined the Muslim League, which sought to represent Muslims across the subcontinent. In 1926 Liaquat won his first election as a member in the United Provinces Legislative Assembly, although as an independent. In 1940 he was elected to the Central Legislative Assembly, where he established a reputation as a successful politician of principle, integrity, and eloquence. Although he sought to promote the interests of Muslim Indians, he also worked to quell communal discord. In 1936 he was elected honorary secretary of the Muslim League, and he held the office until independence in 1947. He became increasingly influential within the Muslim League, as illustrated by his appointment as deputy leader of the Muslim League Parliamentary Party in 1940, where he forged a close working relationship as the lieutenant of Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the leader of the Muslim League and later the father of Pakistan. After partition, Liaquat accepted the prime ministership and also served as minister of defense under Jinnah, governor-general of Pakistan. The nation was not only divided into East (now Bangladesh) and West Pakistan, it was also plagued by a refugee crisis as migrating Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs fled across the subcontinent before and immediately after the partition. With Jinnah’s death in 1948, Liaquat became the dominant leader in Pakistan. Although Pakistan’s political establishments were strongly pro-Western, Islam began to broaden its influence. Pakistan’s disputes with India over trade and the division of Kashmir dominated foreign policy, and relations between the two nations remained tense. Liaquat was assassinated in October 1951. His death ushered in a chaotic period, and democracy soon floundered, culminating in the military seizure power in a coup in 1958. See also Indo-Pakistani Wars (Kashmir). Further reading: Long, Roger D., ed. “Dear Mr. Jinnah”: Selected Correspondence and Speeches of Liaquat Ali Khan, 1937–1947. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2004; Reza, Muhammad. Liaquat Ali Khan: His Life and Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004; Talbot, Ian. Pakistan: A Modern History. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998; Tan, T. Y., and G. Kudaisya. The Aftermath of Partition in South Asia. London: Routledge, 2000. Ryan Touhey Khomeini, Ayatollah Ruhollah (c. 1900–1989) Iranian religious and political leader Ruhollah Khomeini, an Iranian religious leader known by the Islamic title of ayatollah, was the driving force behind the movement that overthrew Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in 1979; he then became Iran’s highest political and religious authority for the next 10 years. Although Khomeini was born into a poor family, he was the grandson and son of mullahs (Shi’i religious leaders). When he was five months old, his father was killed in a dispute. The young Khomeini was then raised by his mother, later his aunt, and finally his older brother Murtaza. Khomeini was educated in various Islamic schools and received the sort of instruction expected of a mullah’s son. Khomeini was an attentive, intelligent, hardworking, and serious student. In about 1922 he settled in the city of Qom, and around 1930 he assumed the surname of Khomeini from his birthplace, Khomein (or Khomeyn). As a respected Shi’i scholar and teacher, Khomeini authored many works on Islamic philosophy, law, and ethics. It was his outspoken opposition to Iran’s ruler, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, plus Khomeini’s resolute advocacy of Islamic purity, that garnered him support in Iran. In the 1950s Khomeini received the religious title of ayatollah by popular acclaim; by the early 1960s he had received the title of grand ayatollah, which made him one of the supreme religious leaders of the Shi’i community in Iran. In 1962–63 Khomeini publicly opposed the shah’s land-reform program; he also spoke out against the Western- style emancipation of women in Iran. These criticisms led to Khomeini’s arrest, which quickly sparked antigovernment riots. After a year’s imprisonment Khomeini was forced into exile in November 1964; he eventually settled in the Shi’i holy city of Najaf, Iraq, from which he continued to call for the shah’s removal from power. From the mid-1970s Khomeini’s stature inside Iran grew. When Khomeini’s continued denunciations of the shah caused political difficulties in Iraq, Iraq’s ruler Saddam Hussein expelled Khomeini from the country in October 1978. Khomeini and his second wife then settled in Neauphle-le-Château, a suburb of Paris. From there the Ayatollah Khomeini directed the movement to unseat the shah. Khomeini’s call for a general strike in October 1978 led to a crippling strike in the Iranian oil fields in November. These and other strikes resulted in massive demonstrations, riots, and civil unrest, which in turn forced the departure of the shah from the country on January 16, 1979. Khomeini arrived in the Iranian capital of Tehran on February 1 and was popularly acclaimed as Khomeini, Ayatollah Ruhollah 24 1 the religious leader of Iran’s revolution. The Ayatollah Khomeini appointed a government on February 5 and then moved to live in the holy city of Qom. In December 1979 a new constitution was adopted, which created an Islamic republic in Iran. Khomeini was named Iran’s political and religious leader (fagih) for life. Although the Ayatollah Khomeini held no official government office, he proved implacable in his determination to transform Iran into a theocratically ruled Islamic state. He directed the revival of traditional, fundamentalist Islamic values, customs, laws, and legal procedures, explaining how they were to affect all public and private activities in Iran. Khomeini also acted as arbiter among the various feuding secular and religious factions vying for power in the new revolutionary state. Still, Khomeini made final decisions on important matters requiring his personal authority. The main theme of Khomeini’s foreign policy was the total abandonment of the shah’s pro-Western position and the adoption of an attitude of hostility to both the United States and the Soviet Union. At the same time, Khomeini’s Iran tried to export its version of Islamic fundamentalism to neighboring Muslim countries. After Iranian militants seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979, Khomeini sanctioned their holding of U.S. diplomatic personnel as hostages for more than a year, souring diplomatic relations with the United States for many years. Khomeini also refused to permit an early peaceful solution to the Iran-Iraq War, which had begun in 1980, by insisting that it be prolonged in hopes of overthrowing Iraq’s president, Saddam Hussein. Khomeini finally approved a cease-fire in 1988 that effectively ended the conflict. Iran’s path of economic development almost came to nothing under Khomeini’s rule, and his pursuit of victory in the Iran-Iraq War ultimately proved pointless and extremely costly to Iran. Nevertheless Khomeini was able to retain, by sheer force of personality, his hold over Iran’s Shi’i masses, and until his death in 1989 he remained the supreme political and religious arbiter in the country. See also Iran hostage crisis; Iranian revolution. Further reading: Abrahamian, Ervand. Khomeinism. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993; Durschmied, Erik. The Blood of Revolution. New York: Arcade Publishing, 2002; Gordon, Matthew. Ayatollah Khomeini. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1987. Keith Bukovich Khrushchev, Nikita (1894–1971) Soviet leader Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev was first secretary of the Communist Party and de facto leader of the Soviet Union between 1953 and 1964; he concurrently served as premier from 1958 to 1964. Colorful and highly controversial, Khrushchev was a reformer whose shrewd intellect was frequently overshadowed by his impulsive personality. He abolished the most ruthless aspects of the political system and tried with limited success to catch up with and overtake the U.S. economy. In foreign affairs he forcefully maintained the unity of the Eastern bloc and veered between “peaceful coexistence” and several dangerous confrontations with the United States. He was, without question, one of the most important figures of the cold war. Khrushchev was born in April 1894 in Kalinovka, Russia, near the border with Ukraine. His parents were illiterate peasants, and young Nikita was more familiar with hard labor than formal education. The family relocated to Ukraine in 1908, where he worked various factory jobs and got involved in the organized labor movement. In 1917 he joined the revolutionary Bolsheviks and he later fought for the Red Army. After the war he obtained some Marxist training at a technical college and was assigned a political post in the Ukraine. Over the next 20 years Khrushchev would rise rapidly through the ranks of the Communist Party, and in 1939 he became a full member of the Politburo. His success was largely due to his loyalty to Stalin. During World War II he helped organize the defense of the Ukraine and the relocation of heavy industry into the Russian interior, and he was at Stalingrad when the Red Army turned the tide of the war against Germany. After the war Khrushchev remained an influential member of the Politburo, and when Stalin died in March 1953, he battled with Georgy Malenkov, Lavrenty Beria, and Nikolai Bulganin for the leadership. Malenkov was made premier and initially seemed to be the true successor, but as first secretary of the Communist Party, Khrushchev possessed the real power. By early 1955 he had emerged as the clear leader of the Soviet Union. Once in firm control, Khrushchev embarked on ambitious economic reforms. Khrushchev also continued the policy of spending heavily on the military. Under his leadership, the Soviet Union kept pace in the nuclear arms race with the United States and developed a space program that had significant successes. 242 Khrushchev, Nikita The launch of the Sputnik satellite in 1957 and the first manned space flight in 1961 were great technical triumphs for the Soviet Union. Khrushchev also decided, in a very risky move, to expose the horrors of the Stalinist era and to promote political reforms. In February 1956 he gave a speech to the 20th Party Congress that denounced Stalin’s “cult of personality,” documented various crimes of the old regime, and introduced the policy of “de-Stalinization.” The speech sparked hopes that Khrushchev would tolerate autonomy and perhaps even democracy within the Eastern bloc. These hopes proved illusory when a popular 1956 uprising in Hungary was suppressed by a brutal military intervention authorized by Khrushchev. This action shocked the West, which had welcomed the assurances of Khrushchev that the Soviet Union desired “peaceful coexistence” between capitalism and communism. Khrushchev seemed unable to resist the temptation to taunt the West periodically, and he had several alarming showdowns with the United States. He tried fruitlessly to force the United States and its allies out of Berlin between 1958 and 1961, eventually building the infamous Berlin Wall. He also humiliated Eisenhower in 1960 by revealing the capture of a U.S. U-2 spy plane and its pilot. Riskiest of all, in 1962 Khrushchev secretly placed nuclear missiles in communist Cuba. The purpose of this gamble was to protect Cuba from U.S. attack and to provide the Soviet Union with instant strategic parity. When U.S. spy planes detected the missiles, however, a standoff resulted that brought the world alarmingly close to nuclear war. In the end the Cuban missile crisis was resolved through diplomatic back channels, with the Soviets removing the missiles in exchange for a U.S. pledge not to invade Cuba and the removal of U.S. missiles from Turkey. Both sides gained something, but Khrushchev was widely perceived to have backed down in the face of U.S. resolve. By this time he had already made too many enemies within the Soviet Union. Finally, in late 1964, Khrushchev was removed from power by a conservative faction led by Leonid Brezhnev. His life was spared, perhaps a testament to the success of his political reforms, but Khrushchev spent the rest of his life under house arrest. He died in Moscow in September 1971. Further reading: Khrushchev, Nikita. Khrushchev Remembers. New York: Bantam Books, 1971; ———. Nikita Khrushchev and the Creation of a Superpower. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000; Taubman, William. Khrushchev: The Man and His Era. New York: Norton, 2003. Chris Pennington Kim Il Sung (1912–1994)/ Kim Jong Il (1942– ) Korean political leaders Together, father and son Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il form a dynasty that has ruled the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, or Communist North Korea, since its creation in 1948. Because of the personality cult established by Kim Il Sung and because Korea remains a tightly closed society, details about the lives of the two men remain scarce. The information that is disseminated officially is so flattering that it is highly suspect. For example, one biography of Kim Il Sung reports that he fought more than 100,000 times against the Japanese in the seven years between 1932 and 1945 and was always victorious. Kim Il Sung (originally Kim Sung Chu) was born in 1912 in a northeastern province of Korea. His father was a schoolteacher who took his family to Chinese Manchuria in 1925 to escape Japan’s harsh colonization of their homeland. For the next 14 years, Kim lived in Manchuria, where he joined the Communist Party in 1931. In 1939 Kim went to the Soviet Union, where he received further military training and was part of the Soviet military force that invaded and occupied Pyongyang in 1945. Kim Il Sung (1912–1994)/Kim Jong Il (1942 – ) 243 Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, shown here at the United Nations, initiated radical reforms after the death of Joseph Stalin. According to the terms of the Yalta agreement, the United States and the Soviet Union divided Korea into North and South. Kim stayed in the north with the Soviets, who helped him prevail over other factions and become premier of the new Democratic People’s Republic in 1948. Under Soviet and Chinese sponsorship Kim instigated the Korean War, which lasted until 1953. A great admirer of Stalin, Kim patterned his rule after the Soviet leader. During the years following the Korean War, Kim solidified his power, purged his enemies, drove out foreign influences, and established himself as almost a god. He also managed, through rigorous control of the press, to exalt his family, raising many of them to the status of national heroes. He decreed that no newspaper could be published without his picture on the front page and without all the stories approved by government censors. His pictures and statues were also in every public building in the nation. These and other actions were undertaken as part of Kim’s self-proclaimed doctrine of Juchie, which encompassed the total economic, social, and political philosophy of the country. North Korean citizens born after the Korean War had little or no knowledge of the outside world, since anything foreign was prohibited. His birthday became a national holiday. Since 1976, the Loyalty Festival Period has included February 16 (Kim Jong Il’s birthday) and April 15 (Kim Il Sung’s birthday). According to some reports, Korea went to extraordinary lengths to prolong Kim Il Sung’s life. Purportedly a clinic staffed with 2,000 specialists was constructed solely for the purpose of caring for Kim and his son. Staff at the clinic experimented with diets and drugs on two teams of men who were similar to the leaders in age and body makeup. These efforts to extend his life all failed and the elder Kim died in 1994. Kim Jong Il, the eldest son of Kim Il Sung, became his country’s next dictator. He was born in 1941 while his father was training in the Soviet Union. The Soviets had established a school for the children of Korea’s guerrilla fighters, the Mangyongdae Revolutionary School, where Jong Il received his early education. After two years of training at the Air Academy in East Germany, the young Kim returned to Korea and attended Kim Il Sung University. Kim Jong Il’s portraits began to appear with his father’s, and he was referred to by titles such as “the sun of the communist future.” He made official visits to China and the Soviet Union in the 1980s, further indicating that he would follow his father as ruler. But he was not immediately named as his father’s successor. The title of the country’s president was reserved for his father by a constitutional amendment. Little information is available about the personal life of Kim Jong Il. Some sources report that his halfbrother is being groomed as his successor while other reports indicate that his sons are embroiled in a struggle to become heir. Further reading: French, Paul. North Korea: The