The Historian's Hut: Did You Know?

Sunday, October 8, 2017

The 16th-Century Flight Of John Damian of Falcuis

King James IV (r. 1488-1513), besides being one of Scotland’s most charismatic and internationally active kings, was also an advocate of education and a generous patron to the arts and sciences. As a king with such a renaissance spirit, European intellectuals were naturally drawn to Scotland to join the court of James IV. Among the interesting courtiers of the king, one ambitious man stood out from the rest of the crowd—John Damian of Falcuis.

In the second half of the 15th century (possibly around 1470) John Damian of Falcuis was born in Italy, the heart of the Renaissance. Young John had a wide variety of interests, but he decided to embark on a career path in medicine. He either studied or practiced in France, later earning him the nickname, the “French Leech,” but eventually found himself employed as the court physician of the Scottish King James IV.

Damian landed in Scotland around 1500 or 1501 and soon found that King James IV was willing to fund studies and experiments that expanded well beyond the typical realm of a court physician. Upon discovering this, John Damian of Falcuis must have been delighted, for he was not only interested in medicine, but was also passionate about alchemy and experimental engineering.

James IV patiently provided funding as John Damian attempted to change base metals into gold, a favorite hobby of alchemists. In between his failed alchemical experiments, Damian also studied how to produce life-prolonging elixirs. Despite his attempts in these fields always ending in disappointment, James IV continued to support the energetic dreamer, and even bestowed on Damian the title of abbot of Tongland.

It was after he had become an abbot that John Damian of Falcuis attempted an experiment that would secure his name in history. This time, however, he was not going to try to create gold or produce an elixir of life. In this experiment, he wanted to achieve what mankind often dreams of while gazing up at the clouds—he wanted to fly.

In 1507, John Damian of Falcuis became obsessed with an idea. After observing and studying birds, Damian deduced that the ability of flight had to come from wings. Therefore, to achieve flight, John Damian simply concluded that he needed to manufacture his own personal set of feathery wings.

With his plan concocted, Damian sent his aids to scavenge the land for eagle feathers—for some reason he had concluded that eagle feathers, and only eagle feathers, could do the job. With all the plumage gathered together, the ambitious inventor pieced together two large wings that he could attach to his arms.

John Damian took his great flight in late September 1507, in the city of Stirling, Scotland. Outfitted in his carefully crafted wings, he climbed to the battlements of Stirling Castle, which stood an estimated 70 feet above the ground. Once he was atop the wall, Damian presumably took a few deep, but shaky, breaths as he looked over the surrounding landscape. Yet, in the end he mustered his courage and leapt from the castle walls. Frantically flapping the makeshift wings with as much energy as he could exert, Damian soared away from the side of Stirling Castle. Nevertheless, he only traveled as far as he could jump, and after that short trip, he was violently pulled down to the hard earth by the unsympathetic force of gravity. Damian was granted a bittersweet blessing, for the force of his crash was somewhat dissipated by the trash heap or dung pile in which he landed. In the end, despite having jumped from the walls of a castle, John Damian of Falcuis only suffered a broken leg as a result of his unsuccessful flight and messy landing. Damian never retried the experiment, but he publicly claimed that his unfortunate crash only occurred because hen feathers had been mistakenly woven into the wings.

Although John Damian was unsuccessful in most of his experimental endeavors, King James IV still found the man’s resolve and determination in the face of failure to be charming. Even after the pseudo scientist broke his leg by jumping from the walls of Stirling Castle, the king’s support never wavered. John Damian of Falcuis was still on the payroll of the Scottish monarch when English forces killed King James IV in 1513, during the Battle of Flodden.

Written by C. Keith Hansley.

Top picture attribution: (Illustration of an ornithopter (man with manufactured wings) illustrated prior to 1830 from the Tissandier Collection of early European flight designs, [Public Domain] via Creative Commons).

