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.
The Ancient World Edit
The popular conception of the Sadducees is a “straw man” set up in parallel with the Pharisees. The Sadducees disappeared after the Romans invaded Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple (70 c.e.). They left no written records, much less apologia. Historians relate negative reports from the antagonists of the Sadducees. Based on such evidence it is diffi cult to conjure up an accurate image of them. There are three main fi rsthand witnesses to consider. Josephus calls the Sadducees one of the main Jewish “philosophies,” by which he means an intellectual school. But Josephus is clearly less than happy with them in comparison to the other main Jewish philosophies, the Pharisees and Essenes. The Sadducees reject the immortality of the soul, emphasize free will over fate, and generally dissent from traditions and customs. He identifi es them as aristocratic in their interests and contrarian in their disposition—in contrast to the more popular Pharisees and idealistic Essenes. Many historians associate the Sadducees with the priests of the Jewish Temple because Josephus says that they supported the high priest’s family against King Herod. Then historians go one step further and maintain that the Sadducees collaborated with the Roman overlords. The second witness comes from the Bible. The New Testament offers a slightly different, but better known, picture: The Sadducees can scarcely be differentiated from the Pharisees, and thus Christians often assume that they collaborated with the Pharisees. In the popular mind the Sadducees and Pharisees form a common front against Jesus (Christ) of Nazareth. The New Testament says that the Sadducees do not believe in a resurrection of the dead, an afterlife reward or punishment, and an invisible spirit-fi lled universe. They are located in Jerusalem and active in the Temple, perhaps as priests, and members of the centralized ruling council called the Sanhedrin. Because Romans would have insisted on dealing with ethnic authorities, the likely assumption is that the Sadducees were collaborators. The rabbis, as the third witness, distinguish the Sadducees as opponents to the Pharisees. They make the Sadducees the foils for their own “correct” positions, since they conjure up for themselves a Pharisaical background. Specifi cally, the rabbis would have readers believe that Pharisees and Sadducees disagree on purity issues, the role of civil rulers, temple ritual, and Sabbath observance customs, all of which are of vital concern to rabbinic Judaism. Like Josephus and the New Testament, the Talmud says that they do not believe in the resurrection of the dead. The Sadducees’ teachings were conservative. Fathers of the church such as Origen believed that the Sadducees rejected divine inspiration outside of the Torah (the fi rst fi ve books of the Bible), but this is something of an exaggeration. Nonetheless, the sources agree that the Sadducees were suspicious of later Jewish ideas of a fi nal judgment, heaven and hell, and heavenly beings—and these ideas are not found in the early books of the Bible. They are temple-based and so would most likely be suspicious of efforts to spiritualize or decentralize the religion. They possibly were more pro-Roman because they wanted to keep the temple cult operating and protect S 407 their privileged position. Most likely they were among the most active in the conspiracy against Jesus. Since some Pharisees are identifi ed as priests, and some priests cannot be identifi ed as Sadducees, Sadducees should not simply be exclusively seen as part of the priestly clan, nor can all high priests be seen as Sadducees. See also Christianity, early; Herods; Judaism, early (heterodoxies); Jewish revolts. Further reading: Meier, J. P. A Marginal Jew: Vol. 2. New York: Doubleday, 1991; Skolnik, Fred, and Michael Berenbaum, eds. Encyclopedia Judaica. New York: Macmillan, 2006. Mark F. Whitters
The Sakya kingdom of early northern India is renowned as the homeland of Gautama Buddha. It should be distinguished from the Sakya school of Tibetan Buddhism that is associated with Vajrayana Buddhism. Sakya is identifi ed as a territory on the borders of Nepal and India and had a capital at Kapilavatthu, from which Gautama Buddha’s mother traveled on foot on a visit to her parents and, on the way, gave birth to the Buddha in a park called Lumbini. The Sakyas have been identifi ed with a clan and also with the nomadic people better known as the Scythians. The Scythians were present during Alexander the Great’s invasion of India and infl icted the only defeat upon the Macedonian as he sought to cross the river. The Scythians eventually moved westward and established an empire that stretched as far as eastern Europe during the period of the early Roman Empire. The Mahabharata records the Kiratas as rulers of eastern Nepal, and there were other tribes Tibeto- Burman in nature. The Aryan invasions of India represented an infl ux of peoples who created numerous small states that existed in a state of confl ict but also represented increased opportunities for trade. In response a confederation of tribes began to congregate in the Tarai region at the far extremity of the Ganges Plain. Among the Tarai Confederacy was the Sakya clan. This confederacy continued in different forms until the arrival of King Ashoka (r. 268–231 b.c.e.), who consolidated the Mauryan Empire into which Nepal was subsumed. See also Theraveda and Mahayana Buddhism. Further reading: Rhys-David, Caroline A. F. Sakya or Buddhist Origins. Columbia, MO: South Asia Books, 1978; Whelpton, John. A History of Nepal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. John Walsh San and Khoi tribes The San and Khoi (or Khoi-Khoi) tribes are among the fi rst identifi able tribes in southern Africa. The San, considered southern Africa’s indigenous population, were later displaced by the Khoi-Khoi in a struggle for survival in one of the planet’s most unforgiving regions. In earlier accounts the two groups have been generally known as the Bushmen and represent one of humankind’s most enduring adaptations to a severe climate. Both the San and the Khoi-Khoi, called in some accounts the Khoisan, were adept hunters with their small bows and were able to make poisons strong enough to kill the largest prey, much as the Jivaro tribe in Brazil concocted the deadly curare. They would gain the name “pygmy” because of their small stature. However, while the San were often hunter-gatherers, the Kho-Khoi also raised livestock. The Bushmen over the centuries would fi nd refuge in the Kalahari Desert, where few foes would dare to follow them. However, around the 11th century c.e. the Bantu people began their historic migration into southern Africa from the north. Speaking a different language from the San and Khoi-Khoi and organized into tribal units, the Bantu would change the entire face of southern Africa. The Bantu would give rise to the Zulu nation that, under Shaka in the early 19th century, would control much of what is now the Republic of South Africa. Cave paintings in the Sahara show hunting scenes, perhaps painted by the Bantu there, from over 2,000 years ago. When the Dutch settled what became known as Cape Town in 1652, the life of the San, Khoi-Khoi, and Bantu inhabitants was changed forever. Although fi rst intended as a trading station for the vast Dutch East India Company (the Netherlands then rivaled England as the greatest European maritime power), the Dutch in Cape Town, on the Cape of Good Hope, soon desired to colonize southern Africa. Inevitably, they followed the logic of conquest: To gain the land they desired, they pushed off the indigenous African inhabitants. Called Hottentots by the Dutch, the San and Khoi-Khoi rapidly were reduced to the status of virtual slaves, while the hardiest followed their ancient custom of fl eeing into the deserts. In a brutal attempt at ethnic cleansing the Dutch launched a campaign to virtually exterminate the tribes to gain room for their own farms and 408 Sakyas cattle. Despite colonization the Bushmen still thrive in the Kalahari Desert. See also African city-states; African religious traditions. Further reading: Primack, Richard B. A Primer of Conservation Biology. Sunderland, UK: Sinauer Associates, 2000; Reader, John. Africa: A Biography of the Continent. New York: Vintage, 1991. John F. Murphy, Jr. Sanskrit Sanskrit is an ancient Indo-Aryan language that has for thousands of years become associated with religious teachings and beliefs, notably Hindu and Buddhist forms of thought. Its earliest use is associated with the migrating Aryan peoples who settled in north India and Iran and from whom several families of languages descended in various forms. Aryan means “noble” in Sanskrit. The long history of its use and the fact that so many religious and philosophical concepts are expressed in the language means it has become almost impossible to separate consideration of the language from the content it has most commonly been used to convey. Sanskrit remains an important language in religious expression in the modern world, although it is not spoken widely otherwise. Some religious experts and scholars are able to communicate in Sanskrit. VEDIC AND CLASSICAL SANSKRIT Vedic Sanskrit is the oldest form of the language and was used to explain the Vedas (knowledge) that framed the fi rst known forms of Indian religious expression. Vedic literature includes the Samhitas, which are four collections of texts: the Yajur-Veda, the Sama-Veda, the Atharva-Veda, and the Rig-Veda. The last three of these consist of verse forms used by priests in ritual chants. However, the Yajur-Veda may be divided into two parts, one of which—the Black, or Krishna, Yajur-Veda—contains both ritual verses (mantras) associated with sacrifi ce, as well as explanatory Brahmana, which detail meanings for mythological terms and concepts and also the derivations of some words. These works predate Buddhism and have been dated to c. 1000 b.c.e. As the Vedic age continued, more literature was written in Sanskrit that was of a nonsacred nature. Panini, the earliest known writer about Sanskrit and its structure, considered the nonsacred forms of communication to be bhasa. Meanwhile, sacred texts included a growing number of sutras, or apophthegms. The Chanda texts and particularly the Brahmanas represent the foundations of the Brahmanical practices that spread across India and later Southeast Asia. The sacred Vedic Sanskrit texts were considered by Hindu believers to be in a mystical way at one with the universe and uncreated even by the divine gods. Since the language was universal and immortal, it follows that words expressed by it should be treated with respect, and it was particularly fi tting for certain types of thoughts and concepts. Nevertheless, the language was also used for mundane and even profane communication. The fact that no defi nitive single script has been used for the language is an indication that meaning drift between different groups of Sanskrit speakers took place. Subsequent development of the language meant that it became polished or crafted—more versatile for literary expression. Two of the great literary epics, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, were created in this phase of epic or classical Sanskrit. The Mahabharata details at some length the struggle between the Pandavas and the Kauravas, together with a large amount of additional religiomythical material. Contained within the Mahabharata is the Bhagavad Gita, which is an extended treatise on religious and human duties and forms a central strand of Hindu thought. The Ramayana concerns the romance of Rama and was compiled according to tradition by the poet Valmiki c. 300 b.c.e. In the Ramayana, Prince Rama and his companions are instructed in virtue and duty and then suffer the loss of the prince’s wife, Sita, to the demon king of Lanka. Sita is ultimately recovered with the assistance of the monkey god Hanuman, but her trials continue, as Sita is made to demonstrate her fi delity to Rama, which she resents. The Mahabharata and the Ramayana constitute a basis of poetic expression and intellectual exploration that greatly expanded the mental vocabulary and reference material of all those people able to understand and converse in Sanskrit. To these were added a variety of dramatic and poetical works (nataka and kavya), together with narrative works. The language evolved considerably over the centuries, and this is evident in changes to pronunciation, word choice, and grammar. Sanskrit was also used to create technical, philosophical, grammatical, and other scientifi c texts that were widely used throughout ancient and medieval Asia. It was used for Buddhist works in India and Sri Lanka, and these spread to mainland Southeast Asia where the language is known as Pali and formed the basis for educated discourse, as well as infl uencing the development of local Sanskrit 409 languages. Chinese monks and pilgrims traveled to India in search of Buddhist texts to translate into Chinese, and they formed an important medium through which Sanskrit-expressed ideas entered into the Chinese world and its intellectual tradition. Sanskrit is also the language through which early Jainist thought is expressed. SANSKRIT IN THE COMMON ERA Sanskrit moved from being a spoken language to one that was better known for its use in sacred rituals and written literature. The great Buddhist king Ashoka, for example, followed Gautama Buddha’s teaching to use vernacular languages to spread religious teachings. Although religious and philosophical texts used Sanskrit, government-produced monuments and pronouncements employed other languages (Indo-Aryan) until the early centuries of the Common Era. A parallel development was for commentators to insist that only correct pronunciation in Sanskrit should be permitted and that this could only be achieved by studying the methods of the past. Sanskrit became separated from the masses, who were excluded from learning and mastering the language. Grammarians distinguished between words of Sanskrit origin and words infl uenced by Sanskrit. Sanskrit witnessed the importation of words from other languages, especially those necessary to describe new concepts or proper nouns. Sanskrit also spread as a result of political and military change. The expansion of fi rst the Persian Empire and subsequently the entry into northern India of Alexander the Great provided conduits through which the language could spread to the West. Contact with the Arab world in later centuries was also important in the transmission of cosmology and mathematics. Sanskrit epics had tremendous infl uence on cultural and artistic production throughout India and Indianinfl uenced societies. Some works, including the retelling of part of the Mahabharata by Nannaya Bhatta (1100– 60 c.e.), took as their subject well-known tales of the past and brought them into contemporary focus both through the contrast between the heroic milieu and that familiar with the audience, and also by presenting existing characters with new encounters and events to face. This has begun a tradition of inventive mixing of the past and present that has led to a burgeoning form of popular culture in both oral and written forms. Some critics maintain that the use of Sanskrit has been a tool by which the central Indian state has sought to oppress local traditions and cultures. Sanskrit studies became popular in Europe in the early modern period both as a subject of scholarly inquiry and also as a source of spiritual sustenance. Its popularity has waxed and waned with interest in Eastern philosophies. STRUCTURE OF THE LANGUAGE Sanskrit has come most commonly to be expressed through the Devanagri script, although this is a comparatively modern invention. Sanskrit has a complex and highly mannerized structure, resulting from its origins as a deliberately created language. There are three genders and three numbers, with 10 types of verbs, eight cases, and 10 noun declensions. There are a variety of voiced and unvoiced aspirated sounds in the language and the retrofl ex sound that has been introduced and distinguishes Indian languages from the Indo-European family. The language is highly infl ected and numerous suffi xes, for example, govern different shades of meaning and emphasis. Expressions of time in verb tenses are also complex and contain various types of meaning embedded within them. See also Aryan invasion; Buddhism in China; Jainism. Further reading: Deshpande, Madhav. Samskrta-Subodhini: A Sanskrit Primer. Detroit: University of Michigan Press, 1999; Filliozat, Pierre-Sylvain. The Sanskrit Language: An Overview: History and Structure, Linguistic and Philosophical Representations, Uses and Users. Varanasi, India: Indica Books, 2000; McGrath, Kevin. The Sanskrit Hero: Karna in Epic Mahabharata. Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill 2004; Narasimhan, Chakravarthi V., trans. The Mahabharata. New York: Columbia University Press, 1997; Sen, Amartya. “Indian Traditions and the Western Imagination.” Daedalus (v.134/4, 2005); Valmiki. The Ramayana. Translated by Arshia Sattar. New York: Penguin Global, 2000. John Walsh Sappho (fl . early 6th century b.c.e.) Greek poet Sappho is one of the most important of the lyric poets of the ancient Greek world. She probably lived from the middle part of the seventh through the early part of the sixth centuries b.c.e. Though the exact date of her birth and death are unknown, it is fairly certain that she was born in the city of Mytilene on the island of Lesbos, which is located in the eastern Aegean Sea near Turkey. She came from a noble family. Her father’s name was Skamandronymos, her mother’s Kleiss, and her husband’s Kerkylas. She had a daughter named Kleiss and either two or three brothers. Around the year 600 410 Sappho b.c.e., she, along with the other nobility on Lesbos, were forced into exile to the island of Sicily when a middleclass tyranny, led by Myrsilos, took control of Lesbos. Eventually, she was able to return. Some argue that she taught at a school for young women, others that she was simply at the center of a local poetry clique. Her reputation was great in the ancient world; Plato, about 200 years after her death, called her the “tenth Muse,” referring to the nine Greek goddesses who were the patrons of the arts and sciences and who were the source of inspiration and artistic excellence. Little of her work has survived, but what has is highly praised in the modern world and still has the power to move people. Lyric poetry in the ancient Greek world refers, fi rst of all, to the fact that a lyre originally accompanied the poetry. Unlike our modern conception of the lyric, Greek lyric poetry fi t into at least two major categories: choral ode and monody. The monody is closest to our modern conception of the lyric, that is, a short, personal poem expressing intense emotion. This was the type of poetry that Sappho wrote. She created the Sapphic stanza and may have been the fi rst to accompany her poems with a harp. She is known to have written between seven and nine books of poetry, with the last being a book of wedding songs. Her poems are often favorably mentioned in ancient writing (in fact, the ancient world erected at least one statue to her), but during the Byzantine era, Pope Gregory Nazianzus, in 382 c.e., had most of them destroyed. In 1073 Pope Gregory VII likely burned any of the books that still survived. The problem, from the Catholic Church’s perspective, was that Sappho was likely bisexual, and much of her poetry was erotic and concerned with love between women. Unlike much of the Greek poetry before her, most of Sappho’s poetry is personal, not social. The worlds of beauty, personal relationships, and love are the typical topics of her poems. Unfortunately, all that is left are mostly scraps, sometimes a line, sometimes a stanza, and in only one or two cases, a complete poem. They come to us as quotes in the writings of authors from antiquity and in strips of papyrus used to wrap mummies in Egypt. The most recent discovery of her poems was in 2004 in papyrus wrappings from a mummy and was combined with a previous fragment, also written on papyrus and found in 1922, resulting in a new, nearly complete 12-line poem. This particular poem is about growing old and is a type of carpe diem addressed to a group of girls. The Egyptians copied it about 300 years after her death. The 2004 wrappings also contained two other new fragments. A typical remnant of her poetry is the three lines often titled “The Blast of Love”: “Like a mountain whirlwind / punishing the oak trees, / love shattered my heart.” One of her other likely complete poem is called “A Prayer to Aphrodite.” It is generally presented as a seven-stanza poem and ends by asking the goddess to “labor for my [Sappho’s] mad heart.” Despite the scarcity of surviving poetry, she has infl uenced English-speaking writers as diverse as Philip Spencer and Ezra Pound, as well as many writers in other languages. She continues to have the power to fascinate and delight, and her poetry—as fragmentary as it is—is still worth reading. See also Greek drama; Greek oratory and rhetoric. Further reading: Barnstone, Willis. Greek Lyric Poetry. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1967; Bowra, C. M. Greek Lyric Poetry from Alcman to Simonides. New York: Oxford University Press, 1961; Rose, H. J. A Handbook of Greek Literature from Homer to the Age of Lucian. London: Methuen, 1956). William P. Toth Sargon of Akkad (2334–2279 b.c.e.) king of Sumer and Akkad Sargon of Akkad was the fi rst Mesopotamian ruler to control both southern and northern Babylonia thus becoming the king of Sumer and Akkad and inaugurating the Akkadian Empire. He established his capital at the newly founded site of Akkad in northern Babylonia; its exact location is unknown but perhaps near modern Baghdad. Two things can be known from his name, which means “the legitimate king”: This was not his birth name, and he was probably a usurper. One legend names him as the cupbearer of Ur-Zababa, king of Kish. He started the practice of maintaining a standing army, which allowed him to campaign from eastern Turkey to western Iran. While he fought battles in these areas, it is unclear if he sought and maintained permanent control everywhere he fought, or if he conquered some areas just for the plunder. In many areas he was content to have the local rulers continue as governors so long as they pledged allegiance to Sargon, providing him with taxes and acknowledging him as the “legitimate king.” It is known that he received tribute from Ebla in northern Syria and Elam in western Iran. In later literature he was seen as a good and triumphant king, in contrast to Naram-Sin, who was usually incompetent and disrespectful to the gods. In the Sargon of Akkad 411 “Sargon Legend” his mother, a priestess not allowed to have children, abandons him in a basket in the Euphrates in order to hide his birth. From this humble beginning, Sargon establishes himself as the king of the fi rst Mesopotamian empire. The “King of Battle” is another tale that tells of how Sargon traveled to Purushkhanda in central Turkey in order to save the merchants there who were being oppressed. After defeating the king of the city, Nur-Daggal, the local ruler is allowed to continue to govern as long as he acknowledges Sargon as king. The version of the story that we have comes from 1,000 years after Sargon’s reign and shows the diffi culty we have in reconstructing Sargon’s reign with texts that are not contemporaneous. Because of all the successes of this king, Sargon’s name was adopted by a Neo-Assyrian king of the eighth century b.c.e. See also Assyria; Babylon, early period; Moses. Further reading: Gadd, C. J. “The Reign of Sargon,” pp. 417–434. In I. E. S. Edwards, C. J. Gadd, and N. G. L. Hammond, eds. The Cambridge Ancient History. Vol. 1, Part 2. 3d ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971. James Roames Sassanid Empire The Sassanid Empire was the last pre-Islamic Iranian dynasty that ruled over a large part of western Asia. Following the Achaemenid dynasty, the Sassanids are considered one of the most powerful and famous Iranian dynasties that positively infl uenced the evolution of Iranian nationality and culture during their 400-year sovereignty (224–651 c.e.). The dynastic name, Sassanid or Sassanian, is derived from Sasan, said to have been father or grandfather of Ardashir I, also called Artaxerxes. ARTAXERXES Founder of the Sassanid dynasty, Artaxerxes was fi rst appointed as the governer of Darabgard because of his fi rm familial relationship with the local royal families of Fars. He took advantage of the weakness of the Parthian (Arsacide) kings and expanded his realm. Having achieved a successful supremacy over Fars, he conquered Isfahan and Kirman and won a face-to-face battle with Arsacid Artabanus V, the last Parthian king, defeating and killing him in 224 c.e., leading to the invasion of Ctesiphon, the Parthian’s capital, in 226. He was crowned as the “king of kings of Iran,” according to the fi re temple of Anahita at Istakhr. He expanded his kingdom by conquering the east of Persia, invading Sistan, Khurasan, Marw, Khwarazm, and Balkh. Kushan’s kings, who ruled over Punjab and Kabul, sent envoys to announce their obedience to him. To expand his territory Artaxerxes moved toward the west and was involved in a war with the Roman Empire in 228, in which he defeated the Romans several times. Through these wars he invaded Carrhae and Nisibis and then conquered Arminiya and annexed it to Persia. Following Artaxerxes, 34 Sassanid kings ruled over Persia. Amalgamation of clerical institutions with the monarchy provided the Sassanid monarchs a divine legitimacy, which led to the interference of Zoroastrian priests in the social and political affairs of the country, especially when less powerful kings were ruling. This mix of state and Zoroastrian religion threatened the lives of followers of other religions when religious and biased kings ruled the country. SHAPUR I During the reign of Shapur I, Armenia, which had gone undisciplined, was brought under control. Gordian III, the Roman emperor who had attacked Nisibis and Mesopotamia, was defeated and killed, while his successor, Philip the Arab, established peace with Shapur in return for submitting a heavy indemnity to Shapur, as well as a free hand in Armenia. In a war between Rome and Persia near Edessa, the Roman army was defeated, and Valerian was taken captive. The event increased the Sassanids’ self-confi dence and dignity. Shapur used tens of thousands of captives to advance economic development of his empire. The fall of the Kushan Empire by Shapur was one of the most infl uential events of his kingdom, because it caused the civilized world to be divided between the two empires of Persia and Rome. This new Persia was no longer a partner with Rome but a more powerful rival. HURMUZ I, BAHRAM I, BAHRAM II, AND BAHRAM III Shapur’s successor, Hurmuz I (272–273) was called “brave” for his couragous actions in wars with Rome and Armenia. By allowing the freedom of various religions and limiting the power of clergies and nobles, he followed his father’s lead. These activites brought him an early dismissal from the throne. In Manichaean literature Hurmuz has been mentioned as the “good king.” Following Hurmuz I , his brother Bahram I (273– 276) took the throne. In his reign the policy of tolerance toward non-Zoroastrians was discontinued. Limiting other religions, the clergies of the time gained more 412 Sassanid Empire king of Perse-Armenia, rebelled. Bahram IV defeated him and made his brother (Bahramshapur/Vramshapuh) king of Perse-Armenia. Another signifi cant event during his reign was the formal division of the Roman Empire into eastern and western parts (395), which was apparantly one of the outcomes of Theodosius I’s death, who was killed by his own son. Bahram IV was killed in a violent attack, possibly by a conspiracy of the nobles, which led to a rebellion in his army. Yazdadjird I (399–420) was most likely a brother of Bahram IV and was to some extent successful in limiting the power of nobles in his court, though he was enthroned by them as a pawn. He was called “delight of the state” and “Rameshtras” meaning “peace-seeker” on his coins. Tolorating other religions and their followers, Yazdadjird I was not welcomed by the strict Zoroastrian priests, who had labled him as a “sinner.” However, he imposed his power rather than endanger the stability and independence of his monarohy. Yazdadjird was not able to escape the nobles’ violence and was killed in a conspiracy. BAHRAM V AND FIRUZ I Attempting to exclude the son of Yazdadjird from succession, nobles enthroned a descendant of Ardashir I, Khosrow, but he later abdicated, and Bahram seized the throne as Bahram V (420–438). Bahram V was the son of Yazdadjird I. Bahram V had been raised at al-Hira by al-Mundhirhir of Lakhm. Early in his reign Bahram V defeated an invasion of Hayatila Hephthalites in the northeast of Iran and killed their king. In the west of Iran the wars with the Byzantines ended (422) with a 100-year peace treaty between Byzantines and Iran, providing security and religious freedom of Zoroastrians in Byzantium and freedom for Christians in the Sassanid state. Bahram V was a comfort-seeking man and apparently was not concerned with the interference of clergy in his affairs. He was fond of hunting and is said to have died after falling into a swamp while hunting. The growing interest in Christianity in Armenia created negativity, and to prevent independence Armenia was invaded, and many Christians were killed. The death of Yazdadjird II was followed by a civil war between his sons. His wife, Dinak, as the “queen of queens,” ruled over the country in Ctesiphon for a short time, until her son Hurmuz III (457–459) took the throne; however, the king’s brother Firuz, who was supported by the nobles and priests, defeated and killed Hurmuz and seized power. A major problem during the reign of Firuz I (459– 484) was a seven-year-long famine and drought. Trying to control and manage the country, Firuz remitted taxes and distributed stores of corn and even imported more corn. Following famine and starvation, the country was involved in a war with Hephthalites. In about 469 Firuz was captured and lost Harat to them, agreed to pay tribute, and left his son Kubadh as a hostage to guarantee its payment and levied a poll tax over his entire state to provide his ransom. Firuz fulfi lled his promises, but the Hephthalites did not release Kubadh. Firuz waged war and was killed. The Hephthalites captured many areas in Iran, but Zarmehr, known as Sukhra, one of the great nobles of the state, prevented their advance toward the center of the country. In 484 Zarmehr and other nobles enthroned Balash, Firuz’s brother (484–488), who established peace with the Hephthalites in return for tribute. Balash was a kind and just king as mentioned in Christian and Armenian ducuments, but having an empty treasury, he was not able to control the state and provide stability, even though he encouraged agriculture to improve ecomomic conditions in Iran. In 488 he was deposed by the nobles and priests, whos enthroned Kubadh I (487–531) the son of Firuz. KUBADH I AND KHOSROW I The early years of Kubadh I’s reign were accompanied by growth of the Mazdakits in Iran. The Mazdak revolution was mainly a reaction toward the increasing power of aristocrats, religious nobles, and the pressure imposed on ordinary people as productive sectors of society and as taxpayers. Mazdak believed that the world was covered in dark, and a resurrection was required to help the light overcome the “darkness.” Accordingly, human beings, who are equally born, should share wealth. It is likely that Mazdak’s philosophy was the fi rst egalitarian and socialistic idea. The competition between the monarchy and clerical institutions caused Mazdak’s thoughts to fl ourish and spread in the Persian Empire. Kubadh I, with popular support against the nobles and priests, allied with the movement and their leader, Mazdak. The nobles and priests who found the ongoing situation against their own interests, deposed and imprisoned Kubadh and enthroned his brother, Djamasp. Kubadh escaped prison with the help of his wife and one of his generals and took refuge among the Heph thalites, whose army restored him to the throne in 499. In the second phase of his reign Kubadh gradually changed his policies toward Mazdakites and tried to attract the priests’ and nobles’ support. In spite of 414 Sassanid Empire the Mazdakites’ announcement of Kawus as the crown prince, Kubadh appointed his younger son Khosrow, who successively executed the Mazdakite heads and settled the dispute. Kubadh became involved in a 10- year war with the Hephthalites (503–513) and defeated them so heavily that they were never a threat to Iran’s territory again. He defeated the Byzantines in two wars; the fi rst one in 503 at the reign of Anastase and the other in 531 at the reign of Justinian I. Khosrow I (531–579) was remembered as Anushirwan (of immortal soul) and became the subject of legends. He was recorded in history as the most powerful and knowledgeable king of the Sassanids. He led Iran toward a fl ourishing period. Although he was cruel with Mazdakites at the beginning, in his governing policies he followed Mazdak’s socialism and prevented cruelty from the nobles. Properties that had been taken by force were returned to their former owners. The nobles kept their status but lost their power. He tried to satisfy the poor and afterward was entitled as “dadgar,” meaning “fair.” He implemented a tax reform that paid for his expanded governing system. At the beginning of his reign he accepted the peace treaty proposed by the Byzantine emperor, Justinian I, and tried to reconstruct the state, especially the destruction left by Mazdakite rebels. With a wellequipped army he revived Sassanid power. A new class of militant landlords was created, and the military was trained and paid regularly so that the army could be a continual power. Kharsaw, who found Byzantine growth and power a threat to Iran, invaded Byzantium and occupied many cities in that state. The Byzantines were obliged to pay tribute and sign a 50-year treaty accepting the expenses for the common defense of the Caucasus passes. Khusraw I destroyed the Hephthalites through an accord with the western Turks and divided Hephthalite territory between the Sassanids and the Turks. At the end of his reign Khosrow occupied Yemen and annexed it to Iran, expanding Sassanid territory up the southern coasts of the Persian Gulf and the Oman Sea. HURMUZ IV, BAHRAM VI, AND KHOSROW PARWIZ Khosrow Anushirwan was succeeded by his son Hurmuz IV (579). He was remembered as “Turkzad” meaning “born as a Turk” since his mother was connencted to the kings of western turks. The confl ict between the crown and the nobles resurfaced in his reign. Hurmuz IV is said to have favored common people against the nobles, possibly as a basis of support for his crown. The Zoroastrian clergy were dissatisfi ed with Hurmuz IV’s tolerance toward other religions and turned against him. Ongoing peace negotiations with Byzantium were progressively impeded by Hurmuz IV, and war broke out again, although there was no clear victor. At the same time the king of Turks invaded the eastern borders of Iran. Bahram Chubin of the Mihran family, one of the Parthian princes, fought heavily with the Turks and defeated them at Harat, killing their king. Hurmuz IV, afraid af Bahram Chubin’s fame and wisdom, sent him immediately to Georgia to fi ght with the Byzantines, where he was defeated. Jealous of Bahram’s popularity, Hurmuz IV disgraced him on the pretext that he held back war booty, provoking Bahram to rebel. Groups of nobles and the military supported Bahram Chubin, and the fi rst steps for the collapse of Hurmuzd IV’s throne were taken. The rebel forces, including Hurmuzd IV’s brothers-in-law, dethroned Hurmuz IV, enthroning his son Khosrow. Hurmuz IV was killed. Bahram Chubin, who had more widespread objectives, did not recognize Khosrow’s monarchy and attacked Ctesiphon and defeated Khosrow and his uncles. Bahram Chubin entered the capital in 590 and took the throne as Bahram VI (590–591), with upper-class support. Khosrow, who was later named Khosrow Parwiz (the triumphant) sought help from the Byzantine emperor Maurice. Maurice sent two armies accompanied by his own daughter, Maria, who married Khosrow. Khosrow then defeated Bahram in 591, and he fl ed to the Turks, where he was killed in the next year. Bahram never was able to obtain legitimacy among the nobles since he did not belong to a royal family. Khosrow Parwiz took preventive measures by selecting his own guards from the Byzantine army and eliminated rival sources of power. His lenient treatment of Christians might have been infl uenced by the fact that both of his wives (Maria and Shirin) were Christian. In 602 Maurice was dethroned and killed. His son fl ed to Iran, and Khosrow recognized him as the new Caesar. Supporting the young Caesar to take over by posing as Maurice’s avenger, Khosrow found an opportunity to regain territories ceded to the Byzantines. Khosrow started the last and greatest of Sassanid-Byzantine wars, which lasted about 20 years (604–624). Between 604 and 610 Sassanid armies conquered Armenia, Mesopotamia, and many cities in Syria. Consequently, Byzantiun could not control other parts of the empire as fi rmly as before. Khosrow Parwiz arrested and killed Noman-b-Mundhar, the king of Hira. This unwise violence later proved to be very costly, because Khosrow destroyed the wall between Iran and the Arabs of the Sassanid Empire 415 desert. During wars between Iran and Rome, Heraclius found his way to the throne in Byzantine following a revolt; however, he was not able to overcome the chaotic situation. The vigorous Sassanid army conquered Antioch and Damascus (613), and Shahrbaraz, the Sassanid commander, joined by 26,000 messianic Jews, conquered Jerusalem. He burned the churches of the city and deported 35,000 captives to Ctesiphon, the Sassanid capital, along with the patriarch of Jerusalem and the relic of the True Cross. Then Shahrbaraz invaded Alexandria (619) and the rest of Egypt. Another Iranian commander, Shahin, also conquered Asia Minor. Sassanid territory was at this point comparable to Persia of the Achaemenids. Khosrow’s victories, especially conquering Egypt, which was a major source of food for Constantinpole, forced Heraclius to move his capital to Carthage, an ancient city on the coast of North Africa near Tunis. Using the property and treasurers of the churches, the Roman army was again well equipped and able to defend Rome against Iran. In this phase of the war the Byzantine army, enjoying an effective navy, crossed the Black Sea and took the war to the Asian arena. In 622 Heraclius invaded Armenia and Adharbaydjan in 626. The Byzantines allied with the Khazars north of the Caucasus. Heraclius advanced into the Mesopotamia plains and descended into the Tigris Valley, where he defeated Sassanid forces at Nineveh. Khosrow fl ed to Ctesiphon, leaving Dastagered, his royal palace and animal preserve, for Heraclius to capture in 627. Although weakened, Khosrow obstinately rejected the peace proposal suggested by Heraclius. At the same time he killed and imprisoned many people, including some of his own army offi cers. Furious at his behavior and rejection of the peace proposal, in 628 a group of generals and high-ranking offi cials entered the capital and revolted against him, captured and imprisoned Khosrow, and proclaimed his son Kubadh II as king. They later asked Kubadh to execute Khosrow. In the ancient history of Iran Khosrow is famous for his luxurious lifestyle. Some experts believe that his interest in such a lifestyle promoted and expanded fi ne arts, music, and architecture in his reign. After the execution of Khosrow Parwiz, the Sassanid dynasty lost its power and started to collapse. YAZDADJIRD III During the four-year period between Khursaw’s execution and the enthroning of Yazdadjird III, the last king of the Sassanids (628–632), more than 10 people took power and claimed to be king, none of them exceeding two months in their reign. The real and absolute governors were the priests and nobles to whom the kings were nothing but a pawn. Shiruya, Khosrow’s son, who was enthroned and entitled as Kubadh Firuz (victorious), did not reign more than eight months. He started peace talks with Heraclius and accepted the peace proposal, being aware of Iran’s political instability. Shahrbaraz, the most famous Sassanid general, broke with Khosrow II by the end of his reign and refused to abdicate his provinces, Egypt and Syria. In the summer of 629 he negotitated with Heraclius on his own and left Syria and Egypt. Kubadh II remitted taxes for three years and released many prisoners, in an effort to be unlike his father, Khosrow, but to stabilize his reign and kingdom he killed all of his adult brothers. Leaving only sisters and children, he created subsequent dynastic problems. Kubadh was succeeded by Ardashir III, just a child (628); Sharbaraz was dissatisfi ed with the chaotic situation and revolted and killed Ardashir III and made himself king. He reigned for only 42 days before being killed by his own guards. This was followed by a dynastic crisis, with 11 rulers taking the throne in two years. Khosrow III, who had made himself king in the eastern lands of the Sassanid Empire, was killed, and Jawanshir’s reign was also brief. Since none of Khosrow Parwiz’s sons were alive, his daughter Buran (who was Kubadh II’s wife) was enthroned by the support of the nobles in 630. She struck coins, built bridges, and completed peace negotiations with the Byzantines before being deposed in 631. Her successors were Firuz II, Adhar Midukht, Hurmuz V, and Khosrow IV. At the end of 632 a grandson of Khosrow II, Yazdadjird III (632–651) was proclaimed king. He was the last Sassanid monarch. The Sassanid position in the Arabian Peninsula had already been weakened by widespread revolts. Arab Muslims formed their own alliances and Sassanid governors acknowledged the prophet Muhammad and converted to Islam. The Muslim forces claimed “equality” and “justice” and promised a “better life” for people and were respected and received warmly in the frontiers and even the capital. Yazdadjird III, who hoped to reinvigorate his army, fl ed to Marw and was killed in 652 by a rogue who coveted his elegant clothes and jewelry. Yazdadjird III’s death put an end to the Sassanid monarchy in its known frontiers. His son Firuz took refuge in Tang China and was permitted to establish a fi re temple. See also Byzantine-Persian wars; Medes, Persians, and Elamites; Persian invasions; Persian myth. 416 Sassanid Empire Further reading: Huart, Clement. Ancient Persia and Iranian Civilization. Trans. by M. R. Dobie. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972; Rawlinson, George. The Seventh Great Oriental Monarchy. New York: Dodd, Mead, 1875. Mohammad Gharipour and Faramarz Khojasteh Saul (c. 1020 b.c.e.) fi rst king of Israel The story of Saul is the story of how Israel received its monarchy. It is a tragic story because Saul represents the acceptance of a line of kings, yet the biblical commentary makes known that this new form of government represents a rejection of direct divine government represented by Patriarchs, Judges, and prophets. It is doubly sad for Saul because he is the divinely conceded choice for the fi rst king, yet he is by the end of his life the divinely rejected king, displaced by a new divine choice, David. For David (c. 1000 b.c.e.) there is good evidence of his existence, but for Saul all that historians have is the biblical narrative. Saul’s story is told in 1 Samuel 8–31. The text speaks of public dissatisfaction with Israel’s lack of the centralized and continued authority that other nations have because of their kings. The main motivating factor is that Israel is disunited in the face of many neighboring hostile nations. The age of the charismatic Judges was over. Samuel as popular leader is the bridge fi gure between the era of leadership by the Judges and leadership by kings. He is the last remaining judge of his day—also a prophet—and he seeks to fi nd someone who can facilitate the unity and security of Israel. Samuel’s choice, Saul, seems like a natural candidate for kingship: He is physically head and shoulders above his compatriots, meek in judgments, courageous in battle, and magnanimous in victory. This fi rst phase of Saul’s career as king stunningly accomplished, Samuel, who has dominated the fi rst part of the book of 1 Samuel, now exits the scene. However, once Saul is on his own, the unraveling of his kingdom begins. Three times he specifi cally ignores or rejects a royal mandate given to him by Samuel, and three times Samuel reappears in the text to reject Saul’s decisions. What is interesting is that Saul does what kings of other nations around Israel do: He wins battles, gives terms of surrender, and presides at national celebrations, but what Samuel faults him for revolves around specifi cally religious obligations. He should have not presided at a religious sacrifi ce, he should have slaughtered the enemy king Agag as a sacred vow, and he should not consult with witches: These are actions that Samuel as prophet fi nds such fault with that he announces the divine rejection of Saul. Now the divine choice would fi nd another and more unlikely candidate, one who put religious devotion above the human expectations for kings. That new choice would be David, “a man after God’s heart.” The rest of Saul’s story is intertwined with his rival and erstwhile page David. He fi ghts a civil war with David and chases him out of his kingdom into the land of Israel’s enemies, the Philistines. The sense of inescapable Greek tragedy envelopes the last phase of his life, as popular opinion, many of his family members, and even his own sanity often desert him. At the end of his troubled life he is surrounded in battle by the Philistines and commits suicide. Yet, the narrative of his life does not end in complete darkness. The people whom he had gallantly rescued at the beginning of his reign risk their lives to retrieve his body from the victorious enemies. And David, his rival, grieves his tragic death, lifting up an elegy of praise for his fallen “hero” at the national funeral. Further reading: King, Philip J., and Lawrence E. Stager. Life in Biblical Israel. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002; Edwards, Gene. A Tale of Three Kings. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 1992. Mark F. Whitters scribes Scribes were key to the administrative and legislative aspects of many societies after the creation of writing and fulfi lled numerous functions other than simply record keeping. Very often scribes were instrumental in creating and maintaining the legal, economic, and religious aspects of a culture. In many cultures scribes were a ruling class, and those who possessed literacy maintained a monopoly of knowledge over the largely illiterate agrarian and working-class members of society. In cultures where only a small amount of the population was literate, or even had no concept of symbolic representation, scribal culture was also closely associated with ritual and religion, and in many cases scribes were responsible for the codifi cation of writing, religion, and law. The role of the scribe became important in castes or administrative classes within societies that helped develop and demonstrate the importance of symbolic forms and helped scribes 417 develop more sophisticated methods of notation. These cases in the West led to the development of the alphabet and in the East to the codifi cation of the Chinese language. Scribes were also extremely important in political structures, and many theorists link scribal culture to the expansion and political solidifi cation of many civilizations. MESOPOTAMIA Mesopotamia was the birthplace of writing and civilization, and as a result, scribes were extremely important as key administrators who maintained administrative and economic offi ces and also aided in the development of literature, religion, and historical documents. Scribes in Mesopotamia were trained early, in schools known as Tablet Houses, which were associated with important temples. Scribes were initially not as vital in the Fertile Crescent, growing in importance when the Akkadians settled among Sumerians c. sixth millennium b.c.e. and became the dominant culture in 2350 b.c.e. Their scribes undertook a more systematic notation of the language, retaining the Sumerian ideograms, reading them in their own language, and creating a syllabary based on the Akkadian language. The Akkadians used writing as something akin to a grid for comprehending and ordering the way in which the world worked. The systems of codifi ed law are also attributed to the infl uence of scribal culture, and the Sumerian codes, while not the fi rst, were the basis of legal codes for the following 1,000 years. Scribes effectively maintained a monopoly of knowledge where literacy was restricted to a relative few who were trained from birth to belong to the administrative class. Scribal culture was also key in the diffusion of written systems for record keeping and codifying religion that spread throughout the region, particularly to Egypt and other surrounding kingdoms. EGYPT Scribes were extremely important to Egyptian culture, and it is generally thought that writing appeared c. 3150 b.c.e. in Egypt, two centuries after it appeared in Sumer. Scribes in Egypt used papyrus and as a result of its relatively perishable nature compared to the clay tablets used by the Sumerians for their cuneiform writing, much of early Egyptian work has vanished. There is evidence that Egyptian scribal culture helped develop writing systems and hieroglyphics. In doing this they created a writing system that used phonetics and signs to represent consonants, which, unlike the Sumerian system, helped avoid ambiguity. There was even a god of writing and of scribes, Thoth, who was considered a tricky god, and the written word was endowed with power where names had hidden meaning. Hieroglyphs were considered, not representations, but living realities that aided in religious ritual and funerals. Hence, scribes were heavily involved in ritual and the organization of Egyptian culture and politics. Egyptian scribes may have been among the earliest in history, and Sumerian writing could be derived from Egyptian writing. CHINA Writing developed indepenently in China. Earliest surviving examples of Chinese writing date to the 14th century b.c.e., found on bovine scapula bones and tortoise shells used for divination in Yin, the last capital of the Shang dynasty. Already advanced, the writing system consisted of ideograms, pictograms, and logograms that evolved into modern Chinese writing. Short written inscriptions were also cast into Shnag ritual bronze objects, which became long texts detailing political and military events after the establishment of the Zhou (Chou) dynasty c. 122 b.c.e. Bamboo and wood slips and silk fabrices were also probably used as early writing materials but have not survived. The earliest surviving Chinese writings were the works of priests/diviners who asked questions of the supernatural on behalf of kings and recorded the answers and outcomes. During the Zhou dynasty the diviners became scribes and historians charged with the task of keeping accurate records. Paper was invented in China around the beginning of the Commen Era. The growing size and complexity of the Chinese state and society resulted in a trend that gradually systematized and simplifi ed Chinese scipt. Written Chinese was adopted as the basis of written Korean, Japanese, and Vitenamese. JUDAISM Known as the people of the book, Judaic culture enjoyed a much higher level of literacy than most cultures, as most of the Judaic tribes were encouraged to read in order to fulfi ll their religious duties. By the seventh or sixth century b.c.e. scribes became central to religious practice, codifi ed under David when scribes served under a minister in the king’s court and wrote and copied offi cial texts, such as those inserted later into the book of David. Priestly scribes were leaders of the dispersed communities in Babylon who kept records of what had been left behind during the Diaspora. Scribes helped the king keep order and levy taxes, and as time went on the importance 418 scribes of scribes in Judaic culture increased to the point where scribes became key to the political life of the Judaeans. The scribal fi gure was often connected with the idea of wisdom and read and commented on the Torah in synagogue, becoming the primary interpreters of Jewish law. They also played an essential part in the courts and were indispensable in administrating and diplomacy. Solomon may have been a scribe king who annotated a mass of texts, commentaries, and translations. As time went on, scribes became associated with Talmudic scholarship, and some scribes wrote copious commentaries, which were only cast in defi nitive form in the fourth and fi fth centuries c.e. Scribal culture was extremely important in the development of ancient civilizations, and they not only developed systems of writing that allowed the passage of knowledge down though history but also helped to codify the languages of various cultures and were extremely infl uential in most societies in governmental, administrative, religious, and economic aspects of state. See also Akkad; Babylon, early period; Egypt, culture and religion; libraries, ancient. Further reading: Avrin, Leila. Scribes, Script and Books: The Book Arts from Antiquity to the Renaissance. Chicago: American Library Association, 1991; Davies, Philip. Scribes and Schools: The Canonization of the Hebrew Scriptures. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998; Emanuel, Tov. Scribal Practices and Approaches Refl ected in the Texts Found in the Judean Desert. Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 2004; Innis, Harold. The Bias of Communication. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press, 1951; Logan, Robert. The Alphabet Effect: The Impact of the Phonetic Alphabet on the Development of Western Civilization. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1986; Martin, Henri-Jean. The History and Power of Writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994; Schams, Christine. Jewish Scribes in the Second Temple Period. Sheffi eld, UK: Sheffi eld Academic Press, 1998. Brian Cogan Sea Peoples At the end of the third and the beginning of the second millennia b.c.e. Egypt was beset by a series of invasions. Diverse groups whom the Egyptians associated with “the north” and the Mediterranean Sea carried out these invasions. The most distinguishable groups were the Denyen, Ekwesh, Lukka, Peleset, Shardana, Shekelesh, Teresh, and Weshesh. It is from Egyptian records that these ethnic groups have come to be designated as Sea Peoples. All came to Egypt from the Aegean region or Cyprus, though individual origins of the separate peoples have been ascribed to regions extending from Sardinia to Syria. The main sources for information about the Sea Peoples are inscriptions of the Egyptian kings Merneptah and Ramses III, who defeated respectively a Libyan invasion in which some of the Sea Peoples served as mercenaries (1220 b.c.e.) and a direct assault of Sea Peoples on Egypt (1186 b.c.e.). Reliefs at Medinet Habu illustrate the victory of Ramses III over all enemies including the Sea Peoples in highly symbolic representation. For the Philistine community, major sources consist of Assyrian inscriptions, biblical narratives, and archaeological excavations. Numerous minor references associated with the Sea Peoples have been proposed from throughout the Mediterranean. In the 13th century b.c.e. the most infl uential civilizations in the eastern Mediterranean (the Egyptian, the Hittites, the culture of Mycenae) collapsed. The Sea Peoples, already existing as raiders, traders, and pirates in the region of the Aegean Sea, became major threats to the coasts of these former political powers. The Hittite and Mycenaean Empires disappeared as much due to internal confl ict as to the incursion of Sea Peoples, but Egypt survived. Reconstructions of the demise of these powers all include Sea Peoples, but the extent to which these seafarers infl uenced the actual collapse varies from the catastrophic theory of mass invasion with military conquest, to the opportunistic theory with settlement following the rise of political vacuums. Successful at colonizing the southern coast of Asia Minor, some Sea Peoples moved down the Levantine coast to form settlements stretching from Asia Minor to Egypt. Established cities that attempted to slow or stop this activity, such as Ugarit, might have been overrun by these invaders; however, most settlement may well have come about by infi ltration from other communities. Skilled at sailing and fi ghting, many of the Sea Peoples turned to mercenary service. Egypt itself had made use of mercenary Shardana even as the Hittite Empire had employed the Lukka when these two empires fought each other. When the Libyans and Meshwesh allied to attack Egypt, they hired Shardana, Shekelesh, and Ekwesh for their unsuccessful invasion. Under their own command 34 years later the massed Sea Peoples attacked Egypt from the Mediterranean Sea by ship and from their communities to the northeast by land. Entire families came with the invaders intending to settle the Nile Delta in line with the Levant. Instead, the invaders Sea Peoples 419 were decisively defeated by the Egyptians, resulting in large numbers of both dead and captured, which ends the story of the Sea Peoples. In the Egyptian inscriptions and reliefs the Sea Peoples are depicted with unique features and costumes refl ecting the diverse cultures now included in the blanket term Sea People. However, the ships associated with the invasion are all of a kind, with prows and sterns shaped into the form of a stylized bird’s head. Square sails provide the propulsion, and there is a crow’s nest for observation. The vessels resemble ships of the early Phoenician trading variety, save that no oars are represented. The warriors wear various styles of short kilts, neckbands, and some form of breast covering. Headdresses are of two major kinds: horned helmets and feathered, fl anged “top hats.” Spears, swords, and shields are the standard weapons displayed. In the Egyptian depiction the Sea Peoples are both chaotic in their attack before the orderly Egyptian archers and defeated and captured even as they fi ght; these depictions are a form of Egyptian propaganda. At the conclusion of Ramses III’s defeat of the Sea Peoples, the Peleset and their allies were driven from Egypt proper into the Mediterranean coastal area northeast of the Egyptian border where they were thenceforth known as Philistines. Their warrior culture settled down to a sedentary life around fi ve central cities: Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza. After expanding their territorial control westward to the hill country, the Philistines took up agriculture, modest manufacturing, metallurgy, and trade, for which their location was ideal. Egypt to the south, the Phoenician cities to the north, and the Mediterranean to the west allowed them to become the market center for the state of Judah to their east. The cities remained autonomous and independent until the reign of the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III, who invaded Philistia in 734 b.c.e. and subjugated the region. The end of the Philistines is generally accepted to come with the disappearance of the region in 604 b.c.e. into Nebuchadnezzar II’s Neo-Babylonian Empire. Archaeological excavations at Philistine sites confi rm material and religious connections to the Aegean and to Cyprus. Pottery resembling Mycenaean ware continued to be manufactured along with the distinctive Philistine “beer mugs” even as pottery construction adapted from the indigenous population was produced. Evidence of trade or migration related to Anatolia and Syria also appears at the sites. By the time of the incorporation of the Philistine cities into the Neo-Babylonian Empire the culture had been assimilated into regional traditions. See also Assyria; Babylon, later periods; Egypt, culture and religion; Israel and Judah; pharaoh. Further reading: Oren, Eliezer D., ed. The Sea Peoples and Their World: A Reassessment. University Monograph 108; University Symposium Series 11. Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, 2000; Sanders, N. K. The Sea Peoples: Warriors of the Ancient Mediterranean. London: Thames and Hudson, 1985. Lowell Handy Second Sophistic The philosophical school of sophism, which fi rst fl ourished in fi fth-century b.c.e. Athens, underwent a revival in the second century c.e., and for a brief period it attained a measure of intellectual fashionableness. Although the political center of the Western world moved from Greece to Rome, the new capital did not feel the need to enforce its status as the center of the intellectual world. Instead, many Romans were happy to accept the importation of new ideas and religious systems, from whichever part of their burgeoning empire they should arise. Within this generally liberal atmosphere, Greek and especially Athenian systems of thought held a special place. Greek was likely to be the language of intellectual discussion among the educated urban elite, and familiarity with the works of the past was an essential part of refi nement and statesmanship. A revival in interest in Greek learning was ushered in by the emperor Hadrian in the second century c.e., and this inspired the growth of a set of professional teachers who came to be labeled Sophist and to be members of the Atticist school—that is, to be from Attica, or Athens. Unlike the original Sophists, the later teachers focused entirely on the techniques of rhetoric and ability to argue so as to win an argument. Their methods had no ethical or truth-seeking element and were, therefore, susceptible to the criticism of sophism that it was amoral and improper for a person of good faith to use. Those whose writings have been preserved and who have been associated with this movement include the historians Dio Cassius and Herodian, Maximus, Aelius Aristides, and Polemon of Athens. Polemon managed a successful school of rhetoric at Smyrna and was highly regarded by the emperors Trajan, Hadrian, and Antoninus Pius. According to legend, Polemon had himself buried alive at the age of 56 to escape the misery of chronic gout. Since most extant works of this group are 420 Second Sophistic concerned mostly with substantive matters rather than in the practice of sophistry as a deliberate technique, there is no specifi c body of work that commemorates the Second Sophistic movement. Further reading: Cassius, Dio. The Roman History: The Reign of Augustine. Translated by Ian Scott-Kilvert. New York: Penguin Classics, 1987; Danziger, Danny, and Nicholas Purcell. Hadrian’s Empire. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 2005; Maximus of Tyre, Maximus of Tyre: The Philosophical Orations. Ed. and trans. by E. M. Trapp. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. John Walsh Seleucid Empire The Seleucid Empire (312–63 b.c.e.) was the largest of the Hellenistic states that emerged from the conquests of Alexander the Great. Seleucus I (c. 358–281 b.c.e.), one of Alexander’s generals, founded the Seleucid Empire in 312. Seleucus, who took the title Nicator, or “victor,” was the most successful combatant in the bloody and protracted wars of the Diadochi. The empire he founded stretched from the Middle East and Asia Minor to Bactria in Central Asia. Seleucus initially claimed the Macedonian conquests in India as well but was forced to abandon them to Chandragupta II around 305 b.c.e. Seleucus was later killed by Ptolemy Keraunos, a member of the ruling Egyptian dynasty. The Seleucid dynasty drew from both Greco- Macedonian and Near Eastern traditions of rule. The Seleucid monarch was theoretically not identifi ed with a particular people, but in practice, was Greek in culture. Greeks and Macedonians constituted the vast majority of the kingdom’s governing elite, known as the king’s friends. The Seleucids claimed a particularly strong relationship with the Greek god Apollo but also patronized the traditional religion of Babylon and presented themselves as rulers in the Mesopotamian and Persian traditions. Like other Hellenistic rulers, they claimed divinity. The original capital of the empire was Seleucia on the Tigris, but it fi nally settled at Antioch in Syria. The empire’s vast size made complete centralization impossible. Drawing from the Persian Achaemenid political tradition of dividing the empire into satrapies, the early Seleucids divided their empire into large administrative districts mostly assigned to members of the royal family. Another disadvantage of the size of the Seleucid Empire was that it faced problems on several frontiers, making it diffi cult for Seleucid kings to follow consistent foreign and military policies. After Seleucus the Seleucids lost much of their direct control over Iran and Bactria. Around the middle of the third century b.c.e. a new Greek kingdom arose in Bactria, while Iran fell to the Iranian Parthians. Antiochus III (r. 223–187 b.c.e.), known as Megas or “the Great,” reasserted Seleucid overlordship in this area in the late third century b.c.e., but his success proved short lived. In Asia Minor the Seleucids lost territories to invading Gauls and to a secession that led to the foundation of the independent Hellenistic kingdom of Pergamum, which would become a perpetual rival. The Egyptian Ptolemies challenged Seleucid leadership in the Hellenistic Middle East. Antiochus expelled the Ptolemies from Palestine and Phoenicia, a longstanding area of contention between the two dynasties, after the Battle of the Panium in 200 b.c.e. However, the most fatal rival of Seleucia was the rising power of the Mediterranean, the Roman Republic. Antiochus came into confl ict with the Romans when he sought to expand into Asia Minor and Greece. After two defeats Antiochus agreed to the Peace of Apamea in 188 b.c.e., withdrawing from Europe and western Asia Minor and disbanding his navy and elephant force. After Antiochus the Seleucid Empire was caught between the Romans in the west and the Parthians in the east. The empire also faced a major internal challenge from the population of Judaea. Antiochus IV Epiphanes (r. 175–163 b.c.e.) was an avid promoter of Hellenic culture and of his royal cult. These policies provoked a revolt of the Jews, led by the Maccabees, who eventually managed to establish Judaea as an independent kingdom. Antiochus IV was also forced into a humiliating withdrawal from Egypt, which he had reduced to a Seleucid satellite, when the Roman Senate sent an emissary demanding that he leave. The fact that Antiochus agreed to withdraw when faced merely by a representative of the Senate, not a Roman army, was particularly humiliating. Antiochus died attempting to restore Seleucid power in the east. His death was followed by more defeats and turmoil within the Seleucid house between the descendants of Antiochus IV and his brother and royal predecessor, Seleucus IV Philopator (r. 187–175 b.c.e.). Mithridates I of Parthia took Babylon in 142 b.c.e. and captured the Seleucid ruler Demetrius II Nicator (r. 145–138, 129–126 b.c.e.) in 138 b.c.e. There was a partial Seleucid recovery under Demetrius’s brother Antiochus VII when he advanced far into Parthian territory, but he was killed in battle in 129 b.c.e. The wife of both Demetrius and Antiochus, Cleopatra Thea from Seleucid Empire 421 the Ptolemaic family, was the only Seleucid woman to rule under her own authority (r. 125–121 b.c.e.). Seleucid power dwindled to Syria while the last Seleucids fought bitterly among themselves. Tigranes of Armenia briefl y conquered the late Seleucid state, and fi nally the Roman general Pompey in 64 b.c.e. reduced Syria to a Roman province. The last Seleucid, Antiochus XIII Asiaticus (r. 69–64 b.c.e.) was murdered shortly thereafter. Further reading: Green, Peter. Alexander to Actium: The Historical Evolution of the Hellenistic Age. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990; Sherwin-White, Susan and Amelie Kuhrt. From Samarkhand to Sardis: A New Approach to the Seleucid Empire. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993; Tarn, W. W. Hellenistic Civilization. New York: New American Library, 1961. William E. Burns Seneca (3 b.c.e.–65 c.e.) Roman philosopher and statesman Lucius Annaeus Seneca’s father, Marcus Annaeus Seneca (Seneca the Elder, c. 55 b.c.e.–39 c.e.), was an imperial procurator. He so mastered public speaking and debate that he became an authority on rhetoric. Marcus Annaeus had two other sons besides Lucius Annaeus Seneca. The eldest was Junius Annaeus Gallio, who as governor of Achaea declined to exercise jurisdiction over Paul (Acts 18:11–17). Marcus Annaeus’s third son Annaeus Mela was an important fi nancier and the father of Lucan (Marcus Annaeus Lucanus) the poet. Lucius Annaeus Seneca (Seneca the Younger) was born the middle son at Corduba, Iberia (modern Córdoba, Spain). He became the leading Roman intellectual of his day and a successful orator, lawyer, tragedian, Stoic philosopher, statesman, and wealthy fi nancier. Seneca the Younger studied the Greek poets and playwrights and law in his youth. He was also attracted to the mysticism associated with Pythagorean philosophy. Later in life he adopted Stoicism. As a young man, Seneca served in the Roman administration of Egypt under Tiberius (16–31 c.e.) where he gained experience as an administrator and fi nancier. He also acquired a taste for natural philosophy, studying geology, marine life, and meteorology. After 31 c.e. Seneca went to Rome to train as a Roman lawyer. There he distinguished himself with brilliant legal oratory, causing the emperor Caligula to threaten his life. He was accused of having illicit relations with Julia Livilla, sister of Caligula. The reason for the accusation is not clear but the notorious Valeria Messalina (c. 22–48 c.e.) may have been involved as an opponent of the potential wealth and power of Seneca. Seneca went into exile on Corsica, and while there he wrote numerous works, including tragedies, poems, and essays. In 49 c.e. Seneca was appointed a praetor by the Senate and recalled to Rome by the empress Agrippina to serve as the tutor of her son, Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus. Then aged 12, he would become emperor Nero after the poisoning death of the emperor Claudius in 54 c.e. During the fi rst fi ve years of the reign of Nero both Seneca and Burrus, a Roman army offi cer, aided the management of the public affairs of Rome. They were able to restrain Nero and Agrippina. Neither one actually held offi ce but were able to infl uence public affairs to the benefi t of the empire. Nero eventually listened to the more demagogic of his courtiers who encouraged his murderous impulses. They also sowed suspicion in Nero’s mind about Seneca and Burrus. In 58 c.e. Seneca was the target of political attacks by a number of people, including Publius Suillius Rufus, on an array of charges from sleeping with the emperor’s mother to introducing Nero to pederasty to abuse of power. However, the most serious charge was the contrast between Seneca’s philosophical teachings and his political practice. Using his position with Nero, Seneca was able to gain fame and wealth. During the early years of Nero’s reign Seneca and Burrus were almost as powerful as Nero. Eventually, Marcus Suillius Nerullinus charged Seneca with hypocrisy for denouncing tyranny while tutoring a tyrant. He also charged that there was no philosophy in the world that showed how to gain the immense wealth held by Seneca or that justifi ed Seneca’s opulent spending. In 62 c.e. Burrus died under suspicious circumstances, which broke Seneca’s power. To escape Nero he retired with the emperor’s permission, and in the three remaining years of his life he wrote on philosophy, including Epistuale Morales to Lucilius the Younger. He traveled a good deal with his second wife, Paulina, and rarely visited Rome. In 65 c.e. the conspiracy against Nero conducted by Caius Calpurnius Piso, and others, implicated Seneca. Nero ordered Seneca to commit suicide, which he did. Seneca’s death is described in the works of Tacitus, and his surviving literary works include 12 philosophic essays. His essay Consolationes (On Consolation) expressed his grief at the loss of sons. His essay De Clementia, addressed to Nero, commends mercy in a ruler. His De vita beata and De Otio discuss living as a Stoic sage. Seneca’s surviving meteorological essay 422 Seneca was, as was his work on scientific questions in Naturales Quaestiones, inspired by the Stoic philosophy of Poseidonius. Nine of Seneca’s plays have survived. They are tragedies that express the Stoic belief that disaster comes when passion destroys reason. They were greatly influenced by the plays of Euripides, Aeschylus, and Sophocles. Of Seneca’s letters 124 have survived. His surviving satire, Apocolocyntosis divi Claudii (The Pumpkinification of the Divine Claudius) ridicules the deification of the emperor Claudius. See also Pythagoras; Roman historians; Rome: government. Further reading: Campbell, Robin. Letters from a Stoic: Epistulae Morales ad Lucilium. Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1969; Lucius Annaeus Seneca. The Stoic Philosophy of Seneca: Essays and Letters of Seneca. Ed. by Moses Hadas. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1958; Holland, Francis Caldwell. Seneca. Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1969; Motto, Anna Lydia, and John R. Clark. Seneca, a Critical Bibliography, 1900–1980: Scholarship on His Life, Thought, Prose, and Influence. Amsterdam: A. M. Hakkert, 1989. Andrew J. Waskey Septimus Severus (146–211 c.e.) Roman emperor Septimus Severus was founder of the African dynasty of Roman emperors. He came from a family of Roman citizens who had served as imperial bureaucrats in northern Africa. He found favor with the emperor Marcus Aurelius and served in many high provincial positions. Under Emperor Commodus, Septimus Severus was appointed the legate of the fourth legion in 191 c.e., stationed on the Euphrates. He disdained traditional Roman ways and saw himself as a soldier and ruler of the East, becoming immersed in the religion and culture. He married a member of a priestly family of Emesa and solidified his influence over the politics of the eastern provinces. When his own soldiers killed Emperor Pertinax in 193, Severus was proclaimed emperor by his own legions of the East and by the Danube legions. Some scholars speculate that support for Severus in both the East and West make it clear that he was a part of the conspiracy to overthrow Pertinax, but there is no concrete proof. Severus believed his destiny to rule the empire was found in careful study of the positions of the stars in the heavens. He strengthened his control over the empire by executing the prefect of the infamous Praetorian Guard and put his trust in barbarian troops over the Roman legions under his control. Granting of land and money to troops showed his preference for the barbarians, as well as giving Roman women in marriage to barbarian officers and displaying their likeness on new coins. The Roman soldiers in the Praetorian Guard were replaced by barbarian troops from the outlying districts of the empire. Although he had the support of many legions in the East and south of the Danube, Severus had trouble taking control of the whole empire and spent many years fighting battles against regional generals in Britain, Gaul, and Mesopotamia. Not every opponent was a rival for the title of Caesar; many simply did not want Septimus Severus to rule the empire. After defeating every opponent, Severus shook the social circles of Rome by granting the right of every common soldier to enter the equestrian order and serve in the Roman Senate. This incensed the Roman gentry, but Severus suffered no repercussions from his actions. He began the fifth persecution of Christians and made it a crime against the state to convert to Judaism or Christianity. Saints Perpetua and Felicity, highly revered by the church, were martyred during this persecution. Severus traveled to Britain in 208, trying to restore order to the province and gain support for a vigorous military program. While there, he restored Hadrian’s Wall and ensured the protection of the province from the barbarian Picts to the north. He gave control over the outlying province to his sons and died amid a family feud for control of the area. See also Druids and Picts; martyrologies; persecutions of the church; Roman Empire; Rome: government. Further reading: Magno, Cyril, ed. The Oxford History of Byzantium. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002; Scarre, Christopher. Chronical of the Roman Emperors: The Reignby- Reign Record of the Rulers of Imperial Rome. London: Thames and Hudson, 1995. Russell James Servant Songs of Isaiah The Servant Songs refers to a group of texts found in the biblical book of Isaiah. These passages center upon someone known as the Servant of the Lord. This person or character is commissioned by the God of the Bible to carry out a mission in relation to the nation of Israel. Servant Songs of Isaiah 423 There are at least four such blocs in the book of Isaiah that have been identifi ed as Servant Songs: 42:1–4; 49:1– 6; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12. All these blocs are found in the latter half of Isaiah, often called “Second Isaiah.” Bible scholars beginning with Bernhard Duhm (1892) isolated these passages and suggested that they could be separated from the rest of the book without changing the literary development of the surrounding material. Together these passages appeared to tell their own story and theology. At the same time they do not necessarily form a clearcut literary unit as though together they form a complete book. Almost all Bible scholars now accept the existence of the Servant songs. In addition to the four blocs, some scholars also think that some of the surrounding material of Isaiah has been adjusted to accommodate the songs. Thus, 42:5–9; 49:7–13; 50:10–11 respond to each of the fi rst three songs. The last Servant Song, the longest and most poignant, might serve as a fi tting conclusion to all the other songs and responses. The fi rst song features the “Lord” of Israel as the speaker. The Lord has chosen the Servant and given the Spirit so that he can bring “judgment” to the nations that oppose Israel. The Servant will accomplish the task without violence. The Servant delivers the second song. He says that he is chosen to restore Israel and to be a light for the nations surrounding Israel. The third song also has the Servant for the speaker. He is a teacher who encounters opposition, but God will grant success and accomplish the divine plan through the Servant. The fourth song is the longest and most eloquent and elevated of the songs. The speaker is not identifi ed. The Servant has died, but the death has accomplished something for “the many,” a Semitic way of saying human beings. The Servant had been popularly regarded as guilty of wrongdoing, but he will be vindicated and raised up by God. Sometimes it is regarded as the climax of the Servant Songs. The lines of the fourth song are the most frequently cited passage of the Hebrew Bible in the New Testament. If the songs can be put together into a progression of action, they tell of the Servant’s career, that is, his calling, activities, popular rejection, death, and vindication. The level of misunderstanding, opposition, and hostility is so great that often Jews and Christians refer to the person as the “Suffering Servant.” In the ancient world someone who was a servant was not always an abject slave or menial laborer. Often the servant would publicly represent the master and carry authority of the master, so the Servant might be a dignifi ed or important person for the writer of Isaiah. At the same time the servant’s fate would refl ect on the master, so the treatment of the Servant in these songs suggests the relationship between Israel and Israel’s God. The problem is determining who Isaiah considers to be the Servant. Readers often fi nd several candidates: Israel as a nation, a collective body within Israel (“the remnant”), the community surrounding the writer of the songs (“Isaiah’s disciples”), or a specifi c person (Moses, David, Cyrus). Jews are traditionally sympathetic to the corporate Servant identity; while Christians normally fi nd in Jesus the “Suffering Servant.” It is also possible that Servant may be an idealized Israel as represented in an idealized person, thus adopting a composite among the above options and appealing to traditional Jews and Christians. Christians fi nd in the Servant Songs a messianic image of Jesus Christ (e.g., Acts 8:32–35). Jesus (Christ) of Nazareth himself may have seen himself as the fulfi llment of these passages (see Mark 8:31; 9:30–32; 10:33– 34). Christians see in the Servant an explanation for Jesus’s expiatory suffering, that is, he was commissioned by God to bear the sins of the people. Thus, Christianity teaches that suffering has a positive value and that it is not simply a punishment for sin. On the other hand, the apostle Paul also adapts the image of the Servant to his own life and mission among the Diaspora Jews and non- Jews (Acts 13:47; Gal. 1:15; Rom. 15, 21). Paul’s use shows how Christians and Jews can agree on what the Servant image represents: an insight into the way that the biblical God interacts with humanity in the realm of suffering, judgment, and salvation. See also Christianity, early; Judaism, early (heterodoxies); messianism. Further reading: McKenzie, J. L. Second Isaiah. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday, 1968; Seitz, Christopher R. “The Book of Isaiah, 40–66.” In New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. 6. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 2001. Mark F. Whitters Shang dynasty The Shang is the fi rst truly historic Chinese dynasty (c. 1766–1122 b.c.e.). It is also called the Yin, after its last capital city, where the last 12 kings ruled c. 1395– 1122 b.c.e. Traditional accounts of the Shang came under doubt until the discovery of inscribed oracle bones unearthed near a modern town called Anyang in present-day Henan (Honan) Province in 1900. Systematic digging at Anyang beginning in 1928 revealed an 424 Shang dynasty extensive city and more than 100,000 oracle bones; the writing on some of them is the oldest deciphered from which later written Chinese evolved. Numerous sites excavated since show that by the mid-third millennium b.c.e. an interrelated culture had spread over a wide area in China. However, the core of Shang civilization lay across northern China from the western edge of the Yellow River valley to the coast in Shandong (Shantung) Province, with the core region in modern Henan. Tang (T’ang) the Successful founded the dynasty, overthrowing the last tyrant king of the Xia (Hsia) dynasty, named Jie (Chieh, c. 1766 b.c.e.). According to tradition, Tang established his capital at Ao or Xiao (Hsiao). The dynastic name Shang derived from the name of its sacred city, near Shangjiu (Shang-ch’iu) in eastern Henan. Ruins beneath the present city, called Zhengzhou (Chengchow), correspond to early Shang in time. Shang kings moved their capital fi ve times, the last capital being Yin, which gave its name to the last phase of the dynasty. Although a Shang-era city wall has been uncovered at Zhengzhou, which would be consistent with the site being a capital city, the absence so far of contemporary written records or royal tombs there preclude defi nite identifi cation of this and other sites as the various dynastic capitals. The fact that later Shangera remains in Zhengzhou were of poorer quality than the earlier layer suggests the moving of the capital to other locations. It is not clear why the capital moved fi ve times, exhaustion of tin mines near to each capital could have been a motive because the Shang was a Bronze Age culture. Bronze was power in ancient China, and tin is a key alloy in bronze. THE SHANG CAPITAL AT ANYANG Mature Shang civilization excavated at Anyang shows that Yin was divided into several sections totaling over 16 sq. miles. The royal palace complex had a huge tamped earth platform above a drainage system, on which there were placed regularly spaced stone or bronze bases that once supported timber pillars. The palaces and ritual buildings once had walls of wattleand- daub construction. Smaller houses nearby presumably served for storage or to accommodate other persons. There were also bronze foundries, stone and jade workshops, pottery kilns, and living quarters for workmen. The royal cemetery consisted of 11 large graves, each for the 11 kings who ruled from Yin, excluding the last one, who died in his burning city and did not get a kingly burial; they are surrounded by more than 1,000 smaller graves. The large graves are square or oblong and had ramps that led to the burial chamber 30 feet underground. Although all had been looted, it is apparent that they were richly furnished with objects to serve the owner in the next life. Besides objects, dogs, horses, chariots, and human sacrifi cial victims also accompanied the grave owner to the next world. Archaeologists estimate that it required 7,000 working days to excavate each of the large graves. In 1976 the intact tomb of Lady Fu, a wife of the powerful king Wuding (Wu-ting) was excavated. It contained more than 1,600 precious objects of jade, bone, ivory, bronze, and other materials and sacrifi cial victims. Buildings once stood atop the underground graves where rituals were held for the dead, but they have long perished. Beyond the city core at Yin and other sites were the semisubterranean dwellings of farmers. There was no city wall around Anyang, but a wall of pounded earth 30 feet high, 65–100 feet wide, and 4.5 miles long protected Ao. Archaeologists estimated that it took 12 years for 10,000 workmen, each working for 330 days a year, to complete the task. This suggests that the Shang government was rich in human and material resources. ORACLE BONES The use of tortoiseshells and scapula bones of bovines for divination was peculiar to China. They were used during the Neolithic, Xia (Hsia) dynasty, and early Shang, but only during the Yin phase of the Shang dynasty was writing found on the oracle bones. Shang kings consulted the high god, called Shangdi (Shang-ti), and their ancestors very frequently for advice on many subjects, including the weather, crop conditions, war and peace, the rulers’ health, their wives’ pregnancy, and hunting. The usual formula specifi ed the date, the diviner’s name, the king’s name, and the question, all written down on the bone. Then a heated bronze rod was inserted into an indentation predrilled into the bone, causing cracks, which contained the answer, also written down, and often the actual outcome. The used oracle bones had holes drilled on top through which cords were threaded to bind them together. Bundles of them must have been stored, thus their preservation. The oracle bone inscriptions are the oldest deciphered Chinese writing. They were already sophisticated and therefore must have gone through a long evolutionary process. They contain symbols that are pictographs, ideographs, and logographs, all characteristic of later written Chinese. The oracle bone inscriptions contain the names of all 30 rulers of the dynasty, proving the traditional accounts correct. They give data on natural phenomena such as eclipses and comets, which Shang dynasty 425 help date the events. They also include the names of many offi cials but without details of their functions. The oracle bone inscriptions make clear that a king ruled the Shang state, with the throne passing among men of the royal clan that varied from one brother to another and between father and son. The kings had multiple wives, some like Lady Hao, a wife of king Wuding, was very powerful, commanding troops and managing her own estates. Royal wives came from other clans than the royal one. Offi cials bearing different titles assisted the king, and they were probably aristocrats, but we do not know their functions. Many oracle bones discuss the king waging wars with 1,000 to 5,000 troops against neighboring “barbarians.” The leaders rode to war in chariots drawn by two or four horses, wielding bronze weapons, leading infantrymen. The main weapons were bronze dagger-axes, swords, compound bows, and arrows with bronze tips. When not warring, Shang kings and nobles hunted for sport and probably for meat; many oracles dealt with hunting and big game. METALWARE AND CRAFTS While bronze was used for weapons and chariot fi ttings, the largest use of bronze was to make ritual vessels used in sacrifi ces to gods and ancestors. The earliest Chinese metalware dates to approximately 2000 b.c.e., and many of the early forms have their prototype in potteryware. By late Shang the bronze smiths’ works had reached the highest form of artistry and technological progress. Vessels of complex form and decorated with intricate geometric patterns and animal masks weighing up to 1,500 pounds were made by the piece mold method. They differed from the lost wax method used by metalsmiths in the ancient West. Short inscriptions were also cast into many bronze vessels that bear the personal or clan name of the owner and that clearly designated the pieces for ritual use. More than 30 different shaped vessels of different sizes were produced for the storage, cooking, serving, and consumption of food and alcohol in ceremonies that honored gods and ancestors. Those pieces that survived were buried with the dead. Jades were used as luxury items such as ornaments and also used in rituals. Shang craftspeople also excelled in making a high fi red pottery that approached stoneware, in using the sap of a lac tree to make lacquerware, and in making silk fabrics. No Shang silks have survived but there are imprints of silk fabric in bronzes that were once wrapped in them. FARMING Farming continued along the lines developed since the Neolithic age, using the same stone and wooden tools, for bronze was too precious for ordinary use. The principal grains of north China were various forms of millet, followed by wheat. Animals provided protein, hides, bones, and antlers. Dogs, pigs, cattle, water buffalo, sheep, and horses were domesticated, used for meat, as draft animals, and in ritual sacrifi ces. Many different kinds of fowl were raised, as were fi sh for food, and turtles for shells used in divination. Hunting of wild animals provided sport and food. Several kinds of fermented alcoholic beverages were drunk in rituals and feasting; they were made from millet. Archaeologists have found a site that was possibly used for manufacturing alcohol. The many bronze objects for serving and drinking alcohol testify to the frequency of its use. The founding fathers of the successor Zhou (Chou) dynasty accused the last Shang king of many crimes and vices, among them were excessive drinking and warned their people against drunkenness. CONCLUSION In conclusion, the Shang dynasty was directly descended from the Neolithic cultures of northern China and was centered along present-day Henan Province. They unity of conception of Shang art and the unique and independently derived writing system defi ne the Shang people and civilization as distinctive. In its fully mature phase, called the Yin, it headed many states that bore variants of the same culture and were less powerful and sophisticated than Yin. Shang was a complex and highly organized society, headed by a king, who was supported by his offi cials, artisans, and farmers. It is uncertain who the sacrifi cial victims were, whether they were enslaved prisoners of war or retainers who accompanied their superiors in death. The agricultural economy did not seem sophisticated enough to require the labor of slaves. See also Wen and Wu. Further reading: Chang, Kwang-chi. Shang Civilization. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1980; Li, Chi. Anyang. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1977; Rawson, Jessica. Ancient China, Art and Archaeology. New York: Harper and Row, 1980. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Shintoism Believed to be an indigenous religion of Japan, Shintoism (or Shinto) involved the worshipping of kami and 426 Shintoism prescribed shrine rituals as a way of showing respect and devotion. The term was not in use until the 19th century. Shinto is the religious structure that provides defi nition and a framework in which the practitioner can navigate the worship of specifi c kami. Shintoism is also believed to encompass the indigenous animistic beliefs of the Japanese and was an attempt to formalize different types of beliefs into a cohesive structure. The word kami is the collective term used to describe the representation of what can be referred to as beings (or deities) found within such things as mountains and rivers. Deceased persons are sometimes able to become kami; however, this is a rare occurrence. The written characters that make the word Shinto consist of two kanji, the fi rst being shin (meaning “god” but also translated as “kami”) and the second being tao (meaning “path”). The literal translation means “way of the gods.” It is believed that the Yamato imperial court systematically deployed kami worship as a religious system during the third century c.e. Shinto is widely recognized as an essentially Japanese religious system, having come into existence during the animistic Jomon Period (12,000 to 400 b.c.e.) and practiced by rural rice-cultivating peoples from the Yayoi Period (400 b.c.e. to 300 c.e.). Before the Meiji Restoration in 1868, which saw Shinto becoming the sanctioned religion, there were three distinct forms of Shinto, or more appropriately, kami worship: These were Rural, Shrine, and Imperial Shinto. Before the intervention of the imperial state kami worship was, at best, disorganized and highly individualistic. From the fi fth century c.e. Shinto practices amalgamated with Mahayana Buddhist and Confucian theology. Shinto’s amalgamation with Buddhism and the ritualistic nature of Buddhist practices contributed to its remarkable integration into all levels of society, from the imperial family to the rural population. It is believed that the naming of the religion occurred as a way of distinguishing it from Buddhism and Confucianism. Rural kami worship was often referred to as folk Shinto. In order to ensure prosperous crops and a harmonious village life kami would be worshipped through rituals designed to appeal to or appease the deities. Each region in Japan was thought to have different rituals concerning the kami in their area, and each ritual was defi ned by the type of kami worshipped (such as rice cultivation and fi sh farming), hence different regions in Japan would have had entirely different and diverse systems of worship. As agricultural developments increased and society underwent social and political change, ritual was increasingly employed to ensure a balance between the deities (kami) and the people. As society modernized so did the need for a codifi ed structure of religion and religious practices. Shrine Shinto and imperial Shinto are similar in that they were dependent upon kami worship as ritual. During the beginnings of the imperial state an offi cial network of shrines was established, and through imperial decrees and ritualized (and state-controlled) prayers (norito) the kami system was formalized. Chinese infl uences and concepts of deities during the Yamato court, such as ama-tsu-kami (heavenly deities), also contributed to the continual construction of Shintoism. The majority of information obtained from primary sources concerning Shinto comes from those written during the Yamato court era. The construction of ritsuryo law (Japanese imperial law) focused particularly on shrine rituals that meant that many indigenous rituals or practices had not been written down. Imperial Shinto practices are more likely to have survived in historical record, as imperial households commissioned such records. One such practice is the continual use of clerical titles denoting Shinto priests and practitioners in relation to their duties at various shrines. The highestranking priest or priestess in Japan is referred to as Saishu and is affi liated with the Grand Shrine of Ise. A member of the imperial family most often holds this position. The lowest-ranking Shinto priest is the Toya, a part-time layperson chosen from village members to enter the shine for a specifi c amount of time. Women were originally allowed to hold ceremonial positions within Shinto; however, as the religion underwent a Shintoism 427 Shinto is a Japanese religious system that began before the historic era in Japan. metamorphosis from a rural-based practice to an imperial one they were increasingly relegated to positions that entailed less power, as assistants to the male members of the priesthood. The oldest known texts in which Shinto practices appear is the 712 c.e. Kojiki (Record of ancient matters) and the 720 c.e. Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan). Both texts make mention of the belief that two kami (Izanami and Izanagi) created Japan. Izanami gives birth to a kami of fi re but dies in the process and resides in a place called Yomi no Kuni (Land of Darkness). Izanagi is shocked to witness Izanami in such a place and returns to the living, stopping on the way to wash himself of his visit to Yomi no Kuni. The stories indicate an early belief in death as a pollution of the living and are thought to have guided the creation and formulation of other Shinto practices. The chronicles also legitimized the rule of Emperor Mimakiiri- hiko by ascribing him the name hatsu-kuni-shirasu sumera-mikoto (First Emperor to Rule the Realm). The emperor initiated a state-sponsored adoption of kami worship that included all members of the royal family and the elite ruling members of society. Before this, kami worship lay in the hands of the local rulers and was based more upon shamanistic principles then ritualized worship. Kami were, and still are, found in prominent and often strategic locations throughout Japan. The original underlying foundation of Shinto is the worship of kami to ensure prosperity, health, and an abundance of food and supplies. The Yamato court focused on the Mount Miwa kami called Omononushi, which appeared in the form of a snake and was the subject of agricultural ritual. The area was fertile and consistently provided sustenance for the population, thus the kami was considered powerful. Strategic sites such as the opening of a sea route also had important kami associated with them, such as Sumiyoshi, the kami of Naniwazu (Osaka). However, while kami tied to the environment were viewed as important, the Yamato court also worshipped kami spirits found in ritual objects and objects such as ceremonial weapons. This type of worship became centralized in court life as it pointed toward the power of the court and enabled the transference of power through an object (for example, kami spirits embodied within a ceremonial sword) that was readily visible. Shinto became a structured religious system by the systematic integration of kami worship into early imperial Japanese law and society. It is an indigenous religion that has also absorbed Buddhist and some Confucian rituals and philosophies. Shintoism is notoriously diffi cult to defi ne, especially in light of the fact that the rituals associated with the religion were often fl uid in their approach and highly interchangeable depending on the circumstances of offering. See also Jomon culture; Theraveda and Mahayana Buddhism; Yamato clan and state; Yayoi culture. Further reading: Inoue, Nobutaka, ed. Shinto: A Short History. Trans. by Mark Teeuwen and John Breen. London: Routledge Curzon, 2003; Shinto Committee for the Ninth International Congress for the History of the Religious. An Outline of Shinto Teachings. Tokyo: Jinja Honcho and Kokugakuin University, Institute for Japanese Culture and Classics, 1958; Teeuwen, Mark, and John Breen, eds. Shinto in History: Ways of the Kami. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2000; Toki, Masanori. “Priesthood: Shinto Priesthood.” In Encyclopedia of Religion. Detroit, MI: Macmillian Reference USA, 2004; Underwood, A. C. Shintoism: The Indigenous Religion of Japan. London: Epworth Press, 1934; Watson, Katherine. The Heian Civilization of Japan. London: Phaidon Press, 1983. Samaya L. Sukha Silk Road A German explorer of western China and Central Asia coined the name Silk Road at the end of the 19th century. It describes a route of international commerce that linked China and Rome, exchanging many luxuries by camel caravans, most important of them China’s coveted silks. Seres, which means the “land of silk,” probably referring to China, was fi rst mentioned in Greek accounts in the sixth century b.c.e.; some Chinese silk fabrics must have been traded to western lands in early times. During the early Han dynasty (202 b.c.e.–220 c.e.) China appeased the powerful nomads called the Xiongnu (Hsiung-nu) by regularly giving them large quantities of silk, silver, and food. The Xiongnu traded some of the silk with other peoples. Seeking to end the Xiongnu’s threat to China and their stranglehold of Chinese exports, Emperor Wu launched huge military expeditions against them beginning in 134 b.c.e., ending in the surrender of some Xiongnu tribes and the fl ight of others. The overland route covered was more than 4,000 miles. No caravan traveled the entire route; rather it was a series of journeys in a network of trading centers where buyers and sellers converged. The trans-Asian route began in China’s capitals Luoyang (Loyang) or Chang’an (Ch’ang-an); proceeded westward to China’s frontier city Dunhuang (Tun-huang), where the route split into two, skirting the Taklamakan Desert; then converged at Kashgar (at China’s present western 428 Silk Road frontier) on to Tashkent and Bukhara in Central Asia, where one branch split southeastward across Afghanistan to the Indian subcontinent and another westward through Merv in Iran (ancient Parthia) to Baghdad in Iraq, Antioch or Tyre on the eastern Mediterranean coast, thence by sea to Rome. For much of the journey merchants were protected by the power of China and Rome under the Pax Sinica and Pax Romana. States and cities along the way benefi ted from charging of taxes and dues. When they became too burdensome, as happened with the Iranians, the trading countries sought to open new routes. Thus, in the fi rst century c.e. a sea route was opened that linked the southern Chinese port Guangzhou (Canton), across the Strait of Malacca and Bay of Bengal to India, then through the Persian Gulf or Red Sea to the Roman East to the Mediterranean. After the fall of the Han dynasty and the Western Roman Empire, the Tang (T’ang) dynasty in China and the Byzantine Empire continued the trading relations. In addition to silk, other textiles, metals, gems, glass, horses, and spices were important items of trade. The road was also important for introducing new crops and food items across cultures and for exchange of technological innovations, for example, ground glass lenses from India and paper from China. Finally, it was the route of missionaries and pilgrims that brought Buddhism from India to Central Asia and China and, less important, Nestorian Christianity, Judaism, and Manichaeanism from the Roman East and Iran to East Asia. Marco Polo from Venice traveled via the Silk Road to China in the late 13th century, bringing tales of the fabled East to Europe. The Silk Road was fi nally eclipsed when Europeans discovered a sea route to Asia via Africa after 1498. See also Han Wudi (Han Wu-ti); Zhang Qian (Chang Ch’ien). Further reading: Franck, Irene M., and David M. Brownstone. The Silk Road: A History. New York: Facts On File, 1986; Vollmer, John E., et al. Silk Roads, China Ships: An Exhibition of East-West Trade. Toronto, Canada: Royal Ontario Museum, 1983. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Sima Qian (Ssu-ma Ch’ien) (145–87 b.c.e.) Chinese historian The prestige of history as a fi eld worthy of study and historical writing as an honored pursuit were strongly rooted in Chinese intellectual life from earliest antiquity. The Han dynasty had the distinction of producing the earliest and most important major historical work. It is titled the Shiji (Shih-chi), or Records of the Historian. It was the work of two men, Sima Dan (Ssu-ma T’an), who died in 110 b.c.e., and his more famous son, Sima Qian (145–87 b.c.e.). The monumental work totaled 130 chapters and more than half a million words. The father-and-son team successively held the title Lord Grand Astrologer in the Han government. The title suggests that in antiquity the role of historian was closely associated with astronomical affairs and divination. With their deep knowledge historians were also accepted from antiquity as mentors and teachers of rulers. Such ideals were endorsed and encouraged by Confucius and Confucians who held a deep sense of history and honored memories of the past. Confucians believed that to understand humanity, one had to study history. Two of the fi ve Confucian Classics, the Book of History (Shujing) and the Annals of Spring and Autumn (Qungiu), are works of history. Sima Dan began a project to write a complete history of the world, as the Chinese knew it, from the beginning down to his own time. Although the feudal states during the preimperial period had kept their historical records, the unifi cation of China by the Qin (Ch’in) dynasty and the following Han dynasty required a national history. Sima Dan’s position gave him access to government archives, but he died long before he could complete the task. According to Sima Qian, his father: “Grasped my hand [when on his death bed] and said weeping: ‘Our ancestors were Grand Historians for the house of Chou . . . Will this tradition end with me? If you in turn become Grand Historian, you must continue the work of our ancestors . . . Now fi lial piety begins with the serving of your parents; next you must serve your sovereign; and fi nally you must make something of yourself, that your name may go down through the ages to the glory of your father and mother . . . Now the House of Han has arisen and all the world is united under one rule. I have been Grand Historian, and yet I have failed to make a record of all the enlightened rulers and wise lords, the faithful ministers and gentlemen who were ready to die for duty. I am fearful that the historical materials will be neglected and lost. You must remember and think of this!’ ” Sima Qian received an excellent education. He traveled widely throughout China and knew of local traditions and men who had participated in the great events of the day. He carried on his father’s legacy, completing his monumental work, especially considering the tragic circumstances in his later life. He had taken the unpopular stand of defending a general who had surrendered to the nomads called Xiongnu (Hsiung-nu) for which he was Sima Qian 429 sentenced to death in absentia. This infuriated Emperor Wu (Han Wudi), who condemned him to be castrated. Although a fi ne would have been accepted as substitution, Sima Qian did not have the required sum and refused to accept help from his friends. Thus, he suffered the humiliating punishment but lived to complete his work. The Shiji is a multifaceted masterpiece of organization. It is divided into fi ve sections as follows: 1. Basic Annals (12 chapters): the account of principal events from the legendary Yellow Emperor down to the reign of Emperor Wu. 2. Chronological Tables (10 chapters): tables of dates for important events, holders of government positions from the establishment of the Han to that date, and genealogical information of ruling families down to his time. 3. Treatises or Monographs (eight chapters): essays devoted to history and important subjects, for example, music, economics, the calendar, astronomy, rites, and the Yellow River and canals. 4. Hereditary Houses (30 chapters): detailed accounts and collective biographies of earlier feudal families. 5. Biographies (70 chapters): lives of famous or interesting people, including good and evil offi cials, historians, philosophers, politicians, rogues, rebels, assassins, imperial favorites, merchants, and foreign lands and peoples, including aboriginal tribes, some lumped together as groups, others receiving individual chapters. This section ended with a biography of his father, Sima Dan, an outline of his own career, and his motives and methods in writing the work Sima Qian’s format became the standard and was copied by authors of subsequent dynastic histories that chronicled imperial China. They are unsurpassed in the world for their detail and order. This work is also notable for its elegance of style, emulated but never equaled by later historians. In addition, the work is a model of objectivity, with quotations from fi rsthand sources. In the fi rst century c.e., another family of great historians, surnamed Ban (Pan), would write another great work of historiography called the Hanshu (Han Shu, or Book of Han). Begun by Ban Biao (Pan Piao), 32–92 c.e., it was completed by his son Ban Gu (Pan Ku) and daughter Ban Zhao (Pan Ch’ao). These two monumental works mark the Han dynasty as the era of great historians who set the standard for later generations. Further reading: Dawson, Raymond, trans. Historical Records by Sima Qian. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994. Hardy, Grant. Worlds of Bronze and Bamboo: Sima Qian’s Conquest of History. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Simeon the Stylite (392–459 c.e.) religious leader St. Simeon Stylites was a famous Byzantine ascetic. Many devout Christians in Byzantine society were convinced that the way to higher religious experience and demonstration of faith came through the mortifi cation of the fl esh or by depriving themselves of all earthly pleasures. These ascetics often entered monasteries or became cavedwellers, devoting their lives to fasting and praying in their search for god through privation. As a means of demonstrating his religious devotion Simeon began sitting on top of a 10-foot pillar in a remote area outside the city of Aleppo in northern Syria. Over the next 30-plus years he increased the pillar’s height to almost 50 feet. He added to his suffering by wearing an iron collar; he was tied to the pillar, and food was brought up by a basket on a rope. Simeon preached to the crowds who, as his fame spread, made pilgrimages to see and hear the famous ascetic. Like most Byzantine ascetics, Simeon was a confi rmed misogynist, who yelled and threw things at women pilgrims. His fame created something of a fad for pillar sitting in the Greek Church in the Middle East: More than 200 other people took up Simeon’s lifestyle over the next 1,500 years. Pillar mounting became a common tourist attraction throughout the whole region. Whenever many pilgrims gathered, inns had to be built, religious goods were manufactured, and books were written and sold. Mystics like Simeon and their devotees from as far as the corners of Europe stimulated spiritual—and fi nancial—revival. Simeon was ultimately canonized. A mere 50 years after Simeon’s death, the Byzantine emperor Zeno had a large octagonal church and monastery complex constructed around the pillar. The sanctuary was the largest in the Christian world, surpassed only by the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople more than two generations later. Every attempt of Simeon to escape this world’s grasp by climbing higher on his pillar had failed: His death had brought only more of the same attention and following. The “stylite” movement of Simeon was the last big revival of 430 Simeon the Stylite Byzantine Christianity in the Middle East before the advance of islam. See also Christianity, early; Damascus and Aleppo; martyrologies; monasticism. Further reading: Doran, Robert, trans. The Lives of Simeon Stylites. Collegeville, MN.: Cistercian Publications, 1992. Gonzalez, Justo L. The Story of Christianity. New York: HarperCollins, 1984. Janice J. Terry Sinai, Mount Judaism and Christianity regard Mount Sinai (also called Mount Horeb) as the place where their common spiritual ancestors entered into a unique and exclusive relationship with the supreme deity. The name of the ancestral group was “the children of Israel”; the name of the deity was given as yhwh, not pronounced by religious Jews and often transliterated as Yahweh or Jehovah in versions of the Jewish Bible. (Traditionally, the term used for the deity’s name is the Lord.) The relationship between the two parties, the Lord and Israel, was formalized into an abiding covenant with 10 main planks, called the Ten Commandments. The Jewish Bible tells the story of Moses fi rst encountering the Lord on Mt. Sinai in the form of a burning bush. Years later Moses returned with a throng of refugees who had escaped from Egypt. They stayed for a year or so, during which time the Lord appeared on the mount in an awesome way, revealed the terms of the covenant, and inscribed the Ten Commandments on stone tablets. The Ark of the Covenant was then carefully built as a portable shrine to transport the stone tablets. Sinai also served as the place where Israel raised up institutional community leaders, both priests and judges. From these various literary contexts, especially in the Torah, scholars have been able to sketch out how Mt. Sinai functioned for early Israel. Sinai served as a place that symbolized the people’s remarkable solidarity and focused on their religious obligations. Sinai also symbolizes the place where the Lord lived or came from and thus perhaps was a destination for pilgrimage in the early days of Israel. However, as Israel became more ensconced in Canaan and in political stability, pilgrimage to Mt. Sinai became rare. “Mt. Zion” (Jerusalem) replaced Mt. Sinai as the center of cultic attention. Where is Mount Sinai? Today Sinai refers to the whole peninsula or triangle of desert land between Israel and Egypt, surrounded by the waters of the Suez Canal, the Gulf of Aqaba, and the Mediterranean Sea. In the south of this region is Jebel Musa, “the mountain of Moses” (7,497 feet), the place popularly associated with Mt. Sinai. In the shadow of this mountain is the ancient monastery of St. Catherine, which Justinian I built because he considered that this was the location of the burning bush. Many ancient pilgrims, such as Egeria, testify to Jebel Musa as the site of Mt. Sinai. However, alternative sites have been proposed, with varying degrees of persuasiveness. Among them is Har Karkom—also in the Sinai region—and various hills in Saudi Arabia and Jordan. Har Karkom comes closest to the geographical location described in the Jewish Bible, but archaeological excavations there show that it was venerated as a religious center only in the third millennium b.c.e., long before Moses is thought to have lived. The heights of Saudi Arabia and Jordan have some indirect support from early Jewish scriptures and inconclusive references in the writings of Philo, Paul, Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome, as well as archaeological remains that date to the time of Moses. Further reading: Bright, John. A History of Israel. 2d ed. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1972; Brown, Raymond E., and Robert North. “Biblical Geography.” In R. E. Brown, J. A. Fitzmyer, and R. E. Murphy, eds. New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990. Mark F. Whitters Six Schools of classical Hindu philosophy The Six Schools are part of the Sutra Period in the development of Hinduism. Beginning in the 200s c.e. several schools wrote systematic treatises. Their speculations developed into the basic philosophical systems that were classics in modern times. Their speculations saw philosophy as something to be lived rather than simply as a vehicle for understanding or for social reform. The historical development of the schools is diffi cult to construct because Indian intellectuals were not particularly concerned with chronology, consequently records have been lost or were never kept. Originally most of the schools of Hindu philosophy were nontheistic, or naturalistic, meaning they did not use stories or beliefs about the gods, goddesses, Six Schools of classical Hindu philosophy 431 theistic tendencies into a system. He taught that the soul (atman) is an aspect of the impersonal Absolute (Brahman) from which everything in the cosmos has come. The result is that the world is an illusion (maya) that tricks people into believing that the world is real. He taught that by means of knowledge obtained by identifi cation with the Absolute, the soul might fi nd release. Shankara’s argument is nondualistic because he claims that ultimate reality (Brahman) and temporal reality are of the same essence. He opined that moksha (liberation) arises from the knowledge that Brahman and atman are one. Shankara’s system is called Advaita (nondualism) Vedanta. Its implications for Hinduism were great. The inferences that arise from his nondualism are that the world is an illusion (maya). Furthermore, the practice of bhakti is devotion to an illusion. For those who achieve the liberation of understanding from the Advaita system the ultimate implication is that there is only one Brahman and all else including dharma, gods, rituals, scripture, and devotional practices are illusions. Later Vedanta philosophers rejected his radical nondualism. Ramanuja (c. 1017–1137 c.e.) was a member of the Vedanta tradition who wrote commentaries that moved devotion to a mode or avatar of Brahman back to the center of spiritual belief and practice. His system is called Vaishnavites (qualifi ed nondualism). This system allowed for worship of Vishnu. In the 1200s c.e. the Vaishnavite theologian Madhva taught dualism in the Davait (dualist) Vedanta school. A little earlier Ramanuja (1100s c.e.) took a middle qualifi ed nondualistic position between Madhva and Shankara. This meant that there was a real difference between the Brahman and the individual self that worshipped. This theology aided the development of bhakti movements in south India. It allowed for a tension between identity with the divine power (abheda) and individuality (bheda) to created bhedaabheda. The Samkhya (“knowledge” or “wisdom”) school taught “evolutionary dualism.” It is probably the oldest of the Hindu philosophical systems. It is believed by some to have been founded by Kapila after 100 b.c.e. References in the Svetasvatara Upanishad and the Bhagavad Gita are considered to be references to the philosophy in its preliterate form. One of its important ideas was prakrti (matter). Another important idea was purusha (consciousness). Both prakrti and purusha are words in the Mahabharata, suggesting that these ideas are at least as old as the Mahabharata. The opposition of prakrti and purusha was basic. Individual souls were infi nite and discrete, so salvation occurred when the soul recovered its original purity, completely purged from matter. The Samkhya school taught that prakrti is composed of three gunas (“strands” or “ropes”). The sattva (“reality” or “illumination”) rope is the psychological rope that produces happiness. The raja (“foulness” or “corrupt activity”) rope leads to pain. The tama (“darkness” or “unilluminated”) rope leads to darkness of mind or ignorance. The Yoga (disciplined meditation) school of philosophy is usually paired with the Samkhya school. It developed and practiced the disciplines necessary to achieve liberation from karma in accordance with Samkhya philosophy. The yogi (practitioner of yoga) applying the Samkhya metaphysics used ascetic meditation disciplines and a strict moral code to purge himself or herself of prakrti. Eventually, the Samkhya, Yoga, and Vedanta schools adapted their philosophy so that it served as a base for their theistic system. See also Aryan invasion. Further reading: Bernard, Theos. Hindu Philosophy. New York: Philosophical Library, 1947; Guenon, Rene. Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines. Trans. by Marco Pallis. London: Luzac and Co., 1945; Gupta, Anima Sen, and Chen Mon. Classical Samkhya: A Critical Study. Lucknow, India: Monoranjan Sen, 1961; Larson, Gerald J. Classical Samkhya. Delhi, India: Motilal Bararsidass, 1979; Mohanty, J. H. Classical Indian Philosophy. New York: Rowman and Littlefi eld, 2000; Muller, F. Max. Six Systems of Indian Philosophy. New York: AMS Press, 1977; Radhakrishnan, S., and Charles Alexander Moore. A Source Book in Indian Philosophy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1957; Sharma, Arvind. Classical Hindu Thought: An Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000; Zimmer, Heinrich. Philosophies of India. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1974. Andrew J. Waskey Socrates (c. 470–399 b.c.e.) Greek philosopher Socrates is one of the three greatest philosophers of Greek classical thought and, together with Aristotle and Plato, helped to provide the foundations of Western thought. Socrates was the fi rst of this triumvirate, although he did not produce any written records of his beliefs. A number of issues concerning his beliefs remain controversial, and there is still doubt about the reasons for his death and whether he could or should have sought to escape his fate. Socrates 433 Socrates was born in Athens a decade after the Battle of Salamis signaled the end of the Persian attempts to conquer Greece. Consequently, he was born into a society that was coming to terms with its physical independence and matching that with intellectual independence, although that had been expressed by what are now called the pre-Socratics in terms mostly of vague metaphysics and religious speculation. The main event during his lifetime was the Peloponnesian War fought between Athens and Sparta, which was also seen as a struggle between personal independence and the militarization of society. The ultimate defeat of militarism did not occur until the long and perilously diffi cult years of warfare had passed, with the coarsening of public life and morals that accompanied the war. Socrates was at the forefront of public life in Athens. Xenophon describes him as being part of the circle of Pericles and the other prominent leaders of Athenian society. It is also possible that he worked for a period with Archelaus, a pupil of Anaxagoras, who is reputed to be the fi rst Athenian philosopher. He also may have been familiar with the subjects of geometry and astronomy. Notwithstanding these advantages in society, it is believed that the later part of his life was lived in poverty, as he is so depicted in a play by Aristophanes. Socrates spent most of his working life teaching and practicing philosophy, and he has been depicted as a man so captured by the world of the mind that he could be found unmoving like a statue, completely rapt in thought. He married Xanthippe comparatively late in his life and had three children with her, who survived him when he was arrested by the state on charges of corrupting the youth of Athens and not worshipping the gods of the city. He was brought to trial and condemned to death. Socrates chose to swallow the hemlock that killed him even though it is likely that he could have escaped from confi nement had he so desired. However, Socrates believed it was his duty to continue to serve the state and so acquiesced in the process. SOCRATIC BELIEFS It is from Aristotle and, especially, Plato that understanding of Socrates’ beliefs may be found. Aristotle’s main commentary is contained in Metaphysics, while Plato created a number of dialogues in which Socrates was supposed to have been a participant, notably in Crito and Phaedo, while his Apology of Socrates claims to be a set of speeches the philosopher made at his trial in making a case for his vindication. Both Aristotle and Plato report that one of his main philosophical methods is the use of syllogism in the effort to ascertain what a thing is. Socrates was concerned with the application of reason in the search for the true nature of humanity and of society, which was quite a different body of knowledge from that which occupied pre-Socratic philosophy. The syllogism is a technique that requires the pupil to question personal beliefs through answering the questions of the teacher. The pupil must fi rst state a position in respect of some ethical concern, which is one that cannot be settled by an immediate objective test and is subjective. Socrates then poses supplementary questions that the pupil is required to answer by either an affi rmative or a negative response. Socrates guides the dialogue until the pupil is obliged to come to the opposite of his or her original statement. Socrates uses this technique both as a philosophical tool, with which he develops knowledge by adding premises to those already existing and thereby developing the argument, while also claiming that he had no real knowledge of any sort, which could be demonstrated by the same method. This technique can be used by the skilled questioner to demonstrate the opposite of any moral position and comes close to the accusation made against the early Sophists that they would use debating technique merely to advance their own interests rather than in the pursuit of truth. Socrates tried to bypass this accusation by claiming that he never taught anybody anything and that his technique merely pursued the answers to genuine questions, and that it was beyond his control (or even inter- 434 Socrates Socrates chose to self-administer the fatal hemlock that killed him and ensured that all his domestic duties were completed. est) what those answers ultimately turned out to be. Socrates left himself open to accusations of impropriety by this method, and he was condemned by a number of people who supported the concept of immutable truths or moral guidelines for a variety of reasons. But this form of inductive reasoning is at the heart of the beginning of the scientifi c approach, which was subsequently used by Aristotle to start the classifi cation of existing knowledge. The word Socrates used for the opposing premise used in constructing a syllogism was irony, and this concept has survived to the modern day as meaning an action that contradicts the words used to describe it. Despite the complaints made about Socrates, he believed he was a staunch defender of the concept of absolute morality. He considered this the center of the soul’s quest for truth and virtue, a quest on which the great majority of people had scarcely embarked. Only through a rigorous application of reason could there be any kind of understanding of true morality, which is that which also provides the greatest level of pleasure to the soul, the soul being identical with the individual. He rejected the existing religious concept that held the soul separate from the individual. Consequently, what is good for the soul is also good for the body. This leads to a connection with hedonism, which became more fully expressed through the work of Epicurus and his followers. However, Socrates was more concerned to show that the pleasure a person derives from life and to some extent the value of a person’s life depends on the soul’s ability to understand true goodness. Only true goodness brings happiness, according to Socrates, because any activity that is not inspired by the quest for goodness will bring unintended unhappiness or misfortune to the individual, the surrounding people, or society as a whole. For this reason Socrates opposed early innovations with the concept of democracy since the majority of people were not to be trusted to be motivated by true goodness but, instead, false and probably unexamined desires. This should not really be construed as elitism since Socrates believed that the elite of society was no more likely to be properly educated in morality than anyone else. However, he would have maintained that he was the only person in Athens suited for rule, and that the optimum arrangement would have seen him installed as a tyrant like Peisistratus. THE LEGACY OF SOCRATES As one of the seminal thinkers of Western philosophy, Socrates’s legacy has been enormous. Perhaps his most infl uential legacy was one of the earliest—the distinction between idea or concept and reality that was to become such an important part of Plato’s thought. Socrates was also infl uential in the development of the educational system. He opposed the utilitarianism of the early Sophists and their tuition that was aimed at educating people and empowering them into achieving a better type of life. Instead, he believed that since virtue was the true goal of humanity but could not be taught, the proper type of education should center on the rigorous and personal search for reality. This led to a debate as to the purpose of education in society that has persisted until the present day. However, the Socratic idea that it is possible to lead the mind to profound truths without previous knowledge of the background to those truths is no longer widely supported in academic institutions. Instead the Western tradition features the mastery of content as well as the ability to guide the mind to the truths behind or beyond that content. Socrates has also been considered a founding father of science and of agnosticism, although these attributions depend on contested ideas of exactly what he originally said and believed. It is perhaps in his trial and death that Socrates remains most central to the Western imagination. Some have confl ated the charges of corrupting the youth of Athens with homosexual activities with his followers, which would have been a common enough activity at the time. He has been viewed as both foolish pederast and heroic supporter of the truth in an age of religious persecution and the suppression of freedom of speech. Existing Athenian popular sources referring to Socrates are mostly those found in satirical plays in which he is lumped together with Sophists as a kind of disreputable wordsmith with questionable hygiene habits. This representation clashes noticeably with the striking and compelling personality of Plato’s descriptions. His legendary status as defender of personal liberty has been buttressed by the notion that he would have been able to escape from confi nement in Athens had he so desired. That he chose to stay and administer to himself the fatal poison renders him something of a martyr. According to Plato’s account, at the moment of his death, Socrates was concerned with ensuring that all his remaining domestic duties and chores were complete. See also Epicureanism; Herodotus, Thucydides, and Xenophon; sophism. Further reading: Brickhouse, Thomas C., and Nicholas D. Smith. Plato’s Socrates. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996; Plato. The Last Days of Socrates. Ed. by Harold Tarrant; trans. by Hugh Tredennick. New York: Penguin Classics, 2003; Rudebusch, George. Socrates, Pleasure, and Socrates 435 Value. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002; West, Thomas G., ed. Four Texts on Socrates: Plato’s Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito, and Aristophanes’ Clouds. Trans. by Grace Starry West. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998; Xenophon. Conversations of Socrates. Trans. by Robin H. Waterfi eld and Hugh Tredennick. New York: Penguin Classics, 1990. John Walsh Soga clan The Soga became the most powerful ruling clan in the early Japanese Yamato state between the seventh and eighth centuries c.e. The origins of the Soga clan are unclear, but they claimed to be descended from the Katsuragi clan leader who survived the purge of emperor Yûryaku in the fi fth century c.e. Some scholars believe that the Soga were an immigrant family from the Korean peninsula. They moved to the Soga region of the Yamato state in central Japan and formed alliances with immigrants from the Korean kingdoms, providing scribal and managerial technical skills. The Soga clan’s rise to power began with Soga no Iname, the head of the clan and the fi rst Soga to hold the position of grand minister. He was victorious in the policy debates of 540 c.e. and married two of his daughters to Emperor Kimmei. However, neither of Iname’s grandsons became heir to the throne. The next Soga clan head, Soga no Umako, also grand minister, succeeded in marrying one of his daughters to Kimmei’s son, King Bidatsu, and the couple produced a son who was one of three candidates for the throne. The Soga candidate was eventually enthroned as emperor Yômei after fi erce military battles between the Soga clan and their rivals, the Mononobe, who also supplied a male heir to the throne through a Mononobe woman. Yômei took another daughter of Soga no Iname to be his queen, and the two produced the famous prince Shôtoku Taishi. The victory was short lived however when Yômei fell ill, and fi ghting between the Soga and Mononobe resurfaced. Again the Soga were victorious, and another male offspring of a Soga woman became the sovereign King Sushun. Once the main line of the Mononobe was massacred in 587 the Soga dominated court affairs. Despite Sushun’s connection to the Soga, rumors spread that Sushun would betray his uncle Umako, so Umako had him assassinated and Sushun’s consort, Suiko, became empress. Suiko ruled alongside her son and regent, Shôtoku, during a time when the Soga clan heads Emishi and his son Iruka attempted to assert Soga dominance by levying taxes and trying to expand their lands. Suiko, despite being a part of the Soga, refused requests to expand Soga lands. Iruka even killed Prince Shôtoku’s son. Histories of the time criticize the Soga for trying to become monarchs. The most tyrannical of the Soga patriarchs, Iruka, was assassinated in 645 in a palace coup that effectively ended the Soga rule. The signifi cance of the Soga dynasty was their importation of culture, government, and religion from China and Korea and their infl uence in domestic politics through marriage arrangements and intrafamilial assassination. The Soga supported Buddhism over other forms of court-related native religions, creating several large Buddhist temples, statues, and bells that attested to their power in the physical and spiritual realms. This support for Buddhism further antagonized other clans, who often held key religious-political positions. See also Yamato clan and state. Further reading: Ebersole, Gary. Ritual Poetry and the Politics of Death in Early Japan. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989; Hall, John. The Cambridge History of Japan, Vol. 1: Ancient Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988; Piggot, Joan. Emergence of Japanese Kingship. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997. Michael Wert Sogdians Sogdiana was the meeting point of Asia and Central Asia before 100 b.c.e. The Sogdiana area encompassed modern-day Uzbekistan and Tajikistan and was also called Transoxiana. The use of the word Sogdiana was an attempt to distinguish surrounding Bactria from Transoxiana, and the provincial Persian terminology has persisted in modern historical literature. Sogdiana was a collective term to describe the various principalities within its area. Positioned alongside the Silk Road, it is where Greco-Roman, Indian, and Persian culture collided. The major cities of Sogdiana—Samarkand (Samarqand), Bukhârâ, and Pendzhikent (Penjikent, Panjikand)—enjoyed the fruits of trade that came with their positioning along the Silk Road and played an important part in establishing and maintaining trade relationships between Asia and Central Asia. Merchants and trade caravans traversed the Silk Road during the early fi rst century b.c.e. Contrary to popular belief, the Silk Road was actually a network of roads that crossed from China into Europe. It was at least 2,000 years old by the time the Chinese had set up 436 Soga clan satellite towns along specifi c routes to facilitate trade and commerce. Some cities were the creation of such trade and were in existence from the Bronze Age. Inscriptions dating to the reign of King Darius I (522–486 b.c.e.) refer to the Sogdian area as Sugudu or Sughuda (in Persian), and the whole region was under the patronage of the Achaemenids for some time. Each province functioned much like a separate state, with its own political, economic, and even social systems. Greek and Latin manuscripts speak of a “Land of the Thousand Cities,” roughly located in the area surrounding Bactria, and in 329 b.c.e. Alexander the Great overthrew the area, placing it under the control of his extended empire. Later, Transoxiana experienced various political changes due to a wave of strategic invasions led by nomadic tribes. The Kushan Empire (an offshoot of a Chinese nomadic tribe called the Yuezhi [Yueh-chih]) established a state that encompassed the Transoxiana area, however Sassanians overthrew them in 300 c.e. The Sassanid Empire is believed to have been partly responsible for the reformation of Sogdiana (politically, economically, and socially) and hence contributed to its rise among the trading cities along the Silk Road. Sogdian cities endured various foreign rulers such as the Samanids, who had their capitals at Samarkand and Bukhârâ, and the Mongols from 1219 to 1369 c.e. under Genghis (Chinggis) Khan and Tamurlane (Timur). The area was a melting pot of religion and culture. Major religions included Buddhism, Manichaeanism, Zoroastrianism, Daoism (Taoism), and Nestorian Christianity, and all were tolerated by the Sogdians. Different ethnic and religious groups were free to worship any god until Islam became the dominant religion. From around the seventh century c.e. Islam strongly permeated the Sogdian area and as a consequence the area is renowned for its Islamic architecture and for the urbanization of the surrounding areas for irrigation, housing, and farming. The inhabitants were skilled linguists as they often acted as translators to the Chinese with whom they traded and delivered Buddhist scrolls. The spoken language of Sogdiana was primarily an Iranian dialect (Sogdian); however, due to the mixture of nationalities other languages as diverse as Tajik (Persian as spoken by Tajik ethnic groups of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan), Mongolian, Greek, and Chinese were widely used. Indo-European languages spread quite quickly as the popularity of the trade route grew, and the numbers in the trading cities increased substantially. Written language was highly evolved. Sogdian script was derived from Aramaean script and was used to communicate business deals (among other things) between the trading cities along the Silk Road. The Sogdian cities fi rst participated in intracountry trade with China around 140 b.c.e. The great Chinese diplomat Zhang Qian (Chang Ch’ien)established commercial trade with the Sogdiana area as well as other parts of Central Asia. The Silk Road is thought to have originated from Chang’an (Ch’ang-an), a prosperous and thriving Chinese city whose markets sold silk, glassware, perfumes, and various spices. It is from this city that Asian traders journeyed to the west, passing such cities as Samarkand, Bukhârâ, and Pendzhikent. Due to the wealth attained by commerce the cities of Samarkand, Bukhârâ, and Pendzhikent all had internal palaces, surrounded by housing, independent shops, and bazaars. Most bazaar spaces could accommodate more than 2,000 people. The inclusion of palaces pointed toward the existence of a sophisticated social network and hierarchy. Sections of the cities were transformed into market gardens that produced food for the city inhabitants, as well as providing a surplus for close intracity trade. Most cities of sizable proportions were heavily fortifi ed, its citizens protected by the walls of the city. The cities also had their own citadels outside of the city that offered added protection to inhabitants and wandering traders. Each city, though it encouraged trade, could be self-reliant when required. The Sogdian region was an area that traditionally had a strong Turkish and Iranian presence, politically, economically, and socially. The trade routes between some cities were in heavy use, especially that between Samarkand and Bukhârâ, which was referred to as the Royal Road, or Golden Road. The area was famed for the production of artwork and architecture, and Sogdiana artisans were in high demand along the Silk Road. Pendzhikent and Bukhârâ were known along the route for their frescoes and murals, and Bukhârâ was believed to have functioned more as a city of artisans and scholars than as a commercial trading city, such as Samarkand. Bukhârâ was also infamously known for its trade in Turkish slaves, who were often used as city laborers or transported to Baghdad for use by the courts. Despite an emphasis on artworks by Bukhârâ artisans, Samarkand and Bukhârâ were seen as the two major trading towns in the Sogdian area. This perhaps contributed to the small size of Pendzhikent in relation to Samarkand and Bukhârâ. Samarkand is one of the oldest known inhabited cities in the world. The original city was called Afrasiab (Samarkand expanded and outgrew the old city) and may have been Marakand or Marakanda, the Greek name given by Alexander the Great and his forces. It functioned as the eastern administrative region for the Achaemenid empire and functioned as the commercial Sogdians 437 center of the Sogdian region. It was also named the capital of Mongolian rule in Central Asia by Tamurlane. The city had an eclectic and diverse history of rulers, having experienced mild domination by the Chinese, Mongolian, Persian, and Turkish empires. Though each empire had acted as an overlord of sorts, Samarkand, Pendzhikent, and Bukhârâ were able to maintain some degree of independence (much like a state would function within a country) and thus continued to fl ourish due to the infl ux of trade and the different social and cultural customs of the merchants. Samarkand was considered the epicenter of trade in Sogdiana; the local traders had established a mint and produced their own coinage. The city was known for trading lustrous textiles and gilded ware (silver and gold). It had established profi table commercial trading ties with China to the extent that Samarkand traders lived in China and had established a trading embassy of sorts. Samarkand was also known for its military prowess and for the breeding of military grade horses. Similarly, Pendzhikent was a highly organized and economically stable city. It was located southwest of Samarkand, overlooking the valley, and was the smallest of the satellite capitals. Pendzhikent acted as a capital of the local area before Samarkand rose in popularity and is believed to have been established around 500 b.c.e. It experienced a prominent role in the region during the seventh to eighth centuries c.e., mainly due to the trade and commerce brought into the region by the Silk Road. The city was quite wealthy and had a well-established and famous bazaar that indicated a constant infl ux of traders and merchants had passed through. The city was used by the Hephthalites (an Iranian tribe believed to have ancestry with the Yuezhi (Yueh-chih) of Central Asia) as a capital, then also by Persian invaders aiming to control the lucrative region. Bukhârâ had strong ties with Samarkand and once functioned as a capital for the Samanids. The word Bukhârâ is thought to mean “favored place” in ancient Sogdian, or it is thought to refer to a Buddhist word vihara, meaning “place of learning.” Persian sources (verbal and written histories such as Tarikh-i Bukhara) speak of a city in the area after Alexander had established his sovereignty. It was already an established crafts center in 709 b.c.e. Archaeological sites have been uncovered that point toward the city being somewhat active during Kushan rule. A female, Khatun, ruled Bukhârâ on behalf of her son Bukhar Khudah Tughshada sometime before 670 b.c.e. Persian sources confi rmed her existence when their invading forces came into contact with Sogdiana. The Samanids were interested in trading with Europe, and coinage from Bukhârâ has been located as far north as Scandinavia. This points toward a sophisticated commerce culture, something that the three cities are well known for in their own right. The Sogdian cities enjoyed a relatively long period of infl uence in the area and even managed to survive numerous political, religious, and social changes. Samarkand, Bukhara, and Pendzhikent contributed greatly to commerce between Asia and Central Asia, even extending as far as the northern tip of Europe. They disseminated learning, in the form of manuscripts and scrolls, cultural exchange, and political and social tolerance. Further reading: Christian, David. “Silk Roads or Steppe Roads? The Silk Roads in World History.” Journal of World History (v.11/1, 2000); Dien, Albert, E. “The Glories of Sogdiana.” Silkroad Foundation. Available online. URL: http://www.silk-road.com (October 2005); Drege, J. P., and E. M. Buhrer. The Silk Road Saga. New York: Facts On File, 1989; Faltz, Richard. Religions of the Silk Road: Overland Trade and Cultural Exchange from Antiquity to the Fifteenth Century. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002; Franck, Irene, and David Brownstone. The Silk Road: A History. New York: Facts On File, 1986; Gangler, Anette, et al. Bukhara: The Eastern Dome of Islam, Urban Development, Urban Space, Architecture and Population. Stuttgart, Germany: Axel Menges, 2004; Grotenhuis, Elizabeth Ten. Along the Silk Road. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution, 2002; Vaissiere, Etienne. Sogdian Traders: A History, Handbook 438 Sogdians An 1860s photograph of residents near tea stalls in Samarkand, one of the oldest known inhabited cities in the world. of Oriental Studies. Trans. by James Ward. New York: Brill Academic Publishing, 2005; Wood, Frances. The Silk Road: Two Thousand Years in the Heart of Asia. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004. Samaya L. Sukha Solomon (10th century b.c.e.) king and religious leader The life of Solomon enters like a fairy tale into religious and political traditions, stretching from his life to the times of Justinian I and Muhammad some 1,600 years later. Israel became a political power and military empire never again achieved in its history when Solomon presided as king from 962 to 922 b.c.e. His reign brought unmatched prestige and prosperity to his people and civilization. On the other hand, Solomon also represents a life of precipitous moral decline. The traditions that claim his authorship or inspiration mark a man who squandered his inheritance and ended up in dissolution and lechery. As the Jewish Bible might paraphrase the lesson, it was the best of times for Israel as a nation of might, the worst of times for Solomon as a man of character. He was born as the son of King David, also called Jedidiah (the Lord’s beloved). He was the son of Bathsheba, the woman whom David scandalously took while her husband was away fi ghting David’s wars. Bathsheba’s fi rst son by David died in infancy, and perhaps Solomon was the second. After a period of court intrigue his mother succeeded in obtaining David’s choice of Solomon as his successor. His 40 years as king were marked by a burst of public works. His most famous effort was the construction of the Temple, confi rming Jerusalem as the religious center of the kingdom. Its beauty and its size were so touted by its pilgrims that it was eventually considered, like the Delphic oracle for the Greeks, as the center of the world. Solomon’s successors made the Temple a symbol of unity and hope in their less glorious times. Other building projects that Solomon began or oversaw were the fortifi cation of major cities around his territory. A whole host of fortresses and military stations went up in the desert to the south, protecting the fl ank of Israel against marauders coming from Egypt or the Arab lands. Strategic cities like Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer became food storage cities to serve as refuges against invading armies from the north and northeast. They also prospered because they were on important trade routes. Archaeological investigations confi rm a higher standard of living for these times. Israel most likely served as a hub for trade coming from such places as Sheba (Yemen) in the south, Phoenicia (Lebanon) in the north, and in Aramaea (Syria and Turkey) in the northwest. The Jewish Bible speaks of rulers of these lands paying homage to Solomon and of Solomon being involved with an extensive trade in horses, chariots, and timber. Remarkably, his kingdom invested in seafaring, something that ancient Israel invariably shied away from. The endeavor ended in failure, and Israel never tried again. The moralizers who wrote about Solomon’s kingdom were not reticent to speak about his character. Solomon was supposedly endowed with divine wisdom in a dream shortly after he assumed the kingship. Then two women came to him and claimed the same child as their own. As proof of his wisdom he discerned who the true mother was by a test. The legendary queen of Sheba also came to him seeking advice from the young king and went away marveling about his magnifi cence. Solomon’s name was associated with poetry, songs, scientifi c investigations, and even the occult; the Jewish Bible says that Solomon’s wisdom “surpassed the wisdom of all the people of the east, and all the wisdom of Egypt” (1 Kings 3). Nonetheless, Solomon’s writers then describe his downfall: womanizing. He acquired 700 full wives and 300 concubines. No doubt many of these were for political alliances with foreign peoples—in fact his son and successor, Rehoboam, was born from an Ammonite woman, and Solomon is recorded as building a special home for pharaoh’s daughter. Nonetheless, the judgment of his biographers is negative. The foreign women brought their foreign gods, and the king compromised his exclusive devotion to the Lord. Internal opposition emerged as Solomon’s projects required more and more taxation and national resources. One critic, Jeroboam, later became an insurrectionist and self-appointed king of the northern tribes (called Israel or Samaria), who seceded from the southern tribes (called Judah). External opposition also challenged Israel’s temporary control of the region. Among the many uplifting works attributed to him are the book of Proverbs and several psalms. The Songs of Solomon and Qoheleth (Ecclesiastes) probably refl ect darker days in Solomon’s life when he was carried away by hedonism, materialism, and cynicism. Other works associated with him are not part of the Jewish Bible canon but are viewed as possibly divinely inspired: the Psalms of Solomon and Testament of Solomon. He seems to have been a role model for such later “good” Solomon 439 kings of Judah as Hezekiah and Josiah. Even Byzantine emperor Justinian claimed that his famous church, the Hagia Sophia, made him the Solomon of his day. In later history Solomon is cited as a heroic fi gure by the major religious traditions. Jesus (Christ) of Nazareth cites him as a wise man, and the Gospel of Matthew lists him as an ancestor of Jesus. Rabbinic Jews add to his lore their various tales, and the fathers of the church add to the lore surrounding him. Islam fi nds in him a good statesman and governor, and even the Ethiopian Christians of the Oriental Orthodox Church claim him as a full ethnic ancestor. See also Aramaeans; Christianity, early; Judaism, early (heterodoxies); pilgrimage; Pseudepigrapha and the Apocrypha; wisdom literature. Further reading: Ishida, Tomoo. “Solomon.” In Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York: Doubleday, 1992; Vaux, Roland de. Ancient Israel. Vol. 1: Social Institutions. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965. Mark F. Whitters Solon (c. 635–559 b.c.e.) Greek politician Solon was an important leader and lawmaker of ancient Athens, who brought political reform and stability to the region in the sixth century b.c.e. One of the Seven Wise Men of Greece, he also wrote poetry that still exists and demonstrates his philosophy. Some of the sayings attributed to him are, “I grow old learning something new each day,” and “Speech mirrors action.” Solon, son of Execestides, was born to a noble family. Athens at that time followed laws laid down by Draco—laws so cruel that the word draconian still connotes harsh and pitiless treatment. All power rested with the aristocrats; the poor became poorer and were often imprisoned for debt. Violent rebellion was a constant threat. Not yet a center of culture or learning, Athens suffered several losses as it battled with a smaller city, Megara, over control of the island of Salamis. Solon returned to Athens after years of travel and trading and led the Athenians to victory against Megara c. 600 b.c.e. In six years he was elected archon, or chief magistrate, and 440 Solon A blacksmith, sitting on a stool next to the throne of Solomon, is thought to be a usurper. The man explains to Solomon that the Temple could not have been built without tools made by blacksmiths (ironworkers), whereupon Solomon grants him a seat of honor. given unusual power. The city—or at least, the all-male, wealthy electorate—knew it faced a crisis. Plutarch says Solon was empowered as a lawmaker by the rich because he was wealthy and by the poor because he was honest. Solon warned that enslavement and oppression would lead to civil war, destroying rich and poor alike, and avoided it with the power he was given. Solon cancelled all debts and mortgages, enabling the poor to keep their farms and allowing those who had fl ed indebtedness to return. Families who had been sold into slavery to pay off debts were brought home as well. To further safeguard the economy, Solon restricted food exports, standardized weights and measures, offered citizenship to craftsmen who settled in Athens, obligated children to support their aged parents, and ordered parents to provide for their children’s futures with either land or training. Solon reclassifi ed Athenian society so that taxes and duties were fairly distributed and created the Council of Four Hundred, a legislative body that would debate issues prior to a populace vote. Solon repealed the death sentence that Draco had assigned to trivial crimes so that only manslaughter and murder received such punishment. Some of his laws were innovative, such as the one that stripped a citizen of his rights if he did not join a side during a civil war. Presumably, Solon saw danger in the inaction and apathy of citizens. Solon’s laws were written on wooden tablets, mounted on display panels in public, and all citizens swore obedience to them. Solon was urged to assume absolute authority and become a tyrant—at that time, an acceptable role. He refused and left Athens for 10 years. Popular legend tells that he met with the wealthy King Croesus and Aesop, the teller of fables. Solon learned of Atlantis during a trip to Egypt and wrote part of the story in his old age. He did not complete the work, but a distant relative, Plato, took up the story in his dialogues some 200 years later. Returning to Athens, Solon found the people had split into factions. He took on the role of adviser and peacemaker. Eventually, his own cousin, Peisastratus, became a tyrant. Solon spoke against him without fear of reprisal and urged the people of Athens to throw off tyranny and servitude. When they did not, Solon retired to write and died in 559 b.c.e. See also Athenian predemocracy; Greek city-states. Further reading: Ehrenberg, Victor. From Solon to Socrates. London: Methuen, 1973; Meier, Christian. Athens: A Portrait of the City in Its Golden Age. New York: Metropolitan Books, 1998; Randall, Bernard. Solon: The Lawmaker of Athens. New York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2003. Vickey Kalambakal sophism The development of thought and society in the democratic Athens of the fi fth century b.c.e. and the increasing sophistication of society inspired and benefi ted a class of peripatetic philosopher-teachers who became known as the Sophists. There were numerous Sophists practicing their profession, and around 30 of them are particularly well known, including Protagoras, Isocrates, Gorgias, and Thrasymachus. Their teachings included not just speculation as to the nature and substance of the universe but also rhetoric and the art of life and politics. The education they offered was, therefore, a practical one and suited to contemporary life in Athenian society. Subsequent philosophers such as Socrates and Plato established permanent schools, and their education was more focused on the search for truth. Adherents of these later schools used the term sophist as a term of abuse to imply that the method of sophism deliberately failed to engage with the truth and used philosophical methods falsely to win arguments in an underhanded way. However, in the fi fth century b.c.e. the term was not assigned to any one particular school of thought. Perhaps the greatest of the Sophists was Protagoras of Abdera, who was active in approximately 450–440 b.c.e. He traveled from city to city teaching for pay. His particular area of expertise was in the practice of arete, which involves the development of political and rhetorical skill. He believed that because there was a subjective, human element involved in every judgment or decision, it was impossible to reach ultimate truth about any external phenomenon. Opposing statements could be made about anything, for example, the existence of the gods, without any means of determining what was true because of the imperfection of the human mind (or the shortness of life) and the complexity of issues involved. He observed: “Man is the measure of all things, of the existence of the things that are and the non-existence of the things that are not.” In other words, fi nal or ultimate truth could not be known. His fellow Sophist Gorgias, meanwhile, argued (perhaps satirically) that nothing exists, or if it does exist it cannot be known, or if it could be known it could not be communicated to anyone else. These forms of arguments were in opposition to the Eleatic school, which was then sophism 441 fl ourishing in the southern Italian colony of Elea and was best represented by the thought of Parmenides and his pupil Zeno. Eleaticism featured the monistic belief that thought, expression, and existence all coalesced into being. The Sophists found this to be of little practical value in the Athens of Pericles, where they mostly congregated and where the limits of personal infl uence were being extended for those not of noble birth. Exactly to what extent individual doctrines can be ascribed to individual Sophists is diffi cult to ascertain because knowledge of those teachings is mediated by the writings of Plato, whose dialogues feature debates between Sophists and more modern thinkers such as Socrates but whose audience would have been expected to know in some detail what individual Sophists taught and does not itemize those beliefs in detail. Other sources of early Sophist thought include the “Exhortation to Philosophy” by Iamblichus (third century c.e.) and the “Dissoi Logoi” of Sextus Empiricus (third century c.e.). A particular use of antilogic employed by Sophists was the opposition of custom and nature. Possibly employing a line of thought that had been developed earlier, Sophists aimed to contrast the existing laws of society with the higher laws of nature, either because laws were not suffi ciently rigorous to deal with the nature of humanity or, more commonly, to free people from unwanted restrictions. This form of political discourse represented a feature that could be characterized as an attack on public morals, and so Socratic thinkers claimed it. A number of Sophists were brought to trial for impious teaching, not least because their ideas challenged the existing social order. Critias, for example, taught that the gods were invented by the powerful elites of society to intimidate and help tyrannize the rest of society. Prodicus suggested a sociological approach to the development of the gods of Olympus, while Protagoras, as has been shown, refused to accept that the existence of the gods could ever be known. The Sophists were important as part of the development of education, politics, and philosophy. They represented an early example of the professional educator and the political tutor, one who tempered in his students the desire to succeed with the importance of virtue. See also Platonism. Further reading: Dillon, John, and Tania Gergel, eds. and trans. The Greek Sophists. New York: Penguin Classics, 2003; Guthrie, W. K. C. The Sophists: A History of Greek Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977; Plato. Gorgias. Translated by Chris Emlyn-Jones and Walter Hamilton. New York: Penguin Books, 2004; Plato. Protagoras and Meno. Translated by Adam Beresford. New York: Penguin Classics, 2005. John Walsh Sophocles (496–406 b.c.e.) Greek dramatist Sophocles was one of a trilogy of great Athenian tragic dramatists, along with Aeschylus and Euripides. Sophocles was the greatest of these dramatists and was the most decorated of the three at theatrical festivals. Sophocles was born into a comparatively wealthy family. His father was an armor-maker who lived in Colonus, a small village close to Athens. Sophocles received a high level of education and was a golden youth, noted for his athletic abilities and personal beauty. At the age of 16 he had the honor of leading the formal celebrations in praise of the naval victory over the Persians at Salamis, which helped end the threat of the invasion of Greece. He was also an actor in the earlier part of his life and received some fame and recognition. However, he abandoned acting in favor of civic and religious duties, in addition to his writing. He served as a strategos on three occasions, when he was elected as one of 10 Athenian offi cials placed in charge of military affairs. He was later elected a proboulos, which was one of 10 offi cials charged with overseeing the fi nances of the city. He also gave the oration at the funeral of Euripides, in the same year in which he himself later died. These achievements indicate that he was not only a popular individual who recognized the duties laid upon the privileged of Athens but also one trusted to enact important roles. Sophocles wrote more than 120 plays, although only seven still exist in complete form. The most notable of these works is Oedipus the King (Oedipus Rex). However, Sophocles is perhaps better appreciated as an innovator of the theater rather than for the quality of his individual works. At the beginning of his career the Athenian stage was a somewhat infl exible and formalized institution, but as a result of Sophocles’ innovations it became a place where dramatic tension and characterization could be more deftly manipulated. Perhaps his most important innovation was to introduce a third actor. Previously, only two actors were able to act onstage at one time, although it was possible for those actors to take other roles. The third actor allowed a great deal more fl exibility in the nature of the action and in the possible interactions between the characters. Sophocles was skilled in 442 Sophocles creating characters with terse but powerful strokes that were capable of impelling themselves toward an inevitable doom through the possession of innate tragic fl aws. This conception of tragedy was documented by Aristotle and formed the basis of Western tragic drama. Other Sophoclean innovations include the expansion of the chorus and the intensifi cation of the action through focusing on the resolution of the plot within a single play rather than a trilogy. The play Oedipus the King recounts the story of Oedipus, who was initially the happy and fortunate king of Thebes, but whose fortune unravels as his badtempered arrogance leads him to kill an old man in an act that subsequently causes his kingdom to be plagued. He fi nally comes to realize that, through a combination of his own character fl aws and the ineluctable nature of fate, he has married his mother and murdered his father. At the conclusion of the play Oedipus blinds himself and prepares to face the world in a state of utter desolation. The early play Ajax considers the conventional plot material of the Trojan War. The eponymous hero is outraged by his failure to murder the enemies he has made and kills himself. Odysseus, whose victory over Ajax in a contest had sparked the action, persuades the ruling Greeks to permit Ajax to be buried with dignity. This play shows a possibility of redemption in the character of Odysseus. The play Oedipus at Colonus takes place between the action of Oedipus the King and of Antigone. Oedipus is wandering the world in desolation but refuses to assent to his son Polyneices and his request to take action against Creon. For thereby standing for honor and duty, Oedipus appears to transcend to divine status. The other important plays are Antigone, Electra, and the Trachiniai. Several hundred lines also exist of a satyr play and the names of various other plays exist, especially those rewarded by the 24 victories in the Dionysia festival, in addition to several other fragments. Sophocles rarely diverges from the orthodox religious conception of the universe and adds little to philosophical understanding. However, the power of his dramatic vision and some of the lyrical verse employed within it testify to his standing as a major fi gure in world literature. See also Greek drama; Greek oratory and rhetoric; Persian invasions. Further reading: Beer, Josh. Sophocles and the Tragedy of Athenian Democracy. New York: Praeger Publishers, 2004; Segal, Charles. Tragedy and Civilization: An Interpretation of Sophocles. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1999; Sophocles. The Complete Greek Tragedies: Sophocles. Trans. by Robert Grene. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991, 1992. John Walsh Spartacus (fi rst century b.c.e.) gladiator and rebel slave leader Slavery was widely practiced in the ancient world, though documentation of it is uncommon. Sparse records show that slave revolts were frequent. The ancient Spartans and other Greeks had slaves; in Sparta the conquered people of Messenia were tied to the land as agricultural slaves, called helots. The helots outnumbered the Spartans and fought for freedom but were kept under control for centuries by the militaristic, disciplined government. Other stories of Greek slaves include that of Drimakos, who led a band of escaped slaves on the island of Chios. They lived by robbery, so Drimakos negotiated a treaty with local landowners. The slaves agreed not to steal too much in exchange for being left alone, and Drimakos promised only to accept new runaways into his group if they could prove mistreatment at the hands of their masters. Roman historian Livy tells of revolts south of Rome, involving men recently enslaved after the Second Punic War. Their plot to escape was revealed, and 500 slaves were arrested and executed. Within 12 years a revolt in Etruria and one in Apulia led to the execution of 7,000 slaves. Diodorus Siculus reported two major slave wars in Sicily. The fi rst lasted at least fi ve years and ended in 132 b.c.e. The second slave war occurred in 104–100 b.c.e. In both, Syrian slaves rallied around a leader with mystical powers and joined forces with a second slave rebellion. During the fi rst war the slaves, some 200,000 strong, took over several cities until betrayal from within their ranks led to their downfall. A new law that freed some 800 slaves prompted the second war. Landowners complained, the manumissions ceased, and slaves revolted. A second group, led by Athenion, joined this slave army. Rome’s Senate sent an army of 17,000 to defeat them. The Romans killed 20,000 slaves but won no fi rm victory until its general dueled with Athenion and killed him. A thousand slaves were dispatched to Rome to become gladiators, but all of the men killed each other when they learned of their destination. Historians Plutarch, Sallust, Appian, Florus, and others reported the most famous slave revolt in 73–71 b.c.e.—that of Spartacus, a gladiator in Capua, who may Spartacus 443 have once been a Roman soldier. Gladiators were slaves or enemies who had committed an offense deserving of special punishment; as a gladiator, Spartacus would have been trained to fi ght to the death. Spartacus and at least 50 other gladiators staged an escape from their combat school using kitchen knives as weapons. They hid near Mount Vesuvius and elected three leaders: Spartacus, Crixus, and Oenomaus—the latter two from Gaul. They defeated the initial force sent from Capua to recapture them and were soon joined by other rebel slaves. Italy’s estimated population of 6 million included 2 million slaves, and revolt was taken seriously. Approximately 3,000 soldiers marched to the Vesuvius area but were tricked and defeated by the slaves. Another army engaged the slaves several times but was constantly outwitted by them. Spartacus’s force grew: By some estimates it numbered 70,000 and included slaves from Gaul, Thrace, and the German tribes. The Senate was humiliated and afraid and dispatched consuls Publicola and Lentulus with nearly 9,000 men. Publicola defeated a force led by Crixus, but Spartacus beat both armies and marched his troops north to the Alps where they met and defeated the army of Cisalpine Gaul, led by the Roman governor. While many of the details of Spartacus’s revolt are confusing, a true mystery evolved at this point: Spartacus, so close to escape and freedom, turned his army around and headed south again. After months of enduring raids up and down the Italian peninsula, Marcus Licinius Crassus, the most powerful man in Rome, gathered legions of men and began a hunt for the slaves and their leaders. When one of his legates led two legions into an unwise attack, Crassus had one of every 10 of the soldiers clubbed to death by his fellows, a practice called decimation. After a failed attempt to cross the sea to Sicily, Spartacus drove further south. Crassus began to build a wall across southern Italy, trapping the slaves. They would not be trapped, however, and crossed the trench that was dug, even though thousands of them died. Still in the south, the slaves won a victory against one part of Crassus’s army but were fi nally defeated. Crassus lost only 1,000 men, but the battlefi eld was littered with more rebel corpses than the Romans could count, and Spartacus was among the dead. Five thousand slaves escaped but were cut down by the army of Pompey, Crassus’s rival, and Crassus pursued other rebels into the mountains. About 6,000 survivors were rounded up and crucifi ed along the Appian Way, the road leading from Capua to Rome. More revolts are recorded in the Roman Empire after Spartacus’s time, including a rebellion of gladiators during Nero’s reign. As late as the third century c.e. a gang of 600 slaves led by Bulla eluded capture for two years. None of these reached the proportion of Spartacus’s army, though, and none endured through millennia, as Spartacus’s story has, to inspire and serve as a symbol of resistance to oppression. See also Roman historians; Rome: government. Further reading: Barrow, Reginald. Slavery in the Roman Empire. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1968; Shaw, Brent D. Spartacus and the Slave Wars. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001; Urbainczyk, Theresa. Spartacus. London: Bristol Classical, 2004; Wiedemann, Thomas. Greek and Roman Slavery. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981. Vickey Kalambakal Stoicism Stoicism was a belief system founded by Zeno of Citium at the end of the fourth century b.c.e., at a time when the system of Greek city-states was coming to an end and apparent chaos was about to descend. Stoicism refl ected this situation until the end of its period of infl uence, about the beginning of the fourth century c.e. Important additions to the philosophy were made by Chrysippus and subsequently by the Romans Seneca, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius. The term stoicism was developed from the stoa, or column, alongside which Zeno customarily taught. The early period of Stoicism is closely associated with Athens, where successive generations of philosophers had fl ourished and helped associate the city with the tradition of thought. However, infl uential early Stoics arrived in Athens from various parts of the eastern Mediterranean, showing how Greek culture had spread, most particularly as a result of Alexander the Great’s conquests. Zeno was born on Cyprus and traveled to Athens at the age of 22, where his early career was associated with the Cynics, and there is an undercurrent of cynicism in Stoic thought. The Cynics believed that happiness, a suitable goal for humanity, can only be achieved by focusing the mind on what can be achieved and what is under the power of the individual. Since physical phenomena such as personal health and wealth are beyond the control of individuals, they should not be regarded as appropriate goals. The only things that can be controlled are personal virtue and mental fortitude. To this, Stoics added the concept of logos, which is divine reason and the inspiration 444 Stoicism of the universe. The presence of logos divides matter into the passive and the active, all of which combines to make an integrated whole. Logos, cognate with the fi re aspect of the four elements, makes up the human soul and the reason of the soul, which is at one with the nature of the material of the universe, and can be fully expressed only when it fully comprehends its place in the universe. As a result of the nature of the material that makes up the universe, it follows that people are formed with various desires and attributes that are entirely natural. In common with most forms of Greek philosophy, Stoicism aimed to fi nd the ideal relationship between the individual and nature. Aiming to achieve the desires with which people are naturally endowed, for example, for security, comfort, wealth, was a perfectly acceptable form of behavior. However, it was possible for the individual to approach these goals in the wrong way, owing to imperfections in personal perception, which is the method of seeking to understand the universe. The true Stoic, therefore, should have a rigorous grasp of true perception and an understanding of the reality of the universe, and this tends to lead to a certain acerbity of character. Moral duty and personal virtue are inescapable characteristics of a properly Stoic individual. The second period of Stoic thought occupied the fi rst and second centuries b.c.e. and was dominated by the philosophers Panaetius and Posidonus. These men made some alterations to the nature of Stoic thought but did not signifi cantly change the basis of the philosophy. They were more interested in restoring Stoicism to its Platonic and Aristotelian roots. This confl icted with the additions of Chrysippus, who had added an ethical component to Stoicism that had not been present in Zeno’s teaching. Posidonus and Panaetius were largely responsible for the popularity of Stoicism in Rome, where it was seen as a moral corrective to the temptations of conquest and empire. This was recorded in the second book of Cicero’s De Natura Deorum (On the Nature of the Gods). Lucius Annaeus Seneca (4 b.c.e.–65 c.e.) achieved prominence both for his scholarly works, which adopted Stoicism for the Roman world, and for his tutelage of Nero and subsequent position as joint regent emperor of Rome. His works provided consolation to Boethius in prison, and he then later restated the philosophy as a means of escaping from the trials of the world by rejecting the importance of transitory events and phenomena. The freed slave Epictetus (c. 55–135 c.e.) established his own school of Stoicism that focused on practical humanity and individual freedom. He favored universal justice and the cultivation of a calm indifference to the slings and arrows of fate. Since failure was an inevitable part of human life, it was not to be condemned; only hypocrisy and falsehood was to be avoided. The thought of Epictetus had considerable impact upon subsequent Christian thought. It was warmly embraced by Marcus Aurelius (121–180 c.e.), emperor of Rome. Marcus Aurelius maintained a personal journal in which he recorded his thoughts and moral injunctions, most of which were drawn directly from Epictetus’s statements of Stoic philosophy. His Meditations have subsequently become extremely infl uential in shaping subsequent thought of the Western world. Stoicism has been one of the most enduring thought systems to emerge from ancient Greece. Its infl uence can be traced to numerous subsequent schools of thought, including various forms of Protestantism and Puritanism. In focusing on the separation between the attainable and the worthless and its concentration on the moral imperatives of the individual, Stoicism has proved useful in many contexts. See also Aristotle; Greek oratory and rhetoric; Platonism. Further reading: Boethius, Ancius. The Consolation of Philosophy. Trans. by Victor Watts. New York: Penguin Classics, 2000; Cicero, Marcus Tullius. The Nature of the Gods. Trans. by Horace C. P. McGregor. New York: Penguin Classics, 1972; Epictetus. The Discourses of Epictetus. Ed. by Christopher Gill; trans. by Robin Hard. Phoenix, AZ: Everyman Paperback Classics, 1995; Inwood, Brad, ed. The Cambridge Companion to the Stoics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003; Marcus Aurelius. Meditations. Trans. by Maxwell Staniforth. New York: Penguin Books, 1964. John Walsh Suiko (d. 628 c.e.) empress of Japan Suiko ruled Japan from 592 to 628 c.e. alongside her regent, the crown prince Shotoku Taishi. She was the daughter of Emperor Kimmei and his consort, a woman from the powerful Soga clan. After Kimmei’s death his son Bidatsu took the throne, and Suiko, his half sister, became his wife. Bidatsu soon died, and another of Suiko’s brothers, Yomei, became sovereign until his death two years later. A subsequent power struggle over the throne ended in victory for the Soga as Sushun, one of Suiko’s half brothers, took the throne. However, the Suiko 445 head of the Soga clan, Umako, did not trust Sushun’s growing resentment toward the Soga, and Umako had him assassinated in 592 c.e. After his murder Umako asked her to accept the throne, which she conceded. Shôtoku became her regent and coruler. Scholars used to emphasize Shôtoku’s role over Suiko’s in the governing of Japan, stating that Suiko merely served as the head priestess of the court kami worship. This is due in part to Chinese texts that focused more on Shôtoku’s activity. In Confucianism males rule over women, and thus the Japanese court may have used Shôtoku as the proper male representative in its relations with China. It is also possible that Confucian scholars chose to write more about their interactions with the Yamato state through Shôtoku rather than Suiko. Some scholars note, however, that Suiko was active in sending the Yamato state’s fi rst embassy to China in 600 and established relations with the Korean kingdom Silla in 621. Both Japanese and Korean sources demonstrate that Suiko was just as active as Shôtoku in her administrative rule over the Yamato state. Suiko even asserted her rule against attempts by her uncle Soga no Umako to expand the Soga clan’s power. She rejected Umako’s request for more land, claiming that future scholars would castigate her for being a foolish woman if she allowed the Soga clan to obtain more power. An overly powerful Soga clan encroaching on the power of the sovereign was said to be analogous to two kings in one kingdom, which was like having two Suns in the sky. Suiko’s death in 628 created a power vacuum that led to yet another showdown between the Soga and their rivals. Crown Prince Shôtoku had died before Suiko, and Suiko died before declaring an heir. The Soga forged documents that stated Suiko preferred the Soga-backed candidate of her two remaining sons. The forgery and authoritarian rule by the Soga, especially that of Iruka who used the military to eliminate his critics, pushed opponents to join forces in a coup. Iruka was assassinated in 645, bringing an end to Soga power. See also Yamato clan and state. Further reading: Ebersole, Gary. Ritual Poetry and the Politics of Death in Early Japan. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989; Hall, John. The Cambridge History of Japan, Vol. 1: Ancient Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988; Piggot, Joan. Emergence of Japanese Kingship. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997. Michael Wert Sulla See Marius and Sulla. Sumer Sumer is the name for the region of southern Mesopotamia, between the Tigris and Euphrates (modern-day southeastern Iraq and Kuwait), settled during the third millennium b.c.e. The Sumerians were a non-Semitic people whose place of origin and ethnic identity remains unknown. The Sumerian civilization may have been the fi rst to invent writing. Sumerian early writing, called cuneiform, consisted of drawing pictures on clay tablets with a writing instrument called a stylus. Originally used to keep economic and administrative records, the art of writing later expanded to include religious texts such as hymns, prayers, and myths. Due to their extreme age, these texts are often not fully understood by modern scholars. According to some scholars the earliest form of government in Sumer appears to have consisted of something like a primitive democracy with elected leaders who occupied two main offi ces known as the en and the lugal. In addition to these leaders, the government had a bicameral legislature consisting of two groups: a council of elders and a body of younger, military- aged men. The offi ces of the en and the lugal were not hereditary and would later be replaced by kings in the Early Dynastic Period (c. 2900–2300 b.c.e.). During the period of the monarchy the city-state was the main type of government. Each signifi cant city governed a small amount of territory, which also included smaller towns and villages. Some of the prominent cities include Kish, Lagash, Ur, Uruk, Eridu, and Nippur. Although each city was autonomous and had its own particular deity, the city of Nippur served as the religious center of Sumer. Between c. 2334 and 2154 b.c.e. the empire of Akkad interrupted Sumerian control of southern Mesopotamia. Founded by Sargon of Akkad and ruled from the city of Akkad, this empire stood for nearly two centuries until it fi nally succumbed to internal anarchy and external pressure from a foreign people known as the Gutians. After an interlude of a little over two centuries, the original Sumerian population reasserted itself and regained control c. 2112 b.c.e. The result was the Ur III dynasty, which was governed from the city of Ur. Sometimes called the “Sumerian renaissance,” the Ur III period was a reestablishment of Sumerian power and culture. This Indian summer of the Sumerian civilization featured building programs, the fl ourishing of the arts and literature, and the emergence of 446 Sulla law codes. This revival did not last long, however. After about 100 years the Ur III dynasty fell in 2004 b.c.e., eventually to be replaced by the Babylonians. Sumer left a lasting impression on the cultures that followed. Some of the inventions the Sumerians contributed include writing, the city-state, the wheel, legal documents, and schools. Although the language of Sumer is not related to any other known language, it had some infl uence on Akkadian, the Semitic language that eventually became the dominant language of the ancient Near East. The infl uence of Sumerian culture, however, continued through the later periods of the Babylonians and the Assyrians in their mythology and historiography. See also Assyria; Babylon, early period; cuneiform; Fertile Crescent; Greek city-states; scribes. Further reading: Snell, Daniel C. Life in the Ancient Near East, 3100–332 B.C.E. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997; Van De Mieroop, Marc. A History of the Ancient Near East ca. 3000–323 BC. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004. Dewayne Bryant Sunzi (Sun Tzu) (6th century b.c.e.) Chinese general and author Sunzi means “Master Sun” in Chinese. He was also known as Sun Bin (Pin) or Sun the Cripple because his feet were amputated as punishment for some crime. He was the putative author of a book titled Sunzi Bingfa (Suntzu ping-fa), or the Art of War of Sunzi, which analyzed warfare and strategy. He lived toward the end of the sixth century b.c.e. and led the army of one of China’s warring states to victory. In time Sun became almost a legend. Several new groups of men gained prominence during the Warring States period (487–221 b.c.e.), when warfare among the Chinese states became intense and large scale. One group was the diplomats, who could negotiate successfully. Another group was the professional warriors, because valor in battle provided one avenue of upward mobility for the offi cers and exemption from taxes and labor services and rewards for common soldiers. Strategists and tacticians were also in demand; Sunzi belonged to this group. The Sunzi Bingfa opens thus: “The art of war is of vital importance to the state. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence under no circumstances can it be neglected.” The work consists of 13 chapters: Laying Plans, On Waging War, The Sheathed Sword, Tactics, Energy, Weak Points and Strong, Variation of Tactic, The Army on the March, Terrain, The Nine Situations, Attack by Fire, and The Use of Spies. Each chapter is short and succinct. For example, chapter 3, “The Sheathed Sword,” opens this way: “To fi ght and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fi ghting. In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy’s country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to capture an army entire than to destroy it . . . Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy’s plans; the next best is to prevent the junction of the enemy’s forces; the next in order is to attack the enemy’s army in the fi eld; and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.” The Sunzi Bingfa has been an infl uential book for Chinese generals since the fourth century b.c.e. It was fi rst translated into French in 1782 and was translated into English in 1905. It has been used as a textbook in all Western military academies since the early 20th century and, more recently, in business schools because the strategies it offers are applicable to many endeavors. See also Hundred Schools of Philosophy; Zhou (Chou) dynasty. Further reading: Griffi th, Samuel G. Sun Tzu: The Art of War. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963; Kierman, Frank A., Jr., and John K. Fairbank, eds. Chinese Ways in Wafare. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974; Sun Tzu. The Art of War. Edited by James Clavell. New York: Dell Publishing, 1983. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Susa See Persepolis, Susa, and Ecbatana. Syracuse In 421 b.c.e., with the establishment of the Peace of Nikias, Athens and Sparta managed to set a provisory truce on the Peloponnesian War (431–404 b.c.e.). However, a period of mutual suspicions and instability followed, which created new confl icts for both poleis and their allies. In the winter of 415 b.c.e. the Sicilian city of Segesta decided to ask for Athenian support against their neighbor Selinus, which was helped by Syracusan forces. According to Thucydides (in his History of the Peloponnesian War), Athens agreed to organize and send 60 ships to the island under the joint command Syracuse 447 of Alcibiades, Nikias, and Lamakhos. Full power was granted to the three generals in order to assist Segesta. Strong debates were held concerning the opportunity and the need of the expedition, and Nikias expressed his view against the inconvenience of sending troops far from Athens with an imperialist goal. However, the people supported Alcibiades in favor of the expedition. Shortly before the departure of the fl eet a shocking event interpreted as a bad omen took place: It is recorded that in one night almost all of the statues of Hermes in the city (known as the Hermai) were mutilated. This violent destruction of the busts was seen as a clear act of conspiracy against the state. Alcibiades was suspected in the episode, and claims for responsibility were presented against him. But he had a popular image and was not immediately charged. The huge fl eet, composed by Athenian and allied triremes, constituted the biggest military expedition ever conducted in classical Greece. They left Athens in June 415 b.c.e. and, after joining other forces in Corcyra, reached Sicily. As soon as it was clear that Segesta had no money to support the military deployment, the generals clashed: Whereas Nikias proposed a return to Athens, Lamakhos wanted an immediate attack in Syracuse, and Alcibiades suggested some initial negotiations with the enemy. Informed about his condemnation in Athens, Alcibiades decided to escape to the Peloponnesian islands, where he contacted the Spartans. However, the other two generals followed his plan and decided to put off the main attack. They settled their fl eet in Catana, where Syracusan troops under the command of Hermokrates prepared for combat. A fi rst encounter between cavalry forces occurred, and the Syracusans had to fl ee the battle camp. During the winter both parties discussed alliances with different cities in Italy, reinforced their military capacity, and built defensive walls. Called in to help by the Syracusans, a Spartan contingent under Gylippos arrived in the city and successfully held some skirmishes with the Athenians, turning the tide. The Athenians received reinforcements from Demosthenes and Eurymedon. Nonetheless, this support was not enough to overcome the local horsemen. A mistake by Nikias, who decided to postpone the Athenian homecoming, sealed their defeat: Syracusan and Spartan vessels took advantage of the situation, attacked the rival ships in the harbor, pushed them into the shore, and started a blockage. Athenians decided to leave camp, guided by Nikias and Demosthenes. But they were obliged to split troops in two, and after fi nal encounters with Syracusans, both generals were forced to surrender (413 b.c.e.). Many Athenians were massacred, a few escaped and asked for refuge in Catana, and the remaining were taken as prisoners under harsh conditions. The effects of this catastrophic expedition put the polis at stake. Even if Athens was able to go on with the war against Sparta for another nine years, the truth is that the Sicilian disaster entailed an absolute loss of power and clearly represented the beginning of its fi nal military and political decadence. See also Greek city-states; Herodotus, Thucydides, and Xenophon. Further reading: De Saint Croix, G. E. M. The Origins of the Peloponnesian War. London: Duckworth; Meiggs, R. The Athenian Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972; Kagan, D. The Peace of Nicias and the Sicilian Expedition. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1981. Emiliano J. Buis Syriac culture and church The Syriac culture and church are found in northern Mesopotamia, between the Euphrates and the Tigris Rivers, dominated by the cities of Edessa, Nisibis, and Mosul (from west to east). Syriac, a form of Aramaic, was spoken throughout this area from the time of Jesus (Christ) of Nazareth to the 13th century c.e., when Arabic prevailed. Its culture is often traced back to the Aramaic and Assyrian civilizations. Sebastian Brock, a noted Oxford scholar, calls the Syriac culture and church an authentic Semitic descendant of the biblical world and an ancient voice of early Christianity. Beginning in the fi rst century c.e. Christianity spread quickly in the Syriac region. The fi fth-century Doctrina Addai tells of the disciple Addai sent by Thomas the Apostle to convert the people of Mesopotamia. There are second-century Christian writings in Syriac such as the Odes of Solomon and the Acts of Thomas, and there is likelihood that other books only available in Greek or Coptic, such as the Pseudo- Clementines and the Gospel of Thomas, were composed originally in Syriac. The famed teachers Bardesanes and Mani, who founded their own widespread sects, began in the Syriac-speaking Christian communities. Many other groups and movements had their beginning here as well: the Elkesaites and the Mandaeans of southern Iraq and the Christian ascetics called the Encratites, the celibate and elusive “Sons and Daughters of the Covenant.” 448 Syriac culture and church The principal Roman city of the region, Antioch, was its link to the West, while its link to the East was Persian Ctesiphon (Baghdad). Thus, the cradle of Syriac culture was on the frontier between the two empires and civilizations. The effects of this geographic position were dramatic: The Syriac Church split in 484 according to its location, with the establishment of an autonomous (Assyrian) church in the Persian domain and the remaining (Syrian) church in the Roman domain. Another split occurred in the sixth-century Syrian Church, with one side identifying with the adherents of Council of Chalcedon (Melkites), the other side dissenting (Syriac Orthodox). All three Syriac-based groups claimed their biblical roots in Antioch, the city out of which Peter and Paul launched their missions. Their political affi liations varied: the Assyrians identifi ed with the Persians, the Melkites with the Romans and Byzantines, and the Syriac Orthodox somewhere in the middle. Among the Syrians, the Melkites were concentrated in urban and Hellenized areas (Antioch, Alexandria, and the Mediterranean coast), while the Syriac Orthodox were in the countryside and hinterlands. The Syriac Orthodox adherents were not alone in their resistance to the Council of Chalcedon: Together with the Egyptians, the Armenians, the Georgians, and the Ethiopians, they formed the core of the ancient Oriental Orthodox Churches. The divisions between the Melkites and the other Syriac churches were mainly a result of cultural, linguistic, and political factors rather than theology. The Syriac churches formally rejected the Chalcedonian Creed that Christ has two natures, divine and human, in one person as an innovation of the ancient traditions. Their Byzantine (Melkite) opponents incorrectly held them to be Monophysites, heretics who believed that Christ had only one nature. In fact, the Syriac position was that “Christ is perfect God and perfect man” and was only slightly different from the Chalcedonian formula. The fourth through the sixth centuries were the most prolifi c era for Syriac writers. During this time the language came to fl ourish in its classical forms of Jacobite (serto) and Eastern (Nestorian), together with Estangelo, the common written language. The Syriac Bible, called the Peshitta, was written early enough in the development of Judaism and Christianity that it was one of the oldest witnesses to the scriptural text. The Diatessaron, attributed to Tatian, is an indispensable witness to the gospel texts of the New Testament. Some of the notable religious writers of this period include Aphraates (fl . 336–345), Ephrem the Syrian (d. 373), Narsai (d. c. 503), Jacob of Sarug (d. 521), and Philoxenus of Mabbugh (d. 523). Their elevated prose and poetry manifest in metrical homilies and hymns, some of which spread into the Greek Church and the Latin Church. The secular chronicles and histories of Syriac origin are valuable for fi lling in the gaps left by Latin and Greek works. Some of the outstanding early historians include John of Ephesus (c. 575–585), Pseudo-Zachariah Rhetor (c. 580), and Jacob of Edessa (d. 708). By the early 600s Syriac missionaries had spread their religion as far east as China. The Assyrian Church maintained valuable connections to the silk and spice routes, so they were able to carry their religion into far-fl ung areas. Syriac Orthodox villages and churches were oftentimes swallowed up by the Persian Empire as the Romans and Byzantines retreated toward the Mediterranean Sea. But they did not fi ght the new regime because they had experienced disparagement and persecution from their Melkite coreligionists and former Byzantine rulers. By contrast, the Assyrians and the Syriac Orthodox often took positions of infl uence in science, administration, and education among the Persians, Muslims, and Mongols. Many scientifi c and philosophical books, otherwise lost to the West during the early Middle Ages, were transmitted from their Greek origins to the Arabs by way of the Syriac scholars. Syriac missionaries are legendary for spreading Christianity into India, where their descendants are called Thomas Christians (because of their purported link to the mission of Thomas the Apostle). They follow customs that show affi nities with Judaism. In fact the largest group of Syriac Christians resides in contemporary India. See also Apostles, Twelve; Aramaens; Assyria; Christianity, early; Ephesus and Chalcedon, Councils of; Fertile Crescent; Georgia, ancient; Hellenization; Nestorius and the Nestorian Church; Sassanid Empire. Further reading: Chaillot, C. The Syrian Orthodox Church of Antioch and All the East: A Brief Introduction to Its Life and Spirituality. Geneva, Switzerland: World Council of Churches, 1998; Griffi th, S. “Syria, Syriac.” In E. Ferguson, ed. Encyclopedia of Early Christianity. New York: Garland Publishing, 1990; Hollerweger, Hans, with Andrew Palmer. Introduction by Sebastian Brock. Turabdin: Where Jesus’ Language Is Spoken. Linz, Austria: Friends of Turabdin, 1999. Mark F. Whitters
The Expanding World 600 CE to 1450 Edit