Paranoid Peninsula, A Modern History. London: Zed Books, 2005; Martin, Bradley K. Under the Loving Care of the Fatherly Leader: North Korea and the Kim Dynasty. New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2004. Jean Shepherd Hamm King, Martin Luther, Jr. (1929–1968) U.S. civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr., was a civil rights leader whose campaigns for African-American racial equality made him an American icon. King was born in Atlanta, Georgia, on January 15, 1929, the son of the Reverend Martin Luther King, Sr., and Alberta Williams King. He was part of a ministerial dynasty at Atlanta’s Ebenezer Baptist Church, which was begun by his grandfather, who served the church from 1914 to 1931. King preached there from 1960 until his death. King’s initial education was in the segregated Atlanta school system. He left high school at age 15 after gaining early acceptance at Atlanta’s prestigious Morehouse College. From Morehouse he went north to attend Crozer Theological Seminary in Pennsylvania, becoming president of his senior class, and gaining his B.D. degree in 1951. He then accepted a fellowship that allowed him to pursue a doctorate at Boston University, finishing his preliminary studies in 1953 and receiving his degree in 1955. It was during this time that he met and married Coretta Scott on June 18, 1953. Following Dr. King’s death Coretta King emerged as a promoter of civil rights and social justice in her own right. She served as leader of the King Foundation until her death in 2006. In 1953 King became pastor of the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama, at age 26 and began to condemn Jim Crow segregation in the course of promoting civil rights reform for the African- American citizens of Alabama. In 1955 he joined the Montgomery Bus Boycott. The boycott lasted for more than a year and King faced retribution and death threats, including the bombing of his home. As with many other 244 King, Martin Luther, Jr. civil rights developments, the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately proved the driving force that finally ended segregation on intrastate buses in 1956. In 1957 King took on the leadership of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), which became the springboard for his authority and that of the emerging Civil Rights movement. The movement began in black communities and churches but soon drew members from the broader population outside the south. King shaped the SCLC philosophy toward nonviolent protest and pressure, drawing upon Christian teachings, but also inspired by the successful protests of Mohandas K. Gandhi. King was also on the executive committee of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Through these leadership positions and through growing televised media attention, King became a national figure and a major force in U.S. politics. The movement often faced a violent response to its activities, particularly as its agenda expanded to include a full range of civil rights issues. The speed of change proved dramatic and unstoppable and received national attention through events such as the 1963 March on Washington, which was inspired by and coordinated with other civil rights leaders but made famous by King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. It has been argued that the focus of this demonstration became less angry and more embracing because of pressure put on King by President John F. Kennedy, who believed the wrong approach could damage support for civil rights legislation. King’s ascendance to national prominence was revealed when he became Time magazine’s Man of the Year for 1963. These protests helped in the passing, during the presidency of Lyndon B. Johnson, of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Martin Luther King, Jr., received recognition for his gigantic influence when he was made a Nobel laureate in 1964, being awarded the Peace Prize in recognition of his many efforts. It was in the mid-1960s that King tried to take the civil rights movement to the north, beginning in Chicago in 1966. King and Ralph Abernathy made an effort to confront the poor’s living conditions by moving to the slums. Here he faced violence and discrimination as well as Mayor Richard J. Daley’s Chicago political administration, which undercut reform activities whenever possible. Eventually King and Abernathy returned to the South, but left a then-young follower, Jesse Jackson, in Chicago to carry on their work. From this base Jackson later built his own organization. King started to reevaluate his positions on many areas and issues, including social and economic reform as well as the Vietnam War. His rhetoric and speeches took on new tones that seemed to challenge not only segregation, racial justice, and civil rights but also issues potentially far more controversial to the mainstream. His turn to issues of poverty and its eradication led to his and SCLC’s involvement in the “Poor People’s Campaign” in 1968, which was to culminate in another major march on Washington demanding that the government address the needs of the poorest communities and members of U.S. society. In April 1968 his campaign took him to Memphis, Tennessee, where he offered his support to the Memphis Sanitation Workers’ strike for better wages and conditions. King saw the solution to many of these problems in government-driven job programs to reduce and reverse poverty in the nation in the form of a poor peoples’ bill of rights. While staying at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis on April 4, 1968, in preparation for a local King, Martin Luther, Jr. 24 5 Martin Luther King, Jr., was the most eloquent leader of the American civil rights movement in the 1960s. march in support of the strikers, King appeared on the balcony at 6:01 p.m. and was assassinated by rifle shot. He was pronounced dead at 7:05 p.m. King’s death was met with shock and dismay. President Johnson declared a day of national mourning, and the vice president, Hubert Humphrey, attended the funeral along with a crowd estimated at 300,000. A national and international manhunt was launched for the killer, and two months later in London, England, James Earl Ray was apprehended on a passport violation and extradited to Tennessee, where he was charged with King’s murder and confessed on March 10, 1969. Ray received a 99-year sentence and spent the rest of his life denying his guilt and requesting a trial. He argued that King had been killed by others and that he was only a fall guy in the midst of a larger conspiracy. Ray and several other inmates escaped from Brushy Mountain State Penitentiary in Petros, Tennessee, on June 1977, not long after Ray testified to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Controversy has surrounded the Ray conviction and there are many who believe that sinister forces manipulated and orchestrated the assassination plot. Issues have been raised concerning fingerprint evidence and ballistic tests on the rifle used in the crime. In 1997 Ray was visited in prison by King’s son Dexter, who supported Ray’s demand for a trial. In 1999 the King family instigated a wrongful death civil action against Loyd Jowers, a local Memphis restaurant owner who claimed a role in the assassination. A local jury found that Jowers, even though he had failed a lie detector test in regard to his claim, was guilty and that other government agencies were involved in the assassination. These claims were investigated in detail by the Department of Justice in 2000 and no evidence in support of the allegations was found. The assumptions concerning a high-level conspiracy were enhanced because of King’s conflicts with J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI. Initially they investigated communist associates of King and the organization, and maintained wiretaps at various times, including intruding on King’s privacy and threatening him with exposure of his extramarital affairs. These tapes were placed in the National Archives and will be sealed until 2027. Besides these attacks on the King legacy and honor, there were concerns expressed in the 1980s over plagiarism. This did lead to a formal inquiry in regards to his doctoral dissertation by Boston University, which concluded that almost a third of his work was taken from another student. Yet the university decided not to revoke his degree. It was also argued that many of his other writings and speeches received the benefit of literary assistance in the form of ghostwriters. Nevertheless even in the face of these questions as to his character, Martin Luther King, Jr., remains a major force in U.S. history whose name is one of the most easily recognized in the land. His boyhood home in Atlanta became a national historic site in 1980 and in November 1983 President Ronald Reagan endorsed a bill creating a Martin Luther King National Holiday, which occurs on the third Monday in January. In addition his name was added to many streets and other public buildings throughout the United States and a King National Memorial in Washington, D.C., began with the purchase of land near the National Mall in 1999. Final design approval came in 2005. See also Malcolm X. Further reading: Branch, Taylor. At Canaan’s Edge: America in the King Years, 1965–1968. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2006; Garrow, David J. Y. Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther Jr., and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. New York: HarperCollins, 2004; King, Corretta. Martin Luther King Jr. The Words of Martin Luther King. New York: Newmarket, 2001; King, Martin Luther, Jr. The Autobiography of Martin Luther King Jr. Clayborne Carson, ed. New York: Warner, 1998; Kirk, John A. Martin Luther King, Jr. London: Longman, 2005. Theodore W. Eversole Koizumi, Junichiro (1942– ) Japanese prime minister Junichiro Koizumi was born to a political family in Kanagawa Prefecture and educated at Keio University and University College London. He began his political career as a secretary to Takeo Fukuda, who later became prime minister. Koizumi was elected to the House of Representatives (lower house of the Diet) in 1970 as a member of the Liberal Democratic Party. He became minister of posts and telecommunications in 1992 and served three terms as minister of health and welfare, the first beginning in 1996. Koizumi ran unsuccessfully for the presidency of the Liberal Democratic Party in 1995 and 1999 before he was successful in 2001. He became prime minister of Japan on August 26, 2001, and was reelected in 2003 and 2005; he stepped down in 2006. Koizumi was very popular when first elected. Although his popularity fluctuated over his years in office, he was the longest-serving Japanese prime 246 Koizumi, Junichiro minister in two decades. His greatest efforts were directed at revitalizing the Japanese economy. To this end he proposed privatizing the Japan Post, a public corporation that offers banking and life insurance as well as postal and package delivery services. This proposed privatization was a controversial issue in Japan for several reasons, not the least of which is the fact that it employed one-third of all Japanese government employees, who feared the elimination of their jobs. Koizumi also decreased traditional subsidies for infrastructure and industrial development in rural areas, part of an attempt to shift the base of support for the Liberal Democratic Party from rural areas to a more urban core. Koizumi made several visits to the Yasakuni Shrine in Tokyo, which honors the Japanese war dead, beginning in 2001. Because 14 Class-A war criminals are honored at the shrine, these visits drew international criticism, especialy from China and South Korea, Japan’s victims. Koizumi’s decision to send members of the Japan Self-Defence Force to Iraq in support of U.S. operations in 2003 was also controversial, even though the Japanese troops were theoretically only involved in humanitarian activities. Koizumi’s personal style was quite different from that projected by most Japanese politicians: he called himself a kakumei no hito, or revolutionary, although some of his critics considered him more of a henjin, an eccentric. His personal appearance, complete with relatively long and unkempt hair and fashionable suits, and his much-publicized interest in rock music, suggested cultivation of this image. Further reading: Bowen, Roger. Japan’s Dysfunctional Democracy: The Liberal Democratic Party and Structural Corruption. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2003; Cargill, Thomas F., and Naoyuki Yoshino. Postal Savings and Fiscal Investment in Japan: The PSS and the FILP. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003; Multan, Aurelia George. Japan’s Failed Revolution: Koizumi and the Politics of Economic Reform. Canberra: Asia Pacific Press, 2002; Prime Minister of Japan and His Cabinet. (cited April 2006). Sarah Boslaugh Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of With an area of 120,410 square kilometers, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), or North Korea, occupies slightly more than half of the northern part of the Korean Peninsula in northeast Asia. North Korea shares common borders with the Republic of Korea to the south, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to the north, and Russia to the northeast. A four-kilometer-wide demilitarized zone, which runs 238 kilometers across land and another three kilometers into the sea, marks the boundary between the two Koreas near the 38th parallel. The estimated population of DPRK in 2004 was 22,697,553. Pyongyang is the national capital. North Korea remained one of the most isolated states in the contemporary world. North Korea is a communist state. Its leader, Kim Jong Il succeeded to the position of supreme leadership in 1994 after the death of his father, Kim Il Sung, although this was not formalized until four years later. Both father and son dominated the North Korean government since its inception. A newly amended constitution in 1998 conferred on the deceased Kim the title of president for life and abolished the office of the president. Kim Jong Il heads the National Defense Commission (NDC), which functions as the chief administrative authority in the country. He is also supreme commander of the Korean People’s Army (KPA) and general secretary of the Korean Workers’ Party (KWP). The separate state of North Korea was created as a result of the military situation at the end of World War II. When Japan surrendered in August 1945, the northern part of the peninsula was occupied by Soviet forces, while the southern half came under U.S. military authority. The peninsula was consequently divided into two military occupation zones at the 38th parallel. The Soviet occupation authority turned to Kim Il Sung, who had fought the Japanese in Manchuria, to provide leadership in its zone. In September 1948 Kim launched the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, with himself as the premier. In early 1950 Kim Il Sung lobbied his communist allies in the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to support a North Korean effort to reunite the two Koreas. On June 23, 1950, the commanders of seven combat divisions of the North Korean People’s Army amassed near the border and received orders to initiate the “war of liberation.” Crossing the 38th parallel, North Korean forces quickly overwhelmed South Korean forces before they themselves were stopped and then pushed back across the border by a United Nations (UN) force led by the United States. In November PRC sent “volunteers” to fight alongside the North Koreans when UN forces neared the Yalu River, North Korea’s border with China. An Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of 247 armistice was signed in 1953, establishing a demilitarized zone roughly at the 38th parallel. The wartime situation gave Kim Il Sung the opportunity to consolidate his position and establish himself as the absolute power in North Korea. In a series of show trials and purges, potential rivals were eliminated. In 1956 members of rival factions were purged from the KWP. In fact, some were made to shoulder the blame for the failure of the unification effort. Two years later the KWP announced that it had ended intra-party dissent. Kim Il Sung was now the undisputed leader, controlling virtually all aspects of North Korean society. A personality cult soon emerged around the person of Kim Il Sung, who was elevated to the status of “Great Leader,” and his past as a guerrilla fighter against the Japanese, his defiance of the United States, and his exploits in building the nation were mythologized in song and poetry. Institutions such as universities and museums bear his name, and important places in his life are national shrines. A similar personality cult developed around his son and successor, Kim Jong Il, with mythical events written into his biography. Revered as “Dear Leader,” the younger Kim is said to be imbued with extraordinary intellectual and artistic abilities. North Korea adopted as its guiding ideology juch’e, or self-reliance. Occasionally dubbed Kim Il-Sungism, the concept, which emerged in the mid-1950s, is an amalgamation of Marxist-Leninist doctrines with Maoism, Confucianism, and Korean traditions. Juch’e in operational terms involves the creation of a self-sustaining national economy and a strong military that can provide self-defense. After the Korean War, Kim Il Sung focused on economic development. With a centrally planned command economy, North Korea at first appeared to be making great strides. It recovered quickly from the devastation of the Korean War. In the spirit of juch’e, economic planners focused on industrialization and the collectivization of agriculture. Equally important for North Korean economic survival was Soviet economic assistance, although limited, and the preferential treatment that North Korean goods received in the Soviet Union, PRC, and the East European satellites through the late 1970s–80s. The changing geopolitical situation reduced such outside assistance to almost nothing and exposed the vulnerabilities in the North Korean economy. The consequences of a decades-old inefficient economic system could no longer be kept hidden. Energy and food shortages plagued North Korea, a country with little arable land and no oil reserves. Cycles of natural disasters exacerbated the situation. From the late 1990s onward North Korea had to rely on food aid from other countries, including South Korea, to stave off widespread famine. The relationship between the two Koreas continued a seesaw trend in the Kim Jong Il era. From the mid- 1990s onward there were intermittent talks between the two governments. In 1998 when South Korean president Kim Dae Jung initiated his Sunshine Policy, which held out hope for reconciliation between the two Koreas, he found a receptive audience in the north partly because North Korea saw this as a means of securing the necessary economic assistance. In 2002 the North Korean government also began to abandon some features of its tightly controlled command economy. In addition, it adopted some market features, such as removing price and wage controls. The government also began to court foreign investment and foreign trade, including from the Republic of Korea. In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, North Korea once again garnered attention because of its nuclear weapons program, weapons sales to Iran, and its withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Six-party talks involving North Korea, South Korea, Japan, the PRC, Russia, and the United States did not yield definitive results. In 2005, North Korea tested a missile over the Sea of Japan. This approach increased the level of tension and raised the specter of a military confrontation in the Northeast Asia region. In October 2007, North Korea agreed to disable its nuclear facilities by late 2008 in exchange for economic aid. Further reading: Cummings, Bruce. Korea’s Place in the Sun: A Modern History. New York: Norton, 1997; French, Paul. North Korea: The Paranoid Peninsula—A Modern History. London: Zed Books, 2005; Kim, Chun-Kil. The History of Korea. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2005; Oberdorfer, Don. The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History. New York: Basic Books, 1999; Stueck, William. The Korean War: An International History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997. Soo Chun Lu Korea, Republic of With an area of 98,480 square kilometers, the Republic of Korea (ROK), or South Korea, occupies slightly less than half of the Korean Peninsula. It is bordered to the north by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK, or North Korea), to the south by the East 248 Korea, Republic of China Sea, to the east by the Sea of Japan, and to the west by the Yellow Sea. A four-kilometer-wide demilitarized zone, which runs 238 kilometers across land and another three kilometers over the sea, marks the boundary between the two Koreas. The estimated population of ROK in 2005 was 48,422,644. Seoul, located near the border with North Korea, is the capital city. South Korea has a republican government based on a presidential model. A popularly elected president, who is the head of state, appoints a prime minister as well as other members of the cabinet. A unicameral National Assembly functions as the legislative branch, and the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court make up the judicial branch. In August 1945 Allied forces led by the United States landed on the Korean Peninsula in the south while Soviet forces moved down from the north, eventually liberating Korea from Japanese colonial rule. The 38th parallel became the boundary dividing the occupation forces from 1945 to 1948. What began as the separation of two administrative units dictated by the Yalta agreement between the U.S. and the Soviet Union in 1945 eventually led to the creation of two separate states dictated by the political and ideological divisions of the cold war. Domestic developments further complicated the matter. Throughout the war years, various Korean nationalist factions operating at home and in exile jostled to position themselves as the representatives of an independent Korea. In the immediate postwar era, the United States eventually turned to Syngman Rhee, an exiled popular anticommunist nationalist to provide leadership in the south. In 1947 the newly formed United Nations (un) created a commission to oversee national elections in Korea. Barred from access to the Soviet occupation zone, the commission oversaw the election of the National Assembly in the south in 1948. This body then elected Rhee as the first president. The Republic of Korea was formally established in May 1948. War once again broke out on the Korean Peninsula when North Korean troops crossed the 38th parallel in a failed attempt to reunify the nation under communist rule. The United States promptly intervened in the conflict as part of a UN police action. The Korean War cemented the patron-client relationship between the United States and South Korea. In 1954 the two countries signed a mutual defense treaty that formalized their bilateral security arrangements. Although their numbers were reduced after the 1970s, U.S. troops were stationed in South Korea from then on. Additionally, the United States continued to supply generous military aid to build up South Korea’s defense capabilities. South Korea contributed forces to help the United States in Vietnam from 1965 to 1973. Authoritarian rule characterized the government of South Korea. Rhee combined bellicose rhetoric against the north with repressive tactics at home to silence political opposition. In 1952 he pushed for a change to the popularly elected presidency. Four years later he pushed through a questionable constitutional amendment that permitted a lifelong presidency. This allowed him to run for president again in 1956 and 1960. Meanwhile, domestic, social, and economic problems generated widespread student protests. Rhee resigned and fled to Hawaii, where he lived in exile until his death in 1965. After a short interregnum during which the country turned to a new constitution that established parliamentary democracy, three military men followed as presidents in South Korea. The first, General Park Chung Hee, launched a coup in May 1961 to overthrow the nine-month-old parliamentary government and placed the Republic of Korea under military rule for two years. At the end of 1963 the country adopted a new constitution that permitted presidents to serve two four-year terms, and Park was duly elected to the office. But he would continue to manipulate constitutional processes, or, in some cases, suspend them altogether, in order to remain in power. In 1971 he declared a state of emergency, suspended the constitution, dissolved the National Assembly, and then promulgated a new Yushin (revitalization) constitution. The Korean Central Intelligence Agency (KCIA), which he established, was used to intimidate South Korean dissenters. Park relied on emergency decrees to repress this opposition to his regime; protesters were given long jail terms, a number of students were executed, and the press faced increasingly harsh censorship. Park’s regime finally came to an end when the director of the KCIA assassinated him in October 1979. During the Park Chung Hee era, South Korea made its transition to a modern economy. Inspired by the Japanese economic miracle, the government adopted a series