Sources:

Wednesday, October 4, 2017

A Clever 12th-Century Woman May Have Thwarted The Byzantine Navy in Otranto, Italy

The Normans that rose to power in Italy, most notably Robert Guiscard and Bohemond, were a constant thorn in the side of Alexios I Komnenos, the Emperor of Constantinople from 1081-1118. Guiscard’s initial Norman invasion into the Byzantine Empire lasted from around 1081-1085 and was very destructive and threatening, but proved ultimately unsuccessful. The death of Robert Guiscard in 1085 signaled the end of the invasion, and Guiscard’s son, Bohemond, was eventually pushed back to southern Italy.

When Pope Urban II (r. 1088-1099) announced the First Crusade in 1095, Bohemond joined the ranks of the crusaders and became one of the movement’s leaders. After a long siege lasting from October 1097 to June 1098, Bohemond seized for himself the city of Antioch. The First Crusade officially ended in 1099, with the successful capture of Jerusalem by the crusaders.

Although he had brought new lands under his control, Bohemond was in a precarious situation. His actions in the 1080s had already made him an enemy of the Byzantine Empire, and the crusade had brought upon him the ire of the Muslim monarchs surrounding the Holy Lands. Bohemond made his situation worse by launching a failed invasion against one of his Islamic neighbors, resulting in his untimely capture. When Bohemond was released from captivity around 1103, he wisely fled from the Middle East and returned to Italy by 1105 to recruit more soldiers.

With Bohemond back in Italy, Emperor Alexios Komnenos wisely began to worry about his coastal land holdings. Therefore, according to Alexios’ daughter, Anna Komnene (c. 1088-1153), the emperor tasked a fleet under the command of Isaac Kontostephanos to sail to Dyrrakhion (modern Durrës, Albania) and patrol for suspicious Norman activity.

When Isaac Kontostephanos arrived at Dyrrakhion, he decided to do more than just patrol the shoreline. Instead, he took his fleet and crossed over to Italy, where he laid siege to the city of Otranto, over which Bohemond was a prince. According to Anna Komnene, none of the usual male leaders of Norman Italy were present at Otranto when the Byzantine Navy arrived. The person supposedly in charge of the town was a woman named Emma of Hauteville, daughter of Robert Guiscard and brother of Bohemond.

This female leader of Otranto impressed Anna Komnene so much that she described her as a “woman gladiator” in her history, The Alexiad (Book XII, chapter 8). If Anna’s story is correct (although, corroborating sources are scant), Emma of Hauteville dealt with the situation in a calm, brilliant manner.

As portrayed in The Alexiad, Emma of Hauteville managed to send messengers that were carrying requests for reinforcements around the blockade and siege set up by Isaac Kontostephanos. At the same time, she surrendered the city of Otranto to the Byzantine Empire—the only condition was that the city gates would not be opened until she and Kontostephanos came to a suitable peace agreement. Through the use of additional messengers the besiegers and the besieged kept up a correspondence while the siege continued. The total surrender of the city seemed nigh, but Emma of Hauteville allegedly kept finding little details that needed to be discussed further. If Anna’s tale is correct, Emma of Hauteville played her part perfectly by keeping her enemy confident enough to continue negotiations instead of violently storming the city Otranto.

In this clever way, Emma of Hauteville reportedly was able to stall long enough to allow Norman reinforcements to arrive and relieve the city. According to Anna Komnene, Isaac Kontostephanos’ men were not prepared for the newly-arrived force. She wrote that the sailors of the Byzantine Navy fled for the sea and that Kontostephanos’ hired mercenaries (probably Pechenegs) deserted from the army to loot the surrounding countryside. Bohemond was said to have brought many of these captured deserters with him to Rome when he met with Pope Paschal II (r. 1099-1118) before launching his next invasion of the Byzantine Empire in 1107.

Written by C. Keith Hansley.

Top picture attribution: (Byzantne Fleet led by Thomas the Slav illustrated in the Madrid Skylitzes, c. 11th-13th centuries, [Public Domain] via Creative Commons).

