In the chaotic years that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union, the newly created Russian state was consumed by political turmoil. The culmination of this period was the 1993 Russian constitutional crisis. It was a showdown that claimed the lives of 147 people and was eventually brought to an end with military force. The confrontation showed how fragile Russia’s new democracy had become and set the course for the trajectory of the country over the next decade.

Historical Context: The Collapse of the Soviet Union

Many historians believe that the constitutional crisis of 1993, particularly its violent nature, was predicted by the August coup in 1991. The coup exposed the serious flaws in Soviet leadership, which Yeltsin used to gain support among the Russian people and portrayed himself as a hero of the Independence movement. Yeltsin’s famous speech outside the Russian Parliament Building in defiance of the hard-line communist coup made him a hero in the eyes of many people. After the coup failed, Yeltsin acted quickly as prime minister of Russia to dissolve the Communist Party and officially begin the process of dissolving the Soviet Union itself.

The euphoria of Russian independence soon was replaced by chaos and uncertainty as the leaders of Russia were now faced with filling a power vacuum that had been left by 70 years of autocratic and centralized government. A political conflict was almost inevitable because of the improvised and contradictory nature of the political institutions that were set up in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union. One of the key sources of conflict was the Soviet Constitution of 1978, which was adopted by Russia but unfit to govern a nation in the post-Soviet world. The constitution caused a number of disputes over the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches of government, which set the stage for the constitutional crisis of 1993.

A Nation on the Brink

During the early 1990s, Russia was constantly on the verge of political and economic collapse as it attempted to navigate the hardships left in the wake of the Soviet Union. The nation’s political structure, still stuck in the Soviet past, was pulled from either side by the two forces of the executive and legislative branches of government. Each branch claimed they had the constitutional power to set the country’s agenda, and the stage was set for a showdown.

Boris Yeltsin was a passionate supporter of swift modernization and rapid change, which he saw as the only way to help Russia emerge from the post-Soviet period. However, his aggressive economic measures, which were characterized by his policy of “shock therapy,” brought about quick but painful changes in the market, which triggered runaway inflation that made the lives of everyday Russians miserable. In opposition to Yeltsin’s reformist approach was the Russian Parliament, which was dominated by officials from the Soviet era. These old Soviets grew wary of Yeltsin and began to demand that the executive powers of the presidency be checked by the Russian Constitution.

The Road to Crisis: Causes and Build-up

One of the key motivations behind the 1993 constitutional crisis was a fundamental disagreement between parliament and representatives over the direction, nature, and pace at which Yeltsin pursued constitutional reform to achieve his aims. Yeltsin argued that the newly independent Russian nation required a strong leader to navigate the challenging tides of transition; therefore, he advocated that the president be given more power to impose swift and decisive reforms. In contrast, the Russian parliament, which was made up mostly of conservative and nationalist officials, aimed to hold on to a significant amount of legislation or authority in order to check the growing power of the president.

Between 1992 and 1993, the relationship between parliament and the presidency became increasingly hostile. A legislative impasse resulted in parliament preventing Yeltsin from carrying out several of his most important decrees. Russian Vice President Alexander Rutskoy became a key figure in support of parliament and became the de facto leader of the opposition against Yeltsin.

The Constitution Controversy: Power Struggles

To settle the dispute between parliament and the presidency, Yeltsin sought to dismiss the 1978 Soviet-era constitution in favor of a new document that would create a presidential republic. This new constitution would give the president broad executive authority, allowing Yeltsin to carry out his reform program without the permission of parliament.

However, the Russian Parliament fiercely opposed Yeltin’s planned constitution as they believed such a document would give the executive overwhelming power to overrule the democratic checks and balances that the 1978 Soviet-era constitution had created. They saw Yeltsin’s proposal as a prelude to an authoritarian government that would stifle Russian democracy before it had a chance to flourish.

In response to Yeltsin’s proposal, the Russian Parliament refused to pass any of the president’s proposed laws and reforms. To circumvent this, Yeltsin used a number of presidential decrees to get his laws passed. In retaliation, the Russian Parliament attempted to limit Yeltsin’s authority by passing laws that restricted his reforms and even approved the budget without his approval. As more members of the Russian parliament opposed Yeltsin’s orders, a string of legal and political disputes ensued, leaving the government in disarray and the country in chaos.

The Confrontation: Decrees and Counter-Decrees

The Constitutional Crisis effectively began on September 21, 1993, when Yeltsin issued a presidential decree that dissolved parliament and triggered an election. This sparked the beginning of an open confrontation between the Russian president and the Russian Parliament. To justify his decree, Yeltsin claimed that the legislative branch was blocking important reforms that went against the best interests of the country. His actions were framed as a necessary step to prevent a national emergency and bring back order. However, there was widespread opposition to Yeltsin’s move, and many accused him of behaving unconstitutionally.

In response to his decree, the parliament began the process of impeaching Yeltsin and declared his declaration invalid and unconstitutional. The crisis reached a dangerous stage when parliament declared Vice President Alexander Rutskoy the acting president of Russia. The leaders of the legislative group, Rutskoy and Chairman Ruslan Khasbulatov, further inflamed the conflict by calling on the military to back them in their opposition to Yeltsin.

Constitutional instability deepened over the next few days as both sides issued a series of decrees and counter-decrees. The support of senior military officers, regional governors, the United States, and other Western countries emboldened President Yeltsin, and no compromise was made. As the situation worsened, the Russian Parliament Building, known as the White House, was turned into the center of resistance against Yeltsin, and the Russian Parliament sealed itself within the building in preparation for a siege.

The Siege of the White House

The Constitutional Crisis reached a violent peak on October 3 when pro-parliament demonstrators arrived in Moscow, blockaded streets, and attempted to take control of the Ostankino television center. Yeltsin was forced to declare a state of emergency to regain control over the capital and demonstrate his authority. During the storming of the Ostankino TV tower, Russian military forces defended the building from huge crowds of protesters with deadly force. In total, 46 people were killed during violent clashes at the TV station.

One day later, Yeltsin ordered the Russian armed forces to invade the Russian Parliament building and bring the crisis to an end. The White House was surrounded by tanks, and the parliament was attacked by heavy artillery. The resulting resistance within the building was quickly put to an end as the White House was consumed by flames.

The leaders of the parliamentary faction, notably Rutskoy and Khasbulatov, quickly surrendered themselves to the military and were later taken into custody. The use of force to end the standoff highlighted how serious the constitutional crisis was and how far Yeltsin was prepared to go in order to maintain control. More than a hundred people died during the siege, which was one of the bloodiest days in post-Soviet Russian history and represented the ruthless end to parliamentary resistance to executive power.

Aftermath: Victory and Fallout

After the Russian Constitutional crisis came to an end, the political and social culture of the nation experienced a profound change. Yeltsin quickly began consolidating his power and acted quickly to bring into force a new constitution that would give him broad authority. This new constitution dramatically changed how the Russian Federation was governed, giving the executive considerably more power than was even possible under the Soviet Union.

The new constitution was given public legitimacy in a national referendum in December 1993. While the new constitution aimed to improve the stability of the government and free the executive branch from the obstructions of the legislature when implementing essential reforms, it also created a precedent for future executive overreach that would have serious consequences.

The 1993 Russian Constitutional Crisis and how it was resolved had a significant impact on the trajectory of Russian democracy. Yeltsin’s strategy of dealing with the crisis by using violence and force set a precedent that would characterize the later years of his presidency and that of his successor Vladimir Putin. Moreover, the crisis contributed to a disillusionment with democracy and the peaceful political process.

Legacy: Reflections on the Crisis

The political future of Russia was permanently changed by the Constitutional Crisis of 1993. Although Yeltsin’s victory brought short-term stability to the country, it also weakened legislative oversight and greatly increased presidential authority, planting the seeds for a slide toward autocracy and the end of democracy itself.

The long-term effects are seen in the ongoing consolidation of power by the executive. The new constitution was used by Vladimir Putin to further solidify his hold on power, frequently at the expense of democratic institutions and civil rights. What happened in 1993 showed that parliamentary opposition could be overcome by strong executive action, which helped to foster a political climate in which stability and power were frequently valued above democratic procedures.

Hollywood never fails to entertain with a powerful display of knights on horseback, crashing into a line of terrified infantry. The images and sounds are visceral, with men screaming and the clash of steel upon steel as hundreds of horses charge headlong into the enemy at high speed, carving a deep wedge into the enemy formation. This powerful visual seems effective on screen, but it is full of poetic license that wouldn’t work well on a real battlefield.

In reality, the use of cavalry in medieval combat was far more nuanced. It relied on careful planning, immense discipline, and a large degree of psychology to be effective. And when it was effective, it was utterly devastating.

The Myth of the Suicidal Horse Collision

Horses are naturally skittish animals. Even well-trained warhorses are prone to instinctive responses in dangerous situations that humans can be trained to override. Historian Sir John Keegan noted that cavalry charges against disciplined, well-prepared infantry often failed because horses refused to gallop into a dense mass of enemies. When a mass of soldiers is wielding sharp objects, the prospect becomes even less appealing. 

While pikes were perfect for holding back cavalry, they were not the only option. Even before the age of the pike, infantry with spears and other polearms were easily able to resist cavalry charges. A perfect example of this is the Battle of Hastings in 1066, where the Anglo-Saxon shield wall stood firm against many attempts by the Norman cavalry to break through.

Here, and in many battles before and since, the horses simply refused to impale themselves on spears. Which is quite reasonable from the horses’ perspective. In the age of the pike, the “spears” became ever longer and deadlier, putting a lot more distance between the charging cavalry and the defending infantry. 

So, with the refusal of horses to throw themselves onto a wall, bristling with spikes, how did the cavalry charge actually succeed? Much of the answer lies with psychology.

Shock Tactics and Psychological Warfare on the Battlefield

From ancient to modern times, mass charges used shock tactics, relying heavily on breaking enemy morale and forcing soldiers to rethink the wisdom of standing in the path of 1000 lbs of equine fury. Throughout history, holding the line against mounted riders has always been a terrifying proposition. In the face of a wall of horses and mounted knights, all it takes is for a few infantrymen to break, for a gap to be exposed, which cavalry can then exploit.

As such, cavalry had to break the enemy formation, not by force, but by psychology. A feigned charge could cause men to scatter, and a feigned retreat could cause infantry formations to break in pursuit, at which point the cavalry wheeled round and took advantage of the lack of infantry cohesion. 

Ultimately, it was a game of chicken in which the resolve of the infantry and the cavalry was tested until one side broke or miscalculated the other’s intentions. 

Although exceptions always exist, a solid line of cavalry seldom made contact with a solid line of unbroken infantry, and when it did, it was often catastrophic for the cavalry. Without a gap to exploit, cavalry would simply be impaled. 

In short, the general theme was that cavalry would charge at the infantry. If the infantry broke, the cavalry would press the attack. If the infantry stood firm, the cavalry would veer off at the last moment and reform to try again. Sometimes the cavalry would feign retreat to lure the enemy infantry out of formation, then turn and attack.

Mass, Momentum, and Deadly Precision

Hollywood’s full-pace cavalry charges are certainly spectacular, but full of creative interpretation, and often very far from reality. Approaching the enemy was far more disciplined and slower than on-screen depictions.

The cavalry line was not haphazard. It was in the formation of cohesive, serried ranks of knights, slowly increasing speed, and breaking into a gallop at the last moment. Mass and momentum were key. Such discipline played into psychology, heightening the panic in the enemy. With lances presented, such a sight could easily cause individual soldiers to flinch, panic, and in some cases, run. If the infantry, even individuals, lost their nerve, gaps would open, and the cavalry would ride in, pushing soldiers aside and widening the wedge.

If that happened, the infantry formation was doomed more often than not. 

History is replete with brutal dictators, emperors, warlords, kings, and khans who have caused untold misery and loss of life through their conquests. The actions of a single human can cause the death of millions, leaving a legacy of infamy that echoes through the ages and leaves an indelible mark on human society.

Meanwhile, there are those whose actions have saved millions of lives, and their memory is rarely preserved with such fervor in the collective and individual minds.

The children and grandchildren of those who were saved barely recognize the names of those whose efforts contributed to their existence. Yet these heroes existed, and through their work, countless millions are alive today.

Here are 7 people who saved the most lives throughout human history.

1. Norman Borlaug: Fighting World Hunger

Awarded the Nobel Prize for a lifetime of work, Norman Borlaug was an American agronomist who led the Green Revolution, changing the way the world farms, and leading to massive increases in crop yields. His efforts were central to the huge reduction in global hunger.

Born on March 25, 1914, Borlaug studied biology and forestry at the University of Minnesota, earning a Ph.D. in 1942. After a brief stint at DuPont, Borlaug joined the Rockefeller Foundation to work on wheat improvement in Mexico. By experimenting with novel varieties, Borlaug led scientific efforts to develop strains that were more hardy and had higher yields.

He then began work in India and Pakistan, where rapid population growth had led to critical food shortages. Because of his efforts, better wheat and rice varieties were introduced to developing countries, greatly reducing hunger around the world. Borlaug was in high demand as a consultant, serving on panels and committees dealing with agriculture, resource management, and population growth. His work culminated in the establishment of the Norman Borlaug Institute for International Agriculture in 2006.

He died on September 12, 2009, and his legacy is one of unambiguous benefit to mankind. It is difficult to say exactly how many people were saved as a result of his work, but it is likely more than a billion.

2. Edward Jenner: A Vaccine for Smallpox

Arguably the biggest killer of the 18th century, smallpox was an extremely infectious disease with a high mortality rate, especially among children. Victims suffered from fever and vomiting while their skin was covered in painful blisters. Survivors were left scarred and often blind by the disease’s horrific rampage. Today, it is eradicated, with the last case ever being reported in 1977. This wouldn’t have been possible without a vaccination.

The foundation for the vaccine came from folklore in Britain that claimed milkmaids who got cowpox never contracted smallpox. In 1796, Edward Jenner tested this theory by injecting pus from a cowpox pustule into the arm of eight-year-old James Phipps (with his father’s permission). Jenner was able to prove Phipps’ immunity to smallpox as a result. The medical community, however, demanded more proof, and Jenner “vaccinated” several more children, including his 11-month-old son.

These experiments turned Jenner’s theories into facts. His work resulted in mass vaccinations, and hundreds of millions of people were saved from the horrendous disease. Although the vaccine remains available, it is no longer necessary. Jenner initiated a process that led to the complete elimination of one of humanity’s most deadly diseases.

3. Maurice Hilleman: Over 40 Vaccines

Hugely underrecognized in public memory, Maurice Hilleman can be said to have saved hundreds of millions of lives through his work in creating multiple vaccinations for many of humanity’s most pernicious ailments.

Born in 1919, Hilleman grew up on a farm in Montana during the world’s deadliest flu pandemic. After earning his doctorate at the University of Chicago, Hilleman went to work for pharmaceutical company E.R. Squibb, where he began developing and producing vaccines. When a flu epidemic broke out in Asia in 1957, Hilleman predicted it would come to America. His warnings were dismissed, but he bypassed regulatory agencies and went straight to manufacturers, who heeded his warnings and began producing vaccines. The epidemic did hit America, exactly as Hilleman predicted. It claimed the lives of around 70,000 people—far fewer than the estimated one million who would have died had Hilleman not taken action.

After that, he worked on mumps, measles, rubella, and a host of other vaccines, modernizing medical science and giving humanity a massive defense against most of the world’s common diseases. Today, eight of the 14 most commonly recommended pediatric vaccines were developed by Hilleman.

Much of Hilleman’s success was due to his unrelenting work ethic. He was no joy to work with. He worked a seven-day week, and those who couldn’t keep up with his rigorous demands were unceremoniously fired. Nevertheless, he was a hero credited with saving many millions of lives.

4. Louis Pasteur: Germ Theory, Pasteurization, and a Vaccine for Rabies

Known mainly for the process that bears his name, pasteurization, Louis Pasteur was, in fact, responsible for many other life-saving endeavors. In the middle of the 19th century, Pasteur conducted a wide range of experiments and studied fermentation processes, which helped him refine his understanding of germ theory. This represented a massive leap for medical science and formed the basis for Pasteur’s further experiments. He disproved the idea of spontaneous generation, which held that fleas arose from dust and maggots from rotting meat.

His work on germ theory led to cleanliness and sterilization being considered important parts of medical practice. Through his studies, Pasteur made significant advances in understanding how diseases spread, and some of his methods for reducing their transmission are still used today.

No less important was his work in combating individual diseases through vaccinations. He created vaccines for chicken cholera, anthrax, and arguably his most important of all, rabies. With the help of these vaccines and his other work, Pasteur championed the dynamic of preventative medicine, which has become standard practice around the world today.

It is extremely difficult to estimate how many lives have been saved through Pasteur’s initiatives, but over 100 million people is easily conceivable.

5. Florence Nightingale: The Lady With the Lamp

Known mainly for her nursing work during the Crimean War, Florence Nightingale rose to prominence in Victorian society. Holding a lamp and lighting the darkness, she was a vision of comfort for injured and dying soldiers. Her work towards improving standards for those suffering cannot be pinpointed to a single, overriding aspect, but it is widely accepted that through her methods and her legacy, many millions of people were saved, while the standards she set continue to save millions more.

In 1860, Nightingale opened the second secular nursing school in the world, following on from La Source, opened by Countess Valérie de Gasparin in Switzerland. Nightingale set the precedent for the professionalism of the industry. While her hands-on methods of sanitation were revolutionary, what made her work so widely accepted was the way she presented it.

She had the mind of a scientist and used statistics to back up her claims. She was also a prolific writer and aimed her literature not only at academics but also at the undereducated and barely literate. By writing in simple English, she made her ideas accessible to the actual nurses and medical staff, as well as a huge cross-section of society who could implement any aspect of nursing. Simply observing correct sanitation was a considerable advancement in medical care, whether it was in a hospital or in the home.

6. Jonas Salk

For thousands of years, polio was a major concern for societies across the world. Endemic to human beings, this disease mainly targets children and can cause death, with survivors often left disfigured and paralyzed. To this day, there is no specific treatment, and the disease cannot be cured. It can, however, be prevented. And that is where Jonas Salk focused his efforts.

Born on October 28, 1914, in New York City, Jonas Salk was the eldest of three sons born to Daniel and Dora Salk. He earned his medical degree in 1939 from the New York University School of Medicine before starting a research fellowship at the University of Michigan, where he worked on an influenza vaccine. In 1947, he became the director of the Virus Research Laboratory at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine and began working on a vaccine for paralytic poliomyelitis, better known as polio.

In the mid-1950s, the vaccine was rolled out, and polio rates began dropping immediately. Salk never patented his discovery, nor did he earn any money from it. He wanted it to be distributed as widely as possible across the world without any fear of legal infringements.

7. Albert Sabin

Following Salk’s work was Albert Sabin, who improved the delivery methods for the polio vaccine. Sabin was born in 1906 in Białystok, then part of the Russian Empire, and in 1921 his family emigrated to the United States. He earned his medical degree from New York University in 1931 and worked in the field of infectious diseases. During World War II, he helped develop a vaccine for Japanese encephalitis. In the 1950s, despite the tensions of the Cold War, Sabin worked with Soviet colleagues to perfect an oral version of the vaccine, which proved effective at blocking the virus in the intestines before it could enter the bloodstream.

Rollout of Sabin’s vaccine was slow as the US health system supported Salk’s version. The USSR, however, was not so reticent and administered over a hundred million doses, even supplying other countries, such as Japan, which had been hit hard by polio. Eventually, the results spoke for themselves, and the vaccine was adopted and became the predominant version in the United States as well.

Such was the effectiveness of the vaccine that from 1988 to 2022, the number of confirmed polio cases dropped from 350,000 to just 30. While other doctors and scientists also deserve credit for eradicating polio, it cannot be denied that Jonas Salk and Albert Sabin were the central figures in conquering this horrendous disease. Many tens of millions of lives were saved as a result of them.

Many Other Names

Ultimately, defining metrics for the number of people saved is difficult. There are no set standards for calculating such things, and as a result, people who deserve consideration can easily be overlooked.

While certain politicians deserve credit for guiding the world toward a less deadly place, there are also ordinary people who saved lives through simple actions rather than through concerted, lifelong efforts. Vasily Arkhipov saved the world in 1962, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, when, as an executive officer on board a nuclear submarine, he vetoed the launch of nuclear weapons. The same could be said for Stanislav Petrov, another Soviet officer, who, in 1983, ignored protocol and disobeyed orders when he received reports of a nuclear attack. Instead of starting a chain of events that would have led to a nuclear war, he dismissed the reports as false alarms. Needless to say, a nuclear war could have cost hundreds of millions, even billions, of lives.

Other names deserving of recognition include Alexander Fleming, who accidentally discovered penicillin, and Henry Dunant, who established the Red Cross and won the first Nobel Peace Prize.

And of course, credit has to be given to the unnamed people from prehistory who invented soap!

The Chamorro people are a Malayo-Indonesian ethnic group native to the Mariana Island chain in the central Pacific. They mostly reside on the island of Guam, a US overseas territory. During the Second World War, they found their home to be a battleground between the United States and Japan. The experiences and suffering at the hands of the Japanese occupiers and the destruction of much of the island during the subsequent American invasion are an important tale that helped shape their identity as a people.

Who Are the Chamorro People?

For nearly 4,000 years, the Chamorro people (also spelled CHamoru) have resided on the island of Guam and some other islands in the Marianas archipelago. For centuries, they built a robust seafaring culture to ensure their survival and protect themselves from external occupiers. Archaeologists believe that they have roots in Indonesia and Malaysia. Their culture was influenced by other people they came into contact with: other Pacific islanders, the Spanish, the Japanese, and the Americans. While there have been changes through the centuries, much of their culture and identity has remained unchanged since their first arrival in the Marianas.

Before they embraced Catholicism, Chamorros believed that the world around them was full of spirits known as taotaomona who provided both daily protection and assistance in their tasks, but also created dangers and problems. In the 1500s, explorer Ferdinand Magellan arrived in the Marianas, leading to the first contact with the Europeans. The Chamorros drove his ships away and it was not until the 1660s that Spanish ships landed in Guam and launched a brutal war of conquest, which meant that only 5,000 Chamorros survived by 1700.

While Spanish rule led to mass conversion to Catholicism and changes to the Chamorro language, Chamorro culture and lifestyles survived. The population rebounded after 1700. Madrid had little interest in settling the islands, and only Caroline islands natives were allowed on Guam besides the Chamorro. This was the state of affairs when America seized Guam in 1898.

US Occupation of Guam Before 1941

A combination of imperial ambition and outrage after the explosion of the USS Maine in Havana harbor led to the Spanish-American War in 1898. The US Navy had long aimed to have a series of bases in the Pacific to extend its reach towards Asia. On June 20, 1898, the USS Charleston anchored in Agaña Bay and its captain demanded surrender from the Spanish garrison. The garrison did not resist, thinking that Spain and the US were still at peace. Within a couple of days, the Spanish formally surrendered the island, ending centuries of Spanish rule.

Most Chamorros had no idea what to expect of the American occupation. The Treaty of Paris in 1898 formally transferred control of Guam to the US, designating the island as an overseas territory. However, the territory did not become a state due to a controversial set of Supreme Court rulings known as the Insular Cases. Dating from the early 1900s, the Insular Cases claimed that territories seized from Spain were not suitable for democratic government because their inhabitants were “savages.”

Like the Spanish, the American presence on Guam was initially very limited. The US Navy did use the island as a fueling stop but did not have major dockyard facilities there. Life was slightly better for the Chamorros; in 1933 they received voting rights in local elections and the writ of habeas corpus under a set of codified laws passed by the US-appointed governor. This lasted until the coming storm.

The First Battle of Guam, 1941

A major part of Imperial Japan’s plan of conquest after Pearl Harbor included seizing several islands in the central Pacific. Their motives were somewhat similar to the United States’: to use the island as a staging point for future expansion. Japan also wanted control of the island’s resources and Guam was to be a part of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity-Sphere.

One hour after the Pearl Harbor attacks started, Japanese carrier aircraft started striking American targets on the island, launching the First Battle of Guam. The defenses were very weak due to a shortage of funds for American garrisons in the Pacific. Guam’s military contingent consisted of 274 sailors, 153 Marines, and 120 Insular Force guardsmen, many of whom were Chamorros. On December 10, 400 Japanese marines landed and drove the American and Guamian defenders inland.

The governor of Guam, USN Captain George McMillin, knew that the garrison had no chance to resist. After offering some token resistance, McMillin ordered the garrison to lay down their arms after two days, fearing total annihilation of the garrison and civilian population. 19 Americans and Guamians were killed and 42 wounded in the short battle. Some 5,500 Japanese were landed over the following days to take over the American fortifications. This battle enabled Japan to establish firm control over the entire Marianas chain. It also heralded a new era for the Chamorro people.

Japanese Occupation Policies

During its 31 months under Japanese occupation, Guam was ruled by a Japanese military government supported by a few thousand soldiers, sailors, and marines. The Japanese expanded the island’s airfields and developed the port facilities to accommodate warships and submarines to support operations to the east of the island. Unlike Saipan or Tinian, Guam did not have a large Japanese population on the island to support the military administration.

The Japanese briefly renamed the island “Great Shrine Island” and sought to incorporate it into its Pacific empire. Under Japanese occupation, locals were required to have a white paper to be allowed to move around the island. Food was rationed to feed the garrison and a curfew was in place every day. Anyone who violated the rules or was accused of assisting the Americans was brutally tortured or murdered. However, most Chamorros were allowed to go about their daily lives without harassment for much of the war. While the Japanese made an attempt to encourage locals to adopt the Japanese language and culture, this had little impact.

As the Americans advanced closer to the Marianas, Japanese attitudes started to change. The garrison drew larger and their commanders grew more paranoid. In July 1944, the Japanese ordered 18,000 civilians (mostly Chamorros and some others) into concentration camps in the Manenggon Valley. Japanese forces tortured and murdered anyone who refused. They remained there until their liberation by American troops.

Chamorro Resistance to Japanese Rule

Many Chamorros resented the Japanese occupation and resistance was common, especially as liberation grew near. Their resistance was not like their Filipino counterparts; it was mostly nonviolent and small in scale. Nonetheless, it was crucial for the islanders to resist in order to maintain their dignity, help the Americans, and ensure their survival.

After the surrender in 1941, six American sailors escaped into the center of the island, fearing Japanese captivity. American radioman George Tweed was one of them. For a brief period, he wrote an underground newspaper for the Chamorro. He was hidden on a ranch after the other five were caught and executed. Right before the American landings, he was rescued by an American warship. Japanese patrols had spent the war hunting him, but the locals managed to protect him.

In order to control the island, the Japanese relied on collaborators, mainly Chamorros brought there from Saipan. They also allowed two priests to preach to the locals in an effort to earn their cooperation. One of them, Father Jesus Baza Duenas, publicly denounced Japanese rule and refused to collaborate with them. In their frustration, they murdered him and his nephew. Today, he is considered one of Guam’s most important martyrs of the war.

Desperate for news, Chamorros began creating a network of illicit radio stations in small villages in Guam. Owning a radio not tuned to a Japanese frequency was a serious crime and risked capital punishment. Despite such risks, the Chamorros were encouraged by reports of an American invasion to liberate the island in the summer of 1944.

The Second Battle of Guam, 1944

The Second Battle of Guam began on July 21, 1944 when US marines and soldiers assaulted the beaches on the western side of the island as part of Operation Forager. For two weeks, the US Navy had been shelling and bombing Japanese fortifications across the island. 59,000 American attackers faced off against 18,000 Japanese defenders in a brutal battle that lasted a month. By the end, around 3,000 Americans died and the Japanese garrison was pretty much wiped out.

For the Chamorros, the battle was a nightmarish experience. Unlike the Japanese takeover in 1941, this battle destroyed much of the island, including historical sites. The conditions in the camps at Manenggon worsened and Japanese soldiers suspected the locals of aiding the Americans. Part of the collective punishment of the islanders involved them being forced to build fortifications for the Japanese. Refusal could lead to death. Many people prayed that they would not get killed in the crossfire. Others were concerned that the Americans did not know where they were.

Local resistance continued through the battle. American reconnaissance platoons were guided by Chamorros who knew where the Japanese positions were. Chamorros hoped that by helping the Americans, they could ensure the safety of the people in the concentration camps. They also hoped to identify Japanese stragglers after the war was over. Many American commanders credited the locals with helping them win the battle. The liberation allowed people to go back to their homes and rebuild their lives.

Reparations for the Chamorro People

The Chamorro people suffered terribly under Japanese occupation, especially in 1944. Over 1,000 Chamorros died as a result of battle, Japanese atrocities, and diseases. The survivors also suffered severe psychological trauma following their experiences. Naturally, at the end of the war most Guam residents demanded reparations for their suffering. This proved to be a difficult struggle that lasted many decades.

Since Guam returned to being a US territory, people there were not eligible to apply for Japanese reparations payouts. Those were only for people living in independent states after the war. For decades, the Chamorros insisted that they receive compensation for their wartime suffering. The US government did not push the issue because it wanted to preserve its new relationship with Japan. The Japanese did not express an interest in offering any more money than it was already giving. This kept the Chamorros in limbo for decades.

In the 21st century, this all changed. The US Congress decided to pay the Chamorros directly instead of demanding Japan pay more reparations. The Guam World War II Reconciliation Act of 2021 mandated funds for people who survived the war. If survivors applied for restitution, they could receive it. By 2023, $4.13 million had been issued to survivors and their families. This marked a measure of closure for a people who suffered terribly during the Second World War and stayed loyal to the United States since then. The Chamorro story was one of horror and resilience in the face of cruelty.

Picture a slab-sliding ironclad rounding a bend on the Cumberland River in 1863. Firing on the move and belching black smoke, these nearly invulnerable vessels suddenly made any Confederate river defense vulnerable. While their ocean-going cousins captured national headlines, river ironclads were busy splitting the Confederacy in half.

As a central part of Winfield Scott’s Anaconda Plan to control the Mississippi River, river ironclads were purposely built. With their slow speeds, shallow drafts, armor, and firepower, these ironclads were the real weapons that cracked open the South’s interior.

The Brown Water Navy

While the ocean contingent of the Union’s naval campaign was critical, the Mississippi River Squadron, also known as the Brown Water Navy, was no less important. Built to operate within the narrow, shallow confines of the different rivers like the Cumberland, Red River, and Mississippi, river ironclads became the campaign’s workhorse. Army owned and commanded by Navy officers, they projected power inland, often helping to win crucial campaigns.

At the start of the Civil War in 1861, the Union scrambled to obtain ships. Paddle wheelers, towboats, and steamboats were converted using timber and iron plating. These sufficed until intentionally designed ironclads and later river monitors arrived. These had similar characteristics, such as shallow drafts, armored hulls and turrets, large naval guns, and side or stern wheels for propulsion.

Beginning in January 1862, ironclads began to appear. Soon, they and the Union Army started to break the Confederates’ Mississippi lifeline, which cut off Texas, Arkansas, and parts of Louisiana.

Unique, Powerful, but Not Impervious

During the Civil War, the Union produced about 76 ironclads of different types by 1865: monitors, casemates, and armored river rams. Of these, the City-class ironclads stood out. Designed by Samuel Pook, their distinctive sloped casemate armor helped deflect shots, a wide beam for stability, and armored paddle wheels positioned inside the hull earned them the nickname “Pook Turtles.” These characteristics allowed survival against Confederate shore batteries.

Their size enabled ironclads to deliver firepower in unexpected spots. Boats like the City-class brought heavy naval artillery, such as 42-pounder rifles, to bear. They simply blasted their way past earthen works or hurriedly built outposts manned with often inferior guns. Yet these behemoths had weaknesses too.

Working in a heated, enclosed iron box meant temperatures spiked past 120 degrees. Crews frequently fainted in the intense heat or from fumes from massive boilers or furnaces. Even their armor had a weakness, typically from above. Plunging Confederate shellfire punched through thinner armored (or unarmored) spots. But these powerful ships still clobbered their way past defenses. They were great but imperfect weapons.

Ironclads Versus Fortifications

The Union river fleet’s ironclads, starting in 1862, completely upended the Confederate defense tactic of static river blockades. Under normal circumstances, their heavy guns would shred wooden hulls. Now, Union ironclads sailed up to the forts, shrugged off most hits, and pounded the emplacements to pieces. Whereas a normal siege might take weeks, the ironclads placed shells along the defenses, helping force a surrender in days. This did come with risks— the City-class ironclad USS Cairo sank upon striking a mine during the run-up to the Vicksburg Campaign.

This approach became clear to frustrated Confederate officials during the 1863 Battle of Vicksburg (May 18-July 4). Of the Mississippi River naval battles, this bruising fight is considered the most important. Union ironclads repeatedly traversed the river under Vicksburg’s guns to bring supplies, men, and artillery, despite repeated hits. The city eventually fell on July 4, 1863, splitting the Confederacy.

Confederate Rams as a Response

The Confederates quickly realized the Union ironclad’s menace to their cause. Unlike the industrialized North, the South had few rolling mills, few foundries capable of forging iron plates, and almost no engines. Workers scavenged railroad iron, scrounged machinery, and unseasoned lumber to build boats like the CSS Arkansas. Cobbled together, this underpowered Confederate warship was later scuttled following several important battles only due to engine failure (August 1862).

The South also built cottonclads, or armed steamers loaded with tightly packed cotton bales. This unconventional but effective armor was built cheaply and quickly. These weren’t meant to clash with ironclads but were effective as an expendable defense.

While improvisation was the rule, the South’s industrial weakness quickly hampered defense efforts. The North’s boatyards consistently rolled out City-class (or similar) ironclads. The Confederacy struggled to produce one, often due to material shortages or long delays. The Union wore down its opponents, but the inability to match the North’s production led to the loss of the Mississippi theater.

The Civil War helped introduce the 19th century to ironclad technology. Union ironclads proved themselves as a winning factor on America’s rivers. They turned the Confederate river lifeline into a Union highway by 1865.

An ancient Inca city, Machu Picchu evokes a sense of wonder and mystery, holding the secrets of a lost civilization to be rediscovered. Its abandonment during the Spanish conquest left it to fade into obscurity until 1911, when Yale researcher Hiram Bingham brought it back into the global spotlight. But he did not “discover” the city, which was shown to him by knowledgeable locals, and which had also previously been documented by Western visitors. Bingham invented the story of the lost city to capture the contemporary imagination.

Symbol of the Inca Empire

Machu Picchu, an ancient Inca city likely constructed in the 15th century, stands today as the most iconic symbol of the Inca Empire, the largest pre-colonial empire in South America due to its conquests of neighboring kingdoms. ​​

Despite the absence of a written language, the Incas devised a sophisticated system of communication and record-keeping using cords adorned with knots, known as quipus, a method that is still not fully understood today.

Their legacy encompasses extraordinary architectural and engineering accomplishments that still captivate historians and archaeologists. Constructed without the use of iron, steel, or wheels, Machu Picchu was undoubtedly a monumental architectural feat, involving the labor of thousands of people.

A Mysterious Purpose 

Situated atop a precipitous ridge between two mountains, in a region characterized by heavy rainfall and geological instability, Machu Picchu covers 80,540 acres of mountain slopes, peaks, and valleys. At its heart lies the spectacular archaeological monument known as The Citadel, situated over 7,900 feet above sea level.

While its exact purpose remains uncertain, historians and archaeologists suggest several potential explanations. One prevalent theory is that Machu Picchu served as a royal estate and retreat for the Inca emperor Pachacuti. Additionally, it may have functioned as a religious sanctuary, agricultural hub, and administrative center. The strategic location of Machu Picchu amidst the Andes Mountains suggests its significance as a cultural, religious, and political center for the Inca Empire.

A recent study proposed a groundbreaking new theory regarding Machu Picchu’s location, attributing it to geological factors. Fault lines beneath the site facilitated stone construction by naturally breaking granite into manageable pieces, aiding in drainage and water management. This suggests the Incas deliberately selected the site based on their understanding of the region’s geology. Moreover, the presence of a Quechua term for significant fractures underscores the Inca’s profound understanding of geological formations within their mountain domain.

Searching for Vilcabamba

The most well-known story attributes the site’s discovery to Hiram Bingham, a Yale researcher who traveled to Peru in search of the last Inca capital. He began his adventure in 1911, accompanied by a geologist-geographer, a topographer, a naturalist, a surgeon, an engineer, and a young assistant. The trip began in Cuzco, where they started ascending the Urubamba River valley. The expedition reached a small plain bordered by gullies, where Melchor Arteaga, a tenant of those lands, resided. He informed them that in the opposite direction lay ruins that possibly matched what they were seeking, so he offered to guide them.

After an exhausting journey, crossing the Urubamba River and ascending slopes under stifling heat, they arrived at a small hut where they were welcomed by the family living there. One of their sons volunteered to show Bingham the ruins. Just around the hill from their hosts’ dwelling, the explorer, astonished, saw hundred-stepped Inca terraces, about 330 yards long and 10 feet high. Bingham hurriedly took many photos with his Kodak No. 3A Special and wrote notes in his journals.

A year later, after securing much more funding from Yale University and the National Geographic Society, he returned to Machu Picchu with a much larger team of geologists, archaeologists, and surveyors to begin excavations with the help of indigenous people from the area.​​ Bingham faced criticism for removing thousands of archaeological artifacts to Yale University. Following long-standing legal disputes, Yale returned the collection to Peru between 2011 and 2012, where they are stored at the Museo Manuel Chávez Ballón and UNSAAC-Yale International Center in Cusco.

Discovery?

With the dissemination of his research, notably featured in a dedicated issue of National Geographic in 1913, Hiram Bingham solidified his reputation as the individual who discovered Machu Picchu. Through publications, lectures, and media coverage, Bingham’s findings captured global attention.

Despite his contributions to the discovery and initial exploration of Machu Picchu, Bingham’s approach and interpretations have been criticized by modern scholars. He was driven more by romanticized notions and preconceptions than by empirical evidence, leading to speculative theories and interpretations. He was convinced that he had found the last city of the Incas, the legendary “lost city” of Vilcabamba la Vieja, the last bastion of the independent Inca rulers who waged a lengthy battle against Spanish conquistadors.

Ironically, Bingham had already visited Vilcabamba but decided it was too small to be so legendary. He invented the new lost city and a whole story behind it. For example, during his explorations, they found dozens of bodies buried there, leading Bingham to speculate that Machu Picchu was a temple devoted to the Virgins of the Sun, a holy order of chosen women dedicated to one of the Inca’s deities, the sun god Inti. However, his theory was quickly debunked as bodies of men were found in equal or greater measure.

The “Lost” City That Never Was

A mountain of evidence attests to the fact that Hiram Bingham was not the first to reach the ruins. In the 16th century, there were references to the Machu Picchu site in the writings of Diego Rodríguez Figueroa, known then as Pijchu. Additionally, recent findings have turned up 19th-century maps in which Machu Picchu is accurately located. In the second half of the 19th century, German adventurer Augusto Berns established a mining company, which he used to plunder and sell the relics of Machu Picchu. There are even documents from 1867 that indicate that Berns had to deliver 10% of his looted gold to the Peruvian government.

In 1902, Agustín Lizárraga, a peasant employed by his landlords, embarked on a mission to explore new lands for agricultural expansion. Known for his skill in “climbing the most inaccessible places” and “challenging obstacles,” he was the ideal candidate for the task. Accompanied by his cousin, he journeyed through the rugged mountain terrain until they stumbled upon the awe-inspiring ruins of Machu Picchu. Overwhelmed by the sight, Lizárraga inscribed his name and the year on a stone, commemorating their discovery. Upon their return, Lizárraga’s landlords organized visits to the ruins, hoping to attract tourists and promote the site’s cultural significance.

When Bingham “discovered” the ruins nine years later, he ordered the inscription to be erased, citing conservation reasons. Although Bingham noted the inscription in his diary, he did not publicize its existence, choosing to remain silent on the matter.

Publicizing Machu Picchu

Bingham, it turns out, was well aware that he hadn’t “discovered” anything. He had the 19th-century maps, the resolution authorizing Berns’ presence at the historical site, and had even photographed Lizárraga’s inscription. Additionally, on his expedition, he found three families cultivating crops, including potatoes, sugar cane, yucca, sweet potatoes, and corn on the terraces of Machu Picchu. The son of one of the peasant families, the Richartes, guided Bingham’s expeditions. Bingham even mentioned in his diaries that if it hadn’t been for the boy, they would never have reached the ruins. But Bingham made no effort to dispel his reputation as the great discoverer.

While Hiram Bingham’s efforts to investigate, excavate, and publicize the historical significance of Machu Picchu should be acknowledged, it remains essential to recognize that the site was never truly lost. Despite Bingham’s role in bringing Machu Picchu to the attention of the world, the site had always been known to locals in the area. His actions underscore a broader narrative often seen in historical exploration: the voices of distant explorers often overshadow the knowledge and heritage of indigenous communities. While Bingham’s efforts were instrumental in popularizing Machu Picchu globally, it’s crucial to recognize the enduring connection of indigenous communities to their heritage sites.

Cast aside by Catholic Europe, Elizabeth I pursued an unexpected alliance with Sultan Murad III of the Ottoman Empire. Capitalizing on their shared enemies and limited European trade routes, Murad III accepted Elizabeth I’s offer and introduced her impoverished island nation to the opulence, power, and wealth of the Islamic world. Even though English popular culture quickly exoticized and stigmatized its new Muslim allies, this friendship became one of England’s most profitable commercial relationships, laying the foundation for its future as a global superpower.

Relations Between Christian and Islamic Empires

By the advent of the Ottoman Empire in 1299, most Christian European kingdoms, voivodeships, and republics were in commercial contact or involved in campaigns against Islamic empires. From 711 to 1492, different Spanish Catholic Kingdoms fought to remove the Moors from their occupation of Southern Spain in the Andalusia region. Eastern European kingdoms and the Byzantine Empire were in constant trade with Islamic caliphates in Egypt, Syria, Palestine, and Persia. Yet, the Papacy and its fellow Catholic powers were increasingly threatened by the quick expansion of the Ottoman Empire and its encroaching influence in the Balkans, Eastern Europe, and the Mediterranean region. After Mehmed II defeated the Byzantine Empire at the Siege of Constantinople in 1453, the Papacy condemned the Empire as one of the greatest threats to Christendom.

However, after being excommunicated by Pope Pius V on February 25, 1570, Elizabeth I found herself and her kingdom in the same heretical and political blacklist as the Islamic nations. Surrounded by Catholic kingdoms ready to invade, cut off from some European trade networks, and abandoned by most allies, Elizabeth I was left with no choice but to pursue unconventional alliances that horrified Christian Europe.

“The Enemy of My Enemy Is My Friend”

Inheriting an impoverished nation wracked by plague and sectarian violence with no allies, Elizabeth’s advisors sought any alliance that could stabilize England. Inheriting a debt of £300,000 from her father King Henry VIII, Elizabeth I was also targeted by the king of Spain, Philip II. Widower of her late sister Mary I, Philip II was a staunch Catholic, notorious for his religious intolerance and violence. His animosity towards Elizabeth only intensified after she rejected his marriage proposal and ascended to the throne as an unwed Protestant queen regnant. As a result, he and other Catholic monarchs promised Catholic rebels in England military and financial support to depose their Protestant queen.

Her excommunication was soon realized to be her saving grace. No longer pressured into following papal and imperial policies forbidding diplomatic ties with Islamic empires, Elizabeth I’s advisors began encouraging her to pursue new relations with fellow sovereigns rejected by Catholic Europe. Her spymaster, Francis Walsingham, advised Elizabeth to form an alliance with one of the largest economic and territorial powers of the time: the Ottoman Empire. Accordingly, Elizabeth and her advisors devised an offer to appease the Ottomans based on shared enemies, like Pope Pius V, Philip II, and other Catholic monarchs.

Murad III ruled the Ottoman Empire during its territorial peak from 1574 to 1595, inheriting the sparkling legacy of his grandfather Suleiman the Magnificent. However, his reign began in the aftermath of the Ottomans’ naval defeat by Catholic forces. Aiming to suppress the Empire’s expansion, Pope Pius V reenacted the Holy League led by Spain and Venice, defeating and almost destroying the entire Ottoman navy at the Battle of Lepanto on October 7, 1571.

Even though the Ottoman navy was quickly rebuilt, this was one of the first and most definitive victories of Catholic forces against the Ottomans. With financial and social strains emerging all over the empire from continuous military campaigns, Elizabeth I approached a Sultan who was just as eager to form profitable European alliances away from and against the pope and Spain.

Unexpected Pen Pals

Elizabeth I first reached out to Murad III in 1579 in a letter offering a commercial and diplomatic alliance. She detailed how their nations were facing the same threats from Spain and the Papacy, but together could form a profitable relationship that would strengthen their reigns, economies, and overall standings in Europe. In addition to their shared enemies, Elizabeth I contended that their alliance would not only be pragmatic but theologically sound. She asserted that Sunni Islam and Protestantism shared a fundamental belief that condemned idolatry, which she argued was evident in the Catholic tradition of using priests and saints for intercession with God.

Accounts from the Ottoman court detail Murad III’s astonishment at receiving such a bold offer from a female queen. After being shown where England was on the map, Murad III was captivated by Elizabeth’s small nation and its ability to survive while surrounded by Catholic enemies. Curious and intrigued, Murad III accepted Elizabeth’s offer to cultivate a peaceful alliance that would expand his markets away from Catholic Europe.

Elizabeth I received Murad III’s response on March 7, 1579. His letter dazzled the English court, arriving in a satin satchel clasped with silver and dusted with gold. Written in a gilded font, his three-foot-tall letter accepted Elizabeth I’s offer and granted English merchants safe and total access to all Ottoman ports. While war with Catholic states waged on, Elizabeth I was now welcomed into one of the most robust, extravagant, wealthy, and diverse trade networks in the early-modern world.

From this original correspondence blossomed a 17-year friendship between Elizabeth I, Murad III, and his wife, Safiye Sultan. Despite never meeting in person, Elizabeth I became one of the largest recipients of royal correspondence from the sultanate in Ottoman history.

Elizabeth I often sent gold fabric, portraits, paintings, and clocks decorated with precious jewels to the Sultan and Sultana. In return, Elizabeth was gifted clocks, musical organs, carriages, and gowns made from the gold cloth. These letters not only reflect the formidable diplomatic and economic ties developed between England and the Ottoman Empire, but also remain some of the first documented regular correspondences between an English monarch and a non-Christian ruler.

England’s Diplomatic Entrance Into the Islamic World

From 1579, Elizabeth I began developing intensive diplomatic channels to foster new trade networks throughout the Ottoman Empire and neighboring Islamic empires. In 1580, Murad III issued the Ottoman Empire’s first Capitulation with England, granting all English traders, merchants, and diplomats unlimited access to Ottoman markets with extraterritorial status. This granted Englishmen a special tax and status that exempted them from Ottoman laws.

Shortly after, consuls representing Elizabeth I were established throughout the Ottoman Empire, enforcing English laws on their citizens and facilitating the expansion of English companies and capital.

Through the legitimization of English industries in Ottoman markets, Elizabeth I expanded her international networks to other Islamic empires. Referred to as Sultana Isabel, the Kingdom of Morocco and Barbary States offered Elizabeth I similar trade access and treaties. For example, Moroccan Sultan Ahmad al-Mansur granted English ships safe passage along their North African coasts through the Strait of Gibraltar, giving English merchants direct maritime access to the Ottoman Empire. Also threatened by Spain, the Barbary Company signed a similar charter in 1585 to grant England exclusive trading rights on its Mediterranean coasts with protected access to Ottoman ports.

With these new allies and international markets, Elizabeth I now had direct access to the prosperity, consumer culture, and technological developments across North Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, the Middle East, and the Levant.

Exchange of Goods Between Islamic and English Markets

English consumer culture surged with the circulation of new silks, textiles, spices, art, and tiles from the Ottoman Empire and its neighboring territories. Ottoman tapestries and carpets became status symbols for wealthier households. Additional luxury items like Iranian silk, cotton, pearls, precious metals, and gemstones became coveted displays of rank and class in English high society. Persian, Egyptian, Syrian, and Anatolian tapestries and tiles became common backdrops for English portraiture.

New words were even invented in English to account for the explosion of Ottoman goods in English markets. For instance, the word tulip was added to the English language during this period. Spices, new fruits, nuts like pistachios, and most importantly, sugar from Moroccan companies became popular among the English population. Candied fruits from Morocco quickly became Elizabeth I’s favorite treat. Many accounts and researchers believe that her obsession with Moroccan sweets was the real culprit behind her blackened teeth.

In return for direct and more affordable access to goods previously limited in English markets, English merchants offered Islamic businesses lucrative deals related to war manufacturing and rearmament. Further enraging Catholic Europe, Elizabeth I stripped the ruins of former Catholic churches destroyed during the English Reformation to sell tin, lead, and other metals used to make bullets and weapons. English merchants additionally exchanged these metals alongside timber, muskets, and cloth with the Kingdom of Morocco for saltpeter, the key ingredient for gunpowder. English textiles and fabrics were also sold to make Ottoman military uniforms.

These lucrative exchanges not only strengthened the English and Islamic economies but also provided them with the weapons necessary to wage war against Catholic Europe.

Exchange of People Between England and the Islamic World

The alliance between England and the Ottoman Empire also launched a mass circulation of people between the two nations. Thousands of English traders, merchants, diplomats, and those who could afford it were eager to travel and explore the Ottoman Empire, the Holy Lands, and sites of the most prolific ancient civilizations in Egypt and the Arabian Peninsula. Stories from those travelling quickly became exoticized retellings of everyday life across the Ottoman Empire as Englishmen tried to explain how a culture so foreign to theirs possessed such wealth, diversity, and vibrancy.

Hundreds of English subjects were permanently settled across the Islamic world. Most who remained converted to Islam and changed their names to participate in the business opportunities and cosmopolitan lifestyles within the Ottoman Empire.

Some English subjects who were even kidnapped by pirates along these trade routes also preferred to stay in the Empire. For example, Samson Rowlie was an English merchant who was captured, castrated, and brought to Algiers to serve as a eunuch by pirates. He converted to Islam, adopted the name Hasan Agar, and later became the main treasurer for the Ottoman administration in Algiers. He rejected his family’s demands to return to England, arguing that he would not have such a great position, food, or weather back home.

It was less common for Ottoman subjects to travel or permanently settle in England. While Ottoman diplomats frequently visited Elizabeth I’s court, the sultanate did not have a tradition of establishing permanent embassies. Similarly, the Kingdom of Morocco would send diplomats to England for short periods. For example, the Moroccan Ambassador Abd el-Ouahed ben Messaoud is believed to have inspired Shakespeare’s character of Othello during his stay in London.

Some historians contend that one of the first Muslim women recorded in England was welcomed during Elizabeth I’s reign. Anthony Jenkins, an English diplomat and businessman, gifted Elizabeth I an enslaved Tatar woman, named Aura Soltana, whom he purchased in Greater Russia when travelling back from the Ottoman Empire. Elizabeth I welcomed Soltana into her court and elevated her to one of her ladies-in-waiting and fashion advisor.

Exoticization of the Muslim “Other” in English Popular Culture

Murad III and Elizabeth I’s friendship coincided with the birth of theater culture as the dominant form of entertainment in England. Despite Elizabeth and Murad’s strong friendship, her subjects were still wary of trusting non-Christians. English populations were just as intrigued as they were terrified by the incomparable wealth and luxury that was coming from the Islamic World in comparison to their humble island. To grapple with their exotic, rich, yet un-Christian trading partners, English playwrights began including Muslim characters, histories, and settings into their productions.

Sultans, Islamic merchants, and diplomats became caricatures of the exotic “other,” socially legitimizing grand generalizations, exoticizations, and prejudice against Muslim communities. After the opening of England’s first playhouse in 1576 to the end of Elizabeth I’s reign in 1603, over 60 plays featured Muslim characters that were labelled interchangeably as “Turks,” “Persians,” or “Moors.” Despite the diversity of beliefs, cultures, and identities across all Islamic empires, English plays depicted Muslim characters as greedy and brutish villains or tyrants with darker skin complexions who sought to defile naïve European women.

Famous playwrights like Christopher Marlowe and William Shakespeare highlight the common ways Muslim characters were portrayed and stereotyped during this time. For example, Marlowe’s first famous play, Tamburlaine the Great (1590), loosely depicts the history of Timur, a notorious 14th-century Turco-Mongol conqueror. Marlowe characterizes Tamburlaine as a sacrilegious, overly ambitious, and bloodthirsty ruler with exotic features and an affinity towards violence that the English associated with Turkish and Muslim leaders.

Some of Shakespeare’s characters also built upon these stereotypes. For instance, in his famous play, Othello (1603), Othello is portrayed as a dark and exotic Moorish Venetian general who falls for Desdemona, a European noblewoman. Even though these plays are not outwardly anti-Muslim, their characterization of figures from Islamic regions shows how English populations generalized, judged, and, to some extent, feared Muslim communities and their homelands.

The End of an Era

The friendship between England and the Ottomans dwindled after the passing of Murad III in 1595 and Elizabeth’s passing in 1603. Her successor, James I of England and VI of Scotland, continued to profit from the intensive trade routes and businesses with the Ottoman Empire. However, his pious nature made him less inclined to maintain strong diplomatic ties with his Islamic counterparts.

Instead, James, I was drawn to healing England’s fractured relations with Catholic Europe, finding their partnerships less blasphemous than his cousin’s previous bond with non-Christian empires. As such, in 1604, James I signed the Treaty of London with Spain, officially recognizing Protestant England as a sovereign nation, ending 19 years of warfare, and resuming peaceful trade between the two nations.

The Capitulations, trade negotiations, treaties, and business deals continued between England and the Ottomans until the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1922. While history tends to focus on the Ottoman Empire’s final chapter as “the Sick Man of Europe,” it was the Sultan who took a chance on a fractured island nation that helped Elizabeth’s reign become the Golden Age of England. With the commercial and political support from some of the wealthiest empires in the early-modern world, these Islamic nations helped build the foundations that led England to later become one of the most dominating empires in modern history.

Pope Innocent VIII’s bull, published on December 5, 1484, commissioned two Dominican Inquisitors and professors of theology, Jakob Sprenger and Heinrich Kramer, to end witchcraft, which was, at the time, considered to be practiced by “heretics and other enemies of Christendom, both groups and individuals.” This marked a shift from how those accused of witchcraft were treated in the early Middle Ages and before. 

Unfortunately, as women were the ones most often accused of witchcraft, they received the bulk of the hatred, and subsequent texts and images depicting witchcraft, rituals, and deals with the devil became misogynistic. Sprenger and Kramer aided in creating the image of a witch and the danger they posed to society with the 1487 publication of the Malleus Maleficarum, or The Hammer of Witches, which led to surveillance and discrimination against women, especially those who fell outside of “normal” society.

The Radical Zealotry of Heinrich Kramer

While Sprenger and Kramer both wrote The Hammer of Witches, Kramer was the principal author of the medieval witch-hunting manual. Heinrich Kramer was born in 1430 in Lower Alsace. He joined the Dominican order as a monk and rose in prominence quickly within the field.

Driving him was an earlier trial involving a woman named Helena Scheuberin, the defeat of Kramer in accusing her of witchcraft, and the subsequent descent into his vendetta against women. Scheuberin refused to be locked into the traditional feminine role of her time and voiced her displeasure with Kramer’s sermons. Her refusal to go to service led him to accuse her of witchcraft. 

According to scholar Jane Schuyler, witches in the Middle Ages were regarded warily, as they were believed to cause harm, but they were mostly treated as social misfits isolated from normal society. This changed with the idea that witches were “heretics in league with the devil, opposed to the rule of God on earth; they were seductive and immoral, and received their powers as gifts from Satan,” where they bound their life to his turning away from their Christian faith.

Kramer already had a questionable reputation within the theological fields of his time. When he sought the University of Cologne’s approval for his text in 1487, he was considered too extreme. His fight against heresy and his insistence that the Church was not doing enough against women who were involved with the Devil drove him to push the boundaries of who was in charge of the trials, how they were conducted, and with what evidence. Kramer ended up writing and collecting pieces for The Hammer of Witches only a couple of years after the trial of Scheuberin. His disgust for women operating outside social norms became twisted with misinformation and misogyny that was used to look for and “hunt” witches across Europe, focusing specifically on women in vulnerable positions.

Deconstructing the Systemic Misogyny of the Text

The Hammer of Witches had five sections: the justification of the witch hunts, the papal bull, approval by professors of theology at the University of Cologne, the table of contents, and the main body.

Kramer argued, “women to be the sole operators of witchcraft, ‘What else is woman but a foe to friendship, an inescapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural temptation, a desirable calamity, a domestic danger.’” Those ideals already show the nature of the text regarding women and how they should be held in suspicious regard. Of course, they were more likely to be witches and a danger to the public, and responsible for things like disastrous crops, deaths of vital work animals, sicknesses plaguing the village, or a couple being unable to have children. These events could be devastating to the survival of the village, and the need to point fingers and find a cause meant women were easy scapegoats.

The only way to escape from a witch, according to Kramer, was by turning to religion, saying that, “[If the man being ensnared by the witch] pleaseth God shall escape from her; but he that is a sinner shall be caught by her.”

How the Printing Press Distributed Social Paranoia

While similar ideas and texts were in circulation before, The Hammer of Witches is unique in both the spread of the ideology and its survival over hundreds of years. Johannes Gutenberg changed the course of history for both printing and books with the invention of the movable type printing press in 1436. Unlike in the past, when other texts required entire pages to be carved from a block or hand-lettered, the printing press enabled The Hammer of Witches and other texts to be printed faster and more cheaply. This allowed it to spread across Europe. 

If Kramer had written this text 50 years earlier, it might not have spread as far as it did, ingraining itself into the public’s perception of what a witch is and how to find them. This instead became a printed copy for the educated population, and judicial officials and other men in the court system could use it as a blueprint for how to conduct a witch trial. 

Weaponizing Secular Courts Against the Female Population

When examining how witch trials were conducted, it is important to recognize the fundamental differences between trials in the Middle Ages and those today. Today, it is often considered that the person accused of a crime is ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ The court presents an argument and evidence that a person is guilty. Back then, it was the complete opposite. The accused person had to prove to the court that they were innocent of the crime. 

Now imagine a woman having to prove to a group of men who already have a text that tells them how susceptible women are to getting involved with the Devil and witchcraft. Many, although not all, of these victims were also marginalized by society for being too loud, having vices, mental illnesses, or being older and alone with no support system. Potentially, they could not provide for themselves, and became beggars and a ‘nuisance’ to their village. The change that Kramer pushed for also meant that these crimes that were originally tried religiously could be tried in secular courts as well, which resulted in more trials and executions.

Evidence in the trial could include confessions that were given under coercion, or through torture, and the promise that naming themselves or others as a witch would make the pain end. The ‘observations’ of witchcraft could include testimony of others, including neighbors who may be feuding with the accused. Even testimony of a husband being in bed with his wife all night would not suffice, as the Devil could make witches travel in the blink of an eye. It seems there was little way to protect yourself once you ended up on trial as a witch in Europe during that time.

The Enduring Historical Trauma of the Witch Trials

While witch hunts are no longer a literal event in the modern world, it doesn’t end the trauma related to the damage these trials and executions had on the public, especially for the women accused or worried about being accused. One of the last documented trials of a witch may have been in 1775 in Poland, showing that this text had a lasting impact on the culture. It is estimated that around 40,000 to 60,000 people died because of the witch hunts. 

These views of witchcraft in the text have leaked into other parts of culture that have lasted until even today. Art during the day reinforced the negative stereotypes of women engaging in inappropriate behaviors and meeting with the Devil. Today, we still see images of witches wearing all black, with warts on their noses, flying on broomsticks, and cursing people.

The Hammer of Witches is not the only theological, religious, or historical text that codified systemic prejudice against a group of people. Nor is it the only one that has been used in history to carry out atrocities. However, it serves as a reminder of how women were demonized for years and suffered personally, publicly, and judicially at the hands of men who took this manual verbatim on how to prosecute witches.

In the late 19th century, a radical architectural shift permanently altered our city skylines. As cities were rapidly outgrowing their horizontal boundaries, architects began to look up. Facilitated by the invention of the safety elevator and structural steel, a generation of visionary engineers began constructing “buildings that scraped the sky.” More than just a necessity, these buildings were a statement of progress. The first skyscrapers were bold, intricate, and unapologetically grand.

While many of these pioneering high-rises fell victim to the wrecking ball over the last century, a select few historic structures remain standing. Here are 12 of the oldest skyscrapers that redefined city skylines.

1. Temple Court Building, New York (1883)

The Temple Court Building, located at 5 Beekman Street in Manhattan’s Financial District, was originally completed in 1883. Designed by Benjamin Silliman Jr. and James M. Farnsworth, it displays a blend of Queen Anne, neo-Grec, and Renaissance Revival styles. Its distinctive red-brick façade, adorned with tan stone and terracotta accents, is complemented by two pyramidal towers at the corners.

In 1889, a Romanesque Revival style annex was added to the building. Its limestone façade seamlessly integrates with the original structure. The structure has a nine-story atrium, crowned by a pyramidal skylight, which floods the interior with natural light and highlights the intricate iron railings and detailed ornamentation. The atrium was designated as an interior landmark by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission in 2024.

After a period of vacancy starting in 2001, the building underwent significant restoration and redevelopment. In 2016, it reopened as part of The Beekman Hotel and Residences complex. This project included the addition of a 51-story condominium tower, known as the Beekman Residences, designed by Gerner Kronick + Valcarcel Architects.

2. Hotel Chelsea, New York (1884) 

The Hotel Chelsea, or Chelsea Hotel, is a historic landmark located at 222 West 23rd Street in Manhattan, New York City. Constructed between 1883 and 1884, it was initially designed as one of the city’s first cooperative apartment complexes. Designed by architect Philip Hubert, its style is described as Queen Anne Revival and Victorian Gothic. The 12-story red brick building, adorned with wrought-iron balconies, was, for a time, the tallest structure in New York City.

In 1905, the building transitioned into a hotel, quickly becoming a haven for artists, writers, musicians, and actors. Its bohemian atmosphere attracted a plethora of notable residents, including literary figures such as Mark Twain, Arthur C. Clarke, and Jack Kerouac, who penned “On the Road” during his stay. The hotel also hosted musical legends like Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, and Patti Smith. Andy Warhol filmed his iconic movie “Chelsea Girls” at the hotel in 1966.

Throughout its history, the Chelsea Hotel has been a backdrop for both artistic creation and tumultuous events. The poet Dylan Thomas fell ill at the hotel before his death in 1953, and in 1978, punk rock musician Sid Vicious was implicated in the death of his girlfriend, Nancy Spungen, in one of its rooms.

3. Osborne Apartments, New York (1885) 

The Osborne Apartments, located at 205 West 57th Street in Manhattan, New York City, was constructed between 1883 and 1885. Designed by architect James Edward Ware, the luxury apartment building uses a Romanesque Revival style with a façade clad in rusticated brownstone. The building’s southern section facing 57th Street rises 11 stories, while the northern section extends to 15 stories. The interior is notable for its elaborate lobby, adorned with stuccoed and mosaic-tiled walls, reflecting the opulence of the Gilded Age.

Commissioned by stone contractor Thomas Osborne as a speculative investment, building costs soon spun out of control, resulting in its acquisition by the Taylor family in 1889. Situated directly across from Carnegie Hall and in close proximity to Central Park, it sits within Manhattan’s “Billionaires’ Row,” a stretch known for its luxury real estate and cultural institutions.

Today, the Osborne operates as a cooperative residential building, maintaining its historic charm while offering modern amenities. In 1991, it was designated a New York City landmark, and in 1993, it was added to the National Register of Historic Places.

4. Sun Building, Washington, DC (1887)

Nestled at 1317 F Street NW in Washington, DC, the Sun Building stands as a testament to architectural innovation. Designed by Alfred B. Mullett and constructed between 1885 and 1887, it originally served as the Washington bureau for The Baltimore Sun. When it was completed, the nine-story edifice was among the city’s earliest skyscrapers. The pioneering iron-and-masonry structure has a façade adorned with sun motifs and sunflowers, an early example of corporate branding through architecture.

The building was equipped with steam-powered elevators, later upgraded to hydraulic systems in 1909 and electric elevators in 1922. In 1904, architect B. Stanley Simmons oversaw modifications for the American Bank, including the addition of a ninth floor in 1907 to accommodate the Interstate Commerce Commission’s hearing room. Other notable tenants have included Woodrow Wilson’s law firm and the early offices of the Federal Bureau of Investigation under J. Edgar Hoover.

Recognized for its architectural and historical value, the Sun Building was added to the National Register of Historic Places on March 27, 1985.

5. Rookery Building, Chicago (1888)

Nestled at the corner of LaSalle and Adams Streets in Chicago, the Rookery Building was completed in 1888 by the renowned partnership of Daniel Burnham and John Wellborn Root. This iconic structure seamlessly blends masonry and skeletal frame construction. Root devised a “grillage foundation,” a network of iron rails encased in concrete. This results in an underground floating platform that distributed the building’s enormous weight evenly across the soft earth, a technique that changed how skyscrapers were anchored around the world

The building’s name, “The Rookery,” harks back to a time when the site housed a temporary city hall teeming with crows and pigeons, as well as politicians, leading locals to dub it a “rookery.” Embracing this moniker, Root incorporated bird motifs into the building’s ornamental design, adding a whimsical touch to its grandeur.

One of the Rookery’s most captivating features is its central light court. Originally designed to flood the interior with natural light, this two-story atrium was reimagined in 1905 by the legendary Frank Lloyd Wright. He introduced white Carrara marble, intricate Persian-inspired patterns, and elegant bronze chandeliers, transforming the space into a luminous blend of form and function.

6. Wilder Building, Rochester (1888) 

Constructed between 1887 and 1888, this eleven-story structure is considered Rochester’s first modern skyscraper. Designed by the prominent Rochester architectural firm Warner & Brockett, the building showcases a modified Romanesque style. Its original design featured spires at each corner of the roof, which have since been removed.

A notable feature of the Wilder Building is its association with the invention of the mail chute. James Goold Cutler, who received U.S. Patent 284,951 on September 11, 1883, for the mail chute, installed a perfected version in the Wilder Building during its construction. With the demolition of the Elwood Building in 1965, the Wilder Building’s mail chute is currently the oldest surviving example of this innovation.

Today, the Wilder Building continues to serve as a functional office space, housing various businesses and organizations. Its prime location at the Four Corners in downtown Rochester makes it a central and accessible hub for commerce.

7. APA Building, Melbourne, Australia (1889)

Completed in 1889 at the corner of Elizabeth Street and Flinders Lane in Melbourne, Australia, this structure was an absolute monolith for its time. It wasn’t just the Southern Hemisphere’s first skyscraper. For a brief period, the 12-story, 173-foot structure was one of the tallest commercial buildings in the entire world.

Fueled by the Victorian gold rush, the city was one of the wealthiest in the British Empire, earning the nickname “Marvelous Melbourne.” The building was commissioned by the Australian Property and Investment Company and designed by the architectural firm Oakden, Addison & Kemp in association with John Beswicke. It was designed in Queen Anne Revival style with a highly decorative exterior made of contrasting red brick and cream-colored freestone bandings. The top of the building was a chaotic, beautiful masterpiece of picturesque gables, dormer windows, steep roofs, and a soaring, corner turret spire that made it look like a medieval castle stacked on top of a modern office block. The building was “scalped” of these features in the 1950s.

Unfortunately, by the mid-20th century, the Victorian Queen Anne style had fallen heavily out of architectural favor and lacked modern fire isolation standards. In 1980, despite fierce protests, the building was demolished.

8. New York Times Building (41 Park Row), New York (1889) 

The New York Times was founded in 1851 and initially operated from 113 Nassau Street. As the newspaper’s influence grew, it relocated to a newly constructed building at 41 Park Row in 1858, making it the first structure in New York City designed specifically for a newspaper. By the late 1880s, to accommodate its expanding operations, the Times commissioned architect George B. Post to design a larger Romanesque Revival-style building on the same site. This new 13-story structure was completed in 1889, showcasing advanced construction techniques of the period.

The 1889 building featured a façade adorned with intricate stonework and large arched windows, reflecting the Romanesque Revival style. Its construction was notable for being executed around the existing operations of the newspaper, allowing The New York Times to continue publishing without interruption. This engineering feat demonstrated innovative building practices of the time.

In 1905, The New York Times relocated to a new building at One Times Square, and 41 Park Row underwent modifications, including the addition of four stories. Pace University acquired the building in 1951, repurposing it for academic use. The structure has since been designated a New York City landmark and contributes to the Fulton–Nassau Historic District.

9. Old Chronicle Building, San Francisco (1889) 

The Old Chronicle Building, also known as the de Young Building, is a historic landmark located at 690 Market Street in San Francisco, California. Completed in 1889, it was designed by the renowned Chicago architectural firm Burnham and Root in the Richardsonian Romanesque style. At the time of its completion, the ten-story building, featuring a clock tower reaching 218 feet, was the tallest structure on the West Coast and is considered San Francisco’s first skyscraper.

Commissioned by M. H. de Young, owner of the San Francisco Chronicle, the building served as the newspaper’s headquarters and was a prominent feature of the city’s “Newspaper Row,” sharing the area with other major publications. In 1905, during a mayoral victory celebration, fireworks ignited the wooden clock tower, leading to its removal. Despite suffering significant damage during the 1906 earthquake and subsequent fires, the building was rebuilt under the supervision of architect Willis Polk, preserving its historical significance.

Over the years, the Old Chronicle Building underwent several transformations. In 1962, an attempt to modernize its appearance led to the original masonry façade being covered with a contemporary exterior. However, in 2004, efforts were made to restore its historic character, and the building was converted into the Ritz-Carlton Club and Residences.

10. Manhattan Building, Chicago (1891) 

Located at 431 South Dearborn Street in Chicago, Illinois, the Manhattan Building was designed by architect William Le Baron Jenney and constructed between 1889 and 1891. Upon its completion, the 16-story structure was the tallest building globally and is recognized as the oldest surviving skyscraper with a purely skeletal steel frame.

The building’s distinctive design features bow windows that enhance natural light within its interior spaces. The façade combines a granite base for the lower floors with brick on the upper stories, reducing the load on the internal steel framework. This innovative approach addressed concerns about wind-induced sway, with Jenney incorporating structural elements to ensure stability. The Manhattan Building was also constructed wedged between two existing seven-to-eight-story buildings. Traditional foundations would have destabilized their walls, so Jenney used cantilevered foundation beams. He placed the building’s massive structural columns 15 feet inside the property line, and then balanced the exterior walls out over the edges like a see-saw.

Today, the Manhattan Building continues to serve as a commercial office space, retaining its historical significance and architectural charm. Visitors and architecture enthusiasts can admire its exterior, which showcases the early adoption of steel-frame construction; a pivotal development in skyscraper design. Situated in Chicago’s Loop neighborhood, the building is part of the historic Printing House Row District, offering a glimpse into the city’s rich architectural heritage.

11. Ames Building, Boston (1893) 

Nestled at 1 Court Street in Boston, Massachusetts, the Ames Building stands as a testament to the city’s architectural evolution. Completed in 1893, it was designed by the esteemed firm Shepley, Rutan, and Coolidge in the Richardsonian Romanesque style. At 14 stories, it was Boston’s tallest building upon completion and is considered Beantown’s first skyscraper.

Commissioned by industrialist Frederick Lothrop Ames, the building showcases a façade adorned with granite and sandstone, featuring grand arches and intricate carvings. Its construction marked a significant achievement as the second-tallest masonry load-bearing wall structure globally at the time, surpassed only by Chicago’s Monadnock Building.

Over the years, the Ames Building has undergone several transformations. Initially serving as office space, it was converted into a luxury boutique hotel in 2009. In 2020, Suffolk University acquired the building, repurposing it as a student residence hall.

12. The Witte Huis, Rotterdam, Netherlands (1898) 

This 11-story, 141-foot-tall building was Europe’s first skyscraper. In the late 1890s, Rotterdam was rapidly expanding into a world-class port city. Two wealthy brothers, Gerrit and Jan-Hendrik van der Schuyt, traveled to the United States and were spellbound by the soaring skyscrapers of New York and Chicago. They returned to the Netherlands determined to bring that vertical ambition to Europe.

Locals believed that their soft, marshy ground could not support a skyscraper. To prove them wrong, architect Willem Molenbroek engineered a massive underground foundation, driving 1,000 thick pine piles deep into the soft swampy soil to anchor the structure securely.

Different from its American cousins, the building used Art Nouveau and Jugendstil styles. The exterior was clad in brilliant white glazed bricks, which gave the building its name, and the facade is decorated with ornamental mosaics and stone statues. It has a steep mansard roof featuring a magnificent rooftop viewing platform, which became an instant tourist attraction in 1898.

Starting in the 700s AD, Viking raiders attacked settlements in the northern French coast. These raids led to two sieges of Paris, the establishment of a new Duchy in northern France, and indirectly, the Norman invasion of England.

The Coming of the Northmen: France Faces the Viking Onslaught (8th–9th centuries)

After several years raiding the coasts of the British Isles, Vikings began to target settlements in northern France. ​The first Scandinavian ships appeared off France in 799. They arrived at a perilous time for the locals. The local Frankish nobility struggled to maintain control over their territories and lacked the resources to defend themselves against these raiders. As a result, the Viking raids quickly increased in intensity.

The Vikings initially aimed to plunder the coastal areas, targeting abbeys, churches, and small towns for their wealth. The Vikings were experienced in raiding coastal settlements and the Carolingian rulers in France struggled to respond. The lackluster defense only encouraged more raids as the Vikings were eager to seize more riches.

In the 830s-840s, Viking raiders began establishing fortified camps in the Seine estuary to allow them to raid further inland. In 841, a Viking fleet sailed up the River Seine and plundered Rouen and the Abbey of Jumièges. These raids showed two things: the Carolingians were too weak and the Vikings were planning on staying there. This would have profound implications for the political future of northern France.

The Siege of Paris and the Crisis of the Carolingians (845–885)

In 845, one of the most important moments in Frankish history took place when thousands of Vikings sailed down to the Seine to attack Paris. The Frankish king, Charles the Bald, was poorly prepared for this attack. After the Frankish vanguard was defeated, the Viking chieftain Ragnar Lothbrok laid siege to the city. Charles decided to pay off the Vikings by giving them 7,000 livres of silver and gold.

The Vikings found that by laying siege to poorly defended cities like Paris, they could exact major tributes. Repeated attacks throughout the rest of the 9th century AD devastated towns such as Rouen, Tours, and Angers, while monastic centers like Saint-Denis and Fontenelle were burned multiple times.

In 885, a much larger Viking force numbering in the tens of thousands laid siege to Paris again. This time, Odo, the Frankish Count of Paris, managed to defeat the Vikings thanks to careful preparation and a formidable defense. He also had to pay a ransom to force the Vikings to leave, but the Frankish defense deterred additional Viking attacks on the city. A stalemate now emerged: northern France was at the mercy of the Vikings, but areas further inland were harder to reach due to stronger Frankish defenses.

Rollo and the Settlement at the Lower Seine (911)

While this stalemate persisted, a prominent new Viking ruler appeared on the scene. Rollo, a Scandinavian chieftain born in either Denmark or Norway, took control of much of the Viking-held territory in the Seine estuary and on the coast. His position was strengthened by the fact that the Carolingians were very weak, enabling him to maintain control of the territories seized by prior Viking warlords.

While the Vikings were unable to seize Paris itself, they could take control of the city’s hinterland, leaving it isolated from the rest of France. King Charles the Simple decided that he would try to negotiate with the Norsemen instead of trying to oust them entirely. In 911, both leaders met and signed the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte. This accord enabled Rollo to take control of the vital territory near Rouen. In exchange, he agreed to make peace with the Franks and pledge allegiance to King Charles. He even converted to Christianity and married Charles’s daughter.

Rollo’s realm came to be known as Normandy, or “land of the Northmen.” From now on, the Vikings in northern France were no longer a threat to the Frankish kingdom. Instead, they were co-opted to protect their Frankish liege lords from other external threats. The treaty and subsequent events consolidated the Duchy of Normandy and stopped the rampant Viking pillaging that plagued northern France at the time.

From Raiders to Rulers: The Early Norman Dukes (10th century)

Upon the signing of the treaty between Rollo and King Charles, northern France underwent drastic changes. Many of the Vikings who lived there decided to settle down, adopt a Christian lifestyle, and intermarry with the locals in the towns in the region. The establishment of a prosperous Norman state on the French coast encouraged further migration from Scandinavia.

Rollo proved an able ruler. He fortified Rouen, established law and order, and encouraged trade along the Seine, turning his once-hostile base into a thriving center of commerce. His son and successor, William Longsword, expanded Norman control westward toward the Cotentin and eastward into the Vexin, using both the carrot and the stick. The Normans’ growing power alarmed neighboring counts, but their martial discipline and strategic marriages secured their position.

In 942, Richard I became the Duke of Normandy and he decided to increase the power of the Church in the region. He welcomed reforming monks and established more monasteries to support the Church’s growth. The close ties established between the Duchy and the Church ensured that the Normans could integrate more easily into the Frankish kingdom than if they had retained their Norse pagan beliefs.

Normandy’s Rise: Power, Prosperity, and Integration (11th century)

Normandy continued to expand as a result of the strategic decisions of its dukes and the growth in its population. The descendants of Rollo had perfected the art of balancing independence with loyalty to the French crown. Under Duke Richard II and his successors, the duchy consolidated its institutions, strengthened ducal authority, and cultivated a distinctive Norman identity.

In the late 10th century, the Norman dukes helped to put Hugh Capet on the French throne, an act that demonstrated their influence beyond Normandy. Additionally, their military power was growing. By the mid-century, over 300 permanent knights protected the castles in the duchy, not including thousands more warriors that could be called up in a crisis. The dukes imposed vassalage on the lay nobility as well. Until Richard II in the late-10th century, Norman leaders were willing to call over more Scandinavians to strengthen their numbers.

The mid-11th century witnessed the rise of Duke William, the illegitimate son of Duke Robert I of Normandy. William had become duke at eight years old in 1035 and spent the next few decades facing a host of challenges to his power. After restoring stability to his realm, William turned his attention to England. William’s great-aunt Emma of Normandy had been the mother of the childless Edward the Confessor, whose death in 1066 encouraged William to lay claim to the English throne.

Legacy of Conquest: Normandy and the Wider World

Following Edward’s death in January 1066, his brother-in-law Harold Godwinson moved quickly to seize the crown. William claimed that Edward had previously promised him the throne and invaded England in the fall of 1066 to stake his claim. During that fateful year, Harold not only faced the threat of William’s Normans to the south but also had to defend his kingdom from invasion by King Harald Hardrada of Norway in the north.

Although Harold prevailed against the Norwegians at the Battle of Stamford Bridge, the Normans emerged victorious and Harold was slain at the Battle of Hastings on October 14, 1066. After his coronation in December, William became king of England as well as the duke of Normandy. England and Normandy remained separate realms after William’s death, with his eldest son Robert taking over in Normandy and his second son William II becoming king of England. The territories were reunited in the person of Henry I, William’s third son.

The Normans carried to England their distinctive blend of Viking audacity and Frankish organization. They centralized political administration, and created a new aristocracy bound by loyalty to the new king. Their castles dominated the surrounding countryside as a statement of the new regime. Norman rule reshaped English society and governance, leaving long-lasting legacies in law, architecture, and language.

Across the channel, the duchy itself remained a cornerstone of English power in France until King John was forced to cede the duchy to France in the early 13th century. Born from Viking raids and forged in Frankish politics, Normandy had become a model of adaptability, resilience, and growth. Its influence extended long after the end of the Duchy and to this day, the legacy of the Viking settlers remains imprinted on the territory.