Englishtranslationcopyright©2014byYuvalNoahHarari

Clotheditionpublished2014PublishedsimultaneouslyintheUnitedKingdombyHarvillSeckerFirstpublishedinHebrewin

Israelin2011byKinneret,Zmora-Bitan,Dvir

SignalBooksisanimprintofMcClelland&Stewart,adivisionofRandomHouseofCanadaLimited,aPenguinRandomHouseCompany

Allrightsreserved.Theuseofanypartofthispublicationreproduced,transmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recording,orotherwise,orstoredina

retrievalsystem,withoutthepriorwrittenconsentofthepublisher–or,incaseofphotocopyingorotherreprographiccopying,alicencefromtheCanadianCopyrightLicensingAgency–isan

infringementofthecopyrightlaw.

LibraryandArchivesCanadaCataloguinginPublication

Harari,YuvalN.,authorSapiens:abriefhistoryofhumankind/YuvalNoahHarari.

Includesbibliographicalreferences.ISBN978-0-7710-3850-1(bound).–ISBN978-0-77103852-5(html)

1.Civilization–History.2.Humanbeings–History.I.Title.

CB25.H372014909C2014-904589-1

C2014-904590-5

Jacketdesign©SuzanneDeanPictureresearchbyCarolineWood

MapsbyNeilGower

McClelland&Stewart,adivisionofRandomHouseofCanadaLimited,

aPenguinRandomHouseCompanywww.randomhouse.ca

v3.1

Inlovingmemoryofmyfather,ShlomoHarari

Contents

CoverTitlePageCopyrightDedication

TimelineofHistory

PartOneTheCognitiveRevolution

1AnAnimalofNoSignificance2TheTreeofKnowledge3ADayintheLifeofAdamandEve4TheFlood

PartTwoTheAgriculturalRevolution

5History’sBiggestFraud6BuildingPyramids7MemoryOverload8ThereisNoJusticeinHistory

PartThreeTheUnificationofHumankind

9TheArrowofHistory10TheScentofMoney11ImperialVisions12TheLawofReligion13TheSecretofSuccess

PartFourTheScientificRevolution

14TheDiscoveryofIgnorance15TheMarriageofScienceandEmpire16TheCapitalistCreed17TheWheelsofIndustry18APermanentRevolution19AndTheyLivedHappilyEverAfter20TheEndofHomoSapiens

Afterword:TheAnimalthatBecameaGod

NotesAcknowledgementsImagecredits

TimelineofHistory

YearsBeforethePresent

13.5billion

Matterandenergyappear.Beginningofphysics.Atomsandmoleculesappear.Beginningofchemistry.

4.5billion

FormationofplanetEarth.

3.8billion

Emergenceoforganisms.Beginningofbiology.

6million

Lastcommongrandmotherofhumansandchimpanzees.

2.5million

EvolutionofthegenusHomoinAfrica.Firststonetools.

2million

HumansspreadfromAfricatoEurasia.Evolutionofdifferenthumanspecies.

500,000 NeanderthalsevolveinEuropeandtheMiddleEast.

300,000 Dailyusageoffire.

200,000 HomosapiensevolvesinEastAfrica.

70,000TheCognitiveRevolution.Emergenceoffictivelanguage.Beginningofhistory.SapiensspreadoutofAfrica.

45,000 SapienssettleAustralia.ExtinctionofAustralianmegafauna.

30,000 ExtinctionofNeanderthals.

16,000 SapienssettleAmerica.ExtinctionofAmericanmegafauna.

13,000ExtinctionofHomofloresiensis.Homosapienstheonlysurvivinghumanspecies.

12,000TheAgriculturalRevolution.Domesticationofplantsandanimals.Permanentsettlements.

5,000 Firstkingdoms,scriptandmoney.Polytheisticreligions.

4,250 Firstempire–theAkkadianEmpireofSargon.

2,500

Inventionofcoinage–auniversalmoney.ThePersianEmpire–auniversalpoliticalorder‘forthebenefitofallhumans’.BuddhisminIndia–auniversaltruth‘toliberateallbeingsfromsuffering’.

2,000HanEmpireinChina.RomanEmpireintheMediterranean.Christianity.

1,400 Islam.

500

TheScientificRevolution.Humankindadmitsitsignoranceandbeginstoacquireunprecedentedpower.EuropeansbegintoconquerAmericaandtheoceans.Theentireplanetbecomesasinglehistoricalarena.Theriseofcapitalism.

200TheIndustrialRevolution.Familyandcommunityarereplacedbystateandmarket.Massiveextinctionofplantsandanimals.

ThePresent

HumanstranscendtheboundariesofplanetEarth.Nuclearweaponsthreatenthesurvivalofhumankind.Organismsareincreasinglyshapedbyintelligentdesignratherthannaturalselection.

TheFuture

Intelligentdesignbecomesthebasicprincipleoflife?Homosapiensisreplacedbysuperhumans?

PartOneTheCognitiveRevolution

1.Ahumanhandprintmadeabout30,000yearsago,onthewalloftheChauvet-Pont-d’ArcCaveinsouthernFrance.Somebodytriedtosay,‘Iwashere!’

1

AnAnimalofNoSignificance

ABOUT 13.5 BILLION YEARS AGO, MATTER, energy, time and spacecame intobeing inwhat is knownas theBigBang.The storyof thesefundamentalfeaturesofouruniverseiscalledphysics.About300,000yearsaftertheirappearance,matterandenergystarted

tocoalesceintocomplexstructures,calledatoms,whichthencombinedintomolecules. The story of atoms,molecules and their interactions iscalledchemistry.About3.8billionyearsago,onaplanetcalledEarth,certainmolecules

combined to form particularly large and intricate structures calledorganisms.Thestoryoforganismsiscalledbiology.About 70,000 years ago, organisms belonging to the species Homo

sapiens started to form evenmore elaborate structures called cultures.Thesubsequentdevelopmentofthesehumanculturesiscalledhistory.Three important revolutions shaped the course of history: the

Cognitive Revolution kick-started history about 70,000 years ago. TheAgriculturalRevolutionspeditupabout12,000yearsago.TheScientificRevolution, which got under way only 500 years ago, may well endhistory and start something completely different. This book tells thestory of how these three revolutions have affected humans and theirfelloworganisms.

Therewere humans long before therewas history. Animalsmuch likemodern humans first appeared about 2.5 million years ago. But forcountless generations they did not stand out from the myriad otherorganismswithwhichtheysharedtheirhabitats.

On a hike in East Africa 2 million years ago, you might well haveencountered a familiar cast of human characters: anxious motherscuddling their babies and clutches of carefree children playing in themud; temperamentalyouths chafingagainst thedictatesof societyandweary elders who just wanted to be left in peace; chest-thumpingmachostryingtoimpressthelocalbeautyandwiseoldmatriarchswhohad already seen it all. These archaic humans loved, played, formedclose friendships and competed for status and power – but so didchimpanzees, baboons and elephants. Therewas nothing special aboutthem.Nobody,leastofallhumansthemselves,hadanyinklingthattheirdescendantswouldonedaywalk on themoon, split the atom, fathomthegeneticcodeandwritehistorybooks.Themost important thing toknowaboutprehistorichumans is that theywere insignificant animalswith no more impact on their environment than gorillas, fireflies orjellyfish.Biologists classifyorganisms into species.Animalsare said tobelongtothesamespeciesiftheytendtomatewitheachother,givingbirthtofertile offspring. Horses and donkeys have a recent common ancestorand sharemany physical traits. But they show little sexual interest inone another. Theywillmate if induced to do so – but their offspring,calledmules,aresterile.MutationsindonkeyDNAcanthereforenevercross over to horses, or vice versa. The two types of animals areconsequently considered two distinct species, moving along separateevolutionarypaths.Bycontrast,abulldogandaspanielmaylookverydifferent, but they aremembers of the same species, sharing the sameDNApool.Theywillhappilymateandtheirpuppieswillgrowuptopairoffwithotherdogsandproducemorepuppies.Species that evolved from a common ancestor are bunched togetherunder the heading ‘genus’ (plural genera). Lions, tigers, leopards andjaguarsaredifferent specieswithin thegenusPanthera.Biologists labelorganismswithatwo-partLatinname,genusfollowedbyspecies.Lions,for example, are called Panthera leo, the species leo of the genusPanthera.Presumably,everyonereadingthisbookisaHomosapiens–thespeciessapiens(wise)ofthegenusHomo(man).Generaintheirturnaregroupedintofamilies,suchasthecats(lions,cheetahs,housecats),thedogs(wolves,foxes,jackals)andtheelephants(elephants,mammoths,mastodons).Allmembersofafamilytracetheir

lineagebacktoafoundingmatriarchorpatriarch.Allcats,forexample,from the smallest house kitten to the most ferocious lion, share acommonfelineancestorwholivedabout25millionyearsago.Homosapiens,too,belongstoafamily.Thisbanalfactusedtobeoneofhistory’smostcloselyguardedsecrets.Homosapienslongpreferredtoviewitselfassetapartfromanimals,anorphanbereftoffamily,lackingsiblings or cousins, and most importantly, without parents. But that’sjust not the case. Like it or not, we are members of a large andparticularly noisy family called the great apes. Our closest livingrelatives include chimpanzees, gorillas and orang-utans. Thechimpanzeesaretheclosest.Just6millionyearsago,asinglefemaleapehad two daughters. One became the ancestor of all chimpanzees, theotherisourowngrandmother.

SkeletonsintheCloset

Homosapienshaskepthiddenanevenmoredisturbingsecret.Notonlydowepossessanabundanceofuncivilisedcousins,onceuponatimewehad quite a few brothers and sisters aswell.We are used to thinkingaboutourselvesas theonlyhumans,because for the last10,000years,ourspecieshasindeedbeentheonlyhumanspeciesaround.Yettherealmeaningofthewordhumanis‘ananimalbelongingtothegenusHomo’,and there used to be many other species of this genus besidesHomosapiens.Moreover,asweshallseeinthelastchapterofthebook,inthenot sodistant futurewemightagainhave to contendwithnon-sapienshumans. To clarify this point, I will often use the term ‘Sapiens’ todenotemembers of the speciesHomosapiens,while reserving the term‘human’torefertoallextantmembersofthegenusHomo.HumansfirstevolvedinEastAfricaabout2.5millionyearsagofromanearliergenusofapescalledAustralopithecus,whichmeans ‘SouthernApe’.About2millionyearsago,someofthesearchaicmenandwomenleft their homeland to journey through and settle vast areas of NorthAfrica,EuropeandAsia.SincesurvivalinthesnowyforestsofnorthernEurope required different traits than those needed to stay alive inIndonesia’s steaming jungles, human populations evolved in different

directions. The result was several distinct species, to each of whichscientistshaveassignedapompousLatinname.

2.Oursiblings,accordingtospeculativereconstructions(lefttoright):Homorudolfensis(EastAfrica);Homoerectus(EastAsia);andHomoneanderthalensis

(EuropeandwesternAsia).Allarehumans.

Humans in Europe and western Asia evolved into Homoneanderthalensis (‘Man from theNeander Valley), popularly referred tosimplyas‘Neanderthals’.Neanderthals,bulkierandmoremuscularthanus Sapiens, were well adapted to the cold climate of Ice AgewesternEurasia. The more eastern regions of Asia were populated by Homoerectus, ‘UprightMan’,whosurvived there forclose to2millionyears,makingitthemostdurablehumanspeciesever.Thisrecordisunlikelyto be broken even by our own species. It is doubtful whether Homosapienswillstillbearoundathousandyearsfromnow,so2millionyearsisreallyoutofourleague.On the islandof Java, in Indonesia, livedHomosoloensis, ‘Man from

the Solo Valley’, who was suited to life in the tropics. On anotherIndonesian island – the small island of Flores – archaic humansunderwentaprocessofdwarfing.HumansfirstreachedFloreswhenthesea level was exceptionally low, and the island was easily accessiblefromthemainland.Whentheseasroseagain,somepeopleweretrappedontheisland,whichwaspoorinresources.Bigpeople,whoneedalotoffood, died first. Smaller fellows survived much better. Over the

generations, thepeopleofFloresbecamedwarves.Thisuniquespecies,knownbyscientistsasHomofloresiensis, reachedamaximumheightofonlyonemetreandweighednomorethantwenty-fivekilograms.Theywere nevertheless able to produce stone tools, and even managedoccasionallytohuntdownsomeoftheisland’selephants–though,tobefair,theelephantswereadwarfspeciesaswell.In 2010 another lost sibling was rescued from oblivion, whenscientistsexcavatingtheDenisovaCaveinSiberiadiscoveredafossilisedfinger bone. Genetic analysis proved that the finger belonged to apreviously unknownhuman species,whichwas namedHomo denisova.Whoknowshowmanylostrelativesofoursarewaitingtobediscoveredinothercaves,onotherislands,andinotherclimes.While thesehumanswere evolving inEurope andAsia, evolution inEastAfrica did not stop. The cradle of humanity continued to nurturenumerous new species, such as Homo rudolfensis, ‘Man from LakeRudolf’,Homoergaster, ‘WorkingMan’,andeventuallyourownspecies,whichwe’veimmodestlynamedHomosapiens,‘WiseMan’.Themembersofsomeofthesespeciesweremassiveandothersweredwarves.Somewerefearsomehuntersandothersmeekplant-gatherers.Somelivedonlyonasingleisland,whilemanyroamedovercontinents.But all of them belonged to the genus Homo. They were all humanbeings.It’s a common fallacy to envision these species as arranged in astraight line of descent, with Ergaster begetting Erectus, ErectusbegettingtheNeanderthals,andtheNeanderthalsevolvingintous.Thislinear model gives the mistaken impression that at any particularmomentonlyonetypeofhumaninhabitedtheearth,andthatallearlierspeciesweremerely oldermodels of ourselves. The truth is that fromabout2millionyearsagountilaround10,000yearsago,theworldwashome, at one and the same time, to several human species. Andwhynot?Todaytherearemanyspeciesoffoxes,bearsandpigs.Theearthofahundredmillenniaagowaswalkedbyatleastsixdifferentspeciesofman. It’s our current exclusivity, not that multi-species past, that ispeculiar–andperhapsincriminating.Aswewillshortlysee,weSapienshavegoodreasonstorepressthememoryofoursiblings.

TheCostofThinking

Despitetheirmanydifferences,allhumanspeciesshareseveraldefiningcharacteristics.Mostnotably,humanshaveextraordinarily largebrainscomparedtootheranimals.Mammalsweighingsixtykilogramshaveanaverage brain size of 200 cubic centimetres. The earliest men andwomen, 2.5 million years ago, had brains of about 600 cubiccentimetres.ModernSapienssportabrainaveraging1,200–1,400cubiccentimetres.Neanderthalbrainswereevenbigger.That evolution should select for larger brains may seem to us like,

well,ano-brainer.Wearesoenamouredofourhighintelligencethatweassumethatwhenitcomestocerebralpower,moremustbebetter.Butif thatwere the case, the feline familywould alsohaveproduced catswho coulddo calculus.Why is genusHomo the only one in the entireanimalkingdomtohavecomeupwithsuchmassivethinkingmachines?Thefact is thata jumbobrain isa jumbodrainonthebody. It’snot

easytocarryaround,especiallywhenencasedinsideamassiveskull.It’sevenharder to fuel. InHomosapiens, thebrainaccounts forabout2–3percentoftotalbodyweight,butitconsumes25percentofthebody’senergywhenthebodyisatrest.Bycomparison,thebrainsofotherapesrequire only 8 per cent of rest-time energy. Archaic humans paid fortheirlargebrainsintwoways.Firstly,theyspentmoretimeinsearchoffood. Secondly, their muscles atrophied. Like a government divertingmoneyfromdefencetoeducation,humansdivertedenergyfrombicepstoneurons.It’shardlyaforegoneconclusionthatthisisagoodstrategyforsurvivalonthesavannah.Achimpanzeecan’twinanargumentwithaHomosapiens,buttheapecanripthemanapartlikearagdoll.Todayourbigbrainspayoffnicely,becausewecanproducecarsand

guns thatenableus tomovemuch faster thanchimps,andshoot themfromasafedistanceinsteadofwrestling.Butcarsandgunsarearecentphenomenon. For more than 2 million years, human neural networkskeptgrowingandgrowing,butapartfromsomeflintknivesandpointedsticks, humans had precious little to show for it. What then droveforwardtheevolutionofthemassivehumanbrainduringthose2millionyears?Frankly,wedon’tknow.Another singular human trait is that we walk upright on two legs.

Standingup, it’seasier toscan thesavannah forgameorenemies,andarms thatareunnecessary for locomotionare freed forotherpurposes,likethrowingstonesorsignalling.Themorethingsthesehandscoulddo,themoresuccessfultheirownerswere,soevolutionarypressurebroughtaboutanincreasingconcentrationofnervesandfinelytunedmusclesinthe palms and fingers. As a result, humans can perform very intricatetasks with their hands. In particular, they can produce and usesophisticated tools. The first evidence for tool production dates fromabout2.5millionyears ago, and themanufacture anduseof tools arethecriteriabywhicharchaeologistsrecogniseancienthumans.Yet walking upright has its downside. The skeleton of our primate

ancestors developed for millions of years to support a creature thatwalked on all fours and had a relatively small head. Adjusting to anuprightpositionwasquiteachallenge,especiallywhen the scaffoldinghad to support an extra-large cranium. Humankind paid for its loftyvisionandindustrioushandswithbackachesandstiffnecks.Women paid extra. An upright gait required narrower hips,

constricting the birth canal – and this just when babies’ heads weregettingbiggerandbigger.Deathinchildbirthbecameamajorhazardforhumanfemales.Womenwhogavebirthearlier,whenthe infantsbrainandheadwerestillrelativelysmallandsupple,faredbetterandlivedtohave more children. Natural selection consequently favoured earlierbirths. And, indeed, compared to other animals, humans are bornprematurely,whenmanyoftheirvitalsystemsarestillunderdeveloped.Acoltcantrotshortlyafterbirth;akittenleavesitsmothertoforageonits own when it is just a few weeks old. Human babies are helpless,dependentformanyyearsontheireldersforsustenance,protectionandeducation.This fact has contributed greatly both to humankind’s extraordinary

social abilities and to its unique social problems. Lone mothers couldhardlyforageenoughfoodfortheiroffspringandthemselveswithneedychildren in tow. Raising children required constant help from otherfamily members and neighbours. It takes a tribe to raise a human.Evolution thus favoured those capable of forming strong social ties. Inaddition,sincehumansarebornunderdeveloped,theycanbeeducatedand socialised to a far greater extent than any other animal. Mostmammals emerge from the womb like glazed earthenware emerging

from a kiln – any attempt at remoulding will scratch or break them.Humansemergefromthewomblikemoltenglassfromafurnace.Theycanbespun,stretchedandshapedwithasurprisingdegreeoffreedom.This iswhy todaywecaneducateourchildren tobecomeChristianorBuddhist,capitalistorsocialist,warlikeorpeace-loving.

*

Weassumethatalargebrain,theuseoftools,superiorlearningabilitiesandcomplexsocialstructuresarehugeadvantages.Itseemsself-evidentthat these havemade humankind themost powerful animal on earth.But humans enjoyed all of these advantages for a full 2million yearsduringwhichtheyremainedweakandmarginalcreatures.Thushumanswholivedamillionyearsago,despite theirbigbrainsandsharpstonetools,dweltinconstantfearofpredators,rarelyhuntedlargegame,andsubsistedmainlybygatheringplants,scoopingupinsects,stalkingsmallanimals, and eating the carrion left behind by other more powerfulcarnivores.Oneofthemostcommonusesofearlystonetoolswastocrackopenbonesinordertogettothemarrow.Someresearchersbelievethiswasour original niche. Just aswoodpeckers specialise in extracting insectsfrom the trunks of trees, the first humans specialised in extractingmarrowfrombones.Whymarrow?Well,supposeyouobserveaprideoflions take down and devour a giraffe. Youwait patiently until they’redone.But it’s stillnotyour turnbecause first thehyenasand jackals–andyoudon’tdareinterferewiththemscavengetheleftovers.Onlythenwouldyouandyourbanddareapproachthecarcass,lookcautiouslyleftandright–anddigintotheedibletissuethatremained.This is a key to understanding our history and psychology. GenusHomo’spositioninthefoodchainwas,untilquiterecently,solidlyinthemiddle. For millions of years, humans hunted smaller creatures andgathered what they could, all the while being hunted by largerpredators. It was only 400,000 years ago that several species of manbegan to hunt large game on a regular basis, and only in the last100,000years–withtheriseofHomosapiens–thatmanjumpedtothetopofthefoodchain.That spectacular leap from the middle to the top had enormous

consequences.Otheranimalsatthetopofthepyramid,suchaslionsandsharks,evolvedintothatpositionverygradually,overmillionsofyears.Thisenabledtheecosystemtodevelopchecksandbalancesthatpreventlions and sharks from wreaking too much havoc. As lions becamedeadlier, so gazelles evolved to run faster, hyenas to cooperate better,and rhinoceroses to be more bad-tempered. In contrast, humankindascendedtothetopsoquicklythattheecosystemwasnotgiventimetoadjust. Moreover, humans themselves failed to adjust. Most toppredators of the planet are majestic creatures. Millions of years ofdominion have filled themwith self-confidence. Sapiens by contrast ismorelikeabananarepublicdictator.Havingsorecentlybeenoneoftheunderdogsof the savannah,weare fullof fearsandanxietiesoverourposition,whichmakesusdoubly cruel anddangerous.Manyhistoricalcalamities, from deadly wars to ecological catastrophes, have resultedfromthisover-hastyjump.

ARaceofCooks

Asignificant stepon theway to the topwas thedomesticationof fire.Somehumanspeciesmayhavemadeoccasionaluseof fireasearlyas800,000 years ago. By about 300,000 years ago, Homo erectus,Neanderthals and the forefathers ofHomo sapienswere using fire on adailybasis.Humansnowhadadependablesourceoflightandwarmth,and a deadly weapon against prowling lions. Not long afterwards,humans may even have started deliberately to torch theirneighbourhoods.Acarefullymanagedfirecouldturnimpassablebarrenthicketsintoprimegrasslandsteemingwithgame.Inaddition,oncethefire died down, Stone Age entrepreneurs could walk through thesmokingremainsandharvestcharcoaledanimals,nutsandtubers.Butthebestthingfiredidwascook.Foodsthathumanscannotdigestin their natural forms – such as wheat, rice and potatoes – becamestaples of our diet thanks to cooking. Fire not only changed food’schemistry, it changed its biology as well. Cooking killed germs andparasitesthatinfestedfood.Humansalsohadafareasiertimechewingand digesting old favourites such as fruits, nuts, insects and carrion if

theywerecooked.Whereaschimpanzeesspendfivehoursadaychewingrawfood,asinglehoursufficesforpeopleeatingcookedfood.Theadventofcookingenabledhumanstoeatmorekindsoffood,to

devotelesstimetoeating,andtomakedowithsmallerteethandshorterintestines. Some scholars believe there is a direct link between theadventofcooking,theshorteningofthehumanintestinaltrack,andthegrowth of the human brain. Since long intestines and large brains arebothmassiveenergyconsumers,it’shardtohaveboth.Byshorteningtheintestines and decreasing their energy consumption, cookinginadvertentlyopenedthewaytothejumbobrainsofNeanderthalsandSapiens.1Firealsoopenedthefirstsignificantgulfbetweenmanandtheother

animals.Thepowerofalmostall animalsdependson theirbodies: thestrength of their muscles, the size of their teeth, the breadth of theirwings.Thoughtheymayharnesswindsandcurrents,theyareunabletocontrolthesenaturalforces,andarealwaysconstrainedbytheirphysicaldesign. Eagles, for example, identify thermal columns rising from theground, spread their giant wings and allow the hot air to lift themupwards. Yet eagles cannot control the location of the columns, andtheir maximum carrying capacity is strictly proportional to theirwingspan.Whenhumans domesticated fire, they gained control of an obedient

andpotentiallylimitlessforce.Unlikeeagles,humanscouldchoosewhenandwhereto igniteaflame,andtheywereabletoexploit fire foranynumberoftasks.Mostimportantly,thepoweroffirewasnotlimitedbytheform,structureorstrengthofthehumanbody.Asinglewomanwithaflintorfirestickcouldburndownanentireforestinamatterofhours.Thedomesticationoffirewasasignofthingstocome.

OurBrothers’Keepers

Despite the benefits of fire, 150,000 years ago humans were stillmarginalcreatures.Theycouldnowscareawaylions,warmthemselvesduringcoldnights,andburndowntheoccasionalforest.Yetcountingallspeciestogether,therewerestillnomorethanperhapsamillionhumans

livingbetweentheIndonesianarchipelagoandtheIberianpeninsula,amereblipontheecologicalradar.Our own species, Homo sapiens, was already present on the world

stage, but so far it was just minding its own business in a corner ofAfrica. We don’t know exactly where and when animals that can beclassified as Homo sapiens first evolved from some earlier type ofhumans,butmostscientistsagreethatby150,000yearsago,EastAfricawaspopulatedbySapiensthatlookedjustlikeus.Ifoneofthemturnedup in a modern morgue, the local pathologist would notice nothingpeculiar.Thankstotheblessingsoffire,theyhadsmallerteethandjawsthan theirancestors,whereas theyhadmassivebrains,equal in size toours.Scientists also agree that about 70,000 years ago, Sapiens fromEast

Africa spread into theArabian peninsula, and from there they quicklyoverrantheentireEurasianlandmass.WhenHomo sapiens landed in Arabia, most of Eurasia was already

settled by other humans. What happened to them? There are twoconflictingtheories.The‘InterbreedingTheory’tellsastoryofattraction,sexandmingling.As theAfrican immigrants spreadaround theworld,they bred with other human populations, and people today are theoutcomeofthisinterbreeding.Forexample,whenSapiensreachedtheMiddleEastandEurope,they

encounteredtheNeanderthals.ThesehumansweremoremuscularthanSapiens,hadlargerbrains,andwerebetteradaptedtocoldclimes.Theyusedtoolsandfire,weregoodhunters,andapparentlytookcareoftheirsick and infirm. (Archaeologists have discovered the bones ofNeanderthalswholivedformanyyearswithseverephysicalhandicaps,evidence that theywere cared forby their relatives.)Neanderthals areoftendepictedincaricaturesasthearchetypicalbrutishandstupid‘cavepeople’,butrecentevidencehaschangedtheirimage.According to the Interbreeding Theory, when Sapiens spread into

Neanderthal lands, Sapiens bred with Neanderthals until the twopopulationsmerged. If this is the case, then today’s Eurasians are notpureSapiens.TheyareamixtureofSapiensandNeanderthals.Similarly,whenSapiensreachedEastAsia,theyinterbredwiththelocalErectus,sotheChineseandKoreansareamixtureofSapiensandErectus.The opposing view, called the ‘Replacement Theory’ tells a very

different story – one of incompatibility, revulsion, and perhaps evengenocide. According to this theory, Sapiens and other humans haddifferent anatomies, and most likely different mating habits and evenbodyodours.Theywouldhavehadlittlesexualinterestinoneanother.AndevenifaNeanderthalRomeoandaSapiensJulietfellinlove,theycould not produce fertile children, because the genetic gulf separatingthe two populations was already unbridgeable. The two populationsremained completely distinct, andwhen theNeanderthals died out, orwere killed off, their genes died with them. According to this view,Sapiens replaced all the previous human populations withoutmergingwiththem.Ifthatisthecase,thelineagesofallcontemporaryhumanscanbetracedback,exclusively,toEastAfrica,70,000yearsago.Weareall‘pureSapiens’.

Map1.Homosapiensconquerstheglobe.

Alothingesonthisdebate.Fromanevolutionaryperspective,70,000yearsisarelativelyshortinterval.IftheReplacementTheoryiscorrect,all living humans have roughly the same genetic baggage, and racialdistinctionsamongthemarenegligible.ButiftheInterbreedingTheoryis right, there might well be genetic differences between Africans,EuropeansandAsiansthatgobackhundredsofthousandsofyears.Thisispoliticaldynamite,whichcouldprovidematerial forexplosive racial

theories.In recent decades the Replacement Theory has been the common

wisdominthefield.Ithadfirmerarchaeologicalbacking,andwasmorepoliticallycorrect(scientistshadnodesiretoopenupthePandora’sboxofracismbyclaimingsignificantgeneticdiversityamongmodernhumanpopulations). But that ended in 2010, when the results of a four-yearefforttomaptheNeanderthalgenomewerepublished.Geneticistswereable to collect enough intactNeanderthal DNA from fossils tomake abroad comparison between it and the DNA of contemporary humans.Theresultsstunnedthescientificcommunity.Itturnedoutthat1–4percentoftheuniquehumanDNAofmodern

populations in theMiddleEastandEurope isNeanderthalDNA.That’snot a huge amount, but it’s significant. A second shock came severalmonths later, when DNA extracted from the fossilised finger fromDenisovawasmapped.The resultsproved thatup to6percentof theuniquehumanDNAofmodernMelanesiansandAboriginalAustraliansisDenisovanDNA.If these results are valid – and it’s important to keep in mind that

furtherresearchisunderwayandmayeitherreinforceormodifytheseconclusions– the Interbreedersgotat least some things right.But thatdoesn’tmean that theReplacementTheory is completelywrong. SinceNeanderthalsandDenisovanscontributedonlya smallamountofDNAto our present-day genome, it is impossible to speak of a ‘merger’betweenSapiensandotherhumanspecies.Althoughdifferencesbetweenthemwere not large enough to completely prevent fertile intercourse,theyweresufficienttomakesuchcontactsveryrare.HowthenshouldweunderstandthebiologicalrelatednessofSapiens,

Neanderthals and Denisovans? Clearly, they were not completelydifferentspecieslikehorsesanddonkeys.Ontheotherhand,theywerenot just different populations of the same species, like bulldogs andspaniels. Biological reality is not black and white. There are alsoimportant grey areas. Every two species that evolved from a commonancestor, such as horses and donkeys, were at one time just twopopulationsofthesamespecies, likebulldogsandspaniels.Theremusthavebeenapointwhenthetwopopulationswerealreadyquitedifferentfromoneanother,butstillcapableonrareoccasionsofhavingsexandproducing fertile offspring. Then another mutation severed this last

connectingthread,andtheywenttheirseparateevolutionaryways.It seems that about 50,000 years ago, Sapiens, Neanderthals and

Denisovans were at that borderline point. They were almost, but notquite, entirely separate species. As we shall see in the next chapter,Sapienswerealreadyverydifferent fromNeanderthalsandDenisovansnot only in their genetic code and physical traits, but also in theircognitiveandsocialabilities,yetitappearsitwasstilljustpossible,onrare occasions, for a Sapiens and a Neanderthal to produce a fertileoffspring.Sothepopulationsdidnotmerge,butafewluckyNeanderthalgenes did hitch a ride on the Sapiens Express. It is unsettling – andperhapsthrilling–tothinkthatweSapienscouldatonetimehavesexwithananimalfromadifferentspecies,andproducechildrentogether.

3.AspeculativereconstructionofaNeanderthalchild.GeneticevidencehintsthatatleastsomeNeanderthalsmayhavehadfairskinandhair.

But if theNeanderthals, Denisovans and other human species didn’tmergewithSapiens,whydidtheyvanish?OnepossibilityisthatHomosapiens drove them to extinction. Imagine a Sapiens band reaching aBalkanvalleywhereNeanderthalshad lived forhundredsof thousandsofyears.Thenewcomersbegantohuntthedeerandgatherthenutsandberries that were the Neanderthals’ traditional staples. Sapiens weremoreproficienthuntersandgatherers–thankstobettertechnologyand

superior social skills – so they multiplied and spread. The lessresourceful Neanderthals found it increasingly difficult to feedthemselves.Theirpopulationdwindledandtheyslowlydiedout,exceptperhapsforoneortwomemberswhojoinedtheirSapiensneighbours.Another possibility is that competition for resources flared up intoviolenceandgenocide.ToleranceisnotaSapienstrademark.Inmoderntimes, a small difference in skin colour, dialect or religion has beenenough to prompt one group of Sapiens to set about exterminatinganothergroup.WouldancientSapienshavebeenmoretoleranttowardsanentirelydifferenthumanspecies? Itmaywellbe thatwhenSapiensencounteredNeanderthals, the resultwas the first andmost significantethnic-cleansingcampaigninhistory.Whicheverwayithappened, theNeanderthals(andtheotherhumanspecies)poseoneofhistory’sgreatwhatifs.ImaginehowthingsmighthaveturnedouthadtheNeanderthalsorDenisovanssurvivedalongsideHomo sapiens. What kind of cultures, societies and political structureswouldhaveemerged inaworldwhereseveraldifferenthumanspeciescoexisted? How, for example, would religious faiths have unfolded?Would the book of Genesis have declared that Neanderthals descendfrom Adam and Eve, would Jesus have died for the sins of theDenisovans,andwouldtheQur’anhavereservedseatsinheavenforallrighteous humans, whatever their species? Would Neanderthals havebeenabletoserveintheRomanlegions,orinthesprawlingbureaucracyof imperial China? Would the American Declaration of Independencehold as a self-evident truth that all members of the genus Homo arecreated equal?Would KarlMarx have urgedworkers of all species tounite?Overthepast10,000years,Homosapienshasgrownsoaccustomedtobeing the only human species that it’s hard for us to conceive of anyother possibility. Our lack of brothers and sisters makes it easier toimaginethatwearetheepitomeofcreation,andthatachasmseparatesusfromtherestoftheanimalkingdom.WhenCharlesDarwinindicatedthat Homo sapiens was just another kind of animal, people wereoutraged. Even todaymany refuse to believe it.Had theNeanderthalssurvived, would we still imagine ourselves to be a creature apart?Perhaps this is exactlywhyour ancestorswipedout theNeanderthals.Theyweretoofamiliartoignore,buttoodifferenttotolerate.

Whether Sapiens are toblameornot, no soonerhad theyarrivedat anew location than the native population became extinct. The lastremains ofHomo soloensis are dated to about 50,000 years ago.Homodenisova disappeared shortly thereafter. Neanderthals made their exitroughly 30,000 years ago. The last dwarf-like humans vanished fromFloresIslandabout12,000yearsago.Theyleftbehindsomebones,stonetools,afewgenesinourDNAandalotofunansweredquestions.Theyalsoleftbehindus,Homosapiens,thelasthumanspecies.WhatwastheSapiens’secretofsuccess?Howdidwemanagetosettleso rapidly in somanydistant and ecologically differenthabitats?Howdidwepushallotherhumanspecies intooblivion?Whycouldn’teventhe strong,brainy, cold-proofNeanderthals surviveouronslaught?Thedebatecontinuestorage.Themost likelyansweristheverythingthatmakes the debate possible:Homo sapiens conquered the world thanksabovealltoitsuniquelanguage.

2

TheTreeofKnowledge

IN THE PREVIOUS CHAPTER WE SAW THAT although Sapiens hadalreadypopulatedEastAfrica150,000yearsago,theybegantooverruntherestofplanetEarthanddrivetheotherhumanspeciestoextinctiononlyabout70,000yearsago.Intheinterveningmillennia,eventhoughthesearchaicSapienslookedjustlikeusandtheirbrainswereasbigasours, they did not enjoy any marked advantage over other humanspecies, did not produce particularly sophisticated tools, and did notaccomplishanyotherspecialfeats.In fact, in the first recorded encounter between Sapiens and

Neanderthals, the Neanderthals won. About 100,000 years ago, someSapiens groups migrated north to the Levant, which was Neanderthalterritory,butfailedtosecureafirmfooting.Itmighthavebeenduetonasty natives, an inclement climate, or unfamiliar local parasites.Whatever the reason, the Sapiens eventually retreated, leaving theNeanderthalsasmastersoftheMiddleEast.Thispoorrecordofachievementhasledscholarstospeculatethatthe

internal structureof thebrainsof theseSapienswasprobablydifferentfromours.They looked likeus,but their cognitiveabilities – learning,remembering,communicating–werefarmorelimited.TeachingsuchanancientSapiensEnglish,persuadinghimofthetruthofChristiandogma,or getting him to understand the theory of evolution would probablyhavebeenhopelessundertakings.Conversely,wewouldhavehadaveryhardtimelearninghislanguageandunderstandinghiswayofthinking.But then, beginning about 70,000 years ago, Homo sapiens started

doingveryspecialthings.AroundthatdateSapiensbandsleftAfricafor

a second time. This time they drove the Neanderthals and all otherhumanspeciesnotonlyfromtheMiddleEast,but fromthefaceof theearth.Within a remarkably short period, Sapiens reached Europe andEastAsia.About45,000yearsago,theysomehowcrossedtheopenseaand landed in Australia – a continent hitherto untouched by humans.The period from about 70,000 years ago to about 30,000 years agowitnessed the invention of boats, oil lamps, bows and arrows andneedles (essential for sewingwarmclothing).The firstobjects thatcanreliablybecalledartdatefromthisera(seetheStadellion-manonthispage),asdoesthefirstclearevidenceforreligion,commerceandsocialstratification.Most researchers believe that these unprecedented accomplishmentswere the product of a revolution in Sapiens’ cognitive abilities. Theymaintain that the people who drove the Neanderthals to extinction,settled Australia, and carved the Stadel lion-man were as intelligent,creativeandsensitiveasweare.IfweweretocomeacrosstheartistsoftheStadelCave,wecould learn their languageandtheyours.We’dbeable to explain to themeverythingweknow– from the adventures ofAlice inWonderland to the paradoxes of quantum physics – and theycouldteachushowtheirpeopleviewtheworld.Theappearanceofnewwaysofthinkingandcommunicating,between70,000and30,000yearsago,constitutestheCognitiveRevolution.Whatcaused it?We’renot sure. Themost commonlybelieved theory arguesthataccidentalgeneticmutationschangedtheinnerwiringofthebrainsof Sapiens, enabling them to think in unprecedented ways and tocommunicateusinganaltogethernewtypeoflanguage.WemightcallittheTreeofKnowledgemutation.WhydiditoccurinSapiensDNAratherthaninthatofNeanderthals? Itwasamatterofpurechance,as faraswecantell.But it’smore importanttounderstandtheconsequencesofthe Tree of Knowledgemutation than its causes.What was so specialaboutthenewSapienslanguagethatitenabledustoconquertheworld?*Itwasnotthefirstlanguage.Everyanimalhassomekindoflanguage.Even insects, such as bees and ants, know how to communicate insophisticatedways, informingoneanotherof thewhereaboutsof food.Neitherwasitthefirstvocallanguage.Manyanimals,includingallapeandmonkeyspecies,havevocallanguages.Forexample,greenmonkeys

usecallsofvariouskindstocommunicate.Zoologistshaveidentifiedonecall that means, ‘Careful! An eagle!’ A slightly different call warns,‘Careful!Alion!’Whenresearchersplayedarecordingofthefirstcalltoa group ofmonkeys, themonkeys stoppedwhat theywere doing andlookedupwardsinfear.Whenthesamegroupheardarecordingofthesecondcall,thelionwarning,theyquicklyscrambledupatree.Sapienscanproducemanymoredistinctsoundsthangreenmonkeys,butwhalesand elephants have equally impressive abilities. A parrot can sayanythingAlbertEinsteincouldsay,aswellasmimickingthesoundsofphonesringing,doorsslammingandsirenswailing.WhateveradvantageEinstein had over a parrot, it wasn’t vocal. What, then, is so specialaboutourlanguage?Themost common answer is that our language is amazingly supple.We can connect a limited number of sounds and signs to produce aninfinite number of sentences, each with a distinct meaning. We canthereby ingest, store and communicate a prodigious amount ofinformationaboutthesurroundingworld.Agreenmonkeycanyelltoitscomrades,‘Careful!Alion!’Butamodernhumancantellherfriendsthatthismorning,nearthebendintheriver,shesawaliontrackingaherdofbison.Shecanthendescribetheexactlocation,includingthedifferentpaths leading to the area. With this information, the members of herband can put their heads together and discuss whether they ought toapproachtheriverinordertochaseawaythelionandhuntthebison.Asecondtheoryagreesthatouruniquelanguageevolvedasameansof sharing information about the world. But the most importantinformation thatneeded tobe conveyedwas abouthumans,not aboutlionsandbison.Ourlanguageevolvedasawayofgossiping.Accordingto this theory Homo sapiens is primarily a social animal. Socialcooperationisourkeyforsurvivalandreproduction.Itisnotenoughforindividualmenandwomentoknowthewhereaboutsoflionsandbison.It’s much more important for them to know who in their band hateswhom,whoissleepingwithwhom,whoishonest,andwhoisacheat.

4.Anivoryfigurineofa‘lion-man’(or‘lioness-woman’)fromtheStadelCaveinGermany(c.32,000yearsago).Thebodyishuman,buttheheadisleonine.Thisisoneofthefirstindisputableexamplesofart,andprobablyofreligion,andoftheabilityofthehuman

mindtoimaginethingsthatdonotreallyexist.

Theamountofinformationthatonemustobtainandstoreinordertotrack the ever-changing relationships of a few dozen individuals isstaggering. (In a band of fifty individuals, there are 1,225 one-on-onerelationships,andcountlessmorecomplexsocialcombinations.)Allapesshowakeen interest in such social information,but theyhave trouble

gossiping effectively. Neanderthals and archaicHomo sapiens probablyalso had a hard time talking behind each other’s backs – a muchmaligned ability which is in fact essential for cooperation in largenumbers.Thenew linguistic skills thatmodernSapiensacquiredaboutseventymillenniaagoenabledthemtogossipforhoursonend.Reliableinformation aboutwho couldbe trustedmeant that small bands couldexpand into largerbands, andSapiens coulddevelop tighter andmoresophisticatedtypesofcooperation.1The gossip theory might sound like a joke, but numerous studiessupport it. Even today the vast majority of human communication –whether in the formof emails, phone calls ornewspaper columns – isgossip. It comes so naturally to us that it seems as if our languageevolvedforthisverypurpose.DoyouthinkthathistoryprofessorschataboutthereasonsforWorldWarOnewhentheymeetforlunch,orthatnuclear physicists spend their coffee breaks at scientific conferencestalkingaboutquarks?Sometimes.Butmoreoften,theygossipabouttheprofessorwhocaughtherhusbandcheating,orthequarrelbetweentheheadof thedepartmentand thedean,or the rumours thata colleagueused his research funds to buy a Lexus. Gossip usually focuses onwrongdoings.Rumour-mongersaretheoriginalfourthestate,journalistswho inform society about and thus protect it from cheats andfreeloaders.

Mostlikely,boththegossiptheoryandthethere-is-a-lion-near-the-rivertheoryarevalid.Yetthetrulyuniquefeatureofourlanguageisnotitsability to transmit information about men and lions. Rather, it’s theability to transmit informationabout things thatdonotexistatall.Asfarasweknow,onlySapienscantalkaboutentirekindsofentitiesthattheyhaveneverseen,touchedorsmelled.Legends,myths,godsandreligionsappearedforthefirsttimewiththeCognitiveRevolution.Manyanimalsandhumanspeciescouldpreviouslysay,‘Careful!Alion!’ThankstotheCognitiveRevolution,Homosapiensacquiredtheabilitytosay,‘Thelionistheguardianspiritofourtribe.’ThisabilitytospeakaboutfictionsisthemostuniquefeatureofSapienslanguage.It’s relatively easy to agree that onlyHomo sapiens can speak about

things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things beforebreakfast.Youcouldneverconvinceamonkeytogiveyouabananabypromisinghimlimitlessbananasafterdeathinmonkeyheaven.Butwhyis it important? After all, fiction can be dangerously misleading ordistracting.Peoplewhogototheforestlookingforfairiesandunicornswouldseemtohavelesschanceofsurvivalthanpeoplewhogolookingformushroomsanddeer.Andifyouspendhoursprayingtonon-existingguardian spirits, aren’t you wasting precious time, time better spentforaging,fightingandfornicating?Butfictionhasenabledusnotmerelytoimaginethings,buttodoso

collectively.Wecanweavecommonmyths suchas thebiblical creationstory, the Dreamtime myths of Aboriginal Australians, and thenationalist myths of modern states. Such myths give Sapiens theunprecedentedability to cooperate flexibly in largenumbers.Antsandbeescanalsoworktogetherinhugenumbers,buttheydosoinaveryrigid manner and only with close relatives. Wolves and chimpanzeescooperatefarmoreflexiblythanants,buttheycandosoonlywithsmallnumbers of other individuals that they know intimately. Sapiens cancooperate in extremely flexible ways with countless numbers ofstrangers. That’s why Sapiens rule the world, whereas ants eat ourleftoversandchimpsarelockedupinzoosandresearchlaboratories.

TheLegendofPeugeot

Our chimpanzee cousins usually live in small troops of several dozenindividuals. They form close friendships, hunt together and fightshouldertoshoulderagainstbaboons,cheetahsandenemychimpanzees.Their social structure tends to be hierarchical. The dominantmember,who is almost always amale, is termed the ‘alphamale’.Othermalesandfemalesexhibittheirsubmissiontothealphamalebybowingbeforehim while making grunting sounds, not unlike human subjectskowtowing before a king. The alpha male strives to maintain socialharmonywithinhistroop.Whentwoindividualsfight,hewillinterveneand stop the violence. Less benevolently, he might monopoliseparticularlycovetedfoodsandpreventlower-rankingmalesfrommating

withthefemales.Whentwomalesarecontestingthealphaposition,theyusuallydoso

by forming extensive coalitions of supporters, both male and female,from within the group. Ties between coalition members are based onintimate daily contact – hugging, touching, kissing, grooming andmutual favours. Just as human politicians on election campaigns goaroundshakinghandsandkissingbabies,soaspirantstothetoppositionin a chimpanzee group spend much time hugging, back-slapping andkissing baby chimps. The alpha male usually wins his position notbecauseheisphysicallystronger,butbecauseheleadsalargeandstablecoalition. These coalitions play a central part not only during overtstruggles for thealphaposition,but inalmost allday-to-dayactivities.Membersofacoalitionspendmoretimetogether,sharefood,andhelponeanotherintimesoftrouble.There are clear limits to the size of groups that can be formed and

maintainedinsuchaway.Inordertofunction,allmembersofagroupmust know each other intimately. Two chimpanzees who have nevermet,neverfought,andneverengagedinmutualgroomingwillnotknowwhethertheycantrustoneanother,whetheritwouldbeworthwhiletohelp one another, and which of them ranks higher. Under naturalconditions,atypicalchimpanzeetroopconsistsofabouttwentytofiftyindividuals. As the number of chimpanzees in a troop increases, thesocial order destabilises, eventually leading to a rupture and theformationofanewtroopbysomeoftheanimals.Onlyinahandfulofcases have zoologists observed groups larger than a hundred. Separategroups seldom cooperate, and tend to compete for territory and food.Researchers have documented prolongedwarfare between groups, andevenonecaseof ‘genocidal’ activity inwhichone troop systematicallyslaughteredmostmembersofaneighbouringband.2Similarpatternsprobablydominatedthesociallivesofearlyhumans,

including archaic Homo sapiens. Humans, like chimps, have socialinstinctsthatenabledourancestorstoformfriendshipsandhierarchies,and to hunt or fight together. However, like the social instincts ofchimps, thoseofhumanswereadaptedonly for small intimategroups.When the group grew too large, its social order destabilised and theband split. Even if a particularly fertile valley could feed 500 archaicSapiens, therewasnoway that somany strangers could live together.

Howcouldtheyagreewhoshouldbeleader,whoshouldhuntwhere,orwhoshouldmatewithwhom?Inthewakeof theCognitiveRevolution,gossiphelpedHomo sapiensto form larger and more stable bands. But even gossip has its limits.Sociological research has shown that the maximum ‘natural’ size of agroup bonded by gossip is about 150 individuals. Most people canneither intimately know, nor gossip effectively about, more than 150humanbeings.Even today, a critical threshold in human organisations fallssomewhere around this magic number. Below this threshold,communities, businesses, social networks and military units canmaintain themselves based mainly on intimate acquaintance andrumour-mongering. There is no need for formal ranks, titles and lawbookstokeeporder.3Aplatoonofthirtysoldiersorevenacompanyofahundred soldiers can function well on the basis of intimate relations,with a minimum of formal discipline. A well-respected sergeant canbecome ‘king of the company and exercise authority even overcommissionedofficers.Asmallfamilybusinesscansurviveandflourishwithoutaboardofdirectors,aCEOoranaccountingdepartment.But once the threshold of 150 individuals is crossed, things can nolonger work that way. You cannot run a division with thousands ofsoldiers the sameway you run a platoon. Successful family businessesusuallyfaceacrisiswhentheygrowlargerandhiremorepersonnel.Iftheycannotreinventthemselves,theygobust.How did Homo sapiens manage to cross this critical threshold,eventually founding cities comprising tens of thousands of inhabitantsand empires ruling hundreds ofmillions? The secretwas probably theappearance of fiction. Large numbers of strangers can cooperatesuccessfullybybelievingincommonmyths.Any large-scale human cooperation – whether a modern state, amedieval church, an ancient city or an archaic tribe – is rooted incommon myths that exist only in peoples collective imagination.Churches are rooted in common religious myths. Two Catholics whohavenevermetcanneverthelessgotogetheroncrusadeorpoolfundstobuild ahospital because theybothbelieve thatGodwas incarnated inhuman flesh and allowed Himself to be crucified to redeem our sins.Statesarerootedincommonnationalmyths.TwoSerbswhohavenever

metmight risk their lives to saveoneanotherbecausebothbelieve inthe existence of the Serbian nation, the Serbian homeland and theSerbian flag. Judicial systems are rooted in common legalmyths. Twolawyerswhohavenevermetcanneverthelesscombineeffortstodefendacompletestrangerbecausetheybothbelieveintheexistenceof laws,justice,humanrights–andthemoneypaidoutinfees.Yetnoneof these thingsexistsoutside the stories thatpeople inventandtelloneanother.Therearenogodsintheuniverse,nonations,nomoney, nohuman rights, no laws, andno justice outside the commonimaginationofhumanbeings.Peopleeasilyunderstandthat‘primitives’cementtheirsocialorderbybelieving in ghosts and spirits, and gathering each fullmoon todancetogether around the campfire. What we fail to appreciate is that ourmoderninstitutionsfunctiononexactlythesamebasis.Takeforexampletheworldofbusinesscorporations.Modernbusiness-peopleandlawyersare, in fact, powerful sorcerers.Theprincipaldifferencebetween themand tribal shamans is thatmodern lawyers tell far stranger tales. ThelegendofPeugeotaffordsusagoodexample.

AniconthatsomewhatresemblestheStadellion-manappearstodayoncars, trucks and motorcycles from Paris to Sydney. It’s the hoodornament thatadornsvehiclesmadebyPeugeot,oneof theoldestandlargestofEurope’scarmakers.PeugeotbeganasasmallfamilybusinessinthevillageofValentigney,just300kilometresfromtheStadelCave.Todaythecompanyemploysabout200,000peopleworldwide,mostofwhomarecompletestrangerstoeachother.Thesestrangerscooperatesoeffectively that in 2008 Peugeot produced more than 1.5 millionautomobiles,earningrevenuesofabout55billioneuros.In what sense can we say that Peugeot SA (the company’s officialname)exists?TherearemanyPeugeotvehicles,buttheseareobviouslynot the company. Even if every Peugeot in the world weresimultaneously junkedandsold for scrapmetal,PeugeotSAwouldnotdisappear. It would continue to manufacture new cars and issue itsannualreport.Thecompanyownsfactories,machineryandshowrooms,and employs mechanics, accountants and secretaries, but all thesetogetherdonotcomprisePeugeot.Adisastermightkilleverysingleone

ofPeugeot’semployees,andgoontodestroyallofitsassemblylinesandexecutive offices. Even then, the company could borrow money, hirenew employees, build new factories and buy newmachinery. Peugeothas managers and shareholders, but neither do they constitute thecompany.All themanagers could be dismissed and all its shares sold,butthecompanyitselfwouldremainintact.

5.ThePeugeotLion

Itdoesn’tmeanthatPeugeotSAisinvulnerableorimmortal.Ifajudgewere to mandate the dissolution of the company, its factories wouldremain standing and its workers, accountants, managers andshareholders would continue to live – but Peugeot SA wouldimmediately vanish. In short, Peugeot SA seems to have no essentialconnectiontothephysicalworld.Doesitreallyexist?Peugeotisafigmentofourcollectiveimagination.Lawyerscallthisa

‘legal fiction’. It can’t be pointed at; it is not a physical object. But itexistsasalegalentity.Justlikeyouorme,itisboundbythelawsofthecountries in which it operates. It can open a bank account and ownproperty. It pays taxes, and it can be sued and even prosecutedseparatelyfromanyofthepeoplewhoownorworkforit.Peugeotbelongs toaparticulargenreof legal fictionscalled ‘limited

liability companies’. The idea behind such companies is amonghumanity’s most ingenious inventions. Homo sapiens lived for untoldmillenniawithoutthem.Duringmostofrecordedhistorypropertycouldbeownedonlyby flesh-and-bloodhumans, thekind that stoodon two

legs and had big brains. If in thirteenth-century France Jean set up awagon-manufacturingworkshop,hehimselfwasthebusiness.Ifawagonhe’d made broke down a week after purchase, the disgruntled buyerwouldhavesuedJeanpersonally.IfJeanhadborrowed1,000goldcoinsto set uphisworkshop and the business failed, hewould have had torepaythe loanbysellinghisprivateproperty–hishouse,hiscow,hisland.Hemight evenhavehad to sellhis children into servitude. If hecouldn’t cover the debt, he could be thrown in prison by the state orenslaved by his creditors. He was fully liable, without limit, for allobligationsincurredbyhisworkshop.If youhad livedback then, youwouldprobablyhave thought twice

before you opened an enterprise of your own. And indeed this legalsituationdiscouragedentrepreneurship.Peoplewereafraidtostartnewbusinessesand takeeconomic risks. Ithardly seemedworth taking thechancethattheirfamiliescouldenduputterlydestitute.This is why people began collectively to imagine the existence of

limitedliabilitycompanies.Suchcompanieswerelegallyindependentofthe peoplewho set them up, or investedmoney in them, ormanagedthem.Overthelastfewcenturiessuchcompanieshavebecomethemainplayersintheeconomicarena,andwehavegrownsousedtothemthatwe forget they exist only in our imagination. In theUS, the technicalterm fora limited liability company is a ‘corporation’,which is ironic,becausethetermderivesfrom‘corpus’ (‘body’ inLatin)–theonethingthese corporations lack. Despite their having no real bodies, theAmerican legal system treats corporations as legal persons, as if theywereflesh-and-bloodhumanbeings.And so did the French legal system back in 1896, when Armand

Peugeot,whohadinheritedfromhisparentsametalworkingshopthatproducedsprings,sawsandbicycles,decidedtogointotheautomobilebusiness.Tothatend,hesetupalimitedliabilitycompany.Henamedthecompanyafterhimself,butitwasindependentofhim.Ifoneofthecarsbrokedown,thebuyercouldsuePeugeot,butnotArmandPeugeot.Ifthecompanyborrowedmillionsoffrancsandthenwentbust,ArmandPeugeotdidnotoweitscreditorsasinglefranc.Theloan,afterall,hadbeengiventoPeugeot,thecompany,nottoArmandPeugeot,theHomosapiens. Armand Peugeot died in 1915. Peugeot, the company, is stillaliveandwell.

How exactly did Armand Peugeot, the man, create Peugeot, thecompany?Inmuchthesamewaythatpriestsandsorcerershavecreatedgodsanddemonsthroughouthistory,andinwhichthousandsofFrenchcurés were still creating Christ’s body every Sunday in the parishchurches.Itallrevolvedaroundtellingstories,andconvincingpeopletobelievethem.InthecaseoftheFrenchcurés,thecrucialstorywasthatofChrist’s life anddeath as toldby theCatholicChurch.According tothis story, if aCatholic priest dressed in his sacred garments solemnlysaid the right words at the right moment, mundane bread and wineturned intoGod’s fleshandblood.Thepriestexclaimed ‘Hocest corpusmeum!’(Latinfor‘Thisismybody!’)andhocuspocus–thebreadturnedintoChrist’s flesh. Seeing that the priest had properly and assiduouslyobservedalltheprocedures,millionsofdevoutFrenchCatholicsbehavedasifGodreallyexistedintheconsecratedbreadandwine.InthecaseofPeugeotSAthecrucialstorywastheFrenchlegalcode,

aswrittenbytheFrenchparliament.AccordingtotheFrenchlegislators,ifacertifiedlawyerfollowedalltheproperliturgyandrituals,wrotealltherequiredspellsandoathsonawonderfullydecoratedpieceofpaper,and affixed his ornate signature to the bottom of the document, thenhocuspocus–anewcompanywasincorporated.Whenin1896ArmandPeugeotwantedtocreatehiscompany,hepaidalawyertogothroughallthesesacredprocedures.Oncethelawyerhadperformedalltherightrituals and pronounced all the necessary spells and oaths, millions ofupright French citizens behaved as if the Peugeot company reallyexisted.Tellingeffectivestoriesisnoteasy.Thedifficultyliesnotintellingthe

story, but in convincing everyone else to believe it. Much of historyrevolvesaroundthisquestion:howdoesoneconvincemillionsofpeopleto believe particular stories about gods, or nations, or limited liabilitycompanies? Yet when it succeeds, it gives Sapiens immense power,because itenablesmillionsofstrangerstocooperateandworktowardscommongoals.Just tryto imaginehowdifficult itwouldhavebeentocreatestates,orchurches,orlegalsystemsifwecouldspeakonlyaboutthingsthatreallyexist,suchasrivers,treesandlions.

Over the years, people havewoven an incredibly complex network of

stories.Withinthisnetwork,fictionssuchasPeugeotnotonlyexist,butalsoaccumulateimmensepower.Thekindsofthingsthatpeoplecreatethrough this network of stories are known in academic circles as‘fictions’, ‘socialconstructs’,or ‘imaginedrealities’.Animaginedrealityisnot a lie. I liewhen I say that there is a lionnear the riverwhen Iknowperfectlywellthatthereisnolionthere.Thereisnothingspecialaboutlies.Greenmonkeysandchimpanzeescanlie.Agreenmonkey,forexample,hasbeenobservedcalling‘Careful!Alion!’whentherewasnolionaround.Thisalarmconveniently frightenedawayafellowmonkeywhohadjustfoundabanana,leavingtheliarallalonetostealtheprizeforitself.Unlikelying,animaginedrealityissomethingthateveryonebelieves

in, and as long as this communal belief persists, the imagined realityexerts force in the world. The sculptor from the Stadel Cave maysincerelyhavebelievedintheexistenceofthelion-manguardianspirit.Some sorcerers are charlatans, but most sincerely believe in theexistenceofgodsanddemons.Mostmillionairessincerelybelieveintheexistenceofmoneyand limited liabilitycompanies.Mosthuman-rightsactivistssincerelybelieveintheexistenceofhumanrights.Noonewaslying when, in 2011, the UN demanded that the Libyan governmentrespectthehumanrightsofitscitizens,eventhoughtheUN,Libyaandhumanrightsareallfigmentsofourfertileimaginations.EversincetheCognitiveRevolution,Sapienshasthusbeenlivingina

dual reality.On theonehand, theobjective realityof rivers, treesandlions;andontheotherhand,theimaginedrealityofgods,nationsandcorporations.As timewentby, the imagined realitybecameevermorepowerful, so that today the very survival of rivers, trees and lionsdepends on the grace of imagined entities such as gods, nations andcorporations.

BypassingtheGenome

The ability to create an imagined reality out of words enabled largenumbersofstrangerstocooperateeffectively.Butitalsodidsomethingmore.Since large-scalehumancooperation isbasedonmyths, theway

people cooperate can be altered by changing the myths – by tellingdifferent stories. Under the right circumstances myths can changerapidly.In1789theFrenchpopulationswitchedalmostovernightfrombelieving in the myth of the divine right of kings to believing in themyth of the sovereignty of the people. Consequently,ever since theCognitiveRevolutionHomosapienshasbeenabletoreviseitsbehaviourrapidly in accordancewith changingneeds. This opened a fast lane ofcultural evolution, bypassing the traffic jams of genetic evolution.Speedingdownthisfastlane,Homosapienssoonfaroutstrippedallotherhumanandanimalspeciesinitsabilitytocooperate.Thebehaviourofothersocialanimalsisdeterminedtoalargeextent

by their genes. DNA is not an autocrat. Animal behaviour is alsoinfluencedbyenvironmentalfactorsandindividualquirks.Nevertheless,inagivenenvironment,animalsofthesamespecieswilltendtobehaveinasimilarway.Significantchangesinsocialbehaviourcannotoccur,ingeneral,withoutgeneticmutations.Forexample,commonchimpanzeeshave a genetic tendency to live in hierarchical groups headed by analphamale.Membersofacloselyrelatedchimpanzeespecies,bonobos,usually live inmore egalitarian groups dominated by female alliances.Female common chimpanzees cannot take lessons from their bonoborelativesandstageafeministrevolution.Malechimpscannotgatherinaconstitutionalassembly toabolish theofficeofalphamaleanddeclarethat from here on out all chimps are to be treated as equals. Suchdramaticchanges inbehaviourwouldoccuronly if somethingchangedinthechimpanzees’DNA.For similar reasons, archaichumansdidnot initiateany revolutions.

As far aswe can tell, changes in social patterns, the invention of newtechnologies and the settlement of alienhabitats resulted fromgeneticmutations and environmental pressures more than from culturalinitiatives.Thisiswhyittookhumanshundredsofthousandsofyearstomake thesesteps.Twomillionyearsago,geneticmutations resulted inthe appearance of a new human species called Homo erectus. Itsemergence was accompanied by the development of a new stone tooltechnology,nowrecognisedasadefiningfeatureofthisspecies.AslongasHomo erectus did not undergo further genetic alterations, its stonetoolsremainedroughlythesame–forcloseto2millionyears!In contrast, ever since the Cognitive Revolution, Sapiens have been

abletochangetheirbehaviourquickly,transmittingnewbehaviourstofuturegenerationswithoutanyneedofgeneticorenvironmentalchange.Asaprimeexample,considertherepeatedappearanceofchildlesselites,suchas theCatholicpriesthood,BuddhistmonasticordersandChineseeunuchbureaucracies.Theexistenceofsuchelitesgoesagainstthemostfundamental principles of natural selection, since these dominantmembersofsocietywillinglygiveupprocreation.Whereaschimpanzeealpha males use their power to have sex with as many females aspossible–andconsequentlysirealargeproportionoftheirtroop’syoung– the Catholic alphamale abstains completely from sexual intercourseand childcare. This abstinence does not result from uniqueenvironmental conditions such as a severe lack of food or want ofpotentialmates.Norisittheresultofsomequirkygeneticmutation.TheCatholicChurchhassurvivedforcenturies,notbypassingona‘celibacygene’fromonepopetothenext,butbypassingonthestoriesoftheNewTestamentandofCatholiccanonlaw.In other words, while the behaviour patterns of archaic humansremained fixed for tensof thousandsofyears,Sapienscould transformtheir social structures, the nature of their interpersonal relations, theireconomic activities and a host of other behaviourswithin a decade ortwo.Considera residentofBerlin,born in1900and living to the ripeageofonehundred.ShespentherchildhoodintheHohenzollernEmpireofWilhelm II; her adult years in theWeimarRepublic, theNaziThirdReich and Communist East Germany; and she died a citizen of ademocraticandreunifiedGermany.Shehadmanagedtobeapartoffiveverydifferentsociopolitical systems, thoughherDNAremainedexactlythesame.This was the key to Sapiens’ success. In a one-on-one brawl, aNeanderthalwouldprobablyhavebeatenaSapiens.Butinaconflictofhundreds, Neanderthals wouldn’t stand a chance. Neanderthals couldshare information about the whereabouts of lions, but they probablycould not tell – and revise – stories about tribal spirits. Without anability to compose fiction, Neanderthals were unable to cooperateeffectivelyinlargenumbers,norcouldtheyadapttheirsocialbehaviourtorapidlychangingchallenges.Whilewecan’tgetinsideaNeanderthalmindtounderstandhowtheythought, we have indirect evidence of the limits to their cognition

compared with their Sapiens rivals. Archaeologists excavating 30,000-year-oldSapienssitesintheEuropeanheartlandoccasionallyfindthereseashells from theMediterraneanandAtlantic coasts. In all likelihood,these shells got to the continental interior through long-distance tradebetweendifferentSapiensbands.Neanderthalsiteslackanyevidenceofsuchtrade.Eachgroupmanufactureditsowntoolsfromlocalmaterials.4

6.TheCatholicalphamaleabstainsfromsexualintercourseandchildcare,eventhoughthereisnogeneticorecologicalreasonforhimtodoso.

Another example comes from the South Pacific. Sapiens bands thatlivedontheislandofNewIreland,northofNewGuinea,usedavolcanicglasscalledobsidiantomanufactureparticularlystrongandsharptools.New Ireland, however, hasnonatural deposits of obsidian. Laboratorytestsrevealedthattheobsidiantheyusedwasbroughtfromdepositson

NewBritain,anisland400kilometresaway.Someoftheinhabitantsoftheseislandsmusthavebeenskillednavigatorswhotradedfromislandtoislandoverlongdistances.5Trademayseemaverypragmaticactivity,one thatneedsno fictivebasis.YetthefactisthatnoanimalotherthanSapiensengagesintrade,and all the Sapiens trade neworks about which we have detailedevidencewerebasedonfictions.Tradecannotexistwithouttrust,anditisverydifficult totruststrangers.Theglobal tradenetworkof todayisbased on our trust in such fictional entities as the dollar, the FederalReserve Bank, and the totemic trademarks of corporations.When twostrangersinatribalsocietywanttotrade,theywilloftenestablishtrustbyappealingtoacommongod,mythicalancestorortotemanimal.IfarchaicSapiensbelievinginsuchfictionstradedshellsandobsidian,it stands to reason that they could also have traded information, thuscreatingamuchdenserandwiderknowledgenetworkthantheonethatservedNeanderthalsandotherarchaichumans.Hunting techniques provide another illustration of these differences.Neanderthals usually hunted alone or in small groups. Sapiens, on theother hand, developed techniques that relied on cooperation betweenmanydozensofindividuals,andperhapsevenbetweendifferentbands.One particularly effective method was to surround an entire herd ofanimals, such as wild horses, then chase them into a narrow gorge,whereitwaseasytoslaughterthemenmasse. Ifallwentaccordingtoplan, the bands could harvest tons ofmeat, fat and animal skins in asingleafternoonofcollectiveeffort,andeitherconsumetheserichesinagiantpotlatch, ordry, smokeor (inArctic areas) freeze them for laterusage. Archaeologists have discovered sites where entire herds werebutcheredannuallyinsuchways.Thereareevensiteswherefencesandobstacleswereerectedinordertocreateartificialtrapsandslaughteringgrounds.We may presume that Neanderthals were not pleased to see theirtraditional hunting grounds turned into Sapiens-controlledslaughterhouses. However, if violence broke out between the twospecies,Neanderthalswerenotmuchbetter off thanwildhorses. FiftyNeanderthals cooperating in traditional and static patterns were nomatchfor500versatileandinnovativeSapiens.AndeveniftheSapienslostthefirstround,theycouldquicklyinventnewstratagemsthatwould

enablethemtowinthenexttime.

WhathappenedintheCognitiveRevolution?

Newability Widerconsequences

TheabilitytotransmitlargerquantitiesofinformationabouttheworldsurroundingHomosapiens

Planningandcarryingoutcomplexactions,suchasavoidinglionsandhuntingbison

TheabilitytotransmitlargerquantitiesofinformationaboutSapienssocialrelationships

Largerandmorecohesivegroups,numberingupto150individuals

Theabilitytotransmitinformationaboutthingsthatdonotreallyexist,suchastribalspirits,nations,limitedliabilitycompanies,andhumanrights

a.Cooperationbetweenverylargenumbersofstrangersb.Rapidinnovationofsocialbehaviour

HistoryandBiology

The immensediversityof imaginedrealities thatSapiens invented,andtheresultingdiversityofbehaviourpatterns,arethemaincomponentsofwhat we call ‘cultures’. Once cultures appeared, they never ceased tochangeanddevelop,andtheseunstoppablealterationsarewhatwecall‘history’.The Cognitive Revolution is accordingly the point when historydeclareditsindependencefrombiology.UntiltheCognitiveRevolution,

thedoingsofallhumanspeciesbelongedtotherealmofbiology,or,ifyousoprefer,prehistory(Itendtoavoidtheterm‘prehistory’,becauseitwronglyimpliesthatevenbeforetheCognitiveRevolution,humanswerein a category of their own). From the Cognitive Revolution onwards,historicalnarrativesreplacebiologicaltheoriesasourprimarymeansofexplaining thedevelopmentofHomosapiens.Tounderstand the riseofChristianity or the FrenchRevolution, it is not enough to comprehendtheinteractionofgenes,hormonesandorganisms.Itisnecessarytotakeintoaccounttheinteractionofideas,imagesandfantasiesaswell.This does not mean that Homo sapiens and human culture became

exempt from biological laws. We are still animals, and our physical,emotional and cognitive abilities are still shaped by our DNA. Oursocieties are built from the same building blocks as Neanderthal orchimpanzeesocieties,andthemoreweexaminethesebuildingblocks–sensations,emotions,familyties–thelessdifferencewefindbetweenusandotherapes.Itis,however,amistaketolookforthedifferencesatthelevelofthe

individual or the family. One on one, even ten on ten, we areembarrassingly similar to chimpanzees. Significant differences begin toappearonlywhenwecrossthethresholdof150individuals,andwhenwereach1,000–2,000individuals,thedifferencesareastounding.Ifyoutried to bunch together thousands of chimpanzees into TiananmenSquare, Wall Street, the Vatican or the headquarters of the UnitedNations, the result would be pandemonium. By contrast, Sapiensregularlygatherbythethousands insuchplaces.Together, theycreateorderly patterns – such as trade networks, mass celebrations andpolitical institutions – that they could never have created in isolation.The real difference between us and chimpanzees is the mythical gluethat binds together large numbers of individuals, families and groups.Thisgluehasmadeusthemastersofcreation.Ofcourse,wealsoneededotherskills,suchastheabilitytomakeand

use tools. Yet tool-making is of little consequence unless it is coupledwiththeability tocooperatewithmanyothers.Howis it thatwenowhave intercontinental missiles with nuclear warheads, whereas 30,000years ago we had only sticks with flint spearheads? Physiologically,therehasbeennosignificant improvement inourtool-makingcapacityoverthelast30,000years.AlbertEinsteinwasfarlessdexterouswithhis

hands than was an ancient hunter-gatherer. However, our capacity tocooperatewith large numbers of strangers has improved dramatically.The ancient flint spearhead was manufactured in minutes by a singleperson,whoreliedontheadviceandhelpofafewintimatefriends.Theproduction of a modern nuclear warhead requires the cooperation ofmillionsofstrangersallovertheworld–fromtheworkerswhominetheuranium ore in the depths of the earth to theoretical physicists whowrite long mathematical formulas to describe the interactions ofsubatomicparticles.

To summarise the relationship between biology and history after theCognitiveRevolution:

a.BiologysetsthebasicparametersforthebehaviourandcapacitiesofHomosapiens.Thewholeofhistory takesplacewithin theboundsofthisbiologicalarena.

b.However,thisarenaisextraordinarilylarge,allowingSapienstoplayan astounding variety of games. Thanks to their ability to inventfiction, Sapiens create more and more complex games, which eachgenerationdevelopsandelaboratesevenfurther.

c.Consequently, inorder tounderstandhowSapiensbehave,wemustdescribethehistoricalevolutionoftheiractions.Referringonlytoourbiological constraints would be like a radio sports-caster who,attendingtheWorldCupfootballchampionships,offershislistenersadetailed description of the playing field rather than an account ofwhattheplayersaredoing.

WhatgamesdidourStoneAgeancestorsplayinthearenaofhistory?Asfarasweknow,thepeoplewhocarvedtheStadellion-mansome30,000yearsagohadthesamephysical,emotionalandintellectualabilitieswehave.Whatdidtheydowhentheywokeupinthemorning?Whatdidtheyeat forbreakfast–and lunch?Whatweretheirsocieties like?Didthey have monogamous relationships and nuclear families? Did theyhaveceremonies,moralcodes,sportscontestsandreligiousrituals?Didtheyfightwars?Thenextchaptertakesapeekbehindthecurtainoftheages, examining what life was like in the millennia separating the

CognitiveRevolutionfromtheAgriculturalRevolution.

*Hereand in the followingpages,whenspeakingaboutSapiens language, I refer to thebasiclinguisticabilitiesofourspeciesandnottoaparticulardialect.English,HindiandChineseareall variants of Sapiens language. Apparently, even at the time of the Cognitive Revolution,differentSapiensgroupshaddifferentdialects.

3

ADayintheLifeofAdamandEve

TOUNDERSTANDOURNATURE, HISTORY and psychology, wemustget inside the heads of our hunter-gatherer ancestors. For nearly theentire history of our species, Sapiens lived as foragers. The past 200years,duringwhichever increasingnumbersof Sapienshaveobtainedtheir daily bread as urban labourers and office workers, and thepreceding10,000years,duringwhichmostSapienslivedasfarmersandherders, are the blink of an eye compared to the tens of thousands ofyearsduringwhichourancestorshuntedandgathered.The flourishing fieldofevolutionarypsychologyargues thatmanyof

our present-day social and psychological characteristics were shapedduring this long pre-agricultural era. Even today, scholars in this fieldclaim, our brains and minds are adapted to a life of hunting andgathering.Oureatinghabits,ourconflictsandoursexualityareall theresult of theway our hunter-gathererminds interactwith our currentpost-industrialenvironment,withitsmega-cities,aeroplanes,telephonesandcomputers.Thisenvironmentgivesusmorematerialresourcesandlongerlivesthanthoseenjoyedbyanypreviousgeneration,butitoftenmakes us feel alienated, depressed and pressured. To understandwhy,evolutionary psychologists argue, we need to delve into the hunter-gatherer world that shaped us, the world that we subconsciously stillinhabit.Why,forexample,dopeoplegorgeonhigh-caloriefoodthatisdoing

littlegoodtotheirbodies?Today’saffluentsocietiesareinthethroesofaplagueofobesity,whichisrapidlyspreadingtodevelopingcountries.It’s a puzzlewhywebinge on the sweetest and greasiest foodwe can

find,untilweconsidertheeatinghabitsofourforagerforebears.Inthesavannahs and forests they inhabited, high-calorie sweets wereextremelyrareandfoodingeneralwasinshortsupply.Atypicalforager30,000yearsagohadaccesstoonlyonetypeofsweetfood–ripefruit.IfaStoneAgewomancameacrossa treegroaningwith figs, themostsensiblethingtodowastoeatasmanyofthemasshecouldonthespot,beforethelocalbaboonbandpickedthetreebare.Theinstincttogorgeonhigh-calorie foodwashard-wired intoourgenes.Todaywemaybeliving in high-rise apartments with over-stuffed refrigerators, but ourDNA still thinkswe are in the savannah. That’swhatmakes us spoondownanentiretubofBen&Jerry’swhenwefindoneinthefreezerandwashitdownwithajumboCoke.This ‘gorginggene’ theory iswidely accepted.Other theories are farmore contentious. For example, some evolutionary psychologists arguethat ancient foraging bands were not composed of nuclear familiescentred on monogamous couples. Rather, foragers lived in communesdevoid of private property, monogamous relationships and evenfatherhood.Insuchaband,awomancouldhavesexandformintimatebonds with several men (and women) simultaneously, and all of theband’s adults cooperated inparenting its children.Sincenomanknewdefinitivelywhichofthechildrenwerehis,menshowedequalconcernforallyoungsters.SuchasocialstructureisnotanAquarianutopia.It’swelldocumentedamong animals, notably our closest relatives, the chimpanzees andbonobos. There are even a number of present-day human cultures inwhichcollectivefatherhoodispractised,asforexampleamongtheBaríIndians. According to the beliefs of such societies, a child is not bornfromthespermofasingleman,butfromtheaccumulationofsperminawoman’swomb.A goodmotherwillmake a point of having sexwithseveraldifferentmen,especiallywhensheispregnant,sothatherchildwillenjoythequalities(andpaternalcare)notmerelyofthebesthunter,but also of the best storyteller, the strongest warrior and the mostconsiderate lover. If this sounds silly, bear in mind that before thedevelopment of modern embryological studies, people had no solidevidence thatbabiesarealwayssiredbyasingle fatherrather thanbymany.The proponents of this ‘ancient commune’ theory argue that the

frequent infidelities that characterise modern marriages, and the highrates of divorce, not to mention the cornucopia of psychologicalcomplexes fromwhich both children and adults suffer, all result fromforcing humans to live in nuclear families and monogamousrelationshipsthatareincompatiblewithourbiologicalsoftware.1Many scholars vehemently reject this theory, insisting that bothmonogamy and the forming of nuclear families are core humanbehaviours.Thoughancienthunter-gatherersocietiestendedtobemorecommunal and egalitarian than modern societies, these researchersargue, they were nevertheless comprised of separate cells, eachcontainingajealouscoupleandthechildrentheyheldincommon.Thisis why today monogamous relationships and nuclear families are thenorminthevastmajorityofcultures,whymenandwomentendtobeverypossessiveoftheirpartnersandchildren,andwhyeveninmodernstates such as North Korea and Syria political authority passes fromfathertoson.In order to resolve this controversy and understand our sexuality,society and politics, we need to learn something about the livingconditionsofourancestors, toexaminehowSapiens livedbetweentheCognitive Revolution of 70,000 years ago, and the start of theAgriculturalRevolutionabout12,000yearsago.

Unfortunately,therearefewcertaintiesregardingthelivesofourforagerancestors. The debate between the ‘ancient commune’ and ‘eternalmonogamy schools isbasedon flimsyevidence.Weobviouslyhavenowrittenrecordsfromtheageofforagers,andthearchaeologicalevidenceconsists mainly of fossilised bones and stone tools. Artefacts made ofmoreperishablematerials–suchaswood,bambooorleather–surviveonly under unique conditions. The common impression that pre-agriculturalhumanslivedinanageofstoneisamisconceptionbasedonthisarchaeologicalbias.TheStoneAgeshouldmoreaccuratelybecalledthe Wood Age, because most of the tools used by ancient hunter-gatherersweremadeofwood.Any reconstruction of the lives of ancient hunter-gatherers from thesurviving artefacts is extremely problematic. One of the most glaringdifferences between the ancient foragers and their agricultural and

industrial descendants is that foragers had very few artefacts to beginwith,andtheseplayedacomparativelymodestroleintheirlives.Overthe course of his or her life, a typical member of a modern affluentsociety will own several million artefacts – from cars and houses todisposablenappiesandmilkcartons.There’shardlyanactivity,abelief,orevenanemotionthatisnotmediatedbyobjectsofourowndevising.Our eating habits aremediated by amind-boggling collection of suchitems,fromspoonsandglassestogeneticengineeringlabsandgiganticocean-goingships.Inplay,weuseaplethoraoftoys,fromplasticcardsto 100,000-seater stadiums. Our romantic and sexual relations areaccoutred by rings, beds, nice clothes, sexy underwear, condoms,fashionable restaurants, cheap motels, airport lounges, wedding hallsand catering companies.Religions bring the sacred into our liveswithGothic churches, Muslim mosques, Hindu ashrams, Torah scrolls,Tibetan prayer wheels, priestly cassocks, candles, incense, Christmastrees,matzahballs,tombstonesandicons.Wehardlynoticehowubiquitousourstuffisuntilwehavetomoveit

to a newhouse. Foragersmovedhouse everymonth, everyweek, andsometimes even every day, toting whatever they had on their backs.There were no moving companies, wagons, or even pack animals tosharetheburden.Theyconsequentlyhadtomakedowithonlythemostessential possessions. It’s reasonable topresume, then, that the greaterpart of their mental, religious and emotional lives was conductedwithout the help of artefacts. An archaeologistworking 100,000 yearsfromnowcouldpiecetogetherareasonablepictureofMuslimbeliefandpracticefromthemyriadobjectsheunearthedinaruinedmosque.Butwearelargelyatalossintryingtocomprehendthebeliefsandritualsofancient hunter-gatherers. It’s much the same dilemma that a futurehistorianwouldfaceifhehadtodepictthesocialworldoftwenty-first-centuryteenagerssolelyonthebasisoftheirsurvivingsnailmail–sinceno recordswill remainof theirphoneconversations, emails,blogsandtextmessages.A reliance on artefacts will thus bias an account of ancient hunter-

gatherer life. One way to remedy this is to look at modern foragersocieties.Thesecanbestudieddirectly,byanthropologicalobservation.But there are good reasons to be very careful in extrapolating frommodernforagersocietiestoancientones.