Sources:

The Alexiad by Anna Komnene, translated by E. R. A. Sewter. New York: Penguin Classics, 2009.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Bohemond-I
https://www.geni.com/people/Emma-de-Hauteville/6000000003827587033

Tuesday, October 3, 2017

The Ancient Temple Complex of Abu Simbel Was Moved From Its Original Location In The 20th Century

The temple complex of Abu Simbel is believed to have been constructed loosely between 1264 and 1224 BCE, during the reign of Ramses II (r. 1279-1213 BCE). The temples, built into a cliffside in southern Egypt, celebrated the victory or stalemate against the Hittites that Ramses II achieved at the Battle of Kadesh (c. 1274 BCE). Yet, the site was also meant to strengthen the pharaoh’s claim to godhood.

The complex consists of two temples—the Great Temple and the Small Temple. Four colossal statues of Ramses II, reaching 20 meters in height, guard the entrance of the Great Temple. The carved structure of the Great Temple, itself, extends around 10 meters higher than the colossi of the pharaoh. Inside the Great Temple, around 56 horizontal meters of cliffside were excavated to make room for three magnificently decorated halls. A small distance to the north of the Great Temple lays the Small Temple, dedicated to Ramses’ queen, Nefertari. As a sign of respect and affection, the statues of Ramses II and Nefertari on this smaller temple were made to be equal in height, roughly 10 meters each.

As millennia passed by, the temple complex of Abu Simbel began to be covered by sand, with only the heads to the Great Temple’s colossal statues left visible by the early 19th century. In 1817 CE, however, an unlikely relic hunter named Giovanni Belzoni found and began excavating the Great and Small Temples.

Interestingly, if Giovanni Belzoni returned from the dead and journeyed back to the spot of his discovery, he would no longer be able to find Abu Simbel in the place where it was originally excavated. The whole temple complex has been moved!

This latest addition to the tale of Abu Simbel occurred in the 1960s, when the government of Egypt was beginning construction on the Aswan High Dam. When predictions came out that the rising water from the dam would flood and submerge the temple complex, UNESCO and the government of Egypt scrambled to save Abu Simbel. In a project that officially lasted from 1960-1980 archaeologists and historical preservationists moved the threatened relics and temples to higher and dryer ground.

From 1963-1968, the Great and Small Temples of Abu Simbel were cut into approximately 16,000 movable blocks, and these segments were transported around 210 meters to the northwest of its original position, where it was placed at a location about 65 meters higher in elevation. Once the pieces of the temples were at their new home, the blocks were seamlessly fixed back together with cement and sand, maintaining the original architectural orientation of the structures. With the temple rebuilt, the team then constructed an artificial cliff face around the temples, convincingly made of gravel, rock and cement. Along with the temples at Abu Simbel, the Sanctuary of Isis at Philae, as well as the surrounding stelae near these temples, were all successfully saved from the rising water. In 1979, all of the above ancient monuments were designated as UNESCO World Heritage Sites.

Written by C. Keith Hansley.

(Photograph of the Great Temple of Abu Simbel taken before 1923, [Public Domain] via Creative Commons and the Brooklyn Museum)

(Photograph of the Small Temple of Abu Simbel taken before 1923, [Public Domain] via Creative Commons and the Brooklyn Museum)

(Ramses' face from the "number two" colossal statue being lifted into place during the transportation of Abu Simbel to higher ground, c. 1967, [Public Domain] via Creative Commons)

Sources:

Monday, October 2, 2017

The Japanese Empire Printed Invasion Pesos, Cents, Shillings And Rupees

By 1942, the Japanese had conquered a large empire in the Pacific, stretching from the border between Russia and China in Manchuria, down all the way to Indonesia and the Solomon Islands. When Japan invaded new regions in China or South East Asia, the local populations suffered more than just an occupying force—the Japanese also imposed an invasion currency on the seized regions.

Japanese Invasion Money, interestingly referred to as JIM, came in many different forms. These paper currencies were tailored and modified for each region. The Japanese Military Yen was imposed on China; invasion dollars were put into circulation in Malaya (now Malaysia); Japanese rupees were disseminated in Burma (now Myanmar); paper cents and gulden were released by Japan into the Netherlands East Indies; Japanese versions of shillings and pounds were used in lands captured from the British Empire and Japanese Government pesos and centavos were also printed for the occupied Philippines.

During World War II, the United States was able to take advantage of Japan’s simplistic paper invasion money, especially the Japanese peso. The U. S. quickly counterfeited the invasion money, dropping in loads of bank notes that looked authentic on the front, but had propaganda and anti-Japanese messages printed on the back.

In the end, the Japanese Invasion Money was never very effective and often suffered devaluation because of over-printing. When Japan surrendered to the United States on September 2, 1945, the Japanese Invasion Money lost all of its value as a currency. Even though the money is no longer legal tender, a few of the JIM bank notes (if they are in pristine condition) are still valuable to collectors, yet most JIM’s are now completely worthless, except as personal keepsakes.

Written by C. Keith Hansley.

(Japanese Government (Philippines)-100 Pesos (1944), [Public Domain] via Creative Commons and the National Museum of American History)

(OCE-3a-Oceania-Japanese Occupation-10 Shillings ND (1942), [Public Domain] via Creative Commons and the National Museum of American History)

(NI-125c-Netherlands Indies-Japanese Occupation-10 Gulden (1942), [Public Domain] via Creative Commons and the National Museum of American History)

(Malaya-Japanese Occupation-1000 Dollars ND (1945), [Public Domain] via Creative Commons and the National Museum of American History)

(Burma, Japanese invasion currency,10 rupees (1942-44), [Public Domain] via Creative Commons and the National Museum of American History)

(10 Yen military banknote of the 1938 series. [Public Domain] via Creative Commons and the Army Ministry of Japan)

Sources:

Sunday, October 1, 2017

Did Ancient Roman Children Predict The Victory Of Octavian Over Marc Antony?

As many have said, children, in their innocence, can often pierce through the layers of illusion that adults drape over themselves and the world. Unfortunately, that youthful perspective of the world is often cast aside, labeled naivety and childishness. Nevertheless, the Roman statesman and historian, Cassius Dio (c. 163-235 CE), wrote that children might have used their special intuition of the world to unknowingly predict the future. Dio claimed that the children of ancient Rome predicted the outcome of the civil war between Octavian (later Augustus) and Marc Antony.

The year was 32 BCE, and Octavian convinced the Roman Republic to declare war against Egypt and its queen, Cleopatra, the lover of Marc Antony. As Octavian had planned, Antony sided his faction with Cleopatra’s forces, an action that could be easily labeled by Octavian’s propagandists as treason. With civil war inevitable, senators scrambled to pick a side, making their choice known by staying with Octavian in Rome, or by fleeing from the great city.

According to Cassius Dio, even the children living in 32 BCE were inspired by all of the fervor. Pulling from whatever unknown sources Dio could access, he claimed that great masses of children from Rome gathered together to fight it out in an elaborate mock-battle. Half of the youthful mob called themselves Caesarians (on the side of Octavian) and the other labeled themselves as Antonians. After two days of play fighting, the children under the Caesarian banner delivered a sound defeat to the kids who were pretending to be Antonians.

In his great historical and literary achievement, The Roman History, Cassius Dio counted this play battle as one of many omens and signs sent by the gods to announce the upcoming triumph of Octavian over Marc Antony.

Written by C. Keith Hansley.

Top picture attribution: (Marble Sculpture of Children singing and playing music on a church in Florence, Italy, sculpted by Luca della Robbia (Italian, 1400–1482), [Public Domain] via Creative Commons).

Sources:

The Roman History (Book 50, chapter 8) by Cassius Dio, translated by Ian Scott-Kilvert. New York: Penguin Classics, 1987.