of five-year development plans aimed at transforming an agrarian nation to an industrial power. Comparatively low labor costs allowed South Korea to compete effectively in such labor-intensive industries as textiles. In the 1970s the country shifted its focus away from labor-intensive light industries to heavy industries. This government-controlled economic development effort bore fruit as economic growth rates increased. Korea, Republic of 24 9 In December 1979 General Chun Doo Hwan, a veteran of the Vietnam War, came to power in a coup. Within months he declared martial law. Charging that pro-democracy student demonstrations in Kwangju Province had been instigated by North Korean infiltrators, he acquired emergency powers that would allow him to disregard any constitutionally recognized rights of the people. He also embarked on a campaign to root out those who criticized his regime. Among those he arrested were three longtime civilian critics of authoritarian rule: Kim Young Sam, Kim Dae Jung, and Kim Jong Pil. But protests persisted, and in 1987 Chun stepped aside in favor of his handpicked successor, Roh Tae Woo, who won a presidential election with only 36 percent of the vote. Under Roh, South Korea began to pursue new directions in foreign policy in keeping with the geopolitical trend that hearkened the end of antagonistic camps in the cold war. Roh followed up on an earlier proposal to exchange visits between North and South Korea. Following sports and cultural exchanges, the two countries signed the 1991 Basic Agreement on Reconciliation, Non-Aggression, and Cooperation of Exchanges. Politics in South Korea followed a pattern of democraticization from the late 1980s onward. Kim Young Sam, a longtime critic of Park Chung Hee’s authoritarian rule, emerged victorious in the 1992 presidential elections, becoming the first civilian president in more than three decades. Kim initiated a campaign to root out longtime corruption in government. Both the former presidents Chun and Roh were indicted for corruption and their roles in the 1979 military coup. Kim Young Sam also faced pressure to liberalize the South Korean economy. Widely recognized as one of the 250 Korea, Republic of The capital of the Republic of Korea is Seoul (above), located near the border with North Korea. The Republic of Korea had an estimated population of 48,422,644 in 2005 and has a government based on a presidential model. economic miracles in Asia, South Korea had an average per capita income of $10,600. By 1997 economic growth in South Korea showed signs of abatement due to the effects of the Asian financial crisis. The resulting labor and student protests eventually led to the victory of a longtime opposition leader, Kim Dae Jung, in the presidential elections. Kim Dae Jung presided over a country in the throes of an economic downturn. He pushed for bold reforms to ameliorate the situation. The South Korean leadership worked with the International Monetary Fund in its rescue effort. By 1999 the economy was well on its way to recovery. It was in foreign relations that President Kim Dae Jung would leave his mark. He pursued efforts to build a more cordial relationship with his northern neighbor by providing economic assistance to the beleaguered north. Such efforts, Kim hoped, would end North Korean isolation and eventually change its governmental system. Although Kim’s policy did not yield concrete results, his summit meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il in 2000 raised hopes about eventual reconciliation between the two Koreas. For his efforts, President Kim won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2000. Roh Moo-hyun of the Millennium Democratic Party (MDP) became president after the 2002 elections. Further reading: Cummings, Bruce. Korea’s Place in the Sun: A Modern History. New York: Norton, 1997; Kim, Chun- Kil. The History of Korea. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2005; Oberdorfer, Don. The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History. New York: Basic Books, 1999; Stueck, William. The Korean War: An International History. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997. Soo Chun Lu Korean War (1950–1953) The first major conflict of the cold war began in June 1950 and ended in an inconclusive armistice on July 27, 1953. Long considered a “forgotten war” in which almost 4 million people, including 136,000 U.S. citizens, were killed or wounded, the Korean conflict attracted increased academic and popular attention in the early 21st century. Partition of the ancient former kingdom of Korea resulted from Allied maneuvers near the end of World War II. Occupied by Japan during the war, Korea was divided in 1945 at the 38th parallel. The Soviets occupied the northern area while the United States supervised the southern sector. As the cold war between these former allies intensified, this partition line became a new “Iron Curtain” dividing Koreans from each other. So when the U.S. State Department learned in June 1950 that Communist North Korean forces had crossed the 38th parallel into anticommunist South Korea, President Harry S. Truman feared that South Korean forces alone would be unable to stop apparent Soviet plans to make all of Korea a communist regime. Taking advantage of a temporary Soviet boycott of the United Nations (UN) Security Council, Truman persuaded UN members to declare North Korea the aggressor. This, rather than a congressional declaration of war, became the justification for fielding a joint UN force, dominated by U.S. officers and troops, to launch a “police action” in Korea. UN forces were overwhelmed and pushed ever southward by the North Koreans until September, when General Douglas MacArthur, a World War II hero and Japan’s postwar governor, executed a daring amphibious assault at Inchon, just west of South Korea’s capital of Seoul. By October the 38th parallel was once again under UN control. But MacArthur wanted to go further. Meeting in October with the president MacArthur assured Truman that neighboring China would not interfere if UN forces reunited Korea under U.S. protection. China, fresh from its own communist revolution in 1949 and secretly armed by Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, took exception. By the bitter winter of 1951 waves of Chinese soldiers had entered Korea and were again pushing UN troops southward. Yet MacArthur continued hostile moves against the Chinese and accused Commander in Chief Truman of “appeasement.” By the time Truman, supported unanimously by his Joint Chiefs of Staff, fired MacArthur for insubordination in April, the Korean conflict had settled into a violent stalemate centered on the original partition line. Peace negotiations began in June 1951, but foundered on the issue of repatriation. Many Chinese and North Korean war prisoners were unwilling to return to the regimes that had sent them into war. The Korean stalemate became a venomous election issue in the United States, inspiring Republicans like Senator Joe McCarthy of Minnesota to question Truman’s and the Democrats’ patriotism. Elected president by a large margin in 1952, former General Dwight D. Eisenhower, a Republican, visited the Korean front lines after taking office, but no formal peace treaty ever resulted. A July cease-fire was declared, and the 38th Korean War (1950–1953) 251 parallel, augmented by a DMZ (demilitarized zone) on either side, again marked the continuing division between North and South Korea. Over the years fighting occasionally broke out along the DMZ. North Korea remained a secretive and fanatically communist regime, while South Korea, despite difficulties adapting democratic political processes, became a major manufacturing power in Asia, rivaling Japan. Further reading: Blair, Clay. The Forgotten War: America in Korea 1950–1953. New York: Times Books, 1987; Stueck, William, ed. The Korean War in World History. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2004. Marsha E. Ackermann Kubitschek, Juscelino (1902–1976) Brazilian president A canny political centrist best remembered for the construction of the new capital city of Brasília during his term as president of Brazil (1956–61), Juscelino Kubitschek bequeathed a complex political and economic legacy. Coming on the heels of the populist military dictatorship of Getúlio Vargas (president 1930–45, 1951–54), Kubitschek dispensed with Vargas’s sympathies toward fascism and dictatorial style of governance, distanced himself from the military while endeavoring to placate it, and retained many of his predecessor’s populist policies—including state-supported industrialization and aggressive promotion of foreign investment and economic development. His term saw rapid economic growth and major advances in all major industries. It also left behind record government debt, a highly-mobilized and polarized civil society, and a disgruntled military. Three years after he left office, Brazil descended into military dictatorship that lasted until the mid-1980s (1964–85). Kubitschek de Oliviera was born in the small backcountry town of Diamantina in the state of Minas Gerais on September 12, 1902. His father, a salesman, died when he was two; his mother, a schoolteacher of Slovak ancestry, raised him. Educated as a medical doctor, in 1934 he was elected to the Minas Gerais State Assembly, a position he resigned in 1937 upon Vargas’s announcement of his quasi-fascist Estado Novo (New State). Serving as mayor of Belo Horizonte from 1940 and the Minas Gerais State Assembly from 1945, he won the presidency in 1955 on the ticket of the Progressive Social Party (Partido Social Progresista) under the slogan “fifty years of progress in five.” His critics later lambasted his administration for causing “fifty years of inflation in five.” On taking office, he and his technocrats drew up a Program of Goals, identifying specific growth targets for each economic sector. The basic idea was to bring private capital under state direction to achieve rapid economic growth by focusing on key industries and infrastructure. When he left office, Brazil had a sustainable automobile industry, for instance, built virtually from scratch. Similar growth targets were met in electrification, road construction, and related sectors. This rapid growth carried a high price, however. As state expenditures grew, Brazil’s foreign debt grew, inflation soared, and economic inequality—already among the world’s starkest—increased. Working to placate a resurgent left, a recalcitrant right, and an increasingly disenchanted military, Kubitschek ended up with far more adversaries than allies. His administration met many of its targets for growth, investment, and industrialization, while leaving to his successor a macroeconomic mess and sharpened political divisions that culminated in a prolonged military takeover. After the 1964 coup he went into exile, living in Europe and North America, before returning to Brazil in 1967. Nine years later, on October 22, 1976, he died in a car crash. Further reading: Alexander, Robert J. Juscelino Kubitschek and the Development of Brazil. Athens: Ohio University 252 Kubitschek, Juscelino With her brother carried on her back, a Korean girl walks past a stalled U.S. M-26 tank at Haengju, Korea. Center for International Studies, 1991; Skidmore, Thomas E. Brazil: Five Centuries of Change. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Michael J. Schroeder Kurds The Kurds were most likely an Indo-European people who migrated from Central Asia to Asia Minor and northern Mesopotamian regions, living among Assyrian and Babylonian inhabitants sometime between the second and first millennium b.c.e. For centuries the Kurds maintained their own civilization, establishing a number of kingdoms and tribal fiefdoms in the high mountain areas in the Iran-Mesopotamia regions. The modern Kurdish people are the descendants of the original Kurds who were living in the Zagros Mountains and northern Mesopotamia, and they now populate territories known as Kurdistan, regions stretching from northwestern Iran to southeastern Turkey, northern Iraq, and northeastern Syria. Kurdish tribes can also be found in other countries such as Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Lebanon. Kurds are the fourth-largest ethnic population living in southwest Asia. Most sources indicate that today there are more than 30 million Kurds. Kurdish societal structure remains tribal, with loyalty of each Kurdish group directed toward an immediate family clan, but many modern Kurds now live in large cities. They do share a common cultural heritage that goes beyond their tribal social structure. The distinct Kurdish language belongs to the Iranian subgroup of the Indo-European languages. The Kurds are mainly Sunni Muslims of the Shafi’i theological school of thought, which places more emphasis on the consensus of the community than on the authority of individual clerical scholars as a source of interpreting Islamic law. Many Kurds in Iraq, Iran, and Turkey also adhere to Sufism, or the mystical branch of Islam. Kurdish Islam evolved into a distinct form of vernacular religion with unique Kurdish cultural characteristics. A minority of Kurds are also Shi’i Muslims, Smaller Baha’i, and Christian; Jewish communities can also be found among the Kurdish population, with the Jewish Kurds mainly living in Israel. The modern political history of the Kurds has been a quest for national autonomy. Although the 19th century saw a number of rebellions, Kurdish nationalism made its first appearance with the 1880 revolt of the Kurdish League, led by the charismatic Sheikh ‘Ubaydallah of Nehri. Despite defeat by the Ottomans, Sheikh ‘Ubaydallah’s movement marked the first Kurdish national rebellion that included Kurds of the Ottoman Empire and Qajar Persia. With the rise of the Young Turks Revolution in 1908, which removed the rule of ‘Abdulhamid and restored the 1887 constitution, the Kurds began to form their own political parties. Following the demise of the Ottoman Empire, on August 10, 1920, Britain, France, and Italy designed the Treaty of Sèvres, which officially recognized Kurdish claims for national autonomy and an independent Kurdistan. The treaty was signed by the Allies and Turkey, recognizing that the Kurds have the right to exercise local autonomy. Following the signing of the Lausanne Treaty in 1923, which mainly settled the boundaries between Armenia, Greece, and Turkey, the newly founded Atatürk government rejected the Treaty of Sèvres and subsequently found an opportunity to suppress the Kurdish right for national independence. The Kurds revolted against the Turkish state in 1925, 1930, and 1937, all three revolts led by Sheikh Sa‘id and Sayyid Reza of Dersim, and all three brutally defeated. After that, all Kurdish nationalist movements experienced the same fate. A recent liberation movement for national autonomy was led by the Kurdish Worker’s Party, or Partyiya Karkeren Kurdistan (PKK). The Marxist nationalist party was founded in 1973 and toward the end of the 1970s expanded its influence in the Kurdish regions of Turkey by using guerrilla warfare and terrorism as a way to destabilize the Turkish authority. The PKK proved to be the most violent of all Kurdish political groups in the modern history of Turkish nationalism. In return the Turkish army used various violent means to put down the Kurdish rebellion. These included the arbitrary murder and detention of Kurdish civilians, and the repression of Kurdish thinkers, journalists, and businessmen. The PKK lost much of its strength with the 1999 capture of the organization’s leader, Abullah Ocalan. On August 2004 the party declared a unilateral cease-fire. The struggle for Kurdish nationalism, however, was most fruitful in Iraq. From 1919 to 1945 all the Kurdish rebellions against the British Army and the Iraqi regime were ruthlessly crushed. The Barzani family played a central role in these rebellions. Mustafa Barzani’s Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) led the struggle when, on July 14, 1958, the monarchy was overthrown by General Abdul Karim Qassim. The republican coup raised the Kurdish expectation for more equal participation in the Iraqi state. But Qasim’s regime quickly discarded Kurds 253 Barzani’s call for Kurdish independence, and in 1961 he renewed fighting with the Kurds. From 1961 to 1963 and from 1974 to 1975, Mustafa Barzani led an armed struggle. Later in the 1970s Barzani went into exile in the United States, where he died in 1979. In 1979 Masoud Barzani succeeded his father to lead the KDP. With the help of thousands of armed fighters, the peshmargan, he gained control of major parts of northern Iraq. After the First Gulf War the KDP emerged as one of the most significant Kurdish political organizations, operating with relative freedom to govern sections of northern Iraq while achieving the first enduring semiautonomous Kurdish state in history. In the early 21st century Barzani continued to play a major role in Kurdish politics in Iraq, where he