Firstly, all forager societies that have survived into the modern erahave been influenced by neighbouring agricultural and industrialsocieties. Consequently, it’s risky to assume that what is true of themwasalsotruetensofthousandsofyearsago.Secondly,modernforagersocietieshavesurvivedmainlyinareaswithdifficult climatic conditions and inhospitable terrain, ill-suited foragriculture. Societies that have adapted to the extreme conditions ofplacessuchastheKalahariDesertinsouthernAfricamaywellprovideavery misleading model for understanding ancient societies in fertileareassuchastheYangtzeRiverValley.Inparticular,populationdensityinanarea like theKalahariDesert is far lower than itwasaround theancientYangtze,andthishasfar-reachingimplicationsforkeyquestionsaboutthesizeandstructureofhumanbandsandtherelationsbetweenthem.Thirdly,themostnotablecharacteristicofhunter-gatherersocietiesishowdifferenttheyareonefromtheother.Theydiffernotonlyfromonepart of the world to another but even in the same region. One goodexampleisthehugevarietythefirstEuropeansettlersfoundamongtheAboriginepeoplesofAustralia.JustbeforetheBritishconquest,between300,000 and 700,000 hunter-gatherers lived on the continent in 200–600tribes,eachofwhichwasfurtherdividedintoseveralbands.2Eachtribehaditsownlanguage,religion,normsandcustoms.LivingaroundwhatisnowAdelaideinsouthernAustraliawereseveralpatrilinealclansthat reckoned descent from the father’s side. These clans bondedtogetherintotribesonastrictlyterritorialbasis.Incontrast,sometribesin northern Australia gave more importance to a person’s maternalancestry, and a person’s tribal identity depended on his or her totemratherthanhisterritory.Itstandstoreasonthattheethnicandculturalvarietyamongancienthunter-gatherers was equally impressive, and that the 5 million to 8millionforagerswhopopulatedtheworldontheeveoftheAgriculturalRevolution were divided into thousands of separate tribes withthousandsofdifferentlanguagesandcultures.3This,afterall,wasoneofthemainlegaciesoftheCognitiveRevolution.Thankstotheappearanceoffiction,evenpeoplewiththesamegeneticmake-upwholivedundersimilarecologicalconditionswereabletocreateverydifferentimaginedrealities,whichmanifestedthemselvesindifferentnormsandvalues.

Forexample,there’severyreasontobelievethataforagerbandthatlived30,000yearsagoonthespotwhereOxfordUniversitynowstandswould have spoken a different language from one living whereCambridge isnowsituated.Onebandmighthavebeenbelligerentandthe other peaceful. Perhaps the Cambridge bandwas communalwhilethe one at Oxford was based on nuclear families. The Cantabrigiansmighthave spent longhours carvingwooden statues of their guardianspirits,whereastheOxoniansmayhaveworshippedthroughdance.Theformerperhapsbelieved in reincarnation,while the latter thought thiswasnonsense.Inonesociety,homosexualrelationshipsmighthavebeenaccepted,whileintheothertheyweretaboo.Inotherwords,whileanthropologicalobservationsofmodernforagers

can help us understand some of the possibilities available to ancientforagers, the ancient horizon of possibilities was much broader, andmost of it is hidden from our view.* The heated debates aboutHomosapiens’ ‘natural way of life’ miss the main point. Ever since theCognitiveRevolution, therehasn’tbeenasinglenaturalwayof life forSapiens. There are only cultural choices, from among a bewilderingpaletteofpossibilities.

TheOriginalAffluentSociety

What generalisations can we make about life in the pre-agriculturalworldnevertheless?Itseemssafetosaythatthevastmajorityofpeoplelivedinsmallbandsnumberingseveraldozenoratmostseveralhundredindividuals,andthatall theseindividualswerehumans.It is importanttonotethislastpoint,becauseitisfarfromobvious.Mostmembersofagriculturalandindustrialsocietiesaredomesticatedanimals.Theyarenotequaltotheirmasters,ofcourse,buttheyaremembersallthesame.Today, the society called New Zealand is composed of 4.5 millionSapiensand50millionsheep.Therewas just one exception to this general rule: the dog. The dog

was the first animal domesticated byHomo sapiens, and this occurredbeforetheAgriculturalRevolution.Expertsdisagreeabouttheexactdate,butwehaveincontrovertibleevidenceofdomesticateddogsfromabout

15,000yearsago.Theymayhave joinedthehumanpackthousandsofyearsearlier.Dogs were used for hunting and fighting, and as an alarm system

against wild beasts and human intruders. With the passing ofgenerations,thetwospeciesco-evolvedtocommunicatewellwitheachother.Dogs thatweremostattentive to theneedsand feelingsof theirhuman companions got extra care and food, and were more likely tosurvive. Simultaneously, dogs learned to manipulate people for theirown needs. A 15,000-year bond has yielded a much deeperunderstanding and affection between humans and dogs than betweenhumans and any other animal.4 In some cases dead dogs were evenburiedceremoniously,muchlikehumans.

Members of a band knew each other very intimately, and weresurrounded throughout their lives by friends and relatives. Lonelinessand privacy were rare. Neighbouring bands probably competed forresources and even fought one another, but they also had friendlycontacts. They exchanged members, hunted together, traded rareluxuries, cementedpolitical alliances and celebrated religious festivals.SuchcooperationwasoneoftheimportanttrademarksofHomosapiens,andgaveitacrucialedgeoverotherhumanspecies.Sometimesrelationswith neighbouring bands were tight enough that together theyconstitutedasingletribe,sharingacommonlanguage,commonmyths,andcommonnormsandvalues.Yet we should not overestimate the importance of such external

relations. Even if in times of crisis neighbouring bands drew closertogether, and even if they occasionally gathered to hunt or feasttogether, they still spent the vast majority of their time in completeisolationandindependence.Tradewasmostly limitedtoprestigeitemssuch as shells, amber and pigments. There is no evidence that peopletraded staple goods like fruits andmeat, or that the existence of onebanddependedon the importingof goods fromanother. Sociopoliticalrelations, too, tended to be sporadic. The tribe did not serve as apermanent political framework, and even if it had seasonal meetingplaces, there were no permanent towns or institutions. The averageperson lived many months without seeing or hearing a human from

outside of her own band, and she encountered throughout her life nomore than a few hundred humans. The Sapiens populationwas thinlyspread over vast territories. Before the Agricultural Revolution, thehumanpopulationoftheentireplanetwassmallerthanthatoftoday’sCairo.

7.Firstpet?A12,000-year-oldtombfoundinnorthernIsrael.Itcontainstheskeletonofafifty-year-oldwomannexttothatofapuppy(bottomleftcorner).Thepuppywasburiedclosetothewoman’shead.Herlefthandisrestingonthedoginawaythatmightindicateanemotionalconnection.Thereare,ofcourse,otherpossibleexplanations.Perhaps,for

example,thepuppywasagifttothegatekeeperofthenextworld.

MostSapiensbandslivedontheroad,roamingfromplacetoplaceinsearch of food. Their movements were influenced by the changingseasons, the annual migrations of animals and the growth cycles ofplants. They usually travelled back and forth across the same hometerritory,anareaofbetweenseveraldozenandmanyhundredsofsquarekilometres.Occasionally, bands wandered outside their turf and explored newlands,whetherduetonaturalcalamities,violentconflicts,demographicpressures or the initiative of a charismatic leader. These wanderingsweretheengineofhumanworldwideexpansion.Ifaforagerbandsplitonceeveryfortyyearsanditssplintergroupmigratedtoanewterritory

ahundredkilometrestotheeast,thedistancefromEastAfricatoChinawouldhavebeencoveredinabout10,000years.In someexceptional cases,when food sourceswereparticularly rich,bandssettleddowninseasonalandevenpermanentcamps.Techniquesfordrying,smokingandfreezingfoodalsomadeitpossibletostayputfor longer periods.Most importantly, alongside seas and rivers rich inseafoodandwaterfowl,humanssetuppermanentfishingvillages–thefirst permanent settlements in history, long predating the AgriculturalRevolution. Fishing villages might have appeared on the coasts ofIndonesian islandsas earlyas45,000years ago.Thesemayhavebeenthe base from which Homo sapiens launched its first transoceanicenterprise:theinvasionofAustralia.

In most habitats, Sapiens bands fed themselves in an elastic andopportunistic fashion.They scrounged for termites,pickedberries,dugfor roots, stalked rabbits and hunted bison and mammoth.Notwithstanding thepopular imageof ‘man thehunter’, gatheringwasSapiens’mainactivity,anditprovidedmostoftheircalories,aswellasrawmaterialssuchasflint,woodandbamboo.Sapiensdidnot forageonly for foodandmaterials.They foraged forknowledge aswell. To survive, they needed a detailedmentalmap oftheirterritory.Tomaximisetheefficiencyoftheirdailysearchforfood,theyrequired informationabout thegrowthpatternsofeachplantandthe habits of each animal. They needed to know which foods werenourishing,whichmadeyousick,andhowtouseothersascures.Theyneeded to know the progress of the seasons and what warning signspreceded a thunderstorm or a dry spell. They studied every stream,everywalnuttree,everybearcave,andeveryflint-stonedepositintheirvicinity.Eachindividualhadtounderstandhowtomakeastoneknife,how tomend a torn cloak, how to lay a rabbit trap, and how to faceavalanches, snakebitesorhungry lions.Masteryof eachof thesemanyskillsrequiredyearsofapprenticeshipandpractice.Theaverageancientforagercouldturnaflintstoneintoaspearpointwithinminutes.Whenwe try to imitate this feat, we usually fail miserably.Most of us lackexpert knowledge of the flaking properties of flint and basalt and thefinemotorskillsneededtoworkthemprecisely.

In other words, the average forager had wider, deeper and morevaried knowledge of her immediate surroundings than most of hermodern descendants. Today, most people in industrial societies don’tneedtoknowmuchaboutthenaturalworldinordertosurvive.Whatdoyoureallyneedtoknowinordertogetbyasacomputerengineer,aninsurance agent, a history teacher or a factory worker? You need toknow a lot about your own tiny field of expertise, but for the vastmajorityoflife’snecessitiesyourelyblindlyonthehelpofotherexperts,whose own knowledge is also limited to a tiny field of expertise. Thehumancollectiveknowsfarmoretodaythandidtheancientbands.Butat the individual level, ancient foragers were themost knowledgeableandskilfulpeopleinhistory.ThereissomeevidencethatthesizeoftheaverageSapiensbrainhas

actually decreased since the age of foraging.5 Survival in that erarequired superbmental abilities from everyone.When agriculture andindustrycamealongpeoplecouldincreasinglyrelyontheskillsofothersforsurvival,andnew‘nichesforimbeciles’wereopenedup.Youcouldsurvive and pass your unremarkable genes to the next generation byworkingasawatercarrieroranassembly-lineworker.Foragersmasterednotonly thesurroundingworldofanimals,plants

andobjects,butalsotheinternalworldoftheirownbodiesandsenses.Theylistenedtotheslightestmovementinthegrasstolearnwhetherasnakemightbelurkingthere.Theycarefullyobservedthefoliageoftreesinordertodiscoverfruits,beehivesandbirdnests.Theymovedwithaminimumofeffortandnoise,andknewhowtosit,walkandruninthemostagileandefficientmanner.Variedandconstantuseoftheirbodiesmadethemasfitasmarathonrunners.Theyhadphysicaldexteritythatpeopletodayareunabletoachieveevenafteryearsofpractisingyogaort’aichi.

The hunter-gatherer way of life differed significantly from region toregion and from season to season, but on thewhole foragers seem tohaveenjoyedamorecomfortableand rewarding lifestyle thanmostofthe peasants, shepherds, labourers and office clerks who followed intheirfootsteps.Whilepeopleintoday’saffluentsocietiesworkanaverageoffortyto

forty-fivehoursaweek,andpeopleinthedevelopingworldworksixtyandeveneightyhoursaweek,hunter-gathererslivingtodayinthemostinhospitableofhabitats–suchas theKalahariDesertworkonaverageforjustthirty-fivetoforty-fivehoursaweek.Theyhuntonlyonedayoutofthree,andgatheringtakesupjustthreetosixhoursdaily.Innormaltimes, this is enough to feed the band. It may well be that ancienthunter-gatherers living in zones more fertile than the Kalahari spentevenlesstimeobtainingfoodandrawmaterials.Ontopofthat,foragersenjoyedalighterloadofhouseholdchores.Theyhadnodishestowash,nocarpetstovacuum,nofloorstopolish,nonappiestochangeandnobillstopay.Theforagereconomyprovidedmostpeoplewithmoreinterestinglives

than agriculture or industry do. Today, a Chinese factory hand leaveshome around seven in the morning, makes her way through pollutedstreetstoasweatshop,andthereoperatesthesamemachine,inthesameway,day in,dayout, for ten longandmind-numbinghours, returninghomearound seven in theevening inorder towashdishesanddo thelaundry.Thirtythousandyearsago,aChineseforagermightleavecampwith her companions at, say, eight in the morning. They’d roam thenearby forests andmeadows, gatheringmushrooms, digging up edibleroots,catchingfrogsandoccasionallyrunningawayfromtigers.Byearlyafternoon, theywere back at the camp tomake lunch. That left themplentyoftimetogossip,tellstories,playwiththechildrenandjusthangout.Of course the tigers sometimes caught them,or a snakebit them,but on the other hand they didn’t have to deal with automobileaccidentsandindustrialpollution.Inmost places and atmost times, foraging provided ideal nutrition.

Thatishardlysurprising–thishadbeenthehumandietforhundredsofthousands of years, and the human body was well adapted to it.Evidence from fossilised skeletons indicates that ancient foragerswerelesslikelytosufferfromstarvationormalnutrition,andweregenerallytaller and healthier than their peasant descendants. Average lifeexpectancywas apparently just thirty to forty years, but thiswas duelargely to thehigh incidenceof childmortality.Childrenwhomade itthroughtheperilousfirstyearshadagoodchanceofreachingtheageofsixty,andsomeevenmadeittotheireighties.Amongmodernforagers,forty-five-year-oldwomencanexpect to liveanothertwentyyears,and

about5–8percentofthepopulationisoversixty.6Theforagers’secretofsuccess,whichprotectedthemfromstarvation

and malnutrition, was their varied diet. Farmers tend to eat a verylimitedandunbalanceddiet.Especiallyinpremoderntimes,mostofthecalories feeding an agricultural population came from a single crop –such as wheat, potatoes or rice – that lacks some of the vitamins,minerals and other nutritional materials humans need. The typicalpeasant in traditional China ate rice for breakfast, rice for lunch, andrice fordinner. If shewere lucky, shecouldexpect toeat the sameonthefollowingday.Bycontrast,ancient foragersregularlyatedozensofdifferent foodstuffs. The peasant’s ancient ancestor, the forager, mayhaveeatenberriesandmushroomsforbreakfast;fruits,snailsandturtlefor lunch; and rabbit steak with wild onions for dinner. Tomorrowsmenumight have been completely different. This variety ensured thattheancientforagersreceivedallthenecessarynutrients.Furthermore,bynotbeingdependentonanysinglekindoffood,they

were less liable to suffer when one particular food source failed.Agricultural societies are ravaged by famine when drought, fire orearthquakedevastates theannual riceorpotatocrop.Forager societieswerehardly immune tonaturaldisasters, and suffered fromperiodsofwant and hunger, but they were usually able to deal with suchcalamitiesmoreeasily. If they lostsomeof theirstaple foodstuffs, theycouldgatherorhuntotherspecies,ormovetoalessaffectedarea.Ancientforagersalsosufferedlessfrominfectiousdiseases.Mostofthe

infectiousdiseasesthathaveplaguedagriculturalandindustrialsocieties(suchassmallpox,measlesandtuberculosis)originatedindomesticatedanimals and were transferred to humans only after the AgriculturalRevolution.Ancientforagers,whohaddomesticatedonlydogs,werefreeof these scourges.Moreover,mostpeople inagriculturaland industrialsocieties lived in dense, unhygienic permanent settlements – idealhotbedsfordisease.Foragersroamedthelandinsmallbandsthatcouldnotsustainepidemics.

Thewholesomeandvarieddiet,therelativelyshortworkingweek,andthe rarity of infectious diseases have led many experts to define pre-agriculturalforagersocietiesas‘theoriginalaffluentsocieties’.Itwould

be amistake, however, to idealise the lives of these ancients. Thoughthey lived better lives thanmost people in agricultural and industrialsocieties, their world could still be harsh and unforgiving. Periods ofwantandhardshipwerenotuncommon,childmortalitywashigh,andanaccidentwhichwouldbeminor today could easilybecomeadeathsentence. Most people probably enjoyed the close intimacy of theroaming band, but those unfortunates who incurred the hostility ormockery of their fellow band members probably suffered terribly.Modern foragers occasionally abandon and even kill old or disabledpeople who cannot keep up with the band. Unwanted babies andchildrenmaybe slain, and there are even cases of religiously inspiredhumansacrifice.The Aché people, hunter-gatherers who lived in the jungles of

Paraguay until the 1960s, offer a glimpse into the darker side offoraging.Whenavaluedbandmemberdied,theAchécustomarilykilleda little girl and buried the two together. Anthropologists whointerviewed the Aché recorded a case in which a band abandoned amiddle-aged man who fell sick and was unable to keep up with theothers.Hewasleftunderatree.Vulturesperchedabovehim,expectinga hearty meal. But the man recuperated, and, walking briskly, hemanagedtorejointheband.Hisbodywascoveredwiththebirds’faeces,sohewashenceforthnicknamed‘VultureDroppings’.WhenanoldAchéwomanbecameaburden to therestof theband,

one of the youngermenwould sneak behindher and kill herwith anaxe-blowtothehead.AnAchémantoldtheinquisitiveanthropologistsstoriesofhisprimeyearsinthejungle.‘Icustomarilykilledoldwomen.Iusedtokillmyaunts…Thewomenwereafraidofme…Now,herewith thewhites, I have becomeweak.’ Babies bornwithout hair,whowereconsideredunderdeveloped,werekilledimmediately.Onewomanrecalledthatherfirstbabygirlwaskilledbecausethemeninthebanddidnotwantanothergirl.Onanotheroccasionamankilledasmallboybecausehewas‘inabadmoodandthechildwascrying’.Anotherchildwas buried alive because ‘itwas funny-looking and the other childrenlaughedatit’.7We should be careful, though, not to judge the Aché too quickly.

Anthropologists who lived with them for years report that violencebetweenadultswasveryrare.Bothwomenandmenwerefreetochange

partnersatwill.Theysmiledandlaughedconstantly,hadnoleadershiphierarchy, and generally shunned domineering people. They wereextremely generouswith their few possessions, andwere not obsessedwith successorwealth.The things theyvaluedmost in lifeweregoodsocialinteractionsandhigh-qualityfriendships.8Theyviewedthekillingof children, sick people and the elderly as many people today viewabortion and euthanasia. It should also be noted that the Aché werehunted and killedwithoutmercy by Paraguayan farmers. The need toevadetheirenemiesprobablycausedtheAchétoadoptanexceptionallyharshattitudetowardsanyonewhomightbecomealiabilitytotheband.The truth is that Aché society, like every human society, was very

complex.Weshouldbewareofdemonisingoridealisingitonthebasisofa superficial acquaintance. The Achéwere neither angels nor fiends –theywerehumans.So,too,weretheancienthunter-gatherers.

TalkingGhosts

What can we say about the spiritual and mental life of the ancienthunter-gatherers? The basics of the forager economy can bereconstructedwithsomeconfidencebasedonquantifiableandobjectivefactors. For example, we can calculate how many calories per day aperson needed in order to survive, how many calories were obtainedfromakilogramofwalnuts,andhowmanywalnutscouldbegatheredfrom a square kilometre of forest. With this data, we can make aneducatedguessabouttherelativeimportanceofwalnutsintheirdiet.But did they considerwalnuts a delicacy or a humdrum staple?Did

theybelieve thatwalnut treeswere inhabitedby spirits?Did they findwalnutleavespretty?Ifaforagerboywantedtotakeaforagergirltoaromantic spot, did the shade of a walnut tree suffice? The world ofthought,beliefandfeelingisbydefinitionfarmoredifficulttodecipher.Most scholars agree that animistic beliefs were common among

ancientforagers.Animism(from‘anima’,‘soul’or‘spirit’inLatin)isthebelief that almost every place, every animal, every plant and everynaturalphenomenonhasawarenessandfeelings,andcancommunicatedirectlywithhumans.Thus,animistsmaybelievethatthebigrockatthe

top of the hill has desires and needs. The rockmight be angry aboutsomethingthatpeopledidandrejoiceoversomeotheraction.Therockmightadmonishpeopleorask for favours.Humans, for theirpart, canaddresstherock,tomollifyorthreatenit.Notonlytherock,butalsotheoak tree at the bottom of the hill is an animated being, and so is thestream flowing below the hill, the spring in the forest clearing, thebushesgrowingaround it, thepath to theclearing,andthe fieldmice,wolves and crows that drink there. In the animist world, objects andlivingthingsarenottheonlyanimatedbeings.Therearealsoimmaterialentities–thespiritsofthedead,andfriendlyandmalevolentbeings,thekindthatwetodaycalldemons,fairiesandangels.Animists believe that there is no barrier between humans and otherbeings.Theycanallcommunicatedirectlythroughspeech,song,danceandceremony.Ahuntermayaddressaherdofdeerandaskthatoneofthemsacrificeitself. If thehuntsucceeds,thehuntermayaskthedeadanimal to forgivehim.Whensomeone falls sick,a shamancancontactthespiritthatcausedthesicknessandtrytopacifyitorscareitaway.Ifneed be, the shaman may ask for help from other spirits. Whatcharacterises all these acts of communication is that the entities beingaddressed are local beings. They are not universal gods, but rather aparticulardeer,aparticulartree,aparticularstream,aparticularghost.Justasthereisnobarrierbetweenhumansandotherbeings,neitheristhere a strict hierarchy. Non-human entities do not exist merely toprovide for theneedsofman.Norare theyall-powerfulgodswho runtheworldas theywish.Theworlddoesnotrevolvearoundhumansoraroundanyotherparticulargroupofbeings.Animismisnotaspecificreligion.Itisagenericnameforthousandsof very different religions, cults and beliefs. What makes all of them‘animist’isthiscommonapproachtotheworldandtoman’splaceinit.Saying that ancient foragerswereprobably animists is like saying thatpremodernagriculturistsweremostlytheists.Theism(from‘theos’, ‘god’inGreek)istheviewthattheuniversalorderisbasedonahierarchicalrelationship between humans and a small group of ethereal entitiescalled gods. It is certainly true to say that premodern agriculturiststendedtobetheists,butitdoesnotteachusmuchabouttheparticulars.Thegenericrubric‘theists’coversJewishrabbisfromeighteenth-centuryPoland,witch-burningPuritansfromseventeenth-centuryMassachusetts,

Aztec priests from fifteenth-centuryMexico, Sufimystics from twelfth-century Iran, tenth-century Viking warriors, second-century Romanlegionnaires,andfirst-centuryChinesebureaucrats.Eachoftheseviewedtheothers’beliefsandpracticesasweirdandheretical.Thedifferencesbetweenthebeliefsandpracticesofgroupsof ‘animistic’ foragerswereprobablyjustasbig.Theirreligiousexperiencemayhavebeenturbulentandfilledwithcontroversies,reformsandrevolutions.Butthesecautiousgeneralisationsareaboutasfaraswecango.Anyattempt to describe the specifics of archaic spirituality is highlyspeculative, as there is next to no evidence to go by and the littleevidencewehave–ahandfulofartefactsandcavepaintings–canbeinterpretedinmyriadways.Thetheoriesofscholarswhoclaimtoknowwhat the foragers felt shedmuchmore lighton theprejudicesof theirauthorsthanonStoneAgereligions.Insteadoferectingmountainsoftheoryoveramolehilloftombrelics,cavepaintingsandbonestatuettes,itisbettertobefrankandadmitthatwehaveonlythehaziestnotionsaboutthereligionsofancientforagers.Weassumethattheywereanimists,butthat’snotveryinformative.Wedon’tknowwhichspiritstheyprayedto,whichfestivalstheycelebrated,orwhichtaboostheyobserved.Most importantly,wedon’tknowwhatstories they told. It’s one of the biggest holes in our understanding ofhumanhistory.

Thesociopoliticalworldoftheforagersisanotherareaaboutwhichweknownext tonothing.As explainedabove, scholars cannot evenagreeonthebasics,suchastheexistenceofprivateproperty,nuclearfamiliesand monogamous relationships. It’s likely that different bands haddifferent structures. Some may have been as hierarchical, tense andviolentasthenastiestchimpanzeegroup,whileotherswereaslaid-back,peacefulandlasciviousasabunchofbonobos.

8.ApaintingfromLascauxCave,c.15,000–20,000yearsago.Whatexactlydowesee,andwhatisthepainting’smeaning?Somearguethatweseeamanwiththeheadofabirdandanerectpenis,beingkilledbyabison.Beneaththemanisanotherbirdwhichmightsymbolisethesoul,releasedfromthebodyatthemomentofdeath.Ifso,thepicture

depictsnotaprosaichuntingaccident,butratherthepassagefromthisworldtothenext.Butwehavenowayofknowingwhetheranyofthesespeculationsaretrue.It’sa

Rorschachtestthatrevealsmuchaboutthepreconceptionsofmodernscholars,andlittleaboutthebeliefsofancientforagers.

InSungir,Russia,archaeologistsdiscoveredin1955a30,000-year-oldburialsitebelongingtoamammoth-huntingculture. Inonegrave theyfound the skeleton of a fifty-year-old man, covered with strings ofmammoth ivory beads, containing about 3,000 beads in total. On thedeadman’sheadwasahatdecoratedwithfoxteeth,andonhiswriststwenty-five ivory bracelets.Other graves from the same site containedfar fewer goods. Scholars deduced that the Sungir mammoth-hunterslived inahierarchical society,andthat thedeadmanwasperhaps theleader of a band or of an entire tribe comprising several bands. It is

unlikelythatafewdozenmembersofasinglebandcouldhaveproducedsomanygravegoodsbythemselves.

9.Hunter-gatherersmadethesehandprintsabout9,000yearsagointhe‘HandsCave’,inArgentina.Itlooksasiftheselong-deadhandsarereachingtowardsusfromwithintherock.Thisisoneofthemostmovingrelicsoftheancientforagerworld–butnobody

knowswhatitmeans.

Archaeologists then discovered an even more interesting tomb. Itcontained two skeletons, buried head to head.One belonged to a boyagedabout twelveor thirteen,and theother toagirlofaboutnineorten.Theboywascoveredwith5,000ivorybeads.Heworea fox-toothhatandabeltwith250foxteeth(atleastsixtyfoxeshadtohavetheirteethpulled toget thatmany).Thegirlwasadornedwith5,250 ivorybeads. Both children were surrounded by statuettes and various ivoryobjects. A skilled craftsman (or craftswoman) probably needed aboutforty-five minutes to prepare a single ivory bead. In other words,fashioningthe10,000ivorybeadsthatcoveredthetwochildren,notto

mentiontheotherobjects,requiredsome7,500hoursofdelicatework,welloverthreeyearsoflabourbyanexperiencedartisan!ItishighlyunlikelythatatsuchayoungagetheSungirchildrenhad

provedthemselvesasleadersormammoth-hunters.Onlyculturalbeliefscanexplainwhytheyreceivedsuchanextravagantburial.Onetheoryisthat they owed their rank to their parents. Perhaps they were thechildren of the leader, in a culture that believed in either familycharismaorstrictrulesofsuccession.Accordingtoasecondtheory,thechildrenhadbeen identifiedatbirthas the incarnationsof some long-deadspirits.Athirdtheoryarguesthatthechildren’sburialreflectstheway they died rather than their status in life. They were rituallysacrificed–perhapsaspartof theburial ritesof the leader–andthenentombedwithpompandcircumstance.9Whateverthecorrectanswer,theSungirchildrenareamongthebest

pieces of evidence that 30,000 years ago Sapiens could inventsociopolitical codes thatwent far beyond the dictates of ourDNAandthebehaviourpatternsofotherhumanandanimalspecies.

PeaceorWar?

Finally,there’sthethornyquestionoftheroleofwarinforagersocieties.Some scholars imagine ancient hunter-gatherer societies as peacefulparadises, and argue that war and violence began only with theAgricultural Revolution, when people started to accumulate privateproperty.Otherscholarsmaintainthattheworldoftheancientforagerswasexceptionallycruelandviolent.Bothschoolsofthoughtarecastlesin the air, connected to the ground by the thin strings of meagrearchaeologicalremainsandanthropologicalobservationsofpresent-dayforagers.The anthropological evidence is intriguing but very problematic.

ForagerstodaylivemainlyinisolatedandinhospitableareassuchastheArctic or the Kalahari, where population density is very low andopportunities to fight other people are limited. Moreover, in recentgenerations, foragershavebeenincreasinglysubject totheauthorityofmodern states, which prevent the eruption of large-scale conflicts.

Europeanscholarshavehadonlytwoopportunitiestoobservelargeandrelatively dense populations of independent foragers: in north-westernNorth America in the nineteenth century, and in northern Australiaduring the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Both AmerindianandAboriginalAustraliancultureswitnessedfrequentarmedconflicts.Itisdebatable,however,whether this representsa ‘timeless’conditionortheimpactofEuropeanimperialism.Thearchaeologicalfindingsarebothscarceandopaque.Whattelltale

cluesmightremainofanywarthattookplacetensofthousandsofyearsago?Therewerenofortificationsandwallsbackthen,noartilleryshellsorevenswordsandshields.Anancientspearpointmighthavebeenusedinwar,butitcouldhavebeenusedinahuntaswell.Fossilisedhumanbones are no less hard to interpret. A fracture might indicate a warwound or an accident. Nor is the absence of fractures and cuts on anancientskeletonconclusiveproofthatthepersontowhomtheskeletonbelongeddidnotdieaviolentdeath.Deathcanbecausedbytraumatosofttissuesthatleavesnomarksonbone.Evenmoreimportantly,duringpre-industrialwarfaremorethan90percentofwardeadwerekilledbystarvation, cold and disease rather than by weapons. Imagine that30,000yearsagoonetribedefeated itsneighbourandexpelled it fromcoveted foraging grounds. In the decisive battle, ten members of thedefeated tribe were killed. In the following year, another hundredmembers of the losing tribe died from starvation, cold and disease.Archaeologists who come across these no skeletons may too easilyconcludethatmostfellvictimtosomenaturaldisaster.Howwouldwebeabletotellthattheywereallvictimsofamercilesswar?Duly warned, we can now turn to the archaeological findings. In

Portugal, a survey was made of 400 skeletons from the periodimmediatelypredating theAgriculturalRevolution.Only two skeletonsshowedclearmarksofviolence.Asimilarsurveyof400skeletonsfromthesameperiodinIsraeldiscoveredasinglecrackinasingleskullthatcouldbeattributedtohumanviolence.Athirdsurveyof400skeletonsfromvariouspre-agriculturalsitesintheDanubeValleyfoundevidenceof violence on eighteen skeletons. Eighteen out of 400maynot soundlikealot,butit’sactuallyaveryhighpercentage.Ifalleighteenindeeddiedviolently,itmeansthatabout4.5percentofdeathsintheancientDanube Valley were caused by human violence. Today, the global

averageisonly1.5percent,takingwarandcrimetogether.Duringthetwentiethcentury,only5percentofhumandeathsresultedfromhumanviolence – and this in a century that saw thebloodiestwars andmostmassive genocides in history. If this revelation is typical, the ancientDanubeValleywasasviolentasthetwentiethcentury.*The depressing findings from theDanubeValley are supported by a

stringofequallydepressingfindingsfromotherareas.AtJablSahabainSudan, a 12,000-year-old cemetery containing fifty-nine skeletons wasdiscovered. Arrowheads and spear points were found embedded in orlyingnear the bones of twenty-four skeletons, 40per cent of the find.The skeletonof onewoman revealed twelve injuries. InOfnetCave inBavaria, archaeologists discovered the remains of thirty-eight foragers,mainlywomenandchildren,whohadbeenthrownintotwoburialpits.Half the skeletons, including those of children and babies, bore clearsignsofdamagebyhumanweaponssuchasclubsandknives.Thefewskeletonsbelongingtomaturemalesboretheworstmarksofviolence.Inallprobability,anentireforagerbandwasmassacredatOfnet.Whichbetterrepresentstheworldoftheancientforagers:thepeaceful

skeletons fromIsraelandPortugal,or theabattoirsofJablSahabaandOfnet?Theanswerisneither.Justasforagersexhibitedawidearrayofreligionsandsocialstructures,so,too,didtheyprobablydemonstrateavariety of violence rates.While some areas and some periods of timemayhaveenjoyedpeaceandtranquillity,otherswererivenbyferociousconflicts.10

TheCurtainofSilence

If the larger picture of ancient forager life is hard to reconstruct,particular events are largely irretrievable. When a Sapiens band firstentered a valley inhabited byNeanderthals, the following yearsmighthavewitnessedabreathtakinghistoricaldrama.Unfortunately,nothingwould have survived from such an encounter except, at best, a fewfossilisedbonesandahandfulofstonetoolsthatremainmuteunderthemost intense scholarly inquisitions. We may extract from theminformationabouthumananatomy,humantechnology,humandiet,and

perhapsevenhumansocialstructure.ButtheyrevealnothingaboutthepoliticalallianceforgedbetweenneighbouringSapiensbands,aboutthespirits of the dead that blessed this alliance, or about the ivory beadssecretlygiventothelocalwitchdoctorinordertosecuretheblessingofthespirits.This curtainof silence shrouds tensof thousandsofyearsofhistory.

These long millennia may well have witnessed wars and revolutions,ecstatic religious movements, profound philosophical theories,incomparableartisticmasterpieces.Theforagersmayhavehadtheirall-conqueringNapoleons,whoruledempireshalfthesizeofLuxembourg;giftedBeethovenswholackedsymphonyorchestrasbutbroughtpeopletotearswiththesoundoftheirbambooflutes;andcharismaticprophetswho revealed the words of a local oak tree rather than those of auniversal creator god. But these are all mere guesses. The curtain ofsilenceissothickthatwecannotevenbesuresuchthingsoccurred–letalonedescribethemindetail.Scholars tend to ask only those questions that they can reasonably

expect toanswer.Without thediscoveryofasyetunavailable researchtools,wewillprobablyneverknowwhattheancientforagersbelievedorwhatpoliticaldramas theyexperienced.Yet it is vital to askquestionsforwhichnoanswersareavailable,otherwisewemightbe tempted todismiss 60,000of 70,000years of humanhistorywith the excuse that‘thepeoplewholivedbackthendidnothingofimportance’.Thetruthisthattheydidalotofimportantthings.Inparticular,they

shapedtheworldaroundus toamuch largerdegreethanmostpeoplerealise. Trekkers visiting the Siberian tundra, the deserts of centralAustralia and theAmazonian rainforest believe that theyhave enteredpristine landscapes,virtuallyuntouchedbyhumanhands.But that’sanillusion. The foragers were there before us and they brought aboutdramatic changes even in the densest jungles and the most desolatewildernesses. The next chapter explains how the foragers completelyreshaped the ecology of our planet long before the first agriculturalvillagewasbuilt.ThewanderingbandsofstorytellingSapienswerethemostimportantandmostdestructiveforcetheanimalkingdomhadeverproduced.

*A‘horizonofpossibilities’meanstheentirespectrumofbeliefs,practicesandexperiencesthatareopenbeforeaparticularsociety,givenitsecological,technologicalandculturallimitations.Each society and each individual usually explore only a tiny fraction of their horizon ofpossibilities.

* Itmight be argued that not all eighteen ancient Danubians actually died from the violencewhosemarkscanbeseenontheirremains.Somewereonlyinjured.However,this isprobablycounterbalancedbydeaths fromtraumatosoft tissuesandfromthe invisibledeprivations thataccompanywar.

4

TheFlood

PRIORTOTHECOGNITIVEREVOLUTION,humansofall species livedexclusively on the Afro-Asian landmass. True, they had settled a fewislands by swimming short stretches of water or crossing them onimprovised rafts. Flores, for example, was colonised as far back as850,000yearsago.Yet theywereunable toventure into theopensea,and none reached America, Australia, or remote islands such asMadagascar,NewZealandandHawaii.TheseabarrierpreventednotjusthumansbutalsomanyotherAfro-

Asiananimalsandplants fromreachingthis ‘OuterWorld’.Asaresult,theorganismsofdistantlandslikeAustraliaandMadagascarevolvedinisolation for millions upon millions of years, taking on shapes andnatures very different from those of their distant Afro-Asian relatives.PlanetEarthwasseparated intoseveraldistinctecosystems,eachmadeupofauniqueassemblyofanimalsandplants.Homosapienswasabouttoputanendtothisbiologicalexuberance.FollowingtheCognitiveRevolution,Sapiensacquiredthetechnology,

theorganisationalskills,andperhapseventhevisionnecessarytobreakoutofAfro-AsiaandsettletheOuterWorld.Theirfirstachievementwasthe colonisationofAustralia some45,000years ago.Experts arehard-pressedtoexplainthisfeat.InordertoreachAustralia,humanshadtocrossanumberof seachannels, somemore thanahundredkilometreswide, and upon arrival they had to adapt nearly overnight to acompletelynewecosystem.Themostreasonabletheorysuggeststhat,about45,000yearsago,the

Sapiens living in the Indonesian archipelago (a group of islands

separated from Asia and from each other by only narrow straits)developed the first seafaring societies. They learned how to build andmanoeuvre ocean-going vessels and became long-distance fishermen,tradersandexplorers.Thiswouldhavebroughtaboutanunprecedentedtransformationinhumancapabilitiesandlifestyles.Everyothermammalthatwenttosea–seals,seacows,dolphins–hadtoevolveforaeonstodevelop specialised organs and a hydrodynamic body. The Sapiens inIndonesia, descendants of apes who lived on the African savannah,becamePacificseafarerswithoutgrowingflippersandwithouthavingtowait for theirnoses tomigrate to thetopof theirheadsaswhalesdid.Instead,theybuiltboatsandlearnedhowtosteerthem.AndtheseskillsenabledthemtoreachandsettleAustralia.True,archaeologistshaveyettounearthrafts,oarsorfishingvillagesthat date back as far as 45,000 years ago (they would be difficult todiscover, because rising sea levels have buried the ancient Indonesianshorelineunderahundredmetresofocean).Nevertheless,thereisstrongcircumstantialevidencetosupportthistheory,especiallythefactthatinthe thousands of years following the settlement of Australia, Sapienscolonisedalargenumberofsmallandisolatedislandstoitsnorth.Some,suchasBukaandManus,were separated fromtheclosest landby200kilometres of openwater. It’s hard to believe that anyone could havereached and colonisedManuswithout sophisticated vessels and sailingskills.Asmentioned earlier, there is also firmevidence for regular seatrade between some of these islands, such as New Ireland and NewBritain.1The journey of the first humans to Australia is one of the mostimportantevents inhistory,at leastas importantasColumbus’ journeytoAmericaortheApollo11expeditiontothemoon.Itwasthefirsttimeany human had managed to leave the Afro-Asian ecological system –indeed,thefirsttimeanylargeterrestrialmammalhadmanagedtocrossfromAfro-Asia toAustralia.Of even greater importancewaswhat thehuman pioneers did in this new world. The moment the first hunter-gatherer set foot on an Australian beach was the moment thatHomosapiens climbed to the top rung in the food chain on a particularlandmass and thereafter became the deadliest species in the annals ofplanetEarth.Upuntilthenhumanshaddisplayedsomeinnovativeadaptationsand

behaviours, but their effect on their environment had been negligible.Theyhaddemonstratedremarkablesuccessinmovingintoandadjustingto varioushabitats, but theydid sowithout drastically changing thosehabitats. The settlers of Australia, or more accurately, its conquerors,didn’t just adapt, they transformed the Australian ecosystem beyondrecognition.The first human footprint on a sandy Australian beach wasimmediately washed away by the waves. Yet when the invadersadvanced inland, they leftbehindadifferent footprint,one thatwouldnever be expunged. As they pushed on, they encountered a strangeuniverseofunknowncreaturesthatincludeda200-kilogram,two-metrekangaroo,andamarsupiallion,asmassiveasamoderntiger,thatwasthecontinent’slargestpredator.Koalasfartoobigtobecuddlyandcuterustled in the trees and flightless birds twice the size of ostrichessprintedon theplains.Dragon-like lizards and snakes fivemetres longslithered through theundergrowth.Thegiantdiprotodon,a two-and-a-half-tonwombat, roamed the forests.Except for thebirdsand reptiles,all these animalsweremarsupials – like kangaroos, they gavebirth totiny, helpless, fetus-like youngwhich they then nurturedwithmilk inabdominalpouches.MarsupialmammalswerealmostunknowninAfricaandAsia,butinAustraliatheyreignedsupreme.Withinafewthousandyears,virtuallyallofthesegiantsvanished.Ofthe twenty-four Australian animal species weighing fifty kilograms ormore, twenty-threebecameextinct.2A largenumberof smaller speciesalso disappeared. Food chains throughout the entire Australianecosystem were broken and rearranged. It was the most importanttransformationoftheAustralianecosystemformillionsofyears.WasitallthefaultofHomosapiens?

GuiltyasCharged

Some scholars try to exonerate our species, placing the blame on thevagariesoftheclimate(theusualscapegoatinsuchcases).Yetitishardtobelieve thatHomosapienswas completely innocent. There are threepieces of evidence that weaken the climate alibi, and implicate our

ancestorsintheextinctionoftheAustralianmegafauna.Firstly, even though Australia’s climate changed some 45,000 years

ago,itwasn’taveryremarkableupheaval.It’shardtoseehowthenewweatherpatternsalonecouldhavecausedsuchamassiveextinction.It’scommon today to explain anything and everything as the result ofclimatechange,butthetruthisthatearth’sclimateneverrests.It is inconstantflux.Everyeventinhistoryoccurredagainstthebackgroundofsomeclimatechange.Inparticular,ourplanethasexperiencednumerous cyclesof cooling

andwarming.Duringthelastmillionyears,therehasbeenaniceageonaverage every 100,000 years. The last one ran from about 75,000 to15,000yearsago.Notunusuallysevereforaniceage,ithadtwinpeaks,the firstabout70,000yearsagoand the secondatabout20,000yearsago.Thegiantdiprotodonappeared inAustraliamore than1.5millionyears ago and successfullyweathered at least ten previous ice ages. Italsosurvivedthefirstpeakofthelasticeage,around70,000yearsago.Why,then,diditdisappear45,000yearsago?Ofcourse,ifdiprotodonshadbeentheonlylargeanimaltodisappearatthistime,itmighthavebeen just a fluke.Butmore than90per cent ofAustralia’smegafaunadisappearedalongwith thediprotodon.Theevidence iscircumstantial,but it’s hard to imagine that Sapiens, just by coincidence, arrived inAustraliaattheprecisepointthatalltheseanimalsweredroppingdeadofthechills.3Secondly,whenclimatechangecausesmassextinctions,seacreatures

areusuallyhitashardaslanddwellers.Yetthereisnoevidenceofanysignificant disappearance of oceanic fauna 45,000 years ago. Humaninvolvement can easily explainwhy thewave of extinction obliteratedthe terrestrialmegafaunaofAustraliawhile sparing thatof thenearbyoceans.Despite its burgeoningnavigational abilities,Homo sapienswasstilloverwhelminglyaterrestrialmenace.Thirdly,massextinctionsakintothearchetypalAustraliandecimation

occurred again and again in the ensuingmillennia –whenever peoplesettledanotherpartof theOuterWorld. In thesecasesSapiensguilt isirrefutable. For example, themegafauna of New Zealand –which hadweatheredthealleged‘climatechange’ofc.45,000yearsagowithoutascratch–suffereddevastatingblowsimmediatelyafterthefirsthumansset foot on the islands. The Maoris, New Zealand’s first Sapiens

colonisers,reachedtheislandsabout800yearsago.Withinacoupleofcenturies,themajorityofthelocalmegafaunawasextinct,alongwith60percentofallbirdspecies.AsimilarfatebefellthemammothpopulationofWrangelIslandintheArctic Ocean (200 kilometres north of the Siberian coast).Mammothshad flourished for millions of years over most of the northernhemisphere, but asHomo sapiens spread – first over Eurasia and thenover North America – the mammoths retreated. By 10,000 years agotherewasnotasinglemammothtobefoundintheworld,exceptonafewremoteArcticislands,mostconspicuouslyWrangel.ThemammothsofWrangelcontinuedtoprosperforafewmoremillennia,thensuddenlydisappearedabout4,000yearsago,justwhenthefirsthumansreachedtheisland.Were the Australian extinction an isolated event, we could granthumansthebenefitofthedoubt.ButthehistoricalrecordmakesHomosapienslooklikeanecologicalserialkiller.

All the settlers of Australia had at their disposal was Stone Agetechnology. How could they cause an ecological disaster? There arethreeexplanationsthatmeshquitenicely.Large animals – the primary victims of the Australian extinction –breed slowly. Pregnancy is long, offspring per pregnancy are few, andtherearelongbreaksbetweenpregnancies.Consequently,ifhumanscutdown even one diprotodon every fewmonths, it would be enough tocause diprotodon deaths to outnumber births. Within a few thousandyearsthelast,lonesomediprotodonwouldpassaway,andwithhertheentirespecies.4In fact, for all their size, diprotodons and Australia’s other giantsprobablywouldn’thavebeenthathardtohuntbecausetheywouldhavebeen taken totally by surprise by their two-legged assailants. Varioushuman species had been prowling and evolving in Afro-Asia for 2millionyears.Theyslowlyhoned theirhunting skills,andbegangoingafter largeanimalsaround400,000yearsago.ThebigbeastsofAfricaandAsia learned to avoid humans, sowhen the newmega-predator –Homo sapiens – appeared on the Afro-Asian scene, the large animalsalreadyknewtokeeptheirdistancefromcreaturesthatlookedlikeit.In

contrast,theAustraliangiantshadnotimetolearntorunaway.Humansdon’tcomeacrossasparticularlydangerous.Theydon’thavelong,sharpteeth or muscular, lithe bodies. So when a diprotodon, the largestmarsupialevertowalktheearth,seteyesforthefirsttimeonthisfrail-looking ape, he gave it one glance and then went back to chewingleaves.Theseanimalshadtoevolveafearofhumankind,butbeforetheycoulddosotheyweregone.ThesecondexplanationisthatbythetimeSapiensreachedAustralia,

they had already mastered fire agriculture. Faced with an alien andthreatening environment, they deliberately burned vast areas ofimpassable thickets anddense forests to create opengrasslands,whichattracted more easily hunted game, and were better suited to theirneeds. They thereby completely changed the ecology of large parts ofAustraliawithinafewshortmillennia.Onebodyofevidence supporting thisview is the fossilplant record.

EucalyptustreeswererareinAustralia45,000yearsago.Butthearrivalof Homo sapiens inaugurated a golden age for the species. Sinceeucalyptusesareparticularly resistant to fire, theyspread farandwidewhileothertreesandshrubsdisappeared.Thesechangesinvegetationinfluencedtheanimalsthatatetheplants

and the carnivores that ate the vegetarians. Koalas, which subsistexclusivelyoneucalyptus leaves,happilymunched theirway intonewterritories. Most other animals suffered greatly. Many Australian foodchainscollapsed,drivingtheweakestlinksintoextinction.5Athirdexplanationagreesthathuntingandfireagricultureplayeda

significant role in the extinction, but emphasises that we can’tcompletely ignore the role of climate. The climate changes that besetAustraliaabout45,000yearsagodestabilisedtheecosystemandmadeitparticularly vulnerable.Under normal circumstances the systemwouldprobably have recuperated, as had happened many times previously.However,humansappearedonthestageatjustthiscriticaljunctureandpushedthebrittleecosystemintotheabyss.Thecombinationofclimatechangeandhumanhuntingisparticularlydevastatingforlargeanimals,since it attacks them from different angles. It is hard to find a goodsurvivalstrategythatwillworksimultaneouslyagainstmultiplethreats.Without further evidence, there’s no way of deciding between the

three scenarios. But there are certainly good reasons to believe that if

Homo sapiens had never gone Down Under, it would still be home tomarsupiallions,diprotodonsandgiantkangaroos.

TheEndofSloth

The extinction of the Australian megafauna was probably the firstsignificantmarkHomosapiens leftonourplanet. Itwasfollowedbyaneven largerecologicaldisaster, this time inAmerica.Homosapienswasthe first and only human species to reach the western hemispherelandmass,arrivingabout16,000yearsago,that is inoraround14,000BC.ThefirstAmericansarrivedonfoot,whichtheycoulddobecause,atthetime,sealevelswerelowenoughthatalandbridgeconnectednorth-eastern Siberia with north-western Alaska. Not that it was easy – thejourney was an arduous one, perhaps harder than the sea passage toAustralia. To make the crossing, Sapiens first had to learn how towithstandtheextremeArcticconditionsofnorthernSiberia,anareaonwhichthesunnevershinesinwinter,andwheretemperaturescandroptominusfiftydegreesCelsius.No previous human species had managed to penetrate places like

northern Siberia. Even the cold-adapted Neanderthals restrictedthemselvestorelativelywarmerregionsfurthersouth.ButHomosapiens,whosebodywasadaptedtolivingintheAfricansavannahratherthaninthe lands of snowand ice, devised ingenious solutions.When roamingbandsofSapiensforagersmigratedintocolderclimates,theylearnedtomake snowshoes and effective thermal clothing composed of layers offurs and skins, sewn together tightly with the help of needles. Theydeveloped new weapons and sophisticated hunting techniques thatenabledthemtotrackandkillmammothsandtheotherbiggameofthefar north.As their thermal clothing and hunting techniques improved,Sapiensdaredtoventuredeeperanddeeperintothefrozenregions.Andastheymovednorth,theirclothes,huntingstrategiesandothersurvivalskillscontinuedtoimprove.Butwhy did they bother?Why banish oneself to Siberia by choice?

Perhapssomebandsweredrivennorthbywars,demographicpressuresornaturaldisasters.Othersmighthavebeenlurednorthwardsbymore

positive reasons, such as animal protein. TheArctic landswere full oflarge, juicy animals such as reindeer andmammoths. Everymammothwas a source of a vast quantity of meat (which, given the frostytemperatures,couldevenbefrozenforlateruse),tastyfat,warmfurandvaluable ivory. As the findings from Sungir testify, mammoth-huntersdidnot justsurvive inthefrozennorth–theythrived.Astimepassed,the bands spread far and wide, pursuing mammoths, mastodons,rhinoceroses and reindeer. Around 14,000 BC, the chase took some ofthemfromnorth-easternSiberiatoAlaska.Ofcourse,theydidn’tknowtheywerediscoveringanewworld.Formammothandmanalike,AlaskawasamereextensionofSiberia.Atfirst,glaciersblockedthewayfromAlaskatotherestofAmerica,allowingnomorethanperhapsafewisolatedpioneerstoinvestigatethelandsfurthersouth.However,around12,000BCglobalwarmingmeltedthe iceandopenedaneasierpassage.Makinguseof thenewcorridor,people moved south en masse, spreading over the entire continent.ThoughoriginallyadaptedtohuntinglargegameintheArctic,theysoonadjustedtoanamazingvarietyofclimatesandecosystems.DescendantsoftheSiberianssettledthethickforestsoftheeasternUnitedStates,theswamps of the Mississippi Delta, the deserts of Mexico and steamingjunglesofCentralAmerica.SomemadetheirhomesintheriverworldoftheAmazonbasin,othersstruckrootsinAndeanmountainvalleysortheopenpampasofArgentina.Andallthishappenedinameremillenniumortwo!By10,000BC,humansalreadyinhabitedthemostsouthernpointinAmerica,theislandofTierradelFuegoatthecontinent’ssoutherntip.The human blitzkrieg across America testifies to the incomparableingenuity and the unsurpassed adaptability ofHomo sapiens. No otheranimal had evermoved into such a huge variety of radically differenthabitatssoquickly,everywhereusingvirtuallythesamegenes.6ThesettlingofAmericawashardlybloodless.Itleftbehindalongtrailof victims. American fauna 14,000 years agowas far richer than it istoday. When the first Americans marched south from Alaska into theplains of Canada and the western United States, they encounteredmammothsandmastodons,rodentsthesizeofbears,herdsofhorsesandcamels,oversizedlionsanddozensoflargespeciesthelikesofwhicharecompletelyunknowntoday,amongthemfearsomesabre-toothcatsand

giantgroundslothsthatweigheduptoeighttonsandreachedaheightof sixmetres.SouthAmericahostedanevenmoreexoticmenagerieoflargemammals,reptilesandbirds.TheAmericaswereagreatlaboratoryof evolutionary experimentation, a place where animals and plantsunknowninAfricaandAsiahadevolvedandthrived.Butnolonger.Within2,000yearsoftheSapiensarrival,mostoftheseunique specieswere gone. According to current estimates, within thatshort interval, North America lost thirty-four out of its forty-sevengenera of large mammals. South America lost fifty out of sixty. Thesabre-tooth cats, after flourishing for more than 30 million years,disappeared, and so did the giant ground sloths, the oversized lions,nativeAmericanhorses,nativeAmericancamels, thegiantrodentsandthe mammoths. Thousands of species of smaller mammals, reptiles,birds, and even insects and parasites also became extinct (when themammoths died out, all species of mammoth ticks followed them tooblivion).For decades, palaeontologists and zooarchaeologists – people whosearchforandstudyanimalremains–havebeencombingtheplainsandmountains of theAmericas in search of the fossilised bones of ancientcamelsand thepetrified faecesofgiantground sloths.When they findwhat they seek, the treasures are carefully packed up and sent tolaboratories,whereeveryboneandeverycoprolite(thetechnicalnamefor fossilised turds) ismeticulouslystudiedanddated.Timeandagain,these analyses yield the same results: the freshest dung balls and themost recent camel bones date to the period when humans floodedAmerica, that is, between approximately 12,000 and 9000 BC. Only inone area have scientists discovered younger dung balls: on severalCaribbean islands, in particular Cuba and Hispaniola, they foundpetrified ground-sloth scat dating to about 5000 BC. This is exactly thetime when the first humans managed to cross the Caribbean Sea andsettlethesetwolargeislands.Again,somescholarstrytoexonerateHomosapiensandblameclimatechange(whichrequiresthemtopositthat,forsomemysteriousreason,the climate in the Caribbean islands remained static for 7,000 yearswhiletherestofthewesternhemispherewarmed).ButinAmerica,thedungballcannotbedodged.Wearetheculprits.Thereisnowayaround

that truth. Even if climate change abetted us, the human contributionwasdecisive.7

Noah’sArk

Ifwe combine themass extinctions inAustralia andAmerica, andaddthesmaller-scaleextinctionsthattookplaceasHomosapiensspreadoverAfro-Asia–suchastheextinctionofallotherhumanspecies–andtheextinctions that occurredwhen ancient foragers settled remote islandssuchasCuba,theinevitableconclusionisthatthefirstwaveofSapienscolonisationwasoneof thebiggest and swiftest ecologicaldisasters tobefalltheanimalkingdom.Hardesthitwerethelargefurrycreatures.AtthetimeoftheCognitiveRevolution,theplanetwashometoabout200generaoflargeterrestrialmammalsweighingoverfiftykilograms.Atthetime of the Agricultural Revolution, only about a hundred remained.Homo sapiens drove to extinction about half of the planet’s big beastslongbeforehumansinventedthewheel,writing,orirontools.Thisecologicaltragedywasrestagedinminiaturecountlesstimesafter

the Agricultural Revolution. The archaeological record of island afterislandtellsthesamesadstory.Thetragedyopenswithasceneshowinga rich and varied population of large animals, without any trace ofhumans. In scene two, Sapiens appear, evidencedby ahumanbone, aspearpoint,orperhapsapotsherd.Scenethreequicklyfollows,inwhichmenandwomenoccupycentrestageandmostlargeanimals,alongwithmanysmallerones,aregone.The large island of Madagascar, about 400 kilometres east of the

Africanmainland,offersafamousexample.Throughmillionsofyearsofisolation, aunique collectionof animals evolved there.These includedthe elephant bird, a flightless creature threemetres tall andweighingalmosthalfaton–thelargestbirdintheworld–andthegiantlemurs,the globe’s largest primates. The elephant birds and the giant lemurs,along with most of the other large animals of Madagascar, suddenlyvanished about 1,500 years ago – preciselywhen the first humans setfootontheisland.

10.Reconstructionsoftwogiantgroundsloths(Megatherium)andbehindthemtwogiantarmadillos(Glyptodon).Nowextinct,giantarmadillosmeasuredoverthreemetresinlengthandweigheduptotwotons,whereasgiantgroundslothsreachedheightsofupto

sixmetres,andweigheduptoeighttons.

InthePacificOcean,themainwaveofextinctionbeganinabout1500BC,whenPolynesian farmers settled the Solomon Islands, Fiji andNewCaledonia.Theykilledoff,directlyorindirectly,hundredsofspeciesofbirds,insects,snailsandotherlocalinhabitants.Fromthere,thewaveofextinctionmovedgraduallytotheeast,thesouthandthenorth,intotheheartof thePacificOcean,obliteratingon itsway theunique faunaofSamoaandTonga(1200BC);theMarquisIslands(AD1);EasterIsland,theCookIslandsandHawaii(AD500);andfinallyNewZealand(AD1200).Similar ecological disasters occurred on almost every one of the

thousands of islands that pepper the Atlantic Ocean, Indian Ocean,ArcticOceanandMediterraneanSea.Archaeologistshavediscoveredoneven the tiniest islands evidence of the existence of birds, insects andsnailsthatlivedthereforcountlessgenerations,onlytovanishwhenthefirst human farmers arrived.None but a few extremely remote islandsescapedman’snoticeuntilthemodernage,andtheseislandskepttheir

fauna intact. The Galapagos Islands, to give one famous example,remained uninhabited by humans until the nineteenth century, thuspreserving their unique menagerie, including their giant tortoises,which,liketheancientdiprotodons,shownofearofhumans.The First Wave Extinction, which accompanied the spread of the

foragers, was followed by the Second Wave Extinction, whichaccompanied the spread of the farmers, and gives us an importantperspective on the ThirdWave Extinction, which industrial activity iscausing today.Don’tbelieve tree-huggerswhoclaimthatourancestorslived in harmony with nature. Long before the Industrial Revolution,Homosapiensheldtherecordamongallorganismsfordrivingthemostplant and animal species to their extinctions. We have the dubiousdistinctionofbeingthedeadliestspeciesintheannalsofbiology.Perhaps if more people were aware of the First Wave and Second

Waveextinctions,they’dbelessnonchalantabouttheThirdWavetheyarepartof.Ifweknewhowmanyspecieswe’vealreadyeradicated,wemight be more motivated to protect those that still survive. This isespecially relevant to the large animals of the oceans. Unlike theirterrestrial counterparts, the large sea animals suffered relatively littlefromtheCognitiveandAgriculturalRevolutions.Butmanyofthemareon the brink of extinction now as a result of industrial pollution andhuman overuse of oceanic resources. If things continue at the presentpace, it is likely thatwhales, sharks, tunaanddolphinswill followthediprotodons, ground sloths andmammoths to oblivion. Among all theworld’s large creatures, the only survivors of the human floodwill behumansthemselves,andthefarmyardanimalsthatserveasgalleyslavesinNoah’sArk.

PartTwoTheAgriculturalRevolution

11.AwallpaintingfromanEgyptiangrave,datedtoabout3,500yearsago,depictingtypicalagriculturalscenes.

5

History’sBiggestFraud

FOR2.5MILLIONYEARSHUMANSFEDthemselvesbygatheringplantsand hunting animals that lived and bred without their intervention.Homoerectus,HomoergasterandtheNeanderthalspluckedwildfigsandhuntedwildsheepwithoutdecidingwherefigtreeswouldtakeroot,inwhichmeadowaherdofsheepshouldgraze,orwhichbillygoatwouldinseminatewhichnannygoat.Homosapiens spread fromEastAfrica tothe Middle East, to Europe and Asia, and finally to Australia andAmerica–buteverywhere theywent,Sapiens toocontinued to livebygatheringwildplantsandhuntingwildanimals.Whydoanythingelsewhenyourlifestylefeedsyouamplyandsupportsarichworldofsocialstructures,religiousbeliefsandpoliticaldynamics?All this changed about 10,000 years ago, when Sapiens began to

devotealmostalltheirtimeandefforttomanipulatingthelivesofafewanimalandplant species. Fromsunrise to sunsethumans sowed seeds,wateredplants,pluckedweedsfromthegroundandledsheeptoprimepastures.Thiswork,theythought,wouldprovidethemwithmorefruit,grain and meat. It was a revolution in the way humans lived – theAgriculturalRevolution.The transition to agriculture began around 9500–8500 BC in the hill

countryofsouth-easternTurkey,westernIran,andtheLevant.Itbeganslowly and in a restricted geographical area. Wheat and goats weredomesticatedbyapproximately9000BC;peasandlentilsaround8000BC;olive trees by 5000 BC; horses by 4000 BC; and grapevines in 3500 BC.Some animals and plants, such as camels and cashew nuts, weredomesticatedevenlater,butby3500BCthemainwaveofdomestication

wasover.Eventoday,withallouradvancedtechnologies,morethan90per cent of the calories that feed humanity come from the handful ofplants that our ancestors domesticated between 9500 and 3500 BC –wheat,rice,maize(called‘corn’intheUS),potatoes,milletandbarley.Nonoteworthyplantoranimalhasbeendomesticatedinthelast2,000years. Ifourmindsare thoseofhunter-gatherers,ourcuisine is thatofancientfarmers.Scholars once believed that agriculture spread from a singleMiddleEasternpointoforigintothefourcornersoftheworld.Today,scholarsagreethatagriculturesprangup inotherpartsof theworldnotbytheactionofMiddleEasternfarmersexportingtheirrevolutionbutentirelyindependently.PeopleinCentralAmericadomesticatedmaizeandbeanswithout knowing anything about wheat and pea cultivation in theMiddleEast.SouthAmericanslearnedhowtoraisepotatoesandllamas,unawareofwhatwasgoingon in eitherMexicoor theLevant.Chinasfirstrevolutionariesdomesticatedrice,milletandpigs.NorthAmerica’sfirstgardenerswerethosewhogottiredofcombingtheundergrowthforediblegourdsanddecidedtocultivatepumpkins.NewGuineanstamedsugar cane and bananas, while the first West African farmers madeAfricanmillet,Africanrice,sorghumandwheatconformtotheirneeds.Fromthese initial focalpoints,agriculture spread farandwide.By thefirstcenturyADthevastmajorityofpeoplethroughoutmostoftheworldwereagriculturists.WhydidagriculturalrevolutionseruptintheMiddleEast,ChinaandCentralAmericabutnotinAustralia,AlaskaorSouthAfrica?Thereasonis simple: most species of plants and animals can’t be domesticated.Sapiens could dig up delicious truffles and hunt down woollymammoths, but domesticating either species was out of the question.The fungi were far too elusive, the giant beasts too ferocious. Of thethousandsofspeciesthatourancestorshuntedandgathered,onlyafewwere suitable candidates for farming and herding. Those few specieslived in particular places, and those are the places where agriculturalrevolutionsoccurred.

Scholars once proclaimed that the agricultural revolution was a greatleapforwardforhumanity.Theytoldataleofprogressfuelledbyhuman

brainpower.Evolutiongraduallyproducedevermoreintelligentpeople.Eventually, people were so smart that they were able to deciphernature’s secrets, enabling them to tame sheep and cultivatewheat. Assoon as this happened, they cheerfully abandoned the gruelling,dangerous, and often spartan life of hunter-gatherers, settling down toenjoythepleasant,satiatedlifeoffarmers.

Map2.Locationsanddatesofagriculturalrevolutions.Thedataiscontentious,andthemapisconstantlybeingredrawntoincorporatethelatestarchaeologicaldiscoveries.1

Thattaleisafantasy.Thereisnoevidencethatpeoplebecamemoreintelligentwithtime.ForagersknewthesecretsofnaturelongbeforetheAgricultural Revolution, since their survival depended on an intimateknowledge of the animals they hunted and the plants they gathered.Rather than heralding a new era of easy living, the AgriculturalRevolution left farmers with lives generally more difficult and lesssatisfying than those of foragers. Hunter-gatherers spent their time inmorestimulatingandvariedways,andwerelessindangerofstarvationanddisease.TheAgriculturalRevolutioncertainlyenlargedthesumtotaloffoodatthedisposalofhumankind,buttheextrafooddidnottranslateintoabetterdietormore leisure.Rather, it translated intopopulationexplosionsandpamperedelites.Theaveragefarmerworkedharderthan

the average forager, and got a worse diet in return. The AgriculturalRevolutionwashistory’sbiggestfraud.2Whowasresponsible?Neitherkings,norpriests,normerchants.The

culprits were a handful of plant species, including wheat, rice andpotatoes. These plants domesticated Homo sapiens, rather than viceversa.Think for a moment about the Agricultural Revolution from the

viewpointofwheat.Tenthousandyearsagowheatwasjustawildgrass,one ofmany, confined to a small range in theMiddle East. Suddenly,within just a few short millennia, it was growing all over the world.Accordingtothebasicevolutionarycriteriaofsurvivalandreproduction,wheathasbecomeoneofthemostsuccessfulplantsinthehistoryoftheearth. Inareassuchas theGreatPlainsofNorthAmerica,wherenotasingle wheat stalk grew 10,000 years ago, you can today walk forhundredsuponhundredsofkilometreswithoutencounteringanyotherplant.Worldwide,wheatcoversabout2.25millionsquarekilometresofthe globes surface, almost ten times the size of Britain. How did thisgrassturnfrominsignificanttoubiquitous?WheatdiditbymanipulatingHomosapienstoitsadvantage.Thisape

had been living a fairly comfortable life hunting and gathering untilabout10,000yearsago,butthenbegantoinvestmoreandmoreeffortin cultivating wheat. Within a couple of millennia, humans in manypartsoftheworldweredoinglittlefromdawntoduskotherthantakingcare of wheat plants. It wasn’t easy. Wheat demanded a lot of them.Wheat didn’t like rocks and pebbles, so Sapiens broke their backsclearing fields.Wheatdidn’t like sharing its space,waterandnutrientswithotherplants,somenandwomenlabouredlongdaysweedingunderthescorchingsun.Wheatgotsick, soSapienshadtokeepawatchoutfor worms and blight.Wheat was defenceless against other organismsthatlikedtoeatit,fromrabbitstolocustswarms,sothefarmershadtoguardandprotect it.Wheatwas thirsty, sohumans luggedwater fromsprings and streams to water it. Its hunger even impelled Sapiens tocollectanimalfaecestonourishthegroundinwhichwheatgrew.The body of Homo sapiens had not evolved for such tasks. It was

adapted to climbing apple trees and running after gazelles, not toclearingrocksandcarryingwaterbuckets.Humanspines,knees,necksandarchespaidtheprice.Studiesofancientskeletonsindicatethatthe

transition to agriculture brought about a plethora of ailments, such asslippeddiscs,arthritisandhernias.Moreover,thenewagriculturaltasksdemandedsomuchtimethatpeoplewere forcedtosettlepermanentlynexttotheirwheatfields.Thiscompletelychangedtheirwayoflife.Wedidnotdomesticatewheat. It domesticatedus.Theword ‘domesticate’comesfromtheLatindomus,whichmeans‘house’.Who’stheonelivinginahouse?Notthewheat.It’stheSapiens.HowdidwheatconvinceHomosapienstoexchangearathergoodlifeforamoremiserableexistence?Whatdid itoffer in return? Itdidnotofferabetterdiet.Remember,humansareomnivorousapeswhothriveonawidevarietyoffoods.GrainsmadeuponlyasmallfractionofthehumandietbeforetheAgriculturalRevolution.Adietbasedoncerealsispoor inminerals andvitamins, hard todigest, and reallybad for yourteethandgums.Wheatdidnotgivepeopleeconomicsecurity.Thelifeofapeasantislesssecure thanthatofahunter-gatherer.Foragersreliedondozensofspecies to survive, and could therefore weather difficult years evenwithout stocksofpreserved food. If theavailabilityofone specieswasreduced, they could gather and hunt more of other species. Farmingsocieties have, until very recently, relied for the great bulk of theircalorieintakeonasmallvarietyofdomesticatedplants.Inmanyareas,theyreliedonjustasinglestaple,suchaswheat,potatoesorrice.Iftherains failed or clouds of locusts arrived or if a fungus learned how toinfectthatstaplespecies,peasantsdiedbythethousandsandmillions.Nor could wheat offer security against human violence. The earlyfarmerswereatleastasviolentastheirforagerancestors,ifnotmoreso.Farmershadmorepossessionsandneededlandforplanting.Thelossofpasture land to raidingneighbours couldmean the difference betweensubsistenceandstarvation,sotherewasmuchlessroomforcompromise.When a foraging band was hard-pressed by a stronger rival, it couldusually move on. It was difficult and dangerous, but it was feasible.Whena strongenemy threatenedanagriculturalvillage, retreatmeantgivingup fields,housesandgranaries. Inmanycases, thisdoomed therefugeestostarvation.Farmers,therefore,tendedtostayputandfighttothebitterend.

12.TribalwarfareinNewGuineabetweentwofarmingcommunities(1960).SuchsceneswereprobablywidespreadinthethousandsofyearsfollowingtheAgricultural

Revolution.

Many anthropological and archaeological studies indicate that insimpleagriculturalsocietieswithnopoliticalframeworksbeyondvillageand tribe, human violence was responsible for about 15 per cent ofdeaths, including 25 per cent of male deaths. In contemporary NewGuinea, violence accounts for 30 per cent of male deaths in oneagricultural tribal society, the Dani, and 35 per cent in another, theEnga.InEcuador,perhaps50percentofadultWaoranismeetaviolentdeath at the hands of another human!3 In time, human violence wasbrought under control through the development of larger socialframeworks–cities,kingdomsandstates.Butittookthousandsofyearstobuildsuchhugeandeffectivepoliticalstructures.Village life certainly brought the first farmers some immediate

benefits, such as better protection againstwild animals, rain and cold.Yet for theaverageperson, thedisadvantagesprobablyoutweighedtheadvantages. This is hard for people in today’s prosperous societies toappreciate. Since we enjoy affluence and security, and since ouraffluenceandsecurityarebuilton foundations laidbytheAgricultural

Revolution,weassumethattheAgriculturalRevolutionwasawonderfulimprovement.Yetitiswrongtojudgethousandsofyearsofhistoryfromtheperspectiveoftoday.Amuchmorerepresentativeviewpointisthatof a three-year-old girl dying frommalnutrition in first-century Chinabecauseherfather’scropshavefailed.Wouldshesay ‘Iamdyingfrommalnutrition,butin2,000years,peoplewillhaveplentytoeatandliveinbigair-conditionedhouses,somysufferingisaworthwhilesacrifice’?Whatthendidwheatofferagriculturists,includingthatmalnourished

Chinese girl? It offered nothing for people as individuals. Yet it didbestow something on Homo sapiens as a species. Cultivating wheatprovided much more food per unit of territory, and thereby enabledHomosapienstomultiplyexponentially.Around13,000BC,whenpeoplefed themselvesbygatheringwildplantsandhuntingwildanimals, theareaaroundtheoasisofJericho,inPalestine,couldsupportatmostoneroamingbandofaboutahundredrelativelyhealthyandwell-nourishedpeople.Around8500BC,whenwildplantsgavewaytowheatfields,theoasis supported a large but cramped village of 1,000 people, whosufferedfarmorefromdiseaseandmalnourishment.Thecurrencyofevolutionisneitherhungernorpain,butrathercopies

ofDNAhelixes.Justastheeconomicsuccessofacompanyismeasuredonlybythenumberofdollarsinitsbankaccount,notbythehappinessofitsemployees,sotheevolutionarysuccessofaspeciesismeasuredbythe number of copies of its DNA. If nomore DNA copies remain, thespecies is extinct, just as a company without money is bankrupt. If aspecies boasts many DNA copies, it is a success, and the speciesflourishes.Fromsuchaperspective,1,000copiesarealwaysbetterthanahundredcopies.ThisistheessenceoftheAgriculturalRevolution:theabilitytokeepmorepeoplealiveunderworseconditions.Yet why should individuals care about this evolutionary calculus?

Whywouldanysaneperson lowerhisorher standardof living just tomultiply the number of copies of theHomo sapiens genome? Nobodyagreedtothisdeal:theAgriculturalRevolutionwasatrap.

TheLuxuryTrap

Theriseoffarmingwasaverygradualaffairspreadovercenturiesandmillennia.AbandofHomosapiens gatheringmushrooms andnuts andhunting deer and rabbit did not all of a sudden settle in a permanentvillage, ploughing fields, sowing wheat and carrying water from theriver. The change proceeded by stages, each of which involved just asmallalterationindailylife.Homosapiens reached theMiddleEast around70,000years ago. Forthenext50,000yearsourancestorsflourishedtherewithoutagriculture.The natural resources of the area were enough to support its humanpopulation. In timesofplentypeoplehada fewmore children, and intimesofneedafewless.Humans,likemanymammals,havehormonaland genetic mechanisms that help control procreation. In good timesfemalesreachpubertyearlier,andtheirchancesofgettingpregnantareabithigher.Inbadtimespubertyislateandfertilitydecreases.Tothesenaturalpopulationcontrolswereaddedculturalmechanisms.Babies and small children, who move slowly and demand muchattention, were a burden on nomadic foragers. People tried to spacetheirchildrenthreetofouryearsapart.Womendidsobynursingtheirchildrenaroundtheclockanduntilalateage(around-the-clocksucklingsignificantlydecreasesthechancesofgettingpregnant).Othermethodsincluded full or partial sexual abstinence (backed perhaps by culturaltaboos),abortionsandoccasionallyinfanticide.4Duringthese longmillenniapeopleoccasionallyatewheatgrain,butthiswasamarginalpartoftheirdiet.About18,000yearsago,thelasticeagegavewaytoaperiodofglobalwarming.Astemperaturesrose,sodid rainfall. The new climatewas ideal forMiddle Easternwheat andother cereals, whichmultiplied and spread. People began eatingmorewheat, and in exchange they inadvertently spread its growth. Since itwasimpossibletoeatwildgrainswithoutfirstwinnowing,grindingandcooking them, peoplewho gathered these grains carried themback totheir temporary campsites for processing. Wheat grains are small andnumerous, so someof them inevitably fell on theway to the campsiteandwere lost.Over time,more andmorewheat grew along favouritehumantrailsandnearcampsites.When humans burned down forests and thickets, this also helpedwheat. Fire cleared away trees and shrubs, allowing wheat and othergrasses tomonopolise the sunlight, water and nutrients.Wherewheat

became particularly abundant, and game and other food sourceswerealso plentiful, human bands could gradually give up their nomadiclifestyleandsettledowninseasonalandevenpermanentcamps.Atfirsttheymighthavecampedforfourweeksduringtheharvest.Ageneration later, as wheat plants multiplied and spread, the harvestcampmighthavelastedforfiveweeks,thensix,andfinallyitbecameapermanent village. Evidence of such settlements has been discoveredthroughout the Middle East, particularly in the Levant, where theNatufian culture flourished from 12,500 BC to 9500 BC. The Natufianswerehunter-gathererswhosubsistedondozensofwildspecies,buttheylived in permanent villages and devoted much of their time to theintensive gathering and processing of wild cereals. They built stonehousesandgranaries.Theystoredgrainfortimesofneed.Theyinventednew tools such as stone scythes for harvesting wild wheat, and stonepestlesandmortarstogrindit.In the years following 9500 BC, the descendants of the Natufianscontinuedtogatherandprocesscereals,buttheyalsobegantocultivatethem in more and more elaborate ways. When gathering wild grains,they took care to lay aside part of the harvest to sow the fields nextseason.Theydiscoveredthattheycouldachievemuchbetterresultsbysowingthegrainsdeepinthegroundratherthanhaphazardlyscatteringthemonthesurface.So theybegantohoeandplough.Gradually theyalsostarted toweed the fields, toguard themagainstparasites,and towater and fertilise them. As more effort was directed towards cerealcultivation, there was less time to gather and hunt wild species. Theforagersbecamefarmers.No single step separated thewoman gatheringwildwheat from thewomanfarmingdomesticatedwheat,soit’shardtosayexactlywhenthedecisivetransitiontoagriculturetookplace.But,by8500BC,theMiddleEast was peppered with permanent villages such as Jericho, whoseinhabitants spent most of their time cultivating a few domesticatedspecies.Withthemovetopermanentvillagesandtheincreaseinfoodsupply,thepopulationbegantogrow.Givingupthenomadic lifestyleenabledwomentohaveachildeveryyear.Babieswereweanedatanearlierage–theycouldbefedonporridgeandgruel.Theextrahandsweresorely

needed in the fields.But the extramouthsquicklywipedout the foodsurpluses,soevenmorefieldshadtobeplanted.Aspeoplebeganlivingindisease-riddensettlements,aschildrenfedmoreoncerealsandlessonmother’smilk,andaseachchildcompetedforhisorherporridgewithmore and more siblings, child mortality soared. In most agriculturalsocieties at least one out of every three children died before reachingtwenty.5Yettheincreaseinbirthsstilloutpacedtheincreaseindeaths;humanskepthavinglargernumbersofchildren.With time, the ‘wheat bargain’ becamemore andmoreburdensome.

Children died in droves, and adults ate bread by the sweat of theirbrows.TheaveragepersoninJerichoof8500BClivedaharderlifethanthe average person in Jericho of 9500 BC or 13,000 BC. But nobodyrealisedwhatwashappening.Everygenerationcontinuedtolivelikethepreviousgeneration,makingonlysmallimprovementshereandthereinthe way things were done. Paradoxically, a series of ‘improvements’,eachofwhichwasmeant tomake life easier, addedup to amillstonearoundthenecksofthesefarmers.Why did people make such a fateful miscalculation? For the same

reason thatpeople throughouthistoryhavemiscalculated.Peoplewereunabletofathomthefullconsequencesoftheirdecisions.Whenevertheydecided to do a bit of extra work – say, to hoe the fields instead ofscattering seedson the surface–people thought, ‘Yes,wewillhave towork harder. But the harvest will be so bountiful! We won’t have toworry anymore about lean years.Our childrenwill never go to sleephungry.’Itmadesense.Ifyouworkedharder,youwouldhaveabetterlife.Thatwastheplan.The first part of the plan went smoothly. People indeed worked

harder. But people did not foresee that the number of childrenwouldincrease,meaningthattheextrawheatwouldhavetobesharedbetweenmore children. Neither did the early farmers understand that feedingchildrenwithmore porridge and less breastmilk wouldweaken theirimmune system, and that permanent settlementswouldbehotbeds forinfectious diseases. They did not foresee that by increasing theirdependence on a single source of food, they were actually exposingthemselves even more to the depredations of drought. Nor did thefarmers foresee that ingoodyears theirbulginggranarieswouldtempt

thievesandenemies,compellingthemtostartbuildingwallsanddoingguardduty.Thenwhydidn’thumansabandon farmingwhen theplanbackfired?

Partlybecause it tookgenerations for the small changes toaccumulateandtransformsocietyand,bythen,nobodyrememberedthat theyhadever lived differently. And partly because population growth burnedhumanity’s boats. If the adoption of ploughing increased a village’spopulation from a hundred to no, which ten people would havevolunteered to starve so that theotherscouldgoback to thegoodoldtimes?Therewasnogoingback.Thetrapsnappedshut.Thepursuitofaneasierliferesultedinmuchhardship,andnotforthe

last time. It happens to us today. Howmany young college graduateshavetakendemandingjobsinhigh-poweredfirms,vowingthattheywillwork hard to earn money that will enable them to retire and pursuetheirrealinterestswhentheyarethirty-five?Butbythetimetheyreachthat age, they have largemortgages, children to school, houses in thesuburbsthatnecessitateatleasttwocarsperfamily,andasensethatlifeis not worth living without really good wine and expensive holidaysabroad.Whataretheysupposedtodo,gobacktodigginguproots?No,theydoubletheireffortsandkeepslavingaway.One of history’s few iron laws is that luxuries tend to become

necessities and to spawn new obligations. Once people get used to acertainluxury,theytakeitforgranted.Thentheybegintocountonit.Finally they reach a point where they can’t live without it. Let’s takeanotherfamiliarexamplefromourowntime.Overthelastfewdecades,we have invented countless time-saving devices that are supposed tomake life more relaxed – washing machines, vacuum cleaners,dishwashers,telephones,mobilephones,computers,email.Previouslyittookalotofworktowritealetter,addressandstampanenvelope,andtakeittothemailbox.Ittookdaysorweeks,maybeevenmonths,togetareply.Nowadays Icandashoffanemail, send ithalfwayaroundtheglobe,and(ifmyaddresseeisonline)receiveareplyaminutelater.I’vesavedallthattroubleandtime,butdoIliveamorerelaxedlife?Sadlynot.Backinthesnail-mailera,peopleusuallyonlywroteletters

when theyhad something important to relate.Rather thanwriting thefirst thing that came into their heads, they considered carefully whattheywanted to say and how to phrase it. They expected to receive a

similarly considered answer.Most peoplewrote and received nomorethan a handful of letters amonth and seldom felt compelled to replyimmediately.TodayIreceivedozensofemailseachday,allfrompeoplewhoexpectapromptreply.Wethoughtweweresavingtime;insteadwerevvedup the treadmillof life to ten times its former speedandmadeourdaysmoreanxiousandagitated.Here and there a Ludditeholdout refuses to open an email account,

just as thousands of years ago some human bands refused to take upfarmingandsoescapedtheluxurytrap.ButtheAgriculturalRevolutiondidn’t need every band in a given region to join up. It only took one.Onceonebandsettleddownandstarted tilling,whether in theMiddleEast or Central America, agriculture was irresistible. Since farmingcreated the conditions for swift demographic growth, farmers couldusually overcome foragers by sheer weight of numbers. The foragerscould either run away, abandoning their hunting grounds to field andpasture,ortakeuptheploughsharethemselves.Eitherway,theoldlifewasdoomed.The story of the luxury trap carries with it an important lesson.

Humanity’s search foraneasier life released immense forcesofchangethat transformed the world in ways nobody envisioned or wanted.Nobody plotted the Agricultural Revolution or sought humandependence on cereal cultivation. A series of trivial decisions aimedmostly at filling a few stomachs and gaining a little security had thecumulativeeffectofforcingancientforagerstospendtheirdayscarryingwaterbucketsunderascorchingsun.

DivineIntervention

The above scenario explains the Agricultural Revolution as amiscalculation. It’s very plausible. History is full of far more idioticmiscalculations. But there’s another possibility. Maybe it wasn’t thesearch for an easier life that brought about the transformation.MaybeSapiens had other aspirations, and were consciously willing to maketheirlivesharderinordertoachievethem.Scientists usually seek to attribute historical developments to cold

economicanddemographicfactors.Itsitsbetterwiththeirrationalandmathematicalmethods. In the case ofmodern history, scholars cannotavoid taking into account non-material factors such as ideology andculture. The written evidence forces their hand. We have enoughdocuments, lettersandmemoirs toprovethatWorldWarTwowasnotcaused by food shortages or demographic pressures. But we have nodocuments from the Natufian culture, so when dealing with ancientperiodsthematerialistschoolreignssupreme.Itisdifficulttoprovethatpreliterate people were motivated by faith rather than economicnecessity.Yet,insomerarecases,weareluckyenoughtofindtelltaleclues.In

1995archaeologistsbegantoexcavateasiteinsouth-eastTurkeycalledGöbekli Tepe. In the oldest stratum they discovered no signs of asettlement, houses or daily activities. They did, however, findmonumental pillared structures decoratedwith spectacular engravings.Eachstonepillarweigheduptoseventonsandreachedaheightoffivemetres. In a nearby quarry they found a half-chiselled pillarweighingfifty tons. Altogether, they uncovered more than ten monumentalstructures,thelargestofthemnearlythirtymetresacross.Archaeologists are familiar with such monumental structures from

sites around the world – the best-known example is Stonehenge inBritain. Yet as they studiedGöbekli Tepe, they discovered an amazingfact. Stonehenge dates to 2500 BC, and was built by a developedagricultural society.The structures atGöbekliTepearedated to about9500 BC, and all available evidence indicates that they were built byhunter-gatherers. The archaeological community initially found itdifficult to credit these findings, but one test after another confirmedboththeearlydateof thestructuresandthepre-agriculturalsocietyoftheirbuilders.Thecapabilitiesofancientforagers,andthecomplexityoftheir cultures, seem to be far more impressive than was previouslysuspected.

13.Opposite:TheremainsofamonumentalstructurefromGöbekliTepe.Right:Oneofthedecoratedstonepillars(aboutfivemetreshigh).

Why would a foraging society build such structures? They had noobvious utilitarian purpose. They were neither mammothslaughterhousesnorplacestoshelterfromrainorhidefromlions.Thatleaves us with the theory that they were built for some mysteriouscultural purpose that archaeologists have a hard time deciphering.Whateveritwas,theforagersthoughtitworthahugeamountofeffortand time. The only way to build Göbekli Tepe was for thousands offoragers belonging to different bands and tribes to cooperate over anextended period of time. Only a sophisticated religious or ideologicalsystemcouldsustainsuchefforts.Göbekli Tepe held another sensational secret. For many years,

geneticistshavebeentracingtheoriginsofdomesticatedwheat.Recentdiscoveries indicate that at least one domesticated variant, einkornwheat,originatedintheKaraçadagHills–aboutthirtykilometresfrom

GöbekliTepe.6

Thiscanhardlybeacoincidence.It’slikelythattheculturalcentreofGöbekli Tepe was somehow connected to the initial domestication ofwheatbyhumankindandofhumankindbywheat.Inordertofeedthepeoplewhobuiltandusedthemonumentalstructures,particularlylargequantitiesof foodwererequired. Itmaywellbethat foragersswitchedfromgatheringwildwheattointensewheatcultivation,nottoincreasetheirnormalfoodsupply,butrathertosupportthebuildingandrunningof a temple. In the conventional picture, pioneers first built a village,andwhenitprospered,theysetupatempleinthemiddle.ButGöbekliTepe suggests that the temple may have been built first, and that avillagelatergrewuparoundit.

VictimsoftheRevolution

TheFaustianbargainbetweenhumansandgrainswasnottheonlydealour species made. Another deal was struck concerning the fate ofanimals such as sheep, goats, pigs and chickens. Nomadic bands thatstalked wild sheep gradually altered the constitutions of the herds onwhichtheypreyed.Thisprocessprobablybeganwithselectivehunting.Humanslearnedthatitwastotheiradvantagetohuntonlyadultramsandoldor sick sheep.They spared fertile femalesandyoung lambs inorder to safeguard the long-termvitalityof the localherd.The secondstep might have been to actively defend the herd against predators,drivingawaylions,wolvesandrivalhumanbands.Thebandmightnexthave corralled theherd into a narrowgorge in order to better controland defend it. Finally, people began tomake amore careful selectionamong the sheep in order to tailor them to human needs. The mostaggressive rams, those that showed the greatest resistance to humancontrol, were slaughtered first. So were the skinniest and mostinquisitive females. (Shepherds are not fond of sheep whose curiositytakesthemfarfromtheherd.)Witheachpassinggeneration,thesheepbecamefatter,moresubmissiveandlesscurious.Voilà!MaryhadalittlelambandeverywherethatMarywentthelambwassuretogo.Alternatively,huntersmayhavecaughtandadopted’alamb,fatteningitduringthemonthsofplentyandslaughteringitintheleanerseason.Atsomestagetheybegankeepingagreaternumberofsuchlambs.Someof these reached puberty and began to procreate. Themost aggressiveandunrulylambswerefirsttotheslaughter.Themostsubmissive,mostappealing lambswere allowed to live longer andprocreate. The resultwasaherdofdomesticatedandsubmissivesheep.Such domesticated animals – sheep, chickens, donkeys and others –suppliedfood(meat,milk,eggs),rawmaterials(skins,wool),andmusclepower. Transportation, ploughing, grinding and other tasks, hithertoperformedbyhumansinew,wereincreasinglycarriedoutbyanimals.Inmost farming societies people focused on plant cultivation; raisinganimals was a secondary activity. But a new kind of society alsoappearedinsomeplaces,basedprimarilyontheexploitationofanimals:tribesofpastoralistherders.As humans spread around the world, so did their domesticatedanimals. Ten thousand years ago, notmore than a fewmillion sheep,cattle, goats, boars and chickens lived in restricted Afro-Asian niches.

Todaytheworldcontainsaboutabillionsheep,abillionpigs,morethanabillioncattle,andmorethan25billionchickens.Andtheyareallovertheglobe.Thedomesticatedchicken is themostwidespread fowlever.Following Homo sapiens, domesticated cattle, pigs and sheep are thesecond,thirdandfourthmostwidespreadlargemammalsintheworld.Fromanarrowevolutionaryperspective,whichmeasuressuccessbythenumber of DNA copies, the Agricultural Revolution was a wonderfulboonforchickens,cattle,pigsandsheep.Unfortunately,theevolutionaryperspectiveisanincompletemeasureof success. It judges everything by the criteria of survival andreproduction, with no regard for individual suffering and happiness.Domesticated chickens and cattlemaywell be an evolutionary successstory, but they are also among themostmiserable creatures that everlived. The domestication of animalswas founded on a series of brutalpracticesthatonlybecamecruellerwiththepassingofthecenturies.Thenatural lifespanofwildchickens isaboutseven to twelveyears,and of cattle about twenty to twenty-five years. In the wild, mostchickensandcattlediedlongbeforethat,buttheystillhadafairchanceoflivingforarespectablenumberofyears.Incontrast,thevastmajorityof domesticated chickens and cattle are slaughtered at the age ofbetweena fewweeksanda fewmonths,because thishasalwaysbeentheoptimalslaughteringagefromaneconomicperspective.(Whykeepfeeding a cock for three years if it has already reached its maximumweightafterthreemonths?)Egg-laying hens, dairy cows and draught animals are sometimesallowedtoliveformanyyears.Butthepriceissubjugationtoawayoflifecompletelyalientotheirurgesanddesires.It’sreasonabletoassume,forexample,thatbullsprefertospendtheirdayswanderingoveropenprairiesinthecompanyofotherbullsandcowsratherthanpullingcartsandploughsharesundertheyokeofawhip-wieldingape.In order to turn bulls, horses, donkeys and camels into obedientdraughtanimals,theirnaturalinstinctsandsocialtieshadtobebroken,their aggression and sexuality contained, and their freedom ofmovement curtailed. Farmers developed techniques such as lockinganimals insidepensandcages,bridling them inharnessesand leashes,training them with whips and cattle prods, and mutilating them. Theprocess of taming almost always involves the castrationofmales. This

restrainsmaleaggressionandenableshumansselectivelytocontroltheherd’sprocreation.

14.ApaintingfromanEgyptiangrave,c.1200BC:Apairofoxenploughingafield.Inthewild,cattleroamedastheypleasedinherdswithacomplexsocialstructure.The

castratedanddomesticatedoxwastedawayhislifeunderthelashandinanarrowpen,labouringaloneorinpairsinawaythatsuitedneitheritsbodynoritssocialand

emotionalneeds.Whenanoxcouldnolongerpulltheplough,itwasslaughtered.(NotethehunchedpositionoftheEgyptianfarmerwho,muchliketheox,spenthislifeinhard

labouroppressivetohisbody,hismindandhissocialrelationships.)

In many New Guinean societies, the wealth of a person hastraditionallybeendeterminedbythenumberofpigsheorsheowns.Toensure that the pigs can’t run away, farmers in northern New Guineaslice off a chunkof eachpig’s nose.This causes severepainwheneverthepigtriestosniff.Sincethepigscannotfindfoodorevenfindtheirway around without sniffing, this mutilation makes them completelydependentontheirhumanowners.InanotherareaofNewGuinea,ithasbeen customary to gouge out pigs’ eyes, so that they cannot even seewherethey’regoing.7Thedairyindustryhasitsownwaysofforcinganimalstodoitswill.

Cows, goats and sheep producemilk only after giving birth to calves,kids and lambs, and only as long as the youngsters are suckling. Tocontinueasupplyofanimalmilk,afarmerneedstohavecalves,kidsorlambsforsuckling,butmustpreventthemfrommonopolisingthemilk.One common method throughout history was to simply slaughter thecalves and kids shortly after birth, milk the mother for all she wasworth,andthengetherpregnantagain.This isstillaverywidespreadtechnique. In many modern dairy farms a milk cow usually lives foraboutfiveyearsbeforebeingslaughtered.Duringthesefiveyearssheisalmostconstantlypregnant,andisfertilisedwithin60to120daysaftergivingbirthinordertopreservemaximummilkproduction.Hercalvesare separated from her shortly after birth. The females are reared tobecome the next generation of dairy cows, whereas the males arehandedovertothecareofthemeatindustry.8Anothermethodistokeepthecalvesandkidsneartheirmothers,but

prevent thembyvarious stratagems fromsuckling toomuchmilk.Thesimplestwaytodothatistoallowthekidorcalftostartsuckling,butdrive it away once the milk starts flowing. This method usuallyencounters resistance frombothkidandmother.Someshepherd tribesused to kill the offspring, eat its flesh, and then stuff the skin. Thestuffedoffspringwas thenpresented to themother so that itspresencewouldencouragehermilkproduction.TheNuertribeintheSudanwentsofarastosmearstuffedanimalswiththeirmother’surine,togivethecounterfeitcalvesafamiliar, livescent.AnotherNuertechniquewastotiea ringof thornsaroundacalf’smouth, so that itpricks themotherandcauseshertoresistsuckling.9Tuaregcamelbreeders intheSaharaused to puncture or cut off parts of the nose and upper lip of youngcamels in order to make suckling painful, thereby discouraging themfromconsumingtoomuchmilk.10

Notallagricultural societieswere thiscruel to their farmanimals.Thelivesofsomedomesticatedanimalscouldbequitegood.Sheepraisedforwool, pet dogs and cats, war horses and race horses often enjoyedcomfortableconditions.TheRomanemperorCaligulaallegedlyplannedto appoint his favourite horse, Incitatus, to the consulship. Shepherdsand farmers throughouthistory showedaffection for their animalsand

have takengreat careof them, just asmany slaveholders felt affectionandconcernfortheirslaves.Itwasnoaccidentthatkingsandprophetsstyled themselvesas shepherdsand likened theway theyand thegodscaredfortheirpeopletoashepherd’scareforhisflock.

15.Amoderncalfinanindustrialmeatfarm.Immediatelyafterbirththecalfisseparatedfromitsmotherandlockedinsideatinycagenotmuchbiggerthanthecalf’sownbody.Therethecalfspendsitsentirelife–aboutfourmonthsonaverage.Itneverleavesitscage,norisitallowedtoplaywithothercalvesorevenwalk–allsothatitsmuscleswillnotgrowstrong.Softmusclesmeanasoftandjuicysteak.Thefirsttimethecalfhasachancetowalk,stretchitsmusclesandtouchothercalvesisonitswaytothe

slaughterhouse.Inevolutionaryterms,cattlerepresentoneofthemostsuccessfulanimalspeciesevertoexist.Atthesametime,theyaresomeofthemostmiserableanimalson

theplanet.

Yetfromtheviewpointoftheherd,ratherthanthatoftheshepherd,it’s hard to avoid the impression that for the vast majority ofdomesticated animals, the Agricultural Revolution was a terriblecatastrophe. Their evolutionary ‘success’ is meaningless. A rare wildrhinoceroson thebrinkof extinction isprobablymore satisfied thana

calfwhospendsitsshortlifeinsideatinybox,fattenedtoproducejuicysteaks.Thecontentedrhinocerosisnolesscontentforbeingamongthelast of its kind. The numerical success of the calf’s species is littleconsolationforthesufferingtheindividualendures.This discrepancy between evolutionary success and individual

suffering is perhaps themost important lesson we can draw from theAgriculturalRevolution.Whenwestudythenarrativeofplantssuchaswheat and maize, maybe the purely evolutionary perspective makessense.Yetinthecaseofanimalssuchascattle,sheepandSapiens,eachwithacomplexworldofsensationsandemotions,wehavetoconsiderhow evolutionary success translates into individual experience. In thefollowingchapterswewillseetimeandagainhowadramaticincreaseinthecollectivepowerandostensiblesuccessofourspecieswenthandinhandwithmuchindividualsuffering.

6

BuildingPyramids

THE AGRICULTURAL REVOLUTION IS ONE of the most controversialeventsinhistory.Somepartisansproclaimthatitsethumankindontheroad to prosperity and progress. Others insist that it led to perdition.Thiswastheturningpoint,theysay,whereSapienscastoffitsintimatesymbiosis with nature and sprinted towards greed and alienation.Whichever direction the road led, there was no going back. Farmingenabledpopulationstoincreasesoradicallyandrapidlythatnocomplexagricultural society could ever again sustain itself if it returned tohunting and gathering. Around 10,000 BC, before the transition toagriculture,earthwashometoabout5–8millionnomadicforagers.Bythe first century AD, only 1–2 million foragers remained (mainly inAustralia,AmericaandAfrica),buttheirnumbersweredwarfedbytheworld’s250millionfarmers.1The vastmajority of farmers lived in permanent settlements; only a

fewwerenomadicshepherds.Settlingdowncausedmostpeoplesturftoshrinkdramatically.Ancienthunter-gatherersusuallylivedinterritoriescoveringmanydozensandevenhundredsofsquarekilometres. ‘Home’was the entire territory, with its hills, streams, woods and open sky.Peasants, on theotherhand, spentmostof theirdaysworkinga smallfieldororchard,andtheirdomesticlivescentredonacrampedstructureofwood,stoneormud,measuringnomorethana fewdozenmetres–the house. The typical peasant developed a very strong attachment tothis structure. This was a far-reaching revolution, whose impact waspsychological asmuch as architectural.Henceforth, attachment to ‘myhouse’ and separation from the neighbours became the psychological

hallmarkofamuchmoreself-centredcreature.Thenewagriculturalterritorieswerenotonlyfarsmallerthanthoseofancientforagers,butalsofarmoreartificial.Asidefromtheuseoffire,hunter-gatherersmadefewdeliberatechangestothelandsinwhichtheyroamed. Farmers, on the other hand, lived in artificial human islandsthat they laboriously carved out of the surrounding wilds. They cutdownforests,dugcanals,clearedfields,builthouses,ploughedfurrows,andplantedfruit trees intidyrows.Theresultingartificialhabitatwasmeant only for humans and ‘their’ plants and animals, and was oftenfenced off bywalls and hedges. Farmer families did all they could tokeep out wayward weeds and wild animals. If such interlopers madetheir way in, they were driven out. If they persisted, their humanantagonists sought ways to exterminate them. Particularly strongdefenceswereerectedaround thehome.From thedawnofagricultureuntil this very day, billions of humans armedwith branches, swatters,shoesandpoisonsprayshavewagedrelentlesswaragainst thediligentants, furtive roaches, adventurous spiders and misguided beetles thatconstantlyinfiltratethehumandomicile.For most of history these man-made enclaves remained very small,surroundedbyexpansesofuntamednature.Theearth’ssurfacemeasuresabout 510million square kilometres, ofwhich 155million is land.AslateasAD1400,thevastmajorityoffarmers,alongwiththeirplantsandanimals, clustered together in an area of just 11 million squarekilometres–2percentoftheplanet’ssurface.2Everywhereelsewastoocold, too hot, too dry, too wet, or otherwise unsuited for cultivation.Thisminuscule2percentoftheearth’ssurfaceconstitutedthestageonwhichhistoryunfolded.Peoplefounditdifficulttoleavetheirartificialislands.Theycouldnotabandon their houses, fields and granaries without grave risk of loss.Furthermore,astimewentontheyaccumulatedmoreandmorethings–objects,not easily transportable, that tied themdown.Ancient farmersmightseemtousdirtpoor,butatypicalfamilypossessedmoreartefactsthananentireforagertribe.

TheComingoftheFuture

While agricultural space shrank, agricultural time expanded. Foragersusuallydidn’twastemuchtimethinkingaboutnextweekornextmonth.Farmerssailedintheirimaginationyearsanddecadesintothefuture.Foragersdiscountedthefuturebecausetheylivedfromhandtomouthandcouldonlypreservefoodoraccumulatepossessionswithdifficulty.Ofcourse,theyclearlyengagedinsomeadvancedplanning.ThecreatorsofthecavepaintingsofChauvet,LascauxandAltamiraalmostcertainlyintended them to last for generations. Social alliances and politicalrivalrieswerelong-termaffairs.Itoftentookyearstorepayafavourortoavengeawrong.Nevertheless,inthesubsistenceeconomyofhuntingand gathering, therewas an obvious limit to such long-termplanning.Paradoxically,itsavedforagersalotofanxieties.Therewasnosenseinworryingaboutthingsthattheycouldnotinfluence.TheAgriculturalRevolutionmadethefuturefarmoreimportantthanithadeverbeenbefore.Farmersmustalwayskeep the future inmindandmustworkinitsservice.Theagriculturaleconomywasbasedonaseasonal cycle of production, comprising long months of cultivationfollowed by short peak periods of harvest. On the night following theendofaplentifulharvestthepeasantsmightcelebrateforalltheywereworth,butwithinaweekorsotheywereagainupatdawnfora longdayinthefield.Althoughtherewasenoughfoodfortoday,nextweek,andevennextmonth, theyhad toworryaboutnextyearand theyearafterthat.Concern about the future was rooted not only in seasonal cycles ofproduction,butalsointhefundamentaluncertaintyofagriculture.Sincemostvillageslivedbycultivatingaverylimitedvarietyofdomesticatedplants and animals, they were at the mercy of droughts, floods andpestilence.Peasantswereobligedtoproducemorethantheyconsumedso that they could build up reserves.Without grain in the silo, jars ofoliveoil in thecellar, cheese in thepantryandsausageshanging fromtherafters,theywouldstarveinbadyears.Andbadyearswereboundtocome,soonerorlater.Apeasantlivingontheassumptionthatbadyearswouldnotcomedidn’tlivelong.Consequently, fromtheveryadventofagriculture,worriesabout thefuturebecamemajorplayers in the theatreof thehumanmind.Wherefarmersdependedon rains towater their fields, theonsetof the rainyseasonmeantthateachmorningthefarmersgazedtowardsthehorizon,

sniffing thewind and straining their eyes. Is that a cloud?Would therainscomeontime?Wouldtherebeenough?Wouldviolentstormswashtheseedsfromthefieldsandbatterdownseedlings?Meanwhile,inthevalleys of the Euphrates, Indus and Yellow rivers, other peasantsmonitored, with no less trepidation, the height of the water. Theyneeded the rivers to rise in order to spread the fertile topsoil washeddownfromthehighlands,andtoenabletheirvastirrigationsystemstofillwithwater. But floods that surged too high or came at thewrongtimecoulddestroytheirfieldsasmuchasadrought.Peasants were worried about the future not just because they had

morecauseforworry,butalsobecausetheycoulddosomethingaboutit.Theycouldclearanotherfield,diganotherirrigationcanal,sowmorecrops. The anxious peasant was as frenetic and hardworking as aharvester ant in the summer, sweating to plant olive trees whose oilwouldbepressedbyhischildrenandgrandchildren,puttingoffuntilthewinterorthefollowingyeartheeatingofthefoodhecravedtoday.The stress of farming had far-reaching consequences. It was the

foundationoflarge-scalepoliticalandsocialsystems.Sadly,thediligentpeasants almost never achieved the future economic security they socraved through theirhardwork in thepresent.Everywhere, rulersandelitessprangup, livingoff thepeasants’ surplus foodand leavingthemwithonlyabaresubsistence.These forfeited food surpluses fuelled politics, wars, art and

philosophy.Theybuiltpalaces,forts,monumentsandtemples.Untilthelatemodernera,more than90percentofhumanswerepeasantswhoroseeachmorningtotillthelandbythesweatoftheirbrows.Theextrathey produced fed the tiny minority of elites – kings, governmentofficials, soldiers, priests, artists and thinkers – who fill the historybooks.Historyissomethingthatveryfewpeoplehavebeendoingwhileeveryoneelsewasploughingfieldsandcarryingwaterbuckets.

AnImaginedOrder

The food surpluses produced by peasants, coupled with newtransportationtechnology,eventuallyenabledmoreandmorepeopleto

cramtogether first into largevillages, thenintotowns,andfinally intocities, all of them joined together by new kingdoms and commercialnetworks.Yet in order to take advantage of these new opportunities, foodsurplusesandimprovedtransportationwerenotenough.Themerefactthat one can feed a thousand people in the same town or a millionpeopleinthesamekingdomdoesnotguaranteethattheycanagreehowtodivide the landandwater,how to settledisputesandconflicts, andhow to act in times of drought or war. And if no agreement can bereached, strife spreads, even if the storehouses are bulging. Itwas notfood shortages that causedmostofhistory’swarsand revolutions.TheFrenchRevolutionwasspearheadedbyaffluentlawyers,notbyfamishedpeasants. The Roman Republic reached the height of its power in thefirstcenturyBC,whentreasurefleetsfromthroughouttheMediterraneanenrichedtheRomansbeyondtheirancestors’wildestdreams.Yetitwasat thatmoment ofmaximum affluence that the Roman political ordercollapsedintoaseriesofdeadlycivilwars.Yugoslaviain1991hadmorethanenoughresourcestofeedall its inhabitants,andstilldisintegratedintoaterriblebloodbath.Theproblemattherootofsuchcalamitiesisthathumansevolvedformillionsofyearsinsmallbandsofafewdozenindividuals.ThehandfulofmillenniaseparatingtheAgriculturalRevolutionfromtheappearanceofcities,kingdomsandempireswasnotenoughtimetoallowaninstinctformasscooperationtoevolve.Despite the lackof suchbiological instincts,during the foragingera,hundreds of strangers were able to cooperate thanks to their sharedmyths.However,thiscooperationwaslooseandlimited.EverySapiensbandcontinuedtorunitslifeindependentlyandtoprovideformostofitsownneeds.Anarchaicsociologist living20,000yearsago,whohadno knowledge of events following the Agricultural Revolution, mightwellhaveconcluded thatmythologyhada fairly limited scope.Storiesabout ancestral spirits and tribal totemswere strong enough to enable500peopletotradeseashells,celebratetheoddfestival,andjoinforcestowipeoutaNeanderthalband,butnomorethanthat.Mythology,theancient sociologist would have thought, could not possibly enablemillionsofstrangerstocooperateonadailybasis.But that turned out to be wrong. Myths, it transpired, are stronger

than anyone could have imagined. When the Agricultural Revolutionopened opportunities for the creation of crowded cities and mightyempires,peopleinventedstoriesaboutgreatgods,motherlandsandjointstock companies to provide the needed social links. While humanevolutionwascrawlingatitsusualsnail’space,thehumanimaginationwasbuildingastoundingnetworksofmasscooperation,unlikeanyothereverseenonearth.Around8500BCthelargestsettlementsintheworldwerevillagessuch

asJericho,whichcontaineda fewhundred individuals.By7000 BC thetown of Çatalhöyük in Anatolia numbered between 5,000 and 10,000individuals.Itmaywellhavebeentheworld’sbiggestsettlementatthetime. During the fifth and fourth millennia BC, cities with tens ofthousands of inhabitants sprouted in the Fertile Crescent, and each oftheseheldswayovermanynearbyvillages.In3100BC theentire lowerNile Valley was united into the first Egyptian kingdom. Its pharaohsruled thousands of square kilometres and hundreds of thousands ofpeople. Around 2250 BC Sargon the Great forged the first empire, theAkkadian. It boasted over a million subjects and a standing army of5,400 soldiers. Between 1000 BC and 500 BC, the first mega-empiresappeared in theMiddleEast: theLateAssyrianEmpire, theBabylonianEmpire, and the Persian Empire. They ruled over many millions ofsubjectsandcommandedtensofthousandsofsoldiers.In221BCtheQindynastyunitedChina,andshortlyafterwardsRome

unitedtheMediterraneanbasin.Taxesleviedon40millionQinsubjectspaid for a standing army of hundreds of thousands of soldiers and acomplex bureaucracy that employed more than 100,000 officials. TheRoman Empire at its zenith collected taxes from up to 100 millionsubjects. This revenue financed a standing army of 250,000–500,000soldiers,aroadnetworkstill inuse1,500years later,andtheatresandamphitheatresthathostspectaclestothisday.

16.AstonestelainscribedwiththeCodeofHammurabi,c.1776BC.

Impressive, no doubt, but we mustn’t harbour rosy illusions about‘masscooperationnetworks’operatinginpharaonicEgyptortheRomanEmpire.‘Cooperation’soundsveryaltruistic,butisnotalwaysvoluntaryand seldom egalitarian. Most human cooperation networks have beengeared towards oppression and exploitation. The peasants paid for theburgeoning cooperation networks with their precious food surpluses,despairing when the tax collector wiped out an entire year of hardlabour with a single stroke of his imperial pen. The famed Romanamphitheatres were often built by slaves so that wealthy and idleRomanscouldwatchotherslavesengageinviciousgladiatorialcombat.Even prisons and concentration camps are cooperation networks, and

can function only because thousands of strangers somehowmanage tocoordinatetheiractions.

17.TheDeclarationofIndependenceoftheUnitedStates,signed4July1776.

Allthesecooperationnetworks–fromthecitiesofancientMesopotamiato the Qin and Roman empires – were ‘imagined orders’. The socialnormsthatsustainedthemwerebasedneitheroningrainedinstinctsnoronpersonalacquaintances,butratheronbeliefinsharedmyths.Howcanmythssustainentireempires?Wehavealreadydiscussedonesuchexample:Peugeot.Nowlet’sexaminetwoofthebest-knownmythsof history: the Code of Hammurabi of c.1776 BC, which served as acooperationmanual forhundredsof thousandsof ancientBabylonians;

andtheAmericanDeclarationofIndependenceof1776AD,whichtodaystillservesasacooperationmanualforhundredsofmillionsofmodernAmericans.In 1776 BC Babylon was the world’s biggest city. The BabylonianEmpire was probably the world’s largest, with more than a millionsubjects. It ruledmost ofMesopotamia, including the bulk of modernIraqandpartsofpresent-daySyriaandIran.TheBabyloniankingmostfamoustodaywasHammurabi.Hisfameisdueprimarilytothetextthatbearshisname, theCodeofHammurabi.Thiswasacollectionof lawsand judicial decisionswhose aimwas to presentHammurabi as a rolemodelof a just king, serveas abasis for amoreuniform legal systemacrosstheBabylonianEmpire,andteachfuturegenerationswhatjusticeisandhowajustkingacts.Futuregenerationstooknotice.Theintellectualandbureaucraticeliteof ancient Mesopotamia canonised the text, and apprentice scribescontinued to copy it longafterHammurabidiedandhis empire lay inruins.Hammurabi’s Code is therefore a good source for understandingtheancientMesopotamians’idealofsocialorder.3ThetextbeginsbysayingthatthegodsAnu,EnlilandMarduk–theleadingdeitiesof theMesopotamianpantheon–appointedHammurabi‘tomakejusticeprevailintheland,toabolishthewickedandtheevil,toprevent the strong fromoppressing theweak’.4 It then lists about 300judgements,giveninthesetformula‘Ifsuchandsuchathinghappens,suchisthejudgment.’Forexample,judgements196–9and209–14read:

196.Ifasuperiormanshouldblindtheeyeofanothersuperiorman,theyshallblindhiseye.

197.Ifheshouldbreaktheboneofanothersuperiorman,theyshallbreakhisbone.

198.Ifheshouldblindtheeyeofacommonerorbreaktheboneofacommoner,heshallweighanddeliver60shekelsofsilver.

199.

Ifheshouldblindtheeyeofaslaveofasuperiormanorbreaktheboneofaslaveofasuperiorman,heshallweighanddeliver

one-halfoftheslave’svalue(insilver).5

209.Ifasuperiormanstrikesawomanofsuperiorclassandtherebycauseshertomiscarryherfetus,heshallweighanddelivertenshekelsofsilverforherfetus.

210. Ifthatwomanshoulddie,theyshallkillhisdaughter.

211.Ifheshouldcauseawomanofcommonerclasstomiscarryherfetusbythebeating,heshallweighanddeliverfiveshekelsofsilver.

212.Ifthatwomanshoulddie,heshallweighanddeliverthirtyshekelsofsilver.

213.Ifhestrikesaslave-womanofasuperiormanandtherebycauseshertomiscarryherfetus,heshallweighanddelivertwoshekelsofsilver.

214.Ifthatslave-womanshoulddie,heshallweighanddelivertwentyshekelsofsilver.6

Afterlistinghisjudgements,Hammurabiagaindeclaresthat

Theseare the justdecisionswhichHammurabi, theableking,hasestablishedand therebyhasdirectedthelandalongthecourseoftruthandthecorrectwayoflife…IamHammurabi,nobleking. Ihavenotbeencarelessornegligent towardhumankind,granted tomycareby thegodEnlil,andwithwhoseshepherdingthegodMardukchargedme.7

Hammurabi’s Code asserts that Babylonian social order is rooted inuniversal and eternal principles of justice, dictated by the gods. Theprinciple of hierarchy is of paramount importance. According to thecode, people are divided into two genders and three classes: superiorpeople,commonersandslaves.Membersofeachgenderandclasshavedifferent values. The life of a female commoner is worth thirty silver

shekelsandthatofaslave-womantwentysilvershekels,whereastheeyeofamalecommonerisworthsixtysilvershekels.Thecodealsoestablishesastricthierarchywithinfamilies,according

towhichchildrenarenot independentpersons,butratherthepropertyoftheirparents.Hence,ifonesuperiormankillsthedaughterofanothersuperiorman, thekiller’sdaughter isexecuted inpunishment.Tous itmay seem strange that the killer remains unharmed whereas hisinnocentdaughteriskilled,buttoHammurabiandtheBabyloniansthisseemedperfectlyjust.Hammurabi’sCodewasbasedonthepremisethatif the king’s subjects all accepted their positions in the hierarchy andacted accordingly, the empire’s million inhabitants would be able tocooperateeffectively.Theirsocietycouldthenproduceenoughfoodforitsmembers, distribute it efficiently, protect itself against its enemies,andexpanditsterritorysoastoacquiremorewealthandbettersecurity.About 3,500 years after Hammurabi’s death, the inhabitants of

thirteenBritishcolonies inNorthAmericafelt thatthekingofEnglandwastreatingthemunjustly.TheirrepresentativesgatheredinthecityofPhiladelphia, and on 4 July 1776 the colonies declared that theirinhabitants were no longer subjects of the British Crown. TheirDeclarationofIndependenceproclaimeduniversalandeternalprinciplesof justice,which, like those of Hammurabi,were inspired by a divinepower.However,themostimportantprincipledictatedbytheAmericangodwassomewhatdifferent fromtheprincipledictatedby thegodsofBabylon.TheAmericanDeclarationofIndependenceassertsthat:

Weholdthesetruthstobeself-evident,thatallmenarecreatedequal,thattheyareendowedbytheirCreatorwithcertainunalienablerights,thatamongthesearelife,liberty,andthepursuitofhappiness.

LikeHammurabi’sCode,theAmericanfoundingdocumentpromisesthatifhumansactaccordingtoitssacredprinciples,millionsofthemwouldbeabletocooperateeffectively,livingsafelyandpeacefullyinajustandprosperous society. Like the Code of Hammurabi, the AmericanDeclaration of Independence was not just a document of its time andplace–itwasacceptedbyfuturegenerationsaswell.Formorethan200years, American schoolchildren have been copying and learning it by

heart.Thetwotextspresentuswithanobviousdilemma.BoththeCodeof

Hammurabi and the American Declaration of Independence claim tooutlineuniversalandeternalprinciplesof justice,butaccording to theAmericans all people are equal,whereas according to the Babylonianspeoplearedecidedlyunequal.TheAmericanswould,ofcourse,saythatthey are right, and that Hammurabi is wrong. Hammurabi, naturally,wouldretortthatheisright,andthattheAmericansarewrong.Infact,they are bothwrong.Hammurabi and the American Founding Fathersalikeimaginedarealitygovernedbyuniversalandimmutableprinciplesofjustice,suchasequalityorhierarchy.YettheonlyplacewheresuchuniversalprinciplesexistisinthefertileimaginationofSapiens,andinthemyths they invent and tell one another. These principles have noobjectivevalidity.It is easy forus toaccept that thedivisionofpeople into ‘superiors’

and commoners’ is a figment of the imagination. Yet the idea that allhumansareequalisalsoamyth.Inwhatsensedoallhumansequaloneanother?Isthereanyobjectivereality,outsidethehumanimagination,in which we are truly equal? Are all humans equal to one anotherbiologically?LetustrytotranslatethemostfamouslineoftheAmericanDeclarationofIndependenceintobiologicalterms:

Weholdthesetruthstobeself-evident,thatallmenarecreatedequal,thattheyareendowedby theirCreatorwith certainunalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and thepursuitofhappiness.

Accordingtothescienceofbiology,peoplewerenotcreated’.Theyhaveevolved. And they certainly did not evolve to be ‘equal’. The idea ofequality is inextricably intertwined with the idea of creation. TheAmericansgottheideaofequalityfromChristianity,whicharguesthatevery person has a divinely created soul, and that all souls are equalbeforeGod.However,ifwedonotbelieveintheChristianmythsaboutGod,creationandsouls,whatdoes itmeanthatallpeopleare ‘equal’?Evolutionisbasedondifference,notonequality.Everypersoncarriesasomewhatdifferentgeneticcode,andisexposedfrombirthtodifferentenvironmental influences. This leads to the development of different

qualities that carry with them different chances of survival. ‘Createdequal’shouldthereforebetranslatedinto‘evolveddifferently’.Justaspeoplewerenevercreated,neither,accordingtothescienceof

biology,istherea‘Creator’who‘endows’themwithanything.Thereisonlyablindevolutionaryprocess,devoidofanypurpose,leadingtothebirth of individuals. ‘Endowed by their creator’ should be translatedsimplyinto‘born.Equally,therearenosuchthingsasrightsinbiology.Thereareonly

organs, abilities and characteristics. Birds fly not because they have aright to fly, but because they havewings. And it’s not true that theseorgans, abilities and characteristics are ‘unalienable’. Many of themundergoconstantmutations,andmaywellbecompletelylostovertime.The ostrich is a bird that lost its ability to fly. So ‘unalienable rights’shouldbetranslatedinto‘mutablecharacteristics’.And what are the characteristics that evolved in humans? ‘Life’,

certainly. But ‘liberty’? There is no such thing in biology. Just likeequality,rightsandlimitedliabilitycompanies,libertyissomethingthatpeople invented and that exists only in their imagination. From abiologicalviewpoint,itismeaninglesstosaythathumansindemocraticsocietiesarefree,whereashumansindictatorshipsareunfree.Andwhatabout‘happiness’?Sofarbiologicalresearchhasfailedtocomeupwithacleardefinitionofhappinessorawaytomeasureitobjectively.Mostbiological studiesacknowledgeonly theexistenceofpleasure,which ismore easily defined andmeasured. So ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit ofhappiness’shouldbetranslatedinto‘lifeandthepursuitofpleasure’.So here is that line from theAmericanDeclaration of Independence

translatedintobiologicalterms:

Weholdthesetruthstobeself-evident,thatallmenevolveddifferently,thattheyarebornwithcertainmutablecharacteristics,andthatamongthesearelifeandthepursuitofpleasure.

Advocatesofequalityandhumanrightsmaybeoutragedbythislineofreasoning.Theirresponseis likelytobe, ‘Weknowthatpeoplearenotequalbiologically!Butifwebelievethatweareallequalinessence,itwill enable us to create a stable and prosperous society.’ I have noargumentwiththat.ThisisexactlywhatImeanby‘imaginedorder’.We

believe in a particular order not because it is objectively true, butbecause believing in it enables us to cooperate effectively and forge abetter society. Imagined orders are not evil conspiracies or uselessmirages. Rather, they are the onlyway large numbers of humans cancooperateeffectively.Bearinmind,though,thatHammurabimighthavedefended his principle of hierarchy using the same logic: ‘I know thatsuperiors, commoners and slaves are not inherently different kinds ofpeople.Butifwebelievethattheyare,itwillenableustocreateastableandprosperoussociety.’

TrueBelievers

It’s likely thatmore thana few readers squirmed in their chairswhilereadingtheprecedingparagraphs.Mostofustodayareeducatedtoreactinsuchaway.ItiseasytoacceptthatHammurabi’sCodewasamyth,butwedonotwanttohearthathumanrightsarealsoamyth.Ifpeoplerealise that human rights exist only in the imagination, isn’t there adangerthatoursocietywillcollapse?VoltairesaidaboutGodthat‘thereisnoGod,butdon’ttellthattomyservant,lesthemurdermeatnight’.Hammurabiwouldhavesaidthesameabouthisprincipleofhierarchy,andThomasJeffersonabouthumanrights.Homosapienshasnonaturalrights, just as spiders,hyenasandchimpanzeeshavenonatural rights.Butdon’ttellthattoourservants,lesttheymurderusatnight.Suchfearsarewelljustified.Anaturalorderisastableorder.Thereis

nochance thatgravitywill cease to function tomorrow,even ifpeoplestopbelievinginit.Incontrast,animaginedorderisalwaysindangerofcollapse,becauseitdependsuponmyths,andmythsvanishoncepeoplestop believing in them. In order to safeguard an imagined order,continuous and strenuous efforts are imperative. Some of these effortstake the shape of violence and coercion. Armies, police forces, courtsandprisonsareceaselesslyatworkforcingpeopletoact inaccordancewiththeimaginedorder.IfanancientBabylonianblindedhisneighbour,someviolencewasusuallynecessary inorder toenforce the lawof ‘aneye for an eye’. When, in 1860, a majority of American citizensconcluded that African slaves are human beings and must therefore

enjoytherightofliberty,ittookabloodycivilwartomakethesouthernstatesacquiesce.However,animaginedordercannotbesustainedbyviolencealone.Itrequires some truebelieversaswell.PrinceTalleyrand,whobeganhischameleon-like career under Louis XVI, later served the revolutionaryandNapoleonicregimes,andswitchedloyaltiesintimetoendhisdaysworking for the restored monarchy, summed up decades ofgovernmental experienceby saying that ‘Youcandomany thingswithbayonets,but it isratheruncomfortabletositonthem.’Asinglepriestoften does the work of a hundred soldiers far more cheaply andeffectively.Moreover, nomatterhowefficient bayonets are, somebodymust wield them. Why should the soldiers, jailors, judges and policemaintainanimaginedorderinwhichtheydonotbelieve?Ofallhumancollectiveactivities,theonemostdifficulttoorganiseisviolence.Tosaythatasocialorderismaintainedbymilitaryforceimmediatelyraisesthequestion:whatmaintainsthemilitaryorder?Itisimpossibletoorganisean army solely by coercion. At least some of the commanders andsoldiersmusttrulybelieveinsomething,beitGod,honour,motherland,manhoodormoney.Anevenmoreinterestingquestionconcernsthosestandingatthetopof the social pyramid. Why should they wish to enforce an imaginedorderiftheythemselvesdon’tbelieveinit?Itisquitecommontoarguethattheelitemaydosooutofcynicalgreed.Yetacynicwhobelievesinnothing isunlikely tobegreedy. Itdoesnot takemuch toprovide theobjective biological needs ofHomo sapiens. After those needs aremet,moremoneycanbespentonbuildingpyramids,takingholidaysaroundtheworld,financingelectioncampaigns,fundingyourfavouriteterroristorganisation, or investing in the stock market and making yet moremoney–allofwhichareactivitiesthatatruecynicwouldfindutterlymeaningless.Diogenes,theGreekphilosopherwhofoundedtheCynicalschool, lived in a barrel. When Alexander the Great once visitedDiogenesashewasrelaxinginthesun,andaskediftherewereanythinghemight do for him, the Cynic answered the all-powerful conqueror,‘Yes, there is somethingyoucando forme.Pleasemovea little to theside.Youareblockingthesunlight.’Thisiswhycynicsdon’tbuildempiresandwhyanimaginedordercanbe maintained only if large segments of the population – and in

particular large segments of the elite and the security forces – trulybelieve in it. Christianity would not have lasted 2,000 years if themajority of bishops and priests failed to believe in Christ. Americandemocracywouldnothavelasted250yearsifthemajorityofpresidentsand congressmen failed to believe in human rights. The moderneconomic systemwouldnothave lasteda singleday if themajorityofinvestorsandbankersfailedtobelieveincapitalism.

ThePrisonWalls

How do you cause people to believe in an imagined order such asChristianity, democracy or capitalism? First, you never admit that theorderisimagined.Youalwaysinsistthattheordersustainingsocietyisanobjectiverealitycreatedbythegreatgodsorbythelawsofnature.Peopleareunequal,notbecauseHammurabi said so,butbecauseEnlilandMardukdecreedit.Peopleareequal,notbecauseThomasJeffersonsaid so, but becauseGod created them thatway. Freemarkets are thebest economic system, not because Adam Smith said so, but becausethesearetheimmutablelawsofnature.Youalsoeducatepeoplethoroughly.Fromthemomenttheyareborn,you constantly remind them of the principles of the imagined order,which are incorporated into anything and everything. They areincorporatedintofairytales,dramas,paintings,songs,etiquette,politicalpropaganda, architecture, recipes and fashions. For example, todaypeoplebelieveinequality,soit’sfashionableforrichkidstowearjeans,which were originally working-class attire. In theMiddle Ages peoplebelieved in class divisions, so no youngnoblemanwouldhaveworn apeasant’s smock.Back then, tobe addressed as ‘Sir’ or ‘Madam’was arareprivilegereservedforthenobility,andoftenpurchasedwithblood.Todayallpolitecorrespondence,regardlessoftherecipient,beginswith‘DearSirorMadam’.The humanities and social sciences devotemost of their energies toexplainingexactlyhowtheimaginedorderiswovenintothetapestryoflife.Inthelimitedspaceatourdisposalwecanonlyscratchthesurface.Three main factors prevent people from realising that the order

organisingtheirlivesexistsonlyintheirimagination:

a.The imaginedorder isembedded in thematerialworld. Thoughthe imaginedorder exists only inourminds, it canbewoven into thematerialrealityaroundus,andevensetinstone.MostWesternerstodaybelieveinindividualism.Theybelievethateveryhumanisanindividual,whoseworthdoesnotdependonwhatotherpeoplethinkofhimorher.Eachofushaswithinourselvesabrilliant rayof light thatgivesvalueand meaning to our lives. In modern Western schools teachers andparents tell children that if their classmates make fun of them, theyshould ignore it. Only they themselves, not others, know their trueworth.Inmodernarchitecture,thismythleapsoutoftheimaginationtotakeshapeinstoneandmortar.Theidealmodernhouseisdividedintomanysmall rooms so that each child can have a private space, hidden fromview, providing for maximum autonomy. This private room almostinvariablyhasadoor,andinmanyhouseholdsitisacceptedpracticeforthe child to close, and perhaps lock, the door. Even parents areforbiddentoenterwithoutknockingandaskingpermission.Theroomisdecorated as the child sees fit, with rock-star posters on thewall anddirty sockson the floor.Somebodygrowingup in sucha spacecannothelpbutimaginehimself‘anindividual’,histrueworthemanatingfromwithinratherthanfromwithout.Medievalnoblemendidnotbelieveinindividualism.Someone’sworthwasdeterminedbytheirplaceinthesocialhierarchy,andbywhatotherpeople said about them. Being laughed at was a horrible indignity.Noblementaughttheirchildrentoprotecttheirgoodnamewhateverthecost. Like modern individualism, the medieval value system left theimagination andwasmanifested in the stone ofmedieval castles. Thecastle rarely contained private rooms for children (or anyone else, forthatmatter).Theteenagesonofamedievalbarondidnothaveaprivateroomonthecastle’ssecondfloor,withpostersofRichardtheLionheartandKingArthuronthewallsandalockeddoorthathisparentswerenotallowedtoopen.Hesleptalongsidemanyotheryouths ina largehall.He was always on display and always had to take into account whatothers sawandsaid.Someonegrowingup in suchconditionsnaturally

concluded thataman’s trueworthwasdeterminedbyhisplace in thesocialhierarchyandbywhatotherpeoplesaidofhim.8

b.Theimaginedordershapesourdesires.Mostpeopledonotwishtoacceptthattheordergoverningtheirlivesisimaginary,butinfacteverypersonisbornintoapre-existingimaginedorder,andhisorherdesiresare shaped from birth by its dominant myths. Our personal desirestherebybecometheimaginedorder’smostimportantdefences.Forinstance,themostcherisheddesiresofpresent-dayWesternersareshapedbyromantic,nationalist,capitalistandhumanistmythsthathavebeen around for centuries. Friends giving advice often tell each other,‘Followyourheart.’Buttheheartisadoubleagentthatusuallytakesitsinstructions from the dominant myths of the day, and the veryrecommendationto‘Followyourheart’wasimplantedinourmindsbyacombination of nineteenth-century Romantic myths and twentieth-century consumeristmyths. TheCoca-ColaCompany, for example, hasmarketedDietCokearoundtheworldundertheslogan, ‘DietCoke.Dowhatfeelsgood.’Evenwhat people take to be theirmost personal desires areusuallyprogrammed by the imagined order. Let’s consider, for example, thepopular desire to take a holiday abroad. There is nothing natural orobviousaboutthis.Achimpanzeealphamalewouldneverthinkofusinghispowerinordertogoonholidayintotheterritoryofaneighbouringchimpanzee band. The elite of ancient Egypt spent their fortunesbuilding pyramids and having their corpses mummified, but none ofthemthoughtofgoingshoppinginBabylonortakingaskiingholidayinPhoenicia.Peopletodayspendagreatdealofmoneyonholidaysabroadbecausetheyaretruebelieversinthemythsofromanticconsumerism.Romanticism tells us that in order tomake themost of our humanpotential wemust have as many different experiences as we can.Wemust openourselves to awide spectrumof emotions;wemust samplevarious kinds of relationships;wemust try different cuisines;wemustlearntoappreciatedifferentstylesofmusic.Oneofthebestwaystodoallthatistobreakfreefromourdailyroutine,leavebehindourfamiliarsetting,andgotravellingindistantlands,wherewecan‘experience’theculture, the smells, the tastes and thenormsof otherpeople.Wehear

again and again the romantic myths about ‘how a new experienceopenedmyeyesandchangedmylife’.Consumerismtellsus that inorder tobehappywemustconsumeas

many products and services as possible. If we feel that something ismissingornotquite right, thenweprobablyneed tobuyaproduct (acar,newclothes,organicfood)oraservice(housekeeping,relationshiptherapy, yoga classes). Every television commercial is another littlelegend about how consuming some product or service will make lifebetter.Romanticism, which encourages variety, meshes perfectly with

consumerism.Theirmarriagehas givenbirth to the infinite ‘market ofexperiences’, on which the modern tourism industry is founded. Thetourismindustrydoesnotsellflightticketsandhotelbedrooms.Itsellsexperiences. Paris is not a city, nor India a country – they are bothexperiences, the consumption of which is supposed to widen ourhorizons, fulfil our human potential, and make us happier.Consequently,whentherelationshipbetweenamillionaireandhiswifeis going through a rocky patch, he takes her on an expensive trip toParis.Thetripisnotareflectionofsomeindependentdesire,butratherof an ardent belief in themyths of romantic consumerism. Awealthyman in ancient Egypt would never have dreamed of solving arelationshipcrisisbytakinghiswifeonholidaytoBabylon.Instead,hemighthavebuiltforherthesumptuoustombshehadalwayswanted.

18.TheGreatPyramidofGiza.ThekindofthingrichpeopleinancientEgyptdidwiththeirmoney.

LiketheeliteofancientEgypt,mostpeopleinmostculturesdedicatetheir lives to building pyramids. Only the names, shapes and sizes ofthesepyramidschangefromoneculturetotheother.Theymaytaketheform,forexample,ofasuburbancottagewithaswimmingpoolandanevergreen lawn, or a gleaming penthousewith an enviable view. Fewquestionthemythsthatcauseustodesirethepyramidinthefirstplace.

c. The imagined order is inter-subjective. Even if by somesuperhumaneffortIsucceedinfreeingmypersonaldesiresfromthegripof the imagined order, I am just one person. In order to change theimaginedorderImustconvincemillionsofstrangerstocooperatewithme.Fortheimaginedorderisnotasubjectiveorderexistinginmyownimagination–itisratheraninter-subjectiveorder,existinginthesharedimaginationofthousandsandmillionsofpeople.In order to understand this, we need to understand the difference

between‘objective’,‘subjective’,and‘inter-subjective’.An objective phenomenon exists independently of human

consciousness and human beliefs. Radioactivity, for example, is not amyth. Radioactive emissions occurred long before people discovered

them,andtheyaredangerousevenwhenpeopledonotbelieveinthem.Marie Curie, one of the discoverers of radioactivity, did not know,duringherlongyearsofstudyingradioactivematerials,thattheycouldharmher body.While she did not believe that radioactivity could killher, she nevertheless died of aplastic anaemia, a disease caused byoverexposuretoradioactivematerials.The subjective is something that exists depending on the

consciousnessandbeliefsofasingleindividual.Itdisappearsorchangesif that particular individual changes his or her beliefs. Many a childbelieves in the existence of an imaginary friend who is invisible andinaudibletotherestoftheworld.Theimaginaryfriendexistssolelyinthe child’s subjective consciousness, andwhen the child growsup andceasestobelieveinit,theimaginaryfriendfadesaway.The inter-subjective is something that exists within the

communication network linking the subjective consciousness of manyindividuals.Ifasingleindividualchangeshisorherbeliefs,orevendies,itisoflittleimportance.However,ifmostindividualsinthenetworkdieorchangetheirbeliefs,theinter-subjectivephenomenonwillmutateordisappear.Inter-subjectivephenomenaareneithermalevolentfraudsnorinsignificant charades. They exist in a different way from physicalphenomenasuchasradioactivity,buttheirimpactontheworldmaystillbe enormous. Many of history’s most important drivers are inter-subjective:law,money,gods,nations.Peugeot, for example, is not the imaginary friend of Peugeot’s CEO.

Thecompanyexistsinthesharedimaginationofmillionsofpeople.TheCEObelievesinthecompany’sexistencebecausetheboardofdirectorsalso believes in it, as do the company’s lawyers, the secretaries in thenearbyoffice,thetellersinthebank,thebrokersonthestockexchange,andcardealersfromFrancetoAustralia.IftheCEOaloneweresuddenlytostopbelievinginPeugeot’sexistence,he’dquicklylandinthenearestmentalhospitalandsomeoneelsewouldoccupyhisoffice.Similarly, thedollar,humanrightsand theUnitedStatesofAmerica

existinthesharedimaginationofbillions,andnosingleindividualcanthreatentheirexistence.IfIaloneweretostopbelievinginthedollar,inhuman rights, or in theUnited States, itwouldn’tmuchmatter. Theseimaginedordersareinter-subjective,soinordertochangethemwemustsimultaneouslychangetheconsciousnessofbillionsofpeople,whichis

not easy.A change of suchmagnitude can be accomplished onlywiththe help of a complex organisation, such as a political party, anideologicalmovement,orareligiouscult.However,inordertoestablishsuchcomplexorganisations,it’snecessarytoconvincemanystrangerstocooperatewithoneanother.Andthiswillhappenonlyifthesestrangersbelieve in some shared myths. It follows that in order to change anexistingimaginedorder,wemustfirstbelieveinanalternativeimaginedorder.In order to dismantle Peugeot, for example, we need to imagine

somethingmorepowerful, suchas theFrench legal system. Inorder todismantle theFrench legal systemweneed to imagine somethingevenmore powerful, such as the French state. And if we would like todismantle that too, we will have to imagine something yet morepowerful.Thereisnowayoutoftheimaginedorder.Whenwebreakdownour

prisonwallsand run towards freedom,weare in fact running into themorespaciousexerciseyardofabiggerprison.

7

MemoryOverload

EVOLUTION DID NOT ENDOW HUMANS with the ability to playfootball. True, it produced legs for kicking, elbows for fouling andmouthsforcursing,butallthatthisenablesustodoisperhapspractisepenaltykicksbyourselves.Togetintoagamewiththestrangerswefindintheschoolyardonanygivenafternoon,wenotonlyhavetoworkinconcert with ten teammates we may never have met before, we alsoneedtoknowthattheelevenplayersontheopposingteamareplayingby the same rules. Other animals that engage strangers in ritualisedaggressiondosolargelybyinstinct–puppiesthroughouttheworldhavethe rules for rough-and-tumble play hard-wired into their genes. Buthumanteenagershavenogenesforfootball.Theycanneverthelessplaythe game with complete strangers because they have all learned anidenticalsetofideasaboutfootball.Theseideasareentirelyimaginary,butifeveryonesharesthem,wecanallplaythegame.Thesameapplies,onalargerscale,tokingdoms,churchesandtrade

networks, with one important difference. The rules of football arerelativelysimpleandconcise,muchlikethosenecessaryforcooperationinaforagerbandorsmallvillage.Eachplayercaneasilystoretheminhisbrainandstillhaveroomfor songs, imagesandshopping lists.Butlargesystemsofcooperationthatinvolvenottwenty-twobutthousandsor evenmillions of humans require the handling and storage of hugeamounts of information,muchmore than any single human brain cancontainandprocess.Thelargesocietiesfoundinsomeotherspecies,suchasantsandbees,

are stable and resilient because most of the information needed to

sustainthemisencodedinthegenome.Afemalehoneybeelarvacan,forexample,growuptobeeitheraqueenoraworker,dependingonwhatfood it is fed. Its DNA programmes the necessary behaviours forwhatever role it will fulfil in life. Hives can be very complex socialstructures, containing many different kinds of workers, such asharvesters, nurses and cleaners. But so far researchers have failed tolocatelawyerbees.Beesdon’tneedlawyers,becausethereisnodangerthat theymight forgetorviolate thehiveconstitution.Thequeendoesnot cheat the cleaner bees of their food, and they never go on strikedemandinghigherwages.But humans do such things all the time. Because the Sapiens socialorder is imagined,humans cannotpreserve the critical information forrunningitsimplybymakingcopiesoftheirDNAandpassingtheseontotheir progeny. A conscious effort has to be made to sustain laws,customs, procedures and manners, otherwise the social order wouldquicklycollapse.Forexample,KingHammurabidecreedthatpeoplearedivided intosuperiors,commonersandslaves.Unlike thebeehiveclasssystem, this is not a natural division – there is no trace of it in thehumangenome. If theBabylonianscouldnotkeep this ‘truth’ inmind,theirsocietywouldhaveceasedtofunction.Similarly,whenHammurabipassed his DNA to his offspring, it did not encode his ruling that asuperior man who killed a commoner woman must pay thirty silvershekels.Hammurabideliberatelyhadtoinstructhissonsinthelawsofhisempire,andhissonsandgrandsonshadtodothesame.Empiresgeneratehugeamountsofinformation.Beyondlaws,empireshavetokeepaccountsoftransactionsandtaxes, inventoriesofmilitarysupplies andmerchantvessels, and calendarsof festivals andvictories.Formillionsofyearspeoplestoredinformationinasingleplace–theirbrains.Unfortunately,thehumanbrainisnotagoodstoragedeviceforempire-sizeddatabases,forthreemainreasons.First, its capacity is limited. True, some people have astonishingmemories, and in ancient times therewerememory professionalswhocouldstore intheirheadsthetopographiesofwholeprovincesandthelawcodesofentirestates.Nevertheless,thereisalimitthatevenmastermnemonistscannottranscend.AlawyermightknowbyhearttheentirelawcodeoftheCommonwealthofMassachusetts,butnotthedetailsofeverylegalproceedingthattookplaceinMassachusettsfromtheSalem

witchtrialsonward.Secondly, humans die, and their brains die with them. Anyinformationstoredinabrainwillbeerasedinlessthanacentury.Itis,ofcourse,possibletopassmemoriesfromonebraintoanother,butafterafewtransmissions,theinformationtendstogetgarbledorlost.Thirdlyandmost importantly, thehumanbrainhasbeenadapted tostore and process only particular types of information. In order tosurvive,ancienthunter-gatherershadtoremembertheshapes,qualitiesandbehaviourpatternsof thousandsofplantandanimal species.Theyhadtorememberthatawrinkledyellowmushroomgrowinginautumnunderanelmtreeismostprobablypoisonous,whereasasimilar-lookingmushroomgrowinginwinterunderanoaktreeisagoodstomach-acheremedy. Hunter-gatherers also had to bear in mind the opinions andrelations of several dozen band members. If Lucy needed a bandmember’shelptogetJohntostopharassingher,itwasimportantforhertorememberthatJohnhadfallenoutlastweekwithMary,whowouldthus be a likely and enthusiastic ally. Consequently, evolutionarypressureshaveadaptedthehumanbraintostoreimmensequantitiesofbotanical,zoological,topographicalandsocialinformation.Butwhenparticularlycomplexsocietiesbegantoappearinthewakeof the Agricultural Revolution, a completely new type of informationbecame vital – numbers. Foragers were never obliged to handle largeamountsofmathematicaldata.Noforagerneededtoremember,say,thenumberoffruitoneachtreeintheforest.Sohumanbrainsdidnotadaptto storing and processing numbers. Yet in order to maintain a largekingdom,mathematicaldatawasvital.Itwasneverenoughtolegislatelawsandtellstoriesaboutguardiangods.Onealsohadtocollecttaxes.In order to tax hundreds of thousands of people, itwas imperative tocollect data about peoples incomes and possessions; data aboutpayments made; data about arrears, debts and fines; data aboutdiscountsandexemptions.Thisaddeduptomillionsofdatabits,whichhad tobe storedandprocessed.Without this capacity, the statewouldnever knowwhat resources it had andwhat further resources it couldtap.Whenconfrontedwiththeneedtomemorise,recallandhandleallthesenumbers,mosthumanbrainsoverdosedorfellasleep.Thismentallimitationseverelyconstrainedthesizeandcomplexityofhuman collectives. When the amount of people and property in a

particular society crossed a critical threshold, it became necessary tostoreandprocesslargeamountsofmathematicaldata.Sincethehumanbraincouldnotdoit,thesystemcollapsed.ForthousandsofyearsaftertheAgriculturalRevolution,humansocialnetworksremainedrelativelysmallandsimple.The first toovercome theproblemwere theancientSumerians,who

livedinsouthernMesopotamia.There,ascorchingsunbeatinguponrichmuddyplainsproducedplentifulharvestsandprosperoustowns.Asthenumberofinhabitantsgrew,sodidtheamountofinformationrequiredtocoordinatetheiraffairs.Betweentheyears3500BCand3000BC,someunknown Sumerian geniuses invented a system for storing andprocessinginformationoutsidetheirbrains,onethatwascustom-builttohandle large amounts of mathematical data. The Sumerians therebyreleased their social order from the limitations of the human brain,openingthewayfortheappearanceofcities,kingdomsandempires.Thedata-processingsysteminventedbytheSumeriansiscalled‘writing’.

Signed,Kushim

Writingisamethodforstoringinformationthroughmaterialsigns.TheSumerianwritingsystemdidsobycombiningtwotypesofsigns,whichwere pressed in clay tablets. One type of signs represented numbers.Thereweresignsfor1,10,60,600,3,600and36,000.(TheSumeriansusedacombinationofbase-6andbase-10numeralsystems.Theirbase-6systembestowedonusseveralimportantlegacies,suchasthedivisionofthedayintotwenty-fourhoursandofthecircleinto360degrees.)Theothertypeofsignsrepresentedpeople,animals,merchandise,territories,datesandsoforth.BycombiningbothtypesofsignstheSumerianswereabletopreservefarmoredatathananyhumanbraincouldrememberoranyDNAchaincouldencode.

19.AclaytabletwithanadministrativetextfromthecityofUruk,c.3400–3000BC.‘Kushim’maybethegenerictitleofanofficeholder,orthenameofaparticular

individual.IfKushimwasindeedaperson,hemaybethefirstindividualinhistorywhosenameisknowntous!Allthenamesappliedearlierinhumanhistory–theNeanderthals,theNatufians,ChauvetCave,GöbekliTepe–aremoderninventions.WehavenoideawhatthebuildersofGöbekliTepeactuallycalledtheplace.Withtheappearanceofwriting,wearebeginningtohearhistorythroughtheearsofitsprotagonists.WhenKushim’sneighbourscalledouttohim,theymightreallyhaveshouted‘Kushim!’Itistellingthatthefirstrecordednameinhistorybelongstoanaccountant,ratherthana

prophet,apoetoragreatconqueror.1

Atthisearlystage,writingwaslimitedtofactsandfigures.ThegreatSumerian novel, if there ever was one, was never committed to claytablets.Writingwastime-consumingandthereadingpublictiny,sonoone saw any reason to use it for anything other than essential record-keeping.Ifwelookforthefirstwordsofwisdomreachingusfromourancestors, 5,000 years ago, we’re in for a big disappointment. Theearliestmessagesour ancestorshave left us read, for example, ‘29,086measuresbarley37monthsKushim.’Themostprobablereadingofthissentenceis:‘Atotalof29,086measuresofbarleywerereceivedoverthecourse of 37 months. Signed, Kushim.’ Alas, the first texts of historycontainnophilosophicalinsights,nopoetry,legends,laws,orevenroyaltriumphs. They are humdrum economic documents, recording the

payment of taxes, the accumulation of debts and the ownership ofproperty.

Partialscriptcannotexpresstheentirespectrumofaspokenlanguage,butitcanexpressthingsthatfalloutsidethescopeofspokenlanguage.PartialscriptssuchastheSumerianandmathematicalscriptscannotbeusedtowritepoetry,buttheycankeeptaxaccounts

veryeffectively.

Onlyoneothertypeoftextsurvivedfromtheseancientdays,anditiseven less exciting: lists of words, copied over and over again byapprentice scribes as training exercises. Even had a bored studentwantedtowriteoutsomeofhispoemsinsteadofcopyabillofsale,hecould not have done so. The earliest Sumerian writing was a partialratherthanafullscript.Fullscriptisasystemofmaterialsignsthatcanrepresent spoken language more or less completely. It can thereforeexpress everything people can say, including poetry. Partial script, onthe other hand, is a system of material signs that can represent onlyparticular typesof information,belonging toa limited fieldofactivity.Latin script, ancientEgyptianhieroglyphics andBraille are full scripts.Youcanusethemtowritetaxregisters,lovepoems,historybooks,foodrecipes andbusiness law. In contrast, the earliest Sumerian script, likemodernmathematicalsymbolsandmusicalnotation,arepartialscripts.You canusemathematical script tomake calculations, but you cannot

useittowritelovepoems.

20.Amanholdingaquipu,asdepictedinaSpanishmanuscriptfollowingthefalloftheIncaEmpire.

It didn’t disturb the Sumerians that their script was ill-suited forwritingpoetry.Theydidn’t invent it inordertocopyspokenlanguage,butrathertodothingsthatspokenlanguagefailedat.Thereweresomecultures, such as those of the pre-Columbian Andes, which used onlypartialscriptsthroughouttheirentirehistories,unfazedbytheirscripts’limitationsandfeelingnoneedforafullversion.AndeanscriptwasverydifferentfromitsSumeriancounterpart.Infact,itwassodifferentthatmanypeoplewouldargueitwasn’tascriptatall.Itwasnotwrittenonclaytabletsorpiecesofpaper.Rather,itwaswrittenbytyingknotsoncolourful cords called quipus. Each quipu consisted of many cords ofdifferent colours,madeofwoolor cotton.Oneach cord, several knotswere tied indifferentplaces.Asinglequipucouldcontainhundredsofcordsandthousandsofknots.Bycombiningdifferentknotsondifferent

cordswithdifferentcolours, itwaspossibletorecord largeamountsofmathematicaldatarelatingto, forexample, taxcollectionandpropertyownership.2Forhundreds,perhapsthousandsofyears,quipuswereessentialtothebusiness of cities, kingdoms and empires.3 They reached their fullpotentialundertheIncaEmpire,whichruled10–12millionpeopleandcovered today’sPeru,Ecuador andBolivia, aswell as chunksofChile,Argentina and Colombia. Thanks to quipus, the Incas could save andprocesslargeamountsofdata,withoutwhichtheywouldnothavebeenable tomaintain thecomplexadministrativemachinery thatanempireofthatsizerequires.In fact,quipusweresoeffectiveandaccurate that in theearlyyearsfollowing the Spanish conquest of South America, the Spaniardsthemselves employed quipus in the work of administering their newempire. The problemwas that the Spaniards did not themselves knowhow to record and read quipus, making them dependent on localprofessionals.Thecontinent’snewrulers realised that thisplacedtheminatenuousposition–thenativequipuexpertscouldeasilymisleadandcheat their overlords. So once Spain’s dominion was more firmlyestablished,quipuswerephasedoutandthenewempire’srecordswerekeptentirelyinLatinscriptandnumerals.VeryfewquipussurvivedtheSpanish occupation, and most of those remaining are undecipherable,since,unfortunately,theartofreadingquipushasbeenlost.

TheWondersofBureaucracy

The Mesopotamians eventually started to want to write down thingsotherthanmonotonousmathematicaldata.Between3000BCand2500BCmore and more signs were added to the Sumerian system, graduallytransformingit intoafullscriptthatwetodaycallcuneiform.By2500BC,kingswereusingcuneiformtoissuedecrees,priestswereusingittorecordoracles,and lessexaltedcitizenswereusing it towritepersonalletters.Atroughlythesametime,Egyptiansdevelopedanotherfullscriptknown as hieroglyphics. Other full scripts were developed in China

around1200BCandinCentralAmericaaround1000–500BC.Fromthese initialcentres, full scriptsspreadfarandwide, takingonvariousnewformsandnoveltasks.Peoplebegantowritepoetry,historybooks,romances,dramas,propheciesandcookbooks.Yetwriting’smostimportant task continued to be the storage of reams of mathematicaldata, and that task remained the prerogative of partial script. TheHebrewBible,theGreekIliad,theHinduMahabharataandtheBuddhistTipitika all began as oral works. For many generations they weretransmittedorallyandwouldhavelivedonevenhadwritingneverbeeninvented. But tax registries and complex bureaucracies were borntogetherwithpartialscript,andthetworemaininexorablylinkedtothisday like Siamese twins – think of the cryptic entries in computeriseddatabasesandspreadsheets.As more and more things were written, and particularly asadministrative archives grew to huge proportions, new problemsappeared. Informationstored inapersonsbrain iseasy toretrieve.Mybrain stores billions of bits of data, yet I can quickly, almostinstantaneously, recall the name of Italy’s capital, immediatelyafterwards recollect what I did on 11 September 2001, and thenreconstructtherouteleadingfrommyhousetotheHebrewUniversityinJerusalem.Exactlyhowthebraindoesitremainsamystery,butweallknow that the brain’s retrieval system is amazingly efficient, exceptwhenyouaretryingtorememberwhereyouputyourcarkeys.How, though, do you find and retrieve information stored on quipucordsorclay tablets? Ifyouhave just ten tabletsorahundredtablets,it’snotaproblem.Butwhatifyouhaveaccumulatedthousandsofthem,asdidoneofHammurabi’scontemporaries,KingZimrilimofMari?Imagineforamomentthat it’s1776BC.TwoMariansarequarrellingoverpossessionofawheat field. Jacob insists thathebought the fieldfromEsauthirtyyearsago.EsauretortsthatheinfactrentedthefieldtoJacob for a termof thirty years, and that now, the termbeing up, heintends to reclaim it. They shout and wrangle and start pushing oneanotherbeforetheyrealisethattheycanresolvetheirdisputebygoingto the royalarchive,wherearehoused thedeedsandbillsof sale thatapplytoallthekingdom’srealestate.Uponarrivingatthearchivetheyare shuttled from one official to the other. Theywait through several

herbal teabreaks,aretoldtocomebacktomorrow,andeventuallyaretakenbyagrumblingclerktolookfortherelevantclaytablet.Theclerkopens a door and leads them into a huge room lined, floor to ceiling,withthousandsofclaytablets.Nowondertheclerkissour-faced.Howishesupposedtolocatethedeedtothedisputedwheatfieldwrittenthirtyyears ago? Even if he finds it, how will he be able to cross-check toensurethattheonefromthirtyyearsagoisthelatestdocumentrelatingto the field in question? If he can’t find it, does that prove that Esauneversoldorrentedoutthefield?Orjustthatthedocumentgotlost,orturnedtomushwhensomerainleakedintothearchive?Clearly,justimprintingadocumentinclayisnotenoughtoguarantee

efficient, accurate and convenient data processing. That requiresmethods of organisation like catalogues, methods of reproduction likephotocopy machines, methods of rapid and accurate retrieval likecomputer algorithms, and pedantic (but hopefully cheerful) librarianswhoknowhowtousethesetools.Inventingsuchmethodsprovedtobefarmoredifficultthaninventing

writing. Many writing systems developed independently in culturesdistant intimeandplacefromeachother.Everydecadearchaeologistsdiscoveranotherfewforgottenscripts.SomeofthemmightprovetobeevenolderthantheSumerianscratchesinclay.Butmostofthemremaincuriosities because those who invented them failed to invent efficientwaysofcataloguingandretrievingdata.WhatsetapartSumer,aswellas pharaonic Egypt, ancient China and the Inca Empire, is that thesecultures developed good techniques of archiving, cataloguing andretrieving written records. They also invested in schools for scribes,clerks,librariansandaccountants.Awriting exercise froma school in ancientMesopotamiadiscovered

by modern archaeologists gives us a glimpse into the lives of thesestudents,some4,000yearsago:

Iwentinandsatdown,andmyteacherreadmytablet.Hesaid,‘There’ssomethingmissing!’Andhecanedme.Oneofthepeopleinchargesaid,‘Whydidyouopenyourmouthwithoutmypermission?’Andhecanedme.Theoneinchargeofrulessaid,‘Whydidyougetupwithoutmypermission?’Andhecanedme.

Thegatekeepersaid,‘Whyareyougoingoutwithoutmypermission?’Andhecanedme.Thekeeperofthebeerjugsaid,‘Whydidyougetsomewithoutmypermission?’Andhecanedme.TheSumerianteachersaid,‘WhydidyouspeakAkkadian?’*

Andhecanedme.Myteachersaid,‘Yourhandwritingisnogood!’Andhecanedme.4

Ancient scribes learned notmerely to read andwrite, but also to usecatalogues, dictionaries, calendars, forms and tables. They studied andinternalised techniques of cataloguing, retrieving and processinginformationverydifferentfromthoseusedbythebrain.Inthebrain,alldata is freely associated. When I go with my spouse to sign on amortgage forournewhome, Iamremindedof the firstplacewe livedtogether,whichremindsmeofourhoneymoon inNewOrleans,whichremindsmeofalligators,whichremindmeofdragons,whichremindmeofTheRingoftheNibelungen,andsuddenly,beforeIknowit,thereIamhummingtheSiegfriedleitmotiftoapuzzledbankclerk.Inbureaucracy,things must be kept apart. There is one drawer for home mortgages,another formarriagecertificates,a third for tax registers,anda fourthforlawsuits.Otherwise,howcanyoufindanything?Thingsthatbelonginmorethanonedrawer,likeWagnerianmusicdramas(doIfilethemunder ‘music’, ‘theatre’,orperhaps inventanewcategoryaltogether?),are a terrible headache. So one is forever adding, deleting andrearrangingdrawers.Inordertofunction,thepeoplewhooperatesuchasystemofdrawers

mustbereprogrammedtostopthinkingashumansandtostartthinkingas clerks and accountants. As everyone from ancient times till todayknows,clerksandaccountantsthinkinanon-humanfashion.Theythinklike filingcabinets.This isnot their fault. If theydon’t think thatwaytheirdrawerswillallgetmixedupandtheywon’tbeabletoprovidetheservices theirgovernment,companyororganisationrequires.Themostimportant impact of script on human history is precisely this: it hasgradually changed the way humans think and view the world. Freeassociationandholisticthoughthavegivenwaytocompartmentalisationandbureaucracy.

TheLanguageofNumbers

As the centuries passed, bureaucraticmethods of dataprocessing grewever more different from the way humans naturally think – and evermore important. A critical step was made sometime before the ninthcenturyAD,whenanewpartialscriptwasinvented,onethatcouldstoreand process mathematical data with unprecedented efficiency. Thispartialscriptwascomposedoftensigns,representingthenumbersfrom0 to 9. Confusingly, these signs are known as Arabic numerals eventhoughtheywerefirst inventedbytheHindus(evenmoreconfusingly,modernArabsuseasetofdigitsthatlookquitedifferentfromWesternones).ButtheArabsgetthecreditbecausewhentheyinvadedIndiatheyencounteredthesystem,understooditsusefulness,refinedit,andspreaditthroughtheMiddleEastandthentoEurope.Whenseveralothersignswere lateradded to theArabnumerals (suchas the signs foraddition,subtraction and multiplication), the basis of modern mathematicalnotationcameintobeing.Althoughthissystemofwritingremainsapartialscript,ithasbecome

the world’s dominant language. Almost all states, companies,organisations and institutions – whether they speak Arabic, Hindi,English orNorwegian – usemathematical script to record and processdata. Every piece of information that can be translated intomathematicalscriptisstored,spreadandprocessedwithmind-bogglingspeedandefficiency.A person who wishes to influence the decisions of governments,

organisationsandcompaniesmustthereforelearntospeakinnumbers.Expertsdotheirbesttotranslateevenideassuchas‘poverty’,‘happiness’and ‘honesty’ into numbers (‘the poverty line’, ‘subjective well-beinglevels’, ‘credit rating’). Entire fields of knowledge, such as physics andengineering,havealreadylostalmostall touchwiththespokenhumanlanguage,andaremaintainedsolelybymathematicalscript.

Anequationforcalculatingtheaccelerationofmassiundertheinfluenceofgravity,accordingtotheTheoryofRelativity.Whenmostlaypeopleseesuchanequation,theyusuallypanicandfreeze,likeadeercaughtintheheadlightsofaspeedingvehicle.Thereactionisquitenatural,anddoesnotbetrayalackofintelligenceorcuriosity.Withrare

exceptions,humanbrainsaresimplyincapableofthinkingthroughconceptslikerelativityandquantummechanics.Physicistsneverthelessmanagetodoso,becausetheysetasidethetraditionalhumanwayofthinking,andlearntothinkanewwiththehelpofexternaldata-processingsystems.Crucialpartsoftheirthoughtprocesstakeplacenotin

thehead,butinsidecomputersoronclassroomblackboards.

More recently, mathematical script has given rise to an even morerevolutionarywritingsystem,acomputerisedbinaryscriptconsistingofonlytwosigns:0and1.ThewordsIamnowtypingonmykeyboardarewrittenwithinmycomputerbydifferentcombinationsof0and1.Writing was born as the maidservant of human consciousness, but isincreasingly becoming its master. Our computers have troubleunderstanding how Homo sapiens talks, feels and dreams. So we areteaching Homo sapiens to talk, feel and dream in the language ofnumbers,whichcanbeunderstoodbycomputers.Andthisisnottheendofthestory.Thefieldofartificialintelligence

isseekingtocreateanewkindofintelligencebasedsolelyonthebinaryscriptof computers. Science-fictionmovies suchasTheMatrix andThe

Terminator tell of a daywhen the binary script throws off the yoke ofhumanity.Whenhumanstrytoregaincontroloftherebelliousscript,itrespondsbyattemptingtowipeoutthehumanrace.

* Even after Akkadian became the spoken language, Sumerian remained the language ofadministrationandthusthelanguagerecordedwithwriting.AspiringscribesthushadtospeakSumerian.

8

ThereisNoJusticeinHistory

UNDERSTANDING HUMAN HISTORY IN THE millennia following theAgriculturalRevolutionboilsdowntoasinglequestion:howdidhumansorganisethemselvesinmass-cooperationnetworks,whentheylackedthebiologicalinstinctsnecessarytosustainsuchnetworks?Theshortansweris thathumanscreated imaginedordersanddevisedscripts.These twoinventionsfilledthegapsleftbyourbiologicalinheritance.However,theappearanceofthesenetworkswas,formany,adubious

blessing. The imagined orders sustaining these networks were neitherneutralnorfair.Theydividedpeopleintomake-believegroups,arrangedinahierarchy.Theupperlevelsenjoyedprivilegesandpower,whilethelower ones suffered from discrimination and oppression. Hammurabi’sCode,forexample,establishedapeckingorderofsuperiors,commonersandslaves.Superiorsgotallthegoodthingsinlife.Commonersgotwhatwasleft.Slavesgotabeatingiftheycomplained.Despiteitsproclamationoftheequalityofallmen,theimaginedorder

established by the Americans in 1776 also established a hierarchy. Itcreated a hierarchy betweenmen,whobenefited from it, andwomen,whomitleftdisempowered.Itcreatedahierarchybetweenwhites,whoenjoyedliberty,andblacksandAmericanIndians,whowereconsideredhumansofalessertypeandthereforedidnotshareintheequalrightsofmen.Manyof thosewho signed theDeclarationof Independencewereslaveholders. They did not release their slaves upon signing theDeclaration,nordidtheyconsiderthemselveshypocrites.Intheirview,therightsofmenhadlittletodowithNegroes.TheAmericanorderalsoconsecratedthehierarchybetweenrichand

poor.MostAmericansatthattimehadlittleproblemwiththeinequalitycaused by wealthy parents passing their money and businesses on totheirchildren. Intheirview,equalitymeantsimplythat thesamelawsapplied to rich and poor. It had nothing to do with unemploymentbenefits, integratededucationorhealth insurance. Liberty, too, carriedverydifferentconnotationsthanitdoestoday.In1776,itdidnotmeanthat thedisempowered (certainlynotblacksor Indiansor,God forbid,women) couldgain and exercisepower. Itmeant simply that the statecouldnot,exceptinunusualcircumstances,confiscateacitizen’sprivateproperty or tell him what to do with it. The American order therebyupheldthehierarchyofwealth,whichsomethoughtwasmandatedbyGod and others viewed as representing the immutable laws of nature.Nature, it was claimed, rewarded merit with wealth while penalisingindolence.All the above-mentioned distinctions – between free persons andslaves,betweenwhitesandblacks,betweenrichandpoor–arerootedinfictions.(Thehierarchyofmenandwomenwillbediscussedlater.)Yetit isan iron ruleofhistory thatevery imaginedhierarchydisavows itsfictional origins and claims to be natural and inevitable. For instance,manypeoplewhohaveviewedthehierarchyoffreepersonsandslavesas natural and correct have argued that slavery is not a humaninvention.Hammurabisawitasordainedbythegods.Aristotlearguedthat slaves have a ‘slavish nature’ whereas free people have a ‘freenature’. Their status in society is merely a reflection of their innatenature.Askwhitesupremacistsabouttheracialhierarchy,andyouareinforapseudoscientific lecture concerning the biological differences betweentheraces.YouarelikelytobetoldthatthereissomethinginCaucasianbloodorgenesthatmakeswhitesnaturallymoreintelligent,moralandhardworking.Askadiehardcapitalistaboutthehierarchyofwealth,andyou are likely to hear that it is the inevitable outcome of objectivedifferencesinabilities.Therichhavemoremoney,inthisview,becausetheyaremorecapableanddiligent.Nooneshouldbebothered,then,ifthewealthygetbetterhealthcare,bettereducationandbetternutrition.Therichrichlydeserveeveryperktheyenjoy.

21.AsignonaSouthAfricanbeachfromtheperiodofapartheid,restrictingitsusagetowhites’only.Peoplewithlighterskincolouraretypicallymoreindangerofsunburnthanpeoplewithdarkerskin.YettherewasnobiologicallogicbehindthedivisionofSouthAfricanbeaches.Beachesreservedforpeoplewithlighterskinwerenotcharacterisedby

lowerlevelsofultravioletradiation.

Hinduswhoadheretothecastesystembelievethatcosmicforceshavemade one caste superior to another. According to a famous Hinducreation myth, the gods fashioned the world out of the body of aprimevalbeing,thePurusa.ThesunwascreatedfromthePurusa’seye,themoonfromthePurusa’sbrain,theBrahmins(priests)fromitsmouth,the Kshatriyas (warriors) from its arms, the Vaishyas (peasants andmerchants) from its thighs, and the Shudras (servants) from its legs.Accept this explanation and the sociopolitical differences betweenBrahmins and Shudras are as natural and eternal as the differencesbetweenthesunandthemoon.1TheancientChinesebelievedthatwhenthegoddessNüWacreatedhumansfromearth,shekneadedaristocratsfrom fine yellow soil, whereas commoners were formed from brownmud.2Yet, to the best of our understanding, these hierarchies are all theproduct of human imagination. Brahmins and Shudraswere not reallycreated by the gods from different body parts of a primeval being.

Instead,thedistinctionbetweenthetwocasteswascreatedbylawsandnorms invented by humans in northern India about 3,000 years ago.Contrary to Aristotle, there is no known biological difference betweenslavesandfreepeople.Humanlawsandnormshaveturnedsomepeopleintoslavesandothersintomasters.Betweenblacksandwhitestherearesomeobjectivebiologicaldifferences,suchasskincolourandhairtype,but there is no evidence that the differences extend to intelligence ormorality.Mostpeopleclaimthattheirsocialhierarchyisnaturalandjust,while

thoseofothersocietiesarebasedonfalseandridiculouscriteria.ModernWesternersare taught toscoffat the ideaof racialhierarchy.Theyareshockedbylawsprohibitingblackstoliveinwhiteneighbourhoods,orto study inwhite schools, or to be treated inwhite hospitals. But thehierarchy of rich and poor – whichmandates that rich people live inseparate and more luxurious neighbourhoods, study in separate andmoreprestigiousschools,andreceivemedicaltreatmentinseparateandbetter-equipped facilities–seemsperfectlysensible tomanyAmericansandEuropeans.Yetit’saprovenfactthatmostrichpeoplearerichforthe simple reason that they were born into a rich family, while mostpoorpeoplewillremainpoorthroughouttheirlivessimplybecausetheywerebornintoapoorfamily.

Unfortunately, complex human societies seem to require imaginedhierarchiesandunjustdiscrimination.Of coursenotallhierarchiesaremorallyidentical,andsomesocietiessufferedfrommoreextremetypesofdiscriminationthanothers,yetscholarsknowofnolargesocietythathasbeenabletodispensewithdiscriminationaltogether.Timeandagainpeoplehavecreatedorderintheirsocietiesbyclassifyingthepopulationinto imagined categories, such as superiors, commoners and slaves;whites andblacks; patricians andplebeians; Brahmins and Shudras; orrich and poor. These categories have regulated relations betweenmillionsofhumansbymakingsomepeoplelegally,politicallyorsociallysuperiortoothers.Hierarchies serve an important function. They enable complete

strangers to know how to treat one anotherwithoutwasting the timeandenergyneededtobecomepersonallyacquainted.InGeorgeBernard

Shaw’sPygmalion,HenryHiggins doesn’t need to establish an intimateacquaintancewithElizaDoolittleinordertounderstandhowheshouldrelatetoher.Justhearinghertalktellshimthatsheisamemberoftheunderclasswithwhomhecandoashewishes–forexample,usingheras a pawn in his bet to pass off a flower girl as a duchess. AmodernElizaworkingata florist’sneeds toknowhowmucheffort toput intoselling roses and gladioli to the dozens of people who enter the shopeachday.Shecan’tmakeadetailedenquiryintothetastesandwalletsofeachindividual.Instead,sheusessocialcues–thewaythepersonisdressed,hisorherage,andifshe’snotpoliticallycorrecthisskincolour.Thatishowsheimmediatelydistinguishesbetweentheaccounting-firmpartner who’s likely to place a large order for expensive roses, and amessengerboywhocanonlyaffordabunchofdaisies.Of course, differences in natural abilities also play a role in theformation of social distinctions. But such diversities of aptitudes andcharacter are usually mediated through imagined hierarchies. Thishappensintwoimportantways.Firstandforemost,mostabilitieshaveto be nurtured and developed. Even if somebody is born with aparticular talent, that talent will usually remain latent if it is notfostered, honed and exercised. Not all people get the same chance tocultivate and refine their abilities.Whether or not they have such anopportunity will usually depend on their place within their society’simaginedhierarchy.HarryPotterisagoodexample.Removedfromhisdistinguished wizard family and brought up by ignorant muggles, hearrivesatHogwartswithoutanyexperienceinmagic.Ittakeshimsevenbooks to gain a firm command of his powers and knowledge of hisuniqueabilities.Second, even ifpeoplebelonging todifferent classesdevelopexactlythesameabilities,theyareunlikelytoenjoyequalsuccessbecausetheywillhavetoplaythegamebydifferentrules.If,inBritish-ruledIndia,anUntouchable, a Brahmin, a Catholic Irishman and a ProtestantEnglishmanhadsomehowdevelopedexactlythesamebusinessacumen,they stillwould not have had the same chance of becoming rich. Theeconomic game was rigged by legal restrictions and unofficial glassceilings.

TheViciousCircle

All societies are basedon imaginedhierarchies, but not necessarily onthe same hierarchies. What accounts for the differences? Why didtraditional Indian society classify people according to caste, Ottomansocietyaccordingtoreligion,andAmericansocietyaccordingtorace?Inmost cases thehierarchyoriginated as the result of a set of accidentalhistorical circumstances and was then perpetuated and refined overmanygenerationsasdifferentgroupsdevelopedvestedinterestsinit.Forinstance,manyscholarssurmisethattheHinducastesystemtook

shapewhen Indo-Aryan people invaded the Indian subcontinent about3,000 years ago, subjugating the local population. The invadersestablishedastratifiedsociety,inwhichthey–ofcourse–occupiedtheleading positions (priests and warriors), leaving the natives to live asservants and slaves. The invaders, who were few in number, fearedlosing their privileged status and unique identity. To forestall thisdanger, they divided the population into castes, each of which wasrequired to pursue a specific occupation or perform a specific role insociety.Eachhaddifferentlegalstatus,privilegesandduties.Mixingofcastes – social interaction,marriage, even the sharing ofmeals – wasprohibited. And the distinctionswere not just legal – they became aninherentpartofreligiousmythologyandpractice.The rulers argued that the caste system reflected an eternal cosmic

reality rather thanachancehistoricaldevelopment.Conceptsofpurityand impuritywereessentialelements inHindureligion,and theywereharnessedtobuttressthesocialpyramid.PiousHindusweretaughtthatcontactwithmembersof adifferent caste couldpollutenotonly thempersonally, but society as a whole, and should therefore be abhorred.Such ideas are hardly unique to Hindus. Throughout history, and inalmost all societies, concepts of pollution and purity have played aleading role in enforcing social and political divisions and have beenexploited by numerous ruling classes tomaintain their privileges. Thefear of pollution is not a complete fabrication of priests and princes,however.Itprobablyhasitsrootsinbiologicalsurvivalmechanismsthatmake humans feel an instinctive revulsion towards potential diseasecarriers,suchassickpersonsanddeadbodies.Ifyouwanttokeepany

humangroupisolated–women,Jews,Roma,gays,blacks–thebestwaytodoitisconvinceeveryonethatthesepeopleareasourceofpollution.The Hindu caste system and its attendant laws of purity became

deeplyembeddedinIndianculture.LongaftertheIndo-Aryaninvasionwas forgotten, Indians continued to believe in the caste systemand toabhorthepollutioncausedbycastemixing.Casteswerenotimmunetochange. In fact, as time went by, large castes were divided into sub-castes. Eventually the original four castes turned into 3,000 differentgroupingscalledjati(literally‘birth’).Butthisproliferationofcastesdidnotchangethebasicprincipleof thesystem,accordingtowhicheveryperson isborn intoaparticular rank,andany infringementof its rulespollutesthepersonandsocietyasawhole.Apersonsjatideterminesherprofession,thefoodshecaneat,herplaceofresidenceandhereligiblemarriage partners. Usually a person canmarry onlywithin his or hercaste,andtheresultingchildreninheritthatstatus.Whenever a new profession developed or a new group of people

appearedonthescene,theyhadtoberecognisedasacasteinordertoreceive a legitimate place within Hindu society. Groups that failed towin recognition as a caste were, literally, outcasts – in this stratifiedsociety,theydidnotevenoccupythelowestrung.TheybecameknownasUntouchables.Theyhadtoliveapartfromallotherpeopleandscrapetogether a living in humiliating and disgusting ways, such as siftingthroughgarbagedumpsforscrapmaterial.Evenmembersofthelowestcasteavoidedminglingwiththem,eatingwiththem,touchingthemandcertainlymarryingthem.InmodernIndia,mattersofmarriageandworkarestillheavily influencedby thecastesystem,despiteallattemptsbythedemocraticgovernmentofIndiatobreakdownsuchdistinctionsandconvinceHindusthatthereisnothingpollutingincastemixing.3

PurityinAmerica

A similar vicious circle perpetuated the racial hierarchy in modernAmerica. From the sixteenth to the eighteenth century, the Europeanconquerors importedmillions of African slaves towork themines andplantationsofAmerica.Theychose to import slaves fromAfricarather

than from Europe or East Asia due to three circumstantial factors.Firstly, Africa was closer, so it was cheaper to import slaves fromSenegalthanfromVietnam.Secondly,inAfricatherealreadyexistedawell-developedslavetrade(exportingslavesmainlytotheMiddleEast),whereasinEuropeslaverywas very rare. Itwas obviously far easier to buy slaves in an existingmarketthantocreateanewonefromscratch.Thirdly,andmostimportantly,AmericanplantationsinplacessuchasVirginia, Haiti and Brazil were plagued by malaria and yellow fever,which had originated in Africa. Africans had acquired over thegenerations a partial genetic immunity to these diseases, whereasEuropeans were totally defenceless and died in droves. It wasconsequently wiser for a plantation owner to invest his money in anAfrican slave than in a European slave or indentured labourer.Paradoxically,geneticsuperiority(intermsofimmunity)translatedintosocial inferiority: precisely because Africans were fitter in tropicalclimates than Europeans, they ended up as the slaves of Europeanmasters! Due to these circumstantial factors, the burgeoning newsocieties of America were to be divided into a ruling caste of whiteEuropeansandasubjugatedcasteofblackAfricans.Butpeopledon’tliketosaythattheykeepslavesofacertainraceororigin simply because it’s economically expedient. Like the AryanconquerorsofIndia,whiteEuropeansintheAmericaswantedtobeseennotonlyaseconomicallysuccessfulbutalsoaspious,justandobjective.Religious and scientificmythswere pressed into service to justify thisdivision. Theologians argued that Africans descend from Ham, son ofNoah, saddled by his father with a curse that his offspring would beslaves.Biologistsarguedthatblacksarelessintelligentthanwhitesandtheirmoralsenselessdeveloped.Doctorsallegedthatblacksliveinfilthandspreaddiseases–inotherwords,theyareasourceofpollution.These myths struck a chord in American culture, and in Westernculturegenerally.Theycontinuedtoexerttheirinfluencelongaftertheconditionsthatcreatedslaveryhaddisappeared.IntheearlynineteenthcenturyimperialBritainoutlawedslaveryandstoppedtheAtlanticslavetrade,andinthedecadesthatfollowedslaverywasgraduallyoutlawedthroughouttheAmericancontinent.Notably,thiswasthefirstandonlytimeinhistorythatslaveholdingsocietiesvoluntarilyabolishedslavery.

But, even though the slaveswere freed, the racistmyths that justifiedslavery persisted. Separation of the races was maintained by racistlegislationandsocialcustom.The resultwas a self-reinforcing cycle of cause and effect, a viciouscircle. Consider, for example, the southern United States immediatelyafter the Civil War. In 1865 the Thirteenth Amendment to the USConstitutionoutlawedslaveryandtheFourteenthAmendmentmandatedthatcitizenshipandtheequalprotectionofthelawcouldnotbedeniedonthebasisofrace.However,twocenturiesofslaverymeantthatmostblack families were far poorer and far less educated than most whitefamilies.Ablackpersonborn inAlabama in1865 thushadmuch lesschance of getting a good education and a well-paid job than did hiswhiteneighbours.Hischildren,borninthe1880Sand1890s,startedlifewith the same disadvantage – they, too,were born to an uneducated,poorfamily.But economic disadvantage was not the whole story. Alabama wasalsohometomanypoorwhiteswholackedtheopportunitiesavailableto theirbetter-off racialbrothersandsisters. Inaddition, the IndustrialRevolution and the waves of immigration made the United States anextremely fluid society, where rags could quickly turn into riches. Ifmoneywasallthatmattered,thesharpdividebetweentheracesshouldsoonhaveblurred,notleastthroughintermarriage.Butthatdidnothappen.By1865whites,aswellasmanyblacks,tookit to be a simplematter of fact that blackswere less intelligent,moreviolentandsexuallydissolute, lazierandlessconcernedaboutpersonalcleanliness than whites. They were thus the agents of violence, theft,rape and disease – in other words, pollution. If a black Alabaman in1895miraculouslymanaged to get a good education and then appliedfor a respectable job such as a bank teller, his odds of being acceptedwerefarworsethanthoseofanequallyqualifiedwhitecandidate.Thestigma that labelled blacks as, by nature, unreliable, lazy and lessintelligentconspiredagainsthim.Youmight think that peoplewould gradually understand that thesestigmasweremythratherthanfactandthatblackswouldbeable,overtime, to prove themselves just as competent, law-abiding and clean aswhites. In fact, theoppositehappened– theseprejudicesbecamemoreandmoreentrenchedastimewentby.Sinceallthebestjobswereheld

by whites, it became easier to believe that blacks really are inferior.‘Look,’ said the average white citizen, ‘blacks have been free forgenerations,yettherearealmostnoblackprofessors,lawyers,doctorsorevenbanktellers. Isn’t thatproofthatblacksaresimplyless intelligentandhardworking?’Trappedinthisviciouscircle,blackswerenothiredforwhite-collar jobs because theywere deemed unintelligent, and theproofoftheirinferioritywasthepaucityofblacksinwhite-collarjobs.The vicious circle did not stop there. As anti-black stigmas grew

stronger, they were translated into a system of ‘Jim Crow’ laws andnorms that were meant to safeguard the racial order. Blacks wereforbiddentovoteinelections,tostudyinwhiteschools,tobuyinwhitestores, to eat in white restaurants, to sleep in white hotels. Thejustificationforallofthiswasthatblackswerefoul,slothfulandvicious,sowhiteshadtobeprotectedfromthem.Whitesdidnotwanttosleepinthe same hotel as blacks or to eat in the same restaurant, for fear ofdiseases.Theydidnotwanttheirchildrenlearninginthesameschoolasblack children, for fear of brutality and bad influences. They did notwantblacksvotinginelections,sinceblackswereignorantandimmoral.These fears were substantiated by scientific studies that ‘proved’ thatblacks were indeed less educated, that various diseases were morecommon among them, and that their crime rate was far higher (thestudies ignored the fact that these ‘facts’ resulted from discriminationagainstblacks).By themid-twentiethcentury, segregation in the formerConfederate

stateswasprobablyworsethaninthelatenineteenthcentury.ClennonKing, a black student who applied to the University of Mississippi in1958,wasforcefullycommittedtoamentalasylum.ThepresidingjudgeruledthatablackpersonmustsurelybeinsanetothinkthathecouldbeadmittedtotheUniversityofMississippi.

Theviciouscircle:achancehistoticalsituationistranslatedintoarigidsocialsystem.

Nothing was as revolting to American southerners (and manynortherners) as sexual relations andmarriage between blackmen andwhitewomen.Sexbetweentheracesbecamethegreatesttabooandanyviolation, or suspected violation, was viewed as deserving immediateandsummarypunishmentintheformoflynching.TheKuKluxKlan,awhite supremacist secret society, perpetratedmany such killings. TheycouldhavetaughttheHinduBrahminsathingortwoaboutpuritylaws.With time, the racism spread to more and more cultural arenas.

Americanaestheticculturewasbuiltaroundwhitestandardsofbeauty.Thephysical attributes of thewhite race – for example light skin, fairand straight hair, a small upturned nose – came to be identified asbeautiful. Typical black features – dark skin, dark and bushy hair, aflattenednose–weredeemedugly.Thesepreconceptionsingrainedtheimaginedhierarchyatanevendeeperlevelofhumanconsciousness.Such vicious circles can go on for centuries and even millennia,

perpetuatinganimaginedhierarchythatsprangfromachancehistoricaloccurrence. Unjust discrimination often gets worse, not better, withtime.Moneycomestomoney,andpovertytopoverty.Educationcomesto education, and ignorance to ignorance. Those once victimised byhistoryarelikelytobevictimisedyetagain.Andthosewhomhistoryhasprivilegedaremorelikelytobeprivilegedagain.Mostsociopoliticalhierarchieslackalogicalorbiologicalbasis–they

arenothingbuttheperpetuationofchanceeventssupportedbymyths.Thatisonegoodreasontostudyhistory.Ifthedivisionintoblacksand

whitesorBrahminsandShudraswasgrounded inbiological realities–that is, if Brahmins really had better brains than Shudras – biologywould be sufficient for understanding human society. Since thebiologicaldistinctionsbetweendifferentgroupsofHomosapiens are, infact,negligible,biologycan’texplaintheintricaciesofIndiansocietyorAmericanracialdynamics.Wecanonlyunderstandthosephenomenabystudyingtheevents,circumstances,andpowerrelationsthattransformedfigmentsofimaginationintocruel–andveryreal–socialstructures.

HeandShe

Differentsocietiesadoptdifferentkindsofimaginedhierarchies.RaceisveryimportanttomodernAmericansbutwasrelativelyinsignificanttomedieval Muslims. Caste was a matter of life and death in medievalIndia, whereas in modern Europe it is practically non-existent. Onehierarchy, however, has been of supreme importance in all knownhuman societies: the hierarchy of gender. People everywhere havedivided themselves intomenandwomen.Andalmosteverywheremenhavegotthebetterdeal,atleastsincetheAgriculturalRevolution.SomeoftheearliestChinesetextsareoraclebones,datingto1200BC,

usedtodivinethefuture.Ononewasengravedthequestion:‘WillLadyHao’s childbearing be lucky?’ To which was written the reply: ‘If thechild isbornonadingday, lucky; ifonageng day, vastly auspicious.’However,LadyHaowastogivebirthonajiayinday.Thetextendswiththemoroseobservation: ‘Threeweeksandoneday later,on jiayinday,the child was born. Not lucky. It was a girl.’4More than 3,000 yearslater, when Communist China enacted the ‘one child’ policy, manyChinesefamiliescontinuedtoregardthebirthofagirlasamisfortune.Parents would occasionally abandon ormurder newborn baby girls inordertohaveanothershotatgettingaboy.Inmanysocietieswomenweresimplythepropertyofmen,mostoften

their fathers, husbands or brothers. Rape, inmany legal systems, fallsunderpropertyviolation–inotherwords,thevictimisnotthewomanwhowas raped but themale who owns her. This being the case, thelegalremedywasthetransferofownership–therapistwasrequiredto

pay a bride price to the woman’s father or brother, upon which shebecame the rapist’s property.TheBibledecrees that ‘If amanmeets avirginwhoisnotbetrothed,andseizesherandlieswithher,andtheyarefound,thenthemanwholaywithhershallgivetothefatheroftheyoung woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife’(Deuteronomy 22:28–9). The ancient Hebrews considered this areasonablearrangement.Rapingawomanwhodidnotbelongtoanymanwasnotconsidereda

crime at all, just as picking up a lost coin on a busy street is notconsidered theft. And if a husband raped his own wife, he hadcommittednocrime.Infact,theideathatahusbandcouldrapehiswifewas an oxymoron. To be a husband was to have full control of yourwife’ssexuality.Tosaythatahusband‘raped’hiswifewasasillogicalassayingthatamanstolehisownwallet.Suchthinkingwasnotconfinedto the ancient Middle East. As of 2006, there were still fifty-threecountrieswhereahusbandcouldnotbeprosecuted for the rapeofhiswife.EveninGermany,rapelawswereamendedonlyin1997tocreatealegalcategoryofmaritalrape.5Isthedivisionintomenandwomenaproductoftheimagination,like

the caste system in India and the racial system in America, or is it anaturaldivisionwithdeepbiologicalroots?Andifitisindeedanaturaldivision,aretherealsobiologicalexplanations for thepreferencegiventomenoverwomen?Someofthecultural, legalandpoliticaldisparitiesbetweenmenand

women reflect the obvious biological differences between the sexes.Childbearing has always been women’s job, because men don’t havewombs. Yet around this hard universal kernel, every societyaccumulatedlayeruponlayerofculturalideasandnormsthathavelittleto do with biology. Societies associate a host of attributes withmasculinityandfemininitythat,forthemostpart,lackafirmbiologicalbasis.For instance, in democratic Athens of the fifth century BC, an

individualpossessingawombhadnoindependent legalstatusandwasforbiddentoparticipateinpopularassembliesortobeajudge.Withfewexceptions,suchanindividualcouldnotbenefitfromagoodeducation,nor engage in business or in philosophical discourse. None of Athens’political leaders, none of its great philosophers, orators, artists or

merchants had a womb. Does having a womb make a person unfit,biologically, for these professions? The ancient Athenians thought so.Modern Athenians disagree. In present-day Athens, women vote, areelectedtopublicoffice,makespeeches,designeverythingfromjewellerytobuildingstosoftware,andgotouniversity.Theirwombsdonotkeepthem from doing any of these things as successfully asmen do. True,theyarestillunder-representedinpoliticsandbusiness–onlyabout12percentofthemembersofGreece’sparliamentarewomen.Butthereisno legal barrier to their participation in politics, and most modernGreeksthinkitisquitenormalforawomantoserveinpublicoffice.ManymodernGreeksalsothinkthatanintegralpartofbeingamanis

being sexually attracted to women only, and having sexual relationsexclusivelywiththeoppositesex.Theydon’tseethisasaculturalbias,butratherasabiologicalreality–relationsbetweentwopeopleof theopposite sex are natural, and between two people of the same sexunnatural. In fact, though, Mother Nature does not mind if men aresexually attracted to one another. It’s only humanmothers steeped inparticularcultureswhomakeasceneiftheirsonhasaflingwiththeboynext door. The mother’s tantrums are not a biological imperative. Asignificantnumberofhumancultureshaveviewedhomosexualrelationsas not only legitimate but even socially constructive, ancient Greecebeingthemostnotableexample.TheIliaddoesnotmentionthatThetishad any objection to her sonAchilles’ relationswith Patroclus.QueenOlympiasofMacedonwasoneof themost temperamentalandforcefulwomen of the ancient world, and even had her own husband, KingPhilip, assassinated.Yet shedidn’t have a fitwhenher son,AlexandertheGreat,broughthisloverHephaestionhomefordinner.How can we distinguish what is biologically determined from what

peoplemerely try to justify through biologicalmyths? A good rule ofthumbis‘Biologyenables,Cultureforbids.’Biologyiswillingtotolerateaverywidespectrumofpossibilities. It’sculturethatobligespeopletorealise some possibilities while forbidding others. Biology enableswomen to have children – some cultures obligewomen to realise thispossibility.Biologyenablesmen toenjoy sexwithoneanother– someculturesforbidthemtorealisethispossibility.Culturetendstoarguethatitforbidsonlythatwhichisunnatural.But

fromabiologicalperspective,nothingisunnatural.Whateverispossible

isbydefinitionalsonatural.Atrulyunnaturalbehaviour,onethatgoesagainst the laws of nature, simply cannot exist, so it would need noprohibition. No culture has ever bothered to forbid men tophotosynthesise, women to run faster than the speed of light, ornegativelychargedelectronstobeattractedtoeachother.In truth, our concepts ‘natural’ and unnatural’ are taken not frombiology, but from Christian theology. The theological meaning of‘natural’ is ‘in accordancewith the intentions of theGodwho creatednature’.ChristiantheologiansarguedthatGodcreatedthehumanbody,intendingeach limbandorgantoserveaparticularpurpose. Ifweuseour limbs and organs for the purpose envisioned by God, then it is anaturalactivity.TousethemdifferentlythanGodintendsisunnatural.Butevolutionhasnopurpose.Organshavenotevolvedwithapurpose,andthewaytheyareusedisinconstantflux.Thereisnotasingleorganinthehumanbodythatonlydoesthejobitsprototypedidwhenitfirstappearedhundredsofmillionsofyearsago.Organsevolvetoperformaparticular function, but once they exist, they canbe adapted for otherusages as well. Mouths, for example, appeared because the earliestmulticellularorganismsneededawaytotakenutrientsintotheirbodies.Westilluseourmouthsforthatpurpose,butwealsousethemtokiss,speakand,ifweareRambo,topullthepinsoutofhandgrenades.Areanyoftheseusesunnaturalsimplybecauseourworm-likeancestors600millionyearsagodidn’tdothosethingswiththeirmouths?Similarly,wingsdidn’tsuddenlyappearinalltheiraerodynamicglory.Theydevelopedfromorgansthatservedanotherpurpose.Accordingtoone theory, insect wings evolved millions of years ago from bodyprotrusionsonflightlessbugs.Bugswithbumpshadalargersurfaceareathan those without bumps, and this enabled them to absorb moresunlight and thus stay warmer. In a slow evolutionary process, thesesolar heaters grew larger. The same structure that was good formaximumsunlightabsorption–lotsofsurfacearea,littleweight–also,by coincidence, gave the insects a bit of a liftwhen they skipped andjumped. Those with bigger protrusions could skip and jump farther.Some insects startedusing the things toglide,and from there itwasasmall step towings thatcouldactuallypropel thebug throughtheair.Next time a mosquito buzzes in your ear, accuse her of unnaturalbehaviour. If shewerewell behaved and contentwithwhatGod gave

her,she’duseherwingsonlyassolarpanels.The same sort of multitasking applies to our sexual organs andbehaviour. Sex first evolved for procreation and courtship rituals as awayofsizingupthefitnessofapotentialmate.Butmanyanimalsnowputbothtouseforamultitudeofsocialpurposesthathavelittletodowithcreatinglittlecopiesofthemselves.Chimpanzees,forexample,usesextocementpoliticalalliances,establishintimacyanddefusetensions.Isthatunnatural?

SexandGender

Thereislittlesense,then,inarguingthatthenaturalfunctionofwomenis to give birth, or that homosexuality is unnatural.Most of the laws,norms, rights and obligations that define manhood and womanhoodreflecthumanimaginationmorethanbiologicalreality.Biologically,humansaredividedintomalesandfemales.AmaleHomosapiens is onewho has one X chromosome and one Y chromosome; afemale is one with two Xs. But ‘man’ and woman’ name social, notbiological, categories. While in the great majority of cases in mosthumansocietiesmenaremalesandwomenarefemales,thesocialtermscarryalotofbaggagethathasonlyatenuous,ifany,relationshiptothebiological terms. A man is not a Sapiens with particular biologicalqualities such as XY chromosomes, testicles and lots of testosterone.Rather, he fits into a particular slot in his society’s imagined humanorder. His culture’s myths assign him particular masculine roles (likeengaging in politics), rights (like voting) and duties (like militaryservice).Likewise,awomanisnotaSapienswithtwoXchromosomes,awomb and plenty of oestrogen. Rather, she is a femalemember of animagined human order. The myths of her society assign her uniquefeminineroles(raisingchildren),rights(protectionagainstviolence)andduties (obedience to her husband). Since myths, rather than biology,define the roles, rights anddutiesofmenandwomen, themeaningof‘manhood’and‘womanhood’havevariedimmenselyfromonesocietytoanother.

22.Eighteenth-centurymasculinity:anofficialportraitofKingLouisXIVofFrance.Notethelongwig,stockings,high-heeledshoes,dancersposture–andhugesword.IncontemporaryEurope,allthese(exceptforthesword)wouldbeconsideredmarksofeffeminacy.ButinhistimeLouiswasaEuropeanparagonofmanhoodandvirility.

23.Twenty-first-centurymasculinity:anofficialportraitofBarackObama.Whathappenedtothewig,stockings,highheels–andsword?Dominantmenhavenever

lookedsodullanddrearyastheydotoday.Duringmostofhistory,dominantmenhavebeencolourfulandflamboyant,suchasAmericanIndianchiefswiththeirfeatheredheaddressesandHindumaharajasdeckedoutinsilksanddiamonds.Throughoutthe

animalkingdommalestendtobemorecolourfulandaccessorisedthanfemales–thinkofpeacocks’tailsandlions’manes.

Tomake things less confusing, scholars usually distinguish between‘sex’,which is a biological category, and ‘gender’, a cultural category.

Sex is divided between males and females, and the qualities of thisdivision are objective and have remained constant throughout history.Gender is divided between men and women (and some culturesrecogniseothercategories).So-called‘masculine’and‘feminine’qualitiesare inter-subjective and undergo constant changes. For example, thereare far-reaching differences in the behaviour, desires, dress and evenbody posture expected fromwomen in classicalAthens andwomen inmodernAthens.6Sex is child’s play; but gender is serious business. To get to be a

memberofthemalesexisthesimplestthingintheworld.Youjustneedto be bornwith an X and a Y chromosome. To get to be a female isequally simple. A pair of X chromosomes will do it. In contrast,becoming a man or a woman is a very complicated and demandingundertaking. Sincemost masculine and feminine qualities are culturalrather than biological, no society automatically crowns each male aman,oreveryfemaleawoman.Norarethesetitles laurelsthatcanberested on once they are acquired.Malesmust prove their masculinityconstantly, throughout their lives, from cradle to grave, in an endlessseriesof ritesandperformances.Andawoman’swork isneverdone–shemust continually convince herself and others that she is feminineenough.Successisnotguaranteed.Malesinparticularliveinconstantdreadof

losing their claim to manhood. Throughout history, males have beenwillingtoriskandevensacrificetheirlives,justsothatpeoplewillsay‘He’sarealman!’

What’sSoGoodAboutMen?

At least since the Agricultural Revolution, most human societies havebeenpatriarchalsocietiesthatvaluedmenmorehighlythanwomen.Nomatter how a society defined ‘man’ and ‘woman’, to be a man wasalways better. Patriarchal societies educatemen to think and act in amasculine way and women to think and act in a feminine way,punishing anyone who dares cross those boundaries. Yet they do notequally reward thosewhoconform.Qualities consideredmasculineare

morevaluedthanthoseconsideredfeminine,andmembersofasocietywhopersonifythefeminineidealgetlessthanthosewhoexemplifythemasculine ideal. Fewer resources are invested in the health andeducation of women; they have fewer economic opportunities, lesspolitical power, and less freedom of movement. Gender is a race inwhichsomeoftherunnerscompeteonlyforthebronzemedal.True,ahandfulofwomenhavemadeittothealphaposition,suchas

Cleopatra of Egypt, Empress Wu Zetian of China (c. AD 700) andElizabethIofEngland.Yettheyaretheexceptionsthatprovetherule.ThroughoutElizabeth’s forty-five-yearreign,allMembersofParliamentweremen,allofficersintheRoyalNavyandarmyweremen,alljudgesand lawyers were men, all bishops and archbishops were men, alltheologiansandpriestsweremen,alldoctorsandsurgeonsweremen,allstudents and professors in all universities and colleges were men, allmayors and sheriffs were men, and almost all the writers, architects,poets,philosophers,painters,musiciansandscientistsweremen.Patriarchyhasbeenthenorminalmostallagriculturalandindustrial

societies. It has tenaciously weathered political upheavals, socialrevolutions and economic transformations. Egypt, for example, wasconquered numerous times over the centuries. Assyrians, Persians,Macedonians,Romans,Arabs,Mameluks,TurksandBritishoccupiedit–and its society always remained patriarchal. Egypt was governed bypharaonic law,Greek law, Roman law,Muslim law,Ottoman law andBritish law – and they all discriminated against people whowere not‘realmen’.Since patriarchy is so universal, it cannot be the product of some

vicious circle that was kick-started by a chance occurrence. It isparticularly noteworthy that even before 1492, most societies in bothAmericaandAfro-Asiawerepatriarchal,eventhoughtheyhadbeenoutofcontactforthousandsofyears.IfpatriarchyinAfro-Asiaresultedfromsomechanceoccurrence,whyweretheAztecsandIncaspatriarchal?Itis farmore likely that even though theprecisedefinitionof ‘man’ and‘woman’ varies between cultures, there is some universal biologicalreasonwhyalmost all cultures valuedmanhoodoverwomanhood.Wedonotknowwhat this reason is.Thereareplentyof theories,noneofthemconvincing.

MusclePower

Themostcommontheorypointstothefactthatmenarestrongerthanwomen, and that theyhaveused their greater physical power to forcewomenintosubmission.Amoresubtleversionofthisclaimarguesthattheirstrengthallowsmentomonopolisetasksthatdemandhardmanuallabour, such as ploughing and harvesting. This gives them control offoodproduction,whichinturntranslatesintopoliticalclout.Therearetwoproblemswiththisemphasisonmusclepower.First,the

statement thatmenare stronger thanwomen’ is trueonlyonaverage,andonlywithregardtocertaintypesofstrength.Womenaregenerallymoreresistant tohunger,diseaseand fatigue thanmen.Therearealsomany women who can run faster and lift heavier weights than manymen. Furthermore, and most problematically for this theory, womenhave, throughouthistory,beenexcludedmainly from jobs that requirelittle physical effort (such as the priesthood, law and politics), whileengaging in hard manual labour in the fields, in crafts and in thehousehold. If social power were divided in direct relation to physicalstrengthorstamina,womenshouldhavegotfarmoreofit.Even more importantly, there simply is no direct relation between

physical strength and social power among humans. People in theirsixtiesusuallyexercisepoweroverpeopleintheirtwenties,eventhoughtwentysomethings are much stronger than their elders. The typicalplantationownerinAlabamainthemid-nineteenthcenturycouldhavebeenwrestledtothegroundinsecondsbyanyoftheslavescultivatinghis cotton fields. Boxing matches were not used to select Egyptianpharaohs or Catholic popes. In forager societies, political dominancegenerallyresideswiththepersonpossessingthebestsocialskillsratherthanthemostdevelopedmusculature.Inorganisedcrime,thebigbossisnot necessarily the strongestman.He is often an oldermanwho veryrarelyuseshisownfists;hegetsyoungerandfittermentodothedirtyjobsforhim.Aguywhothinksthatthewaytotakeoverthesyndicateisto beat up the don is unlikely to live long enough to learn from hismistake.Evenamongchimpanzees,thealphamalewinshispositionbybuilding a stable coalitionwith othermales and females, not throughmindlessviolence.

In fact, human history shows that there is often an inverse relationbetween physical prowess and social power. Inmost societies, it’s thelowerclasseswhodothemanuallabour.ThismayreflectHomosapienspositioninthefoodchain.Ifallthatcountedwererawphysicalabilities,Sapienswouldhave found themselves on amiddle rungof the ladder.Buttheirmentalandsocialskillsplacedthematthetop.Itisthereforeonly natural that the chain of power within the species will also bedeterminedbymentalandsocialabilitiesmorethanbybruteforce.Itisthereforehardtobelievethatthemostinfluentialandmoststablesocialhierarchy in history is founded on men’s ability physically to coercewomen.

TheScumofSociety

Another theory explains that masculine dominance results not fromstrengthbut fromaggression.Millionsofyearsofevolutionhavemademen far more violent than women. Women can match men as far ashatred,greedandabuseareconcerned,butwhenpushcomestoshove,the theory goes, men are more willing to engage in raw physicalviolence.This iswhy throughouthistorywarfarehasbeenamasculineprerogative.Intimesofwar,men’scontrolofthearmedforceshasmadethemthe

mastersofciviliansociety,too.Theythenusedtheircontrolofciviliansociety to fight more and more wars, and the greater the number ofwars, thegreatermen’s control of society.This feedback loop explainsboththeubiquityofwarandtheubiquityofpatriarchy.Recent studies of the hormonal and cognitive systems of men and

women strengthen the assumption that men indeed have moreaggressiveandviolenttendencies,andaretherefore,onaverage,bettersuited to serve as common soldiers. Yet granted that the commonsoldiersareallmen,doesitfollowthattheonesmanagingthewarandenjoying its fruits must also be men? That makes no sense. It’s likeassumingthatbecauseall theslavescultivatingcotton fieldsareblack,plantationownerswillbeblackaswell. Justasanall-blackworkforcemight be controlledby an all-whitemanagement,why couldn’t an all-

male soldiery be controlled by an all-female or at least partly femalegovernment? In fact, innumerous societies throughouthistory, the topofficersdidnotworktheirwayupfromtherankofprivate.Aristocrats,thewealthyand theeducatedwereautomaticallyassignedofficer rankandneverservedadayintheranks.When the Duke of Wellington, Napoleon’s nemesis, enlisted in the

Britisharmyat theageofeighteen,hewas immediatelycommissionedasanofficer.Hedidn’tthinkmuchoftheplebeiansunderhiscommand.‘Wehave in the service the scumof theearthascommonsoldiers,’hewrote to a fellow aristocrat during the wars against France. Thesecommonsoldierswereusuallyrecruitedfromamongtheverypoorest,orfrom ethnic minorities (such as the Irish Catholics). Their chances ofascending the military ranks were negligible. The senior ranks werereservedfordukes,princesandkings.Butwhyonlyfordukes,andnotforduchesses?The French Empire in Africa was established and defended by the

sweatandbloodofSenegalese,Algeriansandworking-classFrenchmen.Thepercentageofwell-bornFrenchmenwithintherankswasnegligible.Yet the percentage ofwell-born Frenchmenwithin the small elite thatled the French army, ruled the empire and enjoyed its fruitswas veryhigh.WhyjustFrenchmen,andnotFrenchwomen?In China there was a long tradition of subjugating the army to the

civilian bureaucracy, somandarinswho had never held a sword oftenran the wars. ‘You do not waste good iron to make nails,’ went acommon Chinese saying, meaning that really talented people join thecivilbureaucracy,notthearmy.Why,then,wereallofthesemandarinsmen?One can’t reasonably argue that their physical weakness or low

testosterone levels preventedwomen from being successfulmandarins,generals and politicians. In order to manage a war, you surely needstamina,butnotmuchphysicalstrengthoraggressiveness.Warsarenota pub brawl. They are very complex projects that require anextraordinarydegreeoforganisation,cooperationandappeasement.Theabilitytomaintainpeaceathome,acquirealliesabroad,andunderstandwhatgoesthroughthemindsofotherpeople(particularlyyourenemies)isusuallythekeytovictory.Henceanaggressivebruteisoftentheworstchoice to run a war.Much better is a cooperative personwho knows

howtoappease,howtomanipulateandhowtoseethingsfromdifferentperspectives.Thisisthestuffempire-buildersaremadeof.Themilitarilyincompetent Augustus succeeded in establishing a stable imperialregime, achieving something that eluded both Julius Caesar andAlexandertheGreat,whoweremuchbettergenerals.Bothhisadmiringcontemporaries and modern historians often attribute this feat to hisvirtueofclementia–mildnessandclemency.Women are often stereotyped as better manipulators and appeasers

thanmen,andarefamedfortheirsuperiorabilitytoseethingsfromtheperspective of others. If there’s any truth in these stereotypes, thenwomen should have made excellent politicians and empire-builders,leaving the dirty work on the battlefields to testosterone-charged butsimple-minded machos. Popular myths notwithstanding, this rarelyhappenedintherealworld.Itisnotatallclearwhynot.

PatriarchalGenes

A third type of biological explanation gives less importance to bruteforce and violence, and suggests that through millions of years ofevolution,menandwomenevolveddifferentsurvivalandreproductionstrategies. Asmen competed against each other for the opportunity toimpregnate fertile women, an individual’s chances of reproductiondependedaboveallonhisability tooutperformanddefeatothermen.Astimewentby,themasculinegenesthatmadeittothenextgenerationwerethosebelongingtothemostambitious,aggressiveandcompetitivemen.Awoman,ontheotherhand,hadnoproblemfindingamanwillingto

impregnateher.However,ifshewantedherchildrentoprovideherwithgrandchildren,sheneededtocarrytheminherwombforninearduousmonths,andthennurturethemforyears.Duringthattimeshehadfeweropportunities to obtain food, and required a lot of help. Sheneeded aman. In order to ensure her own survival and the survival of herchildren, the woman had little choice but to agree to whateverconditions themanstipulatedso thathewouldstickaroundandsharesomeoftheburden.Astimewentby,thefemininegenesthatmadeitto

thenextgenerationbelongedtowomenwhoweresubmissivecaretakers.Womenwhospenttoomuchtimefightingforpowerdidnotleaveanyofthosepowerfulgenesforfuturegenerations.Theresultofthesedifferentsurvivalstrategies–sothetheorygoes–is

thatmenhavebeenprogrammedtobeambitiousandcompetitive,andtoexcel inpoliticsandbusiness,whereaswomenhavetendedtomoveoutofthewayanddedicatetheirlivestoraisingchildren.But thisapproachalsoseemstobebeliedbytheempiricalevidence.

Particularlyproblematicistheassumptionthatwomen’sdependenceonexternal help made them dependent on men, rather than on otherwomen, and that male competitiveness made men socially dominant.There are many species of animals, such as elephants and bonobochimpanzees, in which the dynamics between dependent females andcompetitive males results in amatriarchal society. Since females needexternal help, they are obliged to develop their social skills and learnhowtocooperateandappease.Theyconstructall-femalesocialnetworksthathelpeachmemberraiseherchildren.Males,meanwhile,spendtheirtimefightingandcompeting.Theirsocialskillsandsocialbondsremainunderdeveloped.Bonoboandelephantsocietiesarecontrolledbystrongnetworks of cooperative females, while the self-centred anduncooperativemalesarepushedtothesidelines.Thoughbonobofemalesareweakeronaveragethanthemales,thefemalesoftenganguptobeatmaleswhooversteptheirlimits.Ifthisispossibleamongbonobosandelephants,whynotamongHomo

sapiens? Sapiens are relativelyweak animals,whose advantage rests intheirabilitytocooperateinlargenumbers.Ifso,weshouldexpectthatdependentwomen,eveniftheyaredependentonmen,wouldusetheirsuperior social skills to cooperate to outmanoeuvre and manipulateaggressive,autonomousandself-centredmen.How did it happen that in the one species whose success depends

above all on cooperation, individuals who are supposedly lesscooperative (men) control individuals who are supposedly morecooperative(women)?Atpresent,wehavenogoodanswer.Maybethecommonassumptionsarejustwrong.MaybemalesofthespeciesHomosapiens are characterised not by physical strength, aggressiveness andcompetitiveness, but rather by superior social skills and a greatertendencytocooperate.Wejustdon’tknow.

What we do know, however, is that during the last century genderroleshaveundergoneatremendousrevolution.Moreandmoresocietiestodaynotonlygivemenandwomenequal legal status,political rightsandeconomicopportunities,butalsocompletelyrethinktheirmostbasicconceptions of gender and sexuality. Though the gender gap is stillsignificant, events have been moving at a breathtaking speed. At thebeginning of the twentieth century the idea of giving voting rights towomenwasgenerallyseenintheUSAasoutrageous; theprospectofafemalecabinetsecretaryorSupremeCourtjusticewassimplyridiculous;whereashomosexualitywassuchataboosubjectthatitcouldnotevenbe openly discussed. At the beginning of the twenty-first centurywomen’svotingrightsare taken forgranted; femalecabinetsecretariesare hardly a cause for comment; and in 2013 five US Supreme Courtjustices,threeofthemwomen,decidedinfavouroflegalisingsame-sexmarriages(overrulingtheobjectionsoffourmalejustices).These dramatic changes are precisely what makes the history of

gendersobewildering.If,asisbeingdemonstratedtodaysoclearly,thepatriarchal systemhasbeenbasedonunfoundedmyths rather thanonbiological facts,whataccounts for theuniversalityand stabilityof thissystem?

PartThreeTheUnificationofHumankind

24.PilgrimscirclingtheKa’abainMecca.

9

TheArrowofHistory

AFTERTHEAGRICULTURALREVOLUTION,humansocietiesgreweverlargerandmorecomplex,while the imaginedconstructssustaining thesocialorderalsobecamemoreelaborate.Mythsandfictionsaccustomedpeople, nearly from themoment of birth, to think in certainways, tobehaveinaccordancewithcertainstandards,towantcertainthings,andto observe certain rules. They thereby created artificial instincts thatenabledmillions of strangers to cooperate effectively. This network ofartificialinstinctsiscalledculture’.During the first half of the twentieth century, scholars taught that

everyculturewascompleteandharmonious,possessinganunchangingessencethatdefineditforalltime.Eachhumangrouphaditsownworldviewandsystemof social, legalandpoliticalarrangements that ranassmoothlyastheplanetsgoingaroundthesun.Inthisview,culturesleftto theirowndevicesdidnotchange.They justkeptgoingat the samepaceandinthesamedirection.Onlyaforceappliedfromoutsidecouldchangethem.Anthropologists,historiansandpoliticiansthusreferredto‘Samoan Culture’ or ‘Tasmanian Culture’ as if the same beliefs, normsand values had characterised Samoans and Tasmanians from timeimmemorial.Today,most scholars of culture have concluded that the opposite is

true.Everyculturehasitstypicalbeliefs,normsandvalues,buttheseareinconstantflux.Theculturemaytransformitselfinresponsetochangesin its environment or through interaction with neighbouring cultures.Butculturesalsoundergotransitionsduetotheirowninternaldynamics.Even a completely isolated culture existing in an ecologically stable

environmentcannotavoidchange.Unlikethelawsofphysics,whicharefree of inconsistencies, everyman-made order is packed with internalcontradictions. Cultures are constantly trying to reconcile thesecontradictions,andthisprocessfuelschange.For instance, in medieval Europe the nobility believed in bothChristianity and chivalry. A typical nobleman went to church in themorning,andlistenedasthepriestheldforthonthelivesofthesaints.‘Vanityofvanities,’saidthepriest,‘allisvanity.Riches,lustandhonourare dangerous temptations. You must rise above them, and follow inChrist’s footsteps.Bemeek likeHim, avoidviolenceandextravagance,andifattacked–justturntheothercheek.’Returninghomeinameekandpensivemood,thenoblemanwouldchangeintohisbestsilksandgotoabanquet inhis lord’scastle.There thewine flowed likewater, theminstrelsangofLancelotandGuinevere,andtheguestsexchangeddirtyjokesandbloodywartales.‘Itisbettertodie,’declaredthebarons,‘thanto livewith shame. If someonequestions yourhonour, onlyblood canwipeouttheinsult.Andwhatisbetterinlifethantoseeyourenemiesfleebeforeyou,andtheirprettydaughterstrembleatyourfeet?’The contradiction was never fully resolved. But as the Europeannobility,clergyandcommonersgrappledwithit,theirculturechanged.OneattempttofigureitoutproducedtheCrusades.Oncrusade,knightscoulddemonstratetheirmilitaryprowessandtheirreligiousdevotionatonestroke.ThesamecontradictionproducedmilitaryorderssuchastheTemplars and Hospitallers, who tried to mesh Christian and chivalricideals even more tightly. It was also responsible for a large part ofmedievalartandliterature,suchasthetalesofKingArthurandtheHolyGrail.WhatwasCamelotbutanattempttoprovethatagoodknightcanandshouldbeagoodChristian,andthatgoodChristiansmakethebestknights?Anotherexampleisthemodernpoliticalorder.EversincetheFrenchRevolution, people throughout the world have gradually come to seebothequalityandindividualfreedomasfundamentalvalues.Yetthetwovaluescontradicteachother.Equalitycanbeensuredonlybycurtailingthe freedoms of those who are better off. Guaranteeing that everyindividual will be free to do as he wishes inevitably short-changesequality.Theentirepoliticalhistoryoftheworldsince1789canbeseenasaseriesofattemptstoreconcilethiscontradiction.

Anyone who has read a novel by Charles Dickens knows that theliberalregimesofnineteenth-centuryEuropegaveprioritytoindividualfreedomevenifitmeantthrowinginsolventpoorfamiliesinprisonandgivingorphanslittlechoicebutto joinschoolsforpickpockets.Anyonewho has read a novel by Alexander Solzhenitsyn knows howCommunisms egalitarian ideal produced brutal tyrannies that tried tocontroleveryaspectofdailylife.Contemporary American politics also revolve around thiscontradiction.Democratswantamoreequitablesociety,evenifitmeansraising taxes to fundprogrammes tohelp thepoor,elderlyand infirm.Butthatinfringesonthefreedomofindividualstospendtheirmoneyastheywish.WhyshouldthegovernmentforcemetobuyhealthinsuranceifIpreferusingthemoneytoputmykidsthroughcollege?Republicans,on the other hand, want to maximise individual freedom, even if itmeansthattheincomegapbetweenrichandpoorwillgrowwiderandthatmanyAmericanswillnotbeabletoaffordhealthcare.Just as medieval culture did not manage to square chivalry withChristianity, so themodernworld fails to square libertywith equality.Butthisisnodefect.Suchcontradictionsareaninseparablepartofeveryhuman culture. In fact, they are culture’s engines, responsible for thecreativity and dynamism of our species. Just as when two clashingmusicalnotesplayedtogetherforceapieceofmusicforward,sodiscordin our thoughts, ideas and values compel us to think, reevaluate andcriticise.Consistencyistheplaygroundofdullminds.Iftensions,conflictsandirresolvabledilemmasarethespiceofeveryculture,ahumanbeingwhobelongstoanyparticularculturemustholdcontradictory beliefs andbe riven by incompatible values. It’s such anessential feature of any culture that it even has a name: cognitivedissonance. Cognitive dissonance is often considered a failure of thehumanpsyche.Infact,itisavitalasset.Hadpeoplebeenunabletoholdcontradictorybeliefsandvalues,itwouldprobablyhavebeenimpossibletoestablishandmaintainanyhumanculture.If,say,aChristianreallywantstounderstandtheMuslimswhoattendthat mosque down the street, he shouldn’t look for a pristine set ofvaluesthateveryMuslimholdsdear.Rather,heshouldenquireintothecatch-22s ofMuslim culture, those places where rules are at war andstandardsscuffle.It’sattheveryspotwheretheMuslimsteeterbetween

twoimperativesthatyou’llunderstandthembest.

TheSpySatellite

Humanculturesareinconstantflux.Isthisfluxcompletelyrandom,ordoes ithavesomeoverallpattern? Inotherwords,doeshistoryhaveadirection?Theanswerisyes.Overthemillennia,small,simpleculturesgradually

coalesce into bigger andmore complex civilisations, so that theworldcontains fewer and fewer mega-cultures, each of which is bigger andmorecomplex.Thisisofcourseaverycrudegeneralisation,trueonlyatthe macro level. At the micro level, it seems that for every group ofcultures that coalesces intoamega-culture, there’s amega-culture thatbreaksupintopieces.TheMongolEmpireexpandedtodominateahugeswatheofAsiaandevenpartsofEurope,onlytoshatterintofragments.Christianityconvertedhundredsofmillionsofpeopleat thesametimethat it splintered into innumerable sects. The Latin language spreadthroughwestern and central Europe, then split into local dialects thatthemselves eventually became national languages. But these break-upsaretemporaryreversalsinaninexorabletrendtowardsunity.Perceiving the direction of history is really a question of vantage

point.Whenweadopt theproverbialbird’s-eyeviewofhistory,whichexaminesdevelopmentsintermsofdecadesorcenturies,it’shardtosaywhetherhistorymovesinthedirectionofunityorofdiversity.However,tounderstandlong-termprocessesthebird’s-eyeviewistoomyopic.Wewoulddobettertoadoptinsteadtheviewpointofacosmicspysatellite,whichscansmillenniaratherthancenturies.Fromsuchavantagepointitbecomescrystalclearthathistoryismovingrelentlesslytowardsunity.ThesectioningofChristianityandthecollapseoftheMongolEmpirearejustspeedbumpsonhistory’shighway.

*

Thebestway toappreciate thegeneraldirectionofhistory is to countthe number of separate human worlds that coexisted at any given

moment on planet Earth. Today, we are used to thinking about thewholeplanetasasingleunit,butformostofhistory,earthwasinfactanentiregalaxyofisolatedhumanworlds.ConsiderTasmania, amedium-sized island southofAustralia. ItwascutofffromtheAustralianmainlandinabout10,000BCastheendoftheIce Age caused the sea level to rise. A few thousand hunter-gathererswereleftontheisland,andhadnocontactwithanyotherhumansuntilthearrivaloftheEuropeansinthenineteenthcentury.For12,000years,nobodyelseknewtheTasmanianswerethere,andtheydidn’tknowthatthere was anyone else in the world. They had their wars, politicalstruggles,socialoscillationsandculturaldevelopments.Yetasfarastheemperors of China or the rulers of Mesopotamia were concerned,Tasmania could just as well have been located on one of Jupiter’smoons.TheTasmanianslivedinaworldoftheirown.America and Europe, too, were separate worlds for most of theirhistories.InAD378,theRomanemperorValencewasdefeatedandkilledby theGoths at thebattle ofAdrianople. In the sameyear,KingChakTokIch’aakofTikalwasdefeatedandkilledbythearmyofTeotihuacan.(Tikalwasan importantMayancity state,whileTeotihuacanwas thenthe largest city in America, with almost 250,000 inhabitants – of thesame order of magnitude as its contemporary, Rome.) There wasabsolutely no connection between the defeat of Rome and the rise ofTeotihuacan.Romemight just aswellhavebeen locatedonMars, andTeotihuacanonVenus.Howmanydifferenthumanworldscoexistedonearth?Around10.000

BC our planet contained many thousands of them. By 2000 BC, theirnumbershaddwindledtothehundreds,oratmostafewthousand.ByAD1450, their numbers haddeclined evenmore drastically.At that time,just prior to the age of European exploration, earth still contained asignificant number of dwarfworlds such as Tasmania. But close to 90percentofhumanslivedinasinglemega-world:theworldofAfro-Asia.MostofAsia,mostofEurope,andmostofAfrica(includingsubstantialchunks of sub-Saharan Africa) were already connected by significantcultural,politicalandeconomicties.Most of the remaining tenth of the world’s human population wasdividedbetweenfourworldsofconsiderablesizeandcomplexity:

1. The Mesoamerican World, which encompassed most of CentralAmericaandpartsofNorthAmerica.

2. The Andean World, which encompassed most of western SouthAmerica.

3.TheAustralianWorld,whichencompassedthecontinentofAustralia.4. The OceanicWorld, which encompassedmost of the islands of thesouth-westernPacificOcean,fromHawaiitoNewZealand.

Overthenext300years,theAfro-Asiangiantswallowedupalltheotherworlds.ItconsumedtheMesoamericanWorldin1521,whentheSpanishconquered the Aztec Empire. It took its first bite out of the OceanicWorldatthesametime,duringFerdinandMagellan’scircumnavigationof the globe, and soon after that completed its conquest. The AndeanWorldcollapsedin1532,whenSpanishconquistadorscrushedtheIncaEmpire.ThefirstEuropeanlandedontheAustraliancontinentin1606,andthatpristineworldcametoanendwhenBritishcolonisationbeganinearnest in1788.Fifteenyears latertheBritonsestablishedtheirfirstsettlementinTasmania,thusbringingthelastautonomoushumanworldintotheAfro-Asiansphereofinfluence.It tooktheAfro-Asiangiantseveralcenturiestodigestall that ithad

swallowed, but the process was irreversible. Today almost all humansshare the same geopolitical system (the entire planet is divided intointernationallyrecognisedstates); thesameeconomicsystem(capitalistmarket forces shapeeven the remotest cornersof theglobe); the samelegalsystem(humanrightsandinternationallawarevalideverywhere,at least theoretically); and the same scientific system (experts in Iran,Israel, Australia andArgentina have exactly the same views about thestructureofatomsorthetreatmentoftuberculosis).Thesingleglobalcultureisnothomogeneous.Justasasingleorganic

body contains many different kinds of organs and cells, so our singleglobal culture contains many different types of lifestyles and people,from New York stockbrokers to Afghan shepherds. Yet they are allcloselyconnectedandtheyinfluenceoneanotherinmyriadways.Theystillargueand fight,but theyargueusing the sameconceptsand fightusing the same weapons. A real ‘clash of civilisations’ is like theproverbial dialogue of the deaf. Nobody can grasp what the other is

saying. Today when Iran and the United States rattle swords at oneanother, they both speak the language of nation states, capitalisteconomies,internationalrightsandnuclearphysics.

Map3.EarthinAD1450.ThenamedlocationswithintheAfro-AsianWorldwereplacesvisitedbythefourteenth-centuryMuslimtravellerIbnBattuta.AnativeofTangier,inMorocco,IbnBattutavisitedTimbuktu,Zanzibar,southernRussia,CentralAsia,India,ChinaandIndonesia.HistravelsillustratetheunityofAfro-Asiaontheeveofthemodern

era.

We still talk a lot about ‘authentic’ cultures, but if by authentic’wemean something that developed independently, and that consists ofancient local traditions free of external influences, then there are noauthenticculturesleftonearth.Overthelastfewcenturies,allcultureswerechangedalmostbeyondrecognitionbyafloodofglobalinfluences.One of themost interesting examples of this globalisation is ‘ethnic’

cuisine. In an Italian restaurantwe expect to find spaghetti in tomatosauce;inPolishandIrishrestaurantslotsofpotatoes;inanArgentinianrestaurantwecanchoosebetweendozensofkindsofbeefsteaks; inanIndianrestauranthotchilliesareincorporatedintojustabouteverything;andthehighlightatanySwisscaféisthickhotchocolateunderanalpofwhipped cream. But none of these foods is native to those nations.Tomatoes, chilli peppers and cocoa are all Mexican in origin; theyreached Europe and Asia only after the Spaniards conquered Mexico.

Julius Caesar and Dante Alighieri never twirled tomato-drenchedspaghettion their forks (even forkshadn’tbeen inventedyet),WilliamTellnever tastedchocolate,andBuddhanever spiceduphis foodwithchilli.PotatoesreachedPolandandIrelandnomorethan400yearsago.TheonlysteakyoucouldobtaininArgentinain1492wasfromallama.Hollywood filmshaveperpetuatedan imageof thePlains Indiansasbrave horsemen, courageously charging the wagons of Europeanpioneerstoprotectthecustomsoftheirancestors.However,theseNativeAmericanhorsemenwerenot thedefendersof someancient, authenticculture.Instead,theyweretheproductofamajormilitaryandpoliticalrevolution that swept the plains of western North America in theseventeenth and eighteenth centuries, a consequence of the arrival ofEuropeanhorses.In1492therewerenohorsesinAmerica.Thecultureof the nineteenth-century Sioux and Apache has many appealingfeatures,butitwasamodernculture–aresultofglobalforces–muchmorethanauthentic’.

TheGlobalVision

Fromapracticalperspective,themostimportantstageintheprocessofglobalunificationoccurredinthelastfewcenturies,whenempiresgrewand trade intensified. Ever-tightening links were formed between thepeopleofAfro-Asia,America,AustraliaandOceania.ThusMexicanchillipeppersmade it into Indian food and Spanish cattle began grazing inArgentina.Yetfromanideologicalperspective,anevenmoreimportantdevelopmentoccurredduringthefirstmillenniumBC,whentheideaofauniversalordertookroot.Forthousandsofyearspreviously,historywasalreadymovingslowlyinthedirectionofglobalunity,buttheideaofauniversalordergoverningtheentireworldwasstillalientomostpeople.

25.Siouxchiefs(1905).NeithertheSiouxnoranyotherGreatPlainstribehadhorsespriorto1492.

Homosapiensevolvedtothinkofpeopleasdividedintousandthem.‘Us’ was the group immediately around you, whoever you were, and‘them’waseveryoneelse.Infact,nosocialanimaliseverguidedbytheinterestsoftheentirespeciestowhichitbelongs.Nochimpanzeecaresabouttheinterestsofthechimpanzeespecies,nosnailwillliftatentaclefor the global snail community, no lion alpha male makes a bid forbecomingthekingofalllions,andattheentranceofnobeehivecanonefindtheslogan:‘Workerbeesoftheworld–unite!’But beginning with the Cognitive Revolution,Homo sapiens becamemoreandmoreexceptionalinthisrespect.Peoplebegantocooperateona regular basis with complete strangers, whom they imagined as‘brothers’ or ‘friends’. Yet this brotherhood was not universal.Somewhereinthenextvalley,orbeyondthemountainrange,onecouldstill sense ‘them’.When the firstpharaoh,Menes,unitedEgyptaround3000 BC, it was clear to the Egyptians that Egypt had a border, andbeyond the border lurked ‘barbarians’. The barbarians were alien,threatening, and interesting only to the extent that they had land ornatural resources that the Egyptians wanted. All the imagined orders

peoplecreatedtendedtoignoreasubstantialpartofhumankind.ThefirstmillenniumBCwitnessedtheappearanceofthreepotentially

universal orders, whose devotees could for the first time imagine theentireworldand theentirehumanraceasa singleunitgovernedbyasinglesetof laws.Everyonewas ‘us’,at leastpotentially.Therewasnolonger ‘them’. The first universal order to appear was economic: themonetaryorder.The seconduniversalorderwaspolitical: the imperialorder. The third universal order was religious: the order of universalreligionssuchasBuddhism,ChristianityandIslam.Merchants, conquerors and prophets were the first people who

managedtotranscendthebinaryevolutionarydivision,‘usvsthem’,andto foresee the potential unity of humankind. For the merchants, theentire world was a single market and all humans were potentialcustomers.They tried toestablishaneconomicorder thatwouldapplyto all, everywhere. For the conquerors, the entire world was a singleempireandallhumanswerepotentialsubjects,andfortheprophets,theentireworldheldasingletruthandallhumanswerepotentialbelievers.They too tried to establish an order that would be applicable foreveryoneeverywhere.During the last three millennia, people made more and more

ambitiousattemptstorealisethatglobalvision.Thenextthreechaptersdiscuss how money, empires and universal religions spread, and howtheylaidthefoundationoftheunitedworldoftoday.Webeginwiththestory of the greatest conqueror in history, a conqueror possessed ofextreme toleranceandadaptability, thereby turningpeople intoardentdisciples. This conqueror is money. People who do not believe in thesamegodorobeythesamekingaremorethanwillingtousethesamemoney. Osama Bin Laden, for all his hatred of American culture,American religion and American politics, was very fond of Americandollars.Howdidmoneysucceedwheregodsandkingsfailed?

10

TheScentofMoney

IN1519HERNÁNCORTÉSANDHISCONQUISTADORSinvadedMexico,hithertoanisolatedhumanworld.TheAztecs,as thepeoplewholivedthere called themselves, quickly noticed that the aliens showed anextraordinary interest in a certain yellow metal. In fact, they neverseemed to stop talking about it. The nativeswere not unfamiliarwithgold–itwasprettyandeasytowork,sotheyusedittomakejewelleryand statues, and they occasionally used gold dust as a medium ofexchange. But when an Aztec wanted to buy something, he generallypaid incocoabeansorboltsofcloth.TheSpanishobsessionwithgoldthus seemed inexplicable. What was so important about a metal thatcouldnotbeeaten,drunkorwoven,andwastoosofttousefortoolsorweapons?WhenthenativesquestionedCortésas towhytheSpaniardshadsuchapassionforgold,theconquistadoranswered, ‘BecauseIandmycompanions suffer fromadiseaseof theheartwhich canbe curedonlywithgold.’1IntheAfro-AsianworldfromwhichtheSpaniardscame,theobsession

for goldwas indeed an epidemic. Even the bitterest of enemies lustedafterthesameuselessyellowmetal.ThreecenturiesbeforetheconquestofMexico,theancestorsofCortésandhisarmywagedabloodywarofreligion against theMuslim kingdoms in Iberia and North Africa. Thefollowers ofChrist and the followers ofAllah killed eachother by thethousands,devastatedfieldsandorchards,andturnedprosperouscitiesintosmoulderingruins–allforthegreatergloryofChristorAllah.AstheChristiansgraduallygainedtheupperhand,theymarkedtheir

victoriesnotonlybydestroyingmosquesandbuildingchurches,butalso

by issuingnewgold and silver coins bearing the signof the cross andthankingGod forHishelp in combating the infidels.Yetalongside thenew currency, the victors minted another type of coin, called themillares, which carried a somewhat different message. These squarecoinsmadebytheChristianconquerorswereemblazonedwithflowingArabic script that declared: ‘There is no god except Allah, andMuhammadisAllah’smessenger.’EventheCatholicbishopsofMelgueilandAgdeissuedthesefaithfulcopiesofpopularMuslimcoins,andGod-fearingChristianshappilyusedthem.2Tolerance flourished on the other side of the hill too. MuslimmerchantsinNorthAfricaconductedbusinessusingChristiancoinssuchastheFlorentineflorin,theVenetianducatandtheNeapolitangigliato.EvenMuslim rulerswho called for jihad against the infidel Christianswere glad to receive taxes in coins that invokedChrist andHisVirginMother.3

HowMuchisIt?

Hunter-gatherers had no money. Each band hunted, gathered andmanufactured almost everything it required, from meat to medicine,fromsandalstosorcery.Differentbandmembersmayhavespecialisedindifferent tasks, but they shared their goods and services through aneconomy of favours and obligations. A piece of meat given for freewould carry with it the assumption of reciprocity – say, free medicalassistance. The band was economically independent; only a few rareitemsthatcouldnotbefoundlocally–seashells,pigments,obsidianandthelike–hadtobeobtainedfromstrangers.Thiscouldusuallybedonebysimplebarter:‘We’llgiveyouprettyseashells,andyou’llgiveushigh-qualityflint.’Little of this changedwith the onset of the Agricultural Revolution.Mostpeoplecontinuedtoliveinsmall,intimatecommunities.Muchlikeahunter-gathererband,eachvillagewasaself-sufficienteconomicunit,maintained bymutual favours and obligations plus a little barterwithoutsiders. One villager may have been particularly adept at makingshoes, another at dispensingmedical care, so villagers knewwhere to

turnwhenbarefootorsick.Butvillagesweresmallandtheireconomieslimited,sotherecouldbenofull-timeshoemakersanddoctors.The rise of cities and kingdoms and the improvement in transportinfrastructure brought about new opportunities for specialisation.Densely populated cities provided full-time employment not just forprofessional shoemakers and doctors, but also for carpenters, priests,soldiers and lawyers. Villages that gained a reputation for producingreallygoodwine,oliveoilorceramicsdiscoveredthatitwasworththeirwhile to specialisenearlyexclusively in thatproductand trade itwithothersettlementsforalltheothergoodstheyneeded.Thismadealotofsense.Climatesandsoilsdiffer,sowhydrinkmediocrewinefromyourbackyardifyoucanbuyasmoothervarietyfromaplacewhosesoilandclimateismuchbettersuitedtograpevines?Iftheclayinyourbackyardmakes stronger and prettier pots, then you can make an exchange.Furthermore, full-time specialist vintners and potters, not to mentiondoctorsand lawyers, canhone their expertise to thebenefitofall.Butspecialisationcreatedaproblem–howdoyoumanagetheexchangeofgoodsbetweenthespecialists?An economy of favours and obligations doesn’t work when largenumbers of strangers try to cooperate. It’s one thing to provide freeassistancetoasisteroraneighbour,averydifferentthingtotakecareofforeignerswhomightneverreciprocatethefavour.Onecanfallbackonbarter.Butbarter iseffectiveonlywhenexchanginga limitedrangeofproducts.Itcannotformthebasisforacomplexeconomy.4Inordertounderstandthelimitationsofbarter,imaginethatyouownanappleorchardinthehillcountrythatproducesthecrispest,sweetestapples in the entire province. Youwork so hard in your orchard thatyour shoeswearout.Soyouharnessupyourdonkeycartandhead tothe market town down by the river. Your neighbour told you that ashoemaker on the south end of the marketplace made him a reallysturdypairofbootsthat’slastedhimthroughfiveseasons.Youfindtheshoemaker’s shopandoffer tobarter someof your apples in exchangefortheshoesyouneed.The shoemaker hesitates. How many apples should he ask for inpayment?Everydayheencountersdozensofcustomers,afewofwhombringalongsacksofapples,whileotherscarrywheat,goatsorcloth–allofvaryingquality.Stillothersoffertheirexpertiseinpetitioningtheking

or curingbackaches.The last time the shoemaker exchanged shoes forappleswasthreemonthsago,andbackthenheaskedforthreesacksofapples.Orwas it four?Butcometothinkof it, thoseapplesweresourvalleyapples,ratherthanprimehillapples.Ontheotherhand,onthatpreviousoccasion,theapplesweregiveninexchangeforsmallwomen’sshoes.Thisfellowisaskingforman-sizeboots.Besides,inrecentweeksadiseasehasdecimated the flocksaround town,andskinsarebecomingscarce.Thetannersarestartingtodemandtwiceasmanyfinishedshoesin exchange for the same quantity of leather. Shouldn’t that be takenintoconsideration?Inabartereconomy,everydaytheshoemakerandtheapplegrower

willhavetolearnanewtherelativepricesofdozensofcommodities.Ifone hundred different commodities are traded in the market, thenbuyersandsellerswillhavetoknow4,950differentexchangerates.Andif1,000differentcommoditiesaretraded,buyersandsellersmustjuggle499,500differentexchangerates!5Howdoyoufigureitout?Itgetsworse.Evenifyoumanagetocalculatehowmanyapplesequal

onepairofshoes,barterisnotalwayspossible.Afterall,atraderequiresthat each sidewantwhat the other has to offer.What happens if theshoemakerdoesn’tlikeapplesand,ifatthemomentinquestion,whathereallywantsisadivorce?True,thefarmercouldlookforalawyerwholikesapplesandsetupathree-waydeal.Butwhatifthelawyerisfulluponapplesbutreallyneedsahaircut?Some societies tried to solve the problem by establishing a central

barter system that collected products from specialist growers andmanufacturers and distributed them to those who needed them. Thelargest andmost famous such experimentwas conducted in the SovietUnion,anditfailedmiserably.‘Everyonewouldworkaccordingtotheirabilities,andreceiveaccordingtotheirneeds’turnedoutinpracticeinto‘everyonewouldworkaslittleastheycangetawaywith,andreceiveasmuch as they could grab’. More moderate and more successfulexperiments were made on other occasions, for example in the IncaEmpire. Yet most societies found a more easy way to connect largenumbersofexperts–theydevelopedmoney.

ShellsandCigarettes

Money was created many times in many places. Its developmentrequired no technological breakthroughs – it was a purely mentalrevolution.Itinvolvedthecreationofanewinter-subjectiverealitythatexistssolelyinpeople’ssharedimagination.Moneyisnotcoinsandbanknotes.Moneyisanythingthatpeoplearewilling to use in order to represent systematically the value of otherthingsforthepurposeofexchanginggoodsandservices.Moneyenablespeopletocomparequicklyandeasilythevalueofdifferentcommodities(such as apples, shoes and divorces), to easily exchange one thing foranother,andtostorewealthconveniently.Therehavebeenmanytypesofmoney.Themostfamiliaristhecoin,whichisastandardisedpieceofimprintedmetal.Yetmoneyexistedlongbeforetheinventionofcoinage,and cultures have prospered using other things as currency, such asshells,cattle,skins,salt,grain,beads,clothandpromissorynotes.Cowryshellswereusedasmoneyforabout4,000yearsalloverAfrica,SouthAsia,EastAsiaandOceania.TaxescouldstillbepaidincowryshellsinBritishUgandaintheearlytwentiethcentury.

26.InancientChinesescriptthecowry-shellsignrepresentedmoney,inwordssuchas‘tosell’or‘reward’.

Inmodern prisons and POW camps, cigarettes have often served asmoney. Even non-smoking prisoners have been willing to acceptcigarettesinpayment,andtocalculatethevalueofallothergoodsandservices in cigarettes. One Auschwitz survivor described the cigarettecurrencyusedinthecamp:‘Wehadourowncurrency,whosevaluenoone questioned: the cigarette. The price of every articlewas stated incigarettes…In“normal”times,thatis,whenthecandidatestothegaschamberswerecominginataregularpace,aloafofbreadcosttwelvecigarettes;a300-grampackageofmargarine, thirty;awatch,eighty to200;alitreofalcohol,400cigarettes!’6Infact,eventodaycoinsandbanknotesarearareformofmoney.In

2006,thesumtotalofmoneyintheworldisabout$60trillion,yetthe

sumtotalofcoinsandbanknoteswaslessthan$6trillion.7Morethan90percentofallmoney–morethan$50trillionappearinginouraccounts– exists only on computer servers. Accordingly, most businesstransactionsareexecutedbymovingelectronicdatafromonecomputerfiletoanother,withoutanyexchangeofphysicalcash.Onlyacriminalbuysahouse,forexample,byhandingoverasuitcasefullofbanknotes.Aslongaspeoplearewillingtotradegoodsandservicesinexchangeforelectronicdata, it’s evenbetter than shinycoinsandcrispbanknotes–lighter,lessbulky,andeasiertokeeptrackof.Forcomplexcommercial systems to function, somekindofmoney is

indispensable.Ashoemakerinamoneyeconomyneedstoknowonlythepriceschargedforvariouskindsofshoes–thereisnoneedtomemorisetheexchangeratesbetweenshoesandapplesorgoats.Moneyalsofreesapple experts from the need to search out apple-craving shoemakers,because everyone alwayswantsmoney. This is perhaps itsmost basicquality. Everyone always wants money because everyone else alsoalways wants money, which means you can exchange money forwhateveryouwantorneed.Theshoemakerwillalwaysbehappytotakeyourmoney,becausenomatterwhathereallywants–apples,goatsoradivorce–hecangetitinexchangeformoney.Moneyisthusauniversalmediumofexchangethatenablespeopleto

convert almost everything into almost anything else. Brawn getsconvertedtobrainwhenadischargedsoldierfinanceshiscollegetuitionwithhismilitarybenefits.Landgetsconvertedintoloyaltywhenabaronsells property to support his retainers. Health is converted to justicewhenaphysicianusesherfeestohirealawyer–orbribeajudge.Itiseven possible to convert sex into salvation, as fifteenth-centuryprostitutesdidwhentheysleptwithmenformoney,whichtheyinturnusedtobuyindulgencesfromtheCatholicChurch.Idealtypesofmoneyenablepeoplenotmerelytoturnonethinginto

another,buttostorewealthaswell.Manyvaluablescannotbestored–suchastimeorbeauty.Somethingscanbestoredonlyforashorttime,suchasstrawberries.Otherthingsaremoredurable,buttakeupalotofspaceandrequireexpensivefacilitiesandcare.Grain,forexample,canbestoredforyears,buttodosoyouneedtobuildhugestorehousesandguard against rats, mould, water, fire and thieves. Money, whetherpaper, computer bits or cowry shells, solves these problems. Cowry

shells don’t rot, are unpalatable to rats, can survive fires and arecompactenoughtobelockedupinasafe.Inordertousewealthitisnotenoughjusttostoreit.Itoftenneedstobetransportedfromplacetoplace.Someformsofwealth,suchasrealestate,cannotbetransportedatall.Commoditiessuchaswheatandricecanbetransportedonlywithdifficulty.Imagineawealthyfarmerlivingin a moneyless land who emigrates to a distant province. His wealthconsistsmainly of his house and rice paddies. The farmer cannot takewithhimthehouseorthepaddies.Hemightexchangethemfortonsofrice,butitwouldbeveryburdensomeandexpensivetotransportallthatrice.Money solves theseproblems.The farmer can sellhisproperty inexchangeforasackofcowryshells,whichhecaneasilycarrywhereverhegoes.Because money can convert, store and transport wealth easily andcheaply, it made a vital contribution to the appearance of complexcommercialnetworksanddynamicmarkets.Withoutmoney,commercialnetworksandmarketswouldhavebeendoomedtoremainverylimitedintheirsize,complexityanddynamism.

HowDoesMoneyWork?

Cowry shells anddollarshavevalueonly inour common imagination.Theirworth isnot inherent in the chemical structureof the shells andpaper, or their colour, or their shape. In other words, money isn’t amaterialreality–itisapsychologicalconstruct.Itworksbyconvertingmatter into mind. But why does it succeed? Why should anyone bewilling toexchangea fertile ricepaddy forahandfulofuseless cowryshells?Whyareyouwillingtofliphamburgers,sellhealthinsuranceorbabysit three obnoxious bratswhen all you get for your exertions is afewpiecesofcolouredpaper?Peoplearewilling todosuch thingswhen they trust the figmentsoftheir collective imagination. Trust is the rawmaterial from which alltypesofmoneyareminted.Whenawealthyfarmersoldhispossessionsforasackofcowryshellsandtravelledwiththemtoanotherprovince,he trusted that upon reaching his destination other people would be

willing to sell him rice, houses and fields in exchange for the shells.Moneyisaccordinglyasystemofmutualtrust,andnotjustanysystemofmutual trust:money is themost universal andmost efficient system ofmutualtrusteverdevised.Whatcreatedthistrustwasaverycomplexandlong-termnetworkofpolitical, socialandeconomicrelations.Whydo Ibelieve in thecowryshellorgoldcoinordollarbill?Becausemyneighboursbelieveinthem.AndmyneighboursbelieveinthembecauseIbelieveinthem.Andweallbelieveinthembecauseourkingbelievesinthemanddemandsthemintaxes,andbecauseourpriestbelievesinthemanddemandsthemintithes.Takeadollarbillandlookat itcarefully.Youwillseethat it issimplyacolourfulpieceofpaperwiththesignatureoftheUSsecretaryof the treasury on one side, and the slogan ‘In GodWe Trust’ on theother.Weacceptthedollarinpayment,becausewetrustinGodandtheUSsecretaryofthetreasury.Thecrucialroleof trustexplainswhyourfinancial systemsare so tightlyboundupwithourpolitical, socialandideologicalsystems,whyfinancialcrisesareoftentriggeredbypoliticaldevelopments,andwhy the stockmarketcanriseor falldependingonthewaytradersfeelonaparticularmorning.Initially,whenthefirstversionsofmoneywerecreated,peopledidn’thave this sort of trust, so itwas necessary to define as ‘money’ thingsthat had real intrinsic value. History’s first known money Sumerianbarleymoney–isagoodexample.ItappearedinSumeraround3000BC,atthesametimeandplace,andunderthesamecircumstances,inwhichwriting appeared. Just as writing developed to answer the needs ofintensifying administrative activities, so barley money developed toanswertheneedsofintensifyingeconomicactivities.Barleymoneywassimplybarley–fixedamountsofbarleygrainsusedas a universal measure for evaluating and exchanging all other goodsandservices.Themostcommonmeasurementwasthesila,equivalenttoroughly one litre. Standardised bowls, each capable of containing onesila,weremass-producedsothatwheneverpeopleneededtobuyorsellanything, it was easy to measure the necessary amounts of barley.Salaries,too,weresetandpaidinsilasofbarley.Amalelabourerearnedsixtysilasamonth,afemalelabourerthirtysilas.Aforemancouldearnbetween 1,200 and 5,000 silas. Not even the most ravenous foremancouldeat5,000 litresofbarleyamonth,buthecoulduse the silashe

didn’teattobuyallsortsofothercommodities–oil,goats,slaves,andsomethingelsetoeatbesidesbarley.8Even though barley has intrinsic value, it was not easy to convince

people to use it asmoney rather than as just another commodity. Inorder to understandwhy, just thinkwhatwouldhappen if you took asackfullofbarleytoyourlocalshoppingcentre,andtriedtobuyashirtor a pizza. The vendors would probably call security. Still, it wassomewhat easier to build trust in barley as the first type of money,becausebarleyhasaninherentbiologicalvalue.Humanscaneatit.Onthe other hand, itwas difficult to store and transport barley. The realbreakthroughinmonetaryhistoryoccurredwhenpeoplegainedtrustinmoneythatlackedinherentvalue,butwaseasiertostoreandtransport.SuchmoneyappearedinancientMesopotamiainthemiddleofthethirdmillenniumBC.Thiswasthesilvershekel.Thesilvershekelwasnotacoin,butrather8.33gramsofsilver.When

Hammurabi’s Code declared that a superior man who killed a slavewomanmustpayherownertwentysilvershekels,itmeantthathehadtopay166gramsofsilver,nottwentycoins.MostmonetarytermsintheOld Testament are given in terms of silver rather than coins. JosephsbrotherssoldhimtotheIshmaelitesfortwentysilvershekels,orrather166gramsofsilver(thesamepriceasaslavewoman–hewasayouth,afterall).Unlike the barley sila, the silver shekel had no inherent value. You

cannoteat,drinkorclotheyourselfinsilver,andit’stoosoftformakingusefultools–ploughsharesorswordsofsilverwouldcrumplealmostasfast as ones made out of aluminium foil. When they are used foranything, silver and gold are made into jewellery, crowns and otherstatus symbols – luxury goods that members of a particular cultureidentifywithhighsocialstatus.Theirvalueispurelycultural.

Setweightsofpreciousmetalseventuallygavebirth tocoins.The firstcoinsinhistorywerestruckaround640BCbyKingAlyattesofLydia,inwestern Anatolia. These coins had a standardised weight of gold orsilver, and were imprinted with an identification mark. The marktestifiedto twothings.First, it indicatedhowmuchpreciousmetal thecoin contained. Second, it identified the authority that issued the coin

and that guaranteed its contents. Almost all coins in use today aredescendantsoftheLydiancoins.Coins had two important advantages over unmarked metal ingots.

First, the latter had to be weighed for every transaction. Second,weighing the ingot isnotenough.Howdoes the shoemakerknow thatthe silver ingot I putdown formyboots is reallymadeofpure silver,andnotof lead coveredon theoutsidebya thin silver coating?Coinshelpsolvetheseproblems.Themarkimprintedonthemtestifiestotheirexactvalue,sotheshoemakerdoesn’thavetokeepascaleonhiscashregister.Moreimportantly,themarkonthecoinisthesignatureofsomepoliticalauthoritythatguaranteesthecoin’svalue.The shape and size of the mark varied tremendously throughout

history,butthemessagewasalwaysthesame:‘I,theGreatKingSo-And-So,giveyoumypersonalwordthatthismetaldisccontainsexactlyfivegrams of gold. If anyone dares counterfeit this coin, it means he isfabricatingmyownsignature,whichwouldbeablotonmyreputation.Iwill punish such a crime with the utmost severity.’ That’s whycounterfeitingmoneyhasalwaysbeenconsideredamuchmoreseriouscrimethanotheractsofdeception.Counterfeitingisnotjustcheating–it’s a breach of sovereignty, an act of subversion against the power,privileges and person of the king. The legal term is lese-majesty(violatingmajesty),andwastypicallypunishedbytortureanddeath.Aslongaspeopletrustedthepowerandintegrityoftheking,theytrustedhis coins. Total strangers could easily agree on theworth of a Romandenarius coin, because they trusted the power and integrity of theRomanemperor,whosenameandpictureadornedit.

27.Oneoftheearliestcoinsinhistory,fromLydiaoftheseventhcenturyBC.

In turn, thepowerof theemperor restedon thedenarius.Just thinkhowdifficultitwouldhavebeentomaintaintheRomanEmpirewithoutcoins–iftheemperorhadtoraisetaxesandpaysalariesinbarleyandwheat. Itwould have been impossible to collect barley taxes in Syria,transportthefundstothecentraltreasuryinRome,andtransportthemagain toBritain in order to pay the legions there. Itwould have beenequallydifficulttomaintaintheempireiftheinhabitantsofthecityofRome believed in gold coins, but the subject populations rejected thisbelief,puttingtheirtrustinsteadincowryshells,ivorybeadsorrollsofcloth.

TheGospelofGold

Thetrust inRome’scoinswassostrong thatevenoutside theempire’sborders, peoplewere happy to receive payment in denarii. In the firstcenturyAD,Romancoinswereanacceptedmediumof exchange in themarketsof India,eventhoughtheclosestRomanlegionwas thousandsof kilometres away. The Indians had such a strong confidence in thedenarius and the image of the emperor that when local rulers struckcoins of their own they closely imitated the denarius, down to theportraitof theRomanemperor!Thename ‘denarius’becameagenericnameforcoins.MuslimcaliphsArabicisedthisnameandissued‘dinars’.ThedinarisstilltheofficialnameofthecurrencyinJordan,Iraq,Serbia,Macedonia,Tunisiaandseveralothercountries.AsLydian-stylecoinagewasspreadingfromtheMediterraneantothe

Indian Ocean, China developed a slightly different monetary system,basedonbronzecoinsandunmarkedsilverandgoldingots.Yetthetwomonetary systems had enough in common (especially the reliance ongold and silver) that close monetary and commercial relations wereestablishedbetweentheChinesezoneandtheLydianzone.MuslimandEuropeanmerchantsandconquerorsgraduallyspreadtheLydiansystemandthegospelofgoldtothefarcornersoftheearth.Bythelatemodernera the entireworldwas a singlemonetary zone, relying first on goldand silver, and later on a few trusted currencies such as the BritishpoundandtheAmericandollar.

The appearance of a single transnational and transculturalmonetaryzonelaidthefoundationfortheunificationofAfro-Asia,andeventuallyof theentireglobe, intoasingleeconomicandpolitical sphere.Peoplecontinuedtospeakmutuallyincomprehensiblelanguages,obeydifferentrulersandworshipdistinctgods,butallbelievedingoldandsilverandin gold and silver coins. Without this shared belief, global tradingnetworkswouldhavebeenvirtuallyimpossible.Thegoldandsilverthatsixteenth-century conquistadors found in America enabled Europeanmerchantstobuysilk,porcelainandspicesinEastAsia,therebymovingthewheelsof economicgrowth inbothEuropeandEastAsia.Mostofthe gold and silver mined in Mexico and the Andes slipped throughEuropeanfingers to findawelcomehomein thepursesofChinesesilkandporcelainmanufacturers.Whatwouldhavehappenedtotheglobaleconomy if the Chinese hadn’t suffered from the same ‘disease of theheart’ that afflicted Cortés and his companions – and had refused toacceptpaymentingoldandsilver?Yet why should Chinese, Indians, Muslims and Spaniards – who

belonged to very different cultures that failed to agree aboutmuch ofanything–nevertheless share thebelief ingold?Whydidn’t ithappenthat Spaniards believed in gold, while Muslims believed in barley,Indiansincowryshells,andChineseinrollsofsilk?Economistshaveareadyanswer.Once tradeconnects twoareas, the forcesof supplyanddemand tend to equalise theprices of transportable goods. Inorder tounderstandwhy,considerahypotheticalcase.Assumethatwhenregulartrade opened between India and the Mediterranean, Indians wereuninterested in gold, so it was almost worthless. But in theMediterranean, goldwas a coveted status symbol, hence its valuewashigh.Whatwouldhappennext?Merchants travelling between India and the Mediterranean would

noticethedifferenceinthevalueofgold.Inordertomakeaprofit,theywouldbuygoldcheaplyinIndiaandsellitdearlyintheMediterranean.Consequently, thedemandforgold in Indiawouldskyrocket,aswouldits value. At the same time the Mediterranean would experience aninflux of gold, whose value would consequently drop. Within a shorttime thevalueof gold in India and theMediterraneanwouldbequitesimilar.ThemerefactthatMediterraneanpeoplebelievedingoldwouldcauseIndianstostartbelievinginitaswell.EvenifIndiansstillhadno

realuseforgold,thefactthatMediterraneanpeoplewanteditwouldbeenoughtomaketheIndiansvalueit.Similarly, the fact that another person believes in cowry shells, or

dollars, or electronic data, is enough to strengthen our own belief inthem,evenifthatpersonisotherwisehated,despisedorridiculedbyus.Christians andMuslimswho couldnot agree on religious beliefs couldneverthelessagreeonamonetarybelief,becausewhereas religionasksus to believe in something,money asks us to believe that other peoplebelieveinsomething.For thousands of years, philosophers, thinkers and prophets have

besmirchedmoneyandcalled it the rootofall evil.Be thatas itmay,money is also the apogee of human tolerance. Money is more open-minded than language, state laws, cultural codes, religious beliefs andsocialhabits.Moneyistheonlytrustsystemcreatedbyhumansthatcanbridge almost any cultural gap, and that does not discriminate on thebasis of religion, gender, race, age or sexual orientation. Thanks tomoney, even people who don’t know each other and don’t trust eachothercanneverthelesscooperateeffectively.

ThePriceofMoney

Moneyisbasedontwouniversalprinciples:a.Universalconvertibility:withmoneyasanalchemist,youcanturn

landintoloyalty,justiceintohealth,andviolenceintoknowledge.b.Universal trust:withmoneyasago-between,any twopeople can

cooperateonanyproject.These principles have enabled millions of strangers to cooperate

effectively intradeandindustry.But theseseeminglybenignprincipleshave a dark side. When everything is convertible, and when trustdepends on anonymous coins and cowry shells, it corrodes localtraditions,intimaterelationsandhumanvalues,replacingthemwiththecoldlawsofsupplyanddemand.Humancommunitiesandfamilieshavealwaysbeenbasedonbeliefin

‘priceless’ things, such as honour, loyalty, morality and love. Thesethings lie outside the domain of the market, and they shouldn’t be

boughtorsoldformoney.Evenifthemarketoffersagoodprice,certainthingsjustaren’tdone.Parentsmustn’tselltheirchildrenintoslavery;adevout Christian must not commit a mortal sin; a loyal knight mustnever betray his lord; and ancestral tribal lands shall never be sold toforeigners.Money has always tried to break through these barriers, like waterseeping throughcracks inadam.Parentshavebeenreduced to sellingsomeof theirchildren intoslavery inorder tobuy food for theothers.DevoutChristianshavemurdered, stolen and cheated – and later usedtheir spoils to buy forgiveness from the church. Ambitious knightsauctioned their allegiance to the highest bidder, while securing theloyaltyoftheirownfollowersbycashpayments.Triballandsweresoldto foreigners from theother sideof theworld inorder topurchase anentryticketintotheglobaleconomy.Moneyhasanevendarkerside.Foralthoughmoneybuildsuniversaltrust between strangers, this trust is invested not in humans,communitiesorsacredvalues,butinmoneyitselfandintheimpersonalsystems that back it. We do not trust the stranger, or the next-doorneighbour–wetrustthecointheyhold.Iftheyrunoutofcoins,werunoutoftrust.Asmoneybringsdownthedamsofcommunity,religionandstate, theworld is indanger of becomingonebig and ratherheartlessmarketplace.Hencetheeconomichistoryofhumankindisadelicatedance.Peoplerelyonmoneytofacilitatecooperationwithstrangers,butthey’reafraidit will corrupt human values and intimate relations. With one handpeople willingly destroy the communal dams that held at bay themovementofmoneyandcommerceforsolong.Yetwiththeotherhandthey build new dams to protect society, religion and the environmentfromenslavementtomarketforces.It is common nowadays to believe that themarket always prevails,andthatthedamserectedbykings,priestsandcommunitiescannotlonghold back the tides ofmoney. This is naïve. Brutalwarriors, religiousfanatics and concerned citizens have repeatedly managed to trouncecalculatingmerchants,andeventoreshapetheeconomy.Itisthereforeimpossible to understand the unification of humankind as a purelyeconomic process. In order to understand how thousands of isolatedculturescoalescedovertimetoformtheglobalvillageoftoday,wemust

takeintoaccounttheroleofgoldandsilver,butwecannotdisregardtheequallycrucialroleofsteel.

II

ImperialVisions

THEANCIENTROMANSWEREUSEDTObeingdefeated.Liketherulersofmostofhistory’sgreatempires,theycouldlosebattleafterbattlebutstill win the war. An empire that cannot sustain a blow and remainstandingisnotreallyanempire.YeteventheRomansfoundithardtostomach the news arriving from northern Iberia in the middle of thesecond century BC. A small, insignificant mountain town calledNumantia,inhabitedbythepeninsula’snativeCelts,haddaredtothrowofftheRomanyoke.RomeatthetimewastheunquestionedmasteroftheentireMediterraneanbasin,havingvanquishedtheMacedonianandSeleucidempires,subjugatedtheproudcitystatesofGreece,andturnedCarthageintoasmoulderingruin.TheNumantianshadnothingontheirsidebut their fierce loveof freedomandtheir inhospitable terrain.Yettheyforcedlegionafterlegiontosurrenderorretreatinshame.Eventually,in134BC,Romanpatiencesnapped.TheSenatedecidedto

sendScipioAemilianus,Rome’sforemostgeneralandthemanwhohadlevelled Carthage, to take care of the Numantians. He was given amassive armyofmore than30,000 soldiers. Scipio,who respected thefightingspiritandmartialskilloftheNumantians,preferrednottowastehissoldiersinunnecessarycombat.Instead,heencircledNumantiawitha line of fortifications, blocking the town’s contact with the outsideworld.Hungerdidhiswork forhim.Aftermore thanayear, the foodsupply ran out.When the Numantians realised that all hopewas lost,they burned down their town; according to Roman accounts, most ofthemkilledthemselvessoasnottobecomeRomanslaves.Numantia later became a symbol of Spanish independence and

courage. Miguel de Cervantes, the author of Don Quixote, wrote atragedy called The Siege of Numantia which ends with the town’sdestruction, but also with a vision of Spain’s future greatness. Poetscomposedpaeanstoitsfiercedefendersandpainterscommittedmajesticdepictions of the siege to canvas. In 1882, its ruins were declared anationalmonument’andbecameapilgrimagesite forSpanishpatriots.Inthe1950sand1960s,themostpopularcomicbooksinSpainweren’tabout Superman and Spiderman – they told of the adventures of ElJabato, an imaginary ancient Iberian hero who fought against theRoman oppressors. The ancient Numantians are to this day Spain’sparagonsofheroismandpatriotism,castasrolemodelsforthecountry’syoungpeople.Yet Spanish patriots extol the Numantians in Spanish – a romancelanguage that is a progeny of Scipio’s Latin. The Numantians spoke anow dead and lost Celtic language. Cervantes wrote The Siege ofNumantia in Latin script, and the play follows Graeco-Roman artisticmodels. Numantia had no theatres. Spanish patriots who admireNumantian heroism tend also to be loyal followers of the RomanCatholicChurch–don’tmissthatfirstword–achurchwhoseleaderstillsitsinRomeandwhoseGodpreferstobeaddressedinLatin.Similarly,modernSpanishlawderivesfromRomanlaw;SpanishpoliticsisbuiltonRoman foundations; and Spanish cuisine and architecture owe a fargreater debt to Roman legacies than to those of the Celts of Iberia.NothingisreallyleftofNumantiasaveruins.EvenitsstoryhasreachedusthanksonlytothewritingsofRomanhistorians.Itwastailoredtothetastes of Roman audiences which relished tales of freedom-lovingbarbarians. The victory of Rome over Numantiawas so complete thatthevictorsco-optedtheverymemoryofthevanquished.It’snotourkindofstory.Weliketoseeunderdogswin.Butthereisnojusticeinhistory.Mostpastcultureshavesoonerorlaterfallenpreytothe armies of some ruthless empire, which have consigned them tooblivion.Empires,too,ultimatelyfall,buttheytendtoleavebehindrichandenduringlegacies.Almostallpeopleinthetwenty-firstcenturyaretheoffspringofoneempireoranother.

WhatisanEmpire?

Anempire isapoliticalorderwith two importantcharacteristics.First,toqualifyforthatdesignationyouhavetoruleoverasignificantnumberof distinct peoples, each possessing a different cultural identity and aseparate territory. How many peoples exactly? Two or three is notsufficient. Twenty or thirty is plenty. The imperial threshold passessomewhereinbetween.Second,empiresarecharacterisedbyflexiblebordersandapotentiallyunlimitedappetite.Theycanswallowanddigestmoreandmorenationsand territories without altering their basic structure or identity. TheBritish state of today has fairly clear borders that cannot be exceededwithout altering the fundamental structure and identityof the state.Acentury ago almost any place on earth could have becomepart of theBritishEmpire.Culturaldiversityandterritorialflexibilitygiveempiresnotonlytheirunique character, but also their central role in history. It’s thanks tothese two characteristics that empires have managed to unite diverseethnic groups and ecological zones under a single political umbrella,therebyfusingtogetherlargerandlargersegmentsofthehumanspeciesandofplanetEarth.It should be stressed that an empire is defined solely by its culturaldiversity and flexible borders, rather than by its origins, its form ofgovernment,itsterritorialextent,orthesizeofitspopulation.Anempireneednotemergefrommilitaryconquest.TheAthenianEmpirebeganitslife as a voluntary league, and the Habsburg Empire was born inwedlock,cobbledtogetherbyastringofshrewdmarriagealliances.Normustanempireberuledbyanautocraticemperor.TheBritishEmpire,the largest empire in history, was ruled by a democracy. Otherdemocratic (or at least republican) empires have included themodernDutch,French,BelgianandAmericanempires,aswellasthepremodernempiresofNovgorod,Rome,CarthageandAthens.Size,too,doesnotreallymatter.Empirescanbepuny.TheAthenianEmpire at its zenith was much smaller in size and population thantoday’sGreece.TheAztecEmpirewassmallerthantoday’sMexico.Bothwereneverthelessempires,whereasmodernGreeceandmodernMexico

are not, because the former gradually subdued dozens and evenhundredsofdifferentpolitieswhilethelatterhavenot.Athenslordeditovermorethanahundredformerlyindependentcitystates,whereastheAztec Empire, if we can trust its taxation records, ruled 371 differenttribesandpeoples.1How was it possible to squeeze such a human potpourri into the

territoryofamodestmodernstate?Itwaspossiblebecause inthepastthereweremanymoredistinctpeoplesintheworld,eachofwhichhadasmaller population and occupied less territory than today’s typicalpeople. The land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River,whichtodaystrugglestosatisfytheambitionsofjusttwopeoples,easilyaccommodated in biblical times dozens of nations, tribes, pettykingdomsandcitystates.Empires were one of the main reasons for the drastic reduction in

human diversity. The imperial steamroller gradually obliterated theunique characteristics of numerous peoples (such as the Numantians),forgingoutofthemnewandmuchlargergroups.

EvilEmpires?

Inourtime, ‘imperialist’ rankssecondonlyto ‘fascist’ inthe lexiconofpoliticalswearwords.Thecontemporarycritiqueofempirescommonlytakestwoforms:1. Empires do not work. In the long run, it is not possible to rule

effectivelyoveralargenumberofconqueredpeoples.2.Evenifitcanbedone,itshouldnotbedone,becauseempiresare

evilenginesofdestructionandexploitation.Everypeoplehasarighttoself-determination,andshouldneverbesubjecttotheruleofanother.From a historical perspective, the first statement is plain nonsense,

andthesecondisdeeplyproblematic.The truth is thatempirehasbeen theworld’smostcommonformof

politicalorganisationforthelast2,500years.Mosthumansduringthesetwo and a halfmillennia have lived in empires. Empire is also a verystableformofgovernment.Mostempireshavefounditalarminglyeasyto put down rebellions. In general, they have been toppled only by

external invasion or by a split within the ruling elite. Conversely,conqueredpeoplesdon’thaveaverygoodrecordoffreeingthemselvesfrom their imperial overlords. Most have remained subjugated forhundreds of years. Typically, they have been slowly digested by theconqueringempire,untiltheirdistinctculturesfizzledout.Forexample,whentheWesternRomanEmpirefinallyfelltoinvadingGermanic tribes in 476 AD, the Numantians, Arverni, Helvetians,Samnites, Lusitanians, Umbrians, Etruscans and hundreds of otherforgottenpeopleswhomtheRomansconqueredcenturiesearlierdidnotemergefromtheempiresevisceratedcarcasslikeJonahfromthebellyofthegreatfish.Noneofthemwereleft.Thebiologicaldescendantsofthepeoplewhohadidentifiedthemselvesasmembersofthosenations,whohadspokentheirlanguages,worshippedtheirgodsandtoldtheirmythsandlegends,nowthought,spokeandworshippedasRomans.In many cases, the destruction of one empire hardly meantindependenceforsubjectpeoples.Instead,anewempiresteppedintothevacuumcreatedwhen theoldonecollapsedor retreated.Nowherehasthis beenmore obvious than in theMiddle East. The current politicalconstellation in that region – a balance of power between manyindependentpoliticalentitieswithmoreorlessstableborders–isalmostwithoutparallelanytimeinthelastseveralmillennia.ThelasttimetheMiddleEastexperiencedsuchasituationwasintheeighthcenturyBC–almost3,000yearsago!FromtheriseoftheNeo-AssyrianEmpireintheeighthcenturyBCuntilthecollapseoftheBritishandFrenchempiresinthemid-twentiethcenturyAD,theMiddleEastpassedfromthehandsofoneempireintothehandsofanother,likeabatoninarelayrace.Andby the time the British and French finally dropped the baton, theAramaeans, the Ammonites, the Phoenicians, the Philistines, theMoabites, the Edomites and the other peoples conquered by theAssyrianshadlongdisappeared.True, today’s Jews, Armenians and Georgians claim with somemeasureofjusticethattheyaretheoffspringofancientMiddleEasternpeoples. Yet these are only exceptions that prove the rule, and eventheseclaimsaresomewhatexaggerated.Itgoeswithoutsayingthatthepolitical, economic and social practices of modern Jews, for example,owefarmoretotheempiresunderwhichtheylivedduringthepasttwo

millennia than to the traditions of the ancient kingdom of Judaea. IfKingDavidweretoshowupinanultra-Orthodoxsynagogueinpresent-dayJerusalem,hewouldbeutterlybewilderedtofindpeopledressedinEast European clothes, speaking in a German dialect (Yiddish) andhavingendlessargumentsabout themeaningofaBabylonian text (theTalmud).Therewereneithersynagogues,volumesofTalmud,norevenTorahscrollsinancientJudaea.

Building and maintaining an empire usually required the viciousslaughter of large populations and the brutal oppression of everyonewhowasleft.Thestandardimperialtoolkitincludedwars,enslavement,deportationandgenocide.WhentheRomansinvadedScotlandinAD83,they were met by fierce resistance from local Caledonian tribes, andreactedbylayingwastetothecountry.InreplytoRomanpeaceoffers,thechieftainCalgacuscalledtheRomans‘theruffiansoftheworld’,andsaidthat‘toplunder,slaughterandrobberytheygivethelyingnameofempire;theymakeadesertandcallitpeace’.2Thisdoesnotmean,however,thatempiresleavenothingofvaluein

their wake. To colour all empires black and to disavow all imperiallegacies is to reject most of human culture. Imperial elites used theprofits of conquest to finance not only armies and forts but alsophilosophy, art, justice and charity. A significant proportion ofhumanity’sculturalachievementsowetheirexistencetotheexploitationofconqueredpopulations.TheprofitsandprosperitybroughtbyRomanimperialismprovidedCicero, Seneca andStAugustinewith the leisureandwherewithaltothinkandwrite;theTajMahalcouldnothavebeenbuilt without the wealth accumulated byMughal exploitation of theirIndiansubjects;andtheHabsburgEmpire’sprofitsfromitsruleoveritsSlavic, Hungarian and Romanian-speaking provinces paid Haydn’ssalaries and Mozart’s commissions. No Caledonian writer preservedCalgacus’ speech for posterity. We know of it thanks to the Romanhistorian Tacitus. In fact, Tacitus probably made it up. Most scholarstodayagreethatTacitusnotonlyfabricatedthespeechbutinventedthecharacterofCalgacus,theCaledonianchieftain,toserveasamouthpiecefor what he and other upper-class Romans thought about their owncountry.

Evenifwelookbeyondelitecultureandhighart,andfocusinsteadontheworldofcommonpeople,wefindimperial legacies inthemajorityofmoderncultures.Todaymostofusspeak,thinkanddreaminimperiallanguagesthatwereforceduponourancestorsbythesword.MostEastAsiansspeakanddreaminthelanguageoftheHanEmpire.Nomatterwhat their origins, nearly all the inhabitants of the two Americancontinents, fromAlaska’s Barrow Peninsula to the Straits ofMagellan,communicate in one of four imperial languages: Spanish, Portuguese,French or English. Present-day Egyptians speak Arabic, think ofthemselvesasArabs,andidentifywholeheartedlywiththeArabEmpirethatconqueredEgypt in the seventhcenturyandcrushedwithan ironfisttherepeatedrevoltsthatbrokeoutagainstitsrule.About10millionZulus in South Africa hark back to the Zulu age of glory in thenineteenthcentury,eventhoughmostofthemdescendfromtribeswhofought against the Zulu Empire, and were incorporated into it onlythroughbloodymilitarycampaigns.

It’sforYourOwnGood

The first empire about which we have definitive information was theAkkadian Empire of Sargon the Great (c.2250 BC). Sargon began hiscareeras thekingofKish,asmallcitystate inMesopotamia.Withinafew decades hemanaged to conquer not only all otherMesopotamiancitystates,butalsolargeterritoriesoutsidetheMesopotamianheartland.Sargonboasted that hehad conquered the entireworld. In reality, hisdominion stretched from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean, andincluded most of today’s Iraq and Syria, along with a few slices ofmodernIranandTurkey.TheAkkadianEmpiredidnot last longafter its founder’sdeath,but

Sargonleftbehindanimperialmantlethatseldomremainedunclaimed.Forthenext1,700years,Assyrian,BabylonianandHittitekingsadoptedSargonasarolemodel,boastingthatthey,too,hadconqueredtheentireworld.Then,around550BC,CyrustheGreatofPersiacamealongwithanevenmoreimpressiveboast.

Map4.TheAkkadianEmpireandthePersianEmpire.

ThekingsofAssyriaalwaysremainedthekingsofAssyria.Evenwhenthey claimed to rule the entire world, it was obvious that they weredoing it for the greater gloryofAssyria, and theywerenot apologeticaboutit.Cyrus,ontheotherhand,claimednotmerelytorulethewholeworld,buttodosoforthesakeofallpeople.‘Weareconqueringyouforyour own benefit,’ said the Persians. Cyrus wanted the peoples hesubjected to love him and to count themselves lucky to be Persianvassals. Themost famous example of Cyrus’ innovative efforts to gaintheapprobationofanationlivingunderthethumbofhisempirewashiscommand that the Jewish exiles in Babylonia be allowed to return totheirJudaeanhomelandandrebuildtheirtemple.Heevenofferedthemfinancial assistance.Cyrusdidnot seehimself as aPersianking rulingoverJews–hewasalsothekingof theJews,andthusresponsible fortheirwelfare.The presumption to rule the entire world for the benefit of all itsinhabitantswas startling. Evolution hasmadeHomo sapiens, like othersocial mammals, a xenophobic creature. Sapiens instinctively dividehumanityintotwoparts,‘we’and‘they’.Wearepeoplelikeyouandme,

whoshareourlanguage,religionandcustoms.Weareallresponsibleforeachother,butnotresponsibleforthem.Wewerealwaysdistinctfromthem,andowethemnothing.Wedon’twanttoseeanyoftheminourterritory,andwedon’tcareaniotawhathappensintheirterritory.Theyare barely even human. In the language of the Dinka people of theSudan,‘Dinka’simplymeans‘people’.PeoplewhoarenotDinkaarenotpeople. The Dinka’s bitter enemies are the Nuer.What does thewordNuermean inNuer language? Itmeans ‘originalpeople’.ThousandsofkilometresfromtheSudandeserts,inthefrozenice-landsofAlaskaandnorth-easternSiberia, live theYupiks.WhatdoesYupikmean inYupiklanguage?Itmeans‘realpeople’.3In contrast with this ethnic exclusiveness, imperial ideology fromCyrus onward has tended to be inclusive and all-encompassing. Eventhough ithasoftenemphasised racialandculturaldifferencesbetweenrulers and ruled, it has still recognised the basic unity of the entireworld,theexistenceofasinglesetofprinciplesgoverningallplacesandtimes,andthemutualresponsibilitiesofallhumanbeings.Humankindisseenasalargefamily:theprivilegesoftheparentsgohandinhandwithresponsibilityforthewelfareofthechildren.This new imperial vision passed from Cyrus and the Persians toAlexander the Great, and from him to Hellenistic kings, Romanemperors,Muslimcaliphs,Indiandynasts,andeventuallyeventoSovietpremiers andAmericanpresidents.Thisbenevolent imperial visionhasjustified the existence of empires, and negated not only attempts bysubject peoples to rebel, but also attempts by independent peoples toresistimperialexpansion.SimilarimperialvisionsweredevelopedindependentlyofthePersianmodel inotherpartsof theworld,mostnotably inCentralAmerica, inthe Andean region, and in China. According to traditional Chinesepolitical theory,Heaven (Tian) is the sourceof all legitimate authorityon earth.Heaven chooses themostworthypersonor family andgivesthemtheMandateofHeaven.ThispersonorfamilythenrulesoverAllUnder Heaven (Tianxia) for the benefit of all its inhabitants. Thus, alegitimate authority is – by definition – universal. If a ruler lacks theMandateofHeaven,thenhelackslegitimacytoruleevenasinglecity.Ifarulerenjoysthemandate,heisobligedtospreadjusticeandharmonyto the entire world. The Mandate of Heaven could not be given to

several candidates simultaneously, and consequently one could notlegitimisetheexistenceofmorethanoneindependentstate.The first emperor of the united Chinese empire, Qín Shǐ Huángdì,

boastedthat ‘throughoutthesixdirections[oftheuniverse]everythingbelongstotheemperor…whereverthereisahumanfootprint,thereisnotonewhodidnotbecomeasubject[oftheemperor]…hiskindnessreaches even oxen and horses. There is not one who did not benefit.Everymanissafeunderhisownroof.’4InChinesepoliticalthinkingaswell as Chinese historical memory, imperial periods were henceforthseenasgoldenagesoforderandjustice.IncontradictiontothemodernWesternviewthatajustworldiscomposedofseparatenationstates,inChinaperiodsofpoliticalfragmentationwereseenasdarkagesofchaosand injustice. This perception has had far-reaching implications forChinesehistory.Everytimeanempirecollapsed,thedominantpoliticaltheory goaded the powers that be not to settle for paltry independentprincipalities, but to attempt reunification. Sooner or later theseattemptsalwayssucceeded.

WhenTheyBecomeUs

Empires have played a decisive part in amalgamating many smallcultures into fewer big cultures. Ideas, people, goods and technologyspreadmoreeasilywithinthebordersofanempirethaninapoliticallyfragmentedregion.Oftenenough, itwastheempiresthemselveswhichdeliberately spread ideas, institutions, customs and norms.One reasonwastomakelifeeasierforthemselves.Itisdifficulttoruleanempireinwhich every little district has its own set of laws, its own form ofwriting, its own language and its own money. Standardisation was aboontoemperors.Asecondandequallyimportantreasonwhyempiresactivelyspreada

commonculturewastogainlegitimacy.AtleastsincethedaysofCyrusand Qín Shǐ Huángdì, empires have justified their actions – whetherroad-buildingorbloodshed– asnecessary to spreada superior culturefromwhichtheconqueredbenefitevenmorethantheconquerors.The benefits were sometimes salient – law enforcement, urban

planning, standardisation of weights and measures – and sometimesquestionable– taxes,conscription,emperorworship.Butmost imperialelitesearnestlybelievedthattheywereworkingforthegeneralwelfareofalltheempiresinhabitants.China’srulingclasstreatedtheircountry’sneighboursanditsforeignsubjectsasmiserablebarbarianstowhomtheempiremustbringthebenefitsofculture.TheMandateofHeavenwasbestowed upon the emperor not in order to exploit the world, but inordertoeducatehumanity.TheRomans,too,justifiedtheirdominionbyarguingthattheywereendowingthebarbarianswithpeace,justiceandrefinement. ThewildGermans and paintedGauls had lived in squalorandignoranceuntiltheRomanstamedthemwithlaw,cleanedthemupinpublicbathhouses,andimprovedthemwithphilosophy.TheMauryanEmpire in the third century BC tookas itsmission thedisseminationofBuddha’steachingstoanignorantworld.TheMuslimcaliphsreceivedadivinemandatetospreadtheProphet’srevelation,peacefullyifpossiblebut by the sword if necessary. The Spanish and Portuguese empiresproclaimedthatitwasnotrichestheysoughtintheIndiesandAmerica,butconvertstothetruefaith.ThesunneversetontheBritishmissiontospread the twin gospels of liberalism and free trade. The Soviets feltduty-boundtofacilitatetheinexorablehistoricalmarchfromcapitalismtowards the utopian dictatorship of the proletariat. Many Americansnowadays maintain that their government has a moral imperative tobring Third World countries the benefits of democracy and humanrights,evenifthesegoodsaredeliveredbycruisemissilesandF-16s.The cultural ideas spread by empire were seldom the exclusive

creation of the ruling elite. Since the imperial vision tends to beuniversalandinclusive,itwasrelativelyeasyforimperialelitestoadoptideas,normsandtraditionsfromwherevertheyfoundthem,ratherthantostickfanaticallytoasinglehideboundtradition.Whilesomeemperorssoughttopurifytheirculturesandreturntowhattheyviewedastheirroots, for the most part empires have begot hybrid civilisations thatabsorbedmuchfromtheirsubjectpeoples.TheimperialcultureofRomewasGreekalmostasmuchasRoman.TheimperialAbbasidculturewaspart Persian, part Greek, part Arab. Imperial Mongol culture was aChinesecopycat.IntheimperialUnitedStates,anAmericanpresidentofKenyanbloodcanmunchon Italianpizzawhilewatchinghis favouritefilm,LawrenceofArabia,aBritishepicabouttheArabrebellionagainst

theTurks.Not that this cultural melting pot made the process of cultural

assimilationanyeasierforthevanquished.Theimperialcivilisationmaywell have absorbed numerous contributions from various conqueredpeoples, but the hybrid resultwas still alien to the vastmajority. Theprocessofassimilationwasoftenpainfulandtraumatic.Itisnoteasytogive up a familiar and loved local tradition, just as it is difficult andstressfultounderstandandadoptanewculture.Worsestill,evenwhensubjectpeoplesweresuccessfulinadoptingtheimperialculture,itcouldtakedecades, ifnotcenturies,until theimperialeliteacceptedthemaspartof‘us’.Thegenerationsbetweenconquestandacceptancewereleftout in the cold. They had already lost their beloved local culture, buttheywerenotallowed to takeanequalpart in the imperialworld.Onthe contrary, their adopted culture continued to view them asbarbarians.Imagine an Iberian of good stock living a century after the fall of

Numantia.HespeakshisnativeCelticdialectwithhisparents,buthasacquiredimpeccableLatin,withonlyaslightaccent,becauseheneedsitto conduct his business and dealwith the authorities.He indulges hiswife’spenchantforelaboratelyornatebaubles,butisabitembarrassedthatshe,likeotherlocalwomen,retainsthisrelicofCeltictaste–he’dratherhaveheradoptthecleansimplicityofthejewellerywornbytheRomangovernor’swife.HehimselfwearsRomantunicsand, thanks tohissuccessasacattlemerchant,dueinnosmallparttohisexpertiseinthe intricacies of Roman commercial law, he has been able to build aRoman-style villa. Yet, even though he can recite Book III of Virgil’sGeorgics by heart, the Romans still treat him as though he’s semi-barbarian.Herealiseswithfrustrationthathe’llnevergetagovernmentappointment,oroneofthereallygoodseatsintheamphitheatre.Inthelatenineteenthcentury,manyeducatedIndiansweretaughtthe

same lesson by their Britishmasters. One famous anecdote tells of anambitious Indianwhomasteredthe intricaciesof theEnglish language,took lessons in Western-style dance, and even became accustomed toeating with a knife and fork. Equipped with his new manners, hetravelled to England, studied law at University College London, andbecameaqualifiedbarrister.Yetthisyoungmanoflaw,bedeckedinsuitandtie,wasthrownoffatrainintheBritishcolonyofSouthAfricafor

insistingontravellingfirstclassinsteadofsettlingforthirdclass,where‘coloured’menlikehimweresupposedtoride.HisnamewasMohandasKaramchandGandhi.In some cases the processes of acculturation and assimilation

eventuallybrokedownthebarriersbetweenthenewcomersandtheoldelite. The conquered no longer saw the empire as an alien system ofoccupation,andtheconquerorscametoviewtheirsubjectsasequaltothemselves. Rulers and ruled alike came to see ‘them’ as ‘us’. All thesubjects of Rome eventually, after centuries of imperial rule, weregrantedRomancitizenship.Non-RomansrosetooccupythetopranksintheofficercorpsoftheRomanlegionsandwereappointedtotheSenate.In AD 48 the emperor Claudius admitted to the Senate several Gallicnotables,who,henotedinaspeech,through‘customs,culture,andtheties of marriage have blended with ourselves’. Snobbish senatorsprotestedintroducingtheseformerenemiesintotheheartoftheRomanpoliticalsystem.Claudiusremindedthemofaninconvenienttruth.MostoftheirownsenatorialfamiliesdescendedfromItaliantribeswhooncefoughtagainstRome,andwerelatergrantedRomancitizenship.Indeed,theemperorremindedthem,hisownfamilywasofSabineancestry.5DuringthesecondcenturyAD,Romewasruledbya lineofemperors

born in Iberia, inwhoseveinsprobably flowedat least a fewdropsoflocalIberianblood.ThereignsofTrajan,Hadrian,AntoniniusPiusandMarcusAureliusaregenerallythoughttoconstitutetheempire’sgoldenage.After that, all the ethnicdamswere letdown.EmperorSeptimiusSeverus (193–211) was the scion of a Punic family from Libya.Elagabalus (218–22)wasaSyrian.EmperorPhilip (244–9)wasknowncolloquially as ‘Philip the Arab’. The empire’s new citizens adoptedRoman imperial culture with such zest that, for centuries and evenmillenniaafter theempire itselfcollapsed, theycontinued to speak theempire’s language, tobelieve in theChristianGodthat theempirehadadoptedfromoneofitsLevantineprovinces,andtolivebytheempire’slaws.A similar process occurred in the Arab Empire. When it was

established in the mid-seventh century AD, it was based on a sharpdivision between the ruling Arab–Muslim elite and the subjugatedEgyptians, Syrians, Iranians and Berbers, who were neither Arabs nor

Muslim. Many of the empire’s subjects gradually adopted the Muslimfaith, theArabic languageandahybrid imperialculture.TheoldArabelitelookedupontheseparvenuswithdeephostility,fearingtoloseitsunique status and identity. The frustrated converts clamoured for anequalsharewithintheempireandintheworldofIslam.Eventuallytheygottheirway.Egyptians,SyriansandMesopotamianswereincreasinglyseen as ‘Arabs’. Arabs, in their turn – whether authentic’ Arabs fromArabia or newly minted Arabs from Egypt and Syria – came to beincreasinglydominatedbynon-ArabMuslims,inparticularbyIranians,Turks andBerbers. The great success of theArab imperial projectwasthat the imperial culture it created was wholeheartedly adopted bynumerousnon-Arabpeople,whocontinuedtoupholdit,developitandspreadit–evenaftertheoriginalempirecollapsedandtheArabsasanethnicgrouplosttheirdominion.InChinathesuccessoftheimperialprojectwasevenmorethorough.

Formore than2,000years,awelterofethnicandculturalgroups firsttermed barbarians were successfully integrated into imperial ChinesecultureandbecameHanChinese (sonamedafter theHanEmpire thatruled China from 206 BC to AD 220). The ultimate achievement of theChineseEmpireisthatitisstillaliveandkicking,yetitishardtoseeitasanempireexceptinoutlyingareassuchasTibetandXinjiang.Morethan90percentofthepopulationofChinaareseenbythemselvesandbyothersasHan.Wecanunderstandthedecolonisationprocessofthelastfewdecades

inasimilarway.DuringthemoderneraEuropeansconqueredmuchoftheglobeundertheguiseofspreadingasuperiorWesternculture.Theywere so successful thatbillionsofpeoplegradually adopted significantparts of that culture. Indians, Africans, Arabs, Chinese and Maorislearned French, English and Spanish. They began to believe in humanrightsandtheprincipleofself-determination,andtheyadoptedWesternideologies such as liberalism, capitalism, Communism, feminism andnationalism.

TheImperialCycle

Duringthetwentiethcentury,localgroupsthathadadoptedWesternvaluesclaimedequalitywiththeirEuropeanconquerorsinthenameofthese very values.Many anti-colonial struggles werewaged under thebannersofself-determination,socialismandhumanrights,allofwhichareWesternlegacies.JustasEgyptians,IraniansandTurksadoptedandadaptedtheimperialculturethattheyinheritedfromtheoriginalArabconquerors, so today’s Indians, Africans and Chinese have acceptedmuch of the imperial culture of their formerWestern overlords,whileseekingtomoulditinaccordancewiththeirneedsandtraditions.

GoodGuysandBadGuysinHistory

Itistemptingtodividehistoryneatlyintogoodguysandbadguys,withallempiresamongthebadguys.Forthevastmajorityofempireswerefoundedonblood,andmaintainedtheirpowerthroughoppressionandwar. Yet most of today’s cultures are based on imperial legacies. Ifempiresarebydefinitionbad,whatdoesthatsayaboutus?There are schools of thought and political movements that seek topurgehumancultureofimperialism,leavingbehindwhattheyclaimisa

pure,authenticcivilisation,untaintedbysin.Theseideologiesareatbestnaïve; at worst they serve as disingenuous window-dressing for crudenationalismandbigotry.Perhapsyoucouldmakeacasethatsomeofthemyriadculturesthatemergedatthedawnofrecordedhistorywerepure,untouched by sin and unadulterated by other societies. But no culturesince that dawn can reasonably make that claim, certainly no culturethat exists now on earth. All human cultures are at least in part thelegacyofempiresandimperialcivilisations,andnoacademicorpoliticalsurgerycancutouttheimperiallegacieswithoutkillingthepatient.Think, for example, about the love-hate relationship between theindependent Indian republic of today and the British Raj. The Britishconquest and occupation of India cost the lives ofmillions of Indians,andwas responsible for thecontinuoushumiliationandexploitationofhundredsofmillionsmore.YetmanyIndiansadopted,withthezestofconverts, Western ideas such as self-determination and human rights,and were dismayed when the British refused to live up to their owndeclaredvaluesbygrantingnativeIndianseitherequalrightsasBritishsubjectsorindependence.Nevertheless,themodernIndianstateisachildoftheBritishEmpire.The British killed, injured and persecuted the inhabitants of thesubcontinent, but they also united a bewildering mosaic of warringkingdoms, principalities and tribes, creating a shared nationalconsciousness and a country that functioned more or less as a singlepolitical unit. They laid the foundations of the Indian judicial system,createditsadministrativestructure,andbuilt therailroadnetworkthatwas critical for economic integration. Independent India adoptedWesterndemocracy,initsBritishincarnation,asitsformofgovernment.English is still the subcontinent’s lingua franca, a neutral tongue thatnativespeakersofHindi,TamilandMalayalamcanusetocommunicate.Indiansarepassionatecricketplayersandchai(tea)drinkers,andbothgameandbeverageareBritishlegacies.CommercialteafarmingdidnotexistinIndiauntilthemid-nineteenthcentury,whenitwasintroducedby the British East India Company. It was the snobbish British sahibswhospreadthecustomofteadrinkingthroughoutthesubcontinent.

28.TheChhatrapatiShivajitrainstationinMumbai.ItbeganitslifeasVictoriaStation,Bombay.TheBritishbuiltitintheNeo-Gothicstylethatwaspopularinlatenineteenth-centuryBritain.AHindunationalistgovernmentchangedthenamesofbothcityand

station,butshowednoappetiteforrazingsuchamagnificentbuilding,evenifitwasbuiltbyforeignoppressors.

How many Indians today would want to call a vote to divestthemselvesofdemocracy,English,therailwaynetwork,thelegalsystem,cricket and tea on the grounds that they are imperial legacies?And ifthey did, wouldn’t the very act of calling a vote to decide the issuedemonstratetheirdebttotheirformeroverlords?

29.TheTajMahal.Anexampleof‘authentic’Indianculture,orthealiencreationofMuslimimperialism?

Evenifweweretocompletelydisavowthelegacyofabrutalempirein the hope of reconstructing and safeguarding the ‘authentic’ culturesthatprecededit,inallprobabilitywhatwewillbedefendingisnothingbutthelegacyofanolderandnolessbrutalempire.ThosewhoresentthemutilationofIndianculturebytheBritishRajinadvertentlysanctifythelegaciesoftheMughalEmpireandtheconqueringsultanateofDelhi.Andwhoeverattemptstorescue‘authenticIndianculture’fromthealieninfluencesof theseMuslimempires sanctifies the legaciesof theGuptaEmpire,theKushanEmpireandtheMauryaEmpire.IfanextremeHindunationalist were to destroy all the buildings left by the Britishconquerors, such as Mumbai’s main train station, what about thestructuresleftbyIndia’sMuslimconquerors,suchastheTajMahal?Nobody really knows how to solve this thorny question of cultural

inheritance.Whateverpathwetake,thefirststepistoacknowledgethecomplexityofthedilemmaandtoacceptthatsimplisticallydividingthe

pastintogoodguysandbadguysleadsnowhere.Unless,ofcourse,wearewillingtoadmitthatweusuallyfollowtheleadofthebadguys.

TheNewGlobalEmpire

Sincearound200BC,mosthumanshavelivedinempires.Itseemslikelythat in the future, too,mosthumanswill live inone.But this timetheempirewill be truly global. The imperial vision of dominion over theentireworldcouldbeimminent.Asthetwenty-firstcenturyunfolds,nationalismisfastlosingground.

More andmore people believe that all of humankind is the legitimatesource of political authority, rather than the members of a particularnationality, and that safeguarding human rights and protecting theinterests of the entire human species should be the guiding light ofpolitics. If so, having close to 200 independent states is a hindranceratherthanahelp.SinceSwedes,IndonesiansandNigeriansdeservethesame human rights, wouldn’t it be simpler for a single globalgovernmenttosafeguardthem?The appearance of essentially global problems, such as melting ice

caps, nibbles away atwhatever legitimacy remains to the independentnation states. No sovereign state will be able to overcome globalwarming on its own. The Chinese Mandate of Heaven was given byHeaven to solve the problems of humankind. ThemodernMandate ofHeavenwill be given by humankind to solve the problems of heaven,suchastheholeintheozonelayerandtheaccumulationofgreenhousegases.Thecolouroftheglobalempiremaywellbegreen.Asof2014,theworldisstillpoliticallyfragmented,butstatesarefast

losing their independence. Not one of them is really able to executeindependenteconomicpolicies, todeclareandwagewarsas itpleases,or even to run its own internal affairs as it sees fit. States areincreasingly open to the machinations of global markets, to theinterference of global companies andNGOs, and to the supervision ofglobal public opinion and the international judicial system. States areobliged to conform to global standards of financial behaviour,environmental policy and justice. Immensely powerful currents of

capital, labour and information turn and shape the world, with agrowingdisregardforthebordersandopinionsofstates.Theglobalempirebeingforgedbeforeoureyesisnotgovernedbyany

particularstateorethnicgroup.MuchliketheLateRomanEmpire,itisruledbyamulti-ethnicelite,andisheldtogetherbyacommoncultureand common interests. Throughout the world, more and moreentrepreneurs, engineers, experts, scholars, lawyers and managers arecalled to join the empire. They must ponder whether to answer theimperialcallortoremainloyaltotheirstateandtheirpeople.Moreandmorechoosetheempire.

12

TheLawofReligion

INTHEMEDIEVALMARKETINSAMARKAND,acitybuiltonaCentralAsian oasis, Syrianmerchants ran their hands over fine Chinese silks,fierce tribesmen from the steppes displayed the latest batch of straw-haired slaves from the farwest, and shopkeepers pocketed shiny goldcoinsimprintedwithexoticscriptsandtheprofilesofunfamiliarkings.Here,atoneofthatera’smajorcrossroadsbetweeneastandwest,northandsouth,theunificationofhumankindwasaneverydayfact.ThesameprocesscouldbeobservedatworkwhenKublaiKhan’sarmymusteredtoinvade Japan in 1281. Mongol cavalrymen in skins and furs rubbedshoulders with Chinese foot soldiers in bamboo hats, drunken KoreanauxiliariespickedfightswithtattooedsailorsfromtheSouthChinaSea,engineersfromCentralAsialistenedwithdroppingjawstothetalltalesof European adventurers, and all obeyed the command of a singleemperor.Meanwhile,aroundtheholyKa’abainMecca,humanunificationwas

proceedingbyothermeans.HadyoubeenapilgrimtoMecca,circlingIslam’sholiestshrineintheyear1300,youmighthavefoundyourselfinthe company of a party fromMesopotamia, their robes floating in thewind, their eyes blazingwith ecstasy, and theirmouths repeating oneaftertheothertheninety-ninenamesofGod.Justaheadyoumighthaveseen a weather-beaten Turkish patriarch from the Asian steppes,hobbling on a stick and stroking his beard thoughtfully. To one side,goldjewelleryshiningagainstjet-blackskin,mighthavebeenagroupofMuslims from the African kingdom of Mali. The aroma of clove,turmeric, cardamomand sea saltwouldhave signalled thepresenceof

brothersfromIndia,orperhapsfromthemysteriousspiceislandsfurthereast.Today religion is often considered a source of discrimination,disagreementanddisunion.Yet,infact,religionhasbeenthethirdgreatunifier of humankind, alongside money and empires. Since all socialordersandhierarchiesareimagined,theyareallfragile,andthelargerthesociety, themorefragile it is.Thecrucialhistoricalroleofreligionhas been to give superhuman legitimacy to these fragile structures.Religionsassert thatour lawsarenot the resultofhumancaprice,butareordainedbyanabsoluteandsupremeauthority.Thishelpsplaceatleastsomefundamental lawsbeyondchallenge,therebyensuringsocialstability.Religioncanthusbedefinedasasystemofhumannormsandvaluesthatis founded on a belief in a superhuman order. This involves two distinctcriteria:1.Religionshold that there isa superhumanorder,which isnot theproduct of humanwhims or agreements. Professional football is not areligion, because despite itsmany laws, rites and often bizarre rituals,everyone knows that human beings invented football themselves, andFIFA may at any moment enlarge the size of the goal or cancel theoffsiderule.2. Based on this superhuman order, religion establishes norms andvalues that it considers binding. Many Westerners today believe inghosts, fairies and reincarnation, but these beliefs are not a source ofmoral and behavioural standards. As such, they do not constitute areligion.Despite their ability to legitimise widespread social and politicalorders, not all religions have actuated this potential. In order to uniteunderitsaegisalargeexpanseofterritoryinhabitedbydisparategroupsofhumanbeings,a religionmustpossess two furtherqualities.First, itmust espouse a universal superhuman order that is true always andeverywhere.Second,itmustinsistonspreadingthisbelieftoeveryone.Inotherwords,itmustbeuniversalandmissionary.Thebest-knownreligionsofhistory,suchasIslamandBuddhism,areuniversal andmissionary.Consequently people tend to believe that allreligions are like them. In fact, themajority of ancient religionswerelocalandexclusive.Theirfollowersbelievedinlocaldeitiesandspirits,

andhadno interest in converting theentirehuman race.As far asweknow, universal andmissionary religions began to appear only in thefirst millennium BC. Their emergence was one of the most importantrevolutionsinhistory,andmadeavitalcontributiontotheunificationofhumankind,muchliketheemergenceofuniversalempiresanduniversalmoney.

SilencingtheLambs

When animism was the dominant belief system, human norms andvalues had to take into consideration the outlook and interests of amultitudeofotherbeings,suchasanimals,plants,fairiesandghosts.Forexample, a forager band in theGanges Valleymay have established aruleforbiddingpeopletocutdownaparticularlylargefigtree,lestthefig-tree spirit become angry and take revenge. Another forager bandliving in the Indus Valley may have forbidden people from huntingwhite-tailedfoxes,becauseawhite-tailedfoxoncerevealedtoawiseoldwomanwherethebandmightfindpreciousobsidian.Suchreligionstendedtobeverylocalinoutlook,andtoemphasisetheunique features of specific locations, climates and phenomena. Mostforagers spent their entire lives within an area of no more than athousand square kilometres. In order to survive, the inhabitants of aparticular valley needed to understand the superhuman order thatregulatedtheirvalley,andtoadjusttheirbehaviouraccordingly.Itwaspointless to try to convince the inhabitants of some distant valley tofollow the same rules. Thepeople of the Indus didnot bother to sendmissionaries to theGanges to convince locals not to huntwhite-tailedfoxes.The Agricultural Revolution seems to have been accompanied by areligious revolution. Hunter-gatherers picked and pursued wild plantsandanimals,whichcouldbeseenasequalinstatustoHomosapiens.Thefactthatmanhuntedsheepdidnotmakesheepinferiortoman,justasthe fact that tigers hunted man did not make man inferior to tigers.Beingscommunicatedwithoneanotherdirectlyandnegotiatedtherulesgoverning their shared habitat. In contrast, farmers owned and

manipulated plants and animals, and could hardly degrade themselvesbynegotiatingwiththeirpossessions.HencethefirstreligiouseffectoftheAgriculturalRevolutionwas to turnplants andanimals fromequalmembersofaspiritualroundtableintoproperty.This, however, created a big problem. Farmers may have desired

absolutecontrolof their sheep,but theyknewperfectlywell that theircontrolwas limited. They could lock the sheep in pens, castrate ramsand selectively breed ewes, yet they could not ensure that the ewesconceivedandgavebirth tohealthy lambs,norcould theyprevent theeruption of deadly epidemics. How then to safeguard the fecundity oftheflocks?Aleadingtheoryabouttheoriginofthegodsarguesthatgodsgained

importancebecausetheyofferedasolutiontothisproblem.Godssuchasthe fertility goddess, the sky god and the godofmedicine took centrestagewhenplantsandanimalslosttheirabilitytospeak,andthegods’main role was to mediate between humans and the mute plants andanimals.Muchofancientmythologyisinfactalegalcontractinwhichhumans promise everlasting devotion to the gods in exchange formastery over plants and animals – the first chapters of the book ofGenesis are a prime example. For thousands of years after theAgricultural Revolution, religious liturgy consisted mainly of humanssacrificing lambs, wine and cakes to divine powers, who in exchangepromisedabundantharvestsandfecundflocks.TheAgriculturalRevolution initiallyhada far smaller impacton the

status of othermembers of the animist system, such as rocks, springs,ghostsanddemons.However,thesetoograduallyloststatusinfavourofthenewgods.As long aspeople lived their entire liveswithin limitedterritoriesofafewhundredsquarekilometres,mostoftheirneedscouldbemetbylocalspirits.Butoncekingdomsandtradenetworksexpanded,people needed to contact entities whose power and authorityencompassedawholekingdomoranentiretradebasin.The attempt to answer these needs led to the appearance of

polytheisticreligions(fromtheGreek:poly=many,theos=god).Thesereligionsunderstoodtheworldtobecontrolledbyagroupofpowerfulgods, such as the fertility goddess, the rain god and the war god.Humanscouldappealtothesegodsandthegodsmight,iftheyreceiveddevotionsandsacrifices,deigntobringrain,victoryandhealth.

Animism did not entirely disappear at the advent of polytheism.Demons,fairies,ghosts,holyrocks,holyspringsandholytreesremainedanintegralpartofalmostallpolytheistreligions.Thesespiritswerefarlessimportantthanthegreatgods,butforthemundaneneedsofmanyordinarypeople, theyweregoodenough.While theking inhis capitalcity sacrificed dozens of fat rams to the great war god, praying forvictoryoverthebarbarians,thepeasantinhishutlitacandletothefig-treefairy,prayingthatshehelpcurehissickson.Yetthegreatestimpactoftheriseofgreatgodswasnotonsheepordemons, but upon the status of Homo sapiens. Animists thought thathumans were just one of many creatures inhabiting the world.Polytheists,ontheotherhand,increasinglysawtheworldasareflectionof the relationship between gods and humans. Our prayers, oursacrifices,oursinsandourgooddeedsdeterminedthefateoftheentireecosystem.Aterriblefloodmightwipeoutbillionsofants,grasshoppers,turtles, antelopes, giraffes and elephants, just because a few stupidSapiensmade thegodsangry.Polytheism therebyexaltednotonly thestatusofthegods,butalsothatofhumankind.Lessfortunatemembersoftheoldanimistsystemlosttheirstatureandbecameeitherextrasorsilentdecorinthegreatdramaofman’srelationshipwiththegods.

TheBenefitsofIdolatry

Two thousand years of monotheistic brainwashing have caused mostWesternerstoseepolytheismasignorantandchildishidolatry.Thisisanunjuststereotype.Inordertounderstandtheinnerlogicofpolytheism,itisnecessarytograspthecentralideabuttressingthebeliefinmanygods.Polytheism does not necessarily dispute the existence of a singlepowerorlawgoverningtheentireuniverse.Infact,mostpolytheistandeven animist religions recognised such a supreme power that standsbehindallthedifferentgods,demonsandholyrocks.InclassicalGreekpolytheism,Zeus,Hera,Apolloand theircolleagueswere subject toanomnipotentandall-encompassingpower–Fate(Moira,Ananke).Nordicgods, too,were in thrall to fate,which doomed them to perish in thecataclysm of Ragnarök (the Twilight of the Gods). In the polytheistic

religionoftheYorubaofWestAfrica,allgodswerebornofthesupremegodOlodumare, and remained subject to him. InHindu polytheism, asingle principle, Atman, controls the myriad gods and spirits,humankind,andthebiologicalandphysicalworld.Atmanistheeternalessenceorsouloftheentireuniverse,aswellasofeveryindividualandeveryphenomenon.The fundamental insight of polytheism, which distinguishes it from

monotheism,isthatthesupremepowergoverningtheworldisdevoidofinterestsandbiases,andtherefore it isunconcernedwiththemundanedesires,caresandworriesofhumans.It’spointlesstoaskthispowerforvictoryinwar,forhealthorforrain,becausefromitsall-encompassingvantagepoint,itmakesnodifferencewhetheraparticularkingdomwinsor loses, whether a particular city prospers or withers, whether aparticular person recuperates or dies. The Greeks did not waste anysacrificesonFate,andHindusbuiltnotemplestoAtman.Theonlyreasontoapproachthesupremepoweroftheuniversewould

betorenouncealldesiresandembracethebadalongwiththegood–toembrace even defeat, poverty, sickness and death. Thus someHindus,knownasSadhusorSannyasis,devotetheirlivestounitingwithAtman,therebyachievingenlightenment.Theystrivetoseetheworldfromtheviewpointof this fundamentalprinciple, torealise that fromitseternalperspective all mundane desires and fears are meaningless andephemeralphenomena.Most Hindus, however, are not Sadhus. They are sunk deep in the

morass of mundane concerns, where Atman is not much help. Forassistanceinsuchmatters,Hindusapproachthegodswiththeirpartialpowers. Precisely because their powers are partial rather than all-encompassing, gods such as Ganesha, Lakshmi and Saraswati haveinterestsandbiases.Humanscanthereforemakedealswiththesepartialpowersandrelyontheirhelpinordertowinwarsandrecuperatefromillness.Therearenecessarilymanyof thesesmallerpowers, sinceonceyoustartdividinguptheall-encompassingpowerofasupremeprinciple,you’llinevitablyendupwithmorethanonedeity.Hencethepluralityofgods.The insight of polytheism is conducive to far-reaching religious

tolerance. Since polytheists believe, on the one hand, in one supremeand completely disinterested power, and on the other hand in many

partialandbiasedpowers,thereisnodifficultyforthedevoteesofonegod to accept the existence and efficacy of other gods. Polytheism isinherentlyopen-minded,andrarelypersecutes‘heretics’and‘infidels’.Evenwhen polytheists conquered huge empires, they did not try to

converttheirsubjects.TheEgyptians,theRomansandtheAztecsdidnotsend missionaries to foreign lands to spread the worship of Osiris,JupiterorHuitzilopochtli(thechiefAztecgod),andtheycertainlydidn’tdispatcharmiesforthatpurpose.Subjectpeoplesthroughouttheempirewereexpectedtorespecttheempire’sgodsandrituals,sincethesegodsand rituals protected and legitimised the empire. Yet they were notrequired to give up their local gods and rituals. In the Aztec Empire,subject peoples were obliged to build temples for Huitzilopochtli, butthese temples were built alongside those of local gods, rather than intheirstead.Inmanycasestheimperialeliteitselfadoptedthegodsandritualsofsubjectpeople.TheRomanshappilyaddedtheAsiangoddessCybeleandtheEgyptiangoddessIsistotheirpantheon.The only god that the Romans long refused to tolerate was the

monotheisticandevangelisinggodoftheChristians.TheRomanEmpiredidnotrequiretheChristianstogiveuptheirbeliefsandrituals,butitdidexpectthemtopayrespecttotheempire’sprotectorgodsandtothedivinity of the emperor. This was seen as a declaration of politicalloyalty.WhentheChristiansvehementlyrefusedtodoso,andwentontorejectallattemptsatcompromise,theRomansreactedbypersecutingwhat they understood to be a politically subversive faction. And eventhiswas done half-heartedly. In the 300 years from the crucifixion ofChrist to the conversion of Emperor Constantine, polytheistic RomanemperorsinitiatednomorethanfourgeneralpersecutionsofChristians.Localadministratorsandgovernorsincitedsomeanti-Christianviolenceoftheirown.Still,ifwecombineallthevictimsofallthesepersecutions,itturnsoutthatinthesethreecenturies,thepolytheisticRomanskillednomorethanafewthousandChristians.1Incontrast,overthecourseofthenext1,500years,ChristiansslaughteredChristiansbythemillionstodefend slightly different interpretations of the religion of love andcompassion.The religious wars between Catholics and Protestants that swept

Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries are particularlynotorious.AllthoseinvolvedacceptedChrist’sdivinityandHisgospelof

compassionandlove.However,theydisagreedaboutthenatureofthislove.Protestantsbelievedthat thedivine love issogreat thatGodwasincarnated in flesh and allowed Himself to be tortured and crucified,thereby redeeming theoriginal sinandopening thegatesofheaven toall those who professed faith in Him. Catholics maintained that faith,while essential, was not enough. To enter heaven, believers had toparticipate in church rituals anddogooddeeds.Protestants refused toacceptthis,arguingthatthisquidproquobelittlesGod’sgreatnessandlove.Whoeverthinksthatentrytoheavendependsuponhisorherowngood deeds magnifies his own importance, and implies that Christ’ssufferingonthecrossandGod’sloveforhumankindarenotenough.Thesetheologicaldisputesturnedsoviolentthatduringthesixteenthandseventeenthcenturies,CatholicsandProtestantskilledeachotherbythehundreds of thousands.On23August 1572, FrenchCatholicswhostressed the importanceofgooddeedsattackedcommunitiesofFrenchProtestants who highlighted God’s love for humankind. In this attack,the St Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, between 5,000 and 10,000Protestantswere slaughtered in less than twenty-four hours.When thepopeinRomeheardthenewsfromFrance,hewassoovercomebyjoythat he organised festive prayers to celebrate the occasion andcommissioned Giorgio Vasari to decorate one of the Vatican’s roomswith a fresco of the massacre (the room is currently off-limits tovisitors).2 More Christians were killed by fellow Christians in thosetwenty-fourhoursthanbythepolytheisticRomanEmpirethroughoutitsentireexistence.

GodisOne

With time some followers of polytheist gods became so fond of theirparticular patron that they drifted away from the basic polytheistinsight.Theybegantobelievethattheirgodwastheonlygod,andthatHewasinfactthesupremepoweroftheuniverse.Yetatthesametimethey continued to view Him as possessing interests and biases, andbelieved that they could strike deals with Him. Thus were bornmonotheistreligions,whosefollowersbeseechthesupremepowerofthe

universe to help them recover from illness, win the lottery and gainvictoryinwar.ThefirstmonotheistreligionknowntousappearedinEgypt,c.350BC,whenPharaohAkhenatendeclaredthatoneof theminordeitiesof theEgyptianpantheon,thegodAten,was,infact,thesupremepowerrulingthe universe. Akhenaten institutionalised the worship of Aten as thestate religion and tried to check the worship of all other gods. Hisreligious revolution, however, was unsuccessful. After his death, theworshipofAtenwasabandonedinfavouroftheoldpantheon.Polytheismcontinuedtogivebirthhereandtheretoothermonotheistreligions, but they remainedmarginal, not least because they failed todigest their ownuniversalmessage. Judaism, for example, argued thatthesupremepoweroftheuniversehasinterestsandbiases,yetHischiefinterest is in the tiny Jewish nation and in the obscure land of Israel.Judaism had little to offer other nations, and throughout most of itsexistenceithasnotbeenamissionaryreligion.Thisstagecanbecalledthestageof‘localmonotheism’.ThebigbreakthroughcamewithChristianity.This faithbeganasanesotericJewishsectthatsoughttoconvinceJewsthatJesusofNazarethwastheirlong-awaitedmessiah.However,oneofthesect’sfirstleaders,PaulofTarsus,reasonedthat if thesupremepowerof theuniversehasinterestsandbiases,andifHehadbotheredtoincarnateHimselfinthefleshandtodieonthecrossforthesalvationofhumankind,thenthisissomething everyone should hear about, not just Jews. It was thusnecessarytospreadthegoodword–thegospel–aboutJesusthroughouttheworld.Paul’s arguments fell on fertile ground. Christians began organisingwidespreadmissionaryactivitiesaimedatallhumans.Inoneofhistory’sstrangest twists, this esoteric Jewish sect took over themightyRomanEmpire.Christian success served as amodel for anothermonotheist religionthatappeared in theArabianpeninsula in theseventhcentury– Islam.LikeChristianity,Islam,too,beganasasmallsectinaremotecornerofthe world, but in an even stranger and swifter historical surprise itmanagedtobreakoutofthedesertsofArabiaandconqueranimmenseempire stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to India. Henceforth, themonotheistideaplayedacentralroleinworldhistory.

Monotheistshavetendedtobefarmorefanaticalandmissionarythanpolytheists. A religion that recognises the legitimacy of other faithsimplieseitherthatitsgodisnotthesupremepoweroftheuniverse,orthat it received from God just part of the universal truth. Sincemonotheists have usually believed that they are in possession of theentiremessageof theoneandonlyGod, theyhavebeen compelled todiscredit all other religions. Over the last two millennia, monotheistsrepeatedlytriedtostrengthentheirhandbyviolentlyexterminatingallcompetition.Itworked.AtthebeginningofthefirstcenturyAD, therewerehardly

anymonotheistsintheworld.AroundAD500,oneoftheworld’slargestempires–theRomanEmpire–wasaChristianpolity,andmissionarieswere busy spreading Christianity to other parts of Europe, Asia andAfrica. By the end of the first millennium AD, most people in Europe,West Asia and North Africa were monotheists, and empires from theAtlanticOcean to theHimalayas claimed to be ordained by the singlegreatGod.Bytheearlysixteenthcentury,monotheismdominatedmostofAfro-Asia,with theexceptionofEastAsiaand the southernpartsofAfrica, and it began extending long tentacles towards South Africa,America and Oceania. Todaymost people outside East Asia adhere toonemonotheistreligionoranother,andtheglobalpoliticalorderisbuiltonmonotheisticfoundations.Yet just as animism continued to survive within polytheism, so

polytheismcontinued to survivewithinmonotheism. In theory, once apersonbelievesthatthesupremepoweroftheuniversehasinterestsandbiases,what’sthepointinworshippingpartialpowers?Whowouldwantto approach a lowly bureaucratwhen the president’s office is open toyou?Indeed,monotheisttheologytendstodenytheexistenceofallgodsexceptthesupremeGod,andtopourhellfireandbrimstoneoveranyonewhodaresworshipthem.

Map5.TheSpreadofChristianityandIslam.

Yet therehasalwaysbeenachasmbetween theological theoriesandhistorical realities. Most people have found it difficult to digest themonotheistideafully.Theyhavecontinuedtodividetheworldinto‘we’and‘they’,andtoseethesupremepoweroftheuniverseastoodistantand alien for their mundane needs. Themonotheist religions expelledthegodsthroughthefrontdoorwithalotoffanfare,onlytotakethemback in through the sidewindow.Christianity, for example,developeditsownpantheonofsaints,whosecultsdifferedlittlefromthoseofthepolytheisticgods.Justas thegodJupiterdefendedRomeandHuitzilopochtliprotected

theAztecEmpire,soeveryChristiankingdomhaditsownpatronsaintwho helped it overcome difficulties and win wars. England wasprotectedbyStGeorge,ScotlandbyStAndrew,HungarybyStStephen,and France had St Martin. Cities and towns, professions, and evendiseases–eachhadtheirownsaint.ThecityofMilanhadStAmbrose,while St Mark watched over Venice. St Florian protected chimneycleaners,whereasStMathewlentahandtotaxcollectorsindistress.If

yousufferedfromheadachesyouhadtopraytoStAgathius,butiffromtoothaches,thenStApolloniawasamuchbetteraudience.TheChristiansaintsdidnotmerelyresembletheoldpolytheisticgods.

Oftentheyweretheseverysamegodsindisguise.Forexample,thechiefgoddessofCelticIrelandpriortothecomingofChristianitywasBrigid.WhenIrelandwasChristianised,Brigidtoowasbaptised.ShebecameStBrigit,whotothisdayisthemostreveredsaintinCatholicIreland.

TheBattleofGoodandEvil

Polytheism gave birth not merely to monotheist religions, but also todualisticones.Dualisticreligionsespousetheexistenceoftwoopposingpowers:goodandevil.Unlikemonotheism,dualismbelievesthatevilisanindependentpower,neithercreatedbythegoodGod,norsubordinatetoit.Dualismexplainsthattheentireuniverseisabattlegroundbetweenthesetwoforces,andthateverythingthathappensintheworldispartofthestruggle.Dualism is a very attractive world view because it has a short and

simple answer to the famous Problem of Evil, one of the fundamentalconcerns of human thought. ‘Why is there evil in the world? Why istheresuffering?Whydobadthingshappentogoodpeople?’Monotheistshavetopractise intellectualgymnastics toexplainhowanall-knowing,all-powerful and perfectly good God allows so much suffering in theworld.Onewell-knownexplanationisthatthisisGod’swayofallowingfor human free will. Were there no evil, humans could not choosebetween good and evil, and hence there would be no free will. This,however,isanon-intuitiveanswerthatimmediatelyraisesahostofnewquestions.Freedomofwillallowshumans tochooseevil.Many indeedchoose evil and, according to the standard monotheist account, thischoice must bring divine punishment in its wake. If God knew inadvancethataparticularpersonwoulduseherfreewilltochooseevil,andthatasaresultshewouldbepunishedforthisbyeternaltorturesinhell,whydidGodcreateher?Theologianshavewrittencountlessbooksto answer such questions. Some find the answers convincing. Somedon’t.What’s undeniable is thatmonotheists have ahard timedealing

withtheProblemofEvil.Fordualists,it’seasytoexplainevil.Badthingshappeneventogood

people because the world is not governed single-handedly by a goodGod. There is an independent evil power loose in theworld. The evilpowerdoesbadthings.Dualismhasitsowndrawbacks.WhilesolvingtheProblemofEvil,it

is unnerved by the Problem of Order. If the world was created by asingleGod, it’sclearwhyit issuchanorderlyplace,whereeverythingobeysthesamelaws.ButifGoodandEvilbattleforcontroloftheworld,whoenforcesthelawsgoverningthiscosmicwar?Tworivalstatescanfightoneanotherbecausebothobeythesamelawsofphysics.Amissilelaunched fromPakistan can hit targets in India because gravityworksthe same way in both countries. When Good and Evil fight, whatcommonlawsdotheyobey,andwhodecreedtheselaws?So, monotheism explains order, but is mystified by evil. Dualism

explainsevil,butispuzzledbyorder.Thereisonelogicalwayofsolvingtheriddle: toargue that there isa singleomnipotentGodwhocreatedthe entireuniverse – andHe’s evil.Butnobody inhistoryhashad thestomachforsuchabelief.

Dualisticreligionsflourishedformorethanathousandyears.Sometimebetween1500 BCand1000 BC aprophetnamedZoroaster (Zarathustra)wasactivesomewhereinCentralAsia.Hiscreedpassedfromgenerationtogenerationuntilitbecamethemostimportantofdualisticreligions–Zoroastrianism.Zoroastrians saw theworldasacosmicbattlebetweenthegoodgodAhuraMazdaandtheevilgodAngraMainyu.Humanshadto help the good god in this battle. Zoroastrianism was an importantreligionduring theAchaemenidPersianEmpire (550–330 BC) and laterbecametheofficialreligionoftheSassanidPersianEmpire(AD224–651).ItexertedamajorinfluenceonalmostallsubsequentMiddleEasternandCentral Asian religions, and it inspired a number of other dualistreligions,suchasGnosticismandManichaeanism.DuringthethirdandfourthcenturiesAD,theManichaeancreedspread

fromChinatoNorthAfrica,andforamomentitappearedthatitwouldbeat Christianity to achieve dominance in the Roman Empire. Yet theManichaeans lost the soul of Rome to the Christians, the Zoroastrian

Sassanid Empire was overrun by the monotheistic Muslims, and thedualist wave subsided. Today only a handful of dualist communitiessurviveinIndiaandtheMiddleEast.Nevertheless, the rising tide ofmonotheism did not really wipe out

dualism.Jewish,ChristianandMuslimmonotheismabsorbednumerousdualistbeliefsandpractices,andsomeof themostbasic ideasofwhatwecall ‘monotheism’are, infact,dualist inoriginandspirit.CountlessChristians,MuslimsandJewsbelieveinapowerfulevilforce–liketheoneChristianscalltheDevilorSatan–whocanactindependently,fightagainstthegoodGod,andwreakhavocwithoutGod’spermission.Howcanamonotheistadheretosuchadualisticbelief(which,bythe

way, is nowhere to be found in the Old Testament)? Logically, it isimpossible.EitheryoubelieveinasingleomnipotentGodoryoubelievein twoopposingpowers,neitherofwhich isomnipotent.Still,humanshaveawonderfulcapacitytobelieveincontradictions.Soitshouldnotcomeasasurprise thatmillionsofpiousChristians,MuslimsandJewsmanagetobelieveatoneandthesametimeinanomnipotentGodandanindependentDevil.CountlessChristians,MuslimsandJewshavegonesofarastoimaginethatthegoodGodevenneedsourhelpinitsstruggleagainsttheDevil,whichinspiredamongotherthingsthecallforjihadsandcrusades.Another key dualistic concept, particularly in Gnosticism and

Manichaeanism, was the sharp distinction between body and soul,betweenmatter and spirit. Gnostics andManichaeans argued that thegoodgodcreatedthespiritandthesoul,whereasmatterandbodiesarethe creation of the evil god.Man, according to this view, serves as abattleground between the good soul and the evil body. From amonotheisticperspective, this isnonsense–whydistinguishso sharplybetweenbodyandsoul,ormatterandspirit?Andwhyarguethatbodyandmatterareevil?Afterall,everythingwascreatedbythesamegoodGod. But monotheists could not help but be captivated by dualistdichotomies,preciselybecausetheyhelpedthemaddresstheproblemofevil. So such oppositions eventually became cornerstones of ChristianandMuslimthought.Belief inheaven(therealmof thegoodgod)andhell (the realmof the evil god)was alsodualist in origin.There is notraceof thisbelief in theOldTestament,whichalsonever claims thatthesoulsofpeoplecontinuetoliveafterthedeathofthebody.

Infact,monotheism,asithasplayedoutinhistory,isakaleidoscopeofmonotheist,dualist,polytheistandanimistlegacies,jumblingtogetherunder a single divine umbrella. The average Christian believes in themonotheistGod,butalsointhedualistDevil,inpolytheistsaints,andinanimist ghosts. Scholars of religion have a name for this simultaneousavowalofdifferentandevencontradictoryideasandthecombinationofritualsandpracticestakenfromdifferentsources.It’scalledsyncretism.Syncretismmight,infact,bethesinglegreatworldreligion.

TheLawofNature

All the religions we have discussed so far share one importantcharacteristic: theyall focusonabelief ingodsandothersupernaturalentities.ThisseemsobvioustoWesterners,whoarefamiliarmainlywithmonotheistic and polytheist creeds. In fact, however, the religioushistoryof theworlddoesnotboildown to thehistoryofgods.Duringthe first millennium BC, religions of an altogether new kind began tospread through Afro-Asia. The newcomers, such as Jainism andBuddhism in India, Daoism and Confucianism in China, and Stoicism,Cynicism and Epicureanism in the Mediterranean basin, werecharacterisedbytheirdisregardofgods.These creeds maintained that the superhuman order governing theworld is the product of natural laws rather than of divine wills andwhims. Some of these natural-law religions continued to espouse theexistenceofgods,but theirgodsweresubject to the lawsofnaturenolessthanhumans,animalsandplantswere.Godshadtheirnicheintheecosystem, just as elephants and porcupines had theirs, but could nomorechangethelawsofnaturethanelephantscan.AprimeexampleisBuddhism, the most important of the ancient natural law religions,whichremainsoneofthemajorfaiths.The central figure of Buddhism is not a god but a human being,SiddharthaGautama.AccordingtoBuddhisttradition,Gautamawasheirto a small Himalayan kingdom, sometime around 500 BC. The youngprincewasdeeplyaffectedbythesufferingevidentallaroundhim.He

saw thatmen andwomen, children and old people, all suffer not justfrom occasional calamities such as war and plague, but also fromanxiety, frustration and discontent, all of which seem to be aninseparable part of the human condition. People pursue wealth andpower, acquire knowledge and possessions, beget sons and daughters,andbuildhousesandpalaces.Yetnomatterwhattheyachieve,theyarenever content. Thosewho live in poverty dream of riches. Thosewhohaveamillionwanttwomillion.Thosewhohavetwomillionwant10million. Even the rich and famous are rarely satisfied. They too arehauntedbyceaselesscaresandworries,untilsickness,oldageanddeathputabitterendtothem.Everythingthatonehasaccumulatedvanisheslikesmoke.Lifeisapointlessratrace.Buthowtoescapeit?At the age of twenty-nineGautama slipped away fromhis palace inthemiddleof thenight, leavingbehindhis familyandpossessions.HetravelledasahomelessvagabondthroughoutnorthernIndia,searchingforawayoutofsuffering.Hevisitedashramsandsatatthefeetofgurusbut nothing liberated him entirely – some dissatisfaction alwaysremained.Hedidnotdespair.Heresolvedtoinvestigatesufferingonhisownuntilhefoundamethodforcompleteliberation.Hespentsixyearsmeditatingon theessence,causesandcures forhumananguish. In theendhecametotherealisationthatsufferingisnotcausedbyillfortune,bysocialinjustice,orbydivinewhims.Rather,sufferingiscausedbythebehaviourpatternsofone’sownmind.Gautama’s insightwas that nomatterwhat themind experiences, itusuallyreactswithcraving,andcravingalwaysinvolvesdissatisfaction.Whenthemindexperiencessomethingdistasteful itcraves toberidoftheirritation.Whenthemindexperiencessomethingpleasant,itcravesthat thepleasurewill remainandwill intensify.Therefore, themind isalwaysdissatisfied and restless. This is very clearwhenwe experienceunpleasant things, suchaspain.As longas thepain continues,wearedissatisfiedanddoallwecantoavoidit.Yetevenwhenweexperiencepleasant thingswe arenever content.We either fear that thepleasuremight disappear, or we hope that it will intensify. People dream foryearsaboutfindinglovebutarerarelysatisfiedwhentheyfindit.Somebecomeanxiousthattheirpartnerwillleave;othersfeelthattheyhavesettledcheaply,andcouldhavefoundsomeonebetter.Andweallknowpeoplewhomanagetodoboth.

Map6.TheSpreadofBuddhism.

Greatgodscansendusrain,socialinstitutionscanprovidejusticeandgoodhealthcare,and luckycoincidencescan turnus intomillionaires,butnoneofthemcanchangeourbasicmentalpatterns.Henceeventhegreatestkingsaredoomed to live inangst, constantly fleeinggriefandanguish,foreverchasingaftergreaterpleasures.Gautama found that there was a way to exit this vicious circle. If,whenthemindexperiencessomethingpleasantorunpleasant,itsimplyunderstands things as they are, then there is no suffering. If youexperience sadness without craving that the sadness go away, youcontinuetofeelsadnessbutyoudonotsufferfromit.Therecanactuallyberichnessinthesadness.Ifyouexperiencejoywithoutcravingthatthejoy linger and intensify, you continue to feel joy without losing yourpeaceofmind.But how do you get themind to accept things as they are,withoutcraving?Toacceptsadnessassadness,joyasjoy,painaspain?Gautamadeveloped a set of meditation techniques that train the mind to

experience reality as it is, without craving. These practices train themindtofocusallitsattentiononthequestion,‘WhatamIexperiencingnow?’ rather than on ‘What would I rather be experiencing?’ It isdifficulttoachievethisstateofmind,butnotimpossible.Gautama grounded these meditation techniques in a set of ethicalrulesmeant tomake it easier for people to focuson actual experienceand to avoid falling into cravings and fantasies. He instructed hisfollowers to avoid killing, promiscuous sex and theft, since such actsnecessarilystokethefireofcraving(forpower,forsensualpleasure,orfor wealth). When the flames are completely extinguished, craving isreplaced by a state of perfect contentment and serenity, known asnirvana(the literalmeaningofwhichis ‘extinguishingthefire’).Thosewho have attained nirvana are fully liberated from all suffering. Theyexperience reality with the utmost clarity, free of fantasies anddelusions.Whiletheywillmostlikelystillencounterunpleasantnessandpain, such experiences cause them nomisery. A personwho does notcravecannotsuffer.According to Buddhist tradition, Gautama himself attained nirvanaand was fully liberated from suffering. Henceforth he was known as‘Buddha’,whichmeans‘TheEnlightenedOne’.Buddhaspenttherestofhis life explaining his discoveries to others so that everyone could befreed from suffering. He encapsulated his teachings in a single law:suffering arises from craving; the only way to be fully liberated fromsuffering is tobe fully liberated fromcraving; and theonlyway tobeliberatedfromcravingistotrainthemindtoexperiencerealityasitis.This law, known as dharma or dhamma, is seen by Buddhists as auniversal law of nature. That ‘suffering arises from craving’ is alwaysand everywhere true, just as in modern physics E always equalsmc2.Buddhistsarepeoplewhobelieveinthislawandmakeitthefulcrumofall their activities. Belief in gods, on the other hand, is of minorimportance to them.The first principle ofmonotheist religions is ‘Godexists.WhatdoesHewantfromme?’ThefirstprincipleofBuddhismis‘Sufferingexists.HowdoIescapeit?’Buddhismdoesnotdenytheexistenceofgods–theyaredescribedaspowerful beingswho canbring rains and victories – but theyhavenoinfluenceonthelawthatsufferingarisesfromcraving.Ifthemindofapersonisfreeofallcraving,nogodcanmakehimmiserable.Conversely,

once craving arises in a person’s mind, all the gods in the universecannotsavehimfromsuffering.Yet much like the monotheist religions, premodern natural-law

religionssuchasBuddhismneverreallyridthemselvesoftheworshipofgods.Buddhismtoldpeoplethattheyshouldaimfortheultimategoalofcomplete liberation fromsuffering, rather thanforstopsalongthewaysuchaseconomicprosperityandpoliticalpower.However,99percentofBuddhistsdidnotattainnirvana,andeveniftheyhopedtodosoinsome future lifetime, they devoted most of their present lives to thepursuitofmundaneachievements.Sotheycontinuedtoworshipvariousgods, such as theHindugods in India, theBongods inTibet, and theShintogodsinJapan.Moreover,astimewentbyseveralBuddhistsectsdevelopedpantheons

ofBuddhasandbodhisattvas.Thesearehumanandnon-humanbeingswith the capacity to achieve full liberation from suffering but whoforego this liberationoutofcompassion, inorder tohelp thecountlessbeingsstilltrappedinthecycleofmisery.Insteadofworshippinggods,many Buddhists began worshipping these enlightened beings, askingthem for help not only in attaining nirvana, but also in dealing withmundane problems. Thus we find many Buddhas and bodhisattvasthroughout East Asia who spend their time bringing rain, stoppingplagues, and even winning bloody wars – in exchange for prayers,colourfulflowers,fragrantincenseandgiftsofriceandcandy.

TheWorshipofMan

Thelast300yearsareoftendepictedasanageofgrowingsecularism,inwhichreligionshaveincreasinglylosttheirimportance.Ifwearetalkingabout theist religions, this is largely correct. But if we take intoconsideration natural-law religions, thenmodernity turns out to be anageofintensereligiousfervour,unparalleledmissionaryefforts,andthebloodiestwarsofreligioninhistory.Themodernagehaswitnessedtherise of a number of new natural-law religions, such as liberalism,Communism, capitalism, nationalism andNazism. These creeds do notliketobecalledreligions,andrefertothemselvesasideologies.Butthis

isjustasemanticexercise.Ifareligionisasystemofhumannormsandvalues that is founded on belief in a superhuman order, then SovietCommunismwasnolessareligionthanIslam.IslamisofcoursedifferentfromCommunism,becauseIslamseesthe

superhuman order governing theworld as the edict of an omnipotentcreator god, whereas Soviet Communism did not believe in gods. ButBuddhismtoogivesshortshrifttogods,andyetwecommonlyclassifyitas a religion. Like Buddhists, Communists believed in a superhumanorderofnaturaland immutable lawsthatshouldguidehumanactions.Whereas Buddhists believe that the law of nature was discovered bySiddharthaGautama, Communists believed that the law of naturewasdiscoveredbyKarlMarx,FriedrichEngelsandVladimirIlyichLenin.Thesimilaritydoesnotendthere.Likeotherreligions,Communismtoohasitsholyscriptsandpropheticbooks, suchasMarx’sDasKapital,whichforetold thathistorywould soonendwith the inevitablevictoryof theproletariat.Communismhaditsholidaysandfestivals,suchastheFirstof May and the anniversary of the October Revolution. It hadtheologiansadeptatMarxistdialectics,andeveryunitintheSovietarmyhadachaplain,calledacommissar,whomonitoredthepietyofsoldiersandofficers.Communismhadmartyrs,holywarsandheresies, suchasTrotskyism.SovietCommunismwasafanaticalandmissionaryreligion.A devout Communist could not be a Christian or a Buddhist, andwasexpectedtospreadthegospelofMarxandLeninevenatthepriceofhisorherlife.

Religionisasystemofhumannormsandvaluesthatisfoundedonbeliefinasuperhumanorder.Thetheoryofrelativityisnotareligion,because(atleastsofar)thereareno

humannormsandvaluesthatarefoundedonit.Footballisnotareligionbecausenobodyarguesthatitsrulesreflectsuperhumanedicts.Islam,BuddhismandCommunismareallreligions,becauseallaresystemsofhumannormsandvaluesthatarefoundedonbeliefinasuperhumanorder.(Notethedifferencebetween‘superhuman’and‘supernatural’.TheBuddhistlawofnatureandtheMarxistlawsofhistoryaresuperhuman,sincethey

werenotlegislatedbyhumans.Yettheyarenotsupernatural.)

Somereadersmayfeelveryuncomfortablewiththislineofreasoning.Ifitmakesyoufeelbetter,youarefreetogooncallingCommunismanideology rather than a religion. Itmakes no difference.We can dividecreedsintogod-centredreligionsandgodlessideologiesthatclaimtobebased on natural laws. But then, to be consistent, we would need tocatalogue at least some Buddhist, Daoist and Stoic sects as ideologiesrather than religions. Conversely, we should note that belief in godspersistswithinmanymodern ideologies, and that some of them,mostnotablyliberalism,makelittlesensewithoutthisbelief.

*

Itwouldbeimpossibletosurveyherethehistoryofallthenewmoderncreeds,especiallybecausetherearenoclearboundariesbetweenthem.

TheyarenolesssyncreticthanmonotheismandpopularBuddhism.Justas a Buddhist could worship Hindu deities, and just as a monotheistcould believe in the existence of Satan, so the typical Americannowadaysissimultaneouslyanationalist(shebelievesintheexistenceofanAmericannationwithaspecialroletoplayinhistory),afree-marketcapitalist (she believes that open competition and the pursuit of self-interestarethebestwaystocreateaprosperoussociety),andaliberalhumanist(shebelievesthathumanshavebeenendowedbytheircreatorwithcertaininalienablerights).NationalismwillbediscussedinChapter18. Capitalism – themost successful of themodern religions – gets awhole chapter, Chapter 16, which expounds its principal beliefs andrituals. In the remaining pages of this chapter I will address thehumanistreligions.Theist religions focus on the worship of gods. Humanist religions

worship humanity, or more correctly, Homo sapiens. Humanism is abelief that Homo sapiens has a unique and sacred nature, which isfundamentallydifferent fromthenatureofallotheranimalsandofallother phenomena. Humanists believe that the unique nature ofHomosapiens is themost important thing in theworld,and itdetermines themeaningofeverythingthathappensintheuniverse.ThesupremegoodisthegoodofHomosapiens.Therestoftheworldandallotherbeingsexistsolelyforthebenefitofthisspecies.All humanists worship humanity, but they do not agree on its

definition.Humanismhassplit intothreerivalsects that fightovertheexact definition of ‘humanity’, just as rival Christian sects fought overtheexactdefinitionofGod.Today,themostimportanthumanistsectisliberal humanism, which believes that ‘humanity’ is a quality ofindividual humans, and that the liberty of individuals is thereforesacrosanct.Accordingtoliberals,thesacrednatureofhumanityresideswithin each and every individual Homo sapiens. The inner core ofindividualhumansgivesmeaningtotheworld,andisthesourceforallethical and political authority. If we encounter an ethical or politicaldilemma,weshouldlookinsideandlistentoourinnervoice–thevoiceofhumanity.Thechiefcommandmentsofliberalhumanismaremeanttoprotect the libertyof this innervoice against intrusionorharm.Thesecommandmentsarecollectivelyknownas‘humanrights’.This, for example, is why liberals object to torture and the death

penalty.InearlymodernEurope,murdererswerethoughttoviolateanddestabilisethecosmicorder.Tobringthecosmosbacktobalance,itwasnecessarytotortureandpubliclyexecutethecriminal,sothateveryonecouldseetheorderre-established.AttendinggruesomeexecutionswasafavouritepastimeforLondonersandParisiansintheeraofShakespeareand Molière. In today’s Europe, murder is seen as a violation of thesacred nature of humanity. In order to restore order, present-dayEuropeansdonot tortureandexecutecriminals. Instead, theypunishamurderer in what they see as the most ‘humane’ way possible, thussafeguardingandevenrebuildinghishumansanctity.Byhonouringthehumannatureofthemurderer,everyoneisremindedofthesanctityofhumanity, and order is restored. By defending themurderer,we rightwhatthemurdererhaswronged.Eventhoughliberalhumanismsanctifieshumans,itdoesnotdenythe

existence of God, and is, in fact, founded on monotheist beliefs. Theliberalbeliefinthefreeandsacrednatureofeachindividualisadirectlegacy of the traditional Christian belief in free and eternal individualsouls.Without recourse toeternal soulsandaCreatorGod, itbecomesembarrassinglydifficult for liberals to explainwhat is so special aboutindividualSapiens.Another important sect is socialist humanism. Socialists believe that

‘humanity’ iscollectiverather than individualistic.Theyholdassacrednottheinnervoiceofeachindividual,butthespeciesHomosapiensasawhole.Whereasliberalhumanismseeksasmuchfreedomaspossibleforindividual humans, socialist humanism seeks equality between allhumans. According to socialists, inequality is the worst blasphemyagainst the sanctity of humanity, because it privileges peripheralqualitiesofhumansovertheiruniversalessence.Forexample,whentherichareprivilegedover thepoor, itmeans thatwevaluemoneymorethantheuniversalessenceofallhumans,whichisthesameforrichandpooralike.Like liberal humanism, socialist humanism is built on monotheist

foundations.TheideathatallhumansareequalisarevampedversionofthemonotheistconvictionthatallsoulsareequalbeforeGod.Theonlyhumanist sect that has actually broken loose from traditionalmonotheism is evolutionary humanism, whose most famousrepresentatives are theNazis.Whatdistinguished theNazis fromother

humanist sects was a different definition of ‘humanity’, one deeplyinfluencedbythetheoryofevolution.Incontrasttootherhumanists,theNazisbelieved thathumankind isnot somethinguniversal andeternal,but rather a mutable species that can evolve or degenerate. Man canevolveintosuperman,ordegenerateintoasubhuman.The main ambition of the Nazis was to protect humankind from

degeneration and encourage its progressive evolution. This iswhy theNazis said that the Aryan race, themost advanced form of humanity,hadtobeprotectedandfostered,whiledegeneratekindsofHomosapienslike Jews, Roma, homosexuals and the mentally ill had to bequarantined and even exterminated. The Nazis explained that Homosapiensitselfappearedwhenone‘superior’populationofancienthumansevolved,whereas‘inferior’populationssuchastheNeanderthalsbecameextinct.Thesedifferentpopulationswereatfirstnomorethandifferentraces,butdevelopedindependentlyalongtheirownevolutionarypaths.Thismightwellhappenagain.AccordingtotheNazis,Homosapienshadalready divided into several distinct races, each with its own uniquequalities.Oneof these races, theAryan race,had the finestqualities–rationalism, beauty, integrity, diligence. The Aryan race therefore hadthepotentialtoturnmanintosuperman.Otherraces,suchasJewsandblacks, were today’s Neanderthals, possessing inferior qualities. Ifallowed to breed, and in particular to intermarry with Aryans, theywould adulterate all human populations and doom Homo sapiens toextinction.Biologists have since debunked Nazi racial theory. In particular,

genetic research conducted after 1945 has demonstrated that thedifferencesbetweenthevarioushumanlineagesarefarsmallerthantheNazis postulated. But these conclusions are relatively new. Given thestate of scientific knowledge in1933,Nazi beliefswerehardly outsidethepale.Theexistenceofdifferenthumanraces, thesuperiorityof thewhiterace,andtheneedtoprotectandcultivatethissuperiorracewerewidely held beliefs among most Western elites. Scholars in the mostprestigiousWesternuniversities,usingtheorthodoxscientificmethodsofthe day, published studies that allegedly proved that members of thewhite race were more intelligent, more ethical and more skilled thanAfricans or Indians. Politicians in Washington, London and Canberratookitforgrantedthatitwastheirjobtopreventtheadulterationand

degenerationofthewhiterace,by,forexample,restrictingimmigrationfrom China or even Italy to ‘Aryan’ countries such as the USA andAustralia.

HumanistReligions–ReligionsthatWorshipHumanity

LiberalhumanismSocialisthumanism

Evolutionaryhumanism

Homosapienshasauniqueandsacrednaturethatisfundamentallydifferentfromthenatureofallotherbeingsandphenomena.Thesupremegoodisthegoodofhumanity.

‘Humanity’isindividualisticandresideswithineachindividualHomosapiens.

‘Humanity’iscollectiveandresideswithinthespeciesHomosapiensasawhole.

‘Humanity’isamutablespecies.Humansmightdegenerateintosubhumansorevolveintosuperhumans.

ThesupremecommandmentistoprotecttheinnercoreandfreedomofeachindividualHomosapiens.

ThesupremecommandmentistoprotectequalitywithinthespeciesHomosapiens.

Thesupremecommandmentistoprotecthumankindfromdegeneratingintosubhumans,andtoencourageitsevolutionintosuperhumans.

Thesepositionsdidnotchangesimplybecausenewscientificresearchwas published. Sociological and political developments were far morepowerful engines of change. In this sense,Hitler dug not just his own

gravebutthatofracismingeneral.WhenhelaunchedWorldWarTwo,he compelled his enemies tomake clear distinctions between ‘us’ and‘them’.Afterwards,preciselybecauseNaziideologywassoracist,racismbecame discredited in the West. But the change took time. WhitesupremacyremainedamainstreamideologyinAmericanpoliticsatleastuntilthe1960s.TheWhiteAustraliapolicywhichrestrictedimmigrationof non-white people to Australia remained in force until 1973.Aboriginal Australians did not receive equal political rights until the1960s,andmostwereprevented fromvoting inelectionsbecause theyweredeemedunfittofunctionascitizens.

30.ANazipropagandapostershowingontherighta‘raciallypureAryan’andonthelefta‘cross-breed’.Naziadmirationforthehumanbodyisevident,asistheirfearthatthe

lowerracesmightpollutehumanityandcauseitsdegeneration.

The Nazis did not loathe humanity. They fought liberal humanism,humanrightsandCommunismpreciselybecausetheyadmiredhumanityandbelievedinthegreatpotentialofthehumanspecies.ButfollowingthelogicofDarwinianevolution,theyarguedthatnaturalselectionmustbe allowed toweed out unfit individuals and leave only the fittest tosurvive and reproduce. By succouring the weak, liberalism and

Communismnotonlyallowedunfitindividualstosurvive,theyactuallygave them the opportunity to reproduce, thereby undermining naturalselection.Insuchaworld,thefittesthumanswouldinevitablydrownina sea of unfit degenerates.Humankindwould become less and less fitwitheachpassinggeneration–whichcouldleadtoitsextinction.

31.ANazicartoonof1933.Hitlerispresentedasasculptorwhocreatesthesuperman.Abespectacledliberalintellectualisappalledbytheviolenceneededtocreatethe

superman.(Notealsotheeroticglorificationofthehumanbody.)

A1942Germanbiologytextbookexplainsinthechapter‘TheLawsofNatureandMankind’ that the supreme lawofnature is thatallbeingsare locked in a remorseless struggle for survival. After describing howplants struggle for territory, howbeetles struggle to findmates and soforth,thetextbookconcludesthat:

The battle for existence is hard and unforgiving, but is the only way to maintain life. This

struggle eliminates everything that is unfit for life, and selects everything that is able tosurvive…Thesenatural lawsare incontrovertible; living creaturesdemonstrate themby theirverysurvival.Theyareunforgiving.Thosewhoresistthemwillbewipedout.Biologynotonlytellsusaboutanimalsandplants,butalsoshowsus the lawswemust followinour lives,andsteelsourwillstoliveandfightaccordingtotheselaws.Themeaningoflifeisstruggle.Woetohimwhosinsagainsttheselaws.

ThenfollowsaquotationfromMeinKampf:‘Thepersonwhoattemptstofighttheironlogicofnaturetherebyfightstheprincipleshemustthankforhis lifeasahumanbeing.To fightagainstnature is tobringaboutone’sowndestruction.’3

At the dawn of the third millennium, the future of evolutionaryhumanism is unclear. For sixty years after the end of thewar againstHitler it was taboo to link humanismwith evolution and to advocateusing biological methods to upgrade’ Homo sapiens. But today suchprojects are back in vogue. No one speaks about exterminating lowerraces or inferior people, but many contemplate using our increasingknowledgeofhumanbiologytocreatesuperhumans.Atthesametime,ahugegulfisopeningbetweenthetenetsofliberalhumanismandthe latest findingsof the life sciences,agulfwecannotignore much longer. Our liberal political and judicial systems arefounded on the belief that every individual has a sacred inner nature,indivisibleandimmutable,whichgivesmeaningtotheworld,andwhichisthesourceofallethicalandpoliticalauthority.ThisisareincarnationofthetraditionalChristianbelief inafreeandeternalsoulthatresideswithineachindividual.Yetoverthelast200years,thelifescienceshavethoroughly undermined this belief. Scientists studying the innerworkings of the human organism have found no soul there. Theyincreasingly argue that human behaviour is determined by hormones,genes and synapses, rather than by free will – the same forces thatdeterminethebehaviourofchimpanzees,wolves,andants.Ourjudicialandpoliticalsystemslargelytrytosweepsuchinconvenientdiscoveriesunder the carpet. But in all frankness, how long canwemaintain thewallseparatingthedepartmentofbiologyfromthedepartmentsoflawandpoliticalscience?

13

TheSecretofSuccess

COMMERCE, EMPIRES AND UNIVERSAL religions eventually broughtvirtuallyeverySapiensoneverycontinentintotheglobalworldweliveintoday.Notthatthisprocessofexpansionandunificationwaslinearorwithout interruptions. Looking at the bigger picture, though, thetransitionfrommanysmallculturestoafewlargeculturesandfinallytoasingleglobalsocietywasprobablyaninevitableresultofthedynamicsofhumanhistory.Butsayingthataglobalsocietyisinevitableisnotthesameassaying

thattheendresulthadtobetheparticularkindofglobalsocietywenowhave. We can certainly imagine other outcomes. Why is English sowidespread today, and not Danish? Why are there about 2 billionChristiansand1.25billionMuslims,butonly150,000ZoroastriansandnoManichaeans? Ifwecouldgoback in timeto10,000yearsagoandset the process going again, time after time,wouldwe always see theriseofmonotheismandthedeclineofdualism?We can’t do such an experiment, so we don’t really know. But an

examinationoftwocrucialcharacteristicsofhistorycanprovideuswithsomeclues.

1.TheHindsightFallacy

Everypointinhistoryisacrossroads.Asingletravelledroadleadsfromthepasttothepresent,butmyriadpathsforkoffintothefuture.Someof

thosepathsarewider,smootherandbettermarked,andarethusmorelikely to be taken, but sometimes history – or the people who makehistory–takesunexpectedturns.AtthebeginningofthefourthcenturyAD,theRomanEmpirefacedawide horizon of religious possibilities. It could have stuck to itstraditional and variegated polytheism. But its emperor, Constantine,lookingbackonafractiouscenturyofcivilwar,seemstohavethoughtthatasinglereligionwithacleardoctrinecouldhelpunifyhisethnicallydiverserealm.Hecouldhavechosenanyofanumberofcontemporarycultstobehisnationalfaith–Manichaeism,Mithraism,thecultsofIsisor Cybele, Zoroastrianism, Judaism and even Buddhism were allavailable options. Why did he opt for Jesus?Was there something inChristiantheologythatattractedhimpersonally,orperhapsanaspectofthefaiththatmadehimthinkitwouldbeeasiertouseforhispurposes?Didhehaveareligiousexperience,ordidsomeofhisadviserssuggestthattheChristianswerequicklygainingadherentsandthatitwouldbebest to jumpon thatwagon?Historianscanspeculate,butnotprovideanydefinitiveanswer.TheycandescribehowChristianitytookovertheRoman Empire, but they cannot explainwhy this particular possibilitywasrealised.Whatisthedifferencebetweendescribing‘how’andexplaining‘why’?Todescribe‘how’meanstoreconstructtheseriesofspecificeventsthatled from one point to another. To explain ‘why means to find causalconnections that account for the occurrenceof this particular series ofeventstotheexclusionofallothers.SomescholarsdoindeedprovidedeterministicexplanationsofeventssuchastheriseofChristianity.Theyattempttoreducehumanhistorytothe workings of biological, ecological or economic forces. They arguethattherewassomethingaboutthegeography,geneticsoreconomyofthe RomanMediterranean thatmade the rise of amonotheist religioninevitable.Yetmosthistorianstendtobescepticalofsuchdeterministictheories. This is one of the distinguishing marks of history as anacademicdiscipline–thebetteryouknowaparticularhistoricalperiod,theharderitbecomestoexplainwhythingshappenedonewayandnotanother. Those who have only a superficial knowledge of a certainperiodtendtofocusonlyonthepossibilitythatwaseventuallyrealised.They offer a just-so story to explainwith hindsightwhy that outcome

wasinevitable.Thosemoredeeplyinformedabouttheperiodaremuchmorecognisantoftheroadsnottaken.Infact,thepeoplewhoknewtheperiodbest–thosealiveatthetime–werethemostcluelessofall.FortheaverageRomaninConstantine’stime, the futurewasa fog. It isan ironruleofhistory thatwhat looksinevitable in hindsightwas far from obvious at the time. Today is nodifferent.Areweoutoftheglobaleconomiccrisis,oristheworststilltocome? Will China continue growing until it becomes the leadingsuperpower?WilltheUnitedStatesloseitshegemony?Istheupsurgeofmonotheisticfundamentalismthewaveofthefutureoralocalwhirlpoolof little long-term significance? Are we heading towards ecologicaldisasterortechnologicalparadise?Therearegoodargumentstobemadefor all of these outcomes, but no way of knowing for sure. In a fewdecades,peoplewilllookbackandthinkthattheanswerstoallofthesequestionswereobvious.Itisparticularlyimportanttostressthatpossibilitieswhichseemveryunlikely to contemporaries often get realised. When Constantineassumedthethronein306,ChristianitywaslittlemorethananesotericEasternsect.IfyouweretosuggestthenthatitwasabouttobecometheRomanstatereligion,you’dhavebeen laughedoutof theroomjustasyouwouldbetodayifyouweretosuggestthatbytheyear2050HareKrishnawould be the state religion of the USA. In October 1913, theBolshevikswere a small radical Russian faction. No reasonable personwould have predicted that within a mere four years they would takeover the country. In AD 600, the notion that a band of desert-dwellingArabs would soon conquer an expanse stretching from the AtlanticOceantoIndiawasevenmorepreposterous.Indeed,hadtheByzantinearmybeenabletorepeltheinitialonslaught,Islamwouldprobablyhaveremainedanobscurecultofwhichonlyahandfulofcognoscentiwereaware.Scholarswouldthenhaveaveryeasyjobexplainingwhyafaithbased on a revelation to amiddle-agedMeccanmerchant could neverhavecaughton.Notthateverythingispossible.Geographical,biologicalandeconomicforces create constraints. Yet these constraints leave ample room forsurprisingdevelopments,whichdonotseemboundbyanydeterministiclaws.This conclusion disappoints many people, who prefer history to be

deterministic. Determinism is appealing because it implies that ourworldandourbeliefsareanaturalandinevitableproductofhistory.Itis natural and inevitable that we live in nation states, organise oureconomy along capitalist principles, and fervently believe in humanrights. To acknowledge that history is not deterministic is toacknowledgethatitisjustacoincidencethatmostpeopletodaybelieveinnationalism,capitalismandhumanrights.History cannot be explained deterministically and it cannot be

predicted because it is chaotic. Somany forces are at work and theirinteractions are so complex that extremely small variations in thestrengthoftheforcesandthewaytheyinteractproducehugedifferencesin outcomes. Not only that, but history is what is called a ‘level two’chaoticsystem.Chaoticsystemscomeintwoshapes.Levelonechaosischaos that does not react to predictions about it. The weather, forexample,isalevelonechaoticsystem.Thoughitisinfluencedbymyriadfactors,wecanbuildcomputermodelsthattakemoreandmoreofthemintoconsideration,andproducebetterandbetterweatherforecasts.Level two chaos is chaos that reacts to predictions about it, and

thereforecanneverbepredictedaccurately.Markets,forexample,arealevel two chaotic system.Whatwill happen ifwedevelop a computerprogram that forecasts with 100 per cent accuracy the price of oiltomorrow?Thepriceofoilwillimmediatelyreacttotheforecast,whichwouldconsequentlyfailtomaterialise.Ifthecurrentpriceofoilis$90abarrel, and the infallible computer program predicts that tomorrow itwillbe$100,traderswillrushtobuyoilsothattheycanprofitfromthepredictedpricerise.Asaresult,thepricewillshootupto$100abarreltodayratherthantomorrow.Thenwhatwillhappentomorrow?Nobodyknows.Politics, too, is a second-order chaotic system.Many people criticise

Sovietologists for failing to predict the 1989 revolutions and castigateMiddleEastexperts fornotanticipating theArabSpring revolutionsof2011. This is unfair. Revolutions are, by definition, unpredictable. Apredictablerevolutionnevererupts.Whynot?Imaginethatit’s2010andsomegeniuspoliticalscientistsin

cahootswithacomputerwizardhavedevelopedaninfalliblealgorithmthat, incorporated into an attractive interface, can be marketed as arevolution predictor. They offer their services to President Hosni

Mubarak of Egypt and, in return for a generous down payment, tellMubarak that according to their forecasts a revolutionwould certainlybreakoutinEgyptduringthecourseofthefollowingyear.HowwouldMubarak react? Most likely, he would immediately lower taxes,distributebillionsofdollarsinhandoutstothecitizenry–andalsobeefuphissecretpoliceforce,justincase.Thepre-emptivemeasureswork.Theyearcomesandgoesand,surprise,thereisnorevolution.Mubarakdemandshismoneyback.‘Youralgorithmisworthless!’heshoutsatthescientists.‘IntheendIcouldhavebuiltanotherpalaceinsteadofgivingall thatmoney away!’ ‘But the reason the revolution didn’t happen isbecause we predicted it,’ the scientists say in their defence. ‘Prophetswhopredictthingsthatdon’thappen?’Mubarakremarksashemotionshis guards to grab them. ‘I couldhavepickedup a dozenof those fornexttonothingintheCairomarketplace.’Sowhy study history?Unlike physics or economics, history is not ameans formaking accurate predictions.We study history not to knowthe future but to widen our horizons, to understand that our presentsituation is neither natural nor inevitable, and that we consequentlyhavemanymorepossibilitiesbeforeus thanwe imagine.Forexample,studyinghowEuropeanscametodominateAfricansenablesustorealisethatthereisnothingnaturalorinevitableabouttheracialhierarchy,andthattheworldmightwellbearrangeddifferently.

2.BlindClio

We cannot explain the choices that history makes, but we can saysomethingveryimportantaboutthem:history’schoicesarenotmadeforthe benefit of humans. There is absolutely no proof that humanwell-being inevitably improvesashistoryrollsalong.There isnoproof thatcultures that are beneficial to humans must inexorably succeed andspread,while less beneficial cultures disappear. There is no proof thatChristianity was a better choice than Manichaeism, or that the ArabEmpirewasmorebeneficialthanthatoftheSassanidPersians.There is no proof that history isworking for the benefit of humansbecausewe lack an objective scale onwhich tomeasure such benefit.

Differentculturesdefinethegooddifferently,andwehavenoobjectiveyardstick by which to judge between them. The victors, of course,alwaysbelievethattheirdefinitioniscorrect.Butwhyshouldwebelievethe victors? Christians believe that the victory of Christianity overManichaeismwasbeneficialtohumankind,butifwedonotaccepttheChristian world view then there is no reason to agree with them.MuslimsbelievethatthefalloftheSassanidEmpireintoMuslimhandswasbeneficial tohumankind.But thesebenefitsareevidentonly ifweaccepttheMuslimworldview.Itmaywellbethatwe’dallbebetteroffifChristianityandIslamhadbeenforgottenordefeated.Ever more scholars see cultures as a kind of mental infection or

parasite,withhumans as its unwittinghost.Organicparasites, suchasviruses, live inside the body of their hosts. They multiply and spreadfromonehosttotheother,feedingofftheirhosts,weakeningthem,andsometimes evenkilling them.As longas thehosts live longenough topassalongtheparasite,itcareslittleabouttheconditionofitshost.Injust this fashion, cultural ideas live inside theminds of humans. Theymultiply and spread fromonehost to another, occasionallyweakeningthe hosts and sometimes even killing them. A cultural idea – such asbeliefinChristianheavenabovethecloudsorCommunistparadisehereonearth–cancompelahumantodedicatehisorherlifetospreadingthat idea, even at the price of death. The human dies, but the ideaspreads. According to this approach, cultures are not conspiraciesconcocted by some people in order to take advantage of others (asMarxists tend to think). Rather, cultures are mental parasites thatemergeaccidentally,andthereaftertakeadvantageofallpeopleinfectedbythem.This approach is sometimes calledmemetics. It assumes that, just as

organicevolutionisbasedonthereplicationoforganicinformationunitscalled‘genes’,soculturalevolutionisbasedonthereplicationofculturalinformation units called ‘memes’.1 Successful cultures are those thatexcelinreproducingtheirmemes,irrespectiveofthecostsandbenefitstotheirhumanhosts.Most scholars in the humanities disdain memetics, seeing it as an

amateurish attempt to explain cultural processeswith crude biologicalanalogies. But many of these same scholars adhere to memetics’ twinsister – postmodernism. Postmodernist thinkers speak about discourses

rather thanmemes as the building blocks of culture. Yet they too seecultures as propagating themselveswith little regard for thebenefit ofhumankind.Forexample,postmodernistthinkersdescribenationalismasadeadlyplaguethatspreadthroughouttheworldinthenineteenthandtwentieth centuries, causing wars, oppression, hate and genocide. Themoment people in one country were infected with it, those inneighbouring countries were also likely to catch the virus. Thenationalist virus presented itself as being beneficial for humans, yet ithasbeenbeneficialmainlytoitself.Similarargumentsarecommoninthesocialsciences,undertheaegis

of game theory. Game theory explains how in multi-player systems,viewsandbehaviourpatternsthatharmallplayersneverthelessmanagetotakerootandspread.Armsracesarea famousexample.Manyarmsracesbankruptallthosewhotakepartinthem,withoutreallychangingthemilitarybalanceofpower.WhenPakistanbuysadvancedaeroplanes,India responds in kind.When India develops nuclear bombs, Pakistanfollowssuit.WhenPakistanenlargesitsnavy,Indiacounters.Attheendof the process, the balance of powermay remainmuch as itwas, butmeanwhilebillionsofdollarsthatcouldhavebeeninvestedineducationorhealthare spentonweapons.Yet thearms racedynamic ishard toresist. ‘Arms racing’ is a pattern of behaviour that spreads itself like avirus from one country to another, harming everyone, but benefitingitself,undertheevolutionarycriteriaofsurvivalandreproduction.(Keepinmindthatanarmsrace, likeagene,hasnoawareness– itdoesnotconsciouslyseektosurviveandreproduce.Itsspreadistheunintendedresultofapowerfuldynamic.)Nomatterwhatyoucallit–gametheory,postmodernismormemetics

– the dynamics of history are not directed towards enhancing humanwell-being. There is no basis for thinking that the most successfulcultures inhistoryarenecessarily thebest ones forHomo sapiens. Likeevolution,historydisregardsthehappinessofindividualorganisms.Andindividualhumans,fortheirpart,areusuallyfartooignorantandweaktoinfluencethecourseofhistorytotheirownadvantage.

History proceeds from one junction to the next, choosing for somemysterious reason to follow first this path, then another. Around AD

1500,historymade itsmostmomentouschoice, changingnotonly thefateofhumankind,butarguablythefateofall lifeonearth.Wecall ittheScientificRevolution.ItbeganinwesternEurope,alargepeninsulaonthewesterntipofAfro-Asia,whichuptillthenplayednoimportantrole in history. Why did the Scientific Revolution begin there of allplaces,andnot inChinaor India?Whydid itbeginat themidpointofthe second millennium AD rather than two centuries before or threecenturies later? We don’t know. Scholars have proposed dozens oftheories,butnoneofthemisparticularlyconvincing.Historyhasaverywidehorizonofpossibilities,andmanypossibilitiesare never realised. It is conceivable to imagine history going on forgenerationsupongenerationswhilebypassingtheScientificRevolution,justasitisconceivabletoimaginehistorywithoutChristianity,withoutaRomanEmpire,andwithoutgoldcoins.

PartFourTheScientificRevolution

32.Alamogordo,16July1945,05:29:53.Eightsecondsafterthefirstatomicbombwasdetonated.ThenuclearphysicistRobertOppenheimer,uponseeingtheexplosion,quoted

fromtheBhagavadgita:‘NowIambecomeDeath,thedestroyerofworlds.’

14

TheDiscoveryofIgnorance

WERE, SAY, A SPANISH PEASANT TOHAVE fallen asleep in AD 1000andwokenup500yearslater,tothedinofColumbus’sailorsboardingtheNiña,Pinta andSantaMaria, theworldwouldhave seemed tohimquite familiar. Despite many changes in technology, manners andpolitical boundaries, thismedieval Rip VanWinklewould have felt athome.ButhadoneofColumbus’sailorsfallenintoasimilarslumberandwoken up to the ringtone of a twenty-first-century iPhone, he wouldhave found himself in aworld strange beyond comprehension. ‘Is thisheaven?’hemightwellhaveaskedhimself.‘Orperhaps–hell?’The last500yearshavewitnessedaphenomenalandunprecedented

growthinhumanpower.Intheyear1500,therewereabout500millionHomosapiens in theentireworld.Today, thereare7billion.1Thetotalvalueofgoodsandservicesproducedbyhumankindintheyear1500isestimatedat$250billion, in today’sdollars.2Nowadays thevalueofayear of human production is close to $60 trillion.3 In 1500, humanityconsumed about 13 trillion calories of energy per day. Today, weconsume 1,500 trillion calories a day.4 (Take a second look at thosefigures–humanpopulationhasincreasedfourteen-fold,production240-fold,andenergyconsumption115-fold.)SupposeasinglemodernbattleshipgottransportedbacktoColumbus’

time. In amatter of seconds it couldmake driftwood out of theNiña,Pinta and Santa Maria and then sink the navies of every great worldpowerof the timewithout sustainingascratch.Fivemodern freighterscould have taken onboard all the cargo borne by the whole world’smerchantfleets.5Amoderncomputercouldeasilystoreeverywordand

number in all the codex books and scrolls in every single medievallibrary with room to spare. Any large bank today holds more moneythanalltheworld’spremodernkingdomsputtogether.6In1500,fewcitieshadmorethan100,000inhabitants.Mostbuildingswereconstructedofmud,woodandstraw;athree-storeybuildingwasaskyscraper. The streets were rutted dirt tracks, dusty in summer andmuddyinwinter,pliedbypedestrians,horses,goats,chickensandafewcarts.Themost commonurbannoiseswerehumanandanimal voices,along with the occasional hammer and saw. At sunset, the cityscapewent black, with only an occasional candle or torch flickering in thegloom. If an inhabitant of such a city could see modern Tokyo, NewYorkorMumbai,whatwouldshethink?Prior to the sixteenth century, no human had circumnavigated theearth. This changed in 1522, when Magellan’s expedition returned toSpainafterajourneyof72,000kilometres.Ittookthreeyearsandcostthe lives of almost all the crewmembers,Magellan included. In1873,Jules Verne could imagine that Phileas Fogg, a wealthy Britishadventurer,might just be able tomake it around theworld in eightydays. Today anyone with a middle-class income can safely and easilycircumnavigatetheglobeinjustforty-eighthours.In 1500, humans were confined to the earth’s surface. They couldbuild towers and climbmountains, but the skywas reserved forbirds,angelsanddeities.On20July1969humanslandedonthemoon.Thiswasnotmerelyahistoricalachievement,butanevolutionaryandevencosmic feat. During the previous 4 billion years of evolution, noorganismmanagedeven to leave theearth’s atmosphere, andcertainlynoneleftafootortentacleprintonthemoon.Formostofhistory,humansknewnothingabout99.99percentoftheorganisms on the planet – namely, the microorganisms. This was notbecausetheywereofnoconcerntous.Eachofusbearsbillionsofone-celledcreatureswithinus,andnotjustasfree-riders.Theyareourbestfriends,anddeadliestenemies.Someofthemdigestourfoodandcleanourguts,whileotherscauseillnessesandepidemics.Yetitwasonlyin1674 that a human eye first saw a microorganism, when Anton vanLeeuwenhoektookapeekthroughhishome-mademicroscopeandwasstartledtoseeanentireworldoftinycreaturesmillingaboutinadropof water. During the subsequent 300 years, humans have made the

acquaintanceofahugenumberofmicroscopicspecies.We’vemanagedtodefeatmostofthedeadliestcontagiousdiseasestheycause,andhaveharnessed microorganisms in the service of medicine and industry.Todayweengineerbacteriatoproducemedications,manufacturebiofuelandkillparasites.Butthesinglemostremarkableanddefiningmomentofthepast500years came at 05:29:45 on 16 July 1945. At that precise second,American scientists detonated the first atomic bomb at Alamogordo,NewMexico.Fromthatpointonward,humankindhadthecapabilitynotonlytochangethecourseofhistory,buttoendit.

ThehistoricalprocessthatledtoAlamogordoandtothemoonisknownas the Scientific Revolution. During this revolution humankind hasobtained enormous new powers by investing resources in scientificresearch. It is a revolution because, until about AD 1500, humans theworld over doubted their ability to obtain new medical, military andeconomic powers. While government and wealthy patrons allocatedfundstoeducationandscholarship,theaimwas,ingeneral,topreserveexisting capabilities rather than acquire new ones. The typicalpremodern ruler gavemoney to priests, philosophers and poets in thehopethat theywould legitimisehisruleandmaintainthesocialorder.He did not expect them to discover new medications, invent newweaponsorstimulateeconomicgrowth.During the last five centuries, humans increasingly came to believethat they could increase their capabilities by investing in scientificresearch. This wasn’t just blind faith – it was repeatedly provenempirically. The more proofs there were, the more resources wealthypeople and governments were willing to put into science. We wouldnever have been able to walk on themoon, engineer microorganismsand split the atomwithout such investments. TheUS government, forexample,hasinrecentdecadesallocatedbillionsofdollarstothestudyofnuclearphysics.Theknowledgeproducedbythisresearchhasmadepossibletheconstructionofnuclearpowerstations,whichprovidecheapelectricity for American industries, which pay taxes to the USgovernment,whichusessomeofthesetaxestofinancefurtherresearchinnuclearphysics.

TheScientificRevolution’sfeedbackloop.Scienceneedsmorethanjustresearchtomakeprogress.Itdependsonthemutualreinforcementofscience,politicsandeconomics.Politicalandeconomicinstitutionsprovidetheresourceswithoutwhichscientific

researchisalmostimpossible.Inreturn,scientificresearchprovidesnewpowersthatareused,amongotherthings,toobtainnewresources,someofwhicharereinvestedin

research.

Whydidmodernhumansdevelopagrowingbelief intheirabilitytoobtain new powers through research? What forged the bond betweenscience,politicsandeconomics?Thischapterlooksattheuniquenatureofmodernscienceinordertoprovidepartoftheanswer.Thenexttwochapters examine the formation of the alliance between science, theEuropeanempiresandtheeconomicsofcapitalism.

Ignoramus

Humans have sought to understand the universe at least since theCognitiveRevolution.Ourancestorsputagreatdealof timeandeffortinto trying to discover the rules that govern the natural world. Butmodernsciencediffersfromallprevioustraditionsofknowledgeinthreecriticalways:

a.Thewillingnesstoadmitignorance.ModernscienceisbasedontheLatin injunction ignoramus – ‘we do not know’. It assumes that we

don’tknoweverything.Evenmorecritically,itacceptsthatthethingsthat we think we know could be proven wrong as we gain moreknowledge. No concept, idea or theory is sacred and beyondchallenge.

b.Thecentralityofobservationandmathematics.Havingadmittedignorance,modernscienceaimstoobtainnewknowledge. Itdoessoby gathering observations and then using mathematical tools toconnecttheseobservationsintocomprehensivetheories.

c.Theacquisitionofnewpowers.Modernscienceisnotcontentwithcreating theories. It uses these theories in order to acquire newpowers,andinparticulartodevelopnewtechnologies.

TheScientificRevolutionhasnotbeenarevolutionofknowledge.Ithasbeen above all a revolution of ignorance. The great discovery thatlaunchedtheScientificRevolutionwasthediscoverythathumansdonotknowtheanswerstotheirmostimportantquestions.Premodern traditions of knowledge such as Islam, Christianity,BuddhismandConfucianismasserted that everything that is importanttoknowabouttheworldwasalreadyknown.Thegreatgods,ortheonealmightyGod,orthewisepeopleofthepastpossessedall-encompassingwisdom, which they revealed to us in scriptures and oral traditions.Ordinarymortalsgainedknowledgebydelving into theseancient textsand traditions and understanding them properly. It was inconceivablethat the Bible, theQur’an or theVedasweremissing out on a crucialsecretof theuniverse–a secret thatmightyetbediscoveredby flesh-and-bloodcreatures.Ancienttraditionsofknowledgeadmittedonlytwokindsofignorance.First,anindividualmightbeignorantofsomethingimportant.Toobtainthenecessaryknowledge,allheneededtodowasasksomebodywiser.There was no need to discover something that nobody yet knew. Forexample, if a peasant in some thirteenth-century Yorkshire villagewanted to know how the human race originated, he assumed thatChristiantraditionheldthedefinitiveanswer.Allhehadtodowasaskthelocalpriest.Second,anentiretraditionmightbeignorantofunimportantthings.By

definition,whateverthegreatgodsorthewisepeopleofthepastdidnotbothertotelluswasunimportant.Forexample,ifourYorkshirepeasantwanted toknowhowspidersweave theirwebs, itwaspointless toaskthepriest, because therewasno answer to this question in anyof theChristianScriptures.Thatdidnotmean,however,thatChristianitywasdeficient.Rather, itmeant thatunderstandinghowspidersweave theirwebswasunimportant.After all,Godknewperfectlywellhow spidersdo it. If this were a vital piece of information, necessary for humanprosperity and salvation, God would have included a comprehensiveexplanationintheBible.Christianitydidnotforbidpeopletostudyspiders.Butspiderscholars

–iftherewereanyinmedievalEurope–hadtoaccepttheirperipheralroleinsocietyandtheirrelevanceoftheirfindingstotheeternaltruthsofChristianity.Nomatterwhatascholarmightdiscoveraboutspidersorbutterflies or Galapagos finches, that knowledge was little more thantrivia,withnobearingonthefundamentaltruthsofsociety,politicsandeconomics.In fact, thingswere never quite that simple. In every age, even the

mostpiousandconservative, therewerepeoplewhoargued that therewere important things of which their entire tradition was ignorant. Yetsuch people were usually marginalised or persecuted – or else theyfounded a new tradition andbegan arguing that they knew everythingthere is to know. For example, the prophet Muhammad began hisreligiouscareerbycondemninghisfellowArabsforlivinginignoranceofthedivinetruth.YetMuhammadhimselfveryquicklybegantoarguethatheknewthefulltruth,andhisfollowersbegancallinghim‘TheSealof the Prophets’.Henceforth, therewas no need of revelations beyondthosegiventoMuhammad.Modern-dayscienceisauniquetraditionofknowledge,inasmuchasit

openlyadmitscollectiveignoranceregardingthemostimportantquestions.Darwinneverarguedthathewas‘TheSealoftheBiologists’,andthathehadsolvedtheriddleoflifeonceandforall.Aftercenturiesofextensivescientific research, biologists admit that they still don’thaveanygoodexplanationforhowbrainsproduceconsciousness.Physicistsadmitthattheydon’tknowwhatcausedtheBigBang,orhowtoreconcilequantummechanicswiththetheoryofgeneralrelativity.Inothercases, competingscientific theoriesarevociferouslydebated

on thebasisof constantlyemergingnewevidence.Aprimeexample isthe debates about how best to run the economy. Though individualeconomistsmayclaimthattheirmethodisthebest,orthodoxychangeswitheveryfinancialcrisisandstock-exchangebubble,anditisgenerallyacceptedthatthefinalwordoneconomicsisyettobesaid.Instillothercases,particulartheoriesaresupportedsoconsistentlyby

theavailableevidence,thatallalternativeshavelongsincefallenbythewayside.Such theoriesareacceptedas true–yeteveryoneagrees thatwerenewevidencetoemergethatcontradictsthetheory,itwouldhaveto be revised or discarded. Good examples of these are the platetectonicstheoryandthetheoryofevolution.The willingness to admit ignorance has made modern science more

dynamic, supple and inquisitive than any previous tradition ofknowledge.This hashugely expandedour capacity tounderstandhowthe world works and our ability to invent new technologies. But itpresents uswith a serious problem thatmost of our ancestors did nothave to cope with. Our current assumption that we do not knoweverything,andthateventheknowledgewepossessistentative,extendsto the shared myths that enable millions of strangers to cooperateeffectively.Iftheevidenceshowsthatmanyofthosemythsaredoubtful,howcanweholdsocietytogether?Howcanourcommunities,countriesandinternationalsystemfunction?Allmodernattemptstostabilise thesociopoliticalorderhavehadno

choicebuttorelyoneitheroftwounscientificmethods:

a. Take a scientific theory, and in opposition to common scientificpractices, declare that it is a final and absolute truth. This was themethodusedbyNazis(whoclaimedthattheirracialpolicieswerethecorollaries of biological facts) and Communists (who claimed thatMarxandLeninhaddivinedabsoluteeconomictruthsthatcouldneverberefuted).

b. Leave science out of it and live in accordance with a non-scientificabsolutetruth.Thishasbeenthestrategyofliberalhumanism,whichisbuilt on adogmatic belief in theuniqueworth and rights of humanbeings – a doctrinewhichhas embarrassingly little in commonwiththescientificstudyofHomosapiens.

Butthatshouldn’tsurpriseus.Evenscienceitselfhastorelyonreligiousandideologicalbeliefstojustifyandfinanceitsresearch.Modernculturehasneverthelessbeenwillingtoembraceignorancetoamuchgreaterdegreethanhasanypreviousculture.Oneofthethingsthathasmadeitpossibleformodernsocialorderstoholdtogetheristhespreadofanalmostreligiousbeliefintechnologyandinthemethodsofscientific research, which have replaced to some extent the belief inabsolutetruths.

TheScientificDogma

Modern science has no dogma. Yet it has a common core of researchmethods, which are all based on collecting empirical observations –thosewecanobservewithatleastoneofoursenses–andputtingthemtogetherwiththehelpofmathematicaltools.People throughout history collected empirical observations, but theimportance of these observations was usually limited. Why wastepreciousresourcesobtainingnewobservationswhenwealreadyhavealltheanswersweneed?Butasmodernpeoplecametoadmitthattheydidnotknow theanswers to somevery importantquestions, they found itnecessary to look for completely new knowledge. Consequently, thedominantmodernresearchmethodtakesforgrantedtheinsufficiencyofold knowledge. Instead of studying old traditions, emphasis is nowplacedonnewobservationsandexperiments.Whenpresentobservationcollideswithpast tradition,wegiveprecedence to theobservation.Ofcourse,physicistsanalysingthespectraofdistantgalaxies,archaeologistsanalysing the finds from a Bronze Age city, and political scientistsstudying the emergence of capitalism do not disregard tradition. Theystartbystudyingwhatthewisepeopleofthepasthavesaidandwritten.But from their first year in college, aspiring physicists, archaeologistsandpolitical scientists are taught that it is theirmission to gobeyondwhatEinstein,HeinrichSchliemannandMaxWebereverknew.

Mereobservations,however,arenotknowledge.Inordertounderstand

the universe, we need to connect observations into comprehensivetheories.Earlier traditionsusually formulatedtheir theories intermsofstories.Modernscienceusesmathematics.Thereareveryfewequations,graphsandcalculationsintheBible,theQur’an, the Vedas or the Confucian classics. When traditionalmythologiesandscriptureslaiddowngenerallaws,thesewerepresentedin narrative rather than mathematical form. Thus a fundamentalprinciple of Manichaean religion asserted that the world is abattlegroundbetweengoodandevil.Anevilforcecreatedmatter,whilea good force created spirit. Humans are caught between these twoforces,andshouldchoosegoodoverevil.YettheprophetManimadenoattempt to offer amathematical formula that could be used to predicthuman choices by quantifying the respective strength of these twoforces.Henevercalculatedthat‘theforceactingonamanisequaltotheaccelerationofhisspiritdividedbythemassofhisbody’.This is exactly what scientists seek to accomplish. In 1687, IsaacNewton published The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy,arguablythemostimportantbookinmodernhistory.Newtonpresenteda general theory ofmovement and change. The greatness of Newton’stheorywasitsabilitytoexplainandpredictthemovementsofallbodiesin the universe, from falling apples to shooting stars, using three verysimplemathematicallaws:

Henceforth, anyone who wished to understand and predict themovement of a cannonball or a planet simply had to makemeasurementsof theobject’smass,directionandacceleration, and theforcesactingonit.ByinsertingthesenumbersintoNewton’sequations,the future position of the object could be predicted. It worked like

magic. Only around the end of the nineteenth century did scientistscomeacrossafewobservationsthatdidnotfitwellwithNewton’slaws,andtheseledtothenextrevolutionsinphysics–thetheoryofrelativityandquantummechanics.

Newton showed that the book of nature is written in the language ofmathematics. Some chapters (for example) boil down to a clear-cutequation;butscholarswhoattemptedtoreducebiology,economicsandpsychology to neat Newtonian equations have discovered that thesefields have a level of complexity thatmakes such an aspiration futile.Thisdidnotmean,however,thattheygaveuponmathematics.Anewbranch ofmathematicswas developed over the last 200 years to dealwiththemorecomplexaspectsofreality:statistics.In1744, twoPresbyterianclergymeninScotland,AlexanderWebster

andRobertWallace,decidedtosetupa life-insurancefundthatwouldprovidepensionsfor thewidowsandorphansofdeadclergymen.Theyproposedthateachoftheirchurch’sministerswouldpayasmallportionofhisincomeintothefund,whichwouldinvestthemoney.Ifaministerdied, his widow would receive dividends on the fund’s profits. Thiswould allow her to live comfortably for the rest of her life. But todeterminehowmuchtheministershadtopayinsothatthefundwouldhaveenoughmoney to liveup to itsobligations,Webster andWallacehadtobeabletopredicthowmanyministerswoulddieeachyear,howmanywidowsandorphanstheywouldleavebehind,andbyhowmanyyearsthewidowswouldoutlivetheirhusbands.Takenoteofwhatthetwochurchmendidnotdo.Theydidnotprayto

Godtorevealtheanswer.NordidtheysearchforananswerintheHolyScripturesoramongtheworksofancienttheologians.Nordidtheyenterinto an abstract philosophical disputation. Being Scots, they werepractical types.So theycontactedaprofessorofmathematics from theUniversity of Edinburgh, ColinMaclaurin. The three of them collecteddataontheagesatwhichpeoplediedandusedthesetocalculatehowmanyministerswerelikelytopassawayinanygivenyear.Theirworkwasfoundedonseveralrecentbreakthroughsinthefields

ofstatisticsandprobability.Oneof thesewasJacobBernoulli’sLawofLargeNumbers.Bernoullihadcodifiedtheprinciplethatwhileitmight

bedifficulttopredictwithcertaintyasingleevent,suchasthedeathofa particular person, itwas possible to predictwith great accuracy theaverageoutcomeofmanysimilarevents.Thatis,whileMaclaurincouldnotusemaths topredictwhetherWebsterandWallacewoulddienextyear,hecould,givenenoughdata,tellWebsterandWallacehowmanyPresbyterianministersinScotlandwouldalmostcertainlydienextyear.Fortunately, they had ready-made data that they could use. Actuarytables published fifty years previously by Edmond Halley provedparticularly useful. Halley had analysed records of 1,238 births and1,174 deaths that he obtained from the city of Breslau, Germany.Halley’stablesmadeitpossibletoseethat,forexample,atwenty-year-oldpersonhasa1:100chanceofdyinginagivenyear,butafifty-year-oldpersonhasa1:39chance.Processing these numbers, Webster and Wallace concluded that, on

average,therewouldbe930livingScottishPresbyterianministersatanygivenmoment,andanaverageoftwenty-sevenministerswoulddieeachyear,eighteenofwhomwouldbesurvivedbywidows.Fiveofthosewhodidnotleavewidowswouldleaveorphanedchildren,andtwoofthosesurvived bywidowswould also be outlived by children frompreviousmarriages who had not yet reached the age of sixteen. They furthercomputedhowmuchtimewaslikelytogobybeforethewidows’deathorremarriage(inboththeseeventualities,paymentofthepensionwouldcease). These figures enabled Webster andWallace to determine howmuchmoneytheministerswhojoinedtheirfundhadtopayinordertoprovide for their loved ones. By contributing £2 12s. 2d. a year, aminister couldguarantee thathiswidowedwifewould receiveat least£10 a year – a hefty sum in those days. If he thought that was notenoughhecouldchoose topay inmore,up toa levelof£611s.3d. ayear–whichwouldguaranteehiswidowtheevenmorehandsomesumof£25ayear.According to their calculations, by the year 1765 the Fund for a

ProvisionfortheWidowsandChildrenoftheMinistersoftheChurchofScotlandwouldhavecapitaltotalling£58,348.Theircalculationsprovedamazinglyaccurate.Whenthatyeararrived,thefund’scapitalstoodat£58,347–just£1lessthantheprediction!Thiswasevenbetterthantheprophecies of Habakkuk, Jeremiah or St John. Today, Webster andWallace’s fund,knownsimplyasScottishWidows, isoneof the largest

pensionandinsurancecompaniesintheworld.Withassetsworth£100billion,itinsuresnotonlyScottishwidows,butanyonewillingtobuyitspolicies.7Probability calculations such as those used by the two Scottish

ministersbecamethefoundationnotmerelyofactuarialscience,whichiscentraltothepensionandinsurancebusiness,butalsoofthescienceof demography (founded by another clergyman, the Anglican RobertMalthus).DemographyinitsturnwasthecornerstoneonwhichCharlesDarwin (who almost became an Anglican pastor) built his theory ofevolution. While there are no equations that predict what kind oforganismwill evolve under a specific set of conditions, geneticists useprobability calculations to compute the likelihood that a particularmutationwillspreadinagivenpopulation.Similarprobabilisticmodelshave become central to economics, sociology, psychology, politicalscience and the other social and natural sciences. Even physicseventually supplemented Newton’s classical equations with theprobabilitycloudsofquantummechanics.

Weneedmerelylookatthehistoryofeducationtorealisehowfarthisprocesshas takenus.Throughoutmostofhistory,mathematicswasanesoteric field that even educated people rarely studied seriously. Inmedieval Europe, logic, grammar and rhetoric formed the educationalcore, while the teaching of mathematics seldom went beyond simplearithmetic and geometry. Nobody studied statistics. The undisputedmonarchofallscienceswastheology.Today few students study rhetoric; logic is restricted to philosophy

departments, and theology to seminaries. Butmore andmore studentsaremotivated–orforced–tostudymathematics.Thereisanirresistibledrift towards the exact sciences – defined as ‘exact’ by their use ofmathematical tools.Even fieldsof study thatwere traditionallypartofthe humanities, such as the study of human language (linguistics) andthe human psyche (psychology), rely increasingly onmathematics andseek topresent themselvesasexact sciences.Statisticscoursesarenowpartofthebasicrequirementsnotjustinphysicsandbiology,butalsoinpsychology,sociology,economicsandpoliticalscience.In the course catalogue of the psychology department at my own

university,thefirstrequiredcourseinthecurriculumis‘IntroductiontoStatistics and Methodology in Psychological Research’. Second-yearpsychology students must take ‘Statistical Methods in PsychologicalResearch’.Confucius,Buddha, Jesus andMuhammadwouldhavebeenbewilderedifyoutoldthemthatinordertounderstandthehumanmindandcureitsillnessesyoumustfirststudystatistics.

KnowledgeisPower

Most people have a hard time digesting modern science because itsmathematical language is difficult for our minds to grasp, and itsfindingsoftencontradict commonsense.Outof the7billionpeople intheworld,howmanyreallyunderstandquantummechanics,cellbiologyor macroeconomics? Science nevertheless enjoys immense prestigebecauseofthenewpowersitgivesus.Presidentsandgeneralsmaynotunderstandnuclearphysics,buttheyhaveagoodgraspofwhatnuclearbombscando.In1620FrancisBaconpublishedascientificmanifestotidedTheNew

Instrument. In it he argued that ‘knowledge is power’. The real test of‘knowledge’ is not whether it is true, but whether it empowers us.Scientists usually assume that no theory is 100 per cent correct.Consequently,truthisapoortestforknowledge.Therealtestisutility.Atheorythatenablesustodonewthingsconstitutesknowledge.Over thecenturies, sciencehasofferedusmanynewtools.Someare

mental tools, such as those used to predict death rates and economicgrowth. Even more important are technological tools. The connectionforged between science and technology is so strong that today peopletendtoconfusethetwo.Weoftenthinkthatitisimpossibletodevelopnewtechnologieswithoutscientificresearch,andthatthereislittlepointinresearchifitdoesnotresultinnewtechnologies.In fact, the relationship between science and technology is a very

recentphenomenon.Priorto1500,scienceandtechnologyweretotallyseparatefields.WhenBaconconnectedthetwointheearlyseventeenthcentury, it was a revolutionary idea. During the seventeenth andeighteenth centuries this relationship tightened, but the knotwas tied

onlyinthenineteenthcentury.Evenin1800,mostrulerswhowantedastrong army, and most business magnates who wanted a successfulbusiness, did not bother to finance research in physics, biology oreconomics.Idon’tmeantoclaimthat there isnoexceptionto this rule.Agood

historiancanfindprecedentforeverything.Butanevenbetterhistorianknows when these precedents are but curiosities that cloud the bigpicture.Generallyspeaking,mostpremodernrulersandbusinesspeopledid not finance research about the nature of the universe in order todevelop new technologies, and most thinkers did not try to translatetheir findings into technological gadgets. Rulers financed educationalinstitutionswhosemandatewastospreadtraditionalknowledgeforthepurposeofbuttressingtheexistingorder.Hereandtherepeoplediddevelopnewtechnologies,but thesewere

usually created by uneducated craftsmen using trial and error, not byscholarspursuingsystematicscientificresearch.Cartmanufacturersbuiltthesamecartsfromthesamematerialsyearinyearout.Theydidnotsetaside a percentage of their annual profits in order to research anddevelopnewcartmodels.Cartdesignoccasionallyimproved,butitwasusually thanks to the ingenuity of some local carpenterwho never setfootinauniversityanddidnotevenknowhowtoread.This was true of the public as well as the private sector. Whereas

modernstatescallintheirscientiststoprovidesolutionsinalmosteveryareaofnationalpolicy,fromenergytohealthtowastedisposal,ancientkingdoms seldom did so. The contrast between then and now ismostpronouncedinweaponry.WhenoutgoingPresidentDwightEisenhowerwarnedin1961ofthegrowingpowerofthemilitary-industrialcomplex,heleftoutapartoftheequation.Heshouldhavealertedhiscountrytothe military-industrial-scientific complex, because today’s wars arescientificproductions.Theworld’smilitaryforcesinitiate,fundandsteera large part of humanity’s scientific research and technologicaldevelopment.WhenWorldWarOneboggeddownintointerminabletrenchwarfare,

both sides called in the scientists to break the deadlock and save thenation.Themeninwhiteansweredthecall,andoutofthelaboratoriesrolled a constant stream of new wonder-weapons: combat aircraft,poison gas, tanks, submarines and ever more efficient machine guns,

artillerypieces,riflesandbombs.

33.GermanV-2rocketreadytolaunch.Itdidn’tdefeattheAllies,butitkepttheGermanshopingforatechnologicalmiracleuntiltheverylastdaysofthewar.

Scienceplayedaneven larger role inWorldWarTwo.By late1944Germanywas losing thewar anddefeatwas imminent.Ayear earlier,theGermans’allies,theItalians,hadtoppledMussoliniandsurrenderedto the Allies. But Germany kept fighting on, even though the British,AmericanandSovietarmieswereclosingin.OnereasonGermansoldiersand civilians thought not all was lost was that they believed Germanscientists were about to turn the tide with so-called miracle weaponssuchastheV-2rocketandjet-poweredaircraft.While theGermanswereworking on rockets and jets, theAmericanManhattanProjectsuccessfullydevelopedatomicbombs.Bythetimethebomb was ready, in early August 1945, Germany had alreadysurrendered,butJapanwasfightingon.Americanforceswerepoisedtoinvadeitshomeislands.TheJapanesevowedtoresisttheinvasionandfighttothedeath,andtherewaseveryreasontobelievethatitwasnoidle threat. American generals told PresidentHarry S. Truman that aninvasionofJapanwouldcostthelivesofamillionAmericansoldiersand

wouldextend thewarwell into1946.Trumandecided touse thenewbomb. Two weeks and two atom bombs later, Japan surrenderedunconditionallyandthewarwasover.Butscienceisnotjustaboutoffensiveweapons.Itplaysamajorroleinourdefencesaswell.TodaymanyAmericansbelievethatthesolutionto terrorism is technological rather than political. Just give millionsmoretothenanotechnologyindustry,theybelieve,andtheUnitedStatescould send bionic spy-flies into every Afghan cave, Yemenite redoubtand North African encampment. Once that’s done, Osama Bin Laden’sheirs will not be able to make a cup of coffee without a CIA spy-flypassingthisvitalinformationbacktoheadquartersinLangley.Allocatemillions more to brain research, and every airport could be equippedwithultra-sophisticatedFMRIscannersthatcouldimmediatelyrecogniseangryandhatefulthoughtsinpeople’sbrains.Willitreallywork?Whoknows. Is itwise todevelopbionic fliesand thought-readingscanners?Not necessarily. Be that as it may, as you read these lines, the USDepartment of Defense is transferring millions of dollars tonanotechnologyandbrainlaboratoriesforworkontheseandothersuchideas.Thisobsessionwithmilitary technology– fromtanks toatombombsto spy-flies – is a surprisingly recent phenomenon. Up until thenineteenth century, the vast majority of military revolutions were theproductoforganisationalratherthantechnologicalchanges.Whenaliencivilisationsmetforthefirsttime,technologicalgapssometimesplayedan important role. But even in such cases, few thought of deliberatelycreating or enlarging such gaps. Most empires did not rise thanks totechnologicalwizardry, and their rulers did not givemuch thought totechnological improvement. The Arabs did not defeat the SassanidEmpire thanks to superior bows or swords, the Seljuks had notechnological advantage over theByzantines, and theMongols did notconquerChinawiththehelpofsomeingeniousnewweapon.Infact,inall these cases the vanquished enjoyed superior military and civiliantechnology.TheRomanarmyisaparticularlygoodexample.Itwasthebestarmyof its day, yet technologically speaking, Rome had no edge overCarthage, Macedonia or the Seleucid Empire. Its advantage rested onefficientorganisation,irondisciplineandhugemanpowerreserves.The

Romanarmyneversetuparesearchanddevelopmentdepartment,anditsweaponsremainedmoreorlessthesameforcenturiesonend.Ifthelegions of Scipio Aemilianus – the general who levelled Carthage anddefeatedtheNumantiansinthesecondcenturyBC–hadsuddenlypoppedup 500 years later in the age of Constantine the Great, Scipio wouldhavehadafairchanceofbeatingConstantine.Nowimaginewhatwouldhappentoageneralfromafewcenturiesback–sayNapoleon–ifheledhistroopsagainstamodernarmouredbrigade.Napoleonwasabrillianttactician,andhismenwerecrackprofessionals,buttheirskillswouldbeuselessinthefaceofmodernweaponry.AsinRome,soalsoinancientChina:mostgeneralsandphilosophersdidnotthinkittheirdutytodevelopnewweapons.Themostimportantmilitary invention in the history of China was gunpowder. Yet to thebestofourknowledge,gunpowderwasinventedaccidentally,byDaoistalchemistssearchingfortheelixiroflife.Gunpowder’ssubsequentcareerisevenmoretelling.OnemighthavethoughtthattheDaoistalchemistswouldhavemadeChinamasterof theworld. In fact, theChineseusedthe new compound mainly for firecrackers. Even as the Song EmpirecollapsedinthefaceofaMongolinvasion,noemperorsetupamedievalManhattanProjecttosavetheempirebyinventingadoomsdayweapon.Only in the fifteenth century – about 600 years after the invention ofgunpowder – did cannons become a decisive factor on Afro-Asianbattlefields. Why did it take so long for the deadly potential of thissubstancetobeputtomilitaryuse?Becauseitappearedatatimewhenneither kings, scholars, nor merchants thought that new militarytechnologycouldsavethemormakethemrich.Thesituationbegantochangeinthefifteenthandsixteenthcenturies,butanother200yearswentbybeforemostrulersevincedanyinterestinfinancingtheresearchanddevelopmentofnewweapons.Logisticsandstrategy continued to have far greater impact on the outcome ofwarsthan technology. The Napoleonic military machine that crushed thearmies of the European powers at Austerlitz (1805) was armed withmoreor less the sameweaponry that thearmyofLouisXVIhadused.Napoleon himself, despite being an artilleryman, had little interest innew weapons, even though scientists and inventors tried to persuadehim to fund the development of flying machines, submarines androckets.

Science, industry andmilitary technology intertwined only with theadventofthecapitalistsystemandtheIndustrialRevolution.Oncethisrelationshipwasestablished,however,itquicklytransformedtheworld.

TheIdealofProgress

Until the ScientificRevolutionmost human cultures didnot believe inprogress. They thought the golden age was in the past, and that theworldwasstagnant,ifnotdeteriorating.Strictadherencetothewisdomof the agesmight perhaps bring back the good old times, and humaningenuity might conceivably improve this or that facet of daily life.However, it was considered impossible for human know-how toovercometheworld’sfundamentalproblems.IfevenMuhammad,Jesus,BuddhaandConfucius–whokneweverythingthereistoknow–wereunabletoabolishfamine,disease,povertyandwarfromtheworld,howcouldweexpecttodoso?Manyfaithsbelievedthatsomedayamessiahwouldappearandendallwars, faminesandevendeathitself.Butthenotionthathumankindcoulddosobydiscoveringnewknowledgeandinventingnewtoolswasworse than ludicrous– itwashubris.Thestoryof theTowerofBabel,the story of Icarus, the story of the Golem and countless othermythstaughtpeople thatanyattempt togobeyondhuman limitationswouldinevitablyleadtodisappointmentanddisaster.Whenmoderncultureadmittedthatthereweremanyimportantthingsthat it still did not know, andwhen that admission of ignorance wasmarriedtotheideathatscientificdiscoveriescouldgiveusnewpowers,peoplebegansuspectingthatrealprogressmightbepossibleafterall.Asscience began to solve one unsolvable problem after another, manybecame convinced that humankind could overcome any and everyproblem by acquiring and applying new knowledge. Poverty, sickness,wars, famines, old age anddeath itselfwere not the inevitable fate ofhumankind.Theyweresimplythefruitsofourignorance.

34.BenjaminFranklindisarmingthegods.

Afamousexampleislightning.Manyculturesbelievedthatlightningwasthehammerofanangrygod,usedtopunishsinners.Inthemiddleoftheeighteenthcentury,inoneofthemostcelebratedexperimentsinscientifichistory,BenjaminFranklinflewakiteduringalightningstormto test the hypothesis that lightning is simply an electric current.Franklinsempiricalobservations,coupledwithhisknowledgeaboutthequalities of electrical energy, enabled him to invent the lightning rodanddisarmthegods.Poverty isanothercase inpoint.Manycultureshaveviewedpoverty

as an inescapable part of this imperfect world. According to the NewTestament,shortlybeforethecrucifixionawomananointedChristwithpreciousoilworth300denarii. Jesus’ disciples scolded thewoman forwastingsuchahugesumofmoneyinsteadofgivingittothepoor,butJesus defended her, saying that ‘The poor you will always have withyou,andyoucanhelpthemanytimeyouwant.Butyouwillnotalwayshaveme’ (Mark14:7).Today, fewerandfewerpeople, including fewerand fewer Christians, agree with Jesus on this matter. Poverty isincreasingly seen as a technical problemamenable to intervention. It’scommonwisdomthatpoliciesbasedonthelatestfindingsinagronomy,

economics,medicineandsociologycaneliminatepoverty.Andindeed,manypartsoftheworldhavealreadybeenfreedfromthe

worst formsofdeprivation.Throughouthistory, societieshavesufferedfrom twokindsofpoverty: socialpoverty,whichwithholds fromsomepeople the opportunities available to others; and biological poverty,whichputstheverylivesof individualsatriskduetolackoffoodandshelter. Perhaps social poverty can never be eradicated, but in manycountriesaroundtheworldbiologicalpovertyisathingofthepast.Until recently, most people hovered very close to the biological

povertyline,belowwhichapersonlacksenoughcaloriestosustainlifefor long. Even small miscalculations or misfortunes could easily pushpeoplebelowthatline,intostarvation.Naturaldisastersandman-madecalamitiesoftenplungedentirepopulationsover theabyss,causing thedeath ofmillions. Todaymost of theworld’s people have a safety netstretched below them. Individuals are protected from personalmisfortuneby insurance, state-sponsored social securityandaplethoraoflocalandinternationalNGOs.Whencalamitystrikesanentireregion,worldwide relief efforts are usually successful in preventing theworst.People still suffer from numerous degradations, humiliations andpoverty-related illnesses, but in most countries nobody is starving todeath.Infact,inmanysocietiesmorepeopleareindangerofdyingfromobesitythanfromstarvation.

TheGilgameshProject

Of all mankind’s ostensibly insoluble problems, one has remained themost vexing, interesting and important: the problem of death itself.Before the late modern era, most religions and ideologies took it forgrantedthatdeathwasourinevitablefate.Moreover,mostfaithsturneddeath into the main source of meaning in life. Try to imagine Islam,Christianityor theancientEgyptian religion inaworldwithoutdeath.Thesecreedstaughtpeoplethattheymustcometotermswithdeathandpintheirhopesontheafterlife,ratherthanseektoovercomedeathandliveforeverhereonearth.Thebestmindswerebusygivingmeaningtodeath,nottryingtoescapeit.

Thatisthethemeofthemostancientmythtocomedowntous–theGilgamesh myth of ancient Sumer. Its hero is the strongest and mostcapableman in theworld, KingGilgamesh of Uruk,who could defeatanyone in battle. One day, Gilgamesh’s best friend, Enkidu, died.Gilgameshsatbythebodyandobserveditformanydays,untilhesawaworm dropping out of his friend’s nostril. At that moment Gilgameshwasgrippedbyaterriblehorror,andheresolvedthathehimselfwouldnever die. Hewould somehow find away to defeat death. Gilgameshthen undertook a journey to the end of the universe, killing lions,battlingscorpion-menandfindinghiswayintotheunderworld.ThereheshatteredthestonegiantsofUrshanabiandtheferrymanoftheriverofthe dead, and found Utnapishtim, the last survivor of the primordialflood. Yet Gilgamesh failed in his quest. He returned home empty-handed,asmortalasever,butwithonenewpieceofwisdom.Whenthegods created man, Gilgamesh had learned, they set death as man’sinevitabledestiny,andmanmustlearntolivewithit.Disciples of progressdonot share thisdefeatist attitude. Formenof

science, death is not an inevitable destiny, but merely a technicalproblem.Peopledienotbecausethegodsdecreedit,butduetovarioustechnical failures – a heart attack, cancer, an infection. And everytechnicalproblemhasatechnicalsolution.Iftheheartflutters,itcanbestimulated by a pacemaker or replaced by a new heart. If cancerrampages,itcanbekilledwithdrugsorradiation.Ifbacteriaproliferate,theycanbesubduedwithantibiotics.True,atpresentwecannotsolvealltechnicalproblems.Butweareworkingonthem.Ourbestmindsarenotwastingtheirtimetryingtogivemeaningtodeath.Instead,theyarebusy investigating the physiological, hormonal and genetic systemsresponsiblefordiseaseandoldage.Theyaredevelopingnewmedicines,revolutionarytreatmentsandartificialorgansthatwilllengthenourlivesandmightonedayvanquishtheGrimReaperhimself.Until recently, youwould not have heard scientists, or anyone else,

speaksobluntly. ‘Defeatdeath?!Whatnonsense!Weareonlytryingtocurecancer,tuberculosisandAlzheimer’sdisease,’theyinsisted.Peopleavoided the issue of death because the goal seemed too elusive.Whycreateunreasonableexpectations?We’renowatapoint,however,wherewecanbefrankaboutit.TheleadingprojectoftheScientificRevolutionis togivehumankindeternal life.Even ifkillingdeath seemsadistant

goal, we have already achieved things that were inconceivable a fewcenturies ago. In 1199, King Richard the Lionheart was struck by anarrow inhis left shoulder.Todaywe’d sayhe incurredaminor injury.But in 1199, in the absence of antibiotics and effective sterilisationmethods, thisminor fleshwound turned infected and gangrene set in.Theonlywaytostopthespreadofgangreneintwelfth-centuryEuropewastocutofftheinfectedlimb,impossiblewhentheinfectionwasinashoulder.ThegangrenespreadthroughtheLionheart’sbodyandnoonecouldhelptheking.Hediedingreatagonytwoweekslater.As recently as the nineteenth century, the best doctors still did not

knowhow toprevent infection and stop theputrefactionof tissues. Infield hospitals doctors routinely cut off the hands and legs of soldierswho received even minor limb injuries, fearing gangrene. Theseamputations, as well as all other medical procedures (such as toothextraction),weredonewithoutanyanaesthetics.Thefirstanaesthetics–ether, chloroform and morphine – entered regular usage in Westernmedicineonlyinthemiddleofthenineteenthcentury.Beforetheadventofchloroform,foursoldiershadtoholddownawoundedcomradewhilethedoctorsawedofftheinjuredlimb.OnthemorningafterthebattleofWaterloo (1815), heaps of sawn-off hands and legs could be seenadjacent to the field hospitals. In those days, carpenters and butcherswhoenlistedtothearmywereoftensenttoserveinthemedicalcorps,becausesurgeryrequiredlittlemorethanknowingyourwaywithknivesandsaws.In the two centuries since Waterloo, things have changed beyond

recognition.Pills,injectionsandsophisticatedoperationssaveusfromaspate of illnesses and injuries that once dealt an inescapable deathsentence. They also protect us against countless daily aches andailments,whichpremodernpeople simplyacceptedaspartof life.Theaveragelifeexpectancyjumpedfromaroundtwenty-fivetofortyyears,toaroundsixty-sevenintheentireworld,andtoaroundeightyyearsinthedevelopedworld.8Deathsuffereditsworstsetbacksinthearenaofchildmortality.Until

thetwentiethcentury,betweenaquarterandathirdofthechildrenofagricultural societies never reached adulthood. Most succumbed tochildhood diseases such as diphtheria, measles and smallpox. Inseventeenth-century England, 150 out of every 1,000 newborns died

duringtheirfirstyear,andathirdofallchildrenweredeadbeforetheyreachedfifteen.9Today,onlyfiveoutof1,000Englishbabiesdieduringtheirfirstyear,andonlysevenoutof1,000diebeforeagefifteen.10Wecanbetter grasp the full impact of these figuresby setting aside

statisticsandtellingsomestories.AgoodexampleisthefamilyofKingEdward IofEngland(1237–1307)andhiswife,QueenEleanor (1241–90).TheirchildrenenjoyedthebestconditionsandthemostnurturingsurroundingsthatcouldbeprovidedinmedievalEurope.Theylivedinpalaces, ate asmuch food as they liked, had plenty ofwarm clothing,well-stockedfireplaces,thecleanestwateravailable,anarmyofservantsand thebestdoctors.The sourcesmention sixteenchildren thatQueenEleanorborebetween1255and1284:

1.Ananonymousdaughter,bornin1255,diedatbirth.

2.Adaughter,Catherine,diedeitheratageoneoragethree.

3.Adaughter,Joan,diedatsixmonths.

4.Ason,John,diedatagefive.

5.Ason,Henry,diedatagesix.

6.Adaughter,Eleanor,diedatagetwenty-nine.

7.Ananonymousdaughterdiedatfivemonths.

8.Adaughter,Joan,diedatagethirty-five.

9.Ason,Alphonso,diedatageten.

10.Adaughter,Margaret,diedatagefifty-eight.

11.Adaughter,Berengeria,diedatagetwo.

12.Ananonymousdaughterdiedshortlyafterbirth.

13.Adaughter,Mary,diedatagefifty-three.

14.Ananonymoussondiedshortlyafterbirth.

15.Adaughter,Elizabeth,diedatagethirty-four.

16.Ason,Edward.

Theyoungest,Edward,wasthefirstoftheboystosurvivethedangerousyears of childhood, and at his fathers death he ascended the EnglishthroneasKingEdwardII.Inotherwords,ittookEleanorsixteentriestocarryoutthemostfundamentalmissionofanEnglishqueen–toprovideher husband with a male heir. Edward II’s mother must have been awomanofexceptionalpatienceandfortitude.NotsothewomanEdwardchose forhiswife, IsabellaofFrance.Shehadhimmurderedwhenhewasforty-three.11To thebestofourknowledge,EleanorandEdward Iwereahealthy

couple and passed no fatal hereditary illnesses on to their children.Nevertheless, ten out of the sixteen – 62 per cent – died duringchildhood.Onlysixmanagedtolivebeyondtheageofeleven,andonlythree– just18percent– livedbeyondtheageof forty. Inadditiontothesebirths,Eleanormostlikelyhadanumberofpregnanciesthatendedinmiscarriage.Onaverage,EdwardandEleanorlostachildeverythreeyears,tenchildrenoneafteranother.It’snearlyimpossibleforaparenttodaytoimaginesuchloss.

HowlongwilltheGilgameshProject–thequestforimmortality–taketocomplete?Ahundredyears?Fivehundredyears?Athousandyears?Whenwerecallhowlittleweknewaboutthehumanbodyin1900,andhowmuchknowledgewehavegainedinasinglecentury,thereiscausefor optimism. Genetic engineers have recentlymanaged to double theaveragelifeexpectancyofCaenorhabditiselegansworms.12Couldtheydothe same forHomo sapiens? Nanotechnology experts are developing abionicimmunesystemcomposedofmillionsofnano-robots,whowouldinhabit our bodies, open blocked blood vessels, fight viruses andbacteria,eliminatecancerouscellsandevenreverseageingprocesses.13Afewseriousscholarssuggestthatby2050,somehumanswillbecomea-mortal (not immortal, because they could still die of some accident,but a-mortal, meaning that in the absence of fatal trauma their livescouldbeextendedindefinitely).Whether or not Project Gilgamesh succeeds, from a historical

perspective it is fascinating to see thatmost late-modern religions andideologieshavealreadytakendeathandtheafterlifeoutoftheequation.Until the eighteenth century, religions considered death and its

aftermath central to the meaning of life. Beginning in the eighteenthcentury, religions and ideologies such as liberalism, socialism andfeminism lost all interest in the afterlife.What, exactly, happens to aCommunist after he or she dies? What happens to a capitalist? Whathappens to a feminist? It is pointless to look for the answer in thewritingsofMarx,AdamSmithorSimonedeBeauvoir.Theonlymodernideologythatstillawardsdeathacentralroleisnationalism.Initsmorepoeticanddesperatemoments,nationalismpromisesthatwhoeverdiesforthenationwillforeverliveinitscollectivememory.Yetthispromiseissofuzzythatevenmostnationalistsdonotreallyknowwhattomakeofit.

TheSugarDaddyofScience

Weare living ina technicalage.Manyareconvinced that scienceandtechnologyholdtheanswerstoallourproblems.Weshouldjustletthescientists and technicians go onwith their work, and theywill createheavenhereonearth.Butscienceisnotanenterprisethattakesplaceonsomesuperiormoralorspiritualplaneabovetherestofhumanactivity.Likeallotherpartsofourculture,itisshapedbyeconomic,politicalandreligiousinterests.Science is a very expensive affair. A biologist seeking to understand

the human immune system requires laboratories, test tubes, chemicalsand electron microscopes, not to mention lab assistants, electricians,plumbers and cleaners. An economist seeking tomodel creditmarketsmust buy computers, set up giant databanks and develop complicateddata-processing programs. An archaeologist who wishes to understandthe behaviour of archaic hunter-gatherersmust travel to distant lands,excavateancientruinsanddatefossilisedbonesandartefacts.Allofthiscostsmoney.During the past 500 years modern science has achieved wonders

thankslargelytothewillingnessofgovernments,businesses,foundationsandprivatedonorstochannelbillionsofdollarsintoscientificresearch.These billions have done much more to chart the universe, map theplanet and catalogue the animal kingdom than did Galileo Galilei,

ChristopherColumbusandCharlesDarwin. If theseparticulargeniuseshad never been born, their insights would probably have occurred toothers. But if the proper funding were unavailable, no intellectualbrilliance could have compensated for that. If Darwin had never beenborn,forexample,we’dtodayattributethetheoryofevolutiontoAlfredRussel Wallace, who came up with the idea of evolution via naturalselectionindependentlyofDarwinandjustafewyearslater.ButiftheEuropean powers had not financed geographical, zoological andbotanicalresearcharoundtheworld,neitherDarwinnorWallacewouldhave had the necessary empirical data to develop the theory ofevolution.Itislikelythattheywouldnotevenhavetried.Why did the billions start flowing from government and business

coffers into labs and universities? In academic circles,many are naïveenough to believe in pure science. They believe that government andbusiness altruistically give them money to pursue whatever researchprojects strike their fancy. But this hardly describes the realities ofsciencefunding.Mostscientificstudiesarefundedbecausesomebodybelievestheycan

help attain somepolitical, economic or religious goal. For example, inthesixteenthcentury,kingsandbankerschannelledenormousresourcesto finance geographical expeditions around theworld but not a pennyfor studying child psychology. This is because kings and bankerssurmised that the discovery of new geographical knowledge wouldenable them to conquer new lands and set up trade empires,whereastheycouldn’tseeanyprofitinunderstandingchildpsychology.In the 1940s the governments of America and the Soviet Union

channelled enormous resources to the study of nuclear physics ratherthan underwater archaeology. They surmised that studying nuclearphysics would enable them to develop nuclear weapons, whereasunderwater archaeology was unlikely to help win wars. Scientiststhemselvesarenotalwaysawareofthepolitical,economicandreligiousintereststhatcontroltheflowofmoney;manyscientistsdo,infact,actout of pure intellectual curiosity. However, only rarely do scientistsdictatethescientificagenda.Even if we wanted to finance pure science unaffected by political,

economic or religious interests, it would probably be impossible. Ourresources are limited, after all. Ask a congressman to allocate an

additionalmilliondollars to theNational ScienceFoundation for basicresearch,andhe’lljustifiablyaskwhetherthatmoneywouldn’tbebetterusedtofundteachertrainingortogiveaneededtaxbreaktoatroubledfactory in his district. To channel limited resources we must answerquestions such as ‘What ismore important?’ and ‘What is good?’ Andthesearenotscientificquestions.Sciencecanexplainwhatexistsintheworld,howthingswork,andwhatmightbeinthefuture.Bydefinition,it has no pretensions to knowing what should be in the future. Onlyreligionsandideologiesseektoanswersuchquestions.Consider the following quandary: two biologists from the same

department, possessing the same professional skills, have both appliedfor a million-dollar grant to finance their current research projects.Professor Slughornwants to study a disease that infects the udders ofcows,causinga10percentdecreaseintheirmilkproduction.ProfessorSprout wants to study whether cows suffer mentally when they areseparated from their calves. Assuming that the amount of money islimited,andthatitisimpossibletofinancebothresearchprojects,whichoneshouldbefunded?Thereisnoscientificanswertothisquestion.Thereareonlypolitical,

economic and religious answers. In today’s world, it is obvious thatSlughornhasabetterchanceofgetting themoney.Notbecauseudderdiseases are scientifically more interesting than bovine mentality, butbecause the dairy industry,which stands to benefit from the research,hasmorepoliticalandeconomiccloutthantheanimal-rightslobby.Perhaps in a strict Hindu society, where cows are sacred, or in a

societycommittedtoanimalrights,ProfessorSproutwouldhaveabettershot. But as long as she lives in a society that values the commercialpotentialofmilkandthehealthofitshumancitizensoverthefeelingsofcows,she’dbestwriteupherresearchproposalsoastoappealtothoseassumptions. For example, shemightwrite that ‘Depression leads to adecreaseinmilkproduction.Ifweunderstandthementalworldofdairycows,we coulddeveloppsychiatricmedication thatwill improve theirmood,thusraisingmilkproductionbyupto10percent.Iestimatethatthere is a global annualmarket of $250million for bovinepsychiatricmedications.’Science is unable to set its own priorities. It is also incapable of

determiningwhattodowithitsdiscoveries.Forexample,fromapurely

scientificviewpointitisunclearwhatweshoulddowithourincreasingunderstandingofgenetics.Shouldweusethisknowledgetocurecancer,tocreatearaceofgeneticallyengineeredsupermen,ortoengineerdairycowswithsuper-sizedudders?Itisobviousthataliberalgovernment,aCommunist government, a Nazi government and a capitalist businesscorporationwouldusetheverysamescientificdiscoveryforcompletelydifferentpurposes,and there isno scientific reason topreferoneusageoverothers.In short, scientific research can flourish only in alliance with somereligionor ideology.The ideology justifies thecostsof theresearch. Inexchange, the ideology influences the scientificagendaanddetermineswhat to do with the discoveries. Hence in order to comprehend howhumankind has reached Alamogordo and themoon – rather than anynumber of alternative destinations – it is not enough to survey theachievementsofphysicists,biologistsandsociologists.Wehavetotakeintoaccount the ideological,political andeconomic forces that shapedphysics,biologyandsociology,pushingthemincertaindirectionswhileneglectingothers.Two forces in particular deserve our attention: imperialism andcapitalism.The feedback loopbetween science, empireandcapitalhasarguably been history’s chief engine for the past 500 years. Thefollowingchaptersanalyseitsworkings.Firstwe’lllookathowthetwinturbines of science and empirewere latched to one another, and thenlearnhowbothwerehitcheduptothemoneypumpofcapitalism.

15

TheMarriageofScienceandEmpire

HOWFARISTHESUNFROMTHEEARTH?It’saquestionthatintriguedmany early modern astronomers, particularly after Copernicus arguedthat the sun, rather than the earth, is located at the centre of theuniverse. A number of astronomers and mathematicians tried tocalculate the distance, but their methods provided widely varyingresults. A reliable means of making the measurement was finallyproposedinthemiddleof theeighteenthcentury.Everyfewyears, theplanet Venus passes directly between the sun and the earth. Theduration of the transit differs when seen from distant points on theearths surfacebecauseof the tinydifference in theangle atwhich theobserver sees it. If several observationsof the same transitweremadefromdifferentcontinents, simple trigonometrywasall itwould take tocalculateourexactdistancefromthesun.Astronomers predicted that the next Venus transits would occur in

1761 and 1769. So expeditions were sent from Europe to the fourcorners of the world in order to observe the transits from as manydistant points as possible. In 1761 scientists observed the transit fromSiberia, North America, Madagascar and South Africa. As the 1769transit approached, the European scientific community mounted asupremeeffort,andscientistsweredispatchedasfarasnorthernCanadaand California (which was then a wilderness). The Royal Society ofLondonfortheImprovementofNaturalKnowledgeconcludedthatthiswasnotenough.Toobtainthemostaccurateresultsitwasimperativetosendanastronomerallthewaytothesouth-westernPacificOcean.The Royal Society resolved to send an eminent astronomer, Charles

Green,toTahiti,andsparedneithereffortnormoney.But,sinceitwasfundingsuchanexpensiveexpedition,ithardlymadesensetouseittomake just a single astronomical observation. Green was thereforeaccompaniedbyateamofeightotherscientistsfromseveraldisciplines,headedbybotanists JosephBanks andDaniel Solander. The teamalsoincludedartistsassigned toproducedrawingsof thenew lands,plants,animals and peoples that the scientists would no doubt encounter.EquippedwiththemostadvancedscientificinstrumentsthatBanksandthe Royal Society could buy, the expedition was placed under thecommandofCaptainJamesCook,anexperiencedseamanaswellasanaccomplishedgeographerandethnographer.TheexpeditionleftEnglandin1768,observedtheVenustransitfromTahitiin1769,reconnoitredseveralPacificislands,visitedAustraliaandNew Zealand, and returned to England in 1771. It brought backenormous quantities of astronomical, geographical, meteorological,botanical,zoologicalandanthropologicaldata. Its findingsmademajorcontributions to a number of disciplines, sparked the imagination ofEuropeans with astonishing tales of the South Pacific, and inspiredfuturegenerationsofnaturalistsandastronomers.One of the fields that benefited from the Cook expedition wasmedicine. At the time, ships that set sail to distant shores knew thatmore than half their crew members would die on the journey. Thenemesiswasnotangrynatives,enemywarshipsorhomesickness.Itwasa mysterious ailment called scurvy. Men who came down with thedisease grew lethargic and depressed, and their gums and other softtissues bled.As the disease progressed, their teeth fell out, open soresappeared and they grew feverish, jaundiced, and lost control of theirlimbs. Between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries, scurvy isestimated tohave claimed the lives of about 2million sailors.Nooneknew what caused it, and no matter what remedy was tried, sailorscontinued to die in droves. The turning point came in 1747, when aBritish physician, James Lind, conducted a controlled experiment onsailorswho suffered from the disease. He separated them into severalgroupsandgaveeachgroupadifferenttreatment.Oneofthetestgroupswasinstructedtoeatcitrusfruits,acommonfolkremedyforscurvy.Thepatients inthisgrouppromptlyrecovered.Linddidnotknowwhatthecitrusfruitshadthatthesailors’bodieslacked,butwenowknowthatit

isvitaminC.Atypicalshipboarddietatthattimewasnotablylackinginfoods that are rich in this essential nutrient. On long-range voyagessailors usually subsisted on biscuits and beef jerky, and ate almost nofruitsorvegetables.TheRoyalNavywasnotconvincedbyLind’sexperiments,butJamesCookwas.Heresolvedtoprovethedoctorright.Heloadedhisboatwithalargequantityofsauerkrautandorderedhissailorstoeatlotsoffreshfruits andvegetableswhenever theexpeditionmade landfall.Cookdidnot lose a single sailor to scurvy. In the following decades, all theworld’s navies adopted Cook’s nautical diet, and the lives of countlesssailorsandpassengersweresaved.1However, the Cook expedition had another, far less benign result.Cookwas not only an experienced seaman and geographer, but also anavalofficer.TheRoyalSocietyfinancedalargepartoftheexpedition’sexpenses,buttheshipitselfwasprovidedbytheRoyalNavy.Thenavyalsosecondedeighty-fivewell-armedsailorsandmarines,andequippedtheshipwithartillery,muskets,gunpowderandotherweaponry.Muchof the information collected by the expedition particularly theastronomical, geographical, meteorological and anthropological data –wasofobviouspoliticalandmilitaryvalue.ThediscoveryofaneffectivetreatmentforscurvygreatlycontributedtoBritishcontroloftheworld’soceansanditsabilitytosendarmiestotheothersideoftheworld.CookclaimedforBritainmanyoftheislandsandlandshe ‘discovered’,mostnotably Australia. The Cook expedition laid the foundation for theBritishoccupationof thesouth-westernPacificOcean; for theconquestofAustralia,TasmaniaandNewZealand; for thesettlementofmillionsof Europeans in the new colonies; and for the extermination of theirnativeculturesandmostoftheirnativepopulations.2InthecenturyfollowingtheCookexpedition,themostfertilelandsofAustraliaandNewZealandwere taken from theirprevious inhabitantsby European settlers. The native population dropped by up to 90 percent and the survivors were subjected to a harsh regime of racialoppression. For the Aborigines of Australia and the Maoris of NewZealand, theCookexpeditionwas thebeginningof a catastrophe fromwhichtheyhaveneverrecovered.AnevenworsefatebefellthenativesofTasmania.Havingsurvivedfor10,000years in splendid isolation, theywerecompletelywipedout, to

the last man, woman and child, within a century of Cook’s arrival.Europeansettlersfirstdrovethemofftherichestpartsoftheisland,andthen, coveting even the remainingwilderness, hunted them down andkilled them systematically. The few survivors were hounded into anevangelical concentration camp, where well-meaning but notparticularlyopen-mindedmissionaries triedto indoctrinatetheminthewaysof themodernworld.TheTasmanianswere instructed inreadingandwriting,Christianity andvarious ‘productive skills’ suchas sewingclothesandfarming.Buttheyrefusedtolearn.Theybecameevermoremelancholic,stoppedhavingchildren,lostallinterestinlife,andfinallychose the only escape route from the modern world of science andprogress–death.Alas, science and progress pursued them even to the afterlife. The

corpses of the last Tasmanianswere seized in the name of science byanthropologists and curators. They were dissected, weighed andmeasured, and analysed in learned articles. The skulls and skeletonswere then put on display inmuseums and anthropological collections.Onlyin1976didtheTasmanianMuseumgiveupforburialtheskeletonofTruganini,thelastnativeTasmanian,whohaddiedahundredyearsearlier.TheEnglishRoyalCollegeofSurgeonsheldontosamplesofherskinandhairuntil2002.WasCook’sshipascientificexpeditionprotectedbyamilitaryforceor

a military expedition with a few scientists tagging along? That’s likeaskingwhetheryourpetrol tankishalfemptyorhalf full. Itwasboth.The Scientific Revolution and modern imperialism were inseparable.PeoplesuchasCaptainJamesCookandthebotanistJosephBankscouldhardlydistinguishsciencefromempire.NorcouldlucklessTruganini.

WhyEurope?

The fact that people from a large island in the northern Atlanticconquered a large island south of Australia is one of history’s morebizarreoccurrences.NotlongbeforeCook’sexpedition,theBritishIslesand western Europe in general were but distant backwaters of theMediterranean world. Little of importance ever happened there. Even

theRomanEmpire–theonlyimportantpremodernEuropeanempire–derivedmost of its wealth from its North African, Balkan andMiddleEasternprovinces.Rome’swesternEuropeanprovinceswereapoorWildWest,whichcontributedlittleasidefrommineralsandslaves.NorthernEurope was so desolate and barbarous that it wasn’t even worthconquering.

35.Truganini,thelastnativeTasmanian.

OnlyattheendofthefifteenthcenturydidEuropebecomeahothouseof important military, political, economic and cultural developments.Between1500and1750,westernEuropegainedmomentumandbecamemasterofthe‘OuterWorld’,meaningthetwoAmericancontinentsandtheoceans.YeteventhenEuropewasnomatchforthegreatpowersofAsia.EuropeansmanagedtoconquerAmericaandgainsupremacyatsea

mainly because the Asiatic powers showed little interest in them. Theearly modern era was a golden age for the Ottoman Empire in theMediterranean, the Safavid Empire in Persia, the Mughal Empire inIndia, and the ChineseMing andQing dynasties. They expanded theirterritories significantly and enjoyed unprecedented demographic andeconomicgrowth.In1775Asiaaccountedfor80percentoftheworldeconomy.ThecombinedeconomiesofIndiaandChinaalonerepresentedtwo-thirdsofglobalproduction.Incomparison,Europewasaneconomicdwarf.3TheglobalcentreofpowershiftedtoEuropeonlybetween1750and

1850,whenEuropeanshumiliatedtheAsianpowersinaseriesofwarsandconqueredlargepartsofAsia.By1900Europeansfirmlycontrolledtheworlds economyandmostof its territory. In1950westernEuropeand theUnited States together accounted formore thanhalf of globalproduction, whereas Chinas portion had been reduced to 5 per cent.4Under the European aegis a new global order and global cultureemerged. Today all humans are, to a much greater extent than theyusuallywanttoadmit,Europeanindress,thoughtandtaste.Theymaybe fiercelyanti-European in their rhetoric,butalmost everyoneon theplanet views politics, medicine, war and economics through Europeaneyes, and listens to music written in European modes with words inEuropean languages.Even today’sburgeoningChineseeconomy,whichmay soon regain its global primacy, is built on a European model ofproductionandfinance.Howdid the people of this frigid finger of Eurasiamanage to break

out of their remote corner of the globe and conquer the entireworld?Europe’sscientistsareoftengivenmuchofthecredit.It’sunquestionablethatfrom1850onwardEuropeandominationrestedtoalargeextentonthe military–industrial–scientific complex and technological wizardry.All successful latemodern empires cultivated scientific research in thehopeofharvestingtechnologicalinnovations,andmanyscientistsspentmostof their timeworkingonarms,medicinesandmachines for theirimperial masters. A common saying among European soldiers facingAfricanenemieswas,‘Comewhatmay,wehavemachineguns,andtheydon’t.’ Civilian technologies were no less important. Canned food fedsoldiers, railroads and steamships transported soldiers and theirprovisions,whileanewarsenalofmedicinescuredsoldiers,sailorsand

locomotive engineers. These logistical advances played a moresignificantroleintheEuropeanconquestofAfricathandidthemachinegun.Butthatwasn’tthecasebefore1850.Themilitary-industrial-scientific

complexwasstillinitsinfancy;thetechnologicalfruitsoftheScientificRevolutionwere unripe; and the technological gap between European,Asiatic and African powers was small. In 1770, James Cook certainlyhadfarbettertechnologythantheAustralianAborigines,butsodidtheChinese and the Ottomans. Why then was Australia explored andcolonisedbyCaptain JamesCookandnotbyCaptainWanZhengseorCaptainHusseinPasha?Moreimportantly,ifin1770Europeanshadnosignificant technologicaladvantageoverMuslims, IndiansandChinese,how did they manage in the following century to open such a gapbetweenthemselvesandtherestoftheworld?Whydid themilitary-industrial-scientific complexblossom inEurope

rather than India? When Britain leaped forward, why were France,Germany and theUnited States quick to follow,whereasChina laggedbehind? When the gap between industrial and non-industrial nationsbecameanobviouseconomicandpoliticalfactor,whydidRussia,ItalyandAustriasucceedinclosingit,whereasPersia,EgyptandtheOttomanEmpirefailed?Afterall,thetechnologyofthefirstindustrialwavewasrelatively simple.Was it so hard for Chinese or Ottomans to engineersteamengines,manufacturemachinegunsandlaydownrailroads?Theworld’sfirstcommercialrailroadopenedforbusinessin1830,in

Britain.By1850,Westernnationswere criss-crossedby almost 40,000kilometres of railroads – but in the whole of Asia, Africa and LatinAmerica therewereonly4,000kilometresof tracks. In1880, theWestboastedmorethan350,000kilometresofrailroads,whereasintherestoftheworldtherewerebut35,000kilometresoftrainlines(andmostofthese were laid by the British in India).5 The first railroad in Chinaopened only in 1876. It was twenty-five kilometres long and built byEuropeans–theChinesegovernmentdestroyeditthefollowingyear.In1880 the Chinese Empire did not operate a single railroad. The firstrailroadinPersiawasbuiltonlyin1888,anditconnectedTehranwithaMuslim holy site about ten kilometres south of the capital. It wasconstructed and operated by a Belgian company. In 1950, the totalrailwaynetworkofPersiastillamountedtoameagre2,500kilometres,

inacountryseventimesthesizeofBritain.6TheChineseandPersiansdidnotlacktechnologicalinventionssuchassteamengines(whichcouldbefreelycopiedorbought).Theylackedthevalues,myths, judicialapparatusandsociopoliticalstructures that tookcenturiestoformandmatureintheWestandwhichcouldnotbecopiedandinternalisedrapidly.FranceandtheUnitedStatesquicklyfollowedinBritain’s footstepsbecausetheFrenchandAmericansalreadysharedthemostimportantBritishmythsandsocialstructures.TheChineseandPersians could not catch up as quickly because they thought andorganisedtheirsocietiesdifferently.This explanation sheds new light on the period from 1500 to 1850.During this era Europe did not enjoy any obvious technological,political,militaryoreconomicadvantageovertheAsianpowers,yetthecontinent built up a unique potential, whose importance suddenlybecame obvious around 1850. The apparent equality between Europe,China and the Muslim world in 1750 was a mirage. Imagine twobuilders,eachbusyconstructingverytalltowers.Onebuilderuseswoodandmud bricks, whereas the other uses steel and concrete. At first itseemsthatthereisnotmuchofadifferencebetweenthetwomethods,since both towers grow at a similar pace and reach a similar height.However,onceacriticalthresholdiscrossed,thewoodandmudtowercannot stand the strain and collapses, whereas the steel and concretetowergrowsstoreybystorey,asfarastheeyecansee.What potential did Europe develop in the earlymodern period thatenabled it to dominate the late modern world? There are twocomplementaryanswerstothisquestion:modernscienceandcapitalism.Europeans were used to thinking and behaving in a scientific andcapitalist way even before they enjoyed any significant technologicaladvantages. When the technological bonanza began, Europeans couldharnessitfarbetterthananybodyelse.Soitishardlycoincidentalthatscience and capitalism form themost important legacy that Europeanimperialismhasbequeathedthepost-Europeanworldofthetwenty-firstcentury.EuropeandEuropeansnolongerruletheworld,butscienceandcapital are growing ever stronger. The victories of capitalism areexaminedinthefollowingchapter.ThischapterisdedicatedtothelovestorybetweenEuropeanimperialismandmodernscience.

TheMentalityofConquest

Modern science flourished in and thanks to European empires. Thediscipline obviously owes a huge debt to ancient scientific traditions,suchasthoseofclassicalGreece,China,IndiaandIslam,yetitsuniquecharacterbegantotakeshapeonlyintheearlymodernperiod,handinhand with the imperial expansion of Spain, Portugal, Britain, France,Russia and theNetherlands. During the earlymodern period, Chinese,Indians,Muslims,NativeAmericansandPolynesianscontinuedtomakeimportant contributions to the Scientific Revolution. The insights ofMuslim economists were studied by Adam Smith and Karl Marx,treatmentspioneeredbyNativeAmericandoctors foundtheirway intoEnglish medical texts and data extracted from Polynesian informantsrevolutionised Western anthropology. But until the mid-twentiethcentury, the people who collated these myriad scientific discoveries,creating scientific disciplines in the process, were the ruling andintellectualelitesoftheglobalEuropeanempires.TheFarEastandtheIslamic world produced minds as intelligent and curious as those ofEurope. However, between 1500 and 1950 they did not produceanything that comes even close to Newtonian physics or Darwinianbiology.ThisdoesnotmeanthatEuropeanshaveauniquegeneforscience,orthattheywillforeverdominatethestudyofphysicsandbiology.JustasIslambeganasanArabmonopolybutwas subsequently takenoverbyTurksandPersians, somodern sciencebeganasaEuropean speciality,butistodaybecomingamulti-ethnicenterprise.What forged the historical bond between modern science andEuropean imperialism? Technology was an important factor in thenineteenthandtwentiethcenturies,butintheearlymoderneraitwasoflimited importance. The key factorwas that the plant-seeking botanistand the colony-seeking naval officer shared a similar mindset. Bothscientistandconquerorbeganbyadmittingignorance–theybothsaid,‘Idon’t knowwhat’s out there.’ They both felt compelled to go out andmake new discoveries. And they both hoped the new knowledge thusacquiredwouldmakethemmastersoftheworld.

European imperialismwasentirelyunlikeallother imperialprojects inhistory.Previousseekersofempire tended toassumethat theyalreadyunderstoodtheworld.Conquestmerelyutilisedandspreadtheirviewofthe world. The Arabs, to name one example, did not conquer Egypt,Spain or India in order to discover something theydidnot know.TheRomans,MongolsandAztecsvoraciouslyconquerednewlandsinsearchof power and wealth – not of knowledge. In contrast, Europeanimperialists set out to distant shores in the hope of obtaining newknowledgealongwithnewterritories.James Cook was not the first explorer to think this way. The

PortugueseandSpanishvoyagersofthefifteenthandsixteenthcenturiesalready did. PrinceHenry theNavigator andVasco daGama exploredthe coasts of Africa and,while doing so, seized control of islands andharbours.ChristopherColumbus ‘discovered’America and immediatelyclaimedsovereigntyoverthenewlandsforthekingsofSpain.FerdinandMagellan found a way around the world, and simultaneously laid thefoundationfortheSpanishconquestofthePhilippines.As time went by, the conquest of knowledge and the conquest of

territory became ever more tightly intertwined. In the eighteenth andnineteenth centuries, almost every important military expedition thatleftEuropefordistantlandshadonboardscientistswhosetoutnottofightbut tomake scientificdiscoveries.WhenNapoleon invadedEgyptin 1798, he took 165 scholars with him. Among other things, theyfounded an entirely new discipline, Egyptology, and made importantcontributionstothestudyofreligion,linguisticsandbotany.In1831,theRoyalNavysenttheshipHMSBeagletomapthecoastsof

South America, the Falklands Islands and the Galapagos Islands. Thenavyneededthisknowledgeinordertobebetterpreparedintheeventofwar.Theship’scaptain,whowasanamateurscientist,decidedtoaddageologisttotheexpeditiontostudygeological formations theymightencounter on theway.After several professional geologists refusedhisinvitation, the captain offered the job to a twenty-two-year-oldCambridgegraduate,CharlesDarwin.DarwinhadstudiedtobecomeanAnglican parson but was far more interested in geology and naturalsciencesthanintheBible.Hejumpedattheopportunity,andtherestishistory.ThecaptainspenthistimeonthevoyagedrawingmilitarymapswhileDarwin collected the empirical data and formulated the insights

thatwouldeventuallybecomethetheoryofevolution.

On20July1969,NeilArmstrongandBuzzAldrinlandedonthesurfaceofthemoon.Inthemonthsleadinguptotheirexpedition,theApollo11astronauts trained in a remotemoon-like desert in thewesternUnitedStates.Thearea ishome to severalNativeAmericancommunities, andthere is a story – or legend – describing an encounter between theastronautsandoneofthelocals.One day as they were training, the astronauts came across an old

Native American. The man asked them what they were doing there.They replied that they were part of a research expedition that wouldshortlytraveltoexplorethemoon.Whentheoldmanheardthat,hefellsilentforafewmoments,andthenaskedtheastronautsiftheycoulddohimafavour.‘Whatdoyouwant?’theyasked.‘Well,’ said the old man, ‘the people of my tribe believe that holy

spiritsliveonthemoon.Iwaswonderingifyoucouldpassanimportantmessagetothemfrommypeople.’‘What’sthemessage?’askedtheastronauts.Themanutteredsomethinginhistriballanguage,andthenaskedthe

astronauts to repeat it again and again until they had memorised itcorrectly.‘Whatdoesitmean?’askedtheastronauts.‘Oh, I cannot tellyou. It’sa secret thatonlyour tribeand themoon

spiritsareallowedtoknow.’When they returned to their base, the astronauts searched and

searcheduntiltheyfoundsomeonewhocouldspeakthetriballanguage,andaskedhimtotranslatethesecretmessage.Whentheyrepeatedwhattheyhadmemorised,thetranslatorstartedtolaughuproariously.Whenhe calmed down, the astronauts asked him what it meant. The manexplainedthatthesentencetheyhadmemorisedsocarefullysaid,‘Don’tbelievea singleword thesepeopleare tellingyou.Theyhavecome tostealyourlands.’

EmptyMaps

Themodern‘exploreandconquer’mentalityisnicelyillustratedbythedevelopment of world maps. Many cultures drew world maps longbeforethemodernage.Obviously,noneofthemreallyknewthewholeof the world. No Afro-Asian culture knew about America, and noAmerican culture knew about Afro-Asia. But unfamiliar areas weresimply left out, or filledwith imaginarymonsters andwonders. Thesemaps had no empty spaces. They gave the impression of a familiaritywiththeentireworld.Duringthefifteenthandsixteenthcenturies,Europeansbegantodraw

world maps with lots of empty spaces – one indication of thedevelopment of the scientific mindset, as well as of the Europeanimperial drive. The empty maps were a psychological and ideologicalbreakthrough,a clearadmission thatEuropeanswere ignorantof largepartsoftheworld.Thecrucialturningpointcamein1492,whenChristopherColumbus

sailedwestwardfromSpain,seekinganewroutetoEastAsia.Columbusstill believed in theold ‘complete’worldmaps.Using them,ColumbuscalculatedthatJapanshouldhavebeenlocatedabout7,000kilometreswest of Spain. In fact, more than 20,000 kilometres and an entireunknowncontinentseparateEastAsiafromSpain.On12October1492,at about 2:00 a.m., Columbus’ expedition collided with the unknowncontinent.JuanRodriguezBermejo,watchingfromthemastoftheshipPinta,spottedanislandinwhatwenowcalltheBahamas,andshouted‘Land!Land!’Columbusbelievedhehad reached a small islandoff theEastAsian

coast.Hecalledthepeoplehefoundthere‘Indians’becausehethoughthehad landed in the Indies–whatwenowcall theEast Indiesor theIndonesianarchipelago.Columbusstucktothiserror for therestofhislife. The idea that he haddiscovered a completely unknown continentwasinconceivableforhimandformanyofhisgeneration.Forthousandsof years, not only the greatest thinkers and scholars but also theinfallibleScriptureshadknownonlyEurope,AfricaandAsia.Couldtheyall have been wrong? Could the Bible havemissed half the world? Itwouldbeasif in1969,onitswaytothemoon,Apollo11hadcrashed

into a hitherto unknown moon circling the earth, which all previousobservations had somehow failed to spot. In his refusal to admitignorance, Columbus was still a medieval man. He was convinced heknew the whole world, and even his momentous discovery failed toconvincehimotherwise.

36.AEuropeanworldmapfrom1459(Europeisinthetopleftcorner).Themapisfilledwithdetails,evenwhendepictingareasthatwerecompletelyunfamiliartoEuropeans,

suchassouthernAfrica.

The first modernman was Amerigo Vespucci, an Italian sailor whotook part in several expeditions to America in the years 1499–1504.Between 1502 and 1504, two texts describing these expeditions werepublished in Europe. They were attributed to Vespucci. These textsarguedthatthenewlandsdiscoveredbyColumbuswerenotislandsoff

the East Asian coast, but rather an entire continent unknown to theScriptures,classicalgeographersandcontemporaryEuropeans.In1507,convinced by these arguments, a respected mapmaker named MartinWaldseemüller published an updatedworldmap, the first to show theplacewhere Europe’swestward-sailing fleets had landed as a separatecontinent. Having drawn it, Waldseemüller had to give it a name.Erroneouslybelieving thatAmerigoVespuccihadbeen thepersonwhodiscovered it, Waldseemüller named the continent in his honour –America.TheWaldseemüllermapbecameverypopularandwascopiedbymanyothercartographers,spreadingthenamehehadgiventhenewland.Thereispoeticjusticeinthefactthataquarteroftheworld,andtwoofitssevencontinents,arenamedafteralittle-knownItalianwhosesoleclaimtofameisthathehadthecouragetosay,‘Wedon’tknow.’ThediscoveryofAmericawasthefoundationaleventoftheScientific

Revolution.ItnotonlytaughtEuropeanstofavourpresentobservationsover past traditions, but the desire to conquer America also obligedEuropeans to search for new knowledge at breakneck speed. If theyreally wanted to control the vast new territories, they had to gatherenormous amounts of new data about the geography, climate, flora,fauna, languages, cultures and history of the new continent. ChristianScriptures,oldgeographybooksandancientoraltraditionswereoflittlehelp.HenceforthnotonlyEuropeangeographers,butEuropeanscholars in

almostallotherfieldsofknowledgebegantodrawmapswithspacesleftto fill in.Theybegantoadmit that their theorieswerenotperfectandthattherewereimportantthingsthattheydidnotknow.

TheEuropeansweredrawntotheblankspotsonthemapasiftheyweremagnets,andpromptlystartedfillingthemin.Duringthefifteenthandsixteenth centuries, European expeditions circumnavigated Africa,exploredAmerica,crossedthePacificandIndianOceans,andcreatedanetworkofbasesandcoloniesallover theworld.Theyestablished thefirst truly global empires and knitted together the first global tradenetwork.TheEuropeanimperialexpeditionstransformedthehistoryofthe world: from being a series of histories of isolated peoples andcultures,itbecamethehistoryofasingleintegratedhumansociety.

37.TheSalviatiWorldMap,1525.Whilethe1459worldmapisfullofcontinents,islandsanddetailedexplanations,theSalviatimapismostlyempty.TheeyewanderssouthalongtheAmericancoastline,untilitpetersintoemptiness.Anyonelookingatthemapandpossessingevenminimalcuriosityistemptedtoask,‘What’sbeyondthispoint?’Themap

givesnoanswers.Itinvitestheobservertosetsailandfindout.

TheseEuropeanexplore-and-conquerexpeditionsaresofamiliartousthatwetendtooverlookjusthowextraordinarytheywere.Nothinglikethem had ever happened before. Long-distance campaigns of conquestarenotanaturalundertaking.Throughouthistorymosthumansocietiesweresobusywithlocalconflictsandneighbourhoodquarrelsthattheynever considered exploring and conquering distant lands. Most greatempires extended their control only over their immediateneighbourhood – they reached far-flung lands simply because theirneighbourhoodkeptexpanding.Thus theRomansconqueredEtruria inordertodefendRome(c.350–300BC).TheythenconqueredthePoValleyin order to defend Etruria (c.200 BC). They subsequently conqueredProvence to defend the Po Valley (c.120 BC), Gaul to defend Provence(c.50BC),andBritaininordertodefendGaul(c.AD50).Ittookthem400years to get from Rome to London. In 350 BC, no Romanwould haveconceivedofsailingdirectlytoBritainandconqueringit.Occasionally an ambitious ruler or adventurer would embark on along-rangecampaignofconquest,butsuchcampaignsusually followedwell-beaten imperialorcommercialpaths.ThecampaignsofAlexander

the Great, for example, did not result in the establishment of a newempire,butratherintheusurpationofanexistingempire–thatofthePersians.Theclosestprecedents to themodernEuropeanempireswerethe ancient naval empires of Athens and Carthage, and the medievalnavalempireofMajapahit,whichheldswayovermuchofIndonesiainthe fourteenth century. Yet even these empires rarely ventured intounknown seas – their naval exploits were local undertakings whencomparedtotheglobalventuresofthemodernEuropeans.Many scholars argue that the voyages of Admiral Zheng He of theChineseMing dynasty heralded and eclipsed the European voyages ofdiscovery.Between1405and1433,ZhengledsevenhugearmadasfromChina to the far reaches of the Indian Ocean. The largest of thesecomprised almost 300 ships and carried close to30,000people.7 Theyvisited Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India, the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea andEastAfrica.Chinese ships anchored in Jedda, themainharbourof theHejaz,and inMalindi,on theKenyancoast.Columbus’ fleetof1492–whichconsistedofthreesmallshipsmannedby120sailors–waslikeatrioofmosquitoescomparedtoZhengHe’sdroveofdragons.8Yettherewasacrucialdifference.ZhengHeexploredtheoceans,andassistedpro-Chineserulers,buthedidnottrytoconquerorcolonisethecountries he visited.Moreover, the expeditions of Zheng He were notdeeplyrootedinChinesepoliticsandculture.WhentherulingfactioninBeijing changed during the 1430s, the new overlords abruptlyterminated the operation. The great fleet was dismantled, crucialtechnicalandgeographicalknowledgewaslost,andnoexplorerofsuchstatureandmeanseversetoutagainfromaChineseport.Chineserulersinthecomingcenturies, likemostChineserulers inpreviouscenturies,restricted their interests and ambitions to the Middle Kingdom’simmediateenvirons.The Zheng He expeditions prove that Europe did not enjoy anoutstanding technologicaledge.WhatmadeEuropeansexceptionalwastheir unparalleled and insatiable ambition to explore and conquer.Althoughtheymighthavehadtheability,theRomansneverattemptedto conquer India or Scandinavia, the Persians never attempted toconquer Madagascar or Spain, and the Chinese never attempted toconquerIndonesiaorAfrica.MostChineserulersleftevennearbyJapantoitsowndevices.Therewasnothingpeculiaraboutthat.Theoddityis

thatearlymodernEuropeanscaughta fever thatdrove themto sail todistant and completely unknown lands full of alien cultures, take onestep on to their beaches, and immediately declare, ‘I claim all theseterritoriesformyking!’

38.ZhengHe’sflagshipnexttothatofColumbus.

InvasionfromOuterSpace

Around1517,Spanishcolonists in theCaribbean islandsbegan tohearvaguerumoursaboutapowerfulempiresomewhereinthecentreoftheMexican mainland. A mere four years later, the Aztec capital was asmoulderingruin,theAztecEmpirewasathingofthepast,andHernánCortéslordedoveravastnewSpanishEmpireinMexico.TheSpaniardsdidnotstoptocongratulatethemselvesoreventocatchtheir breath. They immediately commenced explore-and-conqueroperationsinalldirections.ThepreviousrulersofCentralAmerica–theAztecs,theToltecs,theMaya–barelyknewSouthAmericaexisted,andnevermadeanyattempttosubjugateit,overthecourseof2,000years.

YetwithinlittlemorethantenyearsoftheSpanishconquestofMexico,Francisco Pizarro had discovered the Inca Empire in South America,vanquishingitin1532.Had the Aztecs and Incas shown a bit more interest in the worldsurroundingthem–andhadtheyknownwhattheSpaniardshaddonetotheirneighbours–theymighthaveresistedtheSpanishconquestmorekeenlyandsuccessfully.IntheyearsseparatingColumbus’firstjourneyto America (1492) from the landing of Cortés in Mexico (1519), theSpaniardsconqueredmostoftheCaribbeanislands,settingupachainofnew colonies. For the subjugated natives, these colonies were hell onearth. They were ruled with an iron fist by greedy and unscrupulouscolonists who enslaved them and set them to work in mines andplantations,killinganyonewhoofferedtheslightestresistance.Mostofthe native population soon died, either because of the harsh workingconditionsor thevirulenceof thediseases thathitch-hiked toAmericaontheconquerors’sailingships.Withintwentyyears,almosttheentirenativeCaribbeanpopulationwaswipedout.TheSpanishcolonistsbeganimportingAfricanslavestofillthevacuum.ThisgenocidetookplaceontheverydoorstepoftheAztecEmpire,yetwhen Cortés landed on the empire’s eastern coast, the Aztecs knewnothingaboutit.ThecomingoftheSpaniardswastheequivalentofanalien invasion from outer space. The Aztecswere convinced that theyknew the entireworld and that they ruledmost of it. To them itwasunimaginable thatoutside theirdomaincouldexistanything like theseSpaniards.When Cortés and his men landed on the sunny beaches oftoday’s Vera Cruz, it was the first time the Aztecs encountered acompletelyunknownpeople.The Aztecs did not know how to react. They had trouble decidingwhat these strangers were. Unlike all known humans, the aliens hadwhiteskins.Theyalsohadlotsoffacialhair.Somehadhairthecolourofthe sun. They stank horribly. (Native hygiene was far better thanSpanish hygiene. When the Spaniards first arrived in Mexico, nativesbearing incense burners were assigned to accompany them wherevertheywent.TheSpaniards thought itwasamarkofdivinehonour.Weknow from native sources that they found the newcomers’ smellunbearable.)

Map7.TheAztecandIncaempiresatthetimeoftheSpanishconquest.

Thealiens’materialculturewasevenmorebewildering.Theycameingiantships, the likeofwhich theAztecshadnever imagined, letaloneseen.Theyrodeonthebackofhugeandterrifyinganimals,swiftasthewind. They could produce lightning and thunder out of shiny metalsticks.Theyhadflashinglongswordsandimpenetrablearmour,againstwhichthenatives’woodenswordsandflintspearswereuseless.Some Aztecs thought these must be gods. Others argued that they

weredemons,ortheghostsofthedead,orpowerfulsorcerers.Insteadofconcentrating all available forces and wiping out the Spaniards, theAztecsdeliberated,dawdledandnegotiated.Theysawnoreasontorush.Afterall,Cortéshadnomorethan550Spaniardswithhim.Whatcould550mendotoanempireofmillions?CortéswasequallyignorantabouttheAztecs,butheandhismenheld

significant advantages over their adversaries.While theAztecs had noexperiencetopreparethemfor thearrivalof thesestrange-lookingandfoul-smelling aliens, the Spaniards knew that the earth was full of

unknownhuman realms, andnoonehadgreater expertise in invadingalien lands and dealingwith situations aboutwhich theywere utterlyignorant. For the modern European conqueror, like the modernEuropeanscientist,plungingintotheunknownwasexhilarating.SowhenCortés anchoredoff that sunnybeach in July1519,hedid

not hesitate to act. Like a science-fiction alien emerging from hisspaceship,hedeclaredtotheawestrucklocals:‘Wecomeinpeace.Takeustoyourleader.’CortésexplainedthathewasapeacefulemissaryfromthegreatkingofSpain, andasked foradiplomatic interviewwith theAztec ruler, Montezuma II. (This was a shameless lie. Cortés led anindependent expedition of greedy adventurers. The king of Spain hadneverheardofCortés,noroftheAztecs.)Cortéswasgivenguides,foodand somemilitary assistance by local enemies of the Aztecs. He thenmarchedtowardstheAzteccapital,thegreatmetropolisofTenochtitlan.TheAztecsallowedthealienstomarchallthewaytothecapital,then

respectfully led the aliens’ leader tomeet EmperorMontezuma. In themiddleoftheinterview,Cortésgaveasignal,andsteel-armedSpaniardsbutcheredMontezuma’sbodyguards(whowerearmedonlywithwoodenclubs,andstoneblades).Thehonouredguesttookhishostprisoner.Cortés was now in a very delicate situation. He had captured the

emperor, but was surrounded by tens of thousands of furious enemywarriors, millions of hostile civilians, and an entire continent aboutwhich he knewpractically nothing.He had at his disposal only a fewhundred Spaniards, and the closest Spanish reinforcements were inCuba,morethan1,500kilometresaway.CortéskeptMontezumacaptiveinthepalace,makingitlookasifthe

king remained free and in charge and as if the ‘Spanish ambassador’were no more than a guest. The Aztec Empire was an extremelycentralised polity, and this unprecedented situation paralysed it.Montezumacontinuedtobehaveasifheruledtheempire,andtheAztecelite continued to obey him, which meant they obeyed Cortés. Thissituation lasted for several months, during which time Cortésinterrogated Montezuma and his attendants, trained translators in avariety of local languages, and sent small Spanish expeditions in alldirections to become familiar with the Aztec Empire and the varioustribes,peoplesandcitiesthatitruled.The Aztec elite eventually revolted against Cortés and Montezuma,

elected a new emperor, and drove the Spaniards from Tenochtitlan.However,bynownumerouscrackshadappearedintheimperialedifice.Cortésusedtheknowledgehehadgainedtoprisethecracksopenwiderand split the empire fromwithin. He convincedmany of the empire’ssubject peoples to join him against the ruling Aztec elite. The subjectpeoplesmiscalculatedbadly.TheyhatedtheAztecs,butknewnothingofSpainortheCaribbeangenocide.TheyassumedthatwithSpanishhelpthey could shake off theAztec yoke. The idea that the Spanishwouldtakeoverneveroccurredtothem.TheyweresurethatifCortésandhisfew hundred henchmen caused any trouble, they could easily beoverwhelmed. The rebellious peoples providedCortéswith an armyoftens of thousands of local troops, and with its help Cortés besiegedTenochtitlanandconqueredthecity.At this stage more and more Spanish soldiers and settlers began

arriving in Mexico, some from Cuba, others all the way from Spain.When the local peoples realisedwhatwas happening, it was too late.Withinacenturyof the landingatVeraCruz, thenativepopulationoftheAmericashadshrunkbyabout90percent,duemainlytounfamiliardiseases that reached America with the invaders. The survivors foundthemselvesunderthethumbofagreedyandracistregimethatwasfarworsethanthatoftheAztecs.TenyearsafterCortéslandedinMexico,Pizarroarrivedontheshore

of the Inca Empire. He had far fewer soldiers than Cortés – hisexpedition numbered just 168men! Yet Pizarro benefited from all theknowledge and experience gained in previous invasions. The Inca, incontrast,knewnothingaboutthefateoftheAztecs.PizarroplagiarisedCortés.HedeclaredhimselfapeacefulemissaryfromthekingofSpain,invited the Inca ruler, Atahualpa, to a diplomatic interview, and thenkidnappedhim.Pizarroproceededtoconquertheparalysedempirewiththe help of local allies. If the subject peoples of the Inca Empire hadknown the fate of the inhabitants of Mexico, they would not havethrownintheirlotwiththeinvaders.Buttheydidnotknow.

Thenativepeoples ofAmericawerenot theonly ones topay aheavyprice for their parochial outlook. The great empires of Asia – theOttoman,theSafavid,theMughalandtheChinese–veryquicklyheard

that the Europeans had discovered something big. Yet they displayedlittle interest in these discoveries. They continued to believe that theworldrevolvedaroundAsia,andmadenoattempttocompetewiththeEuropeans for control of America or of the new ocean lanes in theAtlanticandthePacific.EvenpunyEuropeankingdomssuchasScotlandand Denmark sent a few explore-and-conquer expeditions to America,butnotoneexpeditionofeitherexplorationorconquestwaseversenttoAmericafromtheIslamicworld,IndiaorChina.Thefirstnon-Europeanpower that tried to send amilitary expedition to Americawas Japan.That happened in June 1942, when a Japanese expedition conqueredKiskaandAttu,twosmallislandsofftheAlaskancoast,capturingintheprocesstenUSsoldiersandadog.TheJapanesenevergotanyclosertothemainland.ItishardtoarguethattheOttomansorChineseweretoofaraway,or

that they lacked the technological, economic or military wherewithal.TheresourcesthatsentZhengHefromChinatoEastAfricainthe1420Sshould have been enough to reach America. The Chinese just weren’tinterested.ThefirstChineseworldmaptoshowAmericawasnotissueduntil1602–andthenbyaEuropeanmissionary!For300years,EuropeansenjoyedundisputedmasteryinAmericaand

Oceania,intheAtlanticandthePacific.TheonlysignificantstrugglesinthoseregionswerebetweendifferentEuropeanpowers.Thewealthandresources accumulated by the Europeans eventually enabled them toinvade Asia too, defeat its empires, and divide it among themselves.WhentheOttomans,Persians, IndiansandChinesewokeupandbeganpayingattention,itwastoolate.

Only in the twentiethcenturydidnon-Europeanculturesadopta trulyglobalvision.Thiswasoneofthecrucialfactorsthatledtothecollapseof European hegemony. Thus in the Algerian War of Independence(1954–62), Algerian guerrillas defeated a French army with anoverwhelming numerical, technological and economic advantage. TheAlgerians prevailed because they were supported by a global anti-colonial network, and because they worked out how to harness theworld’smediatotheircause–aswellaspublicopinioninFranceitself.Thedefeatthat littleNorthVietnaminflictedontheAmericancolossus

wasbasedonasimilarstrategy.Theseguerrillaforcesshowedthatevensuperpowerscouldbedefeatedifalocalstrugglebecameaglobalcause.It is interesting to contemplate what might have happened hadMontezuma been able tomanipulate public opinion in Spain and gainassistancefromoneofSpain’srivals–Portugal,FranceortheOttomanEmpire.

RareSpidersandForgottenScripts

Modern science and modern empires were motivated by the restlessfeelingthatperhapssomethingimportantawaitedbeyondthehorizon–something they had better explore and master. Yet the connectionbetweenscienceandempirewentmuchdeeper.Notjustthemotivation,but also the practices of empire-builderswere entangledwith those ofscientists. For modern Europeans, building an empire was a scientificproject,whilesettingupascientificdisciplinewasanimperialproject.When the Muslims conquered India, they did not bring along

archaeologiststosystematicallystudyIndianhistory,anthropologiststostudy Indian cultures, geologists to study Indian soils, or zoologists tostudy Indian fauna.When the British conquered India, they did all ofthesethings.On10April1802theGreatSurveyofIndiawaslaunched.It lasted sixty years. With the help of tens of thousands of nativelabourers,scholarsandguides,theBritishcarefullymappedthewholeofIndia, marking borders, measuring distances, and even calculating forthefirsttimetheexactheightofMountEverestandtheotherHimalayanpeaks. The British explored themilitary resources of Indian provincesand the locationof their goldmines,but theyalso took the trouble tocollect information about rare Indian spiders, to catalogue colourfulbutterflies, totracetheancientoriginsofextinctIndianlanguages,andtodigupforgottenruins.Mohenjo-daro was one of the chief cities of the Indus Valley

civilisation, which flourished in the third millennium BC and wasdestroyedaround1900BC.NoneofIndia’spre-Britishrulers–neithertheMauryas,northeGuptas,northeDelhisultans,northegreatMughals–

hadgiventheruinsasecondglance.ButaBritisharchaeologicalsurveytook notice of the site in 1922. A British team then excavated it, anddiscoveredthefirstgreatcivilisationofIndia,whichnoIndianhadbeenawareof.Another telling example of British scientific curiosity was the

deciphering of cuneiform script. This was the main script usedthroughouttheMiddleEastforcloseto3,000years,butthelastpersonabletoreaditprobablydiedsometimeintheearlyfirstmillenniumAD.Since then, inhabitantsof the region frequentlyencounteredcuneiforminscriptions onmonuments, steles, ancient ruins and broken pots. Buttheyhadnoideahowtoreadtheweird,angularscratchesand,asfaraswe know, they never tried. Cuneiform came to the attention ofEuropeans in 1618, when the Spanish ambassador in Persia wentsightseeingintheruinsofancientPersepolis,wherehesawinscriptionsthatnobodycouldexplain tohim.Newsof theunknown script spreadamongEuropean savantsandpiqued their curiosity. In1657Europeanscholars published the first transcription of a cuneiform text fromPersepolis.Moreandmoretranscriptionsfollowed,andforclosetotwocenturiesscholarsintheWesttriedtodecipherthem.Nonesucceeded.In the 1830s, a British officer named Henry Rawlinson was sent to

PersiatohelptheshahtrainhisarmyintheEuropeanstyle.InhissparetimeRawlinsontravelledaroundPersiaandonedayhewasledbylocalguidestoacliff intheZagrosMountainsandshownthehugeBehistunInscription. About fifteenmetres high and twenty-fivemetres wide, ithad been etched high up on the cliff face on the command of KingDarius I sometimearound500 BC. Itwaswritten incuneiformscript inthree languages: Old Persian, Elamite and Babylonian. The inscriptionwas well known to the local population, but nobody could read it.Rawlinson became convinced that if he could decipher the writing itwouldenablehimandotherscholarstoreadthenumerousinscriptionsand texts that were at the time being discovered all over the MiddleEast,openingadoorintoanancientandforgottenworld.Thefirststepindecipheringtheletteringwastoproduceanaccurate

transcriptionthatcouldbesentbacktoEurope.Rawlinsondefieddeathto do so, scaling the steep cliff to copy the strange letters. He hiredseveral localstohelphim,mostnotablyaKurdishboywhoclimbedto

themostinaccessiblepartsofthecliffinordertocopytheupperportionof the inscription. In 1847 the project was completed, and a full andaccuratecopywassenttoEurope.Rawlinson did not rest on his laurels. As an army officer, he had

militaryandpoliticalmissionstocarryout,butwheneverhehadasparemoment he puzzled over the secret script. He tried one method afteranother and finally managed to decipher the Old Persian part of theinscription. This was easiest, since Old Persian was not that differentfrommodernPersian,whichRawlinsonknewwell.AnunderstandingoftheOldPersiansectiongavehimthekeyheneededtounlockthesecretsoftheElamiteandBabyloniansections.Thegreatdoorswungopen,andout came a rush of ancient but lively voices – the bustle of Sumerianbazaars, the proclamations of Assyrian kings, the arguments ofBabylonian bureaucrats. Without the efforts of modern EuropeanimperialistssuchasRawlinson,wewouldnothaveknownmuchaboutthefateoftheancientMiddleEasternempires.

AnothernotableimperialistscholarwasWilliamJones.JonesarrivedinIndia in September 1783 to serve as a judge in the Supreme Court ofBengal.Hewas so captivatedby thewonders of India thatwithin lessthansixmonthsofhisarrivalhehad foundedtheAsiaticSociety.Thisacademic organisation was devoted to studying the cultures, historiesandsocietiesofAsia,andinparticularthoseofIndia.WithintwoyearsJones published his observations on the Sanskrit language, whichpioneeredthescienceofcomparativelinguistics.In his publications Jones pointed out surprising similarities between

Sanskrit, anancient Indian language thatbecame the sacred tongueofHinduritual,andtheGreekandLatinlanguages,aswellassimilaritiesbetween all these languages and Gothic, Celtic, Old Persian, German,French and English. Thus in Sanskrit, ‘mother’ is ‘matar’, in Latin it is‘mater’, and in Old Celtic it is ‘mathir’. Jones surmised that all theselanguages must share a common origin, developing from a now-forgottenancient ancestor.Hewas thus the first to identifywhat latercametobecalledtheIndo-Europeanfamilyoflanguages.Jones’ studywasan importantmilestonenotmerelydue tohisbold

(andaccurate)hypotheses,butalsobecauseoftheorderlymethodology

that he developed to compare languages. It was adopted by otherscholars, enabling them systematically to study the development of alltheworld’slanguages.Linguistics received enthusiastic imperial support. The European

empiresbelievedthatinordertogoverneffectivelytheymustknowthelanguagesandculturesoftheirsubjects.BritishofficersarrivinginIndiawere supposed to spendup to threeyears inaCalcuttacollege,wherethey studied Hindu and Muslim law alongside English law; Sanskrit,Urdu and Persian alongside Greek and Latin; and Tamil, Bengali andHindustani culture alongside mathematics, economics and geography.The study of linguistics provided invaluable help in understanding thestructureandgrammaroflocallanguages.Thanks to the work of people like William Jones and Henry

Rawlinson, theEuropeanconquerorsknewtheirempiresverywell.Farbetter, indeed, than any previous conquerors, or even than the nativepopulation itself. Their superior knowledge had obvious practicaladvantages.Without such knowledge, it is unlikely that a ridiculouslysmallnumberofBritonscouldhavesucceededingoverning,oppressingand exploiting so many hundreds of millions of Indians for twocenturies. Throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries,fewerthan5,000Britishofficials,about40,000–70,000Britishsoldiers,andperhapsanother100,000Britishbusinesspeople,hangers-on,wivesand children were sufficient to conquer and rule up to 300 millionIndians.9Yetthesepracticaladvantageswerenottheonlyreasonwhyempires

financedthestudyoflinguistics,botany,geographyandhistory.Nolessimportant was the fact that science gave the empires ideologicaljustification. Modern Europeans came to believe that acquiring newknowledge was always good. The fact that the empires produced aconstant stream of new knowledge branded them as progressive andpositiveenterprises.Eventoday,historiesofsciencessuchasgeography,archaeologyandbotanycannotavoidcreditingtheEuropeanempires,atleastindirectly.HistoriesofbotanyhavelittletosayaboutthesufferingoftheAboriginalAustralians,buttheyusuallyfindsomekindwordsforJamesCookandJosephBanks.Furthermore,thenewknowledgeaccumulatedbytheempiresmadeit

possible, at least in theory, to benefit the conquered populations and

bring them the benefits of ‘progress’ – to provide themwithmedicineand education, to build railroads and canals, to ensure justice andprosperity. Imperialists claimed that their empires were not vastenterprisesofexploitationbutratheraltruisticprojectsconductedforthesakeofthenon-Europeanraces–inRudyardKipling’swords,‘theWhiteMan’sburden’:

TakeuptheWhiteMan’sburden–

Sendforththebestyebreed–

Gobindyoursonstoexile

Toserveyourcaptives’need;

Towaitinheavyharness,

Onflutteredfolkandwild–

Yournew-caught,sullenpeoples,

Half-devilandhalf-child.

Ofcourse,thefactsoftenbeliedthismyth.TheBritishconqueredBengal,therichestprovinceofIndia,in1764.Thenewrulerswereinterestedinlittleexceptenriching themselves.Theyadoptedadisastrouseconomicpolicy that a few years later led to the outbreak of the Great BengalFamine.Itbeganin1769,reachedcatastrophiclevelsin1770,andlasteduntil 1773. About 10 million Bengalis, a third of the province’spopulation,diedinthecalamity.10Intruth,neitherthenarrativeofoppressionandexploitationnorthat

of‘TheWhiteMan’sBurden’completelymatchesthefacts.TheEuropeanempiresdidsomanydifferentthingsonsuchalargescale,thatyoucanfind plenty of examples to support whatever you want to say aboutthem.Youthinkthat theseempireswereevilmonstrosities thatspreaddeath,oppressionand injusticearound theworld?Youcouldeasily fillanencyclopediawiththeircrimes.Youwant toarguethat they in factimproved the conditions of their subjects with new medicines, bettereconomic conditions and greater security? You could fill anotherencyclopedia with their achievements. Due to their close cooperationwith science, these empires wielded so much power and changed theworldtosuchanextentthatperhapstheycannotbesimplylabelledasgood or evil. They created the world as we know it, including the

ideologiesweuseinordertojudgethem.But science was also used by imperialists to more sinister ends.Biologists, anthropologists and even linguists provided scientific proofthatEuropeansaresuperiortoallotherraces,andconsequentlyhavetheright (if not perhaps the duty) to rule over them.AfterWilliam Jonesargued thatall Indo-European languagesdescend fromasingleancientlanguagemanyscholarswereeagertodiscoverwhothespeakersofthatlanguagehadbeen.TheynoticedthattheearliestSanskritspeakers,whohad invaded India from Central Asiamore than 3,000 years ago, hadcalled themselves Arya. The speakers of the earliest Persian languagecalled themselvesAiriia.European scholars consequently surmised thatthepeoplewho spoke theprimordial language that gavebirth tobothSanskritandPersian(aswellastoGreek,Latin,GothicandCeltic)musthavecalledthemselvesAryans.CoulditbeacoincidencethatthosewhofoundedthemagnificentIndian,Persian,GreekandRomancivilisationswereallAryans?Next, British, French and German scholars wedded the linguistictheory about the industrious Aryans to Darwin’s theory of naturalselectionandpositedthattheAryanswerenotjustalinguisticgroupbutabiologicalentity–arace.Andnotjustanyrace,butamasterraceoftall, light-haired, blue-eyed, hard-working, and super-rational humanswho emerged from the mists of the north to lay the foundations ofculture throughout the world. Regrettably, the Aryans who invadedIndiaandPersiaintermarriedwiththelocalnativestheyfoundintheselands,losingtheirlightcomplexionsandblondhair,andwiththemtheirrationality and diligence. The civilisations of India and Persiaconsequently declined. In Europe, on the other hand, the Aryanspreserved their racial purity. This is why Europeans had managed toconquertheworld,andwhytheywerefittoruleit–providedtheytookprecautionsnottomixwithinferiorraces.Such racist theories, prominent and respectable for many decades,have become anathema among scientists and politicians alike. Peoplecontinue to conduct a heroic struggle against racismwithout noticingthatthebattlefronthasshifted,andthattheplaceofracisminimperialideologyhasnowbeenreplacedby ‘culturism’.There isnosuchword,but it’sabouttimewecoinedit.Amongtoday’selites,assertionsaboutthe contrasting merits of diverse human groups are almost always

couched in termsofhistoricaldifferencesbetweencultures rather thanbiological differences between races. We no longer say, ‘It’s in theirblood.’Wesay,‘It’sintheirculture.’ThusEuropean right-wingpartieswhichopposeMuslim immigrationusually take care to avoid racial terminology. Marine le Pen’sspeechwriters would have been shown the door on the spot had theysuggested that the leader of the Front National go on television todeclare that, ‘Wedon’twant those inferiorSemites todiluteourAryanblood and spoil our Aryan civilisation.’ Instead, the French FrontNational, the Dutch Party for Freedom, the Alliance for the Future ofAustria and their like tend to argue that Western culture, as it hasevolvedinEurope,ischaracterisedbydemocraticvalues,toleranceandgenderequality,whereasMuslimculture,whichevolved in theMiddleEast, ischaracterisedbyhierarchicalpolitics, fanaticismandmisogyny.Since the two cultures are so different, and since many Muslimimmigrantsareunwilling(andperhapsunable)toadoptWesternvalues,theyshouldnotbeallowedtoenter, lest they foment internalconflictsandcorrodeEuropeandemocracyandliberalism.Suchculturistargumentsarefedbyscientificstudiesinthehumanitiesandsocialsciencesthathighlighttheso-calledclashofcivilisationsandthefundamentaldifferencesbetweendifferentcultures.Notallhistoriansand anthropologists accept these theories or support their politicalusages. But whereas biologists today have an easy time disavowingracism, simply explaining that the biological differences betweenpresent-dayhumanpopulationsaretrivial,itisharderforhistoriansandanthropologists to disavow culturism. After all, if the differencesbetweenhumanculturesare trivial,why shouldwepayhistoriansandanthropologiststostudythem?

Scientistshaveprovidedthe imperialprojectwithpracticalknowledge,ideological justification and technological gadgets. Without thiscontribution it is highly questionable whether Europeans could haveconqueredtheworld.Theconquerorsreturnedthefavourbyprovidingscientists with information and protection, supporting all kinds ofstrange and fascinating projects and spreading the scientific way ofthinking to the farcornersof theearth.Without imperial support, it is

doubtfulwhethermodernsciencewouldhaveprogressedveryfar.Thereare very few scientific disciplines that did not begin their lives asservants to imperialgrowthand thatdonotowea largeproportionoftheirdiscoveries,collections,buildingsandscholarshipstothegeneroushelpofarmyofficers,navycaptainsandimperialgovernors.Thisisobviouslynotthewholestory.Sciencewassupportedbyotherinstitutions, not just by empires. And the European empires rose andflourishedthanksalsotofactorsotherthanscience.Behindthemeteoricriseof both science andempire lurksoneparticularly important force:capitalism. Were it not for businessmen seeking to make money,ColumbuswouldnothavereachedAmerica,JamesCookwouldnothavereached Australia, and Neil Armstrong would never have taken thatsmallsteponthesurfaceofthemoon.

16

TheCapitalistCreed

MONEY HAS BEEN ESSENTIAL BOTH FOR building empires and forpromotingscience.Butismoneytheultimategoaloftheseundertakings,orperhapsjustadangerousnecessity?It isnoteasy tograsp the true roleofeconomics inmodernhistory.

Wholevolumeshavebeenwrittenabouthowmoneyfoundedstatesandruined them, opened new horizons and enslaved millions, moved thewheelsofindustryanddrovehundredsofspeciesintoextinction.Yettounderstandmoderneconomichistory,youreallyneedtounderstandjustasingleword.Thewordisgrowth.Forbetterorworse,insicknessandinhealth,themoderneconomyhasbeengrowinglikeahormone-sousedteenager.Iteatsupeverythingitcanfindandputsoninchesfasterthanyoucancount.For most of history the economy stayed much the same size. Yes,

global production increased, but this was due mostly to demographicexpansion and the settlement of new lands. Per capita productionremainedstatic.Butallthatchangedinthemodernage.In1500,globalproductionofgoodsandserviceswasequaltoabout$250billion;todayit hovers around $60 trillion. More importantly, in 1500, annual percapita production averaged$550,while today everyman,woman andchildproduces,on theaverage,$8,800ayear.1Whataccounts for thisstupendousgrowth?Economicsisanotoriouslycomplicatedsubject.Tomakethingseasier,

let’simagineasimpleexample.Samuel Greedy, a shrewd financier, founds a bank in El Dorado,

California.

A. A. Stone, an up-and-coming contractor in El Dorado, finishes hisfirst big job, receiving payment in cash to the tune of $1million. HedepositsthissuminMrGreedy’sbank.Thebanknowhas$1millionincapital.Inthemeantime,JaneMcDoughnut,anexperiencedbutimpecuniousElDoradochef,thinkssheseesabusinessopportunity–there’snoreallygoodbakeryinherpartoftown.Butshedoesn’thaveenoughmoneyofherown tobuyaproper facilitycompletewith industrialovens, sinks,knives and pots. She goes to the bank, presents her business plan toGreedy,andpersuadeshimthatit’saworthwhileinvestment.Heissuesher a $1million loan, by crediting her account in the bankwith thatsum.McDoughnutnowhiresStone,thecontractor,tobuildandfurnishherbakery.Hispriceis$1,000,000.When she pays him, with a cheque drawn on her account, StonedepositsitinhisaccountintheGreedybank.SohowmuchmoneydoesStonehaveinhisbankaccount?Right,$2million.Howmuchmoney,cash,isactuallylocatedinthebank’ssafe?Yes,$1million.Itdoesn’tstopthere.Ascontractorsarewonttodo,twomonthsintothejobStoneinformsMcDoughnutthat,duetounforeseenproblemsandexpenses,thebillforconstructingthebakerywillactuallybe$2million.MrsMcDoughnutisnotpleased,butshecanhardlystopthejobinthemiddle.So shepaysanothervisit to thebank,convincesMrGreedy togive her an additional loan, and he puts another $1 million in heraccount.Shetransfersthemoneytothecontractor’saccount.HowmuchmoneydoesStonehave inhisaccountnow?He’sgot$3million.But how much money is actually sitting in the bank? Still just $1million.Infact,thesame$1millionthat’sbeeninthebankallalong.CurrentUSbankinglawpermitsthebanktorepeatthisexercisesevenmore times. The contractor would eventually have $10 million in hisaccount, even though the bank still has but $1 million in its vaults.Banks are allowed to loan $10 for every dollar they actually possess,whichmeansthat90percentofallthemoneyinourbankaccountsisnotcoveredbyactualcoinsandnotes.2 Ifallof theaccountholdersat

Barclays Bank suddenly demand their money, Barclays will promptlycollapse(unlessthegovernmentstepsintosaveit).ThesameistrueofLloyds,DeutscheBank,Citibank,andallotherbanksintheworld.ItsoundslikeagiantPonzischeme,doesn’tit?Butifit’safraud,thentheentiremoderneconomyisafraud.Thefact is, it’snotadeception,butratheratributetotheamazingabilitiesof thehumanimagination.Whatenablesbanks–andtheentireeconomy–tosurviveandflourishisour trust in the future. This trust is the sole backing for most of themoneyintheworld.In the bakery example, the discrepancy between the contractor’saccountstatementandtheamountofmoneyactuallyinthebankisMrsMcDoughnut’s bakery. Mr Greedy has put the bank’s money into theasset, trusting that one day it would be profitable. The bakery hasn’tbakedaloafofbreadyet,butMcDoughnutandGreedyanticipatethatayearhenceitwillbesellingthousandsofloaves,rolls,cakesandcookieseachday, at ahandsomeprofit.MrsMcDoughnutwill thenbe able torepay her loan, with interest. If at that point Mr Stone decides towithdrawhissavings,Greedywillbeabletocomeupwiththecash.Theentire enterprise is thus foundedon trust in an imaginary future – thetrust that the entrepreneurand thebankerhave in thebakeryof theirdreams, alongwith the contractor’s trust in the future solvency of thebank.We’vealreadyseenthatmoneyisanastoundingthingbecauseitcanrepresent myriad different objects and convert anything into almostanythingelse.However,beforethemodernerathisabilitywaslimited.In most cases, money could represent and convert only things thatactually existed in the present. This imposed a severe limitation ongrowth,sinceitmadeitveryhardtofinancenewenterprises.Consider our bakery again. CouldMcDoughnut get it built ifmoneycouldrepresentonlytangibleobjects?No.Inthepresent,shehasalotofdreams, but no tangible resources. The only way she could get herbakery built would be to find a contractorwilling towork today andreceive payment in a few years’ time, if and when the bakery startsmaking money. Alas, such contractors are rare breeds. So ourentrepreneur is in a bind. Without a bakery, she can’t bake cakes.Withoutcakes,shecan’tmakemoney.Withoutmoney,shecan’thireacontractor.Withoutacontractor,shehasnobakery.

Humankindwastrappedinthispredicamentforthousandsofyears.Asa result, economies remained frozen. The way out of the trap wasdiscoveredonlyinthemodernera,withtheappearanceofanewsystembasedontrustinthefuture.Init,peopleagreedtorepresentimaginarygoods–goods thatdonotexist in thepresent–withaspecialkindofmoneytheycalled‘credit’.Creditenablesustobuildthepresentattheexpense of the future. It’s founded on the assumption that our futureresourcesaresuretobefarmoreabundantthanourpresentresources.Ahostofnewandwonderfulopportunitiesopenupifwecanbuildthingsinthepresentusingfutureincome.

Ifcreditissuchawonderfulthing,whydidnobodythinkofitearlier?Ofcoursetheydid.Creditarrangementsofonekindoranotherhaveexistedinallknownhumancultures,goingbackatleasttoancientSumer.Theprobleminpreviouseraswasnotthatnoonehadtheideaorknewhowto use it. It was that people seldom wanted to extend much creditbecause they didn’t trust that the future would be better than thepresent. They generally believed that times past had been better thantheirowntimesandthatthefuturewouldbeworse,oratbestmuchthesame.Toputthatineconomicterms,theybelievedthatthetotalamountofwealthwaslimited,ifnotdwindling.Peoplethereforeconsidereditabadbettoassumethattheypersonally,ortheirkingdom,ortheentireworld, would be producing more wealth ten years down the line.Business looked like a zero-sum game. Of course, the profits of oneparticularbakerymightrise,butonlyattheexpenseofthebakerynextdoor.Venicemightflourish,butonlybyimpoverishingGenoa.ThekingofEnglandmightenrichhimself,butonlybyrobbingthekingofFrance.You could cut the pie in many different ways, but it never got anybigger.That’swhymany cultures concluded thatmaking bundles ofmoney

wassinful.AsJesussaid,‘Itiseasierforacameltopassthroughtheeyeof a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God’(Matthew19:24). If thepie isstatic,andIhaveabigpartof it, thenImust have taken somebody else’s slice. The rich were obliged to dopenance for their evil deeds by giving someof their surpluswealth tocharity.

TheEntrepreneur’sDilemma

Iftheglobalpiestayedthesamesize,therewasnomarginforcredit.Creditisthedifferencebetweentoday’spieandtomorrowspie.Ifthepiestays the same, why extend credit? It would be an unacceptable riskunlessyoubelievedthatthebakerorkingaskingforyourmoneymightbeabletostealaslicefromacompetitor.Soitwashardtogetaloaninthepremodernworld,andwhenyougotoneitwasusuallysmall,short-term,andsubjecttohighinterestrates.Upstartentrepreneursthusfounditdifficult to open new bakeries and great kings who wanted to buildpalaces or wage wars had no choice but to raise the necessary fundsthroughhightaxesandtariffs.

TheMagicCircleoftheModernEconomy

Thatwasfineforkings(aslongastheirsubjectsremaineddocile),buta

scullerymaidwhohadagreatideaforabakeryandwantedtomoveupintheworldgenerallycouldonlydreamofwealthwhilescrubbingdowntheroyalkitchensfloors.It was lose-lose. Because credit was limited, people had trouble

financing new businesses. Because therewere few new businesses, theeconomydidnotgrow.Becauseitdidnotgrow,peopleassumeditneverwould, and thosewhohad capitalwerewary of extending credit. Theexpectationofstagnationfulfilleditself.

AGrowingPie

ThencametheScientificRevolutionandtheideaofprogress.Theideaof progress is built on the notion that if we admit our ignorance andinvest resources in research, things can improve. This idea was soontranslated into economic terms.Whoever believes in progress believesthat geographical discoveries, technological inventions andorganisational developments can increase the sum total of humanproduction, trade and wealth. New trade routes in the Atlantic couldflourish without ruining old routes in the Indian Ocean. New goodscould be produced without reducing the production of old ones. Forinstance, one could open a newbakery specialising in chocolate cakesandcroissantswithoutcausingbakeriesspecialisinginbreadtogobust.Everybody would simply develop new tastes and eat more. I can bewealthywithoutyourbecomingpoor;Icanbeobesewithoutyourdyingofhunger.Theentireglobalpiecangrow.Overthe last500yearsthe ideaofprogressconvincedpeopletoput

more and more trust in the future. This trust created credit; creditbroughtrealeconomicgrowth;andgrowthstrengthenedthetrustinthefuture and opened the way for even more credit. It didn’t happenovernight – the economy behaved more like a roller coaster than aballoon.Butoverthelongrun,withthebumpsevenedout,thegeneraldirectionwasunmistakable.Today,thereissomuchcreditintheworldthat governments, business corporations and private individuals easilyobtain large, long-term and low-interest loans that far exceed currentincome.

TheEconomicHistoryoftheWorldinaNutshell

Thebelief inthegrowingglobalpieeventuallyturnedrevolutionary.In 1776 the Scottish economist Adam Smith published The Wealth ofNations,probablythemostimportanteconomicsmanifestoofalltime.Inthe eighth chapter of its first volume, Smithmade the followingnovelargument:whenalandlord,aweaver,orashoemakerhasgreaterprofitsthanheneedstomaintainhisownfamily,heusesthesurplustoemploymoreassistants,inordertofurtherincreasehisprofits.Themoreprofitshehas,themoreassistantshecanemploy.Itfollowsthatanincreaseinthe profits of private entrepreneurs is the basis for the increase incollectivewealthandprosperity.This may not strike you as very original, because we all live in a

capitalist world that takes Smith’s argument for granted. We hearvariationson this themeeveryday in thenews.YetSmith’sclaimthatthe selfish human urge to increase private profits is the basis forcollectivewealthisoneofthemostrevolutionaryideasinhumanhistory–revolutionarynotjustfromaneconomicperspective,butevenmoresofromamoralandpoliticalperspective.WhatSmithsaysis,infact,thatgreedisgood,andthatbybecomingricherIbenefiteverybody,notjustmyself.Egoismisaltruism.Smith taught people to think about the economy as a ‘win-win

situation’, in whichmy profits are also your profits. Not only canwebothenjoyabiggersliceofpieatthesametime,buttheincreaseinyour

slicedependsupontheincreaseinmyslice.IfIampoor,youtoowillbepoorsinceIcannotbuyyourproductsorservices.IfIamrich,youtoowillbeenrichedsinceyoucannowsellmesomething.Smithdeniedthetraditionalcontradictionbetweenwealthandmorality,andthrewopenthegatesofheavenfortherich.Beingrichmeantbeingmoral.InSmithsstory, people become rich not by despoiling their neighbours, but byincreasingtheoverallsizeofthepie.Andwhenthepiegrows,everyonebenefits.Therichareaccordinglythemostusefulandbenevolentpeoplein society, because they turn the wheels of growth for everyone’sadvantage.Allthisdepends,however,ontherichusingtheirprofitstoopennewfactories and hire new employees, rather than wasting them on non-productiveactivities.Smiththereforerepeatedlikeamantrathemaximthat ‘When profits increase, the landlord or weaver will employmoreassistants’andnot‘Whenprofitsincrease,Scroogewillhoardhismoneyinachestandtakeitoutonlytocounthiscoins.’Acrucialpartofthemoderncapitalisteconomywastheemergenceofanewethic,accordingtowhichprofitsoughttobereinvestedinproduction.Thisbringsaboutmore profits, which are again reinvested in production, which bringsmoreprofits,etcetera ad infinitum. Investments canbemade inmanyways: enlarging the factory, conducting scientific research, developingnew products. Yet all these investments must somehow increaseproductionandtranslateintolargerprofits.Inthenewcapitalistcreed,the first andmost sacred commandment is: ‘The profits of productionmustbereinvestedinincreasingproduction.’That’s why capitalism is called ‘capitalism’. Capitalism distinguishes‘capital’ from mere ‘wealth’. Capital consists of money, goods andresourcesthatareinvestedinproduction.Wealth,ontheotherhand,isburied in the ground orwasted on unproductive activities. A pharaohwhopoursresourcesintoanon-productivepyramidisnotacapitalist.Apirate who loots a Spanish treasure fleet and buries a chest full ofglitteringcoinsonthebeachofsomeCaribbeanislandisnotacapitalist.Butahard-workingfactoryhandwhoreinvestspartofhisincomeinthestockmarketis.The idea that ‘The profits of production must be reinvested inincreasing production’ sounds trivial. Yet it was alien to most peoplethroughouthistory.Inpremoderntimes,peoplebelievedthatproduction

wasmore or less constant. So why reinvest your profits if productionwon’t increase by much, no matter what you do? Thus medievalnoblemenespousedanethicofgenerosityandconspicuousconsumption.Theyspenttheirrevenuesontournaments,banquets,palacesandwars,andoncharityandmonumentalcathedrals.Fewtriedtoreinvestprofitsinincreasingtheirmanors’output,developingbetterkindsofwheat,orlookingfornewmarkets.

In the modern era, the nobility has been overtaken by a new elitewhose members are true believers in the capitalist creed. The newcapitalist elite is made up not of dukes and marquises, but of boardchairmen,stocktradersandindustrialists.Thesemagnatesarefarricherthanthemedievalnobility,buttheyarefarlessinterestedinextravagantconsumption, and they spend a much smaller part of their profits onnon-productiveactivities.Medievalnoblemenworecolourfulrobesofgoldandsilk,anddevotedmuch of their time to attending banquets, carnivals and glamoroustournaments. In comparison,modernCEOsdondreary uniforms calledsuitsthataffordthemallthepanacheofaflockofcrows,andtheyhavelittle time for festivities.The typicalventurecapitalist rushes fromonebusiness meeting to another, trying to figure out where to invest hiscapital and following the ups and downs of the stocks and bonds heowns.True,his suitsmightbeVersaceandhemightget to travel inaprivatejet,buttheseexpensesarenothingcomparedtowhatheinvestsinincreasinghumanproduction.

It’s not just Versace-clad business moguls who invest to increaseproductivity.Ordinaryfolkandgovernmentagenciesthinkalongsimilarlines.Howmanydinnerconversationsinmodestneighbourhoodssooneror laterbogdown in interminabledebateaboutwhether it isbetter toinvest one’s savings in the stock market, bonds or property?Governments too strive to invest their tax revenues in productiveenterprises that will increase future income – for example, building anew port could make it easier for factories to export their products,enabling them to make more taxable income, thereby increasing thegovernment’s future revenues. Another government might prefer toinvestineducation,onthegroundsthateducatedpeopleformthebasisfor the lucrative high-tech industries, which pay lots of taxes withoutneedingextensiveportfacilities.

Capitalismbeganasatheoryabouthowtheeconomyfunctions. Itwasbothdescriptiveandprescriptive–itofferedanaccountofhowmoneyworked and promoted the idea that reinvesting profits in productionleadstofasteconomicgrowth.Butcapitalismgraduallybecamefarmorethanjustaneconomicdoctrine.Itnowencompassesanethic–asetofteachingsabouthowpeople shouldbehave, educate their childrenandeven think. Its principal tenet is that economic growth is the supremegood,oratleastaproxyforthesupremegood,becausejustice,freedomandevenhappinessalldependoneconomicgrowth.Askacapitalisthowto bring justice and political freedom to a place like Zimbabwe orAfghanistan, and you are likely to get a lecture on how economicaffluenceandathrivingmiddleclassareessentialforstabledemocraticinstitutions,andabouttheneedthereforetoinculcateAfghantribesmeninthevaluesoffreeenterprise,thriftandself-reliance.Thisnewreligionhashadadecisiveinfluenceonthedevelopmentof

modern science, too. Scientific research is usually funded by eithergovernments or private businesses. When capitalist governments andbusinesses consider investing in a particular scientific project, the firstquestionsareusually,‘Willthisprojectenableustoincreaseproductionandprofits?Willitproduceeconomicgrowth?’Aprojectthatcan’tclearthese hurdles has little chance of finding a sponsor. No history ofmodernsciencecanleavecapitalismoutofthepicture.

Conversely, the history of capitalism is unintelligiblewithout takingscience into account. Capitalisms belief in perpetual economic growthflies in the face of almost everything we know about the universe. Asocietyofwolveswouldbeextremelyfoolishtobelievethatthesupplyofsheepwouldkeepongrowingindefinitely.Thehumaneconomyhasneverthelessmanagedtogrowexponentiallythroughoutthemodernera,thanksonlytothefactthatscientistscomeupwithanotherdiscoveryorgadgeteveryfewyears–suchasthecontinentofAmerica,theinternalcombustion engine, or genetically engineered sheep. Banks andgovernmentsprintmoney,butultimately,itisthescientistswhofootthebill.Overthelastfewyears,banksandgovernmentshavebeenfrenziedly

printingmoney.Everybody is terrified that thecurrent economiccrisismay stop the growth of the economy. So they are creating trillions ofdollars, euros and yen out of thin air, pumping cheap credit into thesystem, and hoping that the scientists, technicians and engineers willmanagetocomeupwithsomethingreallybig,beforethebubblebursts.Everythingdependsonthepeopleinthelabs.Newdiscoveriesinfieldssuch as biotechnology and nanotechnology could create entire newindustries,whoseprofitscouldbackthetrillionsofmake-believemoneythatthebanksandgovernmentshavecreatedsince2008.Ifthelabsdonot fulfil these expectations before the bubble bursts, we are headingtowardsveryroughtimes.

ColumbusSearchesforanInvestor

Capitalismplayedadecisiverolenotonlyintheriseofmodernscience,butalsointheemergenceofEuropeanimperialism.AnditwasEuropeanimperialismthatcreatedthecapitalistcreditsysteminthefirstplace.Ofcourse,creditwasnot invented inmodernEurope. Itexisted inalmostallagriculturalsocieties,andintheearlymodernperiodtheemergenceofEuropeancapitalismwascloselylinkedtoeconomicdevelopmentsinAsia.Remember,too,thatuntilthelateeighteenthcentury,Asiawastheworld’s economic powerhouse, meaning that Europeans had far lesscapitalattheirdisposalthantheChinese,MuslimsorIndians.

However,inthesociopoliticalsystemsofChina,IndiaandtheMuslimworld,creditplayedonlyasecondaryrole.MerchantsandbankersinthemarketsofIstanbul,Isfahan,DelhiandBeijingmayhavethoughtalongcapitalist lines, but the kings and generals in the palaces and fortstended to despise merchants and mercantile thinking. Most non-European empires of the early modern era were established by greatconquerors such as Nurhaci and Nader Shah, or by bureaucratic andmilitary elites as in the Qing and Ottoman empires. Financing warsthroughtaxesandplunder(withoutmakingfinedistinctionsbetweenthetwo),theyowedlittletocreditsystems,andtheycaredevenlessabouttheinterestsofbankersandinvestors.In Europe, on the other hand, kings and generals gradually adopted

themercantilewayofthinking,untilmerchantsandbankersbecametheruling elite. The European conquest of the world was increasinglyfinancedthroughcreditratherthantaxes,andwasincreasinglydirectedbycapitalistswhosemainambitionwastoreceivemaximumreturnsontheirinvestments.Theempiresbuiltbybankersandmerchantsinfrockcoatsandtophatsdefeatedtheempiresbuiltbykingsandnoblemeningold clothes and shining armour. Themercantile empireswere simplymuchshrewderinfinancingtheirconquests.Nobodywantstopaytaxes,buteveryoneishappytoinvest.In1484ChristopherColumbusapproachedthekingofPortugalwith

theproposal thathe financea fleet thatwould sailwestward to findanew trade route toEastAsia. Such explorationswere a very risky andcostlybusiness.Alotofmoneywasneededinordertobuildships,buysupplies,andpaysailorsandsoldiers–andtherewasnoguaranteethattheinvestmentwouldyieldareturn.ThekingofPortugaldeclined.Like a present-day start-up entrepreneur, Columbus did not give up.

HepitchedhisideatootherpotentialinvestorsinItaly,France,England,andagaininPortugal.Eachtimehewasrejected.HethentriedhisluckwithFerdinandand Isabella, rulers of newlyunitedSpain.He tookonsomeexperiencedlobbyists,andwiththeirhelphemanagedtoconvinceQueen Isabella to invest. As every school-child knows, Isabella hit thejackpot. Columbus’ discoveries enabled the Spaniards to conquerAmerica,wheretheyestablishedgoldandsilverminesaswellassugarand tobacco plantations that enriched the Spanish kings, bankers andmerchantsbeyondtheirwildestdreams.

Ahundredyearslater,princesandbankerswerewillingtoextendfarmorecredittoColumbus’successors,andtheyhadmorecapitalattheirdisposal, thanks to the treasures reaped from America. Equallyimportant, princes and bankers had far more trust in the potential ofexploration,andweremorewilling topartwith theirmoney.Thiswasthemagiccircleofimperialcapitalism:creditfinancednewdiscoveries;discoveries ledtocolonies;coloniesprovidedprofits;profitsbuilt trust;andtrusttranslatedintomorecredit.NurhaciandNaderShahranoutoffuel after a few thousand kilometres. Capitalist entrepreneurs onlyincreasedtheirfinancialmomentumfromconquesttoconquest.But these expeditions remained chancy affairs, so credit markets

nevertheless remained quite cautious. Many expeditions returned toEuropeempty-handed,havingdiscoverednothingofvalue.TheEnglish,for instance,wasted a lot of capital in fruitless attempts to discover anorth-western passage to Asia through the Arctic. Many otherexpeditionsdidn’treturnatall.Shipshiticebergs,founderedintropicalstorms, or fell victim to pirates. In order to increase the number ofpotentialinvestorsandreducetherisktheyincurred,Europeansturnedto limited liability joint-stock companies. Instead of a single investorbettingallhismoneyona single rickety ship, the joint-stockcompanycollectedmoney froma largenumberof investors, each riskingonlyasmallportionofhiscapital.Therisksweretherebycurtailed,butnocapwas placed on the profits. Even a small investment in the right shipcouldturnyouintoamillionaire.Decade by decade, western Europe witnessed the development of a

sophisticatedfinancialsystemthatcouldraiselargeamountsofcreditonshort notice and put it at the disposal of private entrepreneurs andgovernments.This systemcould financeexplorationsandconquests farmoreefficientlythananykingdomorempire.Thenew-foundpowerofcredit can be seen in the bitter struggle between Spain and theNetherlands.Inthesixteenthcentury,Spainwasthemostpowerfulstatein Europe, holding sway over a vast global empire. It ruled much ofEurope,hugechunksofNorthandSouthAmerica,thePhilippineIslands,and a string of bases along the coasts of Africa and Asia. Every year,fleetsheavywithAmericanandAsiantreasuresreturnedtotheportsofSeville and Cadiz. The Netherlands was a small and windy swamp,devoid of natural resources, a small corner of the king of Spain’s

dominions.In1568theDutch,whoweremainlyProtestant,revoltedagainsttheir

CatholicSpanishoverlord.AtfirsttherebelsseemedtoplaytheroleofDon Quixote, courageously tilting at invincible windmills. Yet withineighty years the Dutch had not only secured their independence fromSpain,buthadmanaged to replace theSpaniardsand theirPortugueseallies asmasters of the ocean highways, build a global Dutch empire,andbecomethericheststateinEurope.ThesecretofDutchsuccesswascredit.TheDutchburghers,whohad

little taste for combat on land, hired mercenary armies to fight theSpanish for them.TheDutch themselvesmeanwhile took to the sea inever-largerfleets.Mercenaryarmiesandcannon-brandishingfleetscostafortune, but the Dutchwere able to finance theirmilitary expeditionsmore easily than themighty SpanishEmpire because they secured thetrust of the burgeoning European financial system at a timewhen theSpanishkingwascarelesslyerodingitstrustinhim.FinanciersextendedtheDutch enough credit to set up armies and fleets, and these armiesand fleetsgave theDutchcontrolofworld trade routes,which in turnyielded handsome profits. The profits allowed the Dutch to repay theloans, which strengthened the trust of the financiers. Amsterdam wasfastbecomingnotonlyoneof themost importantportsofEurope,butalsothecontinent’sfinancialMecca.

HowexactlydidtheDutchwinthetrustofthefinancialsystem?Firstly,they were sticklers about repaying their loans on time and in full,making the extension of credit less risky for lenders. Secondly, theircountry’s judicial system enjoyed independence and protected privaterights–inparticularprivatepropertyrights.Capitaltricklesawayfromdictatorial states that fail to defend private individuals and theirproperty. Instead, it flows into states upholding the rule of law andprivateproperty.Imagine thatyouare thesonofa solid familyofGerman financiers.

Your father sees an opportunity to expand the business by openingbranchesinmajorEuropeancities.HesendsyoutoAmsterdamandyouryoungerbrothertoMadrid,givingyoueach10,000goldcoinstoinvest.Yourbrother lendshis start-upcapital at interest to thekingofSpain,

whoneedsittoraiseanarmytofightthekingofFrance.YoudecidetolendyourstoaDutchmerchant,whowantstoinvestinscrublandonthesouthernendofadesolateislandcalledManhattan,certainthatpropertyvaluestherewillskyrocketastheHudsonRiverturnsintoamajortradeartery.Bothloansaretoberepaidwithinayear.Theyearpasses.TheDutchmerchant sells the landhe’sboughtatahandsome markup and repays your money with the interest hepromised. Your father is pleased. But your little brother in Madrid isgettingnervous.ThewarwithFranceendedwellforthekingofSpain,buthehasnowembroiledhimselfinaconflictwiththeTurks.Heneedsevery penny to finance the new war, and thinks this is far moreimportant than repaying old debts. Your brother sends letters to thepalaceandasksfriendswithconnectionsatcourttointercede,buttonoavail.Notonlyhasyourbrothernotearnedthepromisedinterest–he’slosttheprincipal.Yourfatherisnotpleased.Now,tomakemattersworse,thekingsendsatreasuryofficialtoyourbrother to tell him, in no uncertain terms, that he expects to receiveanotherloanofthesamesize,forthwith.Yourbrotherhasnomoneytolend.HewriteshometoDad,tryingtopersuadehimthatthistimetheking will come through. The paterfamilias has a soft spot for hisyoungest, and agrees with a heavy heart. Another 10,000 gold coinsdisappearintotheSpanishtreasury,nevertobeseenagain.MeanwhileinAmsterdam,thingsarelookingbright.YoumakemoreandmoreloanstoenterprisingDutchmerchants,whorepaythempromptlyandinfull.Butyourluckdoesnotholdindefinitely.OneofyourusualclientshasahunchthatwoodenclogsaregoingtobethenextfashioncrazeinParis,and asks you for a loan to set up a footwear emporium in the Frenchcapital.Youlendhimthemoney,butunfortunatelytheclogsdon’tcatchonwiththeFrenchladies,andthedisgruntledmerchantrefusestorepaytheloan.Your father is furious,andtellsbothofyou it is timetounleashthelawyers.YourbrotherfilessuitinMadridagainsttheSpanishmonarch,while you file suit in Amsterdam against the erstwhile wooden-shoewizard.InSpain,thelawcourtsaresubservienttotheking–thejudgesserveathispleasureandfearpunishmentiftheydonotdohiswill. Inthe Netherlands, the courts are a separate branch of government, notdependenton the country’s burghers andprinces.The court inMadrid

throws out your brother’s suit, while the court in Amsterdam finds inyourfavourandputsalienontheclog-merchant’sassetstoforcehimtopay up. Your father has learned his lesson. Better to do businesswithmerchants than with kings, and better to do it in Holland than inMadrid.Andyourbrother’stravailsarenotover.ThekingofSpaindesperatelyneedsmoremoneytopayhisarmy.He’ssurethatyourfatherhascashtospare.Sohebringstrumped-uptreasonchargesagainstyourbrother.If he doesn’t come upwith 20,000 gold coins forthwith, he’ll get castintoadungeonandrotthereuntilhedies.Yourfatherhashadenough.Hepaystheransomforhisbelovedson,but swears never to do business in Spain again. He closes hisMadridbranch and relocates your brother to Rotterdam. Two branches inHolland now look like a really good idea.He hears that even Spanishcapitalistsare smuggling their fortunesoutof theircountry.They, too,realise that if theywant to keep theirmoney and use it to gainmorewealth,theyarebetteroffinvestingitwheretheruleoflawprevailsandwhereprivatepropertyisrespected–intheNetherlands,forexample.InsuchwaysdidthekingofSpainsquanderthetrustof investorsatthesametimethatDutchmerchantsgainedtheirconfidence.AnditwastheDutchmerchants–nottheDutchstate–whobuilttheDutchEmpire.ThekingofSpainkeptontryingtofinanceandmaintainhisconquestsby raising unpopular taxes from a disgruntled populace. The Dutchmerchants financedconquestbygetting loans,andincreasinglyalsobysellingsharesintheircompaniesthatentitledtheirholderstoreceiveaportion of the company’s profits. Cautious investors whowould neverhave given their money to the king of Spain, and who would havethoughttwicebeforeextendingcredittotheDutchgovernment,happilyinvested fortunes in the Dutch joint-stock companies that were themainstayofthenewempire.Ifyouthoughtacompanywasgoing tomakeabigprofitbut ithadalreadysoldallitsshares,youcouldbuysomefrompeoplewhoownedthem, probably for a higher price than they originally paid. If youboughtsharesandlaterdiscoveredthatthecompanywasindirestraits,youcouldtrytounloadyourstockforalowerprice.Theresultingtradein company shares led to the establishment in most major Europeancities of stock exchanges, places where the shares of companies were

traded.The most famous Dutch joint-stock company, the VereenigdeOostindischeCompagnie,orVOCforshort,wascharteredin1602, justas theDutchwere throwingoff Spanish rule and theboomof Spanishartillery could still be heard not far fromAmsterdam’s ramparts. VOCusedthemoneyitraisedfromsellingsharestobuildships,sendthemtoAsia, and bring back Chinese, Indian and Indonesian goods. It alsofinanced military actions taken by company ships against competitorsandpirates.EventuallyVOCmoneyfinancedtheconquestofIndonesia.Indonesia is the world’s biggest archipelago. Its thousands uponthousands of islands were ruled in the early seventeenth century byhundreds of kingdoms, principalities, sultanates and tribes.WhenVOCmerchants first arrived in Indonesia in 1603, their aims were strictlycommercial.However,inordertosecuretheircommercialinterestsandmaximisetheprofitsoftheshareholders,VOCmerchantsbegantofightagainst localpotentateswhocharged inflated tariffs,aswellasagainstEuropean competitors.VOCarmed itsmerchant shipswith cannons; itrecruitedEuropean,Japanese,IndianandIndonesianmercenaries;anditbuilt forts and conducted full-scale battles and sieges. This enterprisemay sound a little strange to us, but in the early modern age it wascommon for private companies to hire not only soldiers, but alsogeneralsandadmirals, cannonsandships,andevenentireoff-the-shelfarmies. The international community took this for granted and didn’traiseaneyebrowwhenaprivatecompanyestablishedanempire.Island after island fell to VOC mercenaries and a large part ofIndonesiabecameaVOCcolony.VOCruled Indonesia forclose to200years. Only in 1800 did the Dutch state assume control of Indonesia,making it aDutch national colony for the following 150 years. Todaysome people warn that twenty-first-century corporations areaccumulatingtoomuchpower.Earlymodernhistoryshowsjusthowfarthat can go if businesses are allowed to pursue their self-interestunchecked.While VOC operated in the Indian Ocean, the Dutch West IndiesCompany, orWIC, plied theAtlantic. In order to control trade on theimportantHudsonRiver,WICbuiltasettlementcalledNewAmsterdamonanislandattheriver’smouth.ThecolonywasthreatenedbyIndiansand repeatedly attacked by the British, who eventually captured it in

1664. The British changed its name to New York. The remains of thewall built byWIC to defend its colony against Indians and British aretodaypavedoverbytheworld’smostfamousstreet–WallStreet.

As the seventeenth centurywound to an end, complacency and costlycontinentalwarscausedtheDutchto losenotonlyNewYork,butalsotheirplaceasEurope’s financialand imperialengine.ThevacancywashotlycontestedbyFranceandBritain.AtfirstFranceseemedtobeinafarstrongerposition.ItwasbiggerthanBritain,richer,morepopulous,and it possessed a larger and more experienced army. Yet BritainmanagedtowinthetrustofthefinancialsystemwhereasFranceproveditself unworthy. The behaviour of the French crown was particularlynotorious during what was called the Mississippi Bubble, the largestfinancialcrisisofeighteenth-centuryEurope.Thatstoryalsobeginswithanempire-buildingjoint-stockcompany.In 1717 the Mississippi Company, chartered in France, set out tocolonise the lower Mississippi valley, establishing the city of NewOrleans in the process. To finance its ambitious plans, the company,whichhadgoodconnectionsat thecourtofKingLouisXV,soldsharesontheParisstockexchange.JohnLaw,thecompany’sdirector,wasalsothegovernorof the centralbankofFrance.Furthermore, thekinghadappointed him controller-general of finances, an office roughlyequivalent to that of a modern finance minister. In 1717 the lowerMississippivalleyofferedfewattractionsbesidesswampsandalligators,yet the Mississippi Company spread tales of fabulous riches andboundlessopportunities. Frencharistocrats,businessmenand the stolidmembersoftheurbanbourgeoisiefellforthesefantasies,andMississippishare prices skyrocketed. Initially, shares were offered at 500 livresapiece.On1August1719,sharestradedat2,750livres.By30August,theywereworth4,100livres,andon4September,theyreached5,000livres. On 2 December the price of a Mississippi share crossed thethreshold of 10,000 livres. Euphoria swept the streets of Paris. PeoplesoldalltheirpossessionsandtookhugeloansinordertobuyMississippishares.Everybodybelievedthey’ddiscoveredtheeasywaytoriches.

39.NewAmsterdamin1660,atthetipofManhattanIsland.Thesettlement’sprotectivewallistodaypavedoverbyWallStreet.

Afewdayslater,thepanicbegan.Somespeculatorsrealisedthatthesharepricesweretotallyunrealisticandunsustainable.Theyfiguredthattheyhadbettersellwhilestockpriceswereattheirpeak.Asthesupplyofsharesavailablerose,theirpricedeclined.Whenotherinvestorssawthepricegoingdown,theyalsowantedtogetoutquick.Thestockpriceplummetedfurther,settingoffanavalanche.Inordertostabiliseprices,thecentralbankofFrance–atthedirectionofitsgovernor,JohnLaw–boughtupMississippishares,butitcouldnotdosoforever.Eventuallyit ran out of money. When this happened, the controller-general offinances,thesameJohnLaw,authorisedtheprintingofmoremoneyinorder to buy additional shares. This placed the entire French financialsystem inside the bubble. And not even this financial wizardry couldsavetheday.ThepriceofMississippisharesdroppedfrom10,000livresbackto1,000livres,andthencollapsedcompletely,andtheshareslosteverysouoftheirworth.Bynow,thecentralbankandtheroyaltreasuryowned a huge amount ofworthless stock and had nomoney. The big

speculators emerged largely unscathed – they had sold in time. Smallinvestorslosteverything,andmanycommittedsuicide.TheMississippiBubblewasoneofhistory’smostspectacularfinancial

crashes.TheroyalFrenchfinancialsystemneverrecuperatedfullyfromtheblow.Theway inwhich theMississippiCompanyused itspoliticalclout tomanipulatesharepricesand fuel thebuying frenzycaused thepublic to lose faith in the French banking system and in the financialwisdomoftheFrenchking.LouisXVfounditmoreandmoredifficulttoraise credit. This became one of the chief reasons that the overseasFrench Empire fell into British hands.While the British could borrowmoneyeasilyandat low interest rates,Francehaddifficulties securingloans, and had to pay high interest on them. In order to finance hisgrowingdebts, the kingof Franceborrowedmore andmoremoney athigher and higher interest rates. Eventually, in the 1780s, Louis XVI,whohadascendedtothethroneonhisgrandfather’sdeath,realisedthathalfhisannualbudgetwastiedtoservicingtheinterestonhisloans,andthathewasheadingtowardsbankruptcy.Reluctantly,in1789,LouisXVIconvened theEstatesGeneral, theFrenchparliament thathadnotmetfora centuryandahalf, inorder to finda solution to thecrisis.ThusbegantheFrenchRevolution.While theFrenchoverseasempirewascrumbling, theBritishEmpire

was expanding rapidly. Like the Dutch Empire before it, the BritishEmpirewasestablishedandrunlargelybyprivatejoint-stockcompaniesbased in the London stock exchange. The first English settlements inNorth America were established in the early seventeenth century byjoint-stock companies such as the London Company, the PlymouthCompany,theDorchesterCompanyandtheMassachusettsCompany.The Indian subcontinent toowas conquerednot by theBritish state,

but by the mercenary army of the British East India Company. Thiscompany outperformed even the VOC. From its headquarters inLeadenhallStreet,London, it ruledamighty Indianempire foraboutacentury, maintaining a huge military force of up to 350,000 soldiers,considerably outnumbering the armed forces of the British monarchy.Only in 1858 did the British crown nationalise India along with thecompany’sprivatearmy.NapoleonmadefunoftheBritish,callingthema nation of shopkeepers. Yet these shopkeepers defeated Napoleonhimself,andtheirempirewasthelargesttheworldhaseverseen.

IntheNameofCapital

ThenationalisationofIndonesiabytheDutchcrown(1800)andofIndiabytheBritishcrown(1858)hardlyendedtheembraceofcapitalismandempire.On thecontrary, theconnectiononlygrewstrongerduring thenineteenthcentury.Joint-stockcompaniesnolongerneededtoestablishand govern private colonies – their managers and large shareholdersnowpulled the stringsofpower inLondon,AmsterdamandParis, andtheycouldcountonthestatetolookaftertheir interests.AsMarxandother social critics quipped, Western governments were becoming acapitalisttradeunion.Themostnotorious exampleofhowgovernmentsdid thebiddingof

bigmoneywastheFirstOpiumWar,foughtbetweenBritainandChina(1840–42). In the first half of the nineteenth century, the British EastIndia Company and sundry British business people made fortunes byexporting drugs, particularly opium, to China. Millions of Chinesebecameaddicts,debilitatingthecountrybotheconomicallyandsocially.In the late 1830s the Chinese government issued a ban on drugtrafficking,butBritishdrugmerchantssimply ignoredthe law.Chineseauthoritiesbegantoconfiscateanddestroydrugcargos.Thedrugcartelshadcloseconnections inWestminsterandDowningStreet–manyMPsandCabinetministersinfactheldstockinthedrugcompanies–sotheypressuredthegovernmenttotakeaction.In1840BritaindulydeclaredwaronChinainthenameof‘freetrade’.

It was a walkover. The overconfident Chinese were no match forBritain’snewwonderweapons–steamboats,heavyartillery,rocketsandrapid-firerifles.Underthesubsequentpeacetreaty,Chinaagreednottoconstrain the activities of British drug merchants and to compensatethem for damages inflicted by the Chinese police. Furthermore, theBritish demanded and received control of Hong Kong, which theyproceeded to use as a secure base for drug trafficking (Hong Kongremained in British hands until 1997). In the late nineteenth century,about 40 million Chinese, a tenth of the country’s population, wereopiumaddicts.3Egypt, too, learned to respect the long arm of British capitalism.

During the nineteenth century, French and British investors lent huge

sums to the rulers of Egypt, first in order to finance the Suez Canalproject, and later to fund far less successful enterprises. Egyptian debtswelled, and European creditors increasingly meddled in Egyptianaffairs.In1881Egyptiannationalistshadhadenoughandrebelled.Theydeclaredaunilateralabrogationofallforeigndebt.QueenVictoriawasnotamused.AyearlatershedispatchedherarmyandnavytotheNileandEgyptremainedaBritishprotectorateuntilafterWorldWarTwo.

Thesewerehardlytheonlywarsfoughtintheinterestsofinvestors.Infact,waritselfcouldbecomeacommodity,justlikeopium.In1821theGreeksrebelledagainsttheOttomanEmpire.Theuprisingarousedgreatsympathy in liberal and romantic circles in Britain – Lord Byron, thepoet,evenwenttoGreecetofightalongsidetheinsurgents.ButLondonfinancierssawanopportunityaswell.Theyproposedtotherebelleadersthe issue of tradable Greek Rebellion Bonds on the London stockexchange.TheGreekswouldpromisetorepaythebonds,plusinterest,ifandwhentheywontheirindependence.Privateinvestorsboughtbondstomakeaprofit,oroutofsympathyfortheGreekcause,orboth.Thevalue of Greek Rebellion Bonds rose and fell on the London stockexchange in tempo with military successes and failures on thebattlefieldsofHellas.TheTurksgraduallygainedtheupperhand.Witharebeldefeatimminent,thebondholdersfacedtheprospectoflosingtheirtrousers. The bondholders’ interest was the national interest, so theBritish organised an international fleet that, in 1827, sank the mainOttomanflotillaintheBattleofNavarino.Aftercenturiesofsubjugation,Greecewasfinallyfree.Butfreedomcamewithahugedebtthatthenewcountryhadnowayofrepaying.TheGreekeconomywasmortgagedtoBritishcreditorsfordecadestocome.The bear hug between capital and politics has had far-reaching

implicationsforthecreditmarket.Theamountofcreditinaneconomyisdeterminednotonlybypurelyeconomicfactorssuchasthediscoveryofanewoilfieldortheinventionofanewmachine,butalsobypoliticaleventssuchasregimechangesormoreambitiousforeignpolicies.Afterthe Battle of Navarino, British capitalists were more willing to investtheir money in risky overseas deals. They had seen that if a foreigndebtorrefusedtorepayloans,HerMajesty’sarmywouldgettheirmoney

back.Thisiswhytodayacountry’screditratingisfarmoreimportanttoits

economic well-being than are its natural resources. Credit ratingsindicatetheprobabilitythatacountrywillpayitsdebts.Inadditiontopurelyeconomicdata, they take intoaccountpolitical, socialandevenculturalfactors.Anoil-richcountrycursedwithadespoticgovernment,endemicwarfareandacorruptjudicialsystemwillusuallyreceivealowcreditrating.Asaresult,itislikelytoremainrelativelypoorsinceitwillnot be able to raise the necessary capital to make themost of its oilbounty.Acountrydevoidofnaturalresources,butwhichenjoyspeace,afair judicial system and a free government is likely to receive a highcredit rating.As such, itmaybeable to raise enoughcheapcapital tosupport a good education system and foster a flourishing high-techindustry.

TheCultoftheFreeMarket

Capital and politics influence each other to such an extent that theirrelations are hotly debated by economists, politicians and the generalpublicalike.Ardentcapitaliststendtoarguethatcapitalshouldbefreeto influence politics, but politics should not be allowed to influencecapital. They argue that when governments interfere in the markets,politicalinterestscausethemtomakeunwiseinvestmentsthatresultinslowergrowth.Forexample,agovernmentmayimposeheavytaxationon industrialists and use the money to give lavish unemploymentbenefits,which are popularwith voters. In the viewofmanybusinesspeople, it would be far better if the government left the money withthem.Theywoulduseit,theyclaim,toopennewfactoriesandhiretheunemployed.Inthisview,thewisesteconomicpolicyistokeeppoliticsoutofthe

economy, reduce taxation and government regulation to a minimum,andallowmarketforcesfreereintotaketheircourse.Privateinvestors,unencumberedbypoliticalconsiderations,willinvesttheirmoneywherethey can get themost profit, so theway to ensure themost economicgrowth–whichwillbenefiteveryone,industrialistsandworkers–isfor

thegovernment todo as little aspossible.This free-marketdoctrine istoday themost commonand influential variant of the capitalist creed.The most enthusiastic advocates of the free market criticise militaryadventuresabroadwithasmuchzealaswelfareprogrammesathome.TheyoffergovernmentsthesameadvicethatZenmastersofferinitiates:justdonothing.Butinitsextremeform,beliefinthefreemarketisasnaïveasbelief

in Santa Claus. There simply is no such thing as a market free of allpolitical bias. The most important economic resource is trust in thefuture, and this resource is constantly threatened by thieves andcharlatans. Markets by themselves offer no protection against fraud,theft and violence. It is the job of political systems to ensure trust bylegislating sanctions against cheats and to establish and support policeforces,courtsandjailswhichwillenforcethelaw.Whenkingsfailtodotheir jobs and regulate the markets properly, it leads to loss of trust,dwindling credit and economic depression. Thatwas the lesson taughtby the Mississippi Bubble of 1719, and anyone who forgot it wasreminded by the US housing bubble of 2007, and the ensuing creditcrunchandrecession.

TheCapitalistHell

There is an evenmore fundamental reasonwhy it’s dangerous to givemarketsacompletelyfreerein.AdamSmithtaughtthattheshoemakerwould use his surplus to employ more assistants. This implies thategoistic greed is beneficial for all, since profits are utilised to expandproductionandhiremoreemployees.Yet what happens if the greedy shoemaker increases his profits by

paying employees less and increasing their work hours? The standardanswer is that the free market would protect the employees. If ourshoemaker pays too little and demands toomuch, the best employeeswouldnaturallyabandonhimandgo towork forhis competitors.Thetyrant shoemakerwould find himself leftwith theworst labourers, orwithnolabourersatall.Hewouldhavetomendhiswaysorgooutofbusiness.Hisowngreedwouldcompelhimtotreathisemployeeswell.

This sounds bulletproof in theory, but in practice the bullets getthrough all too easily. In a completely free market, unsupervised bykings and priests, avaricious capitalists can establish monopolies orcollude against their workforces. If there is a single corporationcontrolling all shoe factories in a country, or if all factory ownersconspire to reduce wages simultaneously, then the labourers are nolongerabletoprotectthemselvesbyswitchingjobs.Even worse, greedy bosses might curtail the workers’ freedom of

movement through debt peonage or slavery. At the end of theMiddleAges,slaverywasalmostunknowninChristianEurope.Duringtheearlymodernperiod,theriseofEuropeancapitalismwenthandinhandwiththe rise of the Atlantic slave trade. Unrestrainedmarket forces, ratherthan tyrannical kings or racist ideologues, were responsible for thiscalamity.WhentheEuropeansconqueredAmerica,theyopenedgoldandsilver

mines and established sugar, tobacco and cotton plantations. TheseminesandplantationsbecamethemainstayofAmericanproductionandexport.Thesugarplantationswereparticularlyimportant.IntheMiddleAges, sugar was a rare luxury in Europe. It was imported from theMiddle East at prohibitive prices and used sparingly as a secretingredient in delicacies and snake-oil medicines. After large sugarplantations were established in America, ever-increasing amounts ofsugar began to reach Europe. The price of sugar dropped and Europedeveloped an insatiable sweet tooth. Entrepreneurs met this need byproducing huge quantities of sweets: cakes, cookies, chocolate, candy,and sweetened beverages such as cocoa, coffee and tea. The annualsugarintakeoftheaverageEnglishmanrosefromnearzerointheearlyseventeenth century to around eight kilograms in the early nineteenthcentury.However,growingcaneandextractingitssugarwasalabour-intensive

business. Few people wanted to work long hours in malaria-infestedsugar fields under a tropical sun. Contract labourers would haveproducedacommoditytooexpensiveformassconsumption.Sensitivetomarket forces, and greedy for profits and economic growth, Europeanplantationownersswitchedtoslaves.From the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries, about 10 million

African slaves were imported to America. About 70 per cent of them

worked on the sugar plantations. Labour conditions were abominable.Most slaves lived a short and miserable life, and millions more diedduring wars waged to capture slaves or during the long voyage frominnerAfrica to the shoresofAmerica.All this so thatEuropeanscouldenjoy their sweet tea and candy – and sugar barons could enjoy hugeprofits.Theslavetradewasnotcontrolledbyanystateorgovernment.Itwas

apurelyeconomicenterprise,organisedandfinancedbythefreemarketaccording to the laws of supply and demand. Private slave-tradingcompanies sold shares on the Amsterdam, London and Paris stockexchanges.Middle-classEuropeanslookingforagoodinvestmentboughttheseshares.Relyingonthismoney,thecompaniesboughtships,hiredsailorsandsoldiers,purchasedslavesinAfrica,andtransportedthemtoAmerica.Theretheysoldtheslavestotheplantationowners,usingtheproceeds to purchase plantation products such as sugar, cocoa, coffee,tobacco, cottonand rum.They returned toEurope, sold the sugar andcottonforagoodprice,andthensailedtoAfricatobeginanotherround.Theshareholderswereverypleasedwiththisarrangement.Throughouttheeighteenthcenturytheyieldonslave-tradeinvestmentswasabout6per cent a year – they were extremely profitable, as any modernconsultantwouldbequicktoadmit.This is the fly in the ointment of free-market capitalism. It cannot

ensure that profits are gained in a fair way, or distributed in a fairmanner.Onthecontrary,thecravingtoincreaseprofitsandproductionblinds people to anything that might stand in the way.When growthbecomes a supreme good, unrestricted by any other ethicalconsiderations,itcaneasilyleadtocatastrophe.Somereligions,suchasChristianity and Nazism, have killed millions out of burning hatred.Capitalism has killed millions out of cold indifference coupled withgreed.TheAtlanticslavetradedidnotstemfromracisthatredtowardsAfricans.The individualswhobought the shares, thebrokerswhosoldthem, and the managers of the slave-trade companies rarely thoughtabout theAfricans.Nordid theownersof the sugarplantations.Manyowners lived far from their plantations, and the only information theydemandedwereneatledgersofprofitsandlosses.It is important to remember that the Atlantic slave tradewas not a

single aberration in an otherwise spotless record. The Great Bengal

Famine, discussed in the previous chapter, was caused by a similardynamic– theBritishEast IndiaCompanycaredmoreabout itsprofitsthanaboutthelivesof10millionBengalis.VOC’smilitarycampaignsinIndonesiawerefinancedbyupstandingDutchburgherswholovedtheirchildren,gavetocharity,andenjoyedgoodmusicandfineart,buthadno regard for the suffering of the inhabitants of Java, Sumatra andMalacca. Countless other crimes andmisdemeanours accompanied thegrowthofthemoderneconomyinotherpartsoftheplanet.

The nineteenth century brought no improvement in the ethics ofcapitalism. The Industrial Revolution that swept through Europeenriched the bankers and capital-owners, but condemned millions ofworkerstoalifeofabjectpoverty.IntheEuropeancoloniesthingswereeven worse. In 1876, King Leopold II of Belgium set up anongovernmental humanitarian organisation with the declared aim ofexploring Central Africa and fighting the slave trade along the CongoRiver.Itwasalsochargedwithimprovingconditionsfortheinhabitantsof the region by building roads, schools and hospitals. In 1885 theEuropeanpowersagreedtogivethisorganisationcontrolof2.3millionsquarekilometres in theCongobasin.This territory, seventy-five timesthe size of Belgium, was henceforth known as the Congo Free State.Nobodyaskedtheopinionoftheterritory’s20–30millioninhabitants.Withinashorttimethehumanitarianorganisationbecameabusiness

enterprise whose real aim was growth and profit. The schools andhospitals were forgotten, and the Congo basin was instead filled withmines and plantations, run by mostly Belgian officials who ruthlesslyexploited the local population. The rubber industry was particularlynotorious. Rubber was fast becoming an industrial staple, and rubberexportwas theCongo’smost important source of income. TheAfricanvillagerswhocollectedtherubberwererequiredtoprovidehigherandhigher quotas. Those who failed to deliver their quota were punishedbrutally for their ‘laziness’. Their arms were chopped off andoccasionally entire villages were massacred. According to the mostmoderateestimates,between1885and1908thepursuitofgrowthandprofitscostthelivesof6millionindividuals(atleast20percentoftheCongo’spopulation).Someestimatesreachupto10milliondeaths.4

After1908,andespeciallyafter1945,capitalistgreedwassomewhatreinedin,notleastduetothefearofCommunism.Yetinequitiesarestillrampant.Theeconomicpieof2014 is far larger than thepieof1500,but it is distributed so unevenly that many African peasants andIndonesianlabourersreturnhomeafterahardday’sworkwithlessfoodthan did their ancestors 500 years ago. Much like the AgriculturalRevolution,sotoothegrowthofthemoderneconomymightturnouttobeacolossalfraud.Thehumanspeciesandtheglobaleconomymaywellkeepgrowing,butmanymoreindividualsmayliveinhungerandwant.Capitalism has two answers to this criticism. First, capitalism hascreatedaworldthatnobodybutacapitalist iscapableofrunning.Theonly serious attempt tomanage theworld differently – Communism –wassomuchworseinalmosteveryconceivablewaythatnobodyhasthestomach to try again. In 8500 BC one could cry bitter tears over theAgricultural Revolution, but it was too late to give up agriculture.Similarly,wemaynotlikecapitalism,butwecannotlivewithoutit.Thesecondansweristhatwejustneedmorepatience–paradise,thecapitalistspromise,isrightaroundthecorner.True,mistakeshavebeenmade, such as the Atlantic slave trade and the exploitation of theEuropeanworkingclass.Butwehavelearnedourlesson,andifwejustwaitalittlelongerandallowthepietogrowalittlebigger,everybodywillreceiveafatterslice.Thedivisionofspoilswillneverbeequitable,buttherewillbeenoughtosatisfyeveryman,womanandchild–evenintheCongo.There are, indeed, somepositive signs.At leastwhenweusepurelymaterial criteria – such as life expectancy, childmortality and calorieintake – the standard of living of the average human in 2014 issignificantlyhigherthanitwasin1914,despitetheexponentialgrowthinthenumberofhumans.Yet can the economic pie grow indefinitely? Every pie requires rawmaterialsandenergy.ProphetsofdoomwarnthatsoonerorlaterHomosapienswillexhaust the rawmaterialsandenergyofplanetEarth.Andwhatwillhappenthen?

17

TheWheelsofIndustry

THEMODERN ECONOMYGROWS THANKS to our trust in the futureand to the willingness of capitalists to reinvest their profits inproduction. Yet that does not suffice. Economic growth also requiresenergyandrawmaterials,andthesearefinite.Whenandiftheyrunout,theentiresystemwillcollapse.But theevidenceprovidedby thepast is that theyare finiteonly in

theory. Counter-intuitively, while humankind’s use of energy and rawmaterials has mushroomed in the last few centuries, the amountsavailable for our exploitation have actually increased. Whenever ashortageofeitherhasthreatenedtosloweconomicgrowth,investmentshave flowed into scientific and technological research. These haveinvariablyproducednotonlymoreefficientwaysofexploitingexistingresources,butalsocompletelynewtypesofenergyandmaterials.Considerthevehicleindustry.Overthelast300years,humankindhas

manufactured billions of vehicles – from carts and wheelbarrows, totrains,cars,supersonicjetsandspaceshuttles.Onemighthaveexpectedthat suchaprodigiouseffortwouldhaveexhausted theenergy sourcesand rawmaterials available for vehicle production, and that todaywewouldbescrapingthebottomofthebarrel.Yettheoppositeisthecase.Whereas in1700 theglobal vehicle industry reliedoverwhelminglyonwood and iron, today it has at its disposal a cornucopia of new-foundmaterials such as plastic, rubber, aluminium and titanium, none ofwhichourancestorsevenknewabout.Whereasin1700cartswerebuiltmainly by the muscle power of carpenters and smiths, today themachines in Toyota and Boeing factories are powered by petroleum

combustionenginesandnuclearpowerstations.Asimilarrevolutionhasswept almost all other fields of industry. We call it the IndustrialRevolution.

Formillenniaprior to the IndustrialRevolution,humansalreadyknewhowtomakeuseofalargevarietyofenergysources.Theyburnedwoodin order to smelt iron, heat houses and bake cakes. Sailing shipsharnessed wind power to move around, and watermills captured theflowofriverstogrindgrain.Yetallthesehadclearlimitsandproblems.Treeswerenotavailableeverywhere,thewinddidn’talwaysblowwhenyouneededit,andwaterpowerwasonlyusefulifyoulivednearariver.Anevenbiggerproblemwasthatpeopledidn’tknowhowtoconvertone typeof energy into another. They couldharness themovement ofwindandwatertosailshipsandpushmillstones,butnottoheatwaterorsmeltiron.Conversely,theycouldnotusetheheatenergyproducedby burning wood to make a millstone move. Humans had only onemachinecapableofperformingsuchenergyconversiontricks:thebody.In the natural process ofmetabolism, the bodies of humans and otheranimals burn organic fuels known as food and convert the releasedenergy into the movement of muscles. Men, women and beasts couldconsumegrainandmeat,burnuptheircarbohydratesandfats,andusetheenergytohaularickshaworpullaplough.Since human and animal bodies were the only energy conversiondevice available, muscle power was the key to almost all humanactivities.Humanmusclesbuilt carts andhouses, oxmusclesploughedfields, and horse muscles transported goods. The energy that fuelledthese organicmuscle-machines cameultimately froma single source –plants. Plants in their turnobtained their energy from the sun.By theprocessofphotosynthesis,theycapturedsolarenergyandpackeditintoorganic compounds. Almost everything people did throughout historywas fuelledbysolarenergythatwascapturedbyplantsandconvertedintomusclepower.Humanhistorywasconsequentlydominatedby twomaincycles: thegrowthcyclesofplantsandthechangingcyclesofsolarenergy(dayandnight,summerandwinter).Whensunlightwasscarceandwhenwheatfieldswerestillgreen,humanshadlittleenergy.Granarieswereempty,

taxcollectorswereidle,soldiersfounditdifficulttomoveandfight,andkings tended to keep the peace.When the sun shone brightly and thewheatripened,peasantsharvestedthecropsandfilledthegranaries.Taxcollectorshurried to take their share.Soldiers flexed theirmusclesandsharpenedtheirswords.Kingsconvenedcouncilsandplannedtheirnextcampaigns. Everyone was fuelled by solar energy – captured andpackagedinwheat,riceandpotatoes.

TheSecretintheKitchen

Throughouttheselongmillennia,dayinanddayout,peoplestoodfaceto face with the most important invention in the history of energyproduction–andfailedtonoticeit.Itstaredthemintheeyeeverytimeahousewifeorservantputupakettletoboilwaterforteaorputapotfullofpotatoesonthestove.Theminutethewaterboiled,thelidofthekettleor thepot jumped.Heatwasbeing converted tomovement.Butjumpingpotlidswereanannoyance,especiallyifyouforgotthepotonthestoveandthewaterboiledover.Nobodysawtheirrealpotential.Apartialbreakthroughinconvertingheatintomovementfollowedtheinvention of gunpowder in ninth-century China. At first, the idea ofusinggunpowder topropelprojectileswas socounter-intuitive that forcenturies gunpowder was used primarily to produce fire bombs. Buteventually – perhaps after some bomb expert ground gunpowder in amortaronly tohave thepestle shootoutwith force–gunsmade theirappearance. About 600 years passed between the invention ofgunpowderandthedevelopmentofeffectiveartillery.Even then, the idea of converting heat into motion remained socounter-intuitive that another three centuries went by before peopleinvented thenextmachine that usedheat tomove things around.ThenewtechnologywasborninBritishcoalmines.AstheBritishpopulationswelled, forestswerecutdowntofuel thegrowingeconomyandmakewayforhousesandfields.Britainsufferedfromanincreasingshortageoffirewood. Itbeganburningcoalasa substitute.Manycoal seamswerelocated in waterlogged areas, and flooding prevented miners fromaccessingthe lowerstrataof themines. Itwasaproblemlookingfora

solution. Around 1700, a strange noise began reverberating aroundBritishmineshafts.Thatnoise–harbingeroftheIndustrialRevolution–was subtle at first, but it grew louder and louder with each passingdecadeuntilitenvelopedtheentireworldinadeafeningcacophony.Itemanatedfromasteamengine.There are many types of steam engines, but they all share one

commonprinciple.Youburnsomekindoffuel,suchascoal,andusetheresultingheat toboilwater,producing steam.As the steamexpands itpushesapiston.Thepistonmoves,andanythingthatisconnectedtothepiston moves with it. You have converted heat into movement! Ineighteenth-century British coal mines, the piston was connected to apump that extracted water from the bottom of the mineshafts. Theearliestengineswere incredibly inefficient.Youneededtoburnahugeloadofcoal inorder topumpoutevenatinyamountofwater.But intheminescoalwasplentifulandcloseathand,sonobodycared.In the decades that followed, British entrepreneurs improved the

efficiency of the steam engine, brought it out of the mineshafts, andconnected it to looms and gins. This revolutionised textile production,makingitpossibletoproduceever-largerquantitiesofcheaptextiles.Intheblinkofaneye,Britainbecametheworkshopoftheworld.Butevenmore importantly, getting the steamengine out of themines broke animportantpsychologicalbarrier.Ifyoucouldburncoalinordertomovetextilelooms,whynotusethesamemethodtomoveotherthings,suchasvehicles?In 1825, a British engineer connected a steam engine to a train of

minewagonsfullofcoal.Theenginedrewthewagonsalonganironrailsometwentykilometreslongfromtheminetothenearestharbour.Thiswas the first steam-powered locomotive in history. Clearly, if steamcouldbeusedtotransportcoal,whynotothergoods?Andwhynotevenpeople?On 15 September 1830, the first commercial railway linewasopened,connectingLiverpoolwithManchester.Thetrainsmovedunderthe same steam power that had previously pumped water andmovedtextilelooms.Ameretwentyyearslater,Britainhadtensofthousandsofkilometresofrailwaytracks.1Henceforth,peoplebecameobsessedwiththeideathatmachinesand

enginescouldbeusedtoconvertonetypeofenergy intoanother.Anytypeofenergy,anywhereintheworld,mightbeharnessedtowhatever

needwe had, ifwe could just invent the rightmachine. For example,when physicists realised that an immense amount of energy is storedwithinatoms,theyimmediatelystartedthinkingabouthowthisenergycouldbe released andused tomake electricity, power submarines andannihilatecities.SixhundredyearspassedbetweenthemomentChinesealchemists discovered gunpowder and the moment Turkish cannonpulverisedthewallsofConstantinople.Onlyfortyyearspassedbetweenthe moment Einstein determined that any kind of mass could beconvertedintoenergy–that’swhatE=mc2means–andthemomentatom bombs obliterated Hiroshima and Nagasaki and nuclear powerstationsmushroomedallovertheglobe.Anothercrucialdiscoverywastheinternalcombustionengine,whichtooklittlemorethanagenerationtorevolutionisehumantransportationand turn petroleum into liquid political power. Petroleum had beenknown for thousands of years, and was used to waterproof roofs andlubricateaxles.Yetuntiljustacenturyagonobodythoughtitwasusefulformuchmore than that.The ideaof spillingblood for thesakeofoilwould have seemed ludicrous. Youmight fight awar over land, gold,pepperorslaves,butnotoil.The career of electricity was more startling yet. Two centuries agoelectricity played no role in the economy, and was used at most forarcane scientific experiments and cheap magic tricks. A series ofinventions turned it into our universal genie in a lamp. We flick ourfingersanditprintsbooksandsewsclothes,keepsourvegetablesfreshandouricecreamfrozen,cooksourdinnersandexecutesourcriminals,registersour thoughtsand recordsour smiles, lightsupournightsandentertainsuswithcountlesstelevisionshows.Fewofusunderstandhowelectricitydoesallthesethings,butevenfewercanimaginelifewithoutit.

AnOceanofEnergy

At heart, the Industrial Revolution has been a revolution in energyconversion.Ithasdemonstratedagainandagainthatthereisnolimittotheamountofenergyatourdisposal.Or,moreprecisely,thattheonly

limit is set by our ignorance. Every few decades we discover a newenergysource,sothatthesumtotalofenergyatourdisposaljustkeepsgrowing.Why are somany people afraid thatwe are running out of energy?

Why do they warn of disaster if we exhaust all available fossil fuels?Clearly theworld does not lack energy. All we lack is the knowledgenecessarytoharnessandconvertittoourneeds.Theamountofenergystoredinallthefossilfuelonearthisnegligiblecomparedtotheamountthatthesundispenseseveryday,freeofcharge.Onlyatinyproportionofthesun’senergyreachesus,yetitamountsto3,766,800exajoulesofenergyeachyear(ajouleisaunitofenergyinthemetricsystem,aboutthe amount you expend to lift a small apple one yard straight up; anexajoule is a billion billion joules – that’s a lot of apples).2 All theworld’splantscaptureonlyabout3,000ofthosesolarexajoulesthroughtheprocessofphotosynthesis.3 All human activities and industries puttogether consume about 500 exajoules annually, equivalent to theamount of energy earth receives from the sun in just ninetyminutes.4And that’s only solar energy. In addition,we are surrounded by otherenormous sources of energy, such as nuclear energy and gravitationalenergy,thelattermostevidentinthepoweroftheoceantidescausedbythemoon’spullontheearth.Prior to the Industrial Revolution, the human energy market was

almostcompletelydependentonplants.People livedalongsideagreenenergyreservoircarrying3,000exajoulesayear,and tried topumpasmuch of its energy as they could. Yet there was a clear limit to howmuchtheycouldextract.Duringthe IndustrialRevolution,wecametorealise that we are actually living alongside an enormous ocean ofenergy, one holding billions upon billions of exajoules of potentialpower.Allweneedtodoisinventbetterpumps.

*

Learninghowtoharnessandconvertenergyeffectivelysolvedtheotherproblemthatslowseconomicgrowth–thescarcityofrawmaterials.Ashumans worked out how to harness large quantities of cheap energy,they could begin exploiting previously inaccessible deposits of rawmaterials (for example, mining iron in the Siberian wastelands), or

transporting raw materials from ever more distant locations (forexample, supplying a British textile mill with Australian wool).Simultaneously, scientific breakthroughs enabled humankind to inventcompletelynewrawmaterials, suchasplastic,anddiscoverpreviouslyunknownnaturalmaterials,suchassiliconandaluminium.Chemistsdiscoveredaluminiumonlyinthe1820s,butseparatingthe

metal from its ore was extremely difficult and costly. For decades,aluminiumwasmuchmoreexpensivethangold.Inthe1860S,EmperorNapoleon IIIofFrancecommissionedaluminiumcutlery tobe laidoutforhismostdistinguishedguests.Lessimportantvisitorshadtomakedowiththegoldknivesandforks.5Butattheendofthenineteenthcenturychemists discovered a way to extract immense amounts of cheapaluminium,andcurrentglobalproductionstandsat30milliontonsperyear. Napoleon III would be surprised to hear that his subjects’descendants use cheap disposable aluminium foil to wrap theirsandwichesandputawaytheirleftovers.Two thousand years ago, when people in the Mediterranean basin

sufferedfromdryskintheysmearedoliveoilontheirhands.Today,theyopenatubeofhandcream.Belowis the listof ingredientsofasimplemodernhandcreamthatIboughtatalocalstore:

deionised water, stearic acid, glycerin, caprylic/caprictiglyceride, propylene glycol, isopropylmyristate, panax ginseng root extract, fragrance, cetyl alcohol, triethanolamine, dimeticone,arctostaphylosuva-ursileafextract,magnesiumascorbylphosphate,imidazolidinylurea,methylparaben, camphor, propyl paraben, hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde, hydroxyl-citronellal,linalool,butylphenylmethylproplonal,citronnellol,limonene,geraniol.

Almost all of these ingredientswere inventedordiscovered in the lasttwocenturies.During World War One, Germany was placed under blockade and

suffered severe shortages of raw materials, in particular saltpetre, anessential ingredient in gunpowder and other explosives. The mostimportantsaltpetredepositswereinChileandIndia;therewerenoneatallinGermany.True,saltpetrecouldbereplacedbyammonia,butthatwasexpensivetoproduceaswell.LuckilyfortheGermans,oneoftheirfellowcitizens,aJewishchemistnamedFritzHaber,haddiscoveredin1908 a process for producing ammonia literally out of thin air.When

war broke out, the Germans used Haber’s discovery to commenceindustrial production of explosives using air as a raw material. Somescholars believe that if it hadn’t been for Haber’s discovery, GermanywouldhavebeenforcedtosurrenderlongbeforeNovember1918.6Thediscovery won Haber (who during the war also pioneered the use ofpoisongasinbattle)aNobelPrizein1918.Inchemistry,notinpeace.

LifeontheConveyorBelt

The Industrial Revolution yielded an unprecedented combination ofcheapandabundantenergyandcheapandabundantrawmaterials.Theresultwas an explosion inhumanproductivity. The explosionwas feltfirst and foremost in agriculture. Usually, when we think of theIndustrial Revolution, we think of an urban landscape of smokingchimneys,ortheplightofexploitedcoalminerssweatinginthebowelsoftheearth.YettheIndustrialRevolutionwasaboveallelsetheSecondAgriculturalRevolution.Duringthe last200years, industrialproductionmethodsbecamethemainstay of agriculture.Machines such as tractors began to undertaketasksthatwerepreviouslyperformedbymusclepower,ornotperformedat all. Fields and animals became vastly more productive thanks toartificial fertilisers, industrial insecticides and an entire arsenal ofhormones and medications. Refrigerators, ships and aeroplanes havemade it possible to store produce formonths, and transport it quicklyandcheaplytotheothersideoftheworld.EuropeansbegantodineonfreshArgentinianbeefandJapanesesushi.Evenplantsandanimalsweremechanised.AroundthetimethatHomosapienswaselevatedtodivinestatusbyhumanistreligions,farmanimalsstopped being viewed as living creatures that could feel pain anddistress, and instead came to be treated as machines. Today theseanimals are often mass-produced in factory-like facilities, their bodiesshapedinaccordancewithindustrialneeds.Theypasstheirentirelivesas cogs in a giant production line, and the length and quality of theirexistence is determined by the profits and losses of businesscorporations. Even when the industry takes care to keep them alive,

reasonably healthy and well fed, it has no intrinsic interest in theanimals’socialandpsychologicalneeds(exceptwhenthesehaveadirectimpactonproduction).Egg-laying hens, for example, have a complexworld of behaviouralneeds and drives. They feel strong urges to scout their environment,forage and peck around, determine social hierarchies, build nests andgroomthemselves.Buttheeggindustryoftenlocksthehensinsidetinycoops,anditisnotuncommonforittosqueezefourhenstoacage,eachgivenafloorspaceofabouttwenty-fivebytwenty-twocentimetres.Thehens receive sufficient food, but they are unable to claim a territory,buildanestorengageinothernaturalactivities.Indeed,thecageissosmallthathensareoftenunableeventoflaptheirwingsorstandfullyerect.Pigs are among the most intelligent and inquisitive of mammals,second perhaps only to the great apes. Yet industrialised pig farmsroutinely confine nursing sows inside such small crates that they areliterallyunabletoturnaround(nottomentionwalkorforage).Thesowsarekeptinthesecratesdayandnightforfourweeksaftergivingbirth.Theiroffspringarethentakenawaytobefattenedupandthesowsareimpregnatedwiththenextlitterofpiglets.Many dairy cows live almost all their allotted years inside a smallenclosure; standing, sitting and sleeping in their own urine andexcrement. They receive their measure of food, hormones andmedicationsfromonesetofmachines,andgetmilkedeveryfewhoursby another set ofmachines. The cow in themiddle is treated as littlemore than a mouth that takes in raw materials and an udder thatproduces a commodity. Treating living creatures possessing complexemotionalworlds as if theyweremachines is likely to cause themnotonlyphysicaldiscomfort,butalsomuchsocial stressandpsychologicalfrustration.7

40.Chicksonaconveyorbeltinacommercialhatchery.Malechicksandimperfectfemalechicksarepickedofftheconveyorbeltandarethenasphyxiatedingaschambers,droppedintoautomaticshredders,orsimplythrownintotherubbish,wheretheyarecrushedtodeath.Hundredsofmillionsofchicksdieeachyearinsuchhatcheries.

Just as the Atlantic slave trade did not stem from hatred towardsAfricans,sothemodernanimalindustryisnotmotivatedbyanimosity.Again, it is fuelled by indifference. Most people who produce andconsumeeggs,milkandmeatrarelystoptothinkaboutthefateofthechickens,cowsorpigswhosefleshandemissionstheyareeating.Thosewho do think often argue that such animals are really little differentfrom machines, devoid of sensations and emotions, incapable ofsuffering.Ironically,thesamescientificdisciplineswhichshapeourmilkmachinesandeggmachineshavelatelydemonstratedbeyondreasonabledoubt thatmammals andbirdshave a complex sensory and emotionalmake-up. They not only feel physical pain, but can also suffer fromemotionaldistress.Evolutionary psychology maintains that the emotional and social

needsoffarmanimalsevolvedinthewild,whentheywereessentialforsurvivalandreproduction.Forexample,awildcowhadtoknowhowtoform close relations with other cows and bulls, or else she could not

surviveandreproduce. Inorder to learn thenecessary skills, evolutionimplanted in calves – as in theyoungof all other socialmammals – astrongdesire toplay(playing is themammalianwayof learningsocialbehaviour).And it implanted in theman even stronger desire to bondwiththeirmothers,whosemilkandcarewereessentialforsurvival.Whathappensiffarmersnowtakeayoungcalf,separateherfromher

mother,putherinaclosedcage,giveherfood,waterandinoculationsagainstdiseases,andthen,whensheisoldenough,inseminateherwithbull sperm? From an objective perspective, this calf no longer needseithermaternalbondingorplaymatesinordertosurviveandreproduce.Butfromasubjectiveperspective,thecalfstillfeelsaverystrongurgetobondwithhermotherandtoplaywithothercalves. If theseurgesarenot fulfilled, the calf suffers greatly. This is the basic lesson ofevolutionarypsychology:aneedshapedinthewildcontinuestobefeltsubjectively even if it is no longer really necessary for survival andreproduction.Thetragedyofindustrialagricultureisthatittakesgreatcareoftheobjectiveneedsofanimals,whileneglectingtheirsubjectiveneeds.Thetruthofthistheoryhasbeenknownatleastsincethe1950s,when

the American psychologist Harry Harlow studied the development ofmonkeys.Harlowseparated infantmonkeys from theirmothers severalhours after birth. The monkeys were isolated inside cages, and thenraised by dummy mothers. In each cage, Harlow placed two dummymothers.Onewasmadeofmetalwires,andwasfittedwithamilkbottlefromwhichtheinfantmonkeycouldsuck.Theotherwasmadeofwoodcoveredwithcloth,whichmadeitresemblearealmonkeymother,butitprovidedtheinfantmonkeywithnomaterialsustenancewhatsoever.Itwasassumedthattheinfantswouldclingtothenourishingmetalmotherratherthantothebarrenclothone.ToHarlow’ssurprise,theinfantmonkeysshowedamarkedpreference

for the clothmother, spendingmost of their timewith her.When thetwomotherswereplacedincloseproximity, the infantsheldontotheclothmotherevenwhiletheyreachedovertosuckmilkfromthemetalmother.Harlowsuspectedthatperhaps the infantsdidsobecause theywere cold. Sohe fitted an electric bulb inside thewiremother,whichnowradiatedheat.Mostofthemonkeys,exceptfortheveryyoungones,continuedtoprefertheclothmother.

41.OneofHarlow’sorphanedmonkeysclingstotheclothmotherevenwhilesuckingmilkfromthemetalmother.

Follow-upresearchshowedthatHarlow’sorphanedmonkeysgrewupto be emotionally disturbed even though they had received all thenourishment theyrequired.Theynever fitted intomonkeysociety,haddifficultiescommunicatingwithothermonkeys,andsufferedfromhighlevels of anxiety and aggression. The conclusion was inescapable:monkeysmusthavepsychologicalneedsanddesiresthatgobeyondtheirmaterial requirements, and if these are not fulfilled, they will suffergreatly. Harlow’s infant monkeys preferred to spend their time in thehands of the barren cloth mother because they were looking for anemotional bond and not only for milk. In the following decades,

numerous studies showed that this conclusion applies not only tomonkeys,buttoothermammals,aswellasbirds.Atpresent,millionsoffarmanimalsaresubjectedtothesameconditionsasHarlow’smonkeys,as farmers routinely separate calves, kids and other youngsters fromtheirmothers,toberaisedinisolation.8Altogether, tens of billions of farm animals live today as part of a

mechanisedassemblyline,andabout50billionofthemareslaughteredannually.Theseindustriallivestockmethodshaveledtoasharpincreasein agricultural production and in human food reserves. Together withthe mechanisation of plant cultivation, industrial animal husbandry isthe basis for the entire modern socio-economic order. Before theindustrialisationofagriculture,mostofthefoodproducedinfieldsandfarmswas‘wasted’feedingpeasantsandfarmyardanimals.Onlyasmallpercentage was available to feed artisans, teachers, priests andbureaucrats. Consequently, in almost all societies peasants comprisedmorethan90percentofthepopulation.Followingtheindustrialisationof agriculture, a shrinking number of farmers was enough to feed agrowingnumberofclerksandfactoryhands.TodayintheUnitedStates,only 2 per cent of the populationmakes a living fromagriculture, yetthis 2 per cent produces enough not only to feed the entire USpopulation, but also to export surpluses to the rest of the world.9Without the industrialisation of agriculture the urban IndustrialRevolution couldneverhave takenplace– therewouldnothavebeenenoughhandsandbrainstostafffactoriesandoffices.Asthosefactoriesandofficesabsorbedthebillionsofhandsandbrains

that were released from fieldwork, they began pouring out anunprecedented avalanche of products. Humans now produce far moresteel,manufacturemuchmoreclothing,andbuildmanymorestructuresthan ever before. In addition, they produce a mind-boggling array ofpreviously unimaginable goods, such as light bulbs, mobile phones,cameras and dishwashers. For the first time in human history, supplybegantooutstripdemand.Andanentirelynewproblemwasborn:whoisgoingtobuyallthisstuff?

TheAgeofShopping

Themoderncapitalisteconomymustconstantlyincreaseproductionifitis to survive, like a shark that must swim or suffocate. Yet it’s notenough just to produce. Somebody must also buy the products, orindustrialistsandinvestorsalikewillgobust.Topreventthiscatastropheand to make sure that people will always buy whatever new stuffindustryproduces,anewkindofethicappeared:consumerism.Most people throughout history lived under conditions of scarcity.

Frugalitywas thus theirwatchword.Theaustere ethicsof thePuritansand Spartans are but two famous examples. A good person avoidedluxuries,neverthrewfoodaway,andpatcheduptorntrousersinsteadofbuying a new pair. Only kings and nobles allowed themselves torenouncesuchvaluespubliclyandconspicuouslyflaunttheirriches.Consumerismseestheconsumptionofevermoreproductsandservices

as a positive thing. It encourages people to treat themselves, spoilthemselves, and even kill themselves slowly by overconsumption.Frugalityisadiseasetobecured.Youdon’thavetolookfartoseetheconsumerethic inaction– just read thebackofacerealbox.Here’saquotefromaboxofoneofmyfavouritebreakfastcereals,producedbyanIsraelifirm,Telma:

Sometimesyouneedatreat.Sometimesyouneedalittleextraenergy.Therearetimestowatchyourweight and timeswhen you’ve just got to have something… right now! Telma offers avarietyoftastycerealsjustforyou–treatswithoutremorse.

ThesamepackagesportsanadforanotherbrandofcerealcalledHealthTreats:

HealthTreatsofferslotsofgrains,fruitsandnutsforanexperiencethatcombinestaste,pleasureandhealth.Foranenjoyabletreatinthemiddleoftheday,suitableforahealthylifestyle.Arealtreatwiththewonderfultasteofmore[emphasisintheoriginal].

Throughoutmostofhistory,peoplewerelikelytobehavebeenrepelledrather than attracted by such a text. They would have branded it asselfish, decadent and morally corrupt. Consumerism has worked veryhard, with the help of popular psychology (‘Just do it!’) to convincepeople that indulgence is good for you, whereas frugality is self-oppression.

It has succeeded. We are all good consumers. We buy countlessproducts thatwe don’t really need, and that until yesterdaywe didn’tknow existed. Manufacturers deliberately design short-term goods andinvent new and unnecessary models of perfectly satisfactory productsthat we must purchase in order to stay ‘in’. Shopping has become afavouritepastime,andconsumergoodshavebecomeessentialmediatorsinrelationshipsbetweenfamilymembers,spousesandfriends.Religiousholidays such as Christmas have become shopping festivals. In theUnited States, even Memorial Day – originally a solemn day forrememberingfallensoldiers–isnowanoccasionforspecialsales.Mostpeople mark this day by going shopping, perhaps to prove that thedefendersoffreedomdidnotdieinvain.The floweringof the consumerist ethic ismanifestedmost clearly inthe food market. Traditional agricultural societies lived in the awfulshade of starvation. In the affluentworld of today one of the leadinghealthproblemsisobesity,whichstrikesthepoor(whostuffthemselveswithhamburgersandpizzas)evenmoreseverelythantherich(whoeatorganicsaladsandfruitsmoothies).EachyeartheUSpopulationspendsmoremoney on diets than the amount needed to feed all the hungrypeople in the rest of the world. Obesity is a double victory forconsumerism. Instead of eating little, which will lead to economiccontraction, people eat too much and then buy diet products –contributingtoeconomicgrowthtwiceover.

Howcanwesquaretheconsumeristethicwiththecapitalistethicofthebusiness person, according towhich profits should not bewasted, andshould insteadbe reinvested in production? It’s simple.As in previouseras,thereistodayadivisionoflabourbetweentheeliteandthemasses.In medieval Europe, aristocrats spent their money carelessly onextravagant luxuries, whereas peasants lived frugally, minding everypenny.Today,thetableshaveturned.Therichtakegreatcaremanagingtheir assets and investments, while the less well heeled go into debtbuyingcarsandtelevisionstheydon’treallyneed.Thecapitalistandconsumeristethicsaretwosidesofthesamecoin,amergeroftwocommandments.Thesupremecommandmentoftherichis‘Invest!’Thesupremecommandmentoftherestofusis‘Buy!’

The capitalist-consumerist ethic is revolutionary in another respect.Mostpreviousethicalsystemspresentedpeoplewithaprettytoughdeal.They were promised paradise, but only if they cultivated compassionandtolerance,overcamecravingandanger,andrestrainedtheirselfishinterests.Thiswastootoughformost.Thehistoryofethicsisasadtaleofwonderfulidealsthatnobodycanliveupto.MostChristiansdidnotimitate Christ, most Buddhists failed to follow Buddha, and mostConfucianswouldhavecausedConfuciusatempertantrum.In contrast,most people today successfully live up to the capitalist-consumeristideal.Thenewethicpromisesparadiseonconditionthattherichremaingreedyandspendtheirtimemakingmoremoney,andthatthemassesgivefreereintotheircravingsandpassions–andbuymoreandmore.Thisisthefirstreligioninhistorywhosefollowersactuallydowhat theyareaskedtodo.How, though,doweknowthatwe’ll reallygetparadiseinreturn?We’veseenitontelevision.

18

APermanentRevolution

THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION OPENED up new ways to convertenergy and to produce goods, largely liberating humankind from itsdependence on the surrounding ecosystem. Humans cut down forests,drained swamps, dammed rivers, flooded plains, laid down tens ofthousands of kilometres of railroad tracks, and built skyscrapingmetropolises.AstheworldwasmouldedtofittheneedsofHomosapiens,habitatswere destroyed and specieswent extinct.Our once green andblueplanetisbecomingaconcreteandplasticshoppingcentre.Today, theearthscontinentsarehometoalmost7billionSapiens. If

you took all these people and put them on a large set of scales, theircombinedmasswouldbeabout300milliontons.Ifyouthentookallourdomesticated farmyardanimals–cows,pigs, sheepandchickens–andplacedthemonanevenlargersetofscales,theirmasswouldamounttoabout700milliontons.Incontrast,thecombinedmassofallsurvivinglarge wild animals – from porcupines and penguins to elephants andwhales – is less than 100 million tons. Our children’s books, ouriconography and our TV screens are still full of giraffes, wolves andchimpanzees, but the real world has very few of them left. There areabout80,000giraffesintheworld,comparedto1.5billioncattle;only200,000 wolves, compared to 400 million domesticated dogs; only250,000 chimpanzees – in contrast to billions of humans. Humankindreallyhastakenovertheworld.1Ecologicaldegradationisnotthesameasresourcescarcity.Aswesaw

in the previous chapter, the resources available to humankind areconstantly increasing, and are likely to continue to do so. That’s why

doomsday prophesies of resource scarcity are probably misplaced. Incontrast,thefearofecologicaldegradationisonlytoowellfounded.ThefuturemayseeSapiensgainingcontrolofacornucopiaofnewmaterialsand energy sources, while simultaneously destroying what remains ofthenaturalhabitatanddrivingmostotherspeciestoextinction.Infact,ecologicalturmoilmightendangerthesurvivalofHomosapiensitself. Global warming, rising oceans and widespread pollution couldmake the earth less hospitable to our kind, and the future mightconsequently see a spiralling race between human power and human-induced natural disasters. As humans use their power to counter theforcesofnatureandsubjugatetheecosystemtotheirneedsandwhims,they might cause more and more unanticipated and dangerous sideeffects. These are likely to be controllable only by even more drasticmanipulations of the ecosystem, which would result in even worsechaos.Many call this process ‘the destruction of nature’. But it’s not reallydestruction, it’s change.Nature cannot be destroyed. Sixty-fivemillionyearsago,anasteroidwipedoutthedinosaurs,butinsodoingopenedthe way forward for mammals. Today, humankind is driving manyspecies into extinction and might even annihilate itself. But otherorganismsaredoingquitewell.Ratsandcockroaches,forexample,arein their heyday. These tenacious creatures would probably creep outfrombeneath the smoking rubbleofanuclearArmageddon, readyandabletospreadtheirDNA.Perhaps65millionyearsfromnow,intelligentratswilllookbackgratefullyonthedecimationwroughtbyhumankind,justaswetodaycanthankthatdinosaur-bustingasteroid.Still, the rumours of our own extinction are premature. Since theIndustrial Revolution, theworld’s human population has burgeoned asneverbefore.In1700theworldwashometosome700millionhumans.In1800therewere950millionofus.By1900wealmostdoubledournumbersto1.6billion.Andby2000thatquadrupledto6billion.Todaytherearejustshyof7billionSapiens.

ModernTime

While all these Sapiens have grown increasingly impervious to thewhimsofnature,theyhavebecomeevermoresubjecttothedictatesofmodernindustryandgovernment.TheIndustrialRevolutionopenedtheway to a long line of experiments in social engineering and an evenlonger series of unpremeditated changes in daily life and humanmentality.Oneexampleamongmanyisthereplacementoftherhythmsof traditional agriculture with the uniform and precise schedule ofindustry.Traditionalagriculturedependedoncyclesofnaturaltimeandorganicgrowth.Mostsocietieswereunabletomakeprecisetimemeasurements,norweretheyterriblyinterestedindoingso.Theworldwentaboutitsbusinesswithout clocksand timetables, subjectonly to themovementsof the sun and the growth cycles of plants. There was no uniformworkingday,andallroutineschangeddrasticallyfromseasontoseason.Peopleknewwherethesunwas,andwatchedanxiouslyforportentsoftherainyseasonandharvesttime,buttheydidnotknowthehourandhardly cared about the year. If a lost time traveller popped up in amedievalvillageandaskedapasserby, ‘Whatyear is this?’ thevillagerwouldbe as bewilderedby the question as by the strangers ridiculousclothing.In contrast to medieval peasants and shoemakers, modern industrycares little about the sun or the season. It sanctifies precision anduniformity.Forexample,inamedievalworkshopeachshoemakermadeanentireshoe,fromsoletobuckle.Ifoneshoemakerwaslateforwork,it did not stall the others. However, in a modern footwear-factoryassemblyline,everyworkermansamachinethatproducesjustasmallpart of a shoe, which is then passed on to the next machine. If theworkerwhooperatesmachineno.5hasoverslept,itstallsalltheothermachines.Inordertopreventsuchcalamities,everybodymustadheretoa precise timetable. Each worker arrives at work at exactly the sametime. Everybody takes their lunch break together, whether they arehungryornot.Everybodygoeshomewhenawhistleannouncesthattheshiftisover–notwhentheyhavefinishedtheirproject.

42.CharlieChaplinasasimpleworkercaughtinthewheelsoftheindustrialassemblyline,fromthefilmModernTimes(1936).

TheIndustrialRevolutionturnedthetimetableandtheassemblylineinto a template for almost all human activities. Shortly after factoriesimposed their time frames on human behaviour, schools too adoptedprecise timetables, followed by hospitals, government offices andgrocery stores. Even in places devoid of assembly lines andmachines,thetimetablebecameking.Iftheshiftatthefactoryendsat5p.m.,thelocalpubhadbetterbeopenforbusinessby5:02.A crucial link in the spreading timetable system was public

transportation.Ifworkersneededtostarttheirshiftby08:00,thetrainor bus had to reach the factory gate by 07:55. A few minutes’ delaywould lower production and perhaps even lead to the lay-offs of theunfortunate latecomers. In 1784 a carriage service with a publishedschedulebeganoperatinginBritain.Itstimetablespecifiedonlythehourofdeparture,notarrival.Back then,eachBritishcityandtownhad itsown local time,whichcoulddiffer fromLondon timebyup tohalfanhour.Whenitwas12:00 inLondon, itwasperhaps12:20 inLiverpooland 11:50 in Canterbury. Since therewere no telephones, no radio ortelevision,andnofasttrains–whocouldknow,andwhocared?2

ThefirstcommercialtrainservicebeganoperatingbetweenLiverpoolandManchester in 1830. Ten years later, the first train timetablewasissued.Thetrainsweremuchfasterthantheoldcarriages,sothequirkydifferences in local hours became a severe nuisance. In 1847, Britishtraincompaniesputtheirheadstogetherandagreedthathenceforthalltrain timetables would be calibrated to Greenwich Observatory time,rather than the local timesofLiverpool,ManchesterorGlasgow.Moreandmoreinstitutionsfollowedtheleadofthetraincompanies.Finally,in 1880, the British government took the unprecedented step oflegislatingthatalltimetablesinBritainmustfollowGreenwich.Forthefirst time inhistory,acountryadoptedanational timeandobliged itspopulationtoliveaccordingtoanartificialclockratherthanlocalonesorsunrise-to-sunsetcycles.This modest beginning spawned a global network of timetables,synchronised down to the tiniest fractions of a second. When thebroadcastmedia– first radio, then television–made theirdebut, theyentered a world of timetables and became its main enforcers andevangelists. Among the first things radio stations broadcast were timesignals,beeps thatenabled far-flungsettlementsandshipsatsea tosettheirclocks.Later,radiostationsadoptedthecustomofbroadcastingthenews every hour. Nowadays, the first item of every news broadcast –more important even than the outbreak of war – is the time. DuringWorld War Two, BBC News was broadcast to Nazi-occupied Europe.Eachnewsprogrammeopenedwitha livebroadcastofBigBen tollingthehour– themagical soundof freedom. IngeniousGermanphysicistsfound away to determine theweather conditions in Londonbased ontiny differences in the tone of the broadcast ding-dongs. Thisinformation offered invaluable help to the Luftwaffe.When theBritishSecretServicediscoveredthis,theyreplacedthelivebroadcastwithasetrecordingofthefamousclock.In order to run the timetable network, cheap but precise portableclocks became ubiquitous. In Assyrian, Sassanid or Inca cities theremight have been at most a few sundials. In Europeanmedieval citiestherewasusuallyasingleclock–agiantmachinemountedontopofahigh tower in the town square. These tower clocks were notoriouslyinaccurate, but since therewere no other clocks in town to contradictthem, it hardly made any difference. Today, a single affluent family

generallyhasmoretimepiecesathomethananentiremedievalcountry.You can tell the time by looking at yourwristwatch, glancing at yourAndroid,peeringatthealarmclockbyyourbed,gazingattheclockonthekitchenwall,staringatthemicrowave,catchingaglimpseoftheTVorDVD,ortakinginthetaskbaronyourcomputeroutofthecornerofyoureye.Youneedtomakeaconsciouseffortnottoknowwhattimeitis.The typical person consults these clocks several dozen times a day,

becausealmosteverythingwedohastobedoneontime.Analarmclockwakesusupat7a.m.,weheatourfrozenbagelforexactlyfiftysecondsin themicrowave, brush our teeth for threeminutes until the electrictoothbrushbeeps,catchthe07:40traintowork,runonthetreadmillatthegymuntilthebeeperannouncesthathalfanhourisover,sitdowninfrontoftheTVat7p.m.towatchourfavouriteshow,getinterruptedatpreordainedmomentsbycommercialsthatcost$1,000persecond,andeventuallyunloadallourangstonatherapistwhorestrictsourprattletothenowstandardfifty-minutetherapyhour.

The IndustrialRevolution brought about dozens ofmajor upheavals inhuman society. Adapting to industrial time is just one of them. Othernotable examples include urbanisation, the disappearance of thepeasantry,theriseoftheindustrialproletariat,theempowermentofthecommon person, democratisation, youth culture and the disintegrationofpatriarchy.Yetalloftheseupheavalsaredwarfedbythemostmomentoussocial

revolutionthateverbefellhumankind:thecollapseofthefamilyandthelocalcommunityandtheirreplacementbythestateandthemarket.Asbestwecantell,fromtheearliesttimes,morethanamillionyearsago,humans lived in small, intimate communities,mostofwhosememberswerekin.TheCognitiveRevolutionandtheAgriculturalRevolutiondidnotchangethat.Theygluedtogetherfamiliesandcommunitiestocreatetribes, cities, kingdoms and empires, but families and communitiesremainedthebasicbuildingblocksofallhumansocieties.TheIndustrialRevolution, on the other hand, managed within little more than twocenturies to break these building blocks into atoms. Most of thetraditional functionsof families and communitieswerehandedover to

statesandmarkets.

TheCollapseoftheFamilyandtheCommunity

PriortotheIndustrialRevolution,thedailylifeofmosthumansranitscourse within three ancient frames: the nuclear family, the extendedfamily and the local intimate community.*Most peopleworked in thefamilybusiness–thefamilyfarmorthefamilyworkshop,forexample–or theyworked in their neighbours’ family businesses. The familywasalso the welfare system, the health system, the education system, theconstruction industry, the tradeunion, thepension fund, the insurancecompany, the radio, the television, thenewspapers, thebankandeventhepolice.Whenaperson fell sick, the family tookcareofher.Whenaperson

grewold, the familysupportedher,andherchildrenwereherpensionfund. When a person died, the family took care of the orphans. If apersonwantedtobuildahut,thefamilylentahand.Ifapersonwantedtoopenabusiness, the family raised thenecessarymoney. If apersonwanted tomarry, the family chose, or at least vetted, the prospectivespouse.Ifconflictarosewithaneighbour,thefamilymuscledin.Butifaperson’s illness was too grave for the family to manage, or a newbusiness demanded too large an investment, or the neighbourhoodquarrelescalatedtothepointofviolence,thelocalcommunitycametotherescue.The community offered help on the basis of local traditions and an

economy of favours,which often differed greatly from the supply anddemand laws of the free market. In an old-fashioned medievalcommunity,whenmyneighbourwasinneed,Ihelpedbuildhishutandguardhissheep,withoutexpectinganypaymentinreturn.WhenIwasinneed,myneighbourreturnedthefavour.Atthesametime,thelocalpotentatemight have drafted all of us villagers to construct his castlewithoutpayingusapenny.Inexchange,wecountedonhimtodefendus against brigands and barbarians. Village life involved manytransactionsbutfewpayments.Thereweresomemarkets,ofcourse,buttheirroleswerelimited.Youcouldbuyrarespices,clothandtools,and

hire the services of lawyers and doctors. Yet less than 10 per cent ofcommonlyusedproductsandserviceswereboughtinthemarket.Mosthumanneedsweretakencareofbythefamilyandthecommunity.Therewerealsokingdomsandempiresthatperformedimportanttaskssuchaswagingwars,buildingroadsandconstructingpalaces.Forthesepurposes kings raised taxes and occasionally enