agricultural revolution – History Learning Academy

Smallpox-The Global Killer

“one of the scariest monsters on earth.” Dr. Michael Osterholm.

Smallpox, known by various names like “the speckled monster”, “the red plague”, “Hunpox”, and the “great pox”, was an undiscriminating killer of all races and classes. It might have killed Marcus Aurelius and almost finished Elizabeth I. The Habsburg Emperor Joseph I died from the disease in 1711. Smallpox shaped migrations, influenced military outcomes and undermined governments. Over millennia, the disease spread worldwide and stood as one of the most formidable enemies of human existence, killing billions.

The quest to understand and combat smallpox had spanned centuries. In 1796, English physician Edward Jenner (1749-1823) achieved a historic breakthrough by creating the first vaccine. It was a milestone in the history of medicine but the disease lingered. Its continued impact into the 20th century is a stark reminder of the importance of eradicating such diseases. 1969, the World Health Organization (WHO) finally declared that smallpox was eradicated.

What is Smallpox?

To fully appreciate the magnitude of this achievement, it is crucial to comprehend the nature of smallpox. We must understand its characteristics, its mode of transmission, and its impact on diverse populations worldwide. Diseases happen when pathogens (the agents that cause disease) such as viruses, bacteria and fungi infect the tissue of a living being. Pathogens include viruses, bacteria, and fungi. They infect the tissue of living beings. Symptoms occur when the pathogen releases toxins as they multiply, spread or even kill cells. Diseases occur when pathogens infect the tissue of a living being.

Smallpox is a virus that is a parasite of animals, plants, and bacteria. Some examples include the common cold, influenza, smallpox, AIDS, herpes, hepatitis, polio, and rabies. As parasites, viruses need a host to reproduce. They achieve this by infecting host cells and hijacking their machinery to survive and multiply. Outside of a host, viruses are inert. Contagious diseases can be passed between organisms (e.g. person to person) in various ways – direct contact (touch), indirect contact (with an infected object), and airborne (coughing, sneezing). When infection sets in, it sickens or even kills us.

Like measles and whooping cough, smallpox is a so-called “crowd disease.” This term is used to describe diseases that spread rapidly in densely populated areas. They are particularly dangerous and difficult to control. This is due to their high transmission rates and potential for widespread outbreaks.

Microscopic image of a virus

Smallpox is a Zoonotic disease. It is shared among people and sometimes between other animals like bats, monkeys, and livestock. Smallpox infects humans but not other animals. Other zoonotic diseases include measles, HIV, AIDs, chicken pox, and SARS. Collectively, they are the deadliest diseases in human history.

Arguably the most lethal of the lot, smallpox is an influenza (flu)that scientists later discovered is caused by an Orthopoxvirus. (Snowden,87) The medical name for smallpox is variola virus. Virologists identify two kinds of smallpox. Variola major has a mortality rate of 25 to 30 percent. Variola minor has mild symptoms and a death rate of 1 percent or less. Variola major is the focus of this study.

What made smallpox so deadly?

Smallpox (variola major) has many dangerous traits, including its mode of infection and its adaptability to various climates. Regarding infection, it is highly contagious and transmitted mainly through droplets exhaled through coughing or sneezing. It can only be spread from human to human, not to other animals. The disease can also spread from the corpses of smallpox victims and contaminated items like linens.

Abetting its spread is that smallpox infects a host slowly with no immediate signs of illness. From the time of infection, the incubation period is nine to fourteen days. The infected experience symptoms such as fever, chills, headaches, and nausea. These symptoms could be confused with other ailments. Since symptoms do not appear for a week or two, people could unknowingly infect others for a week or two. After incubation, the overt symptoms include lesioning and skin rashes. Survivors could be blinded or permanently scarred. Some died. It ultimately kills by attacking the internal organs – the liver, lungs and heart. Infants are the most vulnerable. Survivors of smallpox did not become infected again, an essential trait that facilitated its eventual eradication.