Saladin (Salah ad Din, Yusuf ) (c. 1137–1193) Muslim leader Of Kurdish ethnicity, Saladin was born in Tikrit, Iraq, and was raised in northern Syria. After a religious education, he served with his uncle, Asad ad Din Shirkuh, for Abu al-Qasim Nur ad Din (1118–74), who had inherited rule over Syria from his father, Imad al-Din Zangi (1084–1146), founder of the Zangid dynasty. After military successes in repelling Crusader States in Syria and acting on Shirkuh’s advice, Nur ad Din extended his control into Egypt. After Shirkkuh’s death his nephew Saladin was appointed vizier over Egypt. Saladin quickly moved to eradicate Fatimid control over Egypt. In 1171 he abolished the Shi’i Fatimid Caliphate and returned Egypt to orthodox Sunni rule. Saladin then established the Ayyubid dynasty in Egypt and joined with the weakened Abbasid Caliphate based in Baghdad. After Nur ad Din’s death, Saladin, using Egypt as his base of support, extended his control over Syria, Palestine, and northern Iraq and established Damascus as his capital. Recognizing that warring local rulers and political forces had enabled the crusaders to establish control over the coastal areas of the eastern Mediterranean and Palestine, Saladin sought to unify Iraq, Syria, and Egypt under his control. He established new religious schools and mosques as a means to encourage the regeneration of Islam. By 1187 he was strong enough to attack the crusaders and to win a major military victory at the Battle of the Horns of Hattin. He then quickly moved to take Jerusalem after over 80 years of Christian rule. However, in notable contrast to the bloody massacres infl icted on Jerusalem’s inhabitants by the crusaders, Saladin was magnanimous in victory and even the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was left untouched. His tolerance and diplomacy earned him the praise of Muslim and Christian envoys alike. To wrest Jerusalem away from Muslim control, a Third Crusade under King Philip II Augustus of France and Richard I of England, the Lion Hearted, was mounted. The two monarchs soon quarreled but Richard successfully enlarged crusader control over the coastal areas. The battle between Richard I and Saladin’s forces for control over Jerusalem resulted in a standoff. Tired of the battle and recognizing the balance of power in the region, Richard I negotiated an agreement, the Peace of Ramla, with Saladin in 1192. Under this agreement the coastal area of Palestine remained under Christian dominance but Muslims retained control of Jerusalem. Saladin returned to Damascus, where he died shortly thereafter. His family continued the Ayyubid dynastic control over Egypt until 1250, when it fell to the Mamluks. See also Crusades; Fatimid dynasty. Further reading: Lane-Poole, Stanley. Saladin and the Fall of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1898, rept. 2002 with intro. by David Nicolle; Ehrenkreutz, Andrew S. Saladin Albany: State University of New York Press, 1972; Regan, Geoffrey. Lionhearts: Richard I, Saladin and the Era of the Crusades. New York: Walker & Co., 1999; Richards, D. S. trans. The Rare and Excellent History of Saladin or al-Nawadir al-Sultaniyya wa’l-Mahasin al-Yusufi - yya by Baha’ al-Din ibn Shaddan. London: Ashgate, 2002. Janice J. Terry Salutati, Coluccio (1331–1406) humanist scholar and civic leader Salutati was born in Stignano, a village northwest of Florence. Educated in Latin grammar and rhetoric and certifi ed as a notary, he was employed in secretarial and notarial duties in several communities in Italy and was a secretary in the papal curia in Rome. Access to Petrarch’s works at Rome strengthened Salutati’s study of antiquity and infl uenced the nature of his humanism. In 1375, he was appointed to the post of chancellor of the Republic of Florence, a position he held until his death in 1406. As chancellor, Salutati was responsible for the offi cial correspondence of the republic. He was recognized in his own lifetime for the persuasive power of his rhetoric and for his ability to utilize examples from the literature and history of ancient Rome to bolster support for Florence in its confl icts with the papacy and the Visconti rulers of Milan. Salutati identifi ed Florence as the defender of liberty, praised it for its republican institutions, and traced its origins to republican Rome. In doing so, he laid the groundwork for the laudatory writings of Leonardo Bruni and other Florentine humanists. In his public career Salutati demonstrated that it was possible for a humanist to combine a scholarly interest in antiquity with the pursuit of a civic career. He fi rmly believed that the scholar had an obligation to use his knowledge for the benefi t of society. Salutati encouraged budding humanists and opened his library to them. Although his knowledge of Greek was minimal, he encouraged its study and was instrumental in inducing Manuel Chrysoloras, a Byzantine scholar from Constantinople, to institute Greek studies in Florence. In a controversy over the use of pagan literature in the grammar schools of Florence, he sided with the humanist innovators in opposition to the traditionalists, but with a strong caveat that pagan literature should only be used to bolster Christian belief. Salutati’s writings demonstrate that his humanism was, like that of his idol Petrarch, a blend of pagan ethics and Christian piety. However he did not have Petrarch’s aversion to Scholastic thought. Several of Salutati’s treatises are worthy of mention. On the Secular and the Religious contrasts the active life with the monastic and makes a strong case for the latter. On Fate and Fortune focuses on God’s providence, free will, and chance. On Shame examines whether shame is a virtue or a vice. On the Nobility of Law and Medicine favors law over medicine and the active life over the contemplative. The controversial On Tyranny makes a strong case for monarchy in certain circumstances. In his last years, Salutati was working on his unfi nished On the Labors of Hercules, a work that stresses the allegorical use of pagan poetry for Christian purposes. Salutati also wrote poetry in Latin and in Italian vernacular. His private letters were often consolatory, advisory, and even remonstrative. Eulogized when he died, Salutati continues to be revered in Italy for his achievements and for his making Florence the locus of humanism. See also Italian Renaissance; Scholasticism. Further reading: Trinkaus, Charles. In Our Image and Likeness, Humanity and Divinity in Italian Humanist Thought, 2 vols. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970; Witt, Ronald. Hercules at the Crossroads: The Life, Work, and Thought of Coluccio Salutati. Durham: Duke University Press, 1983. Louis B. Gimelli Samarkand Samarkand and the neighboring city Bukhara were oases along the valley of the Zeravshan River. Agriculture thrived in the region from the eighth century b.c.e. Formerly known as ancient Afrasiab, the city was founded during the seventh century b.c.e. Samarkand was surrounded by walls and was famous for its opulent architecture. Its strategic location along the Silk Road, which spanned China and Europe, contributed to its economic success and cultural vibrancy. One route along the Silk Road known as the Golden Road was of particular importance to the rise of Samarkand and Bukhara as key trading hubs. The Golden Road passed through the principal cities of Mesopotamia and was extremely busy, frequented by many traders. Samarkand became a cosmopolitan center of science and art, as new scientifi c and artistic ideas were transmitted rapidly along the Silk Road. For most of its history, the Achaemenid Persians made Samarkand the capital of their empire. Alexander the Great conquered Samarkand (or Marcanda, as it was then known) in 329 b.c.e. after overthrowing the Persians. 352 Salutati, Coluccio By the eighth century trade and culture fl ourished in the city. An Arab chieftain, Qutaiba ibn Muslim, the governor of Khurasan, invaded Samarkand in 712 c.e. Qutayba’s alliance with local Khwarazmians (who supplied him with knowledge of the surroundings as well as use of new technology in the form of mangonels, a heavy war engine for hurling large stones and other missiles) enabled his forces successfully to invade the city. Qutayba reneged on his promise to the Khawarazmians and expelled non-Muslims from the city. From the eighth century, Samarkand became the center of the Umayyad dynasty. It was during this period that Samarkand was established as the center of Islamic civilization. In the ninth and 10th centuries Samarkand was ruled by the Abbasid dynasty and continued to be a major center of Islamic civilization. The city retained its prominence as the capital of the Samanid dynasty and later, of the Seljuks (Turks) Empire. Sometime during the 13th century, the Venetian traveler Marco Polo reached Samarkand, and he described it as “very large and splendid.” In 1220 the Mongols led by the powerful ruler Genghis Khan attacked the city. The destructive siege left Samarkand devastated. The city was left in ruins, but it did not experience total destruction for the Arab traveler Ibn Batuta recorded his observations of Samarkand as “one of the largest and most perfectly beautiful cities of the world,” supporting the view that certain vestiges of the city were still standing. Among all its conquerors the fourth one, Timurlane (Tamerlane), a nobleman originally from a littleknown Turkic tribe, made the biggest impact on Samarkand. The despotic ruler made Samarkand the capital of his empire and rebuilt it in 1370 south of the old site. By sparing all master craftsmen, including architects, from death upon his invasions, he was able to employ them in his service. Samarkand developed into a wellplanned urban civilization. Timurlane’s patronage led to the construction of many religious schools known as madrassas, grand mosques, mausoleums, and palaces. Timurlane also made popular the use of turquoise ceramic. The enormous Bibi Khanum mosque added to the splendor of the city. Upon returning from his victory in India, Timurlane built the Bibi Khanum mosque in honor of his consort, Saray Mulk Khanum. The Timurid phase occupies a distinct place in Islamic architecture, because of the wide use of ceramics. Building materials were not found in Samarkand and builders made mud bricks (out of clay, chopped straw, and camel urine) that were faced in glazed tiles in blue (Timurlane’s favorite color). These were then fashioned into minarets, portals, and domes. The new city of Samarkand built by Timurlane was vastly different from the old city and was based on the Tatar concept. Under Timurlane, the city of Samarkand was home to Arabs, Persians, Turks, and North Africans of diverse sects as well as Christians, Greeks, and Armenians. Timurlane’s grandson Ulugh Beg succeeded him, making Samarkand a major scientifi c hub by building an observatory. In his zeal to make Samarkand a center of learning Ulugh Beg also built two madrassas in the neo-Persian style, the Shir Dar and the Tilla Kari. See also Seljuk dynasty. Further reading: Chuvin, Pierre, and Gérard Degeorge. Samarkand, Bukara, Khiva. London: Thames & Hudson, 2001; Lawton, John, and Francesco Venturi. Samarkand and Bukhara. London: Tauris Park Books, 1991; McGowan, Robin, and Vadim E. Gippenreiter. Fabled Cities of Central Asia. New York: Abbeville Press, 1989. Nurfadzilah Yahaya Samarkand 353 Looking to make Samarkand a center of learning, Timurlane’s grandson Ulugh Beg built two madrassas, including the Shir Dar. samurai The originally Chinese term samurai means “a person who serves in close attendance to nobility.” Its original pronunciation was saburau, which later became saburai. Warriors known as bushi or samurai dominated the Japanese landscape from roughly the sixth century to the end of the 19th century. Samurai literally means “to serve,” which they did with a loyalty, bravery, and honor that have made the samurai one of the best-known icons of Japanese history. Samurai rule ended in 1868 with the arrival of Commodore William Perry and American gunships. The Meiji Restoration of the same year abolished the samurai class and opened Japan to the rest of the world. The samurai are symbols of Japan’s feudal past before the rapid modernization that began imme diately after Japan’s doors were forced open. The rise of the warrior class in Japan was not a result of dramatic revolution, but rather a gradual evolution. Around the turn of the eighth century the imperial house and its supporters secured their position at the apex of Japan’s sociopolitical hierarchy with the introduction of several governing institutions modeled largely on those of the Tang (T’ang) dynasty in China but adapted to meet Japanese requirements. The system had many fl aws and by the mid-700s, the court began to reevaluate its military needs and to restructure its armed forces. A new utilizable system was established around the late 10th century placing the warriors as guards at the imperial court in Kyoto and as members of private militias employed by provincial lords known as daimyo. Attempts by the imperial court to create a conscript army out of peasants and small landowners had failed. In response nobles in the capital and wealthy landowners created their own military forces composed of young members of the gentry who were skilled in the martial arts. The fi rst samurai were thus mercenaries, privately trained and equipped. The result of these developments was the emergence of a group of professional soldiers known as bushi. The word bushi fi rst appears in an early history of Japan called Shoku Nihongi, which is written in the eighth century. Some of bushi were originally farmers who had been armed to protect themselves from the imperially appointed magistrates sent to govern their lands and collect taxes. Bushi class-consciousness—a sense of the warrior class as a separate entity—did not materialize until the 13th century when the Kamakura Shogunate (ruled by a military generalissimo) took power. The new institution created a new category of shogunal retainer who held special privileges and responsibilities and narrowed the scope of social classes from which the bushi class was composed. Its founder, Minamoto Yoritoto, consciously helped foster this new warrior ethos by holding hunts and archery competitions that helped to solidify the warrior identity. With promising protection and gaining political power through political marriages, they surpassed the ruling aristocrats. Gradually the warrior code, or bushido, evolved as the ethical guidelines for the samurai class. The samurai mentality or ethos put honor as the most important trait of the samurai. Seppuku, ritual suicide by disembowelment, became the dominant alternative to dishonor or capture. Splitting open the belly with the short sword was so painful that the ritual was eventually modifi ed to allow a second person to cut off the head of the person committing seppuku once he had started the cut to the abdomen. This became the general practice instead of allowing the person to die slowly. Bushido was strongly infl uenced by the philosophies of Gautama Buddha, Zen (or Ch’an) Buddhism, Shintoism, and Confucius. For samurai Zen was a means to reach calmness, Buddhism a way to reincarnation and rebirth, Shinto a way to connect his soul to the surrounding nature, and Confucianism a way to reach order and organization. A samurai was not just a warrior; he should be able to read, write, and even know some mathematics and have interests in Japanese arts as dance, poetry, Go, and the tea ceremony. Easily identifi ed by their two swords— the longsword or katana and the short sword the wakazashi— the samurai could be seen wearing kimono over fl owing, skirtlike trousers, known as hakama, and a short loose jacket. The samurai’s hair was shaved on top with the sides pulled into a neat topknot. The samurai could often be seen on horseback, poised for battle. Battle for the samurai was also a ritualistic affair. In early medieval days combatants faced off in a structured, well-mannered style. Early samurai idealized single combat, preferably fought on horseback with bow and arrow. A warrior in search of a worthy opponent would gallop to the front lines and call out his ancestry and a list of his accomplishments. Once introductions were complete archers fi red their arrows and samurai with swords and lances charged their adversaries. The personal and individual combat on the battlefi eld gradually disappeared as samurai armies grew in size and footsoldiers began to out number those on horseback. However combat remained a ritualistic event and the source of honor and pride for the warrior class, who were willing, and at times almost eager, to give their lives for their liege lord. 354 samurai Even today the samurai is a prevalent image associated with Japan and the subject of movies and television dramas, in Japan and abroad. Bushido has been given credit for the loyal and hard-working Japanese businessmen who have made the Japanese economy one of the largest in the world. The samurai may be extinct, but the warrior spirit lives on. See also Ming dynasty. Further reading: Duus, Peter. Feudalism in Japan. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc., 1993; Friday, Karl F. Samurai Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. New York: Routledge, 2004; O’Neill, Tom. “Samurai: Japan’s Way of the Warrior.” National Geographic (December 2003); Reischauer, Edwin O. The Japanese. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977; Yamamoto, Tsunetomo. Bushido: The Way of the Samurai. Garden City Park, NJ: Square One Publishers, 2001. Mohammad Gharipour and Ethan Savage Schism of 1054 The Schism of 1054 marks the offi cial breach that separated Roman Catholic Christianity from Orthodox Christianity. It occurred when delegates of Pope Leo IX (1049–54) excommunicated Michael Keroularios, patriarch of Constantinople (1043–58), and his associates. The patriarch, in turn, excommunicated the papal delegates. These mutual condemnations tore Christendom into its Catholic and Orthodox branches. The ecclesiastical division became permanent in the following decades, particularly because of the effect of the Crusades and their impact on Orthodox-Catholic relations. The quarrel that led to these events surfaced by the ninth century when Byzantium was emerging from the long controversy called iconoclasm and was engaging in a new period of missionary activity in eastern Europe (and elsewhere). At the same time Western Christians were expanding, moving Latin Christianity farther east into the Slavic kingdoms of eastern Europe. Missionaries bearing their respective forms of Christianity (Greek and Latin) met in the kingdoms of Moravia and Bulgaria. During this interaction certain differences in practice became evident. The two forms of Christianity used different languages in their liturgy (Latin in the West and Greek in the East, though the Eastern Christians also supported the use of native languages for worship and Scripture and developed the Cyrillic alphabet for this purpose among the Slavs); they had different rules on fasting; they differed in their eucharistic practice with leavened bread used by Eastern Christians and unleavened by Western. Another distinction was the offi cial acceptance of married priests among the Eastern Christians, though bishops could not be married. Furthermore the two forms of Christianity were at odds over their understanding of papal leadership. From the Eastern perspective the pope received the primacy of honor among the bishops, since his was the church diocese of St. Peter, but he was simply one of the fi ve great regional leaders called patriarchs who were all needed to hold an ecumenical council (churchwide) to decide doctrine. From the Western perspective, however, the bishop of Rome was also the heir of St. Peter, and the supreme voice in Christendom. Finally another important distinction was a small difference in the profession of the Nicene Creed by Western Christians. This creed was established by the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea in 325 and augmented by the Second Ecumenical Council in 787. This creed was used as a simple defi nition of faith, professing belief in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, “which proceeds from the Father.” In the West the term fi lioque (and the son) was added to the latter phrase to exclude heretics from professing it. This addition received offi cial sanction by the papacy in the early 11th century. Eastern Christians viewed this as a mistake both theologically (arguing that it confuses the proper understanding of the Trinity) and ecclesiastically (arguing that only an ecumenical council could change the creed). In addition to these matters the breach in 1054 is connected to other historical developments in the 11th century. This period witnessed the development of the papacy as an institutional entity freed from lay control and able to assert its authority in Italy and abroad. One 11th-century pope, for example, asserted that he had the power to depose and reinstate bishops and emperors and that he was above any earthly judge. At the same time, the Byzantine Empire had reached its political apogee and its church was led by one of its strongest willed patriarchs, Michael Keroularios. The revived papacy and the powerful patriarchate crashed together in the summer of 1054. A fi nal factor infl uencing the breach was the arrival of the Normans in Italy in the 11th century. The Normans (from Normandy in France) passed through Italy en route to the Holy Land for pilgrimage and, because of their renowned military skills, were hired as mercenaries by rulers in southern Italy. The Normans soon took advantage of this situation and seized southern Italy. This brought them into confl ict with both the Schism of 1054 355 papacy, whose lands were threatened, and Byzantium, which also had holdings in southern Italy. The Byzantine emperor wanted to maintain good relations with the papacy to ensure an alliance against the Normans, but the patriarch of Constantinople was little concerned with this political perspective. Furthermore the Normans closed churches in their territory that used the Greek ritual, while the patriarch of Constantinople did likewise for those of non-Greek ritual in his territory. When the legates of Pope Leo IX arrived in Constantinople in 1054, they demanded that the Eastern Church accept the Western view on the papacy and certain other practices. When this failed, they excommunicated (cut off from communion) the patriarch and his associates. Keroularios, in turn, anathematized (condemned) the authors of the excommunication. There had been numerous schisms before between Constantinople and Rome that had been mended afterward, but the Schism of 1054 became permanent. Historical circumstances in the following decades transformed the theological condemnations into a seemingly permanent cultural divide between Catholic and Orthodox. The first change occurred shortly after the schism when the papacy shifted its policy toward the Normans from one of hostility to one of support. The Normans now acted with the support of the papacy as they finished off the Byzantine possessions in southern Italy and seized Sicily. With these positions the Normans began to eye the Byzantine Empire as their next goal for conquest. This threat to the Orthodox empire was augmented by new challenges from the north (a pagan, Turkic tribe called the Pechenegs) and a massive challenge from the east in the Muslim Seljuk dynasty, who took control of Anatolia as well as much of the Muslim world. The emperor Alexios I Komennos (1081–1118) appealed to Pope Urban II for military assistance. Pope Urban called for a massive undertaking, not simply to assist Byzantium, but to recover the Holy Land from the Muslims. Thus the First Crusade was born. Tens of thousands of Western soldiers as well as clerics passed through Byzantium. This movement of Westerners, including the Normans who were already actively hostile to Byzantium, increased tension between Orthodox and Catholic. The emperors were concerned that crusaders might not simply move through the empire, but conquer parts of it. This fear greatly increased during the Second and Third Crusades in the 12th century and was fully realized when the Fourth Crusade was diverted to Constantinople. In 1204 Western crusaders sacked this city and conquered the Byzantine Empire. A Catholic patriarch was installed at Constantinople (until 1261). These events, most particularly the last, transformed the Schism of 1054 from a theological dispute to a near permanent cultural divide between East and West, Orthodox and Catholic. See also Constantinople, massacre of; Crusades; Nicaea, Second Council of; Norman kingdoms of Italy and Sicily; Papal States. Further reading: Angold, Michael. The Byzantine Empire (1025–1204): A Political History. New York: Longman, 1984; Hussey, J. M. The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986; Runciman, Steven. The Eastern Schism; A Study of the Papacy and the Eastern Churches during the XIth and XIIth Centuries. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1956. Matthew Herbst Scholasticism Scholasticism is the system of education, especially in theology and philosophy, that dominated European schools and universities from the ninth to the 15th century. These institutions blossomed in the High Middle Ages of the 12th century. It was at this time that the mendicants, or begging orders, arose in the midst of a wider wave of religious revival. They aimed to foster religious renewal among the urban populations and counter heretical movements. The two pioneering mendicant orders, the Franciscans and the Dominicans, opened schools that combined to create the first universities. Scholasticism was marked by formal and material characteristics. The first formal element was the application of the rules of Latin grammar to all kinds of problems, on the assumption that the laws of language correspond to the laws of thought. Thus analysis of language was prominent. Second was the use of dialectic, or disputation. This lies at the heart of the quaestio, the most typical literary form of Scholastic thinking, in which an issue is set, for example, the question of whether or not God exists. The question is then settled by setting out objections to the proposition one intends to defend, stating a contrary position to that of the objector, and finally offering counterarguments to the objections. Despite limitations dialectic could produce rigorous critical thinking and encourage consideration of all sides of a question. 356 Scholasticism SCHOLASTIC AUTHORITIES The material characteristic of Scholasticism was its use of authorities, texts that were consciously and deliberately treated with deference. A large part of Scholastic education consisted of commentary on such texts. Authorities were commonly cited to back up a position in debate. Yet authorities were not treated uniformly. The Bible held a unique position as unerringly teaching the truth; disputes arose over its interpretation. The great teachers of the fi rst eight centuries of Christian theology held the next place, though the best Scholastic thinkers did not pretend that their authority extended to, say, medicine or natural philosophy. By far the most important of these authors was Augustine of Hippo, whose thought was the subject of constant discussion. Next most important was Aristotle, though his acceptability at times was a matter for intense debate. His thought arrived in Europe in three stages. From the beginning of the Scholastic period his Categories and On Interpretation were known and used. These works treat the interpretation of texts and the categorization of entities, such as man or horse, and their characteristics, such as quantity and color. The second entry, in the 12th century, was the discovery, through contact with Arab civilization, of Aristotle’s works on the nature of reasoning. From this time the quaestio becomes the dominant form of thought and expression in theology and philosophy. Finally in the later 12th and early 13th centuries, Aristotle’s works of natural philosophy (what we would call natural science), anthropology, and metaphysics—the study of the principles common to all entities—came into the hands of the West. Much of the Aristotle the Europeans encountered in this phase was laced with the Neoplatonist philosophy of Arab commentators. In addition the works of Pseudo-Dionysius enjoyed great prestige. Pseudo-Dionysius was thought to be a direct disciple of St. Paul but was actually a fi fth century Christian who espoused a Christian form of Neoplatonist philosophy. GREAT SCHOLASTICISTS The medievals’ genius lay in synthesizing and reworking these material elements in new and subtle ways. Four of the most important thinkers of this epoch were Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, John Duns Scotus, and William of Ockham. Albertus, born near the end of the 12th century, probably in southern Germany, entered the Dominicans in 1229. He studied in Cologne and elsewhere and became a master of theology at Paris in 1245, where Thomas Aquinas was his pupil. Albertus returned to Cologne to found a Domin - ican house of studies in 1248, taking Thomas with him. Thereafter he devoted himself to a mixture of study and pastoral and diplomatic work, including brief service as a bishop. In addition to commentaries on the Bible and Pseudo-Dionysius, Albertus produced a corpus of commentaries and paraphrases on the works of Aristotle, taking a special interest in his newly discovered natural philosophy, which he was instrumental in defending to church authorities. His enormous output included works of botany, zoology, cosmology, psychology, logic, metaphysics, ethics, semantics, and, above all, theology. Albertus advocated the use of the full range of available learning in Dominican houses of study and championed the Dominican commitment to the serious study of philosophy. The towering fi gure of Scholastic thought is Thomas Aquinas. Born in 1224 or 1225, he was educated at the Benedictine abbey of Monte Cassino, then at the University of Naples, where he entered the Dominican order in 1244. After studying in Paris and Cologne with Albertus, Thomas returned to Paris in 1252, received his license in theology in 1256, and lectured there until 1259. He also taught in the papal court and later established a Dominican house of studies in Naples. At the end of his life, he abandoned writing without completing his great Summa theologiae, and died several months later, in 1274. Thomas produced voluminous biblical commentaries and commented on most of Aristotle’s works. He wrote two summae, vast guides to theology intended to equip his fellow Dominicans for pastoral and missionary work, as well as a smaller, more popular compendium of theology. His other works range from hymns to polemical essays. Altogether, he wrote some 10 million words. Thomas is best known for his understanding of God as the completely indivisible and self-existent creator, the source of all being. God not only is the origin of creation, but all beings continually depend on him for their existence; their being is a participation in the being of God. Similarly God is the source of all goodness, and so for Thomas, knowledge of God is the goal and the fi nal happiness of all rational creatures. In keeping with that principle, he reworks the Aristotelian ethical theory of virtues to cohere with the Christian doctrines of creation, sin, and grace: Human beings come from God, have fallen away from God, and in Christ return to him and to the perfection of their own being. Thomas’s thought, far from a closed system, is marked by openness to ever-deeper, more refi ned understanding. The variety of the schools of interpretation of his thought testifi es to its intrinsic vitality. Scholasticism 357 John Duns Scotus was born around 1265 in southern Scotland. He joined the Franciscans and was ordained a priest in 1291. He studied theology in Oxford until 1301, and then lectured in Paris and Cologne, where he died in 1308. Scotus and Thomas agree that God can be known as the cause of all things by observing his effects, creatures. Similarly they agree that we cannot know God’s essence in this life. Yet Thomas held that our language about God, which always derives from our sense-based knowledge of creaturely things, has a different sense when applied to God; we can truly say God is wise, because he is the cause of whatever is called wise in creatures, but wisdom in God means something beyond our grasp. To say God is wise—or even that God is—is only analogous to what we mean in saying creatures are, or are wise. The analogy allows us to think and speak logically of God, but the meaning fi nally remains shrouded in mystery. Scotus, on the other hand, asserted that we can and must be able to speak of God as wise. The difference is that God’s wisdom and being are infi nite, but that of creatures is fi nite. William of Ockham (1280–1349), a Franciscan, studied at Oxford and Paris, where he taught from 1315 to 1320. Probably a student of Duns Scotus, he developed a number of Scotus’s leading ideas, some of them in a sharply different direction. He is best known as the father of nominalism. Scotus believed that universal concepts, such as human nature, have a formal existence. They exist, but always concretized in an individual. Ockham held that universals, such as human nature, exist only in the mind, or nominally, by abstracting from individual examples those elements they have in common. Universals do not exist apart from our thinking them. This rejection of the real existence of universals, in favor of taking such ideas as nature or being, to be the products of mental acts, fueled the increasing concentration of late Scholasticism on analysis of concepts and mental acts. See also medieval Europe: educational system; medieval Europe: sciences and medicine; universities, European. Further reading: Adams, Marilyn McCord. William Ockham. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1987; Chenu, M. D. Toward Understanding St. Thomas. Chicago, IL: H. Regnery, 1984; Cross, Richard. Duns Scotus. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999; Tugwell, Simon. Albert and Thomas: Selected Writings. New York: Paulist, 1988. John P. Yocum Scotland Scotland is a European country located in the northern part of the island of Great Britain, off the coast of northwestern Europe. Scottish territories have sea borders; the only land border is with England on the southern part of the island. The geographical union of these two countries has historically brought many disputes between the cultural inhabitants of Great Britain regarding borders and political, economic, religious, and cultural affairs. During the early times of the Roman Empire (c. 27 b.c.e.–395 c.e.), the south of Great Britain was invaded and conquered by Roman military forces. Despite Roman efforts to conquer the northern part of the island, named Caledonia by the Romans, the Picts, a fi erce and warlike people settled in the north, successfully resisted for hundreds of years. After some victories but many lost battles, the Romans decided to keep the southern part and established the Hadrian and Antonine Walls to set a physical border between their domains and the Picts’. After the Roman withdrawal from Britain in 409, the Picts systematically started to invade the territories of their southern neighbors. During the fi fth and sixth centuries several kingdoms struggled to gain power over a larger area of the island. In this period Scotland was divided into four kingdoms: Pictavia, Dalriada, Gododdin (later Northumbria), and Strathclyde. Pictavia was the last stronghold of the Picts, the original inhabitants of the lands north of Hadrian’s Wall. Of the four kingdoms, Pictavia’s inhabitants were the most powerful and the ones that would leave the largest cultural impact. In the Viking age (793–1066) Norse (Norwegian people) invaders conquered much of northern Pictland—Caithness, Sutherland, the Western Isles, and Ross—leaving long-lasting footprints in their culture. A legend states that they were “the painted people,” as the name Pict probably derives from the Latin word Picti meaning “painted folk” or possibly “tattooed people.” This refers to the dark blue color they painted on their bodies and faces to have a more terrifying look in battle in the face of their enemies. Infl uences also came from the Christian missionaries who converted many Picts to Christianity. St. Columba, an Irish missionary who came to Dalriada from Northern Ireland in 563, disseminated the Christian faith among the Picts. The missions came to an end in the seventh century. The Scots occupied the adjacent region to Pictavia in the north toward the beginning of the sixth century. They were a Celtic people from northern Ireland who established a kingdom called Dalriada. It was associated with Irishmen who would later call themselves Scots 358 Scotland and rule all of Scotland. Having a strong devotion for the sea, Scotland’s kings built and maintained a strong navy and waged aggressive war. They also managed a large fl eet to capture fi sh and sea-based resources that were the basis of their economy and culture. Strathclyde was the third kingdom, populated by native Welsh. Bordered on the south by the English, their culture was not as separate as the Picts and Scots— they were strongly infl uenced by the Viking invasion in the ninth century. This cultural mixture remained for centuries with infl uence seen in their language, shipping activities, religion, and warrior spirit. The fourth was the kingdom of Northumbria. It was famous as a center of religious learning and arts. Initially monks from the Celtic Church Christianized Northumbria, and this led to a fl owering of monastic life, with a unique style of religious art that combined Anglo-Saxon and Celtic infl uences. Between 655 and 664 Scottish missionaries were active in Northumbria. Apart from standard English, Northumbria had a series of closely related but distinctive dialects, descended from the early Germanic languages of the Angles and Vikings, and of the Celtic Romano-British tribes. THE KINGDOM OF ALBA In 843 the Picts and Scots united to form the kingdom of Alba, a term used by the Gaels, a linguistic group speaking Gaelic, to refer to the island. Tradition says Dalriadan Kenneth MacAlpin, who is today known as the fi rst king of Scotland, unifi ed the tribes. In 1034 Strathclyde began its gradual incorporation into the kingdom of Alba, as did Northumbria around 1100 after William the Conqueror and his son, William Rufus, invaded. From the middle of the 11th century Alba, which later became the kingdom of Scotland, received strong cultural infl uences from the Normans and Vikings, especially because of the establishment of a Norman reign in England with William the Conqueror in 1066. In Scotland this period is sometimes referred to as the “Anglicization of Scotland,” meaning the expansion of the Angles’ culture in most of Scotland. During the 11th and 12th centuries the Anglo-Norman feudal system was established in Scotland. The reorganization was confi ned at fi rst to ecclesiastical reforms but gradually affected all sectors of Scottish life. For instance Celtic religious orders were suppressed, English ecclesiastics replaced Scottish monks, several monasteries were founded, and the Celtic church was remodeled in agreement with Catholic practice. Norman French supplanted Gaelic language in court circles, while English was spoken in the border areas and many parts of the Lowlands. The traditional system of tribal land tenure was abolished. David I (king from 1124 to 1153) also instituted various judicial, legislative, and administrative reforms, all based on English models; encouraged the development of commerce with England; and granted extensive privileges to the Scottish towns or “burghs.” The Normans militarized large sections of Scotland, building strong stone castles and establishing the feudal system upon the peasantry; they came into frequent confl ict with the native nobility. The concentration of the population was in burghs, later colonized by Normans, Flemish merchants, and Englishmen. The burghs were an autonomous unit of local government with rights to representation in the parliament of Scotland. They were in use from at least the ninth century until their abolition in 1975 when a new regional structure of local government was introduced across Scotland. The word burgh is related to the well-known English borough. WARS OF SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE AND THE STUART DYNASTY In the late 13th and early 14th centuries there were a series of military campaigns fought between Scotland and England known as the Wars of Scottish Independence. The First War (1296–1328) began with the English invasion of Scotland in 1296, and ended with the signing of the Treaty of Edinburgh-Northampton in 1328. The Scottish struggle against England was mainly encouraged by patriot Sir William Wallace recruiting from all sections of the nation. Although Wallace had a heroic sense of freedom and won many battles, in 1305 Wallace was betrayed to the English, convicted of treason, and executed. After his death Robert de Bruce assumed the leadership of the resistance movement, which ended victoriously in 1328 when the regents of the young Edward III of England approved the Treaty of Northampton. By the terms of this document, Scotland obtained recognition as an independent kingdom. The Second War of Independence (1332–57) began with the English supported invasion of Edward Balliol and the “Disinherited” in 1332, and ended around 1357 with the signing of the Treaty of Berwick, through which Scotland retained independence. Under the fi rst two kings of the Stuart dynasty, Robert II (r. 1371–90) and Robert III (r. 1390–1406), the country was further devastated by the war with England, and royal authority was weak. James I (r. 1406–37) attempted to restore order in the country. To do so James imposed various curbs on the nobility and secured parliamentary approval of many legislative reforms. But without the cooperation of the feudal Scotland 359 barons, however, these reforms were unenforceable. James I was murdered in 1437. SOCIETY, LAW, AND SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT From the time of Kenneth I (Kenneth MacAlpin), the Scottish kingdom of Alba was ruled by chieftains and petty kings under the control (technically the suzerainty) of a high king, all offi ces being fi lled through selection by an assembly under a system known as tanistry, which combined a hereditary element with the consent of those ruled. After 1057 the infl uence of Norman settlers in Scotland saw primogeniture adopted as the means of succession in Scotland as in much of western Europe. These early assemblies cannot be considered parliaments in the later sense of the word and were entirely separate from the later, Norman-infl uenced, institution. The Scottish parliament evolved during the Middle Ages from the King’s Council of Bishops and Earls. It is perhaps fi rst identifi able as a parliament in 1235, described as a colloquium and already with a political and judicial role. By the early 14th century the attendance of knights and freeholders had become important, and from 1326 burgh commissioners attended. Consisting of the Three Estates, of clerics, lay tenants in chief, and burgh commissioners sitting in a single chamber, the Scottish parliament acquired signifi cant powers over particular issues. Most obviously it was needed for consent for taxation but it also had a strong infl uence over justice, foreign policy, war, and all manner of other legislation, whether political, ecclesiastical, social, or economic. The parliament had a judicial and political role that was well established by the end of the 13th century. By the late 11th century Celtic law was applied over most of Scotland, with Old Norse law covering the areas under Viking control. In following centuries as Norman infl uence grew and more feudal relationships of government were introduced, Scot-Norman law developed, which was initially similar to Anglo-Norman law, but over time differences evolved. Early in this process David I of Scotland (r. 1124–53) established the offi ce of sheriff with civil and criminal jurisdictions as well as military and administrative functions. At the same time burgh courts emerged dealing with civil and criminal matters, developing law on an English model, and the Dean of Guild courts were developed to deal with building and public safety. EDUCATION During 600–1450 the kingdom of Scotland followed the typical pattern of European education with the Roman Catholic Church organizing schooling. Church choir schools and grammar schools were founded in all the David I established a priory on an island in the Firth of Forth, which became the Augustinian Inchcolm Abbey in 1235. It is now the best-preserved group of monastic buildings in Scotland and was used as a defense in both world wars. 360 Scotland main burghs and some small towns; early examples include the high school of Glasgow in 1124. The Education Act of 1496 introduced compulsory education for the eldest sons of nobles—a fi rst in Scotland since it forced all nobles and freeholders to educate their eldest sons in Latin, followed by the arts and Scots law. The children were sent to a grammar school to be taught Latin when they reached the age of eight or nine. Once they had learned Latin, they had to attend a school of art or of law for a minimum of three years. After that basic education, the children of the nobles could attend university. The fi rst universities in Scotland, all ecclesiastical foundations, were built during the 15th century imitating the cultural development of England, which already had the universities of Cambridge and Oxford since the 11th century. Saint Andrew’s University was founded in 1410 when a charter of incorporation was bestowed upon the Augustinian priory of Saint Andrew’s Cathedral. At this time much of the teaching was of a religious nature and was conducted by clerics associated with the cathedral. CULTURAL DEVELOPMENTS During 600–1450 the Scottish people introduced several music instruments, the most important the harp and the bagpipe. The harp, also called clarsach, is an instrument with a long history in Scotland, rivaling even bagpipes for the position of national instrument. Triangular harps were known as far back as the 10th century, when they appeared on Pictish carvings, and harp compositions may have even formed the basis for the pibroch, an unusual type of music used to inspire Scottish soldiers before a battle. Besides harps, bagpipes (wind instruments consisting of one or more musical pipes, which are fed continuously by a reservoir of air in a bag) became a usual and typical instrument in Scotland. However bagpipes are not unique or indigenous to Scotland. It is unknown when this instrument was fi rst imported to Scotland, but assumptions date it back to the 10th century. It is known that there was an explosion of its popularity around 1000. Bagpipes were also used to encourage the spirit of fi ghters during military campaign marches. Besides musical instruments, this period (600–1450) was already rich in developments in the Scottish literature. Since Scotland received infl uence from different tribes and peoples (Irish, Gaelic, Norman, Picts, Scots, and Roman) its literature has accordingly been written in many languages, such as English, Scottish Gaelic, Scots, Brythonic, French, and Latin. Most literary works in this period consisted of Gaelic literature, in the ethnic language of the Scots. Between c. 1200 and c. 1700 the learned Gaelic elite of both Scotland and Ireland shared a literary form of Gaelic. Gaelic literature written in Scotland before the 14th century includes the Lebor Bretnach, the product of a fl ourishing Gaelic literary establishment at the monastery of Abernethy. This book is the Irish translation of the Historia Brittonum, meaning the History of the British, as it was perceived in the ninth century. The earliest literature known to have been composed in Scotland includes the following: • In Brythonic language (Old Welsh): the Gododdin, attributed to Aneirin, and the Battle of Gwen Ystrad, attributed to Taliesin, both dating back to the sixth century. • In Gaelic language: Elegy for Saint Columba, by Dallan Forgaill, c. 597, and In Praise of Saint Columba by Beccan mac Luigdech of Rum, both about the Irish missionary monk who reintroduced Christianity to Scotland north of England during medieval times. • In Latin: Prayer for Protection, attributed to Saint Mugint, c. 650, and Altus Prosator, The High Creator, attributed to Saint Columba, c. 597. • In Old English and c. 700: the Dream of the Rood, one of the earliest Christian poems, where the poet describes his dream of a conversation with the wood of the Christian Cross. During the 13th century French fl ourished as a literary language and produced the famous Roman de Fergus, the earliest piece of non-Celtic literature to come from Scotland. In addition to French, Latin was also a literary language. Famous examples would be the Inchcolm Antiphoner and the Carmen de morte Sumerledi, a poem that exults triumphantly the victory of the citizens of Glasgow over Somailre mac Gilla Brigte. The most important medieval work written in Scotland, the Vita Columbae, was also written in Latin. The earliest Middle English or Scots literature includes John Barbour’s Brus (14th century), Whyntoun’s Kronykil, and Blind Harry’s Wallace in the 15th century telling the story of the rebel patriot during the First War of Scottish Independence. Other important authors were William Dunbar and Robert Henryson. See also Celtic Christianity; Norman Conquest of England; universities, European; Vikings: Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. Further reading: Blackie, Lorna. Clans and Tartans. Edison, NJ: Chartwell Books, 1987; Blundell, Nigel. Ancient Scotland. Scotland 361 Edison, NJ: Chartwell Books, 1996; Dickinson, William C., and George S. Pryde. A New History of Scotland. London: T. Nelson, 1962; Magnusson, Magnus. Scotland, the Story of a Nation. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2000; Mitchison, Rosalind. A History of Scotland. London: Routledge, 2002; Somerset Fry, Fiona and Peter. The History of Scotland. London: Routledge: 1992; Neil, Wilson. Scotland. From the Malt of Whisky to the Isle of Run. Sidney: Lonely Planet, 2002; Ross, Stewart. Ancient Scotland. Moffat: Lochar Publications, 1991. Diego I. Murguía Sejong (1397–1450) Korean king The fourth king of the Yi dynasty of Korea, King Sejong, ruled from 1418 until his death in 1450 was one of the most famous rulers in Korean history, and one of only two to have the title “the Great.” During his reign there was stability in Korea, and also major advances in literature and the arts, in particular the introduction of a new script. King Sejong was born on May 6, 1397, the third son of King Taejong (r. 1400–18). When he was 10 years old, he gained the title Grand Prince Chunghyeong. He ascended the throne in 1418, at the age of 21, and his oldest brother, Prince Yangnyong Taegun, was overlooked to become king because the royal family regarded him as too headstrong and impetuous and the second brother had predeceased his father. One of King Sejong’s fi rst moves was to secure the southern parts of Korea against attacks by Japanese pirates who were launching raids on Korean coastal villages. He did this by sending soldiers to Tsushima, where they fended off seaborne attacks. In the north, Sejong oversaw the building of four castles and six military posts, which were built to prevent problems with the new Ming dynasty in China. He also encouraged many people from central Korea to move to the north to help build the economy of the region and ensure continued stability. King Sejong’s greatest legacy to Korea was his introduction of the Han’gul script. The Chiphyonjon, a royal institute that conducted research on behalf of the king, introduced this new script. The institute compiled a long series of offi cial histories of Korea and treatises on Confucian ideas and also organized many history talks increasing the knowledge of the royal family and the nobility in the history of Korea. With no suitable Korean script, the Koreans had been using Chinese characters or Hanja to express their language. With Han’gul, although many Chinese words remained, it was possible to have new characters that better refl ected Korean pronunciation and infl exions. The new script was purely phonetic and is believed to have developed from Sanskrit, or even Tibetan. Sejong would have likely come across these scripts while reading religious books. The new script was a move heavily opposed by many scholars, but Sejong, a linguist and an autocrat, pushed for Han’gul to become accepted. This gained Sejong the title “the alphabet king.” A dictionary was published soon afterward. In 1420 after only two years on the throne, Sejong had established the Jiphyeonjeon or “Hall of Worthies” in the royal palace in Seoul, where he persuaded many visiting scholars to remain. During his reign scholars compiled 20 major works on Korean agriculture, astronomy, history, geography, mathematics, military history, science, pharmacology, and philosophy. Of particular note were encyclopedias of Chinese and Korean medicine. During the 1440s King Sejong himself wrote a number of books. Yongbi Eocheon Ga (Songs of fl ying dragons) was written in 1445 and followed two years later by Seokbo Sangjeol (Episodes from the life of Buddha). In June 1447 he wrote Worin Cheon-gang Jigok (Songs of the moon shining on a thousand rivers), a series of poems praising Lord Buddha, and in September of that year helped with the compilation of Dongguk Jeong-un (Dictionary of correct Sino-Korean pronunciation). In terms of justice Sejong started a process of codifying the laws. He massively reduced the amount of corporal punishment that could be infl icted and established two levels of courts of appeal by which people under sentence of death could have evidence in their trial tested before further judges, and available for inspection by the king, prior to sentencing and execution. Sejong is also credited with the invention of the rain gauge, self-striking water clock, and the sundial. Critics of Sejong point out the pervasive nature of slavery during his reign and that he did little (if anything) to help slaves. Some had been sentenced to slavery for criminal actions, but most had been born into slavery and lived their lives in terrible conditions either as domestic hands in the cities or as farm laborers in the countryside. In addition, Sejong continued the system of court eunuchs, who wielded much power in the extravagant court. King Sejong married Sim On (1395–1446) of Cheongsong, later awarded the title Princess Consort Soheon (or Sohon Shimn). They had eight sons and two daughters— the fi rst son, Munjong, would succeed, followed by his son, Tanjong, and then the second son, Sejo. 362 Sejong Sejong and his fi rst concubine, Kim Shinbin (1406–65), had six more sons. With his second concubine, Yang Hyebin, he had three further sons. His third concubine gave him another son, and his fourth and fi fth concubines, another two daughters. King Sejong died in 1450 and was buried at Yong Nung. His son Munjong succeeded him. A street in central Seoul is named after King Sejong, as is the Sejong Center for the Performing Arts. He also appears on the South Korean 10,000 won banknote. From King Sejong’s older brother descend the family of Syngman Rhee, who became president of South Korea from 1948 until 1960. Further reading: Adams, Edward B. Palaces of Seoul, Yi Dynasty Palaces in Korea’s Capital City. Seoul: Taewon Publishing Company, 1972; Kim-Renaud, Yong-Key. King Sejong the Great: the Light of Fifteenth Century Korea. Seoul: International Circle of Korean Languages, 1992. Justin Corfi eld Seljuk dynasty In the 10th century Seljuk Turks migrated from territory around the Aral Sea into Transoxiana. Taking their name from Seljuk ibn Yakak, the Seljuks were Turkish nomadic people. They came to power following the collapse of the Abbasid dynasty when the Fatimid dynasty in Cairo and other ruling families in Spain and North Africa had already established separate ruling dynasties. Converts to Sunni Islam, the Seljuks based their authority on their military prowess. The Seljuk leader Tughril (d. 1063) crossed into Iran by 1043 and in 1055 entered Baghdad as the new ruling sultan. Tughril immediately faced revolts by his brothers and Shi’i rebels; after successfully crushing both threats to his authority, Tughril persecuted the Shi’i population and created a Sunni dominated empire. After Tughril’s death, his son, Alp Arslan (r. 1063–73), succeeded to the sultanate. A military leader, Arslan left the administration of the Seljuk territories to Nizam al-Mulk, who governed from Isfahan. The Seljuk sultanate consisted of a highly decentralized collection of tribal families. At the height of their power the Seljuks ruled territory from the Danube to the Ganges River. The Seljuks referred to the Byzantine Empire as al- Rum (from Rome). Although Arslan was not interested in actually taking over the Byzantine Empire, he permitted Turkish families to raid and loot Byzantine holdings in Asia Minor as well as into Armenian territory. Tiring of the Seljuk threats, Emperor Romanos IV Diogenes was determined to confront Arslan. The Byzantine army consisted of Greek soldiers as well as mercenaries from France and the Balkans. In the ensuing battle the latter proved to be less than loyal to their paymasters. Unbeknown to Romanos IV, Arslan was waiting in Armenia with a large number of well-trained and loyal cavalry forces. In addition, Arslan’s agents followed the progress of the Byzantines as they crossed the Anatolian Peninsula. The Byzantine forces engaged the Seljuks at the Battle of Manzikert near Lake Van in the summer of 1071. Large numbers of mercenaries deserted before the battle, which was a disastrous defeat for the Byzantine Empire. The emperor was wounded and taken prisoner by the Seljuks, who then moved in increasing numbers into Asia Minor. Although the Byzantine Empire survived into the 15th century, the Turkish population in Asia Minor would ultimately outnumber the Greeks. After the Byzantine defeat at Manzikert, western rulers, including the pope, realized that the Byzantine Empire was not strong enough to protect Christians in the east. Seljuk control over the Christian holy sites would be a major contributing factor to the Crusades at the end of the 11th century. After the Byzantine Empire called on the Seljuks for help against European rivals, they were rewarded with the city of Nicaea (Iznik), which became the capital of the sultanate of Rum. Malik Shah (r. 1073–92) succeeded his father as the Seljuk sultan. Malik’s name, taken from Persian not Turkish sources, indicated the extent of Persian infl uences within the Seljuk empire. With the exception of a few coastal cities such as Acre in the eastern Mediterranean, Malik Shah’s territories extended from Syria to Yemen to the Persian Gulf. With no clear successor Malik Shah’s death marked the end of the unifi ed Seljuk empire, which soon fractured into a number of separate territories ruled by rival factions. The lack of political and military unity was a major factor in the Muslim losses to the crusaders. The last of the Seljuk territories fell to the Ottomans in 1300. See also Byzantine Empire: political history; Shi’ism. Further reading: Boyle, J. A., ed. The Cambridge History of Iran. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968; Safi , Omid. Politics of Knowledge in Premodern Islam: Negotiating Ideology and Religious Inquiry. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2006. Janice J. Terry Seljuk dynasty 363 Shahnamah The Shahnamah (various spellings) is a central epic of Persian literature written by the poet Firdawsi (various spellings) in approximately the year 1010. It is an epic poem of considerable length, which aims to recount the history and achievements of the Persian people and their kings. Using the earlier Khvatay-namak, which was a prose epic covering the Persian people from the mythic past to the seventh century, Firdawsi rewrote the prose in verse form and extended the tale to include the Sassanid period. He wrote this under the sponsorship of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni and it endures as a central part of modern Persian culture, extending beyond modern Iran into Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent. Firdawsi wrote his epic, which is known in English as the Epic of Kings, in a form of verse couplets known as masnavi. The effect of the epic was to Persianize the people within the territories claimed by Persian kings, irrespective of their original ethnic and religious affi liations. Because of the Islamization of Persia, the Shahnamah has been cast within a worldview strongly infl uenced by Islamic thought. The Persian heroes, such as Rustam, were recreated within this context. Just as in the case of Jewish verse histories, a number of which cover apparently the same incidents from a different perspective, the Shahnamah acts to provide a centralizing narrative, which was used by state builders to help integrate a set of diverse peoples into a single nation. The story itself covers a bewildering variety of individuals, kings, heroes, and notable people of the past, as well as the defi ning events of their lives. Although the majority of individuals disappear from the narrative quickly, many have distinctive characteristics and are comparatively sophisticated in terms of characterization. Both good and evil appear to be combined in the characters. Previous religious beliefs, notably Zoroastrianism, are presented as having been defeated by the newly arrived faith. However the more than 60 stories and 60,000 couplets allow for considerable latitude in interpretation. The material is deliberately composed in such a way as to invite the reader to ponder on the events of the past and to seek the moral lessons to be learned from them. Misunderstandings, unrequited love, hubris, and jealousy are all present. The epic serves jointly as a history and a repository of moral and religious truths, and an artistic masterpiece in its own right. Further reading: Ferdowsi, Abdelqasem. Shahnameh: The Persian Book of Kings. Trans. by Dick Davis. New York: Viking Adult, 2006; Mackey, Sandra, and Scott Harrop, The Iranians: Persia, Islam and the Soul of a Nation. New York: Plume, 1998; Robinson, B. W. The Persian Book of Kings: An Epitome of the Shahnama of Firdawsi. London: Routledge Curzon, 2002. John Walsh Shi’ism Shi’ism is the belief that Ali and his descendants are the rightful Muslim leaders. Over the centuries a separate body of Shi’i law and practices has also developed. The Shi’i argued that Ali should have been selected as the fi rst caliph following the prophet Muhammad’s death. After having been rejected as caliph three times, Ali fi nally became the caliph only to have his claim immediately questioned by Muaw’iya, the governor of the powerful and wealthy Syrian province, his family the Umayyads, A’isha (the Prophet’s widow), and many other Muslims. Mediation failed to resolve the dispute and for a time there were two claimants to the caliphate. After Ali’s death in 661, his son Hasan renounced any claim to the caliphate and Muaw’iya became the undisputed leader. However after Muaw’iya’s death in 680, Ali’s younger son Husayn claimed he was the legitimate caliph not Yazid, Muaw’iya’s son. As Husayn and his supporters were moving to confront Yazid, they were attacked by a far bigger force at Karbala in present-day Iraq. Vastly outnumbered and taken by surprise, Husayn and his men were killed and their heads were severed and presented to Yazid. However several of Husayn’s children managed to survive and carried on the family claim to leadership. Husayn and his followers became martyrs in Shi’i tradition and their deaths are mourned and commemorated with displays of self-fl agellation and passion plays on the day of Ashura during the month of Muharram. Husayn’s tomb in Karbala became a major Shi’i site of pilgrimage and his memory elicted profound sadness over the believers’ failure to save him. However subsequent disputes over the rightful imam or heir to Husayn and his family led to the creation of a number of different sects among Shi’i followers. Twelver Shi’i accepted the line of rule from Ali to Muhammad al-Muntazar al-Mahdi. He died in 878 but Shi’i believed he merely disappeared into “occulation” where he observed life but was invisible to humans. Twelvers believed that he would return as the Mahdi, or “rightly guided one,” to announce the Day of Judgment. He continued to communicate through ayatollahs, who became the intercessors between the 364 Shahnamah imam and the believers. In the contemporary era, Iran remained a Twelver Shi’i nation and large numbers of Twelvers lived in Iraq, Lebanon, and Bahrain. Zaydi Shi’is were also known as Fivers, who split off in the eighth century. They supported Zayd, the grandson of Husayn, as the rightful imam. In the late ninth century, the Zaydis founded a kingdom in Yemen where they ruled from safe-holds in remote mountainous regions. In 1891 Imam Muhammad ibn Yahya Hamid ad Din established a hereditary Zaydi dynasty that lasted until the 1962 revolution in Yemen. The Isma’ilis, established in 765, were another offshoot of Shi’ism. They established the Fatimid dynasty in Egypt and survived in India and scattered elsewhere around the world. In the contemporary age, they were led by the Aga Khan, a hereditary position. The Alawites broke off from the Twelvers in the ninth century, following the eleventh imam, Hasan al Askari (d. 873), and his student Ibn Nusayr (d. 868). They were sometimes, rather prejoratively, referred to as Nusayris. The Alawites venerated Ali as an incarnation of God and also assimilated a number of Christian infl uences. Alawites ruled Aleppo in northern Syria for a short period but were attacked by both the Isma’ilis and ethnic Kurds and were persecuted as a religious minority by the Mamluks and Ottomans. Alawite practices seemed to deviate so far from orthodox Sunni practice that some Muslims claimed they were not true believers. Under the Ottomans they were disaffected socially and economically. The coastal area of northern Syria around Latakia remained an Alawite region and in the second half of the 20th century they used positions in key army posts to become the long-term rulers of Syria. The Druze were another Shi’i splinter group, who broke off under the Fatimid caliph al-Hakim in the 11th century. Some of al-Hakim’s supporters, including Muhammad al-Darazi, taught that he was the incarnation of God. Al-Darazi was assassinated in 1019 and his followers became known as the Druze. Al-Hakim disappeared in 1021 and the Druze took refuge in the remote mountains of Lebanon. They developed an elaborate secret ritual and belief system known only to adult male members of the sect. The secrecy surrounding Druze beliefs gave rise to numerous speculations about their practices. Although the Druze are historically an offshoot of Islam, their belief system seemed so far from general Muslim practice that they were generally considered to practice a separate religion. Tight knit Druze communities and their reputation for military prowess, coupled with the fragile confessional nature of the modern Lebanese state, enabled the Druze to exercise political power in excess of their actual population in the contemporary era. Small Druze populations are also found in modern-day Syria and Israel. The Shi’i often composed the lower social and economic strata in Muslim states. Throughout most of Muslim history, the rulers have generally been orthodox Sunnis, even in areas such as Iraq or Bahrain where the Shi’i made up a large part or even the majority of the population. After the 1979 revolution in Iran there was a resurgence of Shi’i activism that spread throughout much of the Muslim world. Further reading: Jafri, Husain M. Origins and Early Development of Shi’a Islam. London: Longman, 1979; Momen, Moojan. An Introduction of Shi’i Islam. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1985; Hussain, Jassim M. The Occultation of the Twelfth Imam. London: The Muhammadi Trust, 1982; ‘Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabataba’i, trans. Sayyid Hossein Nasr, Shi’ite Islam. Albany: State University of New York, 1975; Makarem, Sami Nasib. The Druze Faith. Delmar, N. Y.: Caravan Books, 1974; Betts, Robert Brenton. The Druze. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1988. Janice J. Terry Shinran (1173–1263) Buddhist philospher Shinran was a Japanese Buddhist philosopher who was primarily concerned with the fate of the mass of the people who would be unable to achieve enlightenment through their own efforts. He emphasized the role of faith as a means of salvation and placed it in the context of action and attainment of enlightenment. His school of Buddhism was called the Jodo Shinsu (the True Pure Land), and it has become one of the largest such schools in modern Japan. Shinran became a monk at childhood after the deaths of his parents and he studied at the Tendai school on Mount Hiei. He underwent a process of asceticism in the search for enlightenment but failed to achieve his goal in this way. Granted a short sabbatical in the Rokkaku-do (Hexagonal Temple in Kyoto), he encountered Honen and was inspired to follow his Pure Land Buddhist form of belief, which held that calling out the name of the Buddha in true faith would be suffi cient for people to achieve enlightenment in the practice known as nembutsu. Shinran abandoned his Shinran 365 previous asceticism and became an advocate of nembutsu. When this was outlawed in 1209, he was exiled. He subsequently married, despite the requirement for monks to remain celibate. His son, Zenran, followed him into the religious life but this led to confl ict later when Shinran felt compelled to disown Zenran on the basis of the young man’s different (and hence heretical) religious beliefs. Shinran spent around 20 years in Kanto after his exile, where he continued his studies, wrote extensive tracts, and attempted to convert the local people. After the Kanto years, Shinran returned to Kyoto, where he then had a confrontation with his son, who had been leading followers in the absence of his father. Shinran died in Kyoto at the age of 90. His followers commemorated his life, in part with the creation of an organized form of his religious beliefs. True Pure Land Buddhism focuses on the worship of Amitabha Buddha and anticipation of paradise lands to the west, where those saved by their worship will make their perpetual home. Worshipping the Buddha as an individual is contrary to the Buddha’s own intention, since he considered that he had successfully eradicated his own ego and, therefore, there was nothing left to worship. Further the Buddha stressed the need for all people to search for and evaluate all stages on the road to enlightenment individually and systematically. True Pure Land Buddhism, therefore, was far more democratic than the Buddhism of the Buddha himself and offered happiness in the next world to a much larger group of people. It could be used, therefore, as a powerful force for modernization and social reform. Further reading: Foard, James Harlan, Michael Solomon, and Richard K. Payne, eds. The Pure Land Tradition: History and Development. Fremont, CA: Asian Humanities Press, 1996; Shinran. The Collected Works of Shinran in Two Volumes: The Writings and the Introductions, Glossaries and Reading Aids. Jodo Shinsu Hongwanji-Ha, 1997; Souyri, Pierre François. The World Turned Upside Down: Medieval Japanese Society. Trans. by Käthe Roth. London: Pimlico, 2002. John Walsh Shiva Shiva (Siva), along with Vishnu and Brahma, is one of the Trimurti deities of Hinduism. He is worshipped throughout the Hindu world. His beautiful consort Parvati usually accompanies him. Her avatars are Uma, Durga, or Kali. Shiva’s sons are Skanda (six-faced) and the elephant-headed Ganesha. Shiva is depicted in the Vedas as Rudra (the Howler). Rudra was described as the destructive power of rainstorms. With a red face, a blue neck, matted hair locks, and his body smeared with ashes, he dwelled in the Himalayas, where his servants were thieves and ghosts. He wore an animal skin, a cobra as a garland, and a crescent moon as a hair ornament. He carried a trident and used arrows and thunderbolts. He was worshipped in fear without the assurance that worshipping would provide protection. Other weapons used by Rudra included fever, coughs, and poisons. However, he was also a sustainer of life because he had 1,000 remedies for diseases and poisons. In the Svetasvatara Upanisad, Rudra and Shiva were identifi ed as one and the same. During the 100s b.c.e. shrines to Shiva were built, which included phallic symbols. Eventually these developed into a symbolic phallic lingam. Sometimes there would be four faces depicted on the sides of the symbol. These were representative of the omniscient character of the deity. In the development of Shiva worship the lingam was eventually seated in a shallow dish with a symbolic yoni representing a vulva. These were representative of Shiva’s sakti (female reproductive power). As a symbol of Shiva’s potency as a power for generating life the lingam and yoni were interpreted as symbols of creative power. Sometimes Shiva has been represented as half male and half female (Lord Ardhanarisvara). In epic poems and in the Puranas, Shiva’s destructive side was modifi ed by the development of a kinder, gentler side. In myths and in art Shiva (Rudha) was represented as the great yogin. Seated on Mount Kailas in Tibet he would meditate and thereby sustain the world. He was Parvati’s lover, and the “lord of the dance,” who trampled on time and enacted the destiny of the universe. Philosophical interpretations of Saivism interpreted him as the Great God or as the timeless, absolute consciousness that underlies the cosmos. In other myths Shiva was presented as an uncouth ascetic. Dwelling in cemeteries and on cremation grounds, he would smear his body with the ashes of the dead, or mark his forehead with three horizontal stripes of white ash. Myths told of the destructive power of Shiva declared that he wore a necklace of the skulls of deities he had outlived or had killed. As Shiva theology slowly expanded, he became a universal preserver or protector of life. Eventually Shiva devotees (Saivas) organized themselves into orders. Some engaged in shocking behaviors— living in cremation grounds, using skulls as alms bowls, and practicing bloodletting rituals and sacrifi ces. 366 Shiva In the 400s several sects of Saivism developed, and Sanskrit manuals (agamas) were written by some sects. The agamas described beliefs and gave directions for building temples, carving images, and for practicing sect rituals. The sects were generally ascetics who also had a lay following. Among these sects were the Pasupatas founded by Lakulisa, the Kalamukhas, Kapalikas, Trikas, and Kashmiris. In the 700s the Saivas sect developed the Saiva Siddhanta theological tradition in South India. The Saivas used the Sanskrit word for wisdom (siddhanta) to expound the wisdom of Shiva as the supreme lord. The Saiva Siddhanta taught that souls and matter are created by the power that comes from Brahman (maya) and that they do really exist. Souls were in bondage to karma but could be delivered from their ignorance by the liberating power of Shiva. Spiritual power can be acquired from an authentic guru who serves as a spiritual director. In the 600s Saivite religion was promoted by a series of talented religious poets who wrote in the South Indian language of Tamil. Within 100 years religious poetry was set to music and sung over wide areas. The music invited a mystical union with the deity. However the union was not like that of Indian mystics, because the Saivite mystical union was not one of absorption into the divine; nor was there a loss of personality. Nonbelievers challenged the theology of the early Tamil poets. The philosopher Sankara developed arguments for the impersonal power of Brahman. The Saivasiddhanta theologians defended Saivite beliefs against opponents by stressing the protective role of Shiva. Meykandar and his disciple Arulnandi, both Saivasiddhanta theologians of the 1200s, called Shiva Siva Pasupati, or “the Lord of Cattle” (like a “good shepherd”) who cared for the cattle. Saiva theology taught that ignorance kept souls from knowing their real nature. Ignorance made them blind to spiritual realities and to Shiva’s helping powers. Consequently they remained bound to the sufferings of this world by three ropes: the rope of ignorance, the rope of the penalties of karma, and the rope of maya (illusions about this world). Shiva came to be addressed as pati, or Lord, because he offered many spiritual aids that could be used by people to gain liberation from the three bonds. See also Hindu epic literature. Further reading: Kramrisch, Stella. The Presence of Siva. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981; Peterson, Indira Viswanathan. Poems to Siva: The Hymns of the Tamil Saints. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989; Smith, David. The Dance of Siva: Religion, Art and Poetry in South India. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996; Storl, Wolf-Dieter. Shiva: The Wild God of Power and Ecstasy. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions, 2004. Andrew J. Waskey Shona The Shona is the name used to describe a number of tribes with similar cultures who have lived in the eastern part of Zimbabwe. The main tribes are the Zezuru, the Karanga, the Manyika, the Tonga-Korekore, and the Ndau. All speak Bantu and have survived in farming communities. They made up some 80 percent of the population of Zimbabwe in the year 2006, with the president of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe (prime minister 1980–87, president from 1987), being from the Shona, as was the prime minister of Zimbabwe-Rhodesia, Bishop Abel Muzorewa. There are also many Shona in neighboring countries: Botswana, Mozambique, South Africa, and Zambia. Some also lived in the short-lived Republic of Venda, one of South Africa’s homelands or “Bantustans,” established 1979–94. Traditionally the Shona were farmers of millet, sorghum, and maize, the last being their major staple food. They currently grow many other crops, including beans, groundnuts (peanuts), rice, and sweet potatoes. For meat, the Shona hunt animals. Cattle are raised—not for beef but for milk, and also for a measure of wealth, especially for paying dowries. The main migration of the Shona to modern-day Zimbabwe was largely associated with fi nding grazing land for their cattle. Living conditions largely consist of villages that involve clusters of huts around a central area where granaries and common cattle pens are located. Huts are made from mud and wattle, with thatched roofs, and generally accommodate extended families. The kinship system involves exogamous clans, with family trees and traditions, succession, and inheritance generally following the male line, although a few groups of Shona in the north of the country are matrilineal. Chiefs who inherit their position in the male line run the villages. In the ninth century the Shona built the great stone buildings of Great Zimbabwe, one of the most important archaeological sites in southern Africa. The word Zimbabwe, which became the name of the country, means “royal court,” and they were the centers of power in the land. There are three sections that make up Great Zimbabwe: the Hill Complex, the Great Enclosure, and the Valley Complex. The Hill Complex has been called Shona 367 the Acropolis by some historians and was the center of royal events in the whole site. Although it has a number of enclosures, they were probably for animals rather than for protection. Archaeologists have been able to show that it was built in a number of stages, and modifi ed at different times. Some of the buildings collapsed, and the site was then leveled before new building work was started. The eastern section is known as the “ritual enclosure” and is connected with ceremonies involving Shona chiefs. Large statues of carved soapstone birds looked over the site but were removed long ago. There is also some evidence of gold smelting in one section nearby. There are various theories for the small towers, with some scholars suggesting religious purposes, and others that they provided lookout positions. The most famous part of Great Zimbabwe is the Great Enclosure, which is one of the most regularly photographed parts of the entire area, appearing regularly in books and on Rhodesian and Zimbabwe postage stamps. Nearly 255 meters in circumference and 100 meters across, it remains the largest surviving ancient structure in sub-Saharan Africa. Scholars have long surmised it was a royal compound where the king’s mother and his main wives would reside. There was a belief that the large conical tower on the site held treasure, and it was marked on some plans as being the site of the royal treasury. Many people have dug in the hope of fi nding gold, but it is also believed that it was the grain store for the king. The Valley Enclosures date from the 13th century and have yielded the largest amount of archaeological fi nds. There was much speculation on whether the Shona actually built the enclosures at Great Zimbabwe, with some writers surmising that they were Arab, Egyptian, Ethiopian, Greek, Jewish, or Phoenician in origins. Some have sought to link them to the queen of Sheba or the legendary Prester John. Others have seen connections with the famed King Solomon’s mines. However not a single archaeological link connects the ruins with any of these. Some Chinese porcelain, Persian crockery, and beads and a few trinkets from India were found, indicating that the people at Great Zimbabwe traded, probably through intermediaries such as the Arabs, with peoples in the Indian Ocean. The fi rst Caucasian to see Great Zimbabwe was Adam Renders, an American sailor, who arrived in the area in 1867. He married the daughter of an African chief and remained nearby until his death in 1881. The fi rst to write an account of the ruins was Carl Mauch, a German who came to Great Zimbabwe in September 1871. Subsequent travelers started taking pieces of the ruin away with them. British archaeologist Gertrude Caton-Thompson spent three years working at the site in the 1930s and concluded that they were Bantu in style, and part of the legendary Shona civilization. Great Zimbabwe remains the second most important tourist site in Zimbabwe, after Victoria Falls. In recent years Shona culture and customs has been revived with an interest in Shona wood and stone carving, and music. See also Bantu. Further reading: Bourdillon, M. F. C. The Shona Peoples: An Ethnography of the Contemporary Shona, with Special Reference to their Religion. Gwelo, Rhodesia: Mambo Press, 1976; Kileff, Clive and Peggy. Shona Customs: Essays by African Writers. Gwelo, Rhodesia: Mambo Press, 1970. Justin Corfi eld Shotoku Taishi (574–622) Japanese political leader Prince Shotoku Taishi was crown prince and regent of Japan between 592 and 622. His rule opened an era of great reforms that advanced Buddhism and Chinese political and cultural infl uence in Japan. For his role he is called the Great Civilizer. Up to the sixth century Chinese cultural infl uence had grown gradually in Japan. After the mid-sixth century the process quickened. One reason was the gradual 368 Shotoku Taishi In the ninth century the Shona built the stone buildings of Great Zimbabwe, with towers that may have been used for keeping watch. strength and reach of the Yamato state, which required more complex institutions than the clan government of Japan had provided. Second, China became unifi ed in 589 under the Sui dynasty after three and half centuries of division. The great Tang (T’ang) dynasty followed, one of the greatest in China’s imperial history and worthy of emulation. The third factor was the introduction of Buddhism to Japan from China via Korea (the southern Korean state Paekche had a very close relationship with Japan) in 552. Buddhism was attractive to many Japanese but was also resented because it was foreign and not associated with Japanese mythology and the shamanistic practices of its native Shintoism. In 587 the Soga clan won ascendancy at the Yamato court; the chief’s niece, Suiko, became empress, and her nephew Shotoku, descended from both the imperial and Soga clans, became her regent. Shotoku began a great era of reforms that would advance Japanese civilization in the pattern of China. He was a devout Buddhist; in fact a legend has him clutching a statuette of the Buddha at his birth. He proclaimed Buddhism the preferred state religion, promoted the building of temples, welcomed monks and missionaries from China and Korea, lectured on Buddhist teachings, and wrote commentaries on three Buddhist sutras. Thus Buddhism became the most important vehicle for the advancement of Chinese culture. However Buddhism did not provide a structure for the organization of government and society, and for those he turned to the imperial structure of China of the Sui-Tang dynasties. In 604 Prince Shotoku promulgated the Seventeen Article Constitution (or Injunctions). Article II promoted Buddhism stating: “Sincerely revere the three treasures, viz. Buddha, the Law and the Priesthood, are the fi nal refuge of the four generated beings, and are the supreme object of faith in all countries. Any person of any age should revere Buddhist law. Few persons are really bad. If they are taught well, they will be obedient. But if they are not converted [to the truth of] the Three Treasures, how can their wrongs be corrected?” The other 16 articles promoted Confucian precepts such as the supremacy of the ruler, a centralized government, a bureaucracy based on merit and correct principles, and social relationships that promoted harmony. In the same year Prince Shotoku also adopted the Chinese calendar, thereby accepting the Chinese view of world order. China required its tributary states to adopt the Chinese calendar as sign of vassalage. Japan adopted it voluntarily and did not become a Chinese vassal state. He also adopted major features of a Chinese style bureaucratic rule and system of court ranks for offi cials. In 607 Shotoku broke new ground by sending an offi cial embassy to the Chinese court. He would send a total of three, the two subsequent ones in 608 and 614, but the embassies would continue until the mid-ninth century, long after Shotoku’s reign had ended. Each of the later ones had a contingent of four ships with between 500 and 600 students, some staying in China for up to 10 years. After returning to Japan the students, including government offi cials, monks, musicians, painters, and scholars, became transmitters of what they had learned to the wider society. His initiative resulted in one of the greatest technology transfers in premodern times. In addition to government-sponsored students, private individuals also began to travel to China to study, and trade also increased between the two countries. Educated Japanese read Chinese books and wrote in Chinese. The common written script came to unite Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese in a common literary heritage and a shared moral and historical tradition. Many Chinese and Koreans immigrated to Japan during this period, which accelerated the spread of Chinese culture. The Soga clan continued to dominate the Japanese court after Shotoku’s death. His opponents had feared that he sought the throne. But his son Prince Yamashiro refused to press his candidacy for the throne when Empress Suiko died in 628. In 645 the Soga clan was defeated and lost its infl uence at court. However Prince Shotoku’s legacy continued, and even accelerated, during the next century as Japan continued to catapult forward in adopting Chinese culture and institutions. See also Kojiki and Nihon Shoki; Taiho Code; Taika Reforms. Further reading: Brown, Delmer M., ed. The Cambridge History of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993; Samson, G. B. Japan, A Short Cultural History. New York: D. Appleton-Century Company, Inc., 1943. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Siamese invasion of the Khmer kingdom The emergence of Thai kingdoms in the 13th century changed the power confi guration of mainland Southeast Asia. Angkor and Pagan both felt their military might. The conquest of Nan Chao by the Mongols accelerated the process of Thai migration. The kingdoms emerged from alliances between the leaders of muangs (unit of cluster of villages). Prince Mengrai (1239–1317) had Siamese invasion of the Khmer kingdom 369 established the kingdom of Lanna. In 1281 he conquered the kingdom of Haripunjaya and crushed the Mon-Khmer outpost of the area. The founder of Sukhothai, Sri Indraditya (r. 1238–70), overthrew the Khmer overlordship in Thailand. Rama Khamheng (1239–98), the third ruler, carved out a vast empire ruling over ethnic groups like the Burmese, Mon, Lao, and Khmers. After the emergence of Ayutthaya, the tables were turned and the Siamese attacked the Khmers. In 1350, Rama Tibodi I (1312–69) founded the kingdom of Ayutthaya, which dominated Siamese history for four centuries. A new capital city was established and Tibodi named the capital after Rama, the hero of the Ramayana, an important Indian epic. The strategic location of the capital city facilitated attacking the Khmers. Tibodi was bent upon claiming overlordship of the region. The fi rst Siamese invasion began in the year 1352 under the command of Prince Ramesuan (r. 1369–70 and 1388–95). The Khmer ruler Jayavarman Paramesvar (r. 1327–52) became a vassal of Ayutthaya. However, control of Ayutthaya did not last long and the Khmer ruler Kambujadhiraj (r. 1377–83) recovered Angkor. Among the rulers of Ayutthaya, two different policies alternated. The Lopburi faction wanted to establish Siamese hegemony over the Khmers. But the Suphanburi faction was interested in subduing the Thai kingdoms and visualized Sukhothai, rather than Angkor, as a rival. Borommaracha I (r. 1370–88), who was from Suphoburi, did not follow an active policy toward the Khmers and concentrated his energy in subduing Sukhothai. Tibodi and his son Ramesuan along with grandson Ramatacha (1395–1404) were from Lopburi and perceived the threat from Angkor as greater than that of Sukhothai. Ramesuan attacked the Khmers for the second time in 1389. The immediate result of the invasion was the capture of Chonburi and Chantaburi by the Khmer ruler Dharmasokaraj (r. 1383–89), who also captured the majority of the population. The troops of Ayutthaya seized Angkor for seven months and took 90,000 Cambodians as prisoners. In 1431 the Ayutthaya King Borommaracha II (r. 1424–48) invaded Angkor again, killing the ruler Srey (sometimes called Tammasok). Prince Intaburi, son of Borommaracha I, was installed as the new king. But Intaburi’s reign was short-lived and after his death, Angkor again became independent. The Khmers shifted their capital to Phnom Penh in 1432 and their domain was confi ned to a small area. The objective of making Angkor a vassal state was not realized. Trailok (r. 1448–88), the eldest son of King Boromaraja II, was one of the greatest Thai monarchs and reformers. He did not pay attention to Angkor and was involved in continuous war with Chieng Mai. The Siamese attack against the Khmers did not result in Angkor’s becoming a part of Audhya for a long time. After the attack was over and Thai forces retreated back to Ayutthaya, the Khmers reasserted their independence. The sacking of their capital incurred heavy losses in terms of men and material. From the Siamese viewpoint, they had gained the upper hand and Ayutthaya was safe from attack by the Khmers. The domination of Cambodia over Thailand was a thing of the past. A general pattern was also emerging in the internecine wars of the Burmese, Khmers, and Thais. Apart from ransacking the towns and imposing tributes, the victorious power was taking much of the population to make up for those killed in the wars. The result was an ethnic mix in mainland Southeast Asia. The Angkorean features in both the social and cultural domain percolated to Siamese society. The Thais were infl uenced by the Khmer concept of monarchy, and the system of slavery. See also Burma; Khmer kingdom. Further reading: Cady, John F. Thailand, Burma, Laos, & Cambodia. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1966; Hall, D. G. E. A History of South-East Asia. New York: St Martin Press, 1968; Marr, David G., and A. C. Milner, eds. Southeast Asia in the 9th to 14th Centuries. Singapore: ANU, 1986; Mishra, Patit P. “Rama Tibodi I.” In D. Levinson and K. Christensen, eds. Encyclopedia of Modern Asia. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2002; Rong, Syamananda. A History of Thailand. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University and Thai Watana Panich, 1977; Tarling, Nicholas, ed. The Cambridge History of Southeast Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992; Wyatt, David K. Thailand: A Short History. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1986. Patit Paban Mishra Silla dynasty The Silla dynasty was a Korean kingdom with origins in the southeast of the country, in the area around modernday Pusan (Busan). It is said to have begun in about 57 b.c.e. when the Saro tribe and its allies in that region established a confederation of the tribes, led by Pak Hyeokgeose. However many historians feel that date was the invention of 12th-century Korean historians, as found in the Samguk Sagi, written by Kim Bu-sik, to try to show that the Silla predated their main rivals. The early years 370 Silla dynasty of Silla saw a rotated monarchy with members of the Pak, Kim, and Sok families sharing the title of ruler, although not using the title of king until later. As the kingdom of Koguryo was emerging as a major power in northern and central Korea, Silla was taking over tribes in the south. Originally they only targeted the Saro tribe, taking tribute to the Mahan confederation as their vassal in 19 b.c.e. However Silla grew dramatically in prosperity and many historians have seen this as the infl uence of many Chinese merchants who came to settle in the area and brought with them much resultant trade. There were also infl uences from Japan—the envoy that took the tribute to Mahan in 19 b.c.e. was of Japanese ancestry. In the year after this mission, the king of Mahan died and although Silla sent over a delegation for the funeral, they rapidly drew up plans to take land from Mahan and enlarge their area. In 250 c.e. the Mahan confederacy, which had controlled much of central southern Korea, was fi nally absorbed, not by Silla, but by the kingdom of Paekche (Baekje), which had a common border with Silla. This was initially thought to be dangerous as it left the Korean Peninsula under the control of three kingdoms, Silla, Paekche, and Koguryo, with little in the way of buffer states that had existed beforehand. Silla and Paekche feared invasion from the emerging power of Koguryo, which had ejected the last Chinese base in 313. To counter this threat, Kim Naemul (356–401) of Silla assumed the title of maripkan or king ensured that the succession to the throne was hereditary. The end of the rotating monarchy resulted in the ability to establish a more centralized administration, which adopted many of their methods of government, customs, and some Chinese culture. Initially Silla sided with Koguryo to attack Paekche, which had been aiding Japanese pirates. However when Koguryo moved its capital south to Pyongyang in 427, and its focus also moved south, Koguryo and Silla had to form an alliance. Silla also built up trade ties with Japan. King Peopheung (r. 514–540) established Buddhism as the state religion of the kingdom of Silla and embarked on military expeditions that eroded the power of the nonaligned tribes in the region. His successor, King Jinheung (r. 540–576), enlarged the army and used it to help Paekche take lands around modern-day Seoul. However in 553 he decided that his forces were strong enough to seize the whole area for itself, ending the 120- year alliance of convenience between Silla and Paekche. The war in 553–555 led to Silla’s massively enlarging its landholdings, with Paekche forced to cede over half of its territory. This was followed by a long period of peace when scholars in Silla devoted much time to Buddhism. King Pak-jong, who ascended the throne in 576, abdicated to become a monk and his wife became a nun. A considerable part of the wealth of the country was sent in missions of tribute to China, which weakened Silla economically but bought them a fi rm alliance. Gradually Silla came to ally itself militarily with Tang China and in a series of lightning military campaigns, King Muyeol (r. 654–661) managed to capture most of Paekche just before his death, even though the Japanese sent a fl eet bringing an expeditionary force with them to help Paekche in 662 and again in 663. The war ended with Silla’s being victorious and immediately accepting Chinese overlordship. Silla then persuaded China that Koguryo should be the next target, and Silla sent General Kim Yu-shin to attack Koguryo. It took 10–12 years to defeat and destroy the kingdom of Koguryo, and by 668 Silla was in control of Koguryo, and this resulted in the whole of the Korean Peninsula’s being unifi ed under the Silla, the period being known as that of the “Unifi ed Silla.” Confi dent in the superiority of their soldiers after these wars, the kings of Silla became ambitious and decided to attack the Chinese soldiers on the Korean Peninsula and stop paying tribute to the Tang. The fi rst attack on the Chinese was in 671 and the Chinese responded three years later by sending in more soldiers, but the Silla not only were able to withstand the attacks, but also defeated the Chinese at Maechosong, near Yangju, and at Chonsong near the mouth of the Yseong River. The Silla were also able to drive the Chinese garrison out of Pyongyang and force the Chinese soldiers to be pulled back to Liaoting. Although China protested that some of the land of Paekche and Koguryo belonged to them, because of the increasing weakness at the Tang court, it was impossible to press these claims, and in 735 the Chinese formally acknowledged Silla as an independent kingdom with the rights to all the lands south of the Taedong River. During the reign of King Kyongdok (r. 742–764), Silla was at the peak of its power, but the Unifi ed Silla period did not last long. Initially its power was eroded by dynastic struggles. King Hyegeong succeeded King Kyongdok. Kim Yang-seng, who made himself King Sondok, assassinated King Hyegeong. He ruled for four years and then was deposed by King Wonsong. Violent court struggles and intrigue wrought havoc at the Silla court and when Sinmu became king in 839, the authority of the king had been destroyed with much of the country in the hands of nobles who formed alliances to attack other aristocrats. There were many local lords Silla dynasty 371 who started to plot against the central authority and rebellions were followed by civil wars, and a large peasant rebellion. Kyon Hwon (Gyeon Hwon) attacked the royal capital and killed the king, Kyong-ae, proclaiming his Later Paekche Kingdom at Wansanju (Chonju) in 900. In the following year Kung Ye (Gung Ye), in central Korea, captured the city of Kaesong (Songak) and made it the capital for his Later Kingdom of Koguryo. Near Kaesong, another rebel leader, Wang Kon, joined Kung Ye and was made the prime minister in Kung Ye’s government. In 918 he overthrew Kung Ye and made himself ruler of the Later Kingdom of Koguryo. With these two new kingdoms established, it was not long before Silla was totally overthrown. It could no longer call on China for help, and with the overthrow of the Tang (T’ang) dynasty in 908, Silla was totally isolated. The Later Kingdom of Koguryo emerged as the new Koryo dynasty of Korea.The system of government of Silla relied heavily on the king and the royal family. Outside the royal family were the nobility, who each controlled parts of the country. The system of exerting control over the people was similar to that in China, with up to a quarter of the population being slaves. The capital of the kingdom of Silla was at Gyeongju (Kyongju), which had, at its height, a population of about 1 million, making it one of the larger cities in the world at that time. Many remains of Silla can still be seen in the city, the center of which is called Tumuli Park because of the 23 burial mounds that have survived. These were for members of the Silla royal family and were designed to prevent tomb robbery. A large round hole was dug, and lined with gravel and then stone slabs, then a wooden chamber was constructed, and the deceased was interred. After this chamber was sealed, the whole structure was covered with heavy stones, then with earth, and the area covered in turf. As a result jewelry and other artifacts have been found in many of these graves, which have helped historians reconstruct aspects of life in the Silla court. The amount of gold found has shown the wealth of the kingdom, being used for jewelry and foil worked into pots, utensils, and weapons. Also at Gyeongju, along with places such as the Bunhwangsa pagoda, there is the oldest surviving astronomical observatory in East Asia, the Cheomseongdae, which was built between 632 and 646 when Unifi ed Silla was at its height. Although the building looks simple, it was set on 12 rectangular stone bases (one for each month) and set in such a way for astronomers easily to work out the relative positions of different stars. Gyeongju was sacked in 935 and many of the old wooden buildings were destroyed, and the large gardens in the center of the city that commemorated the unifi cation of Korea were wrecked. In 1975 archaeological work on the site of the gardens unearthed many wooden objects from the Anapji Pond. In the area around Gyeongju, there are dozens of temples, and also the burial sites of King Muyeol and General Kim Yu-shin, the two men who established Unifi ed Silla. Many tourists visit the Seokguram Grotto, a site on the UNESCO World Cultural Heritage List, to the southeast of Gyeongju, where a statue of the Buddha, surrounded by guardians and some deities, was constructed during the late Silla period in the mid-eighth century. The statue of Buddha is carved out of a large granite block that was quarried north of the capital and then carried up the mountainside to its present position. Further reading: Gardiner, K. H. J. The Early History of Korea. Canberra: Australian National University Press, 1969; Robinson, Martin, et al. Korea. Melbourne: Lonely Planet Books, 2004; Whitfi eld, Roderick, ed. Treasures from Korea: Art Through 5000 Years. London: British Museum Publications, 1984. Justin Corfi eld Sind, Arab conquest of Sind (or Sindh) is a province of modern-day Pakistan. It is bounded by the Thar Desert to the east, the Kirthar Mountains to the west, and the Arabian Sea to the south. The Indus River passes through Sind and its irrigation was a major source of food and revenue for Sindhi people. Buddhism was established in the area during the reign of King Ashoka, and adherence strengthened over the years. Infl uence was exerted over the region by many different peoples, including the Scythians, Huns, Persians, Greco-Bactrians, and Mauryans. Chief Minister Chach seized the throne of Sind in 622 and established an unpopular dynasty that commanded little loyalty from the people or government offi cials. Arabs had enjoyed a long and mostly untroubled relationship with Sind and its neighbors based mostly on shared commercial interests. Traders shipped goods from the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia westward to the Mediterranean. This continued after the Arabs embraced Islam, but in 711 a dispute broke out following the attack on and enslavement of a group of women and children who were traveling to Arabia. Hajjaj, the governor of the eastern provinces of 372 Sind, Arab conquest of the Umayyad Caliphate, complained but was unable to receive justice to his satisfaction and prepared for a military campaign. Two initial forays were repulsed but a third, led by Muhammad ibn Qasim, was more successful. A force of 6,000 camels, 6,000 cavalry, and accompanying infantry and baggage train was dispatched and managed fi rst to capture the coastal town of Dehul and then defeat the troops of King Dahar in battle, after a number of travails. The Arabs were assisted by the voluntary surrender of large numbers of Sindhi people and offi cials, whose loyalty to Dahar was very limited. Muhammad ibn Qasim was able to establish control over the whole of Sind, which was subsequently integrated into the Umayyad Caliphate, where it remained during the succeeding Abbasid dynasty until central power loosened and it became possible to establish local dynasties. The Abbasid governor, Hisham, who arrived in 757, undertook military expeditions against neighboring states, but there were no further territorial expansions throughout Arab rule. Arab rule of Sind followed a similar pattern to that employed elsewhere, with most offi cial posts remaining in local hands while an Arab governor administered the area with the assistance of troops who garrisoned the major towns and cities. Some people converted to Islam but comparatively few, and there was little effort expended on forcing people to change their religion at that time. The Arab period of rule led to the creation of a fusion of cultures that have helped to characterize subsequent Sindhi society. The city of Mansura was established as the capital and its people benefi ted from Arab learning and knowledge. See also Umayyad dynasty. Further reading: Hitti, Philip. History of the Arabs. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002; Lambrick, H. T. Sind: A General Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975. John Walsh Sixtus IV See Rome, papacy in Renaissance. Song (Sung) dynasty The Song dynasty (960–1279) was founded by Zhao Kuangyin (Chao K’uang-yin), r. 960–976, and is known posthumously as Song Taizu (Song T’ai-tsu) or Grand Ancestor of Song. After the fall of the Tang (T’ang) dynasty in 907 China had been divided with the northern part ruled by a succession of short-lived regimes called the Five Dynasties of China, while southern China was divided between 10 province-sized minor ruling houses. Zhao Kuangyin was an important general serving the last of the Five Dynasties, the Later Zhou. He became emperor as a result of a mutiny conducted by his troops. Fearful that the same soldiers and their offi cers could depose him as easily as they had raised him to the throne, he immediately set out to persuade the leading generals to retire on generous pensions, replacing them with junior offi cers loyal to him. In forming his new government Taizu made the military subordinate to civilians and rotated commanders and garrisons to discourage the formation of strong bonds between them. He also made the army a professional one based on long-term enlistment and fostered policies that discouraged martial pursuits. According to a popular saying, “Good iron is not used to make nails; good men do not become soldiers.” No military uprisings or signifi - cant domestic revolts troubled the dynasty. NORTHERN SONG, 960–1127 Taizu used a combination of persuasion and military action to annex the 10 states in the south. However he did not take on two border states: Liao in the nort heast, ruled by nomadic people called Khitan, and Xixia (Hsi Hsia) in the northwest, ruled by seminomads called Tangut, even though they occupied territories that had been part of the Tang empire. To prevent a repetition of the Song dynasty’s falling after Taizu’s death because of no able heir to take over, Taizu’s mother made him promise to make his younger brother his heir, rather than his young son, when she lay dying in 961. The younger brother, who was already a seasoned general, succeeded in 977 and reigned until 997 as Taizong (T’ang-tsung). When Taizong died the Song dynasty had been in power for almost four decades and was well established. Taizong twice attempted to recover lands inside the Great Wall that Liao had seized; they totaled 16 prefectures and included an important city that is today called Beijing. He failed both times. In 1004 Liao and Song concluded the Treaty of Sangyuan, which defi ned the boundary, established frontier markets, and stipulated annual payment by Song to Liao of 100,000 ounces of silver and 200,000 bolts of silk (the amount was increased by 100,000 units each later) that Song called gifts and Liao called tribute. Except for minor wars the two sides lived in peace for a century. Song also fought an inconclusive war against Xixia between 1040 and 1044, which ended when Song agreed to give Xixia annual gifts of 200,000 Song (Sung) dynasty 373 ounces of silver and 200,000 bolts of silk. Song was willing to buy peace rather than fi ght, arguing that the total gifts amounted to no more than 2 percent of its annual income. The Song government focused on defense, rebuilding sections of the Great Wall, fortifying frontier towns, and deploying a large army of 1,250,000 men. Finding good horses for a cavalry was a problem because Song had inadequate horse breeding lands and Liao and Xixia, which did, would not sell horses to Song. An alternate policy of subsidizing farmers to raise horses, which the government could requisition in war, failed. Taizu and his successors strengthened the central government by expanding the school and examination systems from which the bulk of civil servants were recruited. Advancement in printing and a fast growing economy produced a large and prosperous middle class whose educated sons found honor in serving the government. A Confucian revival that began in the late Tang dynasty gained dynamism under Song. Confucian scholar-offi cials reinterpreted the teachings of Confucius and his early followers that successfully challenged Buddhist teachings. Cut off from contact with India, Buddhism’s original home, by Muslims and others who ruled Central Asia, Chinese Buddhism lost its vitality during the Song era. The reinterpreted Confucianism that matured during Song is called Neo-Confucianism and was accepted as orthodox in China, Korea, and Japan until the 20th century. Song scholar-offi cials formed two parties called Conservatives and Innovators that debated each other on taxation and other government policies. Each party implemented policies according to its ideals when in ascendancy. At its height around 1100 the Song population totaled around 100 million, more than that of the larger earlier Han and Tang empires. Urban centers fl ourished, a national market system boosted trade, new seeds and crops increased food production, and many crafts provided a wide range of products. True porcelain was produced for the fi rst time in the world with high temperature kilns; the products of the many kilns were exported by land and sea throughout Japan, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Egypt. The many craftsmen required in producing the ceramic wares worked in a fashion that resembled the division of labor of modern assembly lines. Song is also famous for literature of many forms and paintings; they reached their zenith under the eighth emperor, Huizong (Hui-tsung), who reigned between 1101 and 1125. Huizong’s extravagant patronage of the arts and lavish spending on palaces and gardens strained the treasury, and his neglect of governing resulted in factional confl icts. Finally his disastrous foreign policy almost ended the dynasty. Huizong stopped appeasing Liao and made an alliance with a new nomadic people called Jurchen in northern Manchuria who had newly established a state called Jin (Chin). Their common goal was to destroy Liao by a pincer attack and to share the spoils. The war fought between 1118 and 1125 destroyed Liao but the alliance collapsed, and Jin then marched on the Song capital, Kaifeng (Kai-feng). Ill prepared, Huizong abdicated, leaving his son Qinzong (Ch’in-tsung) to face the consequences. An abortive peace ended when Jin renewed its attack, capturing Kaifeng, then called Bian (Pien), in 1127 and taking both Song rulers and 3,000 members of their family and court to captivity in Manchuria. In retrospect the period 960–1127 is called Northern Song. SOUTHERN SONG The period 1127–1289 is called Southern Song. A younger son of Huizong eluded capture, rallied Song troops, and continued fi ghting until a peace treaty was signed in 1142 when Jin realized it could not conquer southern China; the new Song ruler, Gaozong (Kaotsung), r. 1127–1162, was resigned to losing northern China. The most important military hero of the Song era, General Yue Fei (Yueh Fei), had been signally successful in resisting Jin forces and had advanced to the Yellow River valley. But Song appeasers led by Qin Gui (Ch’in K’uei) had General Yue imprisoned on false charges and murdered in jail, perhaps as a peace offering to Jin. Yue became a great Chinese hero, admired and venerated in popular religion for his patriotism, while Qin has been despised for his treachery. There were two revisions of the Song-Jin treaty, each adjusting the payment Song made to Jin. Gaozong is regarded as a second dynastic founder; he salvaged a desperate situation and gave the Song another lease on life, albeit in a smaller territory. Most of his successors were undistinguished and relied on powerful chancellors and ministers. The capital of Southern Song was Hangzhou (Hangchou), once called Linan, near the coast south of the Yangzi (Yangtze) River. The Huai River became the boundary between Jin and Southern Song. Southern Song was required to recognize Jin as a superior state and became its vassal and paid it an annual tribute of 200,000 ounces of silver and 200,000 bolts of silk. Southern Song prospered and Hangzhou became a great metropolis, surpassing Kaifeng. Learning fl ourished, and 374 Song (Sung) dynasty southern China fl ourished as never before. Many great seaports grew along the southern coast because seaborne trade replaced land trade along the Silk Road (now traversing lands beyond Southern Song control). Chinese ships, navigated by the compass (fi rst used by Chinese navigators around 1100), with capacity between 200 and 600 tons, dominated the seas, carrying Chinese ceramics and other goods to Japan, Southeast Asia, and southern Asia. Taxes on trade produced the revenues needed to pay the annual tribute to Jin and to pay for the army. Around 1200 the situation in northern China was dramatically changed by the rise of Mongols under Genghis Khan. After uniting the Mongol tribes under him, Genghis began attacking Jin in 1210. His forces took and destroyed Jin Central Capital (modern Beijing) in 1215 and many other cities in northern China. Genghis left the Jin campaign unfi nished to turn westward, destroying Xixia in 1227. In 1232 Song repeated the mistake that Huizong had made in 1118 when he made a treaty with Jin against Liao—it made an alliance with the Mongols against Jin, which was destroyed in 1234. However instead of regaining parts of northern China, Song was faced with the formidable Mongols in 1245. Song forces resisted desperately, both sides using gunpowder and fi rearms. Mongol forces were initially stymied by the strongly fortifi ed Song cities and had problems fi ghting in the river- and canal-intersected terrain of southern China. The great Song fortress Xiangyang (Hsiang-yang) in modern Hubei (Hupei) province north of the central Yangzi valley held up for four years in 1273. Finally Persian siege engineers and starvation forced Xiangyang’s surrender, which opened up the route to conquer the south. The Mongols also built a navy. The last adult Song emperor died in 1274; two years later Hangzhou surrendered without a fi ght. Three infant emperors succeeded one another until 1279 when the last one drowned near Guangzhou (Canton) in 1279 as his remnant navy was overwhelmed by the Mongol fl eet. See also Jin (Chin) dynasty; Liao dynasty. Further reading: Bols, Peter K. “This Culture of Ours,” Intellectual Transitions in T’ang and Sung China. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1992; Gernet, Jacques. Daily Life in China on the Eve of the Mongol Invasion, 125–1276. Trans. by H. M. Wright. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1962; Mote, F. W. Imperial China, 900–1800. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Srivijaya kingdom The Sailendra dynasty was based in the Kedu plain in Java. They fi rst appeared in the sixth century, around 570. The name Sailendra means “lord of the mountain,” a title derived from the Funanese kings, from whom they claimed descent. By the middle of the eighth century the Buddhist dynasty had consolidated its territory in Java, ruling about two-thirds of its eastern area. Bali, Lombok, coastal areas of Kalimantan, and southern Sulawesi fell under Sailendra control. Their sphere of infl uence extended to the Malay Peninsula and parts of Siam as well. Their greatest feat was building the Borobudur temple. Prince Patapan cut their prosperity short; the neighboring Sanjaya dynasty usurped the throne in 832, forcing the Sailendra prince to hide in the forest. The latter returned in 850 but was defeated and fl ed to the Srivijaya kingdom. The Buddhist kingdom of Srivijaya was located on the large island of Sumatra. The name Srivijaya means “great victory.” Most likely the Srivijaya kingdom was on the southeastern coast of Sumatra, including Palembang, another city farther inland along the Musi River. Palembang was probably the center of the ancient Malay kingdom. Evidence supporting this view includes a rectangular enclosure encircled by a moat, forming a fort known as Bamboo Fort. Chinese porcelain shards were discovered in the settlement along the coast. According to a stone inscription dated 683, the founder of the kingdom was a Malay war chief who lived along the river. He waged war against his rival, the Jambi-Melayu, and emerged victorious. The ruler managed to gather support from neighboring polities along the Musi River, which led to the formation of the Srivijaya kingdom, with Palembang as the core area. The Srivijaya kingdom achieved commercial dominance as a maritime power because the mouth of the river Musi was rich with silt and therefore very fertile for the cultivation of crops, including rice. The ancient Malay polity was a coastal power that controlled the Malacca Straits as well as the Sunda Straits, from the late seventh century to the 12th century, though the kingdom might have been in existence since the third century. The straits were busy routes as ships often passed through them as they traveled between China and India. Among the many ports in the area, Srivijaya was the most powerful. It ruled over the coasts of the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra, western Kalimantan, western Java, and the Isthmus of Kra. Srivijaya was mainly a maritime power; its control did not extend to territories far inland. Because of its widespread dominion, Srivijaya, together Srivijaya kingdom 375 with its rival, the kingdom of Jambi, was able to spread Malay culture throughout the Malay Archipelago in the Malay Peninsula, Java, Sumatra, and Borneo. Srivijaya consisted of three main zones—the estuarine region of the capital city Palembang, the hinterland formed by the Musi River basin that maintained a relative amount of independence but with loyal pledges to the Srivijaya ruler, and former rival estuarine zones. The Buddhist king built monasteries, visited them often, and gave money to Buddhist monks traveling to India who frequently stopped in the fortifi ed city. A trunk of a large statue of Buddha, remains of a stupa, old bricks, and other Buddhist statues from the late seventh to eighth centuries have been found on the slope of a hill about 100 feet high, known as Bukit Seguntang. A Chinese monk, I Ching, who visited Srivijaya in 689, wrote that many Chinese monks stayed in the monasteries of Srivijaya long enough to learn the Malay and Sanskrit languages, before continuing their journey to India. Srivijaya was sometimes referred to as Jinzhou, or the “Gold Coast.” This was because Srivijaya’s wealth and fame were mainly due to the reserves of gold found within its kingdom. Srivijaya infl uence began to decline in the 11th century, weakened by attacks from the Javanese, and the Singhasari dynasty was followed by the powerful Majapahit dynasty. Aceh achieved prominence in the region as a center of Islam, as it was one of the fi rst ports frequented by Indian Muslim and Arab merchants. The spread of Islam undermined Srivijaya authority in the region. Finally in 1414 the last Srivijaya ruler, Parameswara, became a Muslim. He founded a sultanate in Malacca, a coastal town on the western coast of the Malay Peninsula, and it thrived as an important port. Further reading: Coedes, George, and Louis-Charles Damais. Sriwijaya: History, Religion & Language of an Early Malay Polity: Collected Studies. Malaysian branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1992; Shaffer, Lynda Norene. Maritime Southeast Asia to 1500. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 1996. Nurfadzilah Yahaya Stephen I (1096–1154) English king Stephen I of England was born to Stephen, count of Blois and Chartres, and Adela, daughter of William the Conqueror, in 1096. The exact date of Stephen’s birth is not known; he had four brothers and three sisters. Stephen’s father died while taking part in the First Crusade. In 1113 while he was still quite young, Stephen’s mother, Adela, sent him to make his fortunes at the court of her brother, Henry I, king of England and duke of Normandy. Stephen’s uncle warmly received his nephew. Henry quickly bestowed upon Stephen many honors including lands in England and Normandy, as well as the title of count of Mortain. In 1125 Henry orchestrated Stephen’s marriage to a wealthy heiress, Matilda of Boulogne. In December 1120 Henry I’s only surviving legitimate son, William the Aethling, drowned when the White Ship capsized in the English Channel. After his son’s death, Henry I became very concerned about the succession. As his fi rst wife had died in 1118, Henry quickly remarried with the hopes of fathering a new male heir. Despite the fact that Henry was the father of several bastard sons by various mistresses, when it became clear that his second marriage would not produce any issue, Henry was faced with a diffi cult decision in regard to whom he should name as his heir. The most prominent contenders for the honor included Henry’s only surviving, legitimate child, Maude (also known by the Latinized version of her name, Matilda); his bastard son, Robert of Gloucester; and Stephen, his nephew. Among Henry’s magnates, Stephen was the most popular 376 Stephen I By the middle of the eighth century the Buddhist dynasty consolidated its territory in Java and built the Borobudur temple. choice given his gender and his legitimacy. Stephen was well liked for his bravery and skill in battle, his easygoing disposition, and his kind nature. However instead of Stephen, Henry named his daughter Maude as his heir. Henry argued that, despite her gender, Maude held the best hereditary claim to the throne of England. In December 1126 Henry insisted that all of his magnates, including Stephen, swear an oath of loyalty to Maude as his heir. In 1128 Henry negotiated the widely unpopular marriage of Maude to Geoffrey la Belle, count of Anjou and Maine. However Henry was quite pleased with the marriage, and Maude further secured her father’s favor when she produced a son in 1133. The baby was named Henry in the king’s honor. Henry I died on December 1, 1135, while in Normandy. As soon as word reached Stephen of his uncle’s death, he set sail from Boulogne for England. Securing the royal treasury at Winchester, Stephen immediately proclaimed himself king. Stephen claimed that upon his deathbed, Henry I had renounced his support of Maude as his heir in favor of Stephen. He also asserted that the oaths of loyalty he had pledged to Maude were null and void, as his uncle had forced him to swear fealty under duress. On December 26, 1135, Stephen was crowned and anointed by William de Corbeil, archbishop of Canterbury. As soon as word reached Maude that Stephen had usurped the English throne, she immediately made plans to fi ght her cousin for the succession. She fi rst appealed to Pope Innocent II for support despite the fact that Innocent had already declared Stephen as the rightful heir to Henry’s throne. When the pope failed to grant Maude any political support, she chose to undertake a military solution. Between 1139 and 1153 civil war raged in England. One monk noted in The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle that the anarchy of Stephen’s reign was a time when “men said openly that Christ and His angels slept.” Maude initially waged a successful war against Stephen. She captured Stephen on February 2, 1141, at the Battle of Lincoln. Proclaiming herself Anglorum Domina or “Lady of the English,” Maude made ready to be crowned queen in London. However several unpopular political decisions resulted in rebellion against Maude. Fighting soon resumed under the command of Stephen’s wife, Matilda of Boulogne. In September 1141, Matilda’s forces captured Robert of Gloucester. Maude was forced to agree to a prisoner exchange—Stephen for Robert. Stephen’s restoration and Maude’s retreat to Robert’s stronghold at Bristol marked the end of the fi rst phase of the civil war. The second phase of the civil war began in 1148. Maude left the fi ghting in England to her eldest son, Henry. Known as Henry FitzEmpress, Henry had a rise to power that was amazingly swift. He acceded to the dukedom of Normandy in 1151, became count of Anjou and Maine upon his father’s unexpected death later that year, and consolidated his power base by marrying Eleanor of Aquitaine in 1152. Eleanor’s wealth provided the money and soldiers that Henry needed if he were going to successfully take up his mother’s claims to the En glish Crown. Fearful of Henry’s growing power, Stephen wished to ensure that his eldest surviving son, Eustace, would succeed him as king of England. In 1150 Stephen took steps to solidify Eustace’s position as his heir by having him crowned and consecrated as king during Stephen’s own lifetime. Pope Celestine II refused to comply with Stephen’s request. On August 17, 1153, Stephen’s main impediment to peace with Duke Henry was removed when Eustace suddenly died. Shortly thereafter, Stephen’s leading magnates, tired of the fi ghting, forced a peace settlement upon Stephen and Duke Henry. In the Treaty of Westminster, Henry agreed to allow Stephen to rule as king for the remainder of his lifetime. In return, Stephen adopted Henry as his son and named him as heir to the throne of England. Sick and worn out from years of fi ghting, Stephen died on October 25, 1154. He was buried next to his wife, Matilda, at Faversham Abbey in Kent, having ruled as the last of the Norman monarchs in England. See also Henry II; Norman Conquest of England; Norman and Plantagenet kings of England. Further reading: Appleby, John T. The Troubled Reign of Stephen. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1970; Bradbury, Jim. Stephen and Matilda: The Civil War of 1139–53. Stroud, Gloucestershire: Alan Sutton Publishing, 1996; Crouch, David. The Reign of King Stephen, 1135–1154. Essex: Pearson Education, 2000; Davis, R. H. C. King Stephen, 1135–1154. London: Longman, 1990; Matthew, Donald. King Stephen. London: Hambledon and London, 2002; Stringer, Keith J. The Reign of Stephen: Kingship, Warfare, and Government in Twelfth Century England. New York: Routledge, 1993. Deborah L. Bauer Su Shi (Su Shih) (1037–1101) Chinese poet One of the most famous and easily recognizable voices in China’s 3,000-year-old history, the great poet Su Shi left behind an impressive body of writing that underscores Su Shi 377 the major themes of Chinese civilization. In Su Shi’s poetry, the reader encounters traditional Chinese values such as the appreciation of others, friendship, fraternal harmony, reverence for nature, and the preoccupation with time—all addressed in a special, elevated mode of feeling, tone, and expression that the Chinese would term shiqing, or lyricism. In the Chinese tradition this elevated mode of expression is akin to what in the Judaeo-Christian tradition is ordinarily understood as religious sentiment and the expression of religious feeling. For the Chinese people literature and culture (wen), especially poetry, were experienced as a religious engagement, a spiritual exercise. Thus when Su Shi in his most characteristic poems, such as the “Rhapsody on the Red Cliffs” (I and II), expresses sadness over the Chinese collective memory of great heroes and ages gone by, the poet is partaking in what the Chinese believed was a most exalted vocation; he serves as a bridge between the past and the present, ensuring the continuity of culture. To the Chinese people, to participate in the preservation and creative transformation of culture over time was to help ensure that Chinese culture attained the same divine immortality as nature. The Chinese ascribed to nature and her aspirant, culture, a kind of basic tendency toward the good, the nurturing, and the generally positive qualities of existence that many Westerners would tend to fi nd somewhat naïve. While it is true that Chinese culture places far greater emphasis on the lighter, more optimistic, side of existence, the Chinese were hardly immune from suffering. The life of the poet Su Shi is a case in point. Su Shi’s career as a high offi cial in Chinese government was full of unpredictable turns. He was exiled from the capital to two of the harshest backward regions of his day. One of them, Hainan Island, was a kind of tropical version of Siberia. In Su Shi’s writings it may at fi rst glance seem as if none of these harsh experiences had registered in his mind at all. Yet that is only the case because of the different aesthetic and cultural demands for poets to submit their voices to standards of restraint, moderation, and, in cases of taboo subjects or very negative experiences, omission. Given Chinese culture’s tendency to shy away from the darker side of experience, the true legacy of a great Chinese poet like Su Shi is the expression of sadness over the passing of time, as seen in the perennial theme of the gap between human mortality and the immortality of nature in Chinese poetry. Because of the Chinese reverence for nature and belief in nature’s propensity to goodness, the true source of tragedy in Chinese existence is the gap between the human and cosmic scales of time, the recognition that no matter how great the man or woman, how signifi cant that person’s contributions to culture, humanity, and the world, the person must ultimately pass away, whereas nature, quite oblivious to the fact, simply continues. Because this discrepancy between human and cosmic time is the main source of tragedy in Chinese conceptions of life, the result is that in lyric expression, the poets mostly hold to the old Chinese ideal of “joy without excess, sorrow without pain,” as in one of Su Shi’s celebrated poems, “Harmonizing with Qin Guan’s (Ch’in Kuan) Poem on Plum Blossoms”: Ten thousand miles of spring scenery follow the traveler, Ten years of fl owering blossoms send the beauty to her old age. Last year when the fl owers bloomed I was already ill, This year facing the fl owers I am still a mess. Who knows when the winds and rains will send spring home, When I will collect the leftover fragrance and return it to Heaven. See also Chinese Poetry, golden age of; Song (Sung) dynasty. Further reading: Bol, Peter K. “Su Shih and Culture.” In Kidder Smith, Jr. et al. Sung Dynasty Uses of the I Ching. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990; Egan, Ronald C. Word, Image, and Deed in the Life of Su Shi. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1994; Fuller, Michael Anthony. Road to East Slope: The Development of Su Shi’s Poetic Voice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1990; Grant, Beata. Mount Lu Revisited: Buddhism in the Life and Writings of Su Shih. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1995; Pine, Red, trans. Poems of the Masters: China’s Classic Anthology of T’ang and Sung Dynasty Verse. Port Townsend, WA: Copper Canyon Press, 2003. Maggie Chiang Subotai (1176–1248) Mongol general Subotai was probably the greatest Mongolian general of the period of Mongolian empire and played an important role in its establishment and expansion. He was likely from Uriyangqai, the region lying between the Onon and Kerulen Rivers, and came into the service of the young 378 Subotai Mongol chieftain Genghis Khan (r. 1206–27) primarily through a long-term family association. Subotai was an important member of Genghis Khan’s guards by the early part of the 13th century and had already distinguished himself in the latter’s service. In 1204 Genghis Khan defeated the league formed against him by Tayang-qan of the Naiman, with the active participation of Subotai. The future khan’s enemies were now defeated or dead or had migrated out of Mongolia to fl ee his wrath. Among those fl eeing were a group of Naiman survivors led by Gücülük, and another group of Merkit led by their chief Toqto’a-beki. Since such groups could recuperate quickly, ally with others, and constitute a major threat to Genghis Khan’s new regime, it was vital to pursue them. Charged with the task, among others, were Jebe, another talented Mongolian general, and Subotai, initiating at fi rst a general reconnaissance, then an advance west, extending over a decade and a half. In 1208 Juji, the oldest son of Genghis Khan, defeated the Merkit group in a great battle on the Irtysh River. Toqto’a-beki was killed but his sons, led by Qudu, took their father’s head with them and fl ed south into Uighur domains. Sent in pursuit were Jebe and Subotai, securing the submission of the Bešbaliq Uighurs on the way, who participated in a battle against Qudu, who was weakened but escaped, on the banks of the Djem or Cem River (1209). By that time the situation in eastern Turkistan, long ruled by the Qara-Khitan, was in fl ux, and the appearance of the Naiman Gücülük further unsettled things. He eventually seized power but even as a refugee constituted a major threat to the new Mongol regime. Faced with a situation beyond their resources, Jebe and Subotai did what good Mongol commanders almost always did: They concentrated against the enemy more easily dealt with, Qudu, and kept the other under close supervision. Subotai went after Qudu, and Jebe pursued Gücülük as far as he could into Qara-Khitan territory, without coming into confl ict with the still powerful Qara-Khitan ruler. Satisfi ed that his enemy was no longer an immediate threat, Jebe then joined with Subotai to defeat the Merkit survivors once and for all. By this time the Merkit were allied with a group of Qangli, a Turkic people, but they were all but destroyed in the battle (1209) at a site called Jade Valley, in the Chinese sources. Unfortunately before they could return home, mission accomplished, the two Mongol generals encountered a new, unexpected enemy, the Khwarazmshah Muhammad, and engaged in a clash with him, which was indecisive. The Mongols withdrew after kindling fake campfi res to mask their movements. In the wake of the advances of Jebe and Subotai, the Qangli and Qarluq, another Turkic people, submitted. Recalled home, both Jebe and Subotai participated in the general assault on the Jin (Chin) dynasty (1125– 1234) in China, leading to the fall of the Jin central capital of Zhongdu (Chungtu) in 1215, the real beginning of Mongolian control in China. Sent west again, the two Mongol generals protected Mongol interests there and participated in the fi nal pursuit of Gücülük, leading to his death in 1218. Eastern Turkistan and large chunks of southern Siberia were under Mongol control, making the latter a serious threat to the Khwarazmshah Muhammad. War came soon after the famous Otrar Incident (1218), in which some merchants under the protection of the Mongol ruler were massacred at the orders of a local Khwarazmian offi cial. Faced with a general assault from, as was the Mongol custom, as many directions at once as possible, the Khwarazmian empire crumbled and the Khwarazm-shah, now a refugee, died on an island in the Caspian in 1220. At the suggestion of Subotai, who with Jebe had actively participated in the campaign, the Mongols launched the greatest reconnaissance in force in history, an expedition through northern Iran, into the Caucasus, and then across the south Russian steppe, to link up again with other Mongol armies. The expedition was a success, although Jebe died. On June 16, 1223, the two generals defeated a Russian allied force on the Kalkha River, the Mongols fi rst encounter with a western power. Subotai participated as a senior commander in the fi nal subjugation of Jin (by 1234). Although already an old man by 1235, about 59, Subotai was now tapped for his greatest role of all, that of strategic commander for a generalized Mongol advance to secure the palimony of Juji’s sons, who by tradition, were to receive the most distant pastures of his father in the extreme west of the Mongolian world. As part of this advance, Subotai participated in the Mongol destruction of Kievan Russia (1237–40) and then was called upon to plan an even larger assault, on eastern Europe, during 1241. Advancing along multiple lines, with coordinated columns, the Mongols overwhelmed all their opponents although the Hungarians proved somewhat tougher than expected, even though the latter were only partially mobilized. Only the death of Ogotai Khan (r. 1229–41), the successor of Genghis Khan, seems to have prevented an even wider advance. Returning home, Subotai spent his last years either in the Mongolian homeland or on the borders of China. His sons and grandsons continued to serve Mongol rulers, including those of China. Subotai 379 See also Rus; Uighur Empire. Further reading: Buell, Paul D. “Sübötei-ba’atur.” In Igor de Rachewiltz, et al., eds. In the Service of the Khan, Eminent Personalities of the Early Mongol-Yuan Period (1200– 1300). Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1993; Buell, Paul D. “Early Mongol Expansion in Western Siberia and Turkestan (1207–1219): a Reconstruction.” Central Asiatic Journal (v.36, 1992). Paul D. Buell Sufi sm Sufi sm is Islamic mysticism. The word derives from the Arabic tasawwuf meaning “to wear wool” or “to seek purifi cation.” Early Sufi s, or practitioners of Sufi sm, often wore simple wool capes and sought knowledge of the higher being using both their bodies and minds. Sufi sm is in the same tradition as Christian and Hindu mysticism. Many became ascetics and developed a number of different rituals to achieve closeness or unity with God. These included the use of prayer beads, similar to a rosary in Catholicism, and fasting, chanting, and dance. The most famous of those using dance were known in the West as the whirling dervishes, an order of Sufi s founded by Jalal al-Din Rumi. The dance involved the acolytes spinning in circles around the master much as the planets revolve around the Sun. The ulema were highly skeptical of Sufi practices and often persecuted Sufi followers. Seeking to bridge the gap between the religious formalism of the ulema and Sufi practices, the philosopher al-Ghazzali argued that the two were not irreconcilable. Muhyiddin ibn ‘Arabi (1165–1240), who was born in Andalusia and died in Damascus, was another Muslim scholar who wrote on Sufi sm. A master or shaykh mentored students of the Sufi orders. Much like fraternal orders, the Sufi s were open to all; however, initiates often had to give up their personal property and pledge obedience to the shaykh. They then embarked on a journey or road through various stages of membership. Religious endowments enabled some Sufi orders to establish their own complexes with a mosque, school, kitchens, and social welfare programs. Sufi complexes were established in Baghdad by the 12th century. These were often built around the tomb of the founder of the order and the tombs of Sufi shaykhs often became sites of pilgrimage and veneration among both the Sunni and Shi’i. Many Sufi s were prolifi c poets as well as musicians and made major contributions to Islamic literature as well to classical Islamic music. Hafi z and al-Rumi were among the most well known and beloved of the Sufi poets. Sufi s also traveled across the Muslim world as teachers and missionaries and were instrumental in the spread of Islam, especially in Africa. See also Islam: literature and music in the golden age. Further reading: Al Faruqi, Isma’il R., and Lois Lamya’, The Cultural Atlas of Islam. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1986; Arberry, A. J. An Introduction to the History of Sufi sm. London: Longman, 1942; Knysh, Alexander. Islamic Mysticism: A Short History. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Janice J. Terry Sui dynasty This short-lived dynasty (581–618) is enormously important in Chinese history because it restored unity to a country that had been divided since the fall of the Han dynasty in 220. For 300 years before its creation China had moreover been divided between the Turkic tribal people called the Toba (T’o-pa) and Xianbi (Hsien-pi) who ruled the north and Chinese, many descended from refugees who had fl ed the nomadic invaders, who ruled the south. As the short-lived Qin (Chin) dynasty (220–206 b.c.e.) that it has been compared to, the Sui heralded China’s second great imperial age under its successor, the Tang (T’ang) dynasty. The last of a succession of mostly short-lived states of northern China ruled by Turkic tribal people was called the Northern Zhou (Chou). The second Northern Zhou ruler was married to the daughter of a powerful nobleman named Yang Jian (Yang Chien), the duke of Sui. When he died leaving a six-year-old son as successor, grandfather Yang became regent and soon seized power and founded a new dynasty named the Sui, in 581. SUI WENDI Yang Jian (r. 581–603) is known by his reign title Sui Wendi (Wen-ti), meaning “literary emperor of the Sui.” Of mixed Chinese and Turkic descent, he was a prudent, hardworking, and wise ruler and was assisted by his capable Turkic wife, Empress Wenxian (Wen-hsian). He established his capital in Chang’an (Ch’ang-an), which had been capital city of the Han dynasty, symbolizing 380 Sufism his goal of restoring its institutions and glories. Between 587 and 589 he subdued southern China, reunifying the country. Though a devout Buddhist, he used Buddhism, Daoism (Taoism), and Confucianism to win support and to establish a common cultural base for the country. Wendi curtailed the power of the great landed families by vesting in the central government the power to appoint all offi cials throughout the land and laid the foundations for personnel recruitment through a nationwide examination for which the successor Tang (T’ang) dynasty is usually given credit. Wendi also began a nationwide land allocation system for farmers and a militia system in which all male farmers who had been given land were obliged to serve. These policies were also fully realized under the succeeding Tang dynasty. Wendi waged inconclusive campaigns against the northern Turkic tribes and the newly formed state that occupied northern Korea and southern Manchuria called Koguryo. He also rebuilt sections of the Great Wall. Wendi was frugal in private life and worked to improve the economy by rebuilding old canals to link Chang’an with the Yellow River and expanding the waterways to link up with the waterways of central China and the Yangzi (Yangtze) River. His son and successor later expanded on the waterways, known as the Grand Canal, in the north to Luoyang (Loyang) with a branch to present day Beijing, and in the south to Hangzhou (Hangchou) on the coast, via Yangzhou (Yangchou) on the Yangzi River. Its total length was 1,250 miles, the longest canal system in the world and a huge engineering feat. This grand project was completed by corvee labor and at great human cost, which generated popular discontent against the dynasty. Its completion was of immense importance because the system linked the rich and growing economy of the south to the heart of the empire in the north to support the needs of defending the empire. The Grand Canal also aided in the reintegration of the long divided empire. Wendi and his empress had fi ve sons. The second son, Yang Guang (Kuang), known to history as Yangdi (Yang-Ti), was born in 569. Talented and well educated, Yang Guang was married to a woman from the royal family of the former Liang dynasty of southern China and appointed viceroy of the newly pacifi ed southern provinces in 589, where he remained for 10 years. He ruled from Yangzhou, which fl ourished as the junction that connected the Yangzi River with prosperous Hangzhou on the coast. In a series of murky events that might have implicated Yang Guang, his elder brother the crown prince was demoted, he was elevated to that position, followed shortly by Wendi’s death. YANGDI (YANG-TI) Yang Guang reigned as Yangdi (Emperor Yang) from 604 to 617. Historians have accused him of megalomania and extravagance that brought down the Sui dynasty. His grand vision led to the simultaneous launching of huge projects that include the building of a second capital in the east, at the site of the former Han capital of Luoyang that had been sacked by the Xiongnu (Hsiungnu) 300 years before. He further expanded the Grand Canal begun by his father, building an eastern branch to modern Beijing. Yangdi also lived extravagantly and traveled extensively along the canals and rivers in a grand fl otilla of pleasure boats and held elaborate entertainments in his lavish palaces. His downfall was however triggered by his ambitious foreign policy and disastrous wars. In the south Wendi had restored Chinese power in present-day northern Vietnam, which had been annexed under the Han dynasty but had broken away from the control of the weak southern dynasties in the era of division. Yangdi invaded the Champa kingdom in presentday central and southern Vietnam, which won acknowledgment of Sui overlordship by the local ruler after a costly campaign. A naval expedition was sent in 610 to pacify islands in the East China Sea, generally assumed to be Taiwan, but formed no permanent settlements there. Chinese ships had sailed to Japan since the Han dynasty, where Chinese cultural infl uence, brought via Korea, had been growing. The fi rst Japanese embassy arrived in Yangdi’s court in 607 and addressed him as “the Bodhisattva Son of Heaven who gives the full weight of his support of Buddhist teachings.” It included Japanese Buddhist monks, who sought permission to study Buddhism in China. Yangdi sent an emissary to Japan in 608 that brought back more information about that country. Thus opened a two-century-long era when 17 Japanese embassies, each with hundreds of students, arrived to study in China, with great signifi cance for Japan’s development. In the north Yangdi, too, had to deal with the Turks. To keep them in check he rebuilt and extended sections of the Great Wall. He also resorted to traditional stratagems such as keeping sons of the Turkish khans in the Sui capitals to ensure their fathers’ good behavior, conferring Sui princesses in marriages with the khans, trade and gifts (Chinese silks for Turkish horses), and Chinese titles for Turkish rulers. His Sui dynasty 381 diplomats also fomented dissension among the Turkish tribes to prevent them from coalescing or forming coalitions against China. When necessary Chinese armies overawed and defeated hostile tribes. The Sui maintained dominance over the Turkic tribes and kept open trade routes between China and the west. In the northeast in lands where the Han had established several commanderies, a state called Koguryo had formed early in the seventh century, with its capital at modern Pyongyang and that incorporated lands of modern northern Korea and Manchuria east of the Liao River. Koguryo was militarily strong and could menace China, especially if it acted in concert with Tungustic tribal people farther north and Turkic people to the west. Wendi had attempted to subdue Koguryo, without success. In 612, 613, and 614 Yangdi launched three major campaigns against Koguryo with crippling losses of life and at huge economic costs. The Korean campaigns and natural disasters added to the economic distress and widespread revolts broke out. Ultimately the Sui were defeated by the diffi cult terrain and the climate, which favored the defenders; the great distance of the campaign from the heartland of China (about a thousand miles); and the weak coordination between the Sui army and navy. With the empire collapsing Yangdi left his capital for the south via the Grand Canal. Two years later he was murdered in his bath and the Sui dynasty ended. INFLUENCE OF THE SUI DYNASTY Historians have judged Yangdi harshly for his personal debauchery and as a tyrant who brought down the dynasty his father founded. However the debacle his policies brought and the civil war that ensued did not last long and China would enter its second imperial age under the successor Tang dynasty. The glories of the Tang dynasty have overshadowed the contributions of the Sui. They include: 1. The sweeping away of the regional regimes and their institutions that had divided China in the preceding three centuries. It built new institutions that would ensure future political and cultural unity in a subcontinental sized nation that stretched from Beijing to Hanoi and from the East China Sea to the gates of Central Asia. At the height of Yangdi’s reign the Chinese empire governed about 50 million people. 2. The modeling of a reunifi ed China on the Han by reviving and expanding institutions such as the examination system based on the Confucian classics and the Han tradition of codifi ed laws (the Sui code became the bases of the Tang and later codes). 3. A land tenure and militia system that would be maintained by the Tang for a century and half, which was key to its success and was copied by Japan and has inspired later Chinese governments because they were just and equitable. The Sui succeeded in reunifying China because of the wise policies of its founder but also because despite partition, the Chinese shared a common written language, common ideology and moral values in Confucianism, and by now a religion that was deeply embedded throughout the land: Buddhism. See also Shotoku Taishi; Taizong (T’ang-tsung). Further reading: Bingham, Woodbridge. The Founding of the T’ang Dynasty: The Fall of Sui and Rise of T’ang. Baltimore: Waverly Press, 1941; Denis Twitchett, ed. Cambridge History of China, Vol. III, Sui and T’ang China, 589–906 a.d. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979; Wright, Arthur. The Sui Dynasty, The Unifi cation of China, a.d. 581–617. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Sukhothai The Sukhothai was an early kingdom in the area around the city of Sukhothai, in north central Thailand. It existed from 1238 to 1438. Thailand was under the Funan and Srivijaya Kingdoms before the migration of Thai people because of pressure from the Mongols. They were compelled to leave Nan Chao in Yunan. The formative stage of Thailand’s history began with powerful monarchs operating from Sukhothai on the banks of the Mae Nam Yom River. The kingdom of Sukhothai’s predominance was due to the fact that it had tremendous potential for agricultural production. It controlled water resources for the entire Menam Basin as it was situated at top of the main fl ood basin. A surplus of food made it possible to have a large army. Sukhothai was one of the early kingdoms that emerged in Thailand and Laos integrating the traditional muang administration with the Indian mandala concept of a centralized state. It borrowed art forms and administrative structure from the Khmers. Mongol infl uence was evident in military units. Legal traditions came from the Mons. In spite of infl uences from India, Sri Lanka, and neighboring 382 Sukhothai regions, Sukhothai evolved its own cultural pattern, maintaining its identity. The legacy of Sukhothai was their language, script, and religion, which became an essential part of Thai culture. The local Thai princes Pho Khun Bang Klang and Pho Khun Pha Muang revolted against Khmer rule, establishing independent regimes. Klang became the king of Sukhothai with title of Sri Indraditya (r. 1238– 70) and was succeeded by his son Pho Khun Ban Muang (r. 1270–77). The regime expanded under the younger brother of Rama Khamheng (1239–1298), who ruled from 1277 until 1298. Rama Khamheng or Rama the Great was one of the greatest monarchs of Thailand and at the time of his death left a vast kingdom. He adopted both diplomacy and warfare to expand Sukhothai’s domain. Their stability was assured by a friendship with China.Many important facets of Thai culture developed under his reign. The Mons, Khmers, Indians, and Sri Lankans had close cultural contact with Sukhothai. The Sri Lankan variety of Buddhism (Theravada Buddhism, also known as Lankavong) became predominant in Thailand. In continuity with the indigenous tradition of worshipping spirits, Rama Khamheng continued to make offerings to Phra Khaphung, the spirit deity located on a hill south of Sukhothai, even after adopting Theravada Buddhism. Thus two religious traditions were merged. Rama Khamheng was the originator of Thai script. The Thai alphabets invented by him are basically still in use, with modifi cations. The reign of Rama Khamheng, the warrior and benevolent monarch, is rightly called the golden period in Thai history. After the death of Rama Khamheng, his son Lao Thai (r. 1298–1346) ascended the throne. The kingdom of Sukhothai faced challenges from rising Thai states and Lao Thai was not very successful. Decline of the kingdom began and later rulers could not check the process of disintegration. There was a struggle for power after the death of Lao Thai and Nguanamthom ruled for some months. Lao Thai’s son Luthai ultimately became the ruler with title of Mahathammaracha I (r. 1346–68). A great scholar and patron of Theravada Buddhism, he was more involved in religious affairs. He did not pay much attention to the affairs of the state. The emergence of the powerful Lan Xang kingdom in Laos and Ayutthaya in southern Thailand resulted in loss of sizable territory of Sukhothai. Fa Nagum established the fi rst unifi ed state of Lan Xang in 1353. The kingdom of Ayutthaya, founded by Rama Tibodi in 1350, dominated Thai power and culture for four centuries. Neither Mahathammaracha I nor his successor Mahathammaracha II (r. 1368–98) could check acquisition of Sukhothai territory by Lan Xang and Ayutthaya. In 1371 Borommaracha I (r. 1370–88) of Ayutthaya, bent upon a policy of doing away with his Thai rivals, invaded Sukhothai and captured several towns. Four years afterward, the important town of Phitsanulok fell to the Ayutthaya king’s army. Sukhothai became a vassal state of Audhya in 1378 after 140 years of independent existence. In 1400 there was a fl icker of hope for Sukhothai, when Mahathammaracha III (r. 1398–1419) declared independence from Ayutthaya’s subjugation. It was suppressed and Ayutthaya installed a new king, Mahathammaracha IV (r. 1419–38). Phitsanulok was the new capital of a much smaller Sukhothai. It became a province of Ayutthaya after the king’s death. The princes of royal families generally became the administrators of the Sukhothai region. See also Khmer kingdom; Mon; Siamese invasion of the Khmer kingdom. Further reading: Bhirasri, Silpa. An Appreciation of Sukhothai Art. Bangkok: Thai Culture, New Series No. 17, 1962; Marr, David G., and A. C. Milner, eds. Southeast Asia in the 9th to 14th Centuries. Singapore: ANU, 1986; Rong, Syamananda. A History of Thailand. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University and Thai Watana Panich, 1977; Tarling, Nicholas, ed. The Cambridge History of Southeast Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992; Wyatt, David K. Thailand: A Short History. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1986. Patit Paban Mishra Sundiata (c. 1190–1255) king of Mali Sundiata is remembered as the fi rst of the kings of Mali. A mythic fi gure in West African history, he is known as the Lion King. He was born to a Mandingo chief, Nara Fe Maghan, and his second wife, Sogolon. After the death of his father, he and his mother had to fl ee because his 11 other brothers were jealous of the love his father had shown him and were a threat to his life. The death of Nara Fe Maghan came at a bad time for the Malinke people, for at this time Sumanguru was trying to revive the kingdom of Ghana. Sumanguru killed Sundiata’s 11 brothers but either did not fi nd Sundiata or dismissed him as a threat because the boy was lame. Sundiata gradually built up his own state of Kangaba, Sundiata 383 without attracting much notice from his father’s killer. In 1235 Sundiata challenged Sumanguru at Kirina, in a largely cavalry battle, with both armies mounted on horses and camels. The warriors would have worn heavily padded cloth coats of armor, although perhaps the more wealthy ones like Sundiata would have had chain mail and helmets imported from North Africa by the Arabs. Sundiata won by a decisive cavalry charge, which left Sumanguru dead, either killed in the fi ghting or executed after. With the death of Sumanguru, Sundiata became the mansa, or chief, of a federation in western Niger, with his new capital at Niani. Sundiata carefully organized his new realm. According to Ancient African Civilizations, Sundiata’s “division of the world assigned specifi c occupations—warrior, ironsmith, djeli (storyteller), and so on—to designated kin groups, reserving the offi ce of mansa for Sundiata’s own dynasty, that of the Keita. Sundiata also set up an administrative system based on provinces, which accommodated regional desires for a degree of self-government while allowing the mansa to retain ultimate control over what was fast becoming the empire of Mali.” Sundiata himself converted to Islam but did not compel his people to become Muslims. His conversion was a pragmatic act of statecraft, in order to gain a better position with the Arabs, who held much of the trade of western Africa, as they would until the coming of the Europeans in the 15th century with the advent of the Portuguese. Following the death of Sundiata, the kingdom that would be known as Mali continued to expand during the reign of his son Uli (1250–70). There was a period of strife when a general named Sakura seized power. Sakura decided to fulfi ll the Islamic vow of the hajj and make a pilgrimage from Mali to Mecca. On the return journey he died, and power reverted to the family of Sundiata, and “the title of mansa returned to the Keita family, passing in 1307 to Kankan Musa, a son of Sundiata’s brother Manding Bory.” Under Kankan Musa, also known as Mansa Musa, Mali reached its apex. Kankan Musa (reigned 1307–37) also made the hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca, in 1324 and returned safely. But with him on his return, Kankan also brought Islamic scholars from Mecca. With them he established centers of learning in Timbuktu, Jenne (or Djenne), and Gao. A huge mud brick mosque in Jenne would later be restored in 1907, when Moulay Hafi d ruled as sultan of Morocco. Ibn Batuta, the great Arab traveler, came to Mansa Musa’s kingdom on his tour of Islamic Africa. Mansa Musa also introduced Islamic architecture to West Africa with the arrival of Ishak as- Sahili, who built a series of mosques. His development of Mali was made possible by the great wealth in gold at his disposal. According to Joseph E. Harris in Africans and Their History, a European atlas would chronicle that “this Negro Lord is called Mansa Musa, Lord of the Negros of Guinea. So abundant is the gold which is found in his country that he is the richest and most noble king in all the land.” Under Mansa Musa, the kingdom of Mali, the creation of Sundiata, enjoyed—in all senses of the word—a true golden age. See also gold and salt, kingdoms of. Further reading: Harris, Joseph E. Africans and Their History. New York: Meridian, 1998; Maxwell, Gavin. Lords of The Atlas [Mountains]. New York: Dutton, 1966; Niane, D. T. Africa from the Twelfth to the Sixteenth Century. London: Heinemann, 1984; Nicolle, David. A Historical Atlas of the Islamic World. New York: Checkmark Books, 2003. John F. Murphy, Jr. Sviatoslav (c. 930–972) king of Russia Sviatoslav ruled over the Rus with the capital in Kiev c. 969–972. He was the son of Kiev’s Prince Igor (r. 912–945) and Princess Olga (who ruled as Sviatoslav’s regent in 945–969 after Igor’s death), known in history as the fi rst Christian princess of Rus. In historical literature Sviatoslav is often called the last Viking, the main goal of whose rule was the permanent and sometimes senseless war campaigns against the neighbors of Rus. Olga’s 25-year rule resulted in Sviatoslav’s disinterest in internal state affairs, so he found a new fi eld of activity—war campaigns in remote territories. The formal beginning of Sviatoslav’s rule is dated at 964 (his fi rst war campaign), but in fact he only minimally infl uenced Kievan life until Olga’s death in 969. In spite of the infl uence of his tutor Asmoud and the military governor (voyevoda) Sveneld, he neglected Kiev and felt himself free from any obligations toward its population. He even announced his desire to live in another city, founded by him in Pereyaslav-on-Danube. As prominent Ukrainian historians Olexiy and Petro Tolochko state, Sviatoslav’s mode of life was motivated exclusively by searches for battle and by mercantile gains from the campaigns often fi nanced by Byzantine diplomacy. Sviatoslav’s campaigns reached into the east. In 964–966 Sviatoslav was at war 384 Sviatoslav with the Khazars for power of the Vyatichi Slavonic tribe. This campaign resulted in the crushing defeat of the Khazar kaganat (princedom) and destruction of its capital Itil and the fortresses of Sarkel and Semender. At the same time he defeated the Volga Bolgars and took their capital Bolgar. In the northern Caucasus he displayed himself in his victory over tribes of Yasy and Kasogi. Soon Volyn and the Carpathian regions had entered into the sphere of Sviatoslav’s attention, and his fi rst squads were sent there, marking the beginnings of this region’s exploration, fi nished by his sons. The most striking trend of Sviatoslav’s wars is connected with the Danubian or Balkan region. In 967 Byzantine emperor Nikephoros II promised Sviatoslav 455 kilos of gold for his campaign. Most researchers believe that Sviatoslav also had his own interests there, so in August 968, his fl eet with 60,000 troops gained victory over Bulgarian king Peter and gained control over 80 settlements on the Danube. This campaign was interrupted by the Pecheneg siege of Kiev (968). Destruction of the Khazar princedom by Sviatoslav eliminated obstacles for their penetration into the inner Rus lands. The consequences of his war campaign caused the deep dissatisfaction of the local population. This did not worry the prince, since he was planning to transfer his capital to Bulgarian lands, and soon after Olga’s death Sviatoslav started the second Balkan campaign (autumn 969), having sectioned control over major Rus lands among his three sons. His successes in 970 and tendency to conduct independent policy in the Danubian region forced the Byzantine emperor to start his expulsion, and the spring of 971 was marked by the taking of the Bulgarian capital of Preslav (the contemporary location is unknown). Sviatoslav was in a two-month siege in Dorostol (modern Silistra), which resulted in a bloody battle and subsequent treaty with Byzantium (972), which Sviatoslav refused because of his claims on Crimea. He went home with his army. On his way near the Dnipro Rapids he was met by Pechenegs, informed by the Byzantines about his trip, which weakened his forces in numerous battles. Trying to break through the nomads, Sviatoslav died in the early spring of 972. See also Bulgar invasions; Bulgarian Empire; Byzantine Empire: political history; Vladimir I (Vladimir the Great). Further reading: Cross, S. H., and O. P. Shervowitz-Wetzor, eds. and trans. The Russian Primary Chronicle: Laurentian Text. Cambridge, MA: Medieval Academy of America, 1953; Evans, J. L. The Kievan Russian Principality, 860–1240. Gaithersburg, MD: Associated Faculty Press, 1981; Hosking, G. A. Russia and Russians: a History. New York: Penguin Press, 2001; Vernadsky, G. Kievan Russia. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1948. Olena V. Smyntyna Sylvester II (c. 940–1003) pope As a young man, Gerbert of Aurellac became a monk in Gaul and later studied in Spain at Barcelona, and under Islamic teachers at Seville and Córdoba. He was particularly skilled in the natural sciences and arithmetic. After completing his education under Bishop Hatto of Vichy, he traveled with the bishop to Rome and won the support of Pope John XIII. Upon a recommendation of the pope, Emperor Otto I sent Gerbert to Reims, where he was given a position as an instructor in the cathedral school under Archdeacon Gerannus. He was highly skilled in oratory and debated Ortricus of Magdeburg before Emperor Otto II on many theological matters. He was bestowed the abbey of Bobbio by the emperor but returned instead to Reims. He was partially responsible for the rise of Hugh Capet. Gerbert was elected archbishop of Reims in 991 by a synod of bishops. This elevation to the See of Reims was later declared invalid. Gerbert argued against the primacy of the pope in settling disputes of ecclesiastical offi ce. Not being able to counteract this decision Gerbert chose another path and went to the court of Otto II, where he became the emperor’s teacher. Gerbert accompanied Otto to Italy and in 998 Pope Gregory V appointed him archbishop of Ravenna. Shortly thereafter, the pope died and Gerbert was elected to the Chair of Peter on February 18, 999, and took the name of Sylvester, becoming the fi rst pope from France. He reigned until his death in 1003. Sylvester’s greatest accomplishment as pope was to fi ght the abuses of the bishops in regard to simony and concubinage. He argued vehemently that all men who rose to the episcopate should be innocent of sin. He became friends with Emperor Otto III and was exiled with the emperor after a Roman revolt against the politics of the emperor. He remained in exile for years. Abandoning his previous beliefs that the pope could not settle ecclesiastical disputes, Sylvester declared his Sylvester II 385 former opponent for the See at Reims, Arnulph, as the rightful archbishop. His reputation suffered some criticism from historians for this change in policy. After the death of Emperor Otto III, Sylvester returned to Rome, though he gained no temporal power from the competing factions of the city. He established metropolitanates in Poland and Hungary and declared the ruler of Hungary to be a king and papal representative. Sylvester wrote many works on mathematics and the physical sciences. The people of Rome held him in high esteem as an exorcisor of the devil and a miracle worker. Some historians claim he introduced Arabic numbers into the West and was the inventor of the pendulum clock. Further reading: Cheetham, Nicholas. Keepers of the Keys: A History of the Popes From St. Peter to John Paul II. New York: Scribner, 1983; Duffy, Eamon. Saints & Sinners: A History of the Popes. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002; Maxwell-Stuart, P. G. Chronicle of the Popes: The Reign-by-Reign Record of the Papacy From St. Peter to the Present. New York: Thames and Hudson, 1997. Russell James
The First Global Age 1450 to 1750 Edit
Sa’did dynasty The Sa’did dynasty, also commonly known as the Sa’dians, ruled Morocco from the mid-16th century until 1659. The dynasty was plagued with internal and external strife but was credited with uniting Morocco, defeating the colonial Portuguese, and invading the great West African Songhai Empire. The name of the dynasty was derived from their ancestry in the tribe of Banu Sa’d, and they were the first Moroccan dynasty claiming the title sharif, or descendants of the prophet Muhammad. The dynasty rose to power by challenging the ruling Wattasids, a declining dynasty despised for allying with the Portuguese and allowing the European power to gain a strong foothold in Morocco. Infighting of rival groups vying for power persisted for much of the early Sa’did rule and extended to neighboring Ottoman-controlled areas. During the 1540s and 1550s, the increasing success and military victories of the Sa’did leader, Muhammad al-Shaykh, forced the Portuguese to withdraw from many cities until their presence in Morocco was restricted to a small number of forts. In 1578, the Battle of the Three Kings was waged, in which the Portuguese king and two Moroccan kings died. The Moroccans were victorious and gained a measure of international respect for defeating a European power. Now led by Ahmad al-Mansur, the Sa’dids began to have closer ties to the Ottomans, yet remained fully independent. As well, they established relations with Spain and England, the latter gaining exclusive trade in Morocco under the Barbary Company. Al-Mansur also led a drive to form a professional military and introduced extensive use of rifles in Moroccan warfare. With his army and powerful alliances, al-Mansur steadily united the country under a despotic regime; as a consequence, a sense of Moroccan unity and national identity took root for the first time. With his expansion hemmed in by Ottoman lands in the east, in 1590 al-Mansur made a power play to control the lucrative West African trade controlled by the Songhai Empire to his south. Al-Mansur first tried to extort taxes from the Songhai ruler Askia Ishaq II but was promptly rebuffed. Al-Mansur then made the decision to invade Songhai in 1591 under the false pretense of uniting Muslims under his authority, but his expansionist and economic ambitions were transparent. The resulting Moroccan victory ended the Songhai Empire and reduced Timbuktu, the internationally respected center of West African scholarship, to a dusty outpost, devoid of scholars of any consequence. In 1593, al-Mansur died, instigating the fractious disintegration of the Sa’did dynasty. Once again, internal division and European political and military influence became a hallmark of the Moroccan state. By 1613, the country had split into two kingdoms and the economy was in shambles. Various rival European states allied with factions in order to gain control of Morocco for their own financial benefit, acting to further the chaotic destruction of the Sa’dids. Internal religious war, assassinations, and a string of decadent rulers, lacking legitimacy or leadership, finally became too much for the Sa’dids to overcome. In 1669, the Alawi sharifs successfully defeated all contenders to become the power brokers in Morocco. See also Alawi dynasty in Morocco; Ottoman Empire (1450–1750). Further reading: Abun-Nasr, Jamil N. A History of the Maghrib in the Islamic Period. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987; Hess, Andrew C. The Forgotten Frontier: A History of the Sixteenth Century Ibero-African Frontier. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978; Kaba, Lansine. “Archers, Musketeers, and Mosquitoes: The Moroccan Invasion of the Sudan and the Songhai Resistance (1591–1612),” The Journal of African History Vol. 22, no. 4 (1981): 457–475. Brent D. Singleton Safavid Empire The Safavid Empire was established as the Mongol il-Khan government declined and the Safavids were victorious over the numerous Turkish tribes who had established independent fiefdoms in Persia (presentday northern Iran) during the 13th and 14th centuries. During this tumultuous period, a number of Sufi, Islamic mystical orders emerged; one order, named after its founder, Shaikh Safi al-Din (1252–1334), created a network of followers who gradually viewed the head of the order as the shah or king. By the 15th century, the Safavid rulers adopted the title padishah or king/ emperor. The Safavid shahs asserted that they were descendants of Ali and the last Twelver Shi’i imam, who was believed to have gone into occultation to reappear at some later time. Religious zealots, the early Safavids attacked Christians as well as those of Turkish ethnicity. They also waged a long and ultimately futile series of wars on the rival Sunni Muslim Ottoman Empire. While the Sunnis asserted that any true Muslim could rule the society, as Shi’i, the Safavids believed that the rulers of Muslim societies should be the descendants of Ali, the prophet Muhammad’s sonin- law, and his sons, in particular the martyr Husayn. These conflicting views over the legitimacy of rule set the two empires on a rival course that would last for over a century. The first Safavid king, Shah Isma’il reigned from l501 to 1524 and established Twelver Shi’i Islam as the state religion. However he moved away from the Sufi foundations of the empire. Unlike the Ottomans, who generally assimilated new cultural styles and allowed great latitude of languages and practices within their territories, the Safavids enforced the separate identity of Persian culture and language. In a series of battles with the Ozbegs and the Ottomans, Shah Isma’il consolidated Iran as a unified state. His successor Shah Tahmasp (reigned 1524–76) waged war with the rival Ottoman Empire for control over northern Iran and Iraq as well as attempting to extend Safavid control around the Caspian Sea and into Georgia. The Safavid Empire reached its zenith under Shah Abbas the Great of Persia (reigned 1588–1629), who ruled with an iron fist. Abbas managed to destroy the rival Turkish Gazilbash tribes, reform the army, and create a prosperous economy based on the trade of luxury goods, especially silk brocades. Unfortunately he left no able successor and after his death the empire entered a long period of decline. Safavid society was composed mostly of rural villagers as well as nomadic pastoralists and an urban elite. The Shi’i clergy or mullahs also held considerable power, particularly over the largely illiterate peasantry, who looked to the clergy for religious and political guidance. Many mullahs were large landowners and used the revenues from their property to provide independent financing for religious schools and foundations. Thus when the central authority in Persia was weak, the mullahs often became a political force in their own right. The Safavid throne of Persia that Sultan Selim I captured in Iran, on display in the Treasury of the Imperial Topkapi Sarayi (palace) 342 Safavid Empire Safavid rulers were dependent on taxations and revenues from vast Crown or state land and often used land to reward loyal officers and bureaucratic officials. Under Abbas I, the Crown also had a state monopoly over the sale of silk and encouraged a lively trade with western European powers as well as with Russia. Safavid rulers, like the Ottomans, were keen patrons of the arts and literature. An illustrated Shahnameh, book of kings, with hundreds of intricate miniature paintings was one of the most famous productions of the court artists. The Safavids maintained a lavish court from their capital in Isfahan and enjoyed playing polo and chess. Foreign envoys often commented on the sumptuous attire of the Safavid elite and the lavish lifestyle of the court. However every seven years, the used clothes of the royalty were burned and the gold and silver threads saved for reuse in new textiles. Although the shahs after Abbas I were not as able or dynamic, the empire survived throughout the 17th century largely because it faced no major external threats. In the early 18th century, the Safavids were threatened by several outside forces. In 1722, tribes from neighboring Afghanistan took Isfahan, but a counterattack by Shah Tahmasp II (reigned 1722–32) restored the city to Safavid control for a short period. Meanwhile, Ottoman forces took advantage of Safavid weakness to extend their authority into northern Persia. Further Afghan attacks effectively destroyed real Safavid power by 1726. Remnants of the dynasty continued to assert their authority as shahs, but the death, by assassination, of Nadir Shah in 1747 marked the formal demise of the once great Safavid Empire. Toward the end of the 18th century, the new Qajar dynasty emerged as the new shahs over Persia. See also Mughal Empire; Ottoman-Safavid wars. Further reading: Abisaab, Rula Jurdi. Converting Persia: Shia Islam and the Safavid Empire, 1501–1736. London: I. B. Tauris & Company, Limited, 2004; Chardin, Jean, and R. W. Ferrier, eds. Journey to Persia: Jean Chardin’s Portrait of a Seventeenth-Century Empire. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1996; Morgan, David. Medieval Persia, 1040–1797. London: Longman Group 1988; Newman, Andrew J. Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire. Library of Middle East History Series, 5 London: I. B. Tauris & Company, Limited, 2006; Savory, Roger. Iran under the Safavids. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980. Janice J. Terry Savonarola, Girolamo (1452–1498) pre-Reformation Italian reformer Girolamo Savonarola was an Italian cleric and reformer whose sermons and writings predated the Reformation. Born in Ferrara in 1452, he was a scholar from boyhood and studied music, medicine, design, and theology. Inspired by a sermon in 1474, he entered the monastery of St. Domenico in Bologna, where he spent six years in the novitiate. Even so young, his poems expressed disagreement and indignation against the venality of the Renaissance church. Gradually Savonarola gained fame as a preacher of the Dominican order. By 1490, he was at the Priory of St. Mark and had become so influential with his listeners that in 1491, he was elected to head post. He had become so powerful by then that he felt able to denounce the customs and ethics of the rulers of the day including Lorenzo de’ Medici, the pope, and the king of Naples. His powerful position in Florence was reinforced when Lorenzo de’ Medici called him to his deathbed and Savonarola refused to give absolution to the dying man because he refused to give up power in Florence. Between 1492 and 1494, Savonarola’s power expanded through his sermons and writings wherein he proclaimed that he had apocalyptic visions that the wrath of the Lord would be visited upon the guilty and the world was threatened by famine, bloodshed, and pestilence. His fame as an orator spread throughout Italy. In 1493, his order of Dominicans of St. Mark received a brief so that it was basically independent of most immediate church authority. His final ascent to power came when the Medicis were overthrown in 1494 at the approach of the French king Charles, who threatened Florence. Because of Savonarola’s remonstrance, the king withdrew from Florence without bloodshed. Because of the turn of events, Savonarola was the unofficial dictator of Florence for the next four years. He established a four-part formula for his rule: fear of God and purification of manners, promotion of the public welfare as opposed to private interests, general amnesty to all political offenders, and a council on the Venetian manner but without a doge. Many of his prescriptions were followed during the next few years. All property was taxed. He organized boys of Florence into a secret militia. He established carnivals wherein the citizens gave away their most expensive possessions as alms to the poor as well as burning luxury items such as masks and other objects used for festivals. He did not oppose the arts, in general; in fact, Savonarola, Girolamo 343 he helped save the Medici Library through funds from his convent. During this period, Florence became rather austere. Many people left their homes to join religious orders, and many sought Savonarola’s order, the Dominicans. People dressed ascetically. Hymns and psalms routinely were sung in the streets. Savonarola’s downfall resulted both from enemies without and within. He made a bitter enemy of the Borgia pope Alexander VI, by denouncing him for his crimes. The Medici worked secretly from inside Florence to return to power. When the pope tried to bribe Savonarola to silence with a cardinal’s hat, he rejected it and continued his denunciations. When he declined invitations to visit Rome, Florence was threatened with an interdict. In 1498, the repeated threats from the pope to the council of Florence coupled with Savonarola’s repeated denunciations of the “antipope” caused the council of Florence to become more hostile to him. At the same time, executions of Medici partisans, a desire for moderation, and resentment after the infamous Carnival of 1497 in which valuable books and artwork were burned all added to Savonarola’s decline. The final cause of Savonarola’s downfall was an ordeal of fire called by his enemies, the Franciscans. When his accusers did not appear, the people felt cheated, and Savonarola became a scapegoat. He was arrested, tortured, and crucified with two followers on May 22, 1498. His death came to be seen as martyrdom in later years, and today, his life’s work is viewed as a forerunner of the Reformation. See also Counter-Reformation (Catholic Reformation) in Europe; Luther, Martin. Further reading: Holmes, G. Florence, Rome, and the Origins of the Renaissance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986; Machiavelli, Niccolò. History of Florence and of the Affairs of Italy form Earliest Times to the Death of Lorenzo the Magnificent. Gloucester: Peter Smith, 1974. Niccoli, Ottavia. Prophecy and People in Renaissance Italy, trans. Lydia G. Cochrane. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990; Weinstein, Donald. “Millenarianism in a Civic Setting: The Savonarola Movement in Florence.” Millennial Dreams in Action: Studies in Revolutionary Religious Movements. New York: Schocken, 1970. Weinstein, Donald. Savonarola and Florence: Prophecy and Patriotism in the Renaissance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1970. Norman C. Rothman scientific revolution Between 1500 and 1789, especially the period of 1600–1750, there occurred a shift in humans’ thinking from the medieval emphasis on God’s eternal unchanging world, which governed people, the universe, and nature, to an approach that defined knowledge and understanding as derived from the immutable laws of nature independent of received truth. Knowledge and truth were to be gained by putting forth an idea, testing it, and expressing the results mathematically. The British coined the term empiricism to summarize the concept gained through human interaction with nature and continental Europeans followed the philosopher Descartes who put forth rationalism with its emphasis on knowledge that could be logically and mathematically proved. Emphasis on Different Sciences Different sciences came to the fore during these centuries. Physics and astronomy were especially prominent in the latter part of the 16th century and then 17th century; chemistry and biology, in the latter part of the 17th century and 18th century; and mathematics, throughout the period as part of scientific calculations. New methods of thought pushed to the surface. These new patterns harkened back to the writings of Aristotle and other Greek and Roman philosopher/scientists that emphasized the use of reason in addition to faith in pursuit of knowledge, nature, and contemplating humanity and the universe. The methodology associated with these thoughts came to be called the scientific method and involved two approaches—the deductive and the inductive. The former, which was associated with the medieval mindset, put the stress on going from a general proposition to particular situations. The inductive method started with an approach to a particular problem, then through testing and observation, the drawing of valid conclusions. When combined, the two methods formed what came to be known as the scientific method. One would state a general proposition; then investigate through a review of the literature, logic, and experimental research; and then apply the result to a specific proposition or hypothesis. The hypothesis would then be subject to observation, experimentation, and collection of data as part of a proof. The test result would either be positive or negative. Conclusions would then be reached confirming or denying or declaring the proposition moot or not proved. The proponents of these combined related approaches to bring about a new scientific revolution 344 scientific revolution were René Descartes and Sir Francis Bacon, respectively. Their seminal writings, published in the 1620s, became the underpinnings for the new way of thinking associated with the scientific revolution. Descartes (1596–1659), the French philosopher and mathematician, concluded that thought stemmed from the mind. The use of logic would deduce all truths starting with the existence of God and the basic reality of both the material and spiritual worlds. His grand concept was that of a unified and mathematically ordered universe that ran as a perfect mechanism. Everything could be explained rationally through logic and mathematics. “I think, therefore I am” summarized the approach known as rationalism. Sir Francis Bacon (1561–1626), a politician and scientist, went a step further. He conceived of an approach that later was identified with the inductive method. He presented a system that used human reason to interpret human experiences. Bacon recommended that facts derived from experiments could be validated through proving the hypothesis. These hypotheses would then be subjected to further experimentation and ultimately be proved so as to reflect fundamental laws of nature. His approach was validated with the advent of new scientific instruments that could measure the physical world. In the 17th century, the thermometer, barometer, air pump, pendulum clock (grandfather clock), telescope, and microscope became readily available. Heliocentric Theory The scientific revolution dates from the work of astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus, who challenged the idea that the universe was geocentric or Earth-centered. Based on mathematics and readings of the work of Hellenistic Greeks, he advanced the heliocentric or Suncentered theory of the universe. His work was reinforced by the observation of Tycho Brahe, who made hundreds of observations via the telescope. Brahe’s data were supported by Johannes Kepler through mathematical calculations that showed that the planets moved elliptically around the Sun and that the Sun exerted a magnetic and gravitational pull on the planets. Galileo Galilei, the mathematician, physicist, and astronomer, perfected the telescope to investigate the Moon, sunspots, the satellites of Jupiter, and the rings of Saturn. He also did work on physics through his former work from the leaning Tower of Pisa that originated basic laws of physics—the laws of motion and gravitation. His experiments demonstrated that the velocity of falling bodies was related to the height from which they fell rather than their weight. These observations highlighted the relationship of gravitational pull to moving bodies. Acceleration would be constant no matter what the size or weight. His experiments, which also involved hydrostatics, optics, and the pendulum, helped to develop his most famous law—the law of inertia—a body at rest or in motion will remain at rest or remain in motion unless affected by an external force such as gravitation. Galileo and Copernicus suffered for their scientific advances. Both put forth ideas that went against the teachings of the Catholic Church; as a result, both were deemed heretical and had their discoveries challenged not scientifically, but theologically. In the succeeding years of the 17th and 18th centuries, physicists built on the previous work. The French physicists Blaise Pascal and Jean Gay-Lussac developed laws and mathematical equations on volume, liquids, and gases. Two professors at the university of Bologna, Mona Agnesi and Laura Bassi, verified Galileo’s work scientific revolution 345 Portrait of Andreas Vesalius from his De humani corporis fabrica (1543). Vesalius pioneered the study of human anatomy. in mathematics and physics, respectively. Christian Huygens developed a wave theory to explain light. Otto von Gernicki proved the material composition of air in terms of its ability to have weight and exert pressure. Other breakthrough work was done in other sciences. In astronomy, astronomer and mathematician Pierre Laplace discovered that comets were governed by mathematical laws, and that the Sun, which once had been a gaseous mass, threw off the planets as it solidified and contracted. In biology, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek discovered bacteria, protozoa, and human spermatozoa. Robert Hooke discovered the cellular structure of plants. Andreas Vesalius gave detailed drawings of the human anatomy. William Harvey traced the circulation of blood. Chemistry Advances Chemistry also saw breakthroughs. Robert Boyle developed an atomic theory and investigated fire, respiration, fermentation, evaporation, and metal rusting. Joseph Priestley also developed ammonia, generated carbon monoxide, and discovered oxygen and offered an explanation of combustion. Henry Cavendish discovered hydrogen. Antoine Lavoisier proved that combustion resulted from a combination of oxygen with other elements. He also showed that respiration was another form of oxidation. Ultimately, this led to a famous law of conservation—“Matter cannot be created or destroyed.” The supreme thinker of the early scientific age, perhaps, was Johannes Kepler, who developed differential calculus, mathematics of infinity, variables—the bases for modern algebra, geometry, and calculus. So dominant was Isaac Newton (1640–1727) in the later scientific age that physical science is often characterized as Newtonian, pre-Newtonian, and post- Newtonian. His writing and ideas were so prevalent that ultimately they affected philosophy, religion, and social science. His ideas influenced reformers who believed (based on Newtonian science) that a science of humanity could solve human problems just as natural sciences were beginning to solve the questions of science. Why was Newton so influential? It was because he was able to synthesize previous discoveries. His law of gravitation stated that all natural objects attract other bodies—inversely, according to the square of their distances and directly in proportion to the products of their masses. Newton had arrived at this conclusion by methods that combined the methods advocated by Descartes and Bacon in his major work, Principia. In that work, he used mathematical proofs that were tested by observation. He arrived at the conclusion that underlies all modern science—all final conclusions have to be based on solid facts. Accordingly, the hypothesis even if supported by mathematics must be rejected if it is not supported by observation or experimentation. More importantly, his basic premise, based on his own experiments in gravitation, was that laws govern all nature, including the universe. His universal laws were then applied to every area. The result in terms of religion and philosophy was deism. Succeeding philosophers following Descartes and Newton divided reality between mind and matter. Science assisted human reason in dealing with matter; faith dealt with the truth beyond the natural senses and helped the mind to intuit truth directly from God. Taking the clue from Newton, clergymen subordinated science to faith. The world was run by universal laws, of which the first law was God’s will. Deism The greatest influence of science and future events was in the development of deism—a belief held by many of the leading members of the American Revolution such as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. Even though deists considered themselves Christians, they rejected many tenets of traditional Christianity. They did accept Jesus Christ but as a great moral teacher rather than as a human savior. The view of most deists was that God was a rather impersonal force—the great physicist or master clock winder in the universe. God set things in motion, but if people behaved according to the golden rule and the Ten Commandments, everything else was left to them. God proposed; humans disposed. All moral decisions were based on the individual’s reason and conscience. No formal denomination held their allegiance—nature was their church and natural laws were their spiritual guides, even their bibles. In the 18th century, sciences passed into general acceptance. Kings endowed observatories, cities funded museums, wealthy benefactors established parks and gardens, and learned societies sponsored popular lectures. Learned societies were established, such as the Royal Society of London, the French Academy of Science, and the American Philosophical Society for Promoting Useful Knowledge. The role of the sciences changed markedly in the 18th century. Benjamin Franklin was lionized on both sides of the Atlantic for his many achievements including the Franklin stove and especially his research and experimentation that proved that lightning was another form of electricity. Whereas 346 scientific revolution scientists such as Giordano Bruno were burned for heresy in 1600, and Galileo was forced by the Inquisition to recall his writings in 1633, the situation was different in the 18th century. Isaac Newton received a wellcompensated paying position, was knighted, and when he died in 1727, received the ultimate accolade—he was buried at Westminster Abbey. Joseph Priestley was a well-respected theologian and high-ranking church official as well as a scientist. Effects ON Technology Just as the scientific revolution affected society, it also affected technology. Among the consequences was the application of scientific methods to farming. Scientific agriculture including planting with fertilizer and utilizing crops that restored fertilizer to the soil through legumes such as turnips, along with new methods of drainage such as irrigation, became common. Landowners also began to experiment with cross-breeding so as to improve their livestock. England especially led the way. Jethro Tull plowed land that was planted in rows through the use of a drill he invented. Charles Townshend experimented in restoring soil fertility by applying clay lime mixture as well as planting turnips in crop rotation. Robert Bakewell developed new techniques of stock raising through selective breeding that not only increased the size of meat cattle, but also increased the milk yield of dairy cows. Arthur Young lectured on the new agriculture and popularized the new method of scientific farming. Science was applied to medicine, which utilized the findings of Vesalius, Harvey, and Leeuwenhoek. Dr. Edward Jenner developed the field of immunology through the injection of cowpox to combat smallpox, which had been the scourge of populations for two centuries. Scientific knowledge was applied to draining mines, pumping water, drying textile fibers, producing gunpowder, manufacturing pottery, building ships, and improving navigation. The Industrial Revolution began in the first half of the 18th century of the application of science to economic development. John Kay invented the flying shuttle and James Hargreaves invented the spinning jenny. Thomas Newcomen produced the first steam engine; James Watt improved the design and revolutionized both factories and transportation. Richard Arkwright invented the water frame. Samuel Crompton invented the water mule. Edmond Cartwright invented the power loom. This first stage of the Industrial Revolution in the middle and latter parts of the 18th century stemmed directly from the scientific revolution. The scientific revolution marked the transition of society from the Middle Ages to modern times. It advanced the perception of people and their place in the universe, the source of knowledge, and the relationship of human society to nature. It led to great advancements in science and mathematics. Beyond this direct outcome, its emphasis on reason directly led to the Enlightenment, which emphasized the natural rights of all human beings. Its questioning of previously accepted doctrines developed into a skepticism regarding received truth that ultimately led to revolution against the established order. New technologies transformed economic options and eventually living situations as people moved from the countryside to cities to seek work in the factories based on the scientifically derived inventions that preceded this technology. Above all, the scientific revolution enshrined the spirit of human initiative, innovation, and invention, which has led to change and progress in succeeding ages. Further reading: Brinton, Crane. The Shaping of Modern Thought. New York: Smith, 1968; Bronowski, Jacob, and Bruce Mazlish. The Western Intellectual Tradition from Leonardo to Hegel. New York: Torchbooks, 1962; Drake, Stillman. Galileo at Work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978; Frangsmyr,Tore, et al. The Quantifying Spirit in the Eighteenth Century. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990; Hall, Rupert. The Revolution in Science, 1500–1750. New York: Longman, 1983; Jardine, Nicholas. The Birth of the History and Philosophy of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988; Mason, Stephen F. A History of Sciences. New York: Collier Books, 1962; Yolton, John W. Philosophy, Religion, and Science in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 1990. Norman C. Rothman Scottish Reformation The Scottish Reformation was the movement in Scotland that ended the Scottish state’s traditional, formal, religious, and governmental relationship with the Church of Rome. The Catholic Church was succeeded by a Presbyterian Church after 1560, when the Scottish parliament formally ended papal jurisdiction in Scotland, prohibited the celebration of the Mass, and ratified a Reformed (Calvinist) doctrinal document, the Scots Confession of Faith (1560), which was succeeded by the binding Westminster Confession of Faith (1647), as statements subordinate only to Holy Scripture. The Scottish Reformation 347 reformer most commonly associated with this movement was John Knox; other early figures of prominence include John Douglas, John Row, John Spottiswoode, John Willock, and John Winram, who were preachers and coauthors of the Scots Confession, and Andrew Melville, a primary influence on the second Book of Discipline. The Church of Scotland’s (often referred to as “the Kirk”) major Reformation statements on church polity are the first Book of Discipline (1560) and the second Book of Discipline (1578). During the Reformation, its liturgy followed the Book of Common Order, first published by Knox in Geneva in 1556. As in many other parts of Europe, Catholic piety before the Reformation was strong, and religious orders enjoyed popularity and influence. The progress of the Reformation in Scotland was heavily influenced by a political scene resulting from the fate of the Scottish monarchy, which in turn was heavily influenced by three centuries of conflict with England. The fact of repeated minority succession to the Scottish throne (James V’s minority lasted from 1513 to 1528, Mary, Queen of Scots, from 1543 to 1561, James VI’s from 1567 to 1581) meant that political power in Scotland was held by various coalitions of nobles rather than by the Scottish Crown. These nobles repeatedly disagreed about the need to pursue alliances with France or with England, and their desire for a decentralized government is paralleled in the ultimate organization of the kirk. James V was the grandson of Henry VII of England, but his father had been defeated and killed by English troops under his uncle, Henry VIII of England, at Flodden Field (1513). James V seems to have preferred a French alliance; he made a French marriage. Support for the pro-English faction in Scotland intensified as the Reformation started on the Continent, however, and its ideas made their way to Scotland. While popular enthusiasm for Catholic eucharistic piety was strong, hostility toward ecclesiastical government and wealth became more focused in light of events on the Continent. Anticlericalism was a frequent theme of anti- Catholic polemic on the Continent, and the same was true in Scotland. After Henry III introduced a reformation in England, he pressured James V to do the same. James threatened the papacy with a reformation and received a number of financial and ecclesiastical concessions in return. To mobilize popular sentiment behind his pro-French position, he attacked the English and was defeated at Solway Moss in 1542 when some of his own nobles surrendered to the English; he died a month later. The decision for the French, in combination with England’s turn toward the Reformation, made England a convenient refuge for the Scottish instigators of religious reform periodically exiled after the 1520s. John Knox, sentenced to serve as a galley slave in 1547 for his role as an associate of the murderers of the Catholic archbishop of St. Andrews, was only one of many such exiles. Succession The succession of James V’s infant daughter led to further jockeying between the Scottish and French parties. Gordon Donaldson has pinpointed three crisis points during Mary’s minority. In 1543, the pro- English party gained the upper hand, pledging Mary to Henry VIII’s son, the future Edward VI of England (a Protestant). In the same year, however, her regent, James Hamilton, earl of Arran, repudiated the English treaty, after which English troops began vandalizing and occupying southern Scotland. In 1547, in return for help against the English, Scotland betrothed Mary to the French dauphin in 1548; he ascended the French throne as Francis II in 1549. Over the succeeding years, however, Scottish sentiment turned against France as it became apparent that the French projected Scotland’s absorption into France. Moreover, the English Crown sponsored a wave of pro-English, pro-Reformation propaganda, and its preachers were sent over the border and sheltered by members of the pro-English party in Scotland. A temporary abatement under Mary I of England ended after the succession of Elizabeth I in 1558, who agreed to support the Scottish Protestant cause against the French. Knox had been bought out of his French enslavement under Edward VI but expelled from England under Mary; he returned to Scotland from Geneva, where he had superintended a congregation of exiles, in 1556. In 1559, he preached a sermon that sparked a pro-English rebellion. The rebellion drew English troops into France in 1560, which in turned triggered the withdrawal of both French and English troops later in 1560. At this point the Scottish parliament, flooded for this sitting by a group of minor nobles whose participation was illegal, formally ended Scotland’s relationship with the Roman Church. During the remainder of Mary’s reign, an ecclesiastical compromise remained in effect in which revenues were divided between remaining benefice holders and the Reformed Church, but Mary as a Catholic could not govern the church, so an alternative body, the General Assembly, which Gordon Donaldson has 348 Scottish Reformation termed a Protestant parliament, served as the kirk’s governing body. Mary, unwise in her marriages, was forced to abdicate in 1567, when Scotland reverted to a government of Protestant regents until James VI attained majority. The most unique feature of the new Scottish Church was its decentralized church polity, formulated in the first Book of Discipline, which also legislated on practical matters. It emphasized preaching and the distribution of the two remaining sacraments (baptism and communion). It forbade the observance of holy days, the celebration of masses and performance of prayers for the dead, and the invocation of saints. The structure of benefices was abolished, with resulting revenues to be used for supporting the clergy, educating the faithful, and maintaining the deserving poor. Congregations were to elect deacons and elders to work with ministers to regulate congregations and maintain church discipline. The General Assembly accepted many of the book’s prescriptions but did not institute the radical withdrawal of benefices from their holders. Notably absent in the book were prescriptions for a church hierarchy. In 1572, the Crown tried to introduce bishops into the church’s government, but this was abandoned by 1576 and repudiated in the second Book of Discipline. This document rejected royal or episcopal supremacy over the church and placed most governmental responsibilities (interpretation of Scripture, ordination of ministers, visitation, and jurisprudence) in the hands of either individual congregations (the word presbytery is used rarely) or supercongregational assemblies (synods or the General Assembly). The Scottish parliament never affirmed the second Book of Discipline; indeed, James VI sought repeatedly to institute Crown and Episcopal control of ecclesiastical affairs. The conflict between the Presbyterian and Episcopal models of polity became a major dynamic within both the Scottish Church and Scotland’s relationship with England for the subsequent century. Further reading: Cowan, Ian B. The Scottish Reformation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1982; Donaldson, Gordon. The Scottish Reformation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960, Dunbar, Linda J. Reforming the Scottish Church. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2002; Foggie, Janet P. Renaissance Religion in Urban Scotland. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2003; Kirk, James. Patterns of Reform. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark Publishers, 1989. Susan R. Boettcher Sekigahara, Battle of (1600) The Battle of Sekigahara was fought between the forces of Tokugawa Ieyasu and those of his opponents. His decisive victory ensured his appointment as shogun of Japan and the establishment of the Tokugawa Shogunate that ruled Japan until 1868. By mid-16th century, the Ashikaga Shogunate of Japan was in terminal decline and civil wars raged in the land as rival nobles or daimyo sought to replace it. The second of the powerful lords, Toyotomi Hideyoshi (1535–98), almost accomplished the task. As he neared death, and with his son Hideyori too young to exercise power, he appointed a council of five regents to rule on the boy’s behalf, hoping that they would checkmate one another. Tokugawa Ieyasu was one of the regents. Ieyasu had helped Hideyoshi in his campaigns and had been rewarded with extensive landholdings Sekigahara, Battle of (1600) 349 A romanticized portrait of Mary, Queen of Scots, who was forced to abdicate when Scotland reverted to a government of Protestant regents in the agriculturally rich Kanto Plain area where he had built a formidable castle at the port of Edo (modern Tokyo). Ieyasu did not participate in Hideyoshi’s attempted conquest of Korea, remaining in Japan to consolidate his holdings. The balance of power among the five regents soon dissolved with four of the five regents aligning against Ieyasu. An adroit politician, Ieyasu was able to crack the formidable coalition by securing the secret support of many of the lords ostensibly loyal to the other regents, who moreover were rivals of one another. The showdown occurred on October 21, 1600, at the Battle of Sekigahara. Ieyasu won decisively, partly through to the defection of some of his opponents’ forces. The victory made him military master of Japan. Eightyseven daimyo houses were extinguished, the remainder, including Toyotomi’s fief, dramatically reduced, allowing Ieyasu to expand the land he directly controlled and to reward his supporters. In 1603, the emperor acknowledged the fait accompli by appointing Ieyasu shogun. He would consolidate his power during his remaining years with laws that secured obedience to the surviving daimyo and by retiring in 1605 in favor of his son, while remaining behind the scenes to ensure the stability of the shogunate. In 1614, he launched a final massive campaign, mobilizing 180,000 troops against Hideyori at his stronghold, Osaka castle, defended by 90,000 men. The castle was taken and Hideyori was killed. These two campaigns ensured the supremacy of the house of Tokugawa. See also Christian century in Japan. Further reading: Sanson, George. A History of Japan, 1334– 1615. London: The Crescent Press, 1961; Totman, Conrad D. Tokugawa Ieyasu: Shogun. San Francisco, CA: Heian International Inc., 1983. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Selim II (1524–1575) Ottoman sultan Suleiman I the Magnificent’s last surviving son, Selim II (r. 1566–75), became sultan of the Ottoman Empire when the empire was at the zenith of its power and glory. Although Selim was a gifted poet, his notorious abuse of alcohol, forbidden in Islam, offended many Muslims, and he was known as “the sot.” Selim was the first Ottoman sultan who had not been a military leader who personally led his troops into battle. An ineffective ruler, Selim fortunately left most of the key administrative decisions to his able grand vizier, Mehmed Sokollu, who had also served under Suleiman. In 1571, against the vizier’s advice, Selim ordered the conquest of Cyprus; some said it was because he wished to control the source of his favorite wine. After a particularly brutal fight, the Ottomans secured the island against the ruling Venetians but aroused the enmity of other European powers. In retaliation, the pope called for a joint Christian fleet to counter Ottoman sea power in the Mediterranean. The new fleet met the Ottoman navy at the Battle of Lepanto (1571) and in the fierce confrontation the Ottomans lost more than 100 ships. However in less than a year, the Ottoman navy was rebuilt, although at great cost, and it subsequently defeated the Venetians who tried to retake Cyprus; the Ottomans also successfully incorporated Tunis into the empire by 1574. They also put down a rebellion in the Hijaz (in present-day Saudi Arabia) and reinforced control over Yemen. The Russians managed to defeat Ottoman attempts to take territory to build a canal connecting the Volga and Don Rivers and Czar Ivan IV (the Terrible) sub- 350 Selim II A painting of Tokugawa Ieyasu, a regent who waged the Battle of Sekigahara on October 21, 1600 sequently signed a fairly short-lived treaty of friendship with the Ottomans. Selim and his vizier also had dreams of building a canal to connect the Red Sea to the Mediterranean but that too failed to materialize. Although not apparent at the time, the era of Ottoman expansion was almost over and other powers were soon to emerge on the global scene Like his forebears, Selim was a patron of the arts and he commissioned the noted Ottoman architect Abdul- Menan Sinan to build what became his masterpiece, the great Selimye mosque at Edirne. In 1575, Selim suffered a concussion from a fall while in a drunken stupor and died soon thereafter. Further reading: Creasy, Edward S. History of the Ottoman Turks. Beirut: rep. Khayats, 1961; Shaw, Stanford. History of the Ottoman Empire, 1280–1808. London: Cambrdige University Press, 1976; Woodhead, Christine. “Selim II,” Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Ed., Vol. I. Leiden: Brill, 1995. Janice J. Terry Sengoku Jidai The 100 years from the end of the 15th to the end of the 16th century is known in Japan as the Sengoku Jidai, the Warring States Era (or Era of the Country at War), named after a period in China during the third century c.e. The Ashikaga Shogunate, established in 1338, and headquartered in Kyoto, enjoyed approximately a century of power. The shogunal government, or bakufu, was, however, unstable because it depended on deputies to look after its interests in the provinces and became ineffective when the original bonds between the shoguns and their deputies loosened with time. The deputies, who were hereditary military governors, consolidated their holdings by appointing a single heir (a son, not necessarily the eldest) rather than letting all sons inherit a portion of their holdings, organized local warriors as military officers, and recruited peasants as soldiers. The nature of war changed during this period. Individual combat between heavily mounted aristocrats was replaced by large armies of footsoldiers armed with pikes, and, after the appearance of Portuguese in 1543, with muskets. The widespread use of muskets and cannons revolutionized warfare and resulted in the building of formidable castles. Prolonged warfare decimated aristocratic families and allowed talented lower-class men to challenge their superiors, the most remarkable example being Toyotomi Hideyoshi. Born a peasant, he rose to unify Japan through ambition and treachery. General lawlessness also led to the emergence of armed and powerful religious sects, the most powerful being the True Pureland Buddhists, who controlled a province on the Sea of Japan and strongholds in the Kyoto-Osaka region. Shogun Yoshinori, who attempted to strengthen the bakufu by checking the power of the military governors, was assassinated by one of them in 1441. From then on, the shogunal government began to fall apart, culminating in the Onin War (1467–77) fought between two claimants seeking to be Yoshinori’s successor, championed by two factions of the ruling family. The war destroyed the remaining authority of the shogunate, ended the system on which it was built, and led to a century of endemic warfare called the Sengoku Jidai. The wars continued because no single family or leader emerged to unify the country. The needs of war led the successful contenders to consolidate their holdings and form alliances by pledging allegiance to more powerful lords in a pattern similar to feudalism in Europe during the Middle Ages. The territorial lords were called daimyo. Early Europeans who traveled to Sengoku Jidai 351 Exterior view of the mausoleums of Sultan Selim II and Sultan Murad III in Constantinople Japan mistakenly called the daimyo kings or princes. In the second half of the 16th century, the process of unification would advance under three leaders, Oda Nobunaga (1534–82), Toyotomi Hideyoshi (1542–98), and Tokugawa Ieyasu (1542–1616). The Sengoku era was also culturally brilliant and economically vibrant. The imperial court, also in Kyoto, was both powerless and poverty stricken. The shoguns continued to use their great wealth to patronize the arts, building magnificent palaces and temples in Kyoto and sponsoring dramatic presentations. Poetry and painting flourished, influenced by Zen Buddhism, as did landscaping and the tea ceremony, all influenced by the aesthetics of Song (Sung) dynasty China. Similarly many daimyo also patronized the arts. The economy grew, despite as well as stimulated by the wars. Agricultural advances produced surpluses that generated trade, mainly with China and Korea. Widespread piracy led the Ming government of China to negotiate a system of officially sanctioned and regulated trade with the shoguns, which was unsuccessful because the bakufu lacked the power of enforcement. Japan imported porcelains, paintings, books, medicine, and copper coins from China and exported raw materials, such as copper and sulfur, as well as finished products such as swords, decorative screens, and folding fans, indicative of sophisticated manufacturing and craft industries in Japan. Towns and ports flourished—for example Hataka in Kyushu (the destination of Qubilai Khan’s invading fleet)—the center for trade with Korea. Money was replacing barter trade, initially in the form of coins imported from China, later also in the form of bills of exchange. The Sengoku era was important in Japanese history as a transition period from a decentralized estate and feudal system to a centralized feudal state. It was also an era of cultural brilliance and economic growth. See also: Ming dynasty, late. Further reading: Sansom, George B. Japan, A Short Cultural History. New York: Century Co., 1931; Sansom, George B. A History of Japan, 1334–1615. London: Cresset Press, 1961; Varley, H. Paul. Imperial Restoration in Medieval Japan. New York: Columbia University Press, 1971; Yamamura, Kozo, ed. The Cambridge History of Japan, Vol. 3, Medieval Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Sepúlveda, Juan Ginés de (1490–1573) Spanish humanist theologian Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda was a 16th-century Spanish humanist theologian. He pursued theological, philosophical, and juridical studies in Córdoba, Alcalá de Henares, and Bologna, where he developed a keen interest in the philosophy of Aristotle. Appointed royal chaplain, court historiographer, and tutor of Philip ii by Emperor Charles V in the mid-1530s, he held reactionary views that drew him into numerous disputations, in which he sought to safeguard orthodoxy and stifle ecclesiastic reforms. Besides those of Erasmus of Rotterdam and Martin Luther, Sepúlveda most famously attacked the progressive and humanitarian views of the Dominican friar Bartolomé de Las Casas (1474–1566), the most outspoken advocate of indigenous rights in the Americas. Opposed to the so-called New Laws (1542) that banned slavery and regulated the encomienda, a 352 Sepúlveda, Juan Ginés de A painting depicting a battle during the Sengoku Jidai, a 100-year period also known as the Warring States Era in Japan neofeudal institution that granted free Indian labor to Spanish landowners, Sepúlveda persuaded the Emperor to revoke them. Las Casas, one of the inspirers of the New Laws, immediately sailed back to Spain to repel the assault of those among the Spanish intelligentsia who sided with the conquistadores and justified the killing and oppression of the Indians. Champion of Slavers and Landowners Sepúlveda was one of them. A self-appointed champion of the interests of slavers and landowners, he had authored a treatise entitled “Concerning the Just Cause of the War against the Indians” (1547) to provide solid philosophical underpinnings for Spanish imperialism and just war theory. In doing so he treaded dangerously close to heresy. His heterodox outlook, tinged with naturalistic paganism and militaristic chauvinism, alienated him from the most significant academic circles of Spain. Even so, thanks to his impressive scholarship and to the support of economic potentates, he retained much of his influence. These two intellectual giants were thus set on a collision course. In 1550, Charles V called a halt to military operations in the New World, until the status of Native Americans, together with the morality and legality of the Spanish conquest, had been thoroughly debated. A group of theologians and jurists (junta) was convoked in Valladolid to listen to the arguments of Las Casas and Sepúlveda and settle the issue once and for all. This dispute is of paramount importance because it constituted the first major articulate attempt on the part of Europeans to understand and define human variability and cultural diversity and marked the crucial universalist/ racialist bifurcation of anthropological philosophy at the dawn of modernity. Papal condemnation of Slavery The bull Sublimis Deus, issued in 1537 by Pope Paul III, had already clarified the Holy See’s official position on the subject. The pope condemned slavery and the portrayal of Indians as “dumb brutes created for our service,” incapable of exercising self-government, free will, or rational thinking, and therefore incapable of receiving the message of Christ. Las Casas, elaborating on this bull and on the writings of Francisco de Vitoria, a Dominican professor at the prestigious university of Salamanca, as well as one of the precursors of international law and human rights theory, decried the barbarity of Spaniards by contrasting it with the meekness, humbleness, and goodheartedness of the Indians. Sustained by an unswerving faith in the essential unity of humankind and by his conviction that a commitment to global justice was a moral imperative, he argued that Indians were fully capable of governing themselves and were entitled to certain basic rights, regardless of the nature of their practices and beliefs, which should anyhow be understood from an indigenous point of view. Antislavery arguments While Las Casas, who had spent most of his life in the colonies, sided with the poor and disenfranchised, Sepúlveda, who knew very little of the Spanish colonial subjects, drew on the doctrine of natural law and on pragmatic realism to marshal most of the arguments, which would be later deployed by antiabolitionists, segregationists, and imperialists. He explained that, for all intents and purposes, given their innate physical and intellectual inferiority, Indians should be assimilated to Aristotle’s “natural slaves.” For Sepúlveda, Christian blood was the only vessel of reason; therefore, Indians were naturally impervious to conversion. In consequence of their being ruled by passions rather than reason, Indians were actually born to be slaves and should be grateful that in spite of their sinfulness, barbarism, licentiousness, and relative indifference to the institute of private property, their new masters acted as God’s instrument of redemption and regeneration. Finally as men ruled over women, and adults ruled over children, so inferior races should be subordinated to the will of superior races. This line of reasoning clearly allowed for the virtual enslavement of indigenous people and authorized the violent reprisals whenever the Indians refused to accept Spanish rule. Officially neither Las Casas nor Sepúlveda won the dispute, but the monarchy made common cause with the church against the encomenderos, for there was a growing concern that the power of colonial landowners was rising disproportionately, and that their unwillingness to reinvest their considerable revenues was harming the Spanish economy. It is also fair to say that the Crown was motivated by sincere moral qualms. With the benefit of hindsight, it is evident that Sepúlveda’s theses were both modern—as when he implied that the spheres of politics and religion should be kept separate and that law should reflect the reality of actual human relationships—and anachronistic, given that he relied on the notion of a natural causation of society and politics that was already obsolete at the time. Consequently, his propositions could not be reconciled with Spanish legal thinking, which had Sepúlveda, Juan Ginés de 353 already taken a clear antislavery position, and consistently refused to sanction the exploitation of American natives under the guise of outmoded and undignified medieval contracts. Nevertheless exploitation and abuse continued, in Potosí as in Mexico, because the cold logic of pragmatism and greed prevailed. Only those natives who learned to avail themselves of colonial laws and acted as their own attorneys could successfully fight their exploiters. See also Mexico, conquest of; natives of North America. Further reading: Hanke, Lewis. All Mankind Is One. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1974; Mires, Francisco. En Nombre de la Cruz: Discusiones Teológicas y Políticas Frente al Holocausto de los Indios. San José, Costa Rica: Departamento Ecuménico de Investigaciones, 1986; Pagden, Anthony. The Fall of Natural Man: The American Indian and the Origins of Comparative Ethnology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982; Sepúlveda, Juan Ginés de. Democrates Segundo, o, De las Justas Causas de la Guerra contra los Indios. Madrid: Consejo superior de investigaciones científicas, 1984. Stefano Fait Seville and Cádiz Seville and Cádiz in Andalusia (in the south of Spain) played a vitally important role in the Spanish empire in the Americas, with the empire being administered from Seville, making it one of the most important cities in Europe in the 16th and early 17th centuries. Parts of Andalusia had been the first areas of Spain captured by the Moors in the eighth century, and by the early 13th-century, Seville, inland port on the Río Guadalquvir, was the leading city in Muslim Spain. It was captured from the Moors in 1248 by Ferdinand III in the Reconquest (Reconquista), and soon afterward, 24,000 Castilian settlers arrived in Seville, transforming the place into a Castilian city. It also became the location of a favorite residence of kings of Spain. Ferdinand III and his son Alfonso X were both buried in Seville. Cádiz on the coast is, by tradition, the oldest continuously inhabited city in Europe, said to have been settled by the Phoenicians in 1100 b.c.e. It then became a Roman naval base and later went into decline and was occupied by the Moors. In 1262, it was captured from the Moors by King Alfonso X. When Christopher Columbus sailed to the Americas in 1492, he left from the port of Huelva, west of Seville and Cádiz. However his second expedition was fitted out and left from Cádiz, as did his fourth expedition. It was Seville, and not Cádiz, that was to profit massively from the Americas. The kings of Spain gave Seville the monopoly of trade with the Americas, quickly making it one of the wealthiest cities during the 16th century. Vast Renaissance and baroque buildings were constructed, the most famous of which was the new cathedral. It had been a mosque but was converted into what later became one of the biggest cathedrals in the world. The famous architect Hernán Ruiz designed the belfry for La Giralda, formerly the minaret of the mosque, and the Cabildo—chapter house—which was constructed between 1558 and 1592. It is decorated by Bartolomé Esteban Murillo (1618–82), one of Spain’s greatest painters and the first to gain widespread fame outside Spain. Murillo may have been the most famous painter associated with the city at this time, but he certainly was not the only one. Francisco de Zurbarán (1598– 1664) had been apprenticed in Seville and many of his paintings were for the Spanish Americas. In his last years, he was heavily influenced by Murillo, and the 354 Seville and Cádiz Sketches of bullfight patrons, from original drawings made in the plazas of Seville by Cádiz and Company style of many of his later paintings shows this. Juan de Valdés Leal (1622–90) was born in Seville but worked in Córdoba before returning to his native city, where he was president of the Seville Academy. When Murillo died, Valdés Leal became the most prominent painter in the city. Diego Velázquez (1599–1660) was also born in Seville but moved to Madrid, where he executed his most famous paintings. There were also a number of sculptors drawn to Seville. Juan Martínez Montañés (1568–1649) moved there in 1287 and remained in Seville for the rest of his life; Pedro Roldán (1624–1700) was responsible for the main altarpiece in Seville, along with Valdés Leal. The tomb of Columbus is also in Seville—but his body was not taken from Cuba until 1899, and it is possible that the real body was lost before this. With Seville protected, being so far up the Río Guadalquivir, one of the main reasons for choosing it as the city from which to administer Spanish America, some traders also used the more accessible port city of Cádiz, close to the mouth of the Río Guadalquivir. It also grew wealthy during the 16th century but never achieved the fame of Seville. However the wealth of Cádiz also attracted raids from the English and the Dutch. In 1587, Sir Francis Drake attacked Cádiz to “singe the king of Spain’s beard” and this delayed the fitting out of the famous Spanish Armada, which set sail in the following year. In 1596, an Anglo-Dutch expedition attacked Cádiz again, burning down much of the city. During the 17th century, the administering of the Americas from Seville became far more difficult. The larger vessels of the period had trouble navigating the Río Guadalquivir, which had started to silt up badly. As well as this, Seville was struck by a massive plague in 1649, which wiped out probably half the population of the city. This did lead to a greater interest in public health, and the Hospital de la Caridad (Charity Hospital) was built in 1676 and still has paintings by Murillo in its chapel. After years of indecision and prevarication, finally it was decided to move the Casa de la Contratación from Seville to Cádiz in 1717. Based on this, a series of large public buildings were commissioned in Cádiz. In 1716, plans had been started for a large cathedral for the city. Although work started quickly, it was not in fact finished until 1838. During the 18th century, nearly three-quarters of Spanish trade with the Americas went through Cádiz, making the city hugely wealthy. Near Cádiz, the famous 18th-century stone fountain La Fuente de las Galeras, with its four spouts to provide water for ships going to the Americas, can still be seen at El Puerto de Santa María. Many of the paintings from the time when Seville was one of the richest cities in Europe are displayed at the city’s Museo de Bellas Artes. Seville also has the oldest surviving bull ring, dating from 1758. The 15th-century building that had served as Seville’s Lonja (Exchange) for the American trade is now the Archivo de Indias, where, since 1785, most of the archival records connected with Spanish America are held. Hundreds of scholars from all around the world still use it every week for research into Spanish and Latin American history and genealogy. See also baroque tradition in Europe. Further reading: Haring, Clarence Henry. Trade and Navigation between Spain and the Indies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1918; Hernández-Múszquiz, Rowena. Economy and Society in Medieval and Early Modern Seville 1391–1506. Columbia University, Ph.D. thesis, 2005; Pike, Ruth. Aristocrats and Traders: Sevillan Society in the Sixteenth Century. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1972. Justin Corfield Shah Jahan (?–1666) Mughal ruler and builder Mughal emperor Jahangir’s death and the following succession struggle ended in the triumph of his son, Prince Khurram, who took the title Shah Jahan, which means “emperor of the world.” He killed his male relatives and forced Jahangir’s powerful widow, Nur Jahan, to retire. He is best remembered for building the Taj Mahal, a mausoleum for his wife, Mumtaz Mahal. He was the fifth ruler of the Mughal (Mogul, Moghul) Empire and his reign marked the zenith of Mughal power and splendor. Anticipating his father’s death, the future Shah Jahan openly rebelled in 1623 and seized power upon Jahangir’s death in 1628, putting to death all his brothers and other possible rivals. Shah Jahan was a devout orthodox Muslim. Intolerant of other faiths, he ordered the destruction of new Hindu temples and Christian churches in 1632. In the same year, he attacked the Portuguese settlements at Hoogley and Chittagong in Bengal. Both trading outposts were far from Goa, the Portuguese viceroy’s seat, and he could send no help. Portuguese prisoners were taken to Agra and kept until 1643, when they were repatriated to Goa. Shan Jahan Shah Jahan 355 also campaigned against the Shi’i ruled Muslim states in the Deccan and subdued them to vassalage. However he had to give up Kandahar in Afghanistan to the Persians in 1653 because they possessed superior artillery and guns, and he also lost control of previous Mughal holdings in Central Asia. Shah Jahan ruled the Mughal Empire at its height and was noted for the extravagance and opulence of his court. He was famous for the buildings he commissioned, most notably the Red Fort in Delhi with its mosque and sumptuous palaces, especially for the gem encrusted Peacock Throne. Although he had a harem of 5,000 women, he was known for his devotion to his wife, Mumtaz Mahal, whose name means “light of the palace.” She died giving birth to the last of their 14 children. He expressed his grief for her by assembling 20,000 workers, who labored for 20 years to complete her mausoleum in Agra. Designed by Persian architects it was a synthesis of Persian Muslim and Indian styles called Indo-Islamic and remains a wonder of the world. Most of his other monuments also remain. The demands of his campaigns and projects resulted in huge tax increases that weakened the economy. As Shah Jahan aged, his adult sons began to conspire for the throne. He kept his eldest and favorite son, Dara Shikuh, in Agra so he could begin acquiring military and administrative experience. Fearing that he was near death, his remaining three ambitious sons revolted in 1657. They fought with one another, against their father, and against their oldest brother. Aurangzeb, the third and most ruthless, was the victor. He killed his brothers and imprisoned his aged father in an apartment in Agra fort with a view of the Taj Mahal until his death in 1666. Meanwhile Aurangzeb proclaimed himself Emperor Alamgir in 1658. See also Delhi and Agra. Further reading: Prawdin, Michael. Builders of the Moghul Empire. New York: Allen and Unwin, 1963; Richards, John F. The Moghul Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993; Schimmel, Annemarie. The Empire of the Great Moghuls: History, Art and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004. Jiiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Shimabara Rebellion, Japan The Shimabara Rebellion of 1635 was the last major uprising against the Tokugawa Shogunate, which Tokugawa Ieyasu had established after his victory at the Battle of Sekigahara (1600). He was appointed shogun, or supreme military ruler, by the emperor Go- Yozei in 1603. The first Jesuit missionaries had arrived in Japan in 1549 and enjoyed enormous success until about 500,000 Japanese had been converted. Success, however, proved its undoing, resulting in the banning of Christian missionary activities in 1587 by Toyotomi Hideyoshi. His death in 1598 brought an end to the persecution for a time. However it was resumed by newly appointed Shogun Tokugawa Ieyasu in 1606 and enforced by his son Hidetada in 1614. He ordered the banishment of all missionaries. Persecution of Christians continued also under the third shogun Iemitsu. Persecution climaxed in 1637, when a popular rising of disaffected peasants and ronin took place in a heavily Christian area near Nagasaki. The force soon numbered some 37,000 rebels, who seized an old castle in its Shimabara Peninsula. A Tokugawa force of 100,000 men was sent against the rebels but made surprisingly little headway against them. Finally, Shogun Tokugawa had to call on the help of some Dutch warships at Nagasaki to fire on the rebels. Since at this time, the Protestant Dutch were enemies of Catholic Spain, they were happy to aid the Tokugawa army. Finally, the castle fell after a three-month siege and the holdouts were massacred, ending the revolt and Christian resistance. The results of the Shimabara Rebellion were farreaching. The Tokugawa Shogunate moved to seal Japan off from foreign contact. All Portuguese were expelled in 1639. In 1640, all members of a Portuguese embassy sent to negotiate with the shogun were executed. All Europeans were expelled except the Dutch, who were allowed to send to ships to Nagasaki annually. Every Japanese person who attempted to leave Japan, and then returned, was executed. For nearly 250 years, Japan was sealed off from contact with the outside world. See also Bushido, Tokugawa period in Japan; Christian century in Japan; Jesuits in Asia; Sengoku Jidai. Further reading: Morton, W. Scott. Japan: Its History and Culture. New York: McGraw Hill, 1984; Turnbull, Stephen R. The Book of the Samurai: The Warrior Class of Japan. New York: Bison Books, 1982; ———. Battles of the Samurai. London: Arms and Armour Press, 1987; ———. The Samurai Sourcebook. London: Arms and Armour Press, 1992; ———. Samurai: The World of the Warrior. Oxford: Osprey, 2003; 356 Shimabara Rebellion, Japan ———. Samurai Warriors. Poole: Blandford Press, 1987; ———. Warriors of Feudal Japan. Oxford: Osprey, 2005. John Murphy ships and shipping By the 15th century, contact between seafarers from northern Europe and their counterparts in the Mediterranean had brought about the development of a number of ship types in use throughout Europe. Shipbuilders from the Atlantic seaboard borrowed framefirst construction techniques from the Mediterranean roundships and galleys, while southern European builders borrowed the more maneuverable square sail and the stern post rudder from ships built to weather the heavier seas of the Atlantic and North Sea. The result of such cross-fertilization was a series of ship types that would not undergo any more radical transformations until the age of steam; a 15th century tall sailing ship had more in common with the vessels of the early 19th century than with those of only 100 years before. The basic ship types in use in Europe at the dawn of the 15th century were the carrack, a tall sailing vessel, and the galley. Much sleeker and lower in the water, the galley was propelled primarily by oars, though it also carried sails to be used in favorable conditions. Sometimes very large, up to more than 1,000 tons, carracks were driven by three or four masts, each with one or two square sails, with the exception of the mizzenmast, the one nearest the rear or the stern of the ship, which carried a lateen sail. Carracks were guided by a centrally mounted stern post rudder. These ships were often quite slow and cumbersome, their breadth being roughly two-thirds their length, but they were much more seaworthy than their medieval ancestors, the roundship and the cog. The galley was smaller by comparison, ranging from 100 to 150 tons; was roughly eight times as long as it was wide; and carried either one or two masts fitted with lateen sails. They were steered by a pair of large oars fitted one on each side of the vessel. All elements combined to make the galley a much faster ship: the lateen sail was much more efficient at harnessing the wind while the oars meant that the ship never got stuck in calms. The galley was also incomparably more expensive to operate. More sailors were necessary to work the great triangular sails, but most of all the hundreds of oarsmen had to be fed and even paid, unless they were slaves or convicts, as was often the case. It was primarily the difference in operating costs that made the galley the vessel of choice for transporting light, expensive goods such as spices, silk, or precious metals through the Mediterranean, while bulky goods were sent over long distances in carracks. Introduction of the Cannon The widespread introduction of cannon in the 16th century changed the face of shipmaking. Throughout the Middle Ages a ship’s fighting capacity and ability to defend itself resided in the number of able-bodied men it had aboard. This gave the galley an advantage; each oarsman could be given a sword. Artillery changed that. Now a ship’s fighting ability was measured in the number of cannon the ship carried, and tall sailing ships could mount more guns than low, sleek galleys. Galleys did not disappear overnight, but by the 17th century, they were relegated more and more to patrolling coasts or providing rapid transport to dignitaries. The carrack, on the other hand, continued to evolve. Hulls were lengthened in proportion to width, giving the vessels greater speed and stability. The results of this evolutionary process, the smaller caravel and the great galleons, became the instruments of European exploration and expansion. The European tradition, however, was far from universal. The Turkish fleets as well as those of North African ports were quick to adopt the changes introduced in European shipping, though the seafarers active in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean produced ships of a very different type. Overseas and coastal trade tended to be carried in dhows, Arab vessels of varying sizes, which can still be found along the east coast of Africa and in the Red Sea. Dhows ranged from small craft to deep, oceangoing ships mounting one or two large lateen sails. The hulls, however, were made of planks fitted together and sewn to each other rather than nailed to an internal structure as in European ships. Such ships were unable to stand up to the cannon-carrying European vessels that began arriving in the Indian Ocean in the early 16th century. As a result, Europeans were able to dictate the terms of shipping, but European shipbuilding techniques spread to the Indian Ocean area. Chinese Ships Chinese ships form a category of their own. The most important Chinese ship type, the junk, mounted a stern-post rudder as early as the 12th century, though it carried fanlike bamboo sails, lugsails, and had a squared, flat-bottomed hull. By the 15th century, Chinese junks ships and shipping 357 could be as large as 1,500 tons, and, unlike European vessels, were built in several watertight compartments. The centralized government of China failed, however, to encourage development of oceangoing sea power and, as a result, the Chinese presence on the sea diminished considerably beginning with the late 15th century. European Trading Empires The early modern period witnessed the expansion of European-based colonial and trading empires throughout much of the globe. That expansion would not have been possible without the developments in European shipbuilding techniques that came about during the 14th century. Substantially, the rest of the period merely witnessed the continued refinement of the ship types developed at the end of the Middle Ages. These versatile vessels were then imitated both in the eastern Mediterranean and to a large degree among the long-distance traders of the Indian Ocean region as well. The Chinese, on the other hand, having developed a robust and seaworthy ship type of their own, remained largely impervious to the developments that had taken place in Europe and that had been adopted in so much of the world. See also Dutch East India Company; French East India Company; slave trade, Africa and the; voyages of discovery. Further reading: Friel, Ian. The Good Ship: Ships, Shipbuilding and Technology in England, 1200–1520. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995; Gardiner, Robert, ed. Cogs, Caravels and Galleons: The Sailing Ship, 1000–1650, History of the Ship, Vol. 3. London: Conway Maritime Press, 1994; Hattendorf, John B. Maritime History in the Age of Discovery: An Introduction. Melbourne, FL: Krieger, 1995; Pryor, John H. Geography, Technology and War: Studies in the Maritime History of the Mediterranean, 649–1571. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988; Scammell, G. V. The World Encompassed: The First European Maritime Empires, c. 800–1650. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981. Thomas A. Kirk Shivaji (1627–1680) Indian leader Shivaji was born on February 19, 1627, in the hill fort of Shivaneri. He is best remembered for his valor and relentless struggle against the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb (1618–1707). The father of Shivaji was Shahji, a jagirdar (fief holder) of the sultan of Bijapur. Jijabai, his mother, inspired Shivaji by telling stories of heroes from Hindu mythologies. She inculcated a spirit of bravery and self-determination in him. Shahji sent his son to manage his land tenures around Pune region, and Dadaji Kondadeb was in charge of teaching young Shivaji the art of administration and warfare. Shivaji’s personality grew among the rugged mountains in the Pune region as he matured with the care of his mother, his apprenticeship under Dadaji, and an indomitable spirit of independence. First Military Successes Shivaji’s first military endeavor occurred at the age of 16, when he seized the fort of Torana. The following year two more forts, Kondana and Raigarh, were taken by his army. The conquest of Javli kingdom in 1656 made Shivaji dominant in Mavala region, and the path was open for further conquests in the Konkan area. Shivaji also came into conflict with the Mughals when he made forays into Ahmadnagar, but he made peace with them in 1657. By 1659, he seized more forts along the Konkan coast and became master of Kalyan and Bhiwandi. The Bijapur sultan Adil Shah grew alarmed at Shivaji’s growing prowess. The respite from the Mughals allowed the sultan to focus on Shivaji, so he sent General Afzal Khan with 10,000 troops to capture him. The two leaders agreed to meet each other unarmed, but before Afzal could take out his dagger, Shivaji finished him with a hidden iron finger grip containing tiger claws. Afterward, the Bijapur army was routed, and Sivaji’s exploits made him a legendary figure. In 1660, Shivaji had to face the Mughal army of Deccan viceroy Shaista Khan, who was dispatched by Aurangzeb, anxious at the rapid rise of Shivaji. Pune and north Konkan came under Shaista Khan. Bijapur launched an attack under Sidi Salabat and took away Panhala. An agreement was signed between Shivaji and the sultan of Bijapur in 1662, by which Shivaji agreed not to attack Bijapur in exchange for control over northwestern part of the kingdom. The following year, Shivaji made a daring attack on Shaista Khan’s camp at Pune and the latter fled in disgrace. The important Mughal port of Surat was attacked in 1664, and Shivaji returned with treasure worth a fortune. Aurangzeb wanted to subdue Shivaji and sent his capable Hindu general Mirza Raja Jai Singh with an army of 12,000. Jai Singh made careful preparations to influence anti-Shivaji forces and then struck at the fort of Purandar, where Shivaji’s family was staying. It was 358 Shivaji besieged and Shivaji had to sign the Treaty of Purandar in 1665 after lengthy negotiations. Shivaji retained 12 forts out of his 35 and agreed to remain loyal to Aurangzeb. Jai Singh’s plan for subduing Bijapur failed, and he persuaded Shivaji to meet the emperor in person at Agra. He was put under house arrest but managed to escape. Another treaty was signed, but it did not stop the offensive of Shivaji against the Mughals, and in 1670 he launched another attack against their territories. Purandar and some other forts were recaptured by him. Surat was once again attacked. Self-Declared King On June 6, 1674, Shivaji declared himself as a sovereign king in a ceremony at Raigarh, in which he gave himself the title of Chhatrapati (sovereign king). He started the Raj Shaka (royal era) and issued shivarai hun (gold coin) on this occasion. An independent Maratha state became an accomplished fact in the face of the mighty Mughals and ever opposing hegemony of Bijapur kingdom. The Marathas looked him as father of the nation and the rise of Maratha nationalism owes a great deal to Shivaji, who rose from a minor chieftain to king of an independent kingdom. At the time of the struggle for freedom against British colonial rule, he was taken as a symbol of nationalism in the nationalist historiography. Shivaji did not make an agenda of fighting for the Hindu cause against forces of Islam. He was a brave soldier who prized his independence. His waging of war against external domination was a yearning for freedom against subjugation. After 1674, Shivaji launched a spate of offensives against Mughals in Berar and Khandesh. He besieged the forts at Vellore and Jinji. As a sovereign ruler, he signed a treaty with Golconda Sultanate. He also signed a friendship treaty with the Kutubshah of Golconda Sultanate. Administration Amid his conquests and relentless guerrilla warfare against enemies, Shivaji laid the foundation of a sound administrative system. The ashtapradhans (eight ministers) were ministers holding different portfolios. The ieshwa was the most important one, having charge of finance and general administration. The sar-i-naubat was the commander in chief, and the majumdar was the accountant. The dabir looked after foreign powers and waqe navis managed the intelligence department. The departments of justice and charity were entrusted with nyayadhish and panditrao. He was one of the few rulers who had a developed navy, and he enacted improvements to the organization and functioning of the army. The soldiers were given strict instructions for not harassing women and noncombatants. Salary was given in cash and the chiefs received land revenue grants. His numerous forts were well managed. A tax called chauth (one-fourth of land revenue) was levied in neighboring territories as a kind of protection money against Maratha raids. Shivaji adopted a policy of religious toleration and employed Muslims in the army. His admirals in the navy were Muslims. Shivaji was one of the greatest statesmen and generals, symbolizing the Maratha will against the imperial rule of the Mughals. He died on April 3, 1680, from high fever and was succeeded by his son, Raje Sambhaji (1657–89). See also Mughal Empire. Further reading: Apte, B. K., ed. Chhatrapati Shivaji: Coronation Tercentenary Commemoration Volume. Bombay: University of Bombay, 1974; Kasar, D. B. Rigveda to Raigarh: Making of Shivaji the Great. Mumbai: Manudevi Prakashan, 2005; Kincaid, Dennis. The Grand Rebel: An Impression of Shivaji, Founder of the Maratha Empire. London: Collins, 1937; Sarkar, Jadunath. Shivaji. Calcutta: S. C. Sarkar and Sons, 1961. Patit Paban Mishra Sikhism and Guru Nanak (1469–1539) founder of Sikhism Sri Guru Nanak Dev, founder of Sikhism, was born in 1469 in Sheikhupura district of present-day Pakistan to a Hindu family of Kshatriya caste. He was educated in Sanskrit, Persian, and Arabic. Although attracted to spiritualism, he did not adhere to religious conventions and refused putting on sacred thread according to the traditional Hindu custom. In spite of his marriage and his father’s insistence that he pursue a career, the young man pursued his spiritual quest, spending hours in meditation and in religious discourse with Muslim and Hindu saints. Nanak donated all his belongings to the poor, renounced the world, and made an extensive tour of the Indian subcontinent and according to the tradition went even to Mecca, Medina, Tibet, and Sri Lanka. During his travels to places of worship of both Hindus and Muslims, Nanak developed his religious thought and monotheism, belief in one god, who was timeless and everlasting. Like the Bhakit saints of India, he visualized an egalitarian society without any discrimination between different classes and religion. He was against Sikhism and Guru Nanak 359 all forms of rituals and proclaimed that there was neither Hindu nor Muslim, emphasizing brotherhood and peaceful coexistence between the followers of the two religions. Nanak’s message against caste distinctions, ritualism, superstition, and idol worship attracted adherents and he mixed freely with low-class people during his travels. He distributed money among the poor and maintained a common kitchen where all could dine together. Nanak identified himself with the downtrodden and declared that he was the lowliest of the low. He held woman in high esteem and once exclaimed, “Why denounce her from [of] whom even kings and great men are born?” Nanak advocated an honest livelihood, life of purity, and shared earnings. He believed in rebirths and taught that good deeds and chanting God’s name could end the cycle of rebirths. Finally he settled as a farmer in a place called Dera Baba Nank in Punjab, attracting large number of disciples with his simple and universal message. The followers of Nanak were called Sikhs (disciples) and he was their guru, the first of nine gurus. The second guru was his son Guru Angad (1504–52). The three essential elements in Nanak’s teaching were Nam Simran (thought about God), Kirt Kaara (living a normal life), and Wand Chhako (sharing with needy). In time, guru, shabad (ideology), and sangat (organization) also became important. Sikhism emphasized the necessity of family life and all gurus, except for the eighth, were married, leading normal family lives. Work was emphasized and the gurus earned their livelihoods in different vocations. There was no place for ascetics in Sikhism. The Adi Granth that forms the basis of Sikh theology is the record of Nanak’s teaching and the holy book of Sikhism. It was transcribed by Bhai Gurudasin in the 16th century in Punjab, a vernacular language of northern India. The Sikh way of life became popular among many people, and Sikhism was a dynamic and growing religion. The third Mughal emperor, Akbar, gave a grant of land to the Sikhs as a sign of approval. The fifth guru, Arjan Dev (1563–1606), who had compiled the Granth Sahib, built Amritsar as a holy city for all Sikhs and laid the foundation of Harmindar Sahib (the Golden Temple). The martyrdom of the Sikh leader during the revolt of Emperor Jahanair transformed Sikhism into a militant religion and long conflict with imperial power began. The militarization of the Sikh community became marked under fifth guru, Hargovind (1595–1644), at the time of Shah Jahan (1592–1666). Sikhs rose up against the Mughal emperor, Aurangzeb (1618–1707), who executed Guru Tegh Bahadur (the ninth guru). His son Govind Singh (1666–1708) then fought against Aurangzeb by founding a military brotherhood called Khalsa (pure). Govind Singh was the last guru. As the Mughal Empire disintegrated, the Sikhs established a state and strove for regional independence. Further reading: Bhattacharyya, Narendra Nath. Medieval Bhakti Movements in India. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1999; Chandra, Satish. Medieval India: From Sultanate to the Moghuls. Delhi: Har Anand, 1999; Majumdar, R. C., ed. The Delhi Sultanate. Bombay, India: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1989; Mann, Gurinder Singh. The Making of Sikh Scripture. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000; Mishra, Patit Paban. “India—Medieval Period,” Levinson, D., and K. Christensen, eds. Encyclopedia of Modern Asia. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2002. Patit Paban Mishra silver in the Americas The discovery of massive deposits of silver in New Spain and Peru from the mid-16th century set in motion a chain of events that reverberated across the globe. Large-scale silver production in Spanish America not only transformed local, regional, and colonial economies across large parts of the Americas. It also fueled a price revolution in Europe, accelerated the growth of the nascent African slave trade, and heightened imperial competition between Europe’s early modern nation-states, particularly Spain and England. American silver proved crucial in providing the Spanish imperial state with the fiscal base necessary to build and defend its overseas empire, while also sparking keen interest in American exploration and colonization by Spain’s European rivals. At every level—local, regional, colonywide, and global—the economic, social, and political transformations wrought by large-scale silver production in Spain’s New World holdings were enduring and profound. Two main centers of silver production emerged in 16th-century Spanish America: the region north and west of Mexico City, centered on the provinces of Zacatecas and Guanajuato, and the “mountain of silver” at Potosí in the Peruvian Andes. (Silver production at Potosí is treated elsewhere in these pages.) The development of New Spain’s silver industry, with its epicenter at Zacatecas, followed a very different trajectory. Unlike Peru’s, the silver deposits of New Spain had not been systematically mined by pre-Columbian 36 0 silver in the Americas polities. The Zacatecas mining region, with its low rainfall and infertile soils, had been outside the Aztec sphere of influence and had few sedentary inhabitants prior to the conquest of Mexico. Silver ores were first discovered there in September 1546 by Juan de Tolsa, commander of a detachment of Spanish soldiers exploring the arid region. In the next few years, the discovery prompted a vast silver rush, rapidly and permanently transforming the regional economies of Zacatecas, Guanajuato, and, farther south, the Bajío, the breadbasket of the colony, in response to rising demands for food, clothing, and other products required by the emergent mining economy. New Spain Production As in Peru, large-scale silver production in New Spain required huge infusions of both labor and capital, along with long-term investments and substantial technical expertise. Labor shortages soon proved the principal bottleneck to New Spain’s silver economy. As in Peru, the Spanish Crown, eager to collect its quinto real (“royal fifth,” a tax comprising 20 percent of all production), played a central role in creating and fostering the colony’s silver mining industry, in some cases slashing its quinto in half to stimulate production. The Crown claimed all subsoil rights, but in order to attract sufficient labor and capital, and to induce prospectors to find new deposits, the imperial state came to rely on a combination of state-directed and private initiatives. Deep-shaft mines and their accompanying refining facilities were invariably owned by private individuals, primarily encomenderos in the mid- and late 1500s, followed by men of sufficient wealth and experience to own and operate such large and complex enterprises. Indian and mestizo laborers were lured into the region from the Basin of Mexico and elsewhere mainly by relatively high wages and related incentives. By the 1550s, African slaves also began to play an increasingly important role in the mining industry, a development that provided an important stimulus to the Atlantic slave trade during its earliest phase. Unlike the situation in Peru, where a modification of the preconquest mita labor in the Andean highlands generated a hellish environment for mineworkers, symbolized by the “infernal pits” of Potosí, in New Spain silver mine workers comprised a kind of aristocracy of labor, with relatively greater privileges and freedoms than Indians held in encomienda. Still, working conditions in the mines were dangerous and accidents common. Hispanization proceeded more quickly among Indian, African, and mestizo mineworkers in Zacatecas than it did elsewhere in New Spain, creating a large, mostly proletarian Spanish-speaking male labor force. New Spain’s silver mines, along with its obrajes, were thus the first to develop private labor relationships, including wage labor, independent of state mediation or control, leading some scholars to interpret the mining economy as a key locus of the origins of capitalism in Mexico. Ancillary industries, necessary to feed, clothe, and shelter mineworkers, mushroomed within the mining zones and beyond, including artisan work and craftwork, stock raising, agriculture, cloth production, and related enterprises. As in Peru, the ripple effects generated by the silver mining industry transformed local and regional economies far from the actual sites of production. After the refinement of the mercury amalgamation process in the 1570s, silver production in Spanish America soared. While Potosí’s production declined from its height in the early 1600s, New Spain’s output remained relatively stable from the 1550s to around 1700, increasing dramatically thereafter. In 1700, New Spain’s silver production hovered around 5 million pesos annually. By the 1780s, the figure had quadrupled. As early as 1600, silver ore, bullion, and coins constituted some 80 percent of New Spain’s exports, making it far and away the largest and most important industry in Spain’s wealthiest and most important colony. Inflation In Spain These massive infusions of silver into Spain’s economy contributed to an inflationary spiral that had profound ripple effects across large parts of Europe. The causes of the so-called price revolution that socked western Europe beginning in the 1560s were numerous and complex. Along with steady population increases and the glacial pace of agricultural innovation, chief among the most common explanations for this dizzying rise in prices for food and manufactured goods in western Europe from the 1560s is the dramatic increase in the amount of silver coinage in circulation, a circumstance directly attributable to the enormous influx of silver into Spain from Peru and New Spain. Scholarly consensus holds that overall, this price revolution disproportionately benefited wealthier classes and harmed the poor, as the relentless rise in the price of bread, cloth, and rents was not matched by rising wages or productivity. Spain’s example also spurred its rivals, especially England and France, to try to replicate Spain’s stunning silver in the Americas 36 1 successes in their own schemes of conquest and colonization in the Americas. Yet the very different histories of these emergent nation-states generated very different models of colonization, with the English, French, Portuguese, and Dutch states playing a far lesser role than the Spanish Crown, and with a much greater role for private and entrepreneurial enterprises, most notably joint-stock companies, such as the Virginia Company, as the principal engines driving the initiatives that constituted the next wave of American conquests and colonization. See also New Spain, Viceroyalty of (Mexico); Peru, Viceroyalty of; slave trade, Africa and the. Further reading: Bakewell, Peter J. Silver Mining and Society in Colonial Mexico: Zacatecas, 1546–1700. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971; Bakewell, Peter J., ed. Mines of Silver and Gold in the Americas, Vol. 19. Aldershot, Hampshire, UK: Ashgate Publishing, Limited, 1997; Bakewell, Peter J. Miners of the Red Mountain: Indian Labor in Potosí, 1545–1650. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1984; Braudel, Fernand. The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II. New York: Harper & Row, 1972. Michael J. Schroeder Sinan, Abdul-Menan (1489–1574) Ottoman architect Sinan was born in Kayseri in central Anatolia to a Greek Orthodox family. When he was in his early 20s, older than was customary, he was recruited in the devshirme levy to be educated in Istanbul. He was selected for the elite Janissaries and served in several military campaigns, where he became a noted engineer building bridges and other structures. He served as the major architect for sultans Suleiman I the Magnificent and Selim II (the sot) and became the empire’s chief architect (mimbar bashi). During his long and productive life, Sinan designed more known buildings than any other architect in history. He built mosques, hammams, mausoleums, aqueducts, and palaces. Building on ideas from earlier Byzantine designs, particularly the Aya Sopia in Istanbul, Sinan struggled to surpass the grandeur and size of the dome in that great Byzantine church. Sinan’s Suleimaniya complex in Istanbul has a mosque with a huge central dome supported by two half-domes giving the appearance of soaring in the air; the mosque, with tall needle shaped minarets, opens onto a courtyard with a portico, a style much favored in Ottoman architecture. The vast complex, with over 400 domes in total, also includes schools, a hospice, a soup kitchen, and commercial shops to support the social work of the complex. Sinan also built the elaborately decorated Rustem Pasha mosque for the grand vizier as well as the tombs for Suleiman’s son Mehmed and Suleiman’s beloved wife, Hurrem Sultan (Roxelana); these are adorned with brightly colored Iznik tiles in deep blues and reds. In his autobiography, Sinan rated the Selimya mosque in Edirne, outside Istanbul, as his masterpiece owing to its huge central dome, which seems to float over a vast open interior space. Sinan died in 1574 at the age of 99 and is buried in a simple tomb close to one of his greatest accomplishments, the Suleimaniya complex. See also Ottoman Empire (1450–1750); Safavid Empire. Further reading: Goodwin, Godfrey. A History of Ottoman Architecture. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1971; Kuran, Aptullah. The Mosque in Early Ottoman Architecture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968; Levey, Michael. The World of Ottoman Art. London: Thames and Hudson, 1975; Stratton, Arthur. Sinan. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1972. Janice J. Terry slave trade, Africa and the The discovery of the Americas created new economic opportunities with agriculture the foundation of these opportunities. In 1493, only a year after his first voyage, Christopher Columbus introduced sugarcane into the Caribbean, the crop on which Europeans built the first plantations in the New World. Sugarcane demanded a large labor force, particularly at harvest. Europeans sought to meet the demand for labor by using criminals, orphans, indentured servants, and Native Americans. But there was still a need for laborers. Native Americans succumbed to Old World diseases, and the supply of European laborers met only a fraction of the demand. In the mid-15th century, the Portuguese addressed the problem of labor by enslaving Africans to grow sugarcane on the Madeira Islands in the Atlantic Ocean. The Spanish used slavery in their New World colony Hispaniola (now the island of Haiti and the Dominican Republic), importing the first slaves in 1502. The institutionalization of 362 Sinan, Abdul-Menan slavery in the New World spurred trade in slaves. The fact that demand for slaves outpaced the growth in supply by natural increase nearly everywhere in the Americas perpetuated the slave trade over four centuries. PORTUGAL LEADS SLAVE TRADE Portugal monopolized the trade at the outset. The Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494 granted Portugal access to Africa and with it, slaves. After 1528, Portuguese shipping companies supplied Spain with slaves through a series of asientos, or contracts. An asiento specified the delivery of slaves in piezas de India, which quantified labor rather than slaves. Men tallied more piezas than women because of the expectation that men would yield more labor than women. For the same reason, the young were worth more than the old. A cargo of 100 piezas constituted the smallest number of slaves if all were young males and the largest if all were elderly females. Of course slave traders rarely got the “ideal” of all young men fit for the rigors of the plantation. Market conditions yielded a mix, with a majority being young men with some women also included, particularly those of childbearing age in hopes of perpetuating the slave population by reproduction. A cargo might also contain the prepubescent and elderly because of their low prices. Their purchase, however, entailed risk because they were susceptible to disease and early death. The value of labor and therefore of slaves fluctuated over time. In 1693, the records of the Portuguese Cacheau Company reveal that one pieza was worth 1.6 slaves. In 1715, however, records of the South Sea Company of Great Britain reveal that the value of one pieza had declined to 1.04 slaves. These figures imply an increase in the demand for slaves over time. Supply rose to meet demand. Between 1521 and 1550, Spain imported into its colonies 15,000 slaves, 500 per year on average, and between 1551 and 1595, they brought in 36,300 slaves, amounting to 810 per year on average. The largest importer of slaves, Brazil, imported more than 200,000 during these years. In total Portugal had shipped 264,000 slaves to the New World by 1600. Portugal so dominated trade that by 1600, its maritime rival Britain had shipped only 2,000 slaves to the Americas. No other nation participated in the trade until after 1600. Portugal’s trade in slaves benefited from political instability in Africa. War engulfed the empire of Jolof, spanning modern Senegal and Gambia, in the middle of the 16th century. Warlords enslaved prisoners, trading them with Portugal for guns. At the same time, the deterioration of the central government of Kongo, modern Angola, Cabinda, and the Republic of the Congo permitted the Portuguese access to the interior of the kingdom and to a larger number of slaves than had been possible when Kongo confined Portugal to the coast. In 1614, Portugal allied with the Jaga, a group hostile to the Ndongo rulers of Angola. The resulting war won Portugal captives it sold as slaves. New alliances after 1640 gave Portugal access to slaves in Luanda, the modern capital of Angola. Political instability gave Europeans more slaves than they might otherwise have expected, for Africa was impenetrable to Europeans into the 19th century. Tropical diseases made it hazardous for Europeans to roam the interior of the continent in search of slaves. Where African tribes remained united, they kept Europeans at arm’s length. Instead, Europeans established fortresses along the western coast of Africa, the first at Elmina, a town in Ghana, in 1482, and awaited the delivery of slaves from African merchants and chieftains. Once at the coast, slaves waited in dungeons, pens, or stockades until the arrival of a ship. Both Africans and Europeans, intermingling for the first time, were at risk of disease. Confinement in tight quarters on the coast and aboard ship exacerbated the danger to Africans of an epidemic. SLAVE SHIP CONDITIONS Once onboard the ships, slaves endured lengthy waits until the captain had enough slaves and the right force slave trade, Africa and the 363 A slave trader identified as Captain Kimber orders the torture of a young enslaved African woman aboard his ship. and direction of wind to sail. Seldom less than a month, the wait on the coast sometimes stretched to half a year. All the while slaves, packed 100–1,000 per ship, depending on its size, occupied little more than six square feet of space with two or three feet of headroom. Slavers separated men from women, shackling the men in pairs to reduce the danger of rebellion. Long chains tethered groups of slaves, kept below deck most of the time, for movement to the deck for fresh air and meals. The duration of the wait on the coast and the voyage to the Americas tempted the all-male crews to rape female slaves. Once a ship set sail, slaves were vulnerable to the vicissitudes of weather and wind. Rain prevented them from getting fresh air on deck and increased the incidence and spread of diseases. Storms imperiled even the most promising crossing. In 1738, a storm assailed the Dutch ship Leusdan only days from its destination. When it began to leak, the crew, fearing a fight over the lifeboats, locked some 660 slaves below deck, leaving them to drown. Only the crew and 14 slaves on deck survived. The absence of wind brought ships to a standstill and strained the food supply. Ship captains rarely had more than three months of food at the start of a voyage and reduced slave rations on long trips. The crossing from the Guinea Coast was especially perilous because ships had to traverse the doldrums twice and thereby risk a lengthy calm. One study estimated the mortality rate for ocean crossings of fewer than 20 days at 8 percent, though the death rate increased to nearly one-quarter for voyages longer than two months. Malaria, yellow fever, and intestinal ailments accounted for two-thirds of deaths, and smallpox, scurvy, and suicide the remaining third. Once a ship reached its destination, an inspector boarded to check slaves for disease, quarantining all slaves if he found one with a communicable disease and prolonging their stay aboard ship until contagion had passed. On land, slaves at last had fresh food and water. Traders amassed slaves for sale once ashore, selling the young and old first and holding men and women of childbearing age for sale until last in the expectation that prices would rise with the eagerness of buyers to close the deal. The fact that ovulating women fetched a higher price than pre- and postmenopausal women contradicts the assertion of slave traders that they did not sell slaves for the purpose of breeding. Traders sold most slaves by auction, though an alternative was to fix the price for a group of slaves of similar age and physical condition and allow buyers to choose from among this group. 36 4 slave trade, Africa and the An illustration showing the dimensions allowed to slaves as cargo in a slave ship. By the 1760s, slave imports averaged between 10,000 and 15,000 per year. By 1787, the number exceeded 40,000 per year. OTHER NATIONS ENTER THE SLAVE TRADE Portugal’s hold on the slave trade began to weaken in the 17th century, as the Netherlands entered the fray. After 1630, the Dutch imported into northern Brazil slaves they wrested from Portugal. Taking Curaçao in 1634, the Dutch used it to funnel slaves to their colonies and to those of Portugal, Spain, Britain, and France. In 1637, the Netherlands captured the Portuguese fortress at Elmina, making it the point of origin of the Dutch slave trade. After 1667, the Netherlands imported slaves into Surinam. In total the Netherlands brought 39,900 slaves to the New World between 1601 and 1650 with the number rising to 76,400 between 1726 and 1770. Thereafter the Netherlands’s share of the slave trade decreased rapidly. Britain also contested Portuguese dominance. The spread of tobacco in Virginia after 1617 opened British North America to the slave trade. In 1619, the Dutch landed 20 slaves, the first shipment of its kind, in Jamestown. During much of the 17th century, the slave trade in the thirteen colonies was more trickle than deluge. In 1640, Virginia had only 150 slaves and in 1670, fewer than 1,000. In contrast to Latin America and the Caribbean, slaves in the thirteen colonies increased their numbers through reproduction, diminishing the need to import slaves. The slave trade in British North America was strongest after the decline of indentured servitude around 1670 and the rise of rice plantations along the Carolina coast about 1700. The thirteen colonies, according to one estimate, imported between 1619 and 1750, roughly 201,500 slaves, an average of 1,550 per year. By comparison the French imported 1,690 slaves per year on average into the island of Martinique between 1664 and 1735 and the Spanish 3,880 per year on average into its colonies between 1640 and 1750. Following the pattern of British North America, the colonization of the Caribbean opened it to the slave trade. Settling Barbados in 1624, Britain imported the first slaves in 1627. Thereafter the slave trade grew with the spread of sugar cultivation as the trade had in the thirteen colonies with the tobacco boom. Barbadian imports increased from 6,500 slaves between 1640 and 1644 (an average of 1,300 per year) to 36,400 between 1698 and 1707 (an average of 3,640 per year). In Jamaica sugar and the slave trade took hold in the middle of the 17th century. Between 1651 and 1675, planters imported 8,000 slaves, an average of roughly 330 per year, roughly one-sixth the number imported into Barbados. By the turn of the century, however, Jamaica had eclipsed Barbados, importing between 1676 and 1700 77,100 slaves, an average of roughly 3,210 per year. Extrapolating the number of imports from the Royal African Company, a slave trading firm granted a monopoly by King Charles II, to all traders throughout Jamaica, planters imported into the island roughly 7,800 slaves between 1708 and 1711, an average of 2,600 per year. Between 1655 and 1674, Barbados supplied Jamaica with one-third of its slaves though the proportion fell by the turn of the 18th century to 5 percent. By then most imports came from Africa though the voyage to Jamaica was 1,000 miles farther west than Barbados. The Leeward Islands were the last of Britain’s Caribbean holdings to enter the slave trade. By 1670, island planters had imported only 7,000 slaves. The numbers grew to 44,800 between 1672 and 1706, an average of 1,280 per year, with another 43,100 between 1707 and 1733, an average of 1,600 per year. In total the British imported 250,000 slaves into the Caribbean by 1700, and throughout the Americas, traders of all nations bought and sold 266,100 slaves between 1519 and 1600. This represents an average of 3,300 per year, with the number rising to roughly 1.3 million between 1726 and 1750, an astonishing average of 52,000 per year. In all the New World absorbed more than 1.5 million slaves between 1519 and 1750. See also epidemics in the Americas; sugarcane plantations in the Americas; tobacco in colonial British America. Further reading: Curtin, Philip D. The Atlantic Slave Trade: A Census. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969; Drescher, Seymour. From Slavery to Freedom: Comparative Studies in the Rise and Fall of Atlantic Slavery. New York: New York University Press, 1999; Dunn, Richard S. Sugar and Slaves: The Rise of the Planter Class in the English West Indies, 1624–1713. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1972; Eltis, David, Stephen D. Behrendt, David Richardson, and Herbert S. Klein, eds. The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade: A Database on CD ROM. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999; Eltis, David, and David Richards, eds. Routes to Slavery: Direction, Ethnicity and Mortality in the Atlantic Slave Trade. London: Frank Cass, 1997; Inikori, Joseph E., and Stanley L. Engerman, eds. The Atlantic Slave Trade: Effects on Economies, Societies, and Peoples in Africa, the Americas, and Europe. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1992; Klein, Herbert S. The Atlantic Slave Trade. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999; Manning, Patrick, ed. Slave Trades, 1500–1800: Globalization of Forced Labor. London: Ashgate Publishing, 1996; Palmer, Collin A. The First Passage: Blacks in the Americas, 1502–1617. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995; Postma, slave trade, Africa and the 36 5 Johannes. The Atlantic Slave Trade. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2003; Rawley, James A. The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade: A History. New York: W. W. Norton, 1981; Thomas, Hugh. The Slave Trade: The Story of the Atlantic Slave Trade, 1440–1870. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1997. Christopher Cumo Songhai Empire The Songhai Empire was the largest empire in the history of western Sudan. It grew from the small state of Gao, which was founded between 500 and 700 a.d. However the empire did not become a major force in the history of empire building and territorial expansion until 1464 when Sunni Ali, also known as Ali Beer, became the king. In 1469 and 1470, his military campaigns led to the incorporation of Timbuktu and Azawad, located northward and northeast, respectively. In 1473, he attacked Jenne, a great Islamic center located southward, and in 1483, he was able to drive the Mossi out of Walata-Baghana. Within 28 years of his ascendancy, Sunni Ali had converted the little state of Gao into a magnificent empire stretching from the Niger in the east to Jenne in the west, and from the Timbuktu in the north to Hombori in the south. He was said to be a ruthless ruler who maltreated all those who opposed his administration and did all that was possible to keep vassal states under firm administrative control by appointing governors who administered his orders. Payment of tributes, which were in form of goods and contribution of workforce for further territorial expansion, placed the empire on a powerful economic and political footing. The death of Sunni Ali in 1492 was followed by a 40-month reign by his son Sunni Baru, who was deposed in 1493 by Askia Muhammad Touré. Askia Muhammad Touré, popularly known in history as Muhammad the Great, completed the process of nation building and conquest initiated by Sunni Ali by extending territories of Songhai Empire to Baghana and Taghaza, a significant caravan route and salt producing area. While Sunni Ali’s reign was characterized by ruthlessness and dislocation of commerce, that of Askia Muhammad the Great was known for the pacification of the subjugated people and the promotion of commerce, Islamic scholarship, and general tranquility. His 1496 pilgrimage to the holy city of Mecca had far-reaching consequences for the promotion of Islam as it attracted Muslim clerics and commerce to the empire. Islamic religion flourished in the great Islamic centers such as Timbuktu and Sankore. The University of Sankore produced the likes of Mahmoud Kati and Abdulrahman As Sadi, whose books are valued sources for the reconstruction of the history of Songhai and western Sudan in general. Askia Muhammad the Great relied on the advice of Muslim clerics in governing the empire and made Islamic law the instrument of political and administrative machinery in western parts. In the eastern territories of Gao and Kikiya he allowed traditional religion to exist by granting non-Muslims of the region the freedom they needed to practice their religion. As had his predecessor, Askia Muhammad divided the entire kingdom into provinces administered by governors, or kio. The central administration consisted of a council of ministers predominantly from his immediate and extended families. While Jenne controlled internal commerce, Gao and Timbuktu served as link to other economic centers in the east and northeast and west and northwest, respectively. Short -lived prosperity The prosperity of the empire was however short-lived. Starting in the middle of the 16th century, internal problems hindered the government and provided an enabling condition for its invasion and destruction by the Moroccans in 1651. At the top of the list of the internal factors that led to the fall of Songhai Empire was the succession dispute among the sons of Askia Muhammad the Great. Aside from allowing hitherto subjugated states to assert their independence, this development inhibited economic prosperity and further territorial expansion. The Civil War of 1588 had its origin in poor internal control exemplified in the succession dispute between Ishaq and Sadiq, two sons of Askia Daud, and the crises between the western parts, which was under strong Islamic influence, and the east, under the firm control of the non-Muslims. The last straw was the Moroccan invasion of 1591. The defeat by the Moroccans can only be appreciated against the backdrop of the fact that the empire on the eve of the invasion was in the throes of an internal convulsion. Al-Mansur, the sultan of Morocco, who had failed in two early expeditions, wasted no time to invade the empire during its most turbulent period. In 1591, he attacked Songhai with 4,000 professional soldiers and another 2,000 armed with arquebus, a gun with three legs. Askia Ishaq II raised an army of 18,000 cavalry and 9,700 infantry to resist the 366 Songhai Empire invasion of the Moroccan army. The overwhelming numbers of the Songhai army could not defeat their Moroccan counterparts in the battle, known to history as the Battle of Tondibi; the Moroccan army was more professional, disciplined, and equipped with sophisticated weaponry. The Moroccan invasion led to the demise of the Songhai, the largest empire to have emerged in western Sudan. The guerrilla warfare initiated after 1591 was not formidable enough for the reassertion of political freedom. The invasion led to loss of lives and property and the extension of Moroccan political hegemony over Songhai. Islamic scholars and clerics fled to other parts of the western Sudan and the great Islamic centers of Timbuktu and Sankore lost their hitherto prime position. Further reading: Ajayi, J. F. A., and Michael Crowder, eds. History of West Africa, Vol I. New York: Columbia University Press, 1972; Boahen, Adu. Topics in West African History. London: Longman, 1997; Davidson, Basil. West Africa before the Colonial Era: A History to 1850. London and New York: Longman, 1998; Fage, J. D. A History of West Africa: An Introductory Survey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969. Saheed Aderinto Spanish Armada The growing frictions between England and Spain in the mid-16th century gradually led to the armed conflict between the Spanish “invincible” fleet, Armada, and the English Royal Navy in the English Channel and around the British coast in 1588, resulting in the devastating defeat of Spain and a glorious triumph of Queen Elizabeth I of England. When Queen Elizabeth (r. 1558–1603) ascended the English throne in 1558, King Philip II of Spain (r. 1556–98), who had been the husband of the English Queen Mary I (r. 1553–58), showed interest in proposing marriage to Elizabeth in order to form an alliance with England to balance the French power on the Continent. When Elizabeth chose to procrastinate, Philip gradually lost patience. In the mid‑1580s, the situation changed dramatically, when Philip II, a fervent defender of the Roman papacy, joined his old French Catholic rivals in their wars against the French Huguenots and the Dutch Calvinists. Meanwhile, Elizabeth became the archheretic of the Catholic world, after Pope Pius V excommunicated the queen in 1570 for declaring herself the “Supreme Governor” of the Church of England and introducing Calvinist rituals into public worship for her people. King Philip’s hostility toward Queen Elizabeth was linked closely to his own personal trouble with his Calvinist Dutch subjects. In 1578, the king appointed the duke of Parma to suppress the Calvinists in the northern provinces of the Netherlands, who had been rebelling against Habsburg Dynasty control for decades. While the duke gained some ground in the south, the ten northern provinces declared the independence of the United Provinces, or Dutch Republic, in 1581. Facing escalating pressure from the duke of Parma, the Dutch sought military assistance from Queen Elizabeth. She sent an army of 6,000 soldiers led by the earl of Leicester to the Netherlands, and the joint Dutch and English forces began to hold a front to check Parma’s northern advance for two years (1585‑87). To Philip II, the military involvement of the English queen in his personal dynastic affairs rendered her, just as the German Lutherans, the Dutch Calvinists, and the French Huguenots, an enemy of God. Philip II, moreover, felt humiliated by English piracy on the high seas, which challenged the century-long imperial dominance and commercial monopoly of Spain over the Atlantic Ocean. In the 1560s, Sir John Hawkins made three risky trips, transporting West African slaves to the Americas for sale, and thus helped England gain a share in the highly profitable slave trade. In the 1570s, Sir Francis Drake carried out a series of raids on Spanish treasure ships on the high seas. Queen Elizabeth enjoyed her share of profits from both adventures. In 1587, while the duke of Parma made progress in upsetting the Anglo-Dutch alliance in the Netherlands, the Anglo-Spanish relationship deteriorated because of two incidents. In February, Elizabeth issued the order for the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots, who had been a proxy in Philip’s conspiracy against the heretic English queen for about two decades. In April, Sir Francis Drake led a fleet of 23 English ships, attacking the Spanish homeland, burning about 30 ships in the harbor of Cádiz, and looting treasures from the Spanish merchants worth more than 100,000 pounds in the Azores, of which Elizabeth gained 40,000 pounds. Philip became convinced that the time had come to crush the middle-aged queen, whom the Catholic world despised and the Habsburgs had to destroy in order to save the Netherlands. In the late summer, the strategy of the Armada invasion was designed by the king himself. The Armada would sail to the English Channel at the same time as Spanish Armada 36 7 Parma was crossing the channel with his own vessels, carrying 30,000 soldiers from Flanders. The joint forces would then invade England by disembarking near the mouth of the Thames. The strategic plan was no longer a secret at the end of the year, and Queen Elizabeth decided to take the challenge. English Naval Forces By common estimation, the Spanish Armada comprised 138 ships from Spain and different Habsburg dominions, weighing a total of 58,000 tons, carrying 30,000 men and 2,400 cannons. The number of soldiers would be doubled once the forces of the duke of Parma joined in. The English naval forces comprised 34 royal warships and 170 privately owned ships carefully chosen from East Anglia and Kent. Spain had dominated the high seas for about a century, but its navy was not superior to its English counterparts. The Armada had 21 galleons, which were massive in size, but slow in speed. The commander of the Armada, the duke of Medina- Sidonia, was an expert of fleet logistics, but not a professional military leader. The soldiers of the Armada were pious Catholics, but inexperienced in sea battles, especially in navigating the Channel, where winds and waves were often unpredictable. In comparison, the major English warships were also huge, but faster, more maneuverable, and equipped with better guns. The commanders of the English Royal Navy, Lord Howard of Effington, Sir Francis Drake, and Sir John Hawkins, were career seamen, each having unique experiences in sailing and battling on the sea. The English soldiers, including many veterans from the Dutch War, knew the Channel better and were well prepared for sea battles there. Of course, both sides were determined to win, but neither side calculated correctly how the war would eventually proceed. On July 29, 1588, after three months of voyage from Lisbon, the Armada reached the Lizard Point, the southern tip of England. It spread into a crescent formation and sailed along the English coast northeastward up to Calais. The duke of Medina-Sidonia led the main battleships in the center with the vanguard on the left and the rearguard on the right of about 20 capital ships each. On July 31, the English naval ships sailed out from Plymouth with an equally impressive force and kept chasing the Spanish fleet. For next few days, the two fleets faced off tensely in the Channel, but neither side attempted a major military engagement. The Armada was approaching Calais on August 6, hoping to join the forces with the duke of Parma as planned by Philip II himself. However, the duke had been outmaneuvered by the Dutch forces on land and sea in Flanders, did not dare risk being lacerated while convoying his army in his own small barges from Flanders across the Channel to England. While the Spanish were considering how to get Parma’s soldiers embarked, eight English blazing fireships, on the night of August 7, penetrated the colossus of the Armada, breaking the crescent formation, setting fires on Spanish ships, and causing the whole fleet to flee in panic. On the following day, the Spanish fleet suffered from an all-day gale blowing from the south-southwest to the north-northwest, and lost many lives in the battles off Gravelines. Afterward, the continuously deteriorating weather dispersed the Armada into the North Sea, and thus buried any hope for the duke of Parma to join the Armada for invading England. On its way back to Spain, the Armada was forced to sail around the Scottish and Irish coasts and continued to lose ships and lives under the fierce chase of the English naval force. In mid-October, the surviving Spanish ships miraculously navigated back home. The final tally of the Armada’s loss was appalling. Only 60 of 130 ships could be accounted for, and 11,000 lives might have been lost. In 1588, Spain undoubtedly lost the battle, Philip II was certainly humiliated, and the English victory saved England from a very probable disaster anticipated by its enemy. However, the defeat of the Spanish Armada did not alter the policies and behavior of the Spanish, English, or other major European monarchs. The religious wars continued to spiral all over Europe. Neither did it immediately change the geopolitical balance in Europe. Spain recovered quickly and continued its interventionist role in transnational affairs of Europe, and England did not transform itself into a superpower overnight. However, Queen Elizabeth emerged from her victory a heroine to her subjects in England and Protestants all over Europe. See also Calvin, John; Luther, Martin; slave trade, Africa and the. Further reading: Fernandez-Armesto, Felipe. The Spanish Armada: The Experience of War in 1588. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988; Martin, Colin, and Geoffrey Parker. The Spanish Armada. London: Hamish Hamilton, 1988; Mattingly, Garrett. The Armada. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1959; Parker, Geoffrey. Philip II. New York: Little, Brown, 1978; Rasor, Eugene L. The Spanish Armada: Historiography and Annotated Bibliography. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1993; Wernham, Richard B. Before the Armada: The Growth of English Foreign Policy, 1485–1588. London: Cape, 1966; ———. The Return of the 368 Spanish Armada Armadas: The Last Years of the Elizabethan War against Spain, 1595–1603. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994. Wenxi Liu Spanish Succession, War of the The War of the Spanish Succession (1701–14) was a great European conflict fought over which claimant would assume the vacant throne of Spain. Throughout the 16th century, Spain had been ruled by the Habsburg dynasty, which also controlled Austria and other parts of Europe. Charles II (1661– 1700), the last Habsburg king of Spain, had no legitimate heir. He named Philip, duc d’Anjou (1683–1746), as his successor. The Bourbon dynasty, which ruled France, had been long-standing rivals of the Habsburgs; the closest claimant to the Spanish throne was Louis xiv’s eldest son with Maria-Theresa. However, the princess had been barred from her rights to the Spanish throne as part of her marriage contract. This condition was contingent upon receipt of the bride’s dowry, which was never paid. Since the promotion of Louis XIV’s son to the Spanish throne would unite the thrones of both France and Spain and certainly prompt a reaction from the European powers, Louis XIV advocated that his younger grandson, duc d’Anjou, rule Spain. Leopold I (1640–1705), Holy Roman Emperor, king of Austria, and member of the Habsburg family, attempted to preserve his family’s control of Spain by forwarding himself as the rightful successor to Charles II. Such a situation would unite the thrones of Austria and Spain, a situation unacceptable to the European powers, and Leopold I advocated his son, Archduke Charles (1685–1740), as king of Spain. Expanding French Influence Louis XIV’s attempts to expand French influence on the European continent prompted England and the Netherlands to side with the Holy Roman Empire against France in order to preserve the balance of power. The son of Leopold I’s daughter, Prince Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria (1692–99), was the preferred candidate as king of Spain by the European powers, who feared either family’s gaining too much dominance. Prince Joseph Ferdinand was agreed upon as heir in 1698, but he died of smallpox in 1699. England then ratified the Treaty of London (1700) recognizing Archduke Charles as heir to the Spanish throne. Charles II died in 1700. He declared the duc d’Anjou his successor and Louis XIV quickly declared his grandson Philip V king of the Spanish empire. England could not afford war with France and recognized Philip V as king of Spain in 1701. Louis XIV attempted to solidify his newfound influence by severing both England and the Netherlands from Spanish trade. The blow to both countries’ commercial interests forced them into an alliance with Austria against France and Spain. The Treaty of the Hague (1701) of the Netherlands, England, and Austria recognized Philip V as king of Spain but transferred sections of Italy and the Netherlands under Spanish rule to Austria. It also confirmed England’s and the Netherlands’s commercial rights in Spain. The war began in 1702, when Austrian forces invaded Spanish territories in Italy, forcing French intervention. England, the Netherlands, and several German states sided with Austria while Bavaria, Portugal, and Savoy supported France and Spain. Other opportunist states joined sides in the conflict, expanding fighting throughout Europe and North America, where the conflict became known as Queen Anne’s War. The duke of Marlborough captured territories in the Netherlands in 1702–03 while Prince Eugene held French forces in Italy. The French, under the duc de Villars, scored a victory at Friedlingen in 1702. Success in Alsace, located between France and the Holy Roman Empire, presented the opportunity for an invasion of Austria in 1703, but dissention among French commanders ruined this opportunity. Marlborough moved his troops from the Netherlands to Bavaria, linking with Prince Eugene’s forces to defeat the French at the Battle of Blenheim (1704). Meanwhile, Portugal and Savoy switched sides, joining the coalition headed by England, Austria, and the Netherlands. In 1704, England captured the strategic island of Gibraltar. French Invade Italy In 1706, French forces evacuated Italy following Prince Eugene’s victory at Turin and the Netherlands following Marlborough’s victory at Ramillies. In 1708, following Prince Eugene’s disastrous expedition into Provence the previous year, Marlborough and Eugene won at Oudenarde and captured Lille. French forces retreated, losing an additional battle at Malplaquet (1709). Allied campaigns in Spain (1708–10) garnered little success in weakening Philip V’s position. Louis XIV opened peace negotiations, but his refusal to join against his grandson brought negotiations to a halt. In 1711, the death of Holy Roman Emperor Joseph I (1678–1711) resulted in the ascension of Archduke Spanish Succession, War of the 369 Charles (Charles VI) to the thrones of Austria and the Holy Roman Empire. The English opened negotiations to end the war. The Treaty of Utrecht (1713) ended hostilities among France, Spain, England, and the Netherlands. Charles VI continued the war, finally ending hostilities by signing the Treaties of Rastatt and Baden (1714), which complemented the general settlement of the Treaty of Utrecht. Philip V retained the Spanish throne under the condition that he and his descendants were barred from the throne of France. Austria gained territory in Italy and the Netherlands previously belonging to Spain while England gained Gibraltar, Minorca, and exclusive rights to slave trading in Spanish America for 30 years. France recognized Anne as queen of England and surrendered some of its American territories. France’s dominance over the European continent was checked and the notion of the preservation of the balance of power emerged as the cornerstone of European politics for centuries to come. See also Austrian Succession, War of the (1740– 1748); Stuart, House of. Further reading: Dickinson, W. Calvin, and Eloise R. Hitchcock, eds. The War of the Spanish Succession, 1702–1713: A Selected Bibliography. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1996; Frey, Linda, and Marsha Frey, eds. The Treaties of the War of the Spanish Succession: An Historical and Critical Dictionary. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1995; Lynn, John. The Wars of Louis XIV, 1667–1714. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Longman, 1999; Sturgill, Claude. Marshal Villars and the War of the Spanish Succession. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1965. Eric Martone Stuart, House of (England) The Stuart dynasty ruled England at a time when the power of the absolute monarchy was declining in England and the powers of representative government were increasing. The Stuart dynasty came into power in England with the death of the last Tudor monarch, Queen Elizabeth I, in 1603. Elizabeth died without an heir, forcing the English government to ask the Stuart family of Scotland to assume the throne of England. The Stuarts were related to the House of Tudor, as Mary Stuart and Elizabeth were cousins. Despite the fact that Mary was executed for treason in 1587, her son James Stuart (James i), the king of Scotland, was chosen to succeed Elizabeth. This choice brought the Crowns of Scotland and England under one monarch, despite the fact that they remained two separate kingdoms. James was a firm believer in the powers of an absolute monarch, as is evidenced by his writings and speeches to the English parliament. When James came to the throne of England, he had to contend with financial difficulties and clashes with Parliament over the prerogatives of the monarchy. These issues arose as James attempted to raise new revenues by imposing taxes on his subjects without the approval of Parliament. James was also upset by the fact Parliament was against his choice of a potential bride for his son because she was Catholic and Spanish. This hostility occurred as a result of the tensions between Protestant England and Catholic Spain. James was so infuriated by the Parliament’s creation of the Great Protestation in 1621, a list of privileges the English parliament claimed it was entitled to, that he dissolved Parliament and arrested four individuals responsible for this action. Charles i succeeded his father to the thrones of Scotland and England when James died in 1625. Parliament continued to attempt to place restrictions on the power of the king by issuing a Petition of Rights in 1628. The petition placed limitations on the king’s power to raise revenue without the permission of Parliament, required the permission of subjects to house soldiers in their homes, placed restrictions on the king to impose martial law, and restricted the king from arresting a subject without laying proper criminal charges. Charles signed this petition because he wished to obtain funds from Parliament, but he soon illustrated his desire to subvert the petition by acquiring as much money from his subjects as possible without assembling Parliament through the extension of existing taxes. The attempt by Charles I to rule England without the assent of Parliament caused many problems and violated the traditional institutional basis of English law. Charles also made many enemies by imposing Anglican conformity on the populace and taking away the pulpits of the Puritans. Dissolution And Recall of Parliment It was the desire of the archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud, to impose Anglican conformity on the Presbyterian Scots that led to the English Civil War. Charles prepared to move an army into Scotland in 1638 to create a settlement to this religious dispute with the Scots. Charles could not afford this army, and Parliament refused to give Charles any more money unless he rectified the grievances that had occurred during his 370 Stuart, House of (England) and his father’s reigns. Charles refused to accept this ultimatum and dissolved Parliament in May 1640, but he was forced to recall Parliament as he needed funds to subdue the Scottish army. When Parliament was assembled in October 1641, it attempted to place further restrictions on the ability of the king to raise revenue and stipulated the abolishment of certain administrative courts. Parliament also demanded the king to convene Parliament every three years and commanded Charles to remove certain individuals from power. This last demand eventually led to the execution of Laud and one of Charles’s councilors, Thomas Wentworth, the earl of Strafford. Charles attempted to intimidate Parliament by ordering the imprisonment of five individuals who held influence in the House of Commons, but they fled. Charles chose to take drastic measures against Parliament and assembled an army at Nottingham in 1642, leading to the start of the English Civil War. English Civil War The English Civil War lasted from 1642 to 1649, as the Stuart cause gained a lot of support from the northern and western sections of England and the rural areas. The parliamentary forces possessed a great deal of support from southern and eastern England certain urbanized areas of the country. A Puritan named Oliver Cromwell was instrumental to the parliamentary cause as his armies won important victories at Marston Moor in 1644 and Naseby in 1645 and forced Charles to flee to the Scots for assistance. This move by Charles was disastrous as the Scots handed him over to the parliamentary forces in exchange for 400,000 pounds. A debate ensued in regard to the future of Charles and the English political system. While this debate raged, a Scottish army was assembled in support of Charles but was quickly defeated. This gave the radicals another excuse to preside over a trial of Charles, which found him guilty and executed him on January 30, 1649. The king’s son, Charles II, attempted to restore his family’s claim to the English and Scottish thrones by allying with the Scots. Charles II won Scottish support by guaranteeing the Scottish Kirk (church) instead of imposing Anglican conformity, but his army was defeated, forcing him to flee to the continent. Following the English Civil War, Cromwell used his influence in the army and English politics to take control of the English government by assuming the position of Lord Protector. The death of Cromwell in 1658 and the subsequent political problems the English faced were enough for Parliament to seek a restoration of the Stuart monarch in 1660. Charles II returned to England but had to accept the limitations imposed on royal authority by the English parliament. Anglicanism was made the official religion of England and Ireland, but Scotland was allowed to retain their Presbyterian Kirk. The major problem concerning the return of the Stuart dynasty to the English throne was the Stuart family’s Catholic leanings. Charles II was influenced by the French court and his French mother, and in 1670, he allied with Louis XIV, king of France, against the Dutch. This agreement also stipulated Charles II would proclaim himself a Catholic when the tensions between Catholicism and Protestantism diminished in England. This agreement was a successful move in regard to foreign policy for this victory against the Dutch allowed the English to acquire the Dutch colony of New Amsterdam and confirmed the superiority of English naval power over the Dutch. Charles II died in 1685 without leaving any legitimate heirs to succeed him, causing his Catholic brother James II to ascend the thrones of England and Scotland. The accession of James II concerned some members of Parliament for they feared a Catholic monarch would stay on the throne of England for some time. James II compounded this fear by making it legal for Catholics to hold governmental positions in 1687. It is impossible to determine whether he sought to restore the absolute powers of the monarchy, but he intended to bring Catholicism back to England. This concern over a Catholic monarch became particularly acute when James II had a son in 1688, who would certainly be raised in the Catholic faith. The Whigs and a number of Tories engineered a plan to remove James II by inviting James II’s daughter Mary, who was Protestant, and her husband, William of Orange, to invade England and seize the English throne. William, who was looking for English support against the French, agreed to this and went ashore at Torbay on November 5, 1688, with an army numbering approximately 14,000 soldiers. Support for James II dwindled as the English gentry and populace wanted a Protestant heir to assume the throne after James II died. This lack of support forced James II to flee to France, thereby forfeiting the Stuart claim to the English and Scottish Crowns. See also Anne; Glorious Revolution; William III. Further reading: Magnusson, Magnus. Scotland: The Story of a Nation. London: Grove Press, 2003; Merriman, John. A Stuart, House of (England) 371 History of Modern Europe, Vol. 1, From the Renaissance to the Age of Napoleon. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1996; Smith, Lacey Baldwin. This Realm of England: 1399 to 1688. New York: D. C. Heath and Company, 1996; Winks, Robin, and Thomas Kaiser. Europe, 1648–1815: From the Old Regime to the Age of Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004; Woolrych, Austin. Britain in Revolution, 1625–1660. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Brian de Ruiter sugarcane plantations in the Americas The histories of African slavery and sugar production in the Americas are inextricably bound together. The plantation economies of the Caribbean and Brazil, which together received approximately 80 percent of the estimated 10 million African slaves transported to the Western Hemisphere from the 1490s through the 1860s, were dominated by sugar production. As an expansive scholarly literature since the 1960s has made plain, sugar and slavery are the keywords of much of Brazilian and Caribbean history and together have shaped the cultural, economic, political, social, and demographic history of the Atlantic World in many profound ways. The origins of sugarcane (Saccarum officinarum L.), a type of grass, have been traced to New Guinea in around 8000 b.c.e. By the first century c.e., it was grown across much of southern Asia and the Pacific. By 1000 c.e., its production and consumption among the elite had spread through much of the Mediterranean world, largely in consequence of the spread of Islam. In the 1400s, the Portuguese and Spanish developed important templates for later New World plantation sugar production on their Atlantic islands: the Portuguese in São Tomé and Madeira, the Spanish in the Canaries. Before the encounter with the Americas in 1492, both were employing African slave labor to produce sugar and developing processing techniques that, after 1492, were transplanted wholesale to the sugarproducing zones of the Western Hemisphere. Christopher Columbus is credited with taking the first sugarcane to the New World in 1493 from Spain’s Canary Islands. Soon Hispaniola had largely reproduced the industrial processing techniques developed in the Atlantic and made its first shipments of sugar to Europe around 1516. By the mid-1520s, large quantities of sugar were being shipped from Brazil to Lisbon. The sweet granular substance proved a sensation among its elite customers, and demand skyrocketed. Cultivation and processing of sugar quickly spread throughout the Antilles and the Brazilian littoral as well as to Mexico, Paraguay, and South America’s Pacific coast. Early Spanish efforts in the Caribbean ended largely in failure, though by the 1580s the French and English began plantation sugar production using African slave labor in the Lesser Antilles. Large-scale slave-based commercial sugar production in the Caribbean did not take off until after 1650, on the islands claimed by the French, English, and Dutch. The English example is instructive. Sugar from Barbados began arriving in England in the mid-1650s. In the 40 years from 1660 to 1700, annual English consumption rose from 1,000 to 50,000 hogsheads, while export rose from 2,000 to 18,000 hogsheads. By the 1750s, the vast bulk of the 110,000 hogsheads imported annually were being consumed at home. The peak of British West Indian sugar exports to England was in 1774, with nearly 2 million hundredweight. Growth rates for the French were comparable. For the Portuguese, the 1600s was the century of sugar, as their coastal plantations in Brazil spread rapidly inland, especially in the Northeast. Demand seemed insatiable, and production grew apace. Sugar making, especially in its New World incarnation, has been aptly described as an industry that depends on farming and factory production. Through a series of complex steps requiring substantial skill and technical infrastructure, the cane juice was extracted from the stalk by mechanical means (crushing, chopping, etc.). After the juice was boiled and cooled numerous times, with precise temperatures and timing, the end product consisted of a granular precipitate of the plant’s naturally occurring sucrose, ranging in color from dark brown to white. Its labor demands were intensive and immediate; for optimal production values, the cane juice must be extracted from the plant within 24 hours of its harvest. Two categories of Labor needed Sugar production thus required two broad categories of labor: one in the field to cut and haul the cane to the mill, and another in the mill to process the juice into granulated sugar. These labor requirements in turn created two broad strata of slave laborers: more numerous field slaves, among whom mortality rates were exceedingly high (in 17th-century Brazil, an average of 90 percent of imported African slaves died dur- 372 sugarcane plantations in the Americas ing their first seven years in the colony), and a smaller number of skilled slaves, who tended to receive more preferential treatment. Among mill slaves, industrial accidents were common, as many were crushed to death in the grinders and burned in the mill’s many boilers and kettles. As sugar production skyrocketed so did the importation of African slaves into the sugar-producing zones. The relationship between the two was direct, as most scholars agree. In 1645, before widespread sugar production had taken root, Barbados counted 5,680 African slaves; by 1698, with sugar production having grown by more than 5,000 percent, its slave population exceeded 42,000. Jamaica counted 1,400 African slaves in 1658; by 1698, their numbers had risen to over 40,000. Slave population growth rates in Antigua, Saint-Domingue (later Haiti), and other English, French, and Dutch sugar islands were comparable. The vast majority slaved in the sugar economy. In 17th-century Brazil, sugar plantation slavery came to form the central pillar of the colonial economy. Similarly, one of the colony’s core social institutions became the engenho (same root as the English engine), which came to mean both the machinery of the mill itself and the larger plantation complex. The sugar harvest (safra in Portuguese, zafra in Spanish) began toward the end of July and continued without stop for the next eight or nine months. Slaves were divided into crews: one to cut and haul cane to the mill, another to process the cane into sugar. Water power turned the grinding mill in larger engenhos, oxen in smaller engenhos. The highest strata of workers consisted of the boiler technicians and artisans, who could be either slave or free. The average engenho had from 60 to 80 slaves, though some counted more than 200. Overall slave mortality rates averaged from 5 to 10 percent annually but were higher among field slaves. Sugar planters became the dominant social class in Brazil and almost everywhere else where sugar production formed the basis of the colonial economy. Caribbean and Brazilian sugar production generated ripple effects throughout the Atlantic World. Large quantities of West Indian sugar were exported to Britain’s North American colonies, where most of it was distilled into rum. The West Indian trade also fueled the North American colonial economy through its large and growing demand for lumber, foodstuffs, and other goods produced for export to the sugar islands. Rum exports to Britain similarly skyrocketed, from 100,000 gallons in 1700 to 3,341,000 gallons in 1776. The effects generated by West Indian sugar production on the British and British North American economies were enormous and remain the topic of ongoing scholarly research and debate. In his book Capitalism and Slavery (1944), West Indian historian Eric Williams was the first to propose a direct causal relationship between the growth of African slavery in the New World, dominated by sugar production, and the development of capitalism in Europe, particularly in Britain. Spawning a huge debate and literature, this book has been challenged in many specific points. Yet the overall thrust of his thesis—that sugar, slavery, and British capitalism all emerged together as part of the same process of social transformation—has stood the test of time, its main arguments retaining credibility in the scholarly community six decades after the book’s publication. African Slavery Expands After the French acquisition of the western portion of the Spanish island of Hispaniola in the Treaty of Ryswick of 1695 (henceforth Saint-Domingue), sugar production and African slavery exploded. By the 1760s, slave imports averaged between 10,000 and 15,000 per year. By 1787, the number exceeded 40,000 per year. By the time of the French Revolution in 1789, Saint-Domingue was populated by an estimated 500,000 slaves, more than two-thirds born in Africa, vastly outnumbering sugarcane plantations in the Americas 373 An engraving of sugarcane processing in the West Indies, with a white overseer directing Native laborers both whites and mulattoes. Known in France as the “Pearl of the Antilles,” Saint-Domingue had quickly become the world’s largest sugar producer, with more than 800 sugar plantations, many with hundreds of slaves. Decadal mortality rates among slaves on Saint- Domingue in the mid- and late 1700s are estimated at more than 90 percent. The more than 10 million African slaves transported over nearly three centuries to work in New World plantation agriculture, most in sugar production, has been called accurately the largest forced migration in the history of the world. The African diaspora, fueled in large part by an insatiable European demand for sugar, coffee, tobacco, and other tropical plantation export commodities of the Americas, profoundly shaped every aspect of African, European, and American history, especially in the Caribbean and Brazil. The long-term historical effects of Europe’s sweet tooth remain readily apparent across the Americas, Africa, and the broader Atlantic World. See also slave trade, Africa and the. Further reading: Cateau, Heather, and S. H. H. Carrington. Capitalism and Slavery Fifty Years Later: Eric Eustace Williams: A Reassessment of the Man and His Work. New York: Peter Lang, 2000; Mintz, Sidney. Sweetness and Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History. New York: Viking, 1985; Schwartz, Stuart B. Sugar Plantations in the Formation of Brazilian Society: Bahia, 1500–1835. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985; Sheridan, Richard B. Sugar and Slavery, an Economic History of the British West Indies, 1623– 1775. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992; Williams, Eric. From Columbus to Castro: The History of the Caribbean. New York: Vintage, 1970. Michael J. Schroeder Suleiman I the Magnificent (1494–1566) Ottoman sultan Suleiman (r. 1520–66) ruled the Ottoman Empire when it was the most powerful empire on earth. He came to the throne after his father, Selim I (the Grim), had expanded Ottoman territories to the east and west. Although he was only in his 20s when he became the sultan, Suleiman already had experience in the field as a military commander and as an able administrator in Balkan and Crimean territories. Suleiman was known as “the Magnificent” in Europe, and among his subjects as Kanuni (the lawgiver) for his codification of Ottoman laws. Known for his fairness and honesty, Suleiman granted extensive local autonomy to his far-flung provinces, maintaining close regulation only over taxes and the regulation of trade. Victory over European rivals In 1527, Suleiman had over 80,000 trained men in military service and with better guns and horsemen than his European rivals, the Ottomans quickly seized Belgrade after the Battle of Mohács and moved on to lay siege to Vienna in 1529. But Suleiman failed to defeat his main rival Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor, or to take Vienna. As the Ottoman troops retreated from the city they were reputed to have left sacks of coffee, already popular among the Ottoman urban elite and a commodity that would soon enjoy widespread favor in the west as well. Although Suleiman also failed in the attempt to take Malta, he ruled all of the Balkans and Hungary, as well as most of the territory around the Black Sea, the eastern Mediterranean, Egypt, and much of North Africa. He rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem, parts of which still stand. The Austrian diplomat Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq described in lavish detail the grandeur of the Ottoman court under Suleiman. Europeans praised Suleiman’s serious demeanor and culture, as well as his ability to discuss literature and philosophy in several languages. A contemporary of the other great monarchs of the age, Charles V of Spain, Francis I of France, and Henry VIII of England, Suleiman made practical alliances with Francis I to counter the power of Charles V and was a major participant in European diplomacy. Marriage Suleiman married a favorite slave from Russia, Hurrem Haseki (The Joyous One), known in Europe as Roxelana. Suleiman was deeply in love with Hurrem, and he wrote her moving love poems under the penname of muhibbi (beloved). However, Hurrem, as well as her mother-inlaw and a rival wife, became powerful political forces in their own right and plotted ruthlessly for their particular favorites to become Suleiman’s successor. Hurrem outmaneuvered her rivals so that her favorite son, Selim II, would become sultan. Believing Hurrem’s allegations about intrigues by his more capable sons, particularly Mustapha, Suleiman ordered their murders. Suleiman was devastated when Hurrem died and had the famed Ottoman architect Abdul-Menan Sinan build a magnificent mausoleum in her memory. Sinan also designed the massive Suleimaniya complex in Istanbul as a lasting monument to the great sultan. 374 Suleiman I the Magnificent Although already in his 70s, Suleiman again led his troops into battle in what became another failed attempt to take Vienna in 1566. After the ailing Suleiman died on the battlefield, his commander kept the death a secret from the troops, who kept on fighting, until Suleiman’s son, Selim II, had been safely installed as the new sultan. Selim inherited an empire at its zenith of power but failed to equal his father’s distinction as either an administrator or military leader. Further reading: Atil, Esin. Suleymanname: The Illustrated History of Sultan Suleyman the Magnificent. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1986; Barber, Noel. The Sultans. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1973; Clot, André, and Matthew Reisz. Suleiman the Magnificent: The Man, His Life, His Epoch. London: Saqi Books, 2006; Forster, Edward Seymour, trans. and ed. The Turkish Letters of Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1927. Janice J. Terry Sunni Ali (d. 1492) founder of West African Songhai dynasty Sunni Ali was an African ruler who founded the Songhai Empire in the 15th century. He was the hereditary ruler of the kingdom of Songhai, which existed from the 11th century and was centered in the city of Gao on the Niger River in the southeastern part of the presentday Republic of Mali. In 1335, Gao, as the kingdom was also called, fell under the influence of Mali, the predominant Sudanic state of the time. (The Sudan is the grassland region of West Africa between the forest area of West Africa and the Sahara, on a south-north axis. It extends from the Atlantic Ocean on the west to the Red Sea on the east.) Mali had been the dominant regional power since the mid-13th century. After Sunni Ali ascended the hereditary throne of Gao in 1464, he transformed the kingdom of Gao into the empire of Songhai, even though the Songhai people were a numerical minority in the new empire he created. At its height in the mid-16th century, Songhai was the greatest empire in Sudanic history, with an area of more than 1 million square miles. It stretched from the Niger bend in the east (on the borders of the contemporary states of Niger and Nigeria) to the Senegal headwaters in the west and from Timbuktu and the Sahara in the north to Jenne and the forest belt in the south. In creating this empire, Sunni Ali completed by 1470 the destruction of Mali, which had been declining for about 100 years. As in the case of the predecessor empires of Ghana and Mali, the economic basis for the empire of Songhai under Sunni Ali was the trans-Saharan trade route. This so-called Silent Trade of goods was based on a trade route that ran north-south from North Africa to West Africa. Goods from Europe and the Muslim world, such as cloth and salt, would be exchanged for gold derived from West African mines at Wangara and Bouke (in the present-day Ivory Coast). The traders from the north would leave their goods on a riverbank. If the gold miners from West Africa approved of the amount, they would leave gold and take the goods. The gold would be deposited the next day on the riverbank for the traders from the north. Usually no words would be exchanged in these transactions. Songhai benefited from the tariffs imposed on these goods, which passed through its territory. In establishing his empire, Sunni Ali made use of his well-armed cavalry, which was very efficient. His army also had an infantry. In addition, Sunni Ali developed a powerful navy, a fleet of ships manned by Sorko fishermen (the people who had cofounded Ghana). In 1468, he ousted the nomadic Tuareg from Timbuktu, the major Sudanic city between the Sahara and the Sudanic belt. In the process, he pillaged the city, an oasis of Muslim learning as the headquarters of the famous Islamic university of Sankore, and killed many priests and scholars during these attacks, thereby earning the enmity of the Islamic establishment. In contrast, his conquest of Jenne, although prolonged, was less violent. Utilizing the navy and siege engines, he took seven months and seven days to complete the blockade of the city. Jenne was the southern counterpart of Timbuktu as it was the connecting link between the Sudanic belt and the forest belt. After 1480, Sunni Ali had established his empire and stepped up military campaigns against nomadic peoples who threatened the economic basis of the empire. The Tuaregs who menaced Timbuktu were harassed. The Mossi who sacked the gold town of Wangara were similarly harassed and driven back into their Upper Volta homeland between 1483 and 1486. (Until gold and silver began to arrive in large amounts in the mid-1500s from Mexico and Peru, West African gold was the major source of coinage for Europe and the Middle East.) The Fulani were also pushed back to their home territory in northern Niger, Guinea, and Senegal. In fact, Sunni Ali drowned in 1492 after an expedition against the Fulani. The empire that Sunni Ali founded lasted in part because of the administration he developed. The conquered territories were made into provinces whereby Sunni Ali 375 their hereditary rulers became governors of the newly created vassal states of the empire of Songhai. Therefore, the empire that Sunni Ali created was a centralized state with some degree of local autonomy for outlying areas. In addition, places like Timbuktu and the Muslim provinces received special government. It was Sunni Ali’s lukewarm practice of Islam that incurred the wrath of the ulema, the Muslim scholars. He was only nominally Muslim and did not neglect traditional Songhai religious practices, which his own people continued to observe. He also did not make Islam the state religion. These actions, in combination with the sack of Timbuktu, earned him enduring hostility from Arab/Muslim historians. This enmity was a cause for the overthrow of Sunni Ali’s dynasty the year after his death. See also slave trade, Africa and the. Further reading: Bovill, Edward W. The Golden Trade of the Moors: West African Kingdoms in the Fourteenth Century. New York: Markus Wiener, 1998; Davidson, Basil. A History of West Africa. New York: Archer, 1966; Fage, J. D., ed. A Guide to Original Sources for Precolonial Western Africa Published in European Languages. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1994; Hopkins, J. F. P., and Nehemia Levitzon. Corpus of Early Arabic Sources for West African History. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 1981; Hunwick, John, ed. Timbuktu and the Songhai Empire. Leiden: Brill, 1999. Norman C. Rothman Swiss Confederacy Modern Switzerland dates from 1848. Previously, its government was based on an agreement or confederacy among three Swiss cantons in 1291. Between the 11th and 13th centuries, new technology had opened up Alpine passes and with this, trade appeared. This whetted the appetite of ambitious dynasties, especially the Habsburgs, based originally in northern and central Switzerland, to attempt to control the trade, which meant control of the cantons. In response, the rural forested cantons of Uri and Schwyz (from which the name Switzerland derives), which had received judicial autonomy from neighboring counts and dukes and were directly under the Holy Roman Empire (Germany, northern Italy, Bohemia, the Low Countries, and parts of eastern France) joined, with the district of Unterwalden to form the confederacy. They felt threatened by the encroaching Habsburg power and joined to defend one another. Victories at Morgarten (1315), Sempach (1386), and Nafels (1388) caused the Habsburgs basically to abandon their designs on Switzerland and concentrate on their new seat of power in Austria. The military successes encouraged the expansion of the confederacy or confederation beyond its rural forested core during the 14th century, including the cities of Luzerne/Lucerne, Zurich, and Berne, so that by 1400 there were eight members and by 1460 much of what is now northern and central Switzerland was included. By that date, the confederacy had reached the Rhine. The golden age of the confederacy came between 1475 and 1515. It was instrumental in the defeat of Charles of Burgundy, who aspired to reestablish a middle kingdom between France and Germany. In 1499, it received de facto if not de jure independence from the Empire (Germany). Its initial success in the Italian wars added towns in southern Switzerland such as Lugano and Locarno under the confederacy. After their defeat by the French at Marignan in 1515, the confederacy ceased to be a major military power, although individual Swiss acted as mercenaries for centuries. By this time, there were 13 members, including Basle. Three Centuries of No Expa Nsion For the next three centuries, there was no official expansion of the old Swiss Confederacy, although Frenchspeaking districts in southwestern Switzerland, such as Fribourg, Geneva, Vaud, and Valais, were in alliance with it, as was the partly French-speaking Neuchâtel. In addition, the partly Italian-speaking canton of Grisons in the southeast, as well as the Italian-speaking Ticino, became associated with the Swiss confederation. In 1648 the Swiss Confederacy received the formal recognition of its independence from the Empire. Ultimately, the French-speaking areas that had been associated with the confederacy entered as full cantons after the Napoleonic Wars, in 1815. At the same time, Grisons and the Italian-speaking areas that had been subordinate to the older Swiss cantons received full rights and were admitted as equal cantons with splits in existing cantons raising the total to the present 22. It was at this time that the country became officially known as Switzerland. At this date, the country achieved its present frontiers and went from an exclusively German-speaking land to a country in which approximately 30 percent of the population was French- and Italian-speaking and on equal terms with the German majority. 376 Swiss Confederacy Nonetheless, the country remained a confederacy or confederation in structure. Each canton had its own form of government whether democratic, oligarchic, or absolute; each could impose its own internal customs duties; and each could make its own alliances within and without the confederacy. As a result, tensions ran high during the period of 1815 to 1847 between the liberal, urban and mostly Protestant cantons and the traditional rural and mostly Catholic cantons. Eventually, disagreement came to a head when the Catholic cantons objected to the suppression of the monasteries and formed an alliance called the Sonderbund (after its seven members). The federal diet declared this alliance a violation of the 1815 constitution and war broke out. The Sonderbund was defeated, and in 1848 a new constitution was adopted that had the effect of ending the old structure of the confederacy. Two Chamber Assembly In place of the old Swiss Confederacy diet composed of representatives of the cantons, there was a two-chamber assembly, with one chamber composed of representatives of the people and the other chamber composed of representatives of the cantons. (It was modeled on the U.S. system.) Unlike the old confederacy, there was a relatively strong executive chosen at the federal level called the Federal Council. It was composed of seven members chosen by the assembly for three years and not by the cantons. Also unlike the old Confederacy, economic power was placed at the center so that individual cantons could no longer make separate economic arrangements. Changes in the constitution and other matters of national interest were decided by plebiscite and referendum voted on by all of the citizens not through the decisions of various cantons as in confederacy days. The Swiss Confederacy lasted from 1291 to 1848. It came into existence as the result of new economic and political developments in the High Middle Ages; it ended because of new economic and political developments associated with the evolution of the nation-state in modern times. The old confederacy with 13 cities and small village communities dominating a country was no longer feasible. Further reading: Diem, Aubrey. Switzerland: Land, People, Economy. Kitchner, ON: Media International, 1994; Lloyd, William Bross. Waging Peace: The Swiss Experience. Washington, D.C.: Public Affairs Press, 1958; Meier, Heinz K. Switzerland. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio Press, 1990; Schimel, Carol L. Conflict and Consensus in Switzerland. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981; Soloveytchik, G. Switzerland in Perspective. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1982. Norman C. Rothman