shared power with his Kurdish rival Jalal Talabani. Talabani was a major Kurdish nationalist and the leader of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), which was established in 1975. Formed mainly by urban intellectuals and leftist thinkers, the PUK emerged as KDP’s main political competitor. In the early 1990s he helped the Kurdish uprising against the Ba’athist state while working closely with the United States, the United Kingdom, and France to establish the no-fly zone over northern Iraq to protect the Kurds from bombing and chemical attacks by Saddam Hussein’s army. After years of rivalry, the PUK joined forces with the KDP and other Kurdish parties to create the Democratic Patriotic Alliance of Kurdistan to represent the Kurds in the Iraqi National Assembly elections of 2005 and 2006. In post-Ba’athist Iraq, Talabani was named the president of Iraq on April 6, 2005, and again on April 22, 2006, by the Iraqi National Assembly. See also Gulf War, Second (Iraq War). Further reading: McDowell, David. Modern History of the Kurds. London: I.B. Tauris, 2004; McKiernan, Kevin. The Kurds: A People in Search of Their Homeland. London: St. Martin’s Press, 2006; Yildiz, Kerim. The Kurds in Iraq: The Past, Present and Future. London: Pluto Press, 2004; Yildiz, Kerim. The Kurds in Turkey: EU Accession and Human Rights. London: Pluto Press, 2005. Babak Rahimi Kuwait Kuwait is one of the Gulf States, located at the head of the Persian Gulf, with Iraq to its north and east and Saudi Arabia to its south. Iran is located directly across the Gulf waters. The geography of Kuwait is dominated by mostly flat deserts interspersed with a few oases in Kuwait’s 6,880 square miles of territory. Kuwait is a diminutive form of the word for fort. The official language is Arabic. From the 19th century onward the Sabah clan allied with the indigenous commercial elites, and Kuwait developed as a thriving mercantile community with an economy based on foreign trade. Although never directly under Ottoman rule, the Al-Sabahs paid financial tributes to the empire and recognized the sultan’s power, but Ottoman threats to annex Kuwait pushed the Sabahs to ally with Britain. An 1899 treaty gave Britain control over Kuwait’s foreign affair, and Kuwait became a British protectorate. From that time forward, border issues continually plagued the country. The British relinquished control in 1961. 254 Kuwait Minaret towers in Kuwait City. The tiny nation became the center of world attention in the early 1990s after Iraq invaded it. After independence the Sabah family governed Kuwait as emirs with a constitutional monarchy. The emir ruled the country through the council of ministers, which mostly consisted of family members appointed by the emir himself. The judicial system was based on Islamic law, or sharia, particularly the Maliki school of jurisprudence, but many of the criminal and commercial laws were based on prior British laws. The legislative branch was composed of a National Assembly (Majlis al-Ummah), whose 50 members were elected to four-year terms. Political parties are legally banned and instead, several organizations have representatives in parliament. Prior to 2005, voting was restricted to men who were able to prove that their ancestry in Kuwait dated prior to 1920 and who were not members of the armed forces. In 2005, women were granted the right to vote. After 2005 the government granted citizenship to 5,000 biduns, people without documents—originally from Syria, Iraq, and Jordan—per year. Foreigners, called expatriate workers in Kuwait, are needed to fill positions in the workforce and especially in the oil, construction, and service sectors. Since these immigrant workers are not entitled to free government services and benefits and cannot become citizens, there is some hostility between the native Kuwaiti population and the majority immigrant population. The economy is mostly based on oil and overseas investments. In the 1970s the petroleum industry increased its extraction and processing capabilities, and by the mid- 1980s 80 percent of the oil extracted in Kuwait was also being refined there. Oil production led to a Kuwaiti economic boom, with both direct and indirect services and products. By 2006 Kuwait had one of the highest per capita incomes in the world. See also Gulf War, First (1991); Hussein, Saddam. Further reading: Al-Mughni, Haya. Women in Kuwait: The Politics of Gender. London: Saqi Books, 2001; Ismael, Jacqueline S. Kuwait: Dependency and Class in a Rentier State. Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1993; Tetreault, Mary Ann. Stories of Democracy: Politics and Society in Contemporary Kuwait. New York: Columbia University Press, 2000. Randa A. Kayyali Kyoto Treaty The purpose of the Kyoto Treaty, also known as the Kyoto Protocol, is to reduce global warming by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Countries that ratify the Kyoto Treaty agree to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to 5 percent below their 1990 level by the year 2012. The treaty was first proposed in 1997. The Kyoto Treaty took effect on February 16, 2005, after ratification by Russia met the requirement that the treaty be ratified by countries accounting for at least 55 percent of global carbon emissions. As of September 2005 156 countries representing over 61 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions had signed the treaty; notable exceptions included the United States and Australia. Developing countries such as China and Russia are exempt from the requirement that they reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gases contribute to global warming through what is known as the “greenhouse effect.” The analogy refers to a greenhouse used for gardening, in which sun rays are allowed to penetrate the glass walls and ceiling and warm the air within the greenhouse, and the warmed air is prevented from leaving the greenhouse by those same glass walls and ceiling. In the case of Earth, the planet is warmed by solar radiation which can penetrate Earth’s atmosphere, but a proportion of radiation reflected off the Earth cannot escape back through the atmosphere due to its different wavelength. Scientists estimate that without the greenhouse effect, the average surface temperature on Earth would be –18°C. The Kyoto Treaty allows nations to engage in carbon emissions trading. This means that a signatory may increase their carbon emissions and remain within compliance by purchasing “credits” from countries that have decreased their emissions. Countries can also qualify for credits by engaging in clean energy programs and fostering forests and other natural systems referred to as “carbon sinks” because they remove carbon dioxide from the environment. The current concern with greenhouse gases has to do with the increasing quantities of those gases, and the role they are believed to play in global warming, that is, an increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s surface and atmosphere. It is the consensus scientific opinion that global temperature has risen 0.4 – 0.8ºC since the late 19th century and that human activities are the cause of most of this change. Scientists who endorse the global warming hypothesis predict that the rise in temperature will continue to intensify with increasing industrial development and the resultant increase in greenhouse gas emissions. Predicted effects of continued global warming include a rise in sea level, leading to Kyoto Treaty 255 coastal flooding, extreme weather, and food shortages due to crop failures. Not all scientists accept the global warming hypothesis, however. Alternative explanations include the argument that the increase in temperature has not been clearly established, that it is within the range of normal variation to be expected over time, or that it is due to the period when measurement began having been unusually cold. Others argue that although the global temperature does seem to be rising, there is no proof that the rise in temperature was caused by human activity. See also environmental problems. Further reading: Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, http://law-ref. org/KYOTO/index.html; Maslin, Mark. Global Warming: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004; Viktor, David G. The Collapse of the Kyoto Protocol and the Struggle to Slow Global Warming. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004. Sarah Boslaugh

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.

Also on FANDOM

Random Wiki