Smallpox also demonstrated a remarkable ability to survive in diverse climates. This includes the cooler temperatures of Northern Europe. This adaptability allowed smallpox to extend its reach far beyond the tropical regions where diseases like malaria thrived. Adaptability, contagiousness, and lethality made smallpox a pervasive and influential force in shaping human events. Its resilience, even in the face of diverse climates, underscores the gravity of this deadly disease’s impact on human history.

Smallpox and History

Scholars increasingly acknowledge the role of smallpox and other diseases in the unfolding of history. In his 2019 book, Epidemics and Society: From the Black Death to the Present, Frank Snowden writes that diseases are “a major part of the ‘big picture’ of historical change.” They are crucial for understanding historical development. They include societal developments such as economic crises, wars, revolutions, and demographic change. (2) Human history is littered with diseases like the plague, cholera, and the Spanish flu. Smallpox (variola major) is one of history’s most formative diseases and perhaps the deadliest.

Origins

Where did smallpox come from? Archaeological findings suggest smallpox and other diseases have a very long history. These diseases grew out of what sociologist Jonathan Kennedy calls “an epidemiological revolution.” This revolution followed hot on the heels of the Neolithic Revolution (c 10,000 to 8,000 BCE). This period saw some humans change from nomadic lifestyles to sedentary farm-based communities with more sustained interaction with domesticated animals. (Kennedy, 43). So, while we do not know the exact origins of smallpox, scholars have extrapolated its likely origins. Since it is a Zoonotic disease, closely related to cowpox found in animals like bovines and rodents, it likely grew out of the Neolithic period.

Early Cases.

Even with today’s sophisticated archeological methods, it is difficult to determine the first cases of smallpox. The scant written records and rudimentary scientific knowledge of ancient peoples’ diseases mean that potential cases of smallpox could also be other diseases, such as measles, the bubonic plague or typhus. Archeologists might have found evidence of instances of smallpox in ancient Egypt. Three mummies, including the young Pharoah Ramses V, who died in 1157 BC, were found with what looked like pockmarks. Written sources from Asia describe potential cases of smallpox in China (1122 BC) and India (1500 BC). Again, these are not definitive.

Smallpox and the Mediterranean

Whatever its specific origins, smallpox eventually spread throughout the world, enabled by denser populations and improvements in transportation technology that facilitated more human interactions through trade, migration and war. Egypt, a potential source of smallpox, sits south of the Mediterranean Sea, a hub of interaction. As historian David Abulafia points out, “The sea routes of the Mediterranean have always provided a means for the transmission of pandemics,” like the Justinian plague in the sixth century AD and the Black Death in the fourteenth century AD. (144)

Some scholars believe smallpox impacted the Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC), which saw Athens fight Sparta for regional supremacy. In 430 BC, the Plague of Athens devastated that city, killing a quarter of the population over three years and severely weakening the Athenian war effort, thus facilitating Sparta’s victory. (Kennedy, 60). Other scholars have suggested measles or the bubonic plague. It is difficult to discern since contemporaries, as Abulafia points out, “saw these events as divine punishment rather than pathologies.” (144) Thucydides is often cited for his observations of the Athenian plague but does not describe the disease symptoms in a manner that would verify it was smallpox.

For some, smallpox is the prime suspect behind the Antonine Plague (164-165 AD) in the Roman Empire during the reign of Marcus Aurelius (161-180 CE). Fatality estimates vary but may have been in the millions. Historian Mark Thompson and others suggest that soldiers brought the disease back home after fighting in Mesopotamia. Contemporary Greek physician Galen described the symptoms as “diarrhea, high fever, and the appearance of pustules on the skin after nine days.” (Kerhaw 211). By this time, the Roman Empire displayed vulnerabilities and epidemics such as the Antigone Plague, further weakening its resilience by disrupting the Roman economy, labour force, and army.

More Reliable Accounts

We find more reliable accounts of smallpox and other diseases as written records improve. However, only in the fourth century AD “can we find the first unmistakable description of smallpox in China. (Hopkins, 104). There is some debate about how it initially entered China. Some argued that it first came from the Huns, a nomadic tribe to the north. Hopkins, for instance, points to early accounts of what might be smallpox in China from around 250 BC and introduced by the Huns a few decades before the creation of the Great Wall. Some Chinese called it the “Hunpox” epidemic, reflecting their sense of its source. (Hopkins, 101) Again, the records are scant, so confirming that this “Hunpox” was smallpox is difficult. Other scholars challenge the “Hun origin” theory and suggest smallpox might have been introduced to China centuries later via India, along with the introduction of Buddhism around 65 AD. (Hopkins, 104).

Smallpox might have spread to the Korean peninsula around 48 AD. While Japan was separated from the mainland by water, the disease eventually reached the island country around 585 AD and wreaked havoc. Historian Charles Holcombe estimates that an epidemic in 735-737 AD may have killed a quarter of Japan’s population. (Holcombe, 118)

Smallpox became established as an “Old World Disease.”

Smallpox eventually migrated throughout Europe, a continent significantly less densely populated and travelled than Asia, the Near East, and the Mediterranean until the early modern era. Historian Frank Snowden and other scholars suggest that the virus spread during the Crusades of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, as soldiers and pilgrims travelled back and forth between Europe and the Levant, the general area of what is now Israel, Lebanon, and Syria (97, Snowden). Over time, as European populations increased and interregional interactions became more frequent, smallpox and other diseases became endemic.

Smallpox became endemic throughout most parts of Eurasia, or the “Old World.” Biologist Frank Fenner writes, “By 1000 AD, smallpox was probably endemic in the more densely populated Eurasian landmass from Japan to Spain and the African countries on the southern rim of the Mediterranean. (402). By the 14^th century, smallpox was established in Germany, Spain and France. By the latter half of the 16^th century, smallpox was endemic to Europe.

Smallpox, the “New World” and the Columbian Exchange

Smallpox finally made its way to the Americas in the sixteenth century. Advances in navigation and shipbuilding and a growing appetite for trade with the faraway lands of India and China compelled European powers to seek reliable sea routes to these markets. Christopher Columbus reached the Americas in 1492. Later voyages and settlements led to what Alfred Crosby called the “Columbian Exchange,” the transatlantic transmission of technologies, foods, and diseases.

As part of this exchange, smallpox served as the primary biological culprit (other Old World diseases like measles contributed) in an epidemiological onslaught that would lead to the death of more than 90% of the indigenous population of the Americas (60.5 million in 1500 to 6 million a century later).

This demise facilitated the eventual European domination of the “New World. (Kennedy, 127). Moreover, the decimation of the Indigenous population, coupled with malaria’s devastation of European settlers in the warmer parts of America, encouraged, from the late 17^th century onwards, the import of African slaves who had developed more immunity and so provided a more secure labour force. African slaves, travelling in tightly packed ships that served as incubators, also unwittingly spread smallpox and other diseases to the Americas.

Smallpox After 1600 AD

As the world became more interconnected through war, migration and trade, smallpox became endemic to many parts of the world and continued to impact human affairs. Snowden writes that in Europe during the 17^th and 18^th centuries, smallpox “replaced bubonic plague as the most feared of all killers.” (97). Most people became infected during their lifetimes. While indigenous people of the Americas suffered the worst devastations, Europeans still felt its deadly touch despite variolation and other mitigating factors, like improved public hygiene and better nutrition. People were more likely to die from infectious diseases than today’s leading causes of death, cardiovascular disease and cancer. (Berman, 13) Some estimates suggest smallpox caused a tenth of all European deaths during the 18^th century and “a third of all deaths among children younger than ten.” (Snowden 98). It was also the continent’s leading cause of blindness.

In Asia, smallpox shaped territorial competition and reduced local population numbers. In 1759, China’s Qing dynasty defeated the Western Mongols. Military prowess partially explains the outcome, but as historian Charles Holcombe writes, the Mongol’s demise might have been more from smallpox, “a disease to which Mongols were shockingly vulnerable.” (168, Holcombe).

As mentioned earlier, smallpox had wiped out a quarter of Japan’s population in 735-7 AD. Japan experienced many epidemics in the following centuries, particularly in its more densely populated regions. However, as populations spread to frontiers, so did smallpox. During the 19^th century, the disease spread to Northern Japan, with Japanese settlers migrating to Hokkaido, drastically reducing the minority Ainu population.

Smallpox also thrived in India. Jayant Banthia and Tim Dyson note that “case fatality in India from smallpox was high – in the vicinity of 25-30 percent in unprotected populations, higher than recent estimates for eighteenth-century Europe.” (676)

Edward Jenner and the First Vaccine (1796)

Edward Jenner created a smallpox vaccine (the first ever vaccine) in 1796, but it would take time to distribute globally. In the meantime, smallpox continued to thrive. The Franco-Prussian War triggered a smallpox pandemic of 1870–1875 that claimed 500,000 lives. Vaccination was mandatory in the Prussian army, but many French soldiers were not vaccinated, so smallpox outbreaks among French prisoners of war spread to the German civilian population and other parts of Europe.

This public health disaster ultimately inspired stricter legislation in Germany and England, though not in France. Smallpox continued to wreak havoc into the next century and “may have caused the death of as many as 300 million people in the 20^th century alone. (Khan and Darwez,21)

Conclusion.

Dr. Michael Osterholm’s description of smallpox as “one of the scariest monsters on earth” is not hyperbole. The disease killed billions and caused immeasurable suffering. Due to its adaptability and resilience, smallpox thrived on most continents. Its demographic devastation, most notably in the Americas, profoundly impacted human history.

It’s one weakness is that it can’t infect a person more than once, facilitating the effectiveness of vaccine treatment and the disease’s demise. The history of smallpox and other diseases offers valuable lessons and insights. We would be wise to heed them in a world with a growing population and greater interaction.

Bibliography

Alden, Dauril, and Joseph C. Miller. “Out of Africa: The Slave Trade and the Transmission of Smallpox to Brazil, 1560-1831.” The Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18, no. 2 (1987): 195–224. https://doi.org/10.2307/204281.

Banthia, Jayant, and Tim Dyson. “Smallpox in Nineteenth-Century India.” Population and Development Review 25, no. 4 (1999): 649–80. http://www.jstor.org/stable/172481.

Berman, Jonathan M. Anti-Vaxxers: How to Challenge a Misinformed Movement. Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press, 2020.

Chang, Chia-Feng. “Disease and Its Impact on Politics, Diplomacy, and the Military: The Case of Smallpox and the Manchus (1613–1795).” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 57, no. 2 (2002): 177–97. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24623679.

Fenner, Frank. “Smallpox: Emergence, Global Spread, and Eradication.” History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 15, no. 3 (1993): 397–420. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23331731.

Fenner, Frank. “SMALLPOX IN SOUTHEAST ASIA.” Crossroads: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 3, no. 2/3 (1987): 34–48. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40860242.

Holcombe, Charles. A History of East Asia: From the Origins of Civilization to the Twenty-First Century. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Hopkin, Donald R. The Greatest Killer: Smallpox in History. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2002.

AMALIE M. KASS. “Boston’s Historic Smallpox Epidemic:” Massachusetts Historical Review (MHR) 14 (2012): 1–51. https://doi.org/10.5224/masshistrevi.14.1.0001.

Kennedy, Jonathan. Pathogens: A History of the World in Eight Plagues. Toronto: Random House, 2023.

Kershaw, Stephen P. A Brief History of the Roman Empire: Rise and Fall.

Khan, Gazala, and Sazzad Parwez. “A Historical Narrative on Pandemic Patterns of Behavior and Belief.” Journal of Global Faultlines 9, no. 1 (2022): 21–32. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48676220.

Li, Yu, Darin S. Carroll, Shea N. Gardner, Matthew C. Walsh, Elizabeth A. Vitalis, and Inger K. Damon. “On the Origin of Smallpox: Correlating Variola Phylogenics with Historical Smallpox Records.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104, no. 40 (2007): 15787–92. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25449217.

Manley, Jennifer. “Measles and Ancient Plagues: A Note on New Scientific Evidence.” The Classical World 107, no. 3 (2014): 393–97. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24699810.

Martin, Sean. A Short History of Disease: Plagues, Poxes and Civilizations. Herts, UK: Pocket Essentials, 2015.

Mnookin, Seth. The Panic Virus: A True Story of Medicine, Science, and Fear. New York: Simon and Shuster, 2011.

Morens, David M., and Robert J. Littman. “Epidemiology of the Plague of Athens.” Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-) 122 (1992): 271–304. https://doi.org/10.2307/284374.

Pas, Remco van de. “Epidemics in the Colonial Era.” Globalization Paradox and the Coronavirus Pandemic. Clingendael Institute, 2020. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep24671.6.

Osterholm, Michael T. and Mark Olshaker. Deadliest Enemy: Our War Against Killer Germs. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2020.

Riley, James C. “Smallpox and American Indians Revisited.” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 65, no. 4 (2010): 445–77. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24631803.

Snowden, Frank M. Epidemics and Society: From the Black Death to the Present, Yale University Press, 2018

Sohal, Sukhdev Singh. “Revisiting Smallpox Epidemic in Punjab (c. 1850 – c. 1901).” Social Scientist 43, no. 1/2 (2015): 61–76. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24372964.

Thein, MM, LG GOH, and KH Phua. “The Smallpox Story: From Variolation to Victory.” Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health 2, no. 3 (1988): 203–10. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26720502.

Thomson, Mark. “Junior Division Winner: The Migration of Smallpox and Its Indelible Footprint on Latin American History.” The History Teacher 32, no. 1 (1998): 117–31. https://doi.org/10.2307/494425.

Vögele, Jörg, Luisa Rittershaus, and Katharina Schuler. “Epidemics and Pandemics – the Historical Perspective. Introduction.” Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung. Supplement, no. 33 (2021): 7–33. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27087273.

Warren, Christopher. “Could First Fleet Smallpox Infect Aborigines? – A Note.” Aboriginal History 31 (2007): 152–64. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24046734.

Britain and the Origins of the Industrial Revolution, Part 2: Population Growth and Improved Food Production

In Part 1 of our 7-part series on Britain and the origins of the Industrial Revolution, we introduced it as a time of gradual but fundamental change (transformation) in Britain from a dependency on organic resources and means of production to mechanized production using sources such as coal. Along the way, Britain became more urbanized and expanded its markets domestically and internationally, becoming the world’s foremost power by the early to middle of the 19^th century. How did this happen? What preconditions facilitated this transformation?

Part 2 examines one of these preconditions: Improved Farming and Population Growth.

Improved farming and population growth provided essential preconditions for industrialization. Factory owners would need more people to grow their labour force and to buy their products. More people required more food, and this growing demand hastened agricultural innovations that, in turn, facilitated population growth. During the 17^th century, farms gradually depended less on environmental whims and offered more predictable and productive yields. Before these changes, people lived according to a traditional cycle of population and productivity. When food production reached a limit based on available land and agricultural methods, the population reached a threshold, declined, and grew again until it reached production limits. This pattern stemmed from a system where agriculture involved subsistence for peasants and income for landlords and common lands were used for grazing livestock and fuel (e.g. wood).

Commercial Farming, Cash Crops and Enclosures

Various agricultural innovations drastically improved farm production and broke this cycle. One fundamental change was the development of market-oriented agriculture. Landowners, mainly nobles, increasingly fenced off common lands to create land enclosures focused on growing cash crops for sale and export rather than local consumption. Governments, who sought noble support and tax revenues, supported these measures against peasant resistance – sometimes with armed forces. This displaced peasants and many became wage earners on far or factories.

These cash crops created a greater demand for larger fields. Historian John Merriman writes, “Between 1750 and 1850 in Britain, 6 million acres – or one-fourth of the country’s cultivatable land – were incorporated into larger farms. (518) The trend toward commercial agriculture was well on its way.

Farming Innovations: Crop Rotation and Animal Husbandry

As farming became more commercialized, farmers became more specialized and adopted practices such as crop rotation. Crop rotation differed from conventional agriculture, which saw farmers plant the same crop in the same place every year while leaving some fields fallow for two or three years to replenish their nutrients. Problems arose as these crops drew the same nutrients out of the soil, thus depleting it. Moreover, pests and diseases could establish themselves more readily. Crop rotation addressed these problems. Planting different crops sequentially on the same land optimizes soil nutrients and helps prevent pests and weed infestations. For instance, a farmer might plant corn one season and beans the next.

Healthy soil and healthy crops drastically improved food production. Innovators like Robert Bakewell (1725-1795) improved animal husbandry, enhancing food supplies – particularly protein.

Technological Advances

Technological advances also increased productivity. Farmer Jethro Tull (1674-1741) created the seed drill that planted seeds in deep soil, a drastic improvement over simply casting seeds on or near the surface where they would be more vulnerable to the elements or animals. Iron plows allowed farmers to turn the soil more deeply.

Charles “Turnip” Townsend (1674-1738) learned how to cultivate sandy soil with fertilizer from the Dutch and expanded arable lands (Kagan 495).

More production and more food options.

Throughout the next century, these farming innovations meant fewer people could produce more food, and more food could be grown per acre. Improved food production also created more varied and calorie-rich diets –fundamental contributors to population growth. The potato and maize – two nutritious foods from the Americas played essential roles. Imported from the Americas, the potato became especially widespread throughout Europe. Donald Kagan writes, “On a single acre, a peasant family could grow enough potatoes for an entire year. (Kagan, 497). These local developments were bolstered by what Alfred Crosby called the “Columbian Exchange” – the exchange of food, animals, and disease between Europe and the Americas—from this, Europe gained maize, potatoes, sweet potatoes, and cod. Indentured servants and slaves – laboured to produce these essential foodstuffs.

Overall, production rates soared. Merriman points out, “England produced almost three times more grain in the 1830s than the previous century.” (Merriman 518) Besides feeding more people, farms produced more fodder for livestock and helped create a more reliable milk and meat source. More livestock also meant more fertilizer (manure). Fish like the cod harvested off Canada’s east coast offered another protein source.

Nutrition, Sanitation and Disease

Better nutrition went hand in hand with improved disease prevention and treatment. Diseases like tuberculosis, influenza and dysentery still took many lives but conditions generally improved as cities gradually improved water supplies and waste management. Medical practices only played a minor role until well into the 19^th century. However, Edward Jenner’s vaccines for smallpox in the 1790s helped contain lethal outbreaks, and vaccinations would help stave off other diseases in the next century.

Rapid Population Growth

Over the eighteenth century the turn of the century, the population of England and Wales increased from about 5.5. million to approximately 10 million and 20.9 million by 1850. (Cipolla, 29) Growing numbers in urban centers like Manchester provided cheaper labour for factories to flourish. Moreover, the combined factors of population growth and increased income per head led to more purchasing power and growing demand for products – – two essential factors for industrial growth.

Stay tuned for our next blog in our 7-part series on the origins of the Industrial Revolution in Britain.

Part 3: Access to Foreign Markets and Capital Investment

Six Reasons to Study History

At some point, in elementary and high school, you took a history course. The curriculum focused on your country or continent (e.g. European History). Being from Canada, I learned about the Fur Trade, French and English competition in North America, national and provincial politics, and a smattering of other topics.

However, no one told us why we studied history. We didn’t learn how studying the past could benefit us, enrich our lives and teach us skills to help us navigate careers and even our lives. School teachers omitted the most fundamental question: Why study history?

Perhaps addressing this fundamental question would evoke more interest and appreciation in the subject

Historians have written extensively on the importance of understanding the past. After careful consideration, we have distilled these explanations into six reasons to study history.

Understand the Present. “Everything,” Jules Benjamin writes, “that exists in the present has come out of the past.” Our material life, for instance, grew out of past developments. The Agricultural Revolution that began some 10,000 years led to farming, rising populations, and, as historians have recently pointed out, much of the environmental damage we contend with today. Technologies have changed our lives – papermaking in China, the Gutenberg printing press, irrigation, gunpower, and computers, to name a few. Politically, our borders, governing bodies, and values come out of the past. Democracy, a Greek concept, hails back thousands of years, as does Confucianism, a significant factor in Chinese politics and culture. Modern religious conflicts between the monotheistic religions – Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – can be better understood by delving into the past. Current issues around race, gender, class and many others can be traced back in time.

Understand Causation. As Peter Stearns and Marcus Collins write, causation is the “factors which promoted a change in the first place.” (33). Not surprisingly, causation is a contentious matter among historians. Regarding the decline of the Roman Empire, some historians emphasize external factors such as the growing determination and strength of the barbarians. In contrast, others have devoted more attention to internal factors such as corruption and financial mismanagement. Whatever their positions, contemporary historians tend to agree that “most major developments respond to several factors, that is, multiple causations (34). Lessons about causation allow us to analyze current events with a more critical eye. Conspiracy theorists, for instance, who point to Bill Gates or a secret New Order as the orchestraters of the COVID-19 pandemic, would be well served to study history and causation more carefully. A recommended read – David Hackett Fischer’s Historical Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought.

Situate Events in Context. Intrinsically linked to causation is context. Context, in short, is the set of conditions in which events unfold. Historians tell us that Serbian nationalist Gavrilo Princip’s assassination of Austria-Hungary’s Archduke Franz Ferdinand sparked the beginning of World War I. They also rightly assert we need to explore the conditions in which Princip shot the Archduke – Great Power rivalries, militarism, nationalism, and various other factors came into play – to develop a fuller understanding of what happened. Understanding context helps us understand events (past and present) in sophisticated rather than superficial ways.

Challenge Abuses of History. Somepeople use history to further their agendas. Hitler and the Nazis rewrote history to justify their actions. Among other past abuses, they identified a longstanding Jewish conspiracy to undermine German society while espousing their contrived record of Aryan accomplishment and superiority. We need to challenge these abuses. As Margaret McMillan writes, “Politicians and other leaders too often get away with misusing or abusing history for their own ends because the rest of us do not know enough to challenge them. (36) This is especially relevant now, in what some call the age of disinformation. Politicians like Donald Trump casually refer to a great America of the past or fabricates “facts” about election fraud or other issues to reinforce his position. Historical training, as Stearns and Collins point out, “helps people to handle different kinds of evidence and to sort fact from opinion and disinformation.” (9). After all, who wants to be lead astray by those informed by partisanship, opportunism, or lazy thinking?

Pleasure. The love of learning!Some people approach history simply for the joy of learning more about the past – tracing family trees, visiting exotic locations and past eras can be exhilarating and enriching.

Practical Skills. People often overlook the practical skills involved in historical study. You learn how to research topics and interpret sources for their biases and background. In the process, you assess various viewpoints and interpretations. Communicating your views helps you develop critical thinking, organization, as well as your writing and verbal skills. Universities, for instance, apply these skills to a variety of topics. Entrepreneurs and business students examine case studies of businesses past and present to gain insights into how companies succeed and fail. Law schools refer to pasts decisions – precedence

There are many other reasons to study history that we will explore in future blogs. John Tosh writes that “historical education achieves a number of goals at once: it trains the mind, enlarges the sympathies and provides a much-needed perspective on some of the most pressing problems of our time. (35) These factors, coupled with the pure pleasure of learning about our past, offer poignant reasons to explore history.

Enjoy!

Selected Bibliography.

Benjamin, Jules R. A Student’s Guide to History. Boston: St. Martins, 2001.

Collins, Marc and Peter N. Stearns. Why Study History? London: London Publishing Partnership, 2020.

Fischer, David Hackett. Historians’ Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought. New York: Harper Perennial, 1970.

McMillan, Margaret. The Uses and Abuses of History. Toronto: Penguin Group, 2008.

Stearns, Peter N. et al. Knowing, Teaching, and Learning History. New York: New York University Press, 2000.

Tosh, John. The Pursuit of History: Aims, Methods and New Directions in the Study of Modern History. Essex: Pearson Education Limited, 1999.

Wineberg, Sam. Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 2001.

What was the “Agricultural Revolution”?

Try this. Ask people to name three revolutions. Depending on their background, they might cite the American and French Revolutions of the nineteenth century. Others will mention the Russian Revolution of 1917 or the Industrial Revolution. How many cited the Agricultural Revolution? Likely not many. Ironic, since the agricultural revolution stands as one of the more fundamental and far-reaching developments in human history. Peter Stearns calls it a “great watershed in human history.” (Stearns 16) Ronald Wright argues that “In the magnitude of its consequences, no other invention rivals farming…” (Wright, 45)

So, what is the agricultural revolution? When did it happen? How did it change how humans lived? It is a far-reaching and complex topic but let’s try to cover the essentials. “Essentially,” the agricultural revolution transitioned nomadic hunting-gathering societies to human societies that grew their food and for some domesticated animals. This development is revolutionary because it fundamentally changed how people lived. Hunting and gathering societies depended on edible wild plants and animals, whereas agricultural communities controlled and shaped their environment (to some extent) to grow crops and domesticate animals. Besides planting crops, agricultural societies changed their landscapes through irrigation and canal construction.

When Did it Happen? Where did it happen first? The above chronology offers a general timeline. Essentially we are looking at 9000 BCE to 3500 BCE. Agriculture on a large scale first happened in various river valleys (e.g. Nile River, Indus Valley, Mesopotamia, Mesoamerica) that offered reliable water sources and fertile soil. Different crops grew throughout the world. Egypt produced wheat and barley. People living on what became the Greek peninsula grew grapes and olives. China cultivated rice

There are two points to remember. One is that this revolution happened over a very long time – 1000s of years. Secondly, agriculture occurred independently in various parts of the world and at different times. Mesoamerica, for instance, had no contact with Eurasia and alone learned to cultivate crops like maize and squash. Later, as populations grew and interacted more through trade, agricultural practices and technologies would be shared and accelerate agricultural production over larger areas.

Nomadic to Sedentary and Permanent Dwellings. Tending to crops requires people to stay in one area. Hence the term “sedentary agriculture.” Nomadic people might remain in one place for some time, but as soon as the supply of wild plants and or game ran low or migrated, they were on the move. Permanent dwellings offered space to store food and house families.

Growing Populations, Social and Political Specialization By increasing food production, the agricultural revolution also facilitated drastic population growth. Agriculture could sustain more people in a smaller area. As Greg Woolf writes, “5 square miles cold support a farming village of 150 people. (Woolf 58). A more reliable food source also contributed to higher life expectancy. These growing population centers became the first steps toward cities, city-states and even empires. A food surplus allowed people to adopt more specialized roles in families, politics and religious life.

What motivated hunters and gatherers to adopt agriculture?Great question. After all, farming required more effort than hunting and gathering. Accordingly, people likely adopted agriculture very gradually. Probably, circumstances pushed them in this direction. Climate change, for example, might have encouraged big game to migrate north of the Middle East and other river valley areas. Overhunting also might have significantly diminished the wild animal population. Another factor might be growing populations that required alternative food supply offered by hunting and gathering.

Historians, of course, differ on how the Agricultural Revolution came about, how it evolved and its impact. Concerning the latter, some historians have lauded it as one of the seminal movements of human progress. Others see it as the catalyst for current problems such as overpopulation, consumerism, rapid species extinction and climate change. Whatever their position, they agree that the Agricultural Revolution is one of the most fundamental developments in human history.

Select Bibliography.

Havari, Yural Noah. Sapiens. A Brief History of Humankind. Toronto: McLelland and Stewart, 2014.

McClellan III, James E. and Harold Dorn. Science and Technology in World History: An Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 2015

Roberts, J.M. The Penguin History of the World. New York: Penguin Books Ltd, 1987.

Stearns, Peter et al. World Civilizations: The Global Experience. Third Edition. New York: Longman, 2001.

Woolf, Greg, ed. Ancient Civilizations. London: Duncan Baird Publishers Ltd., 2005.

Wright, Ronald. A Short History of Progress. Toronto: House of Anansi Press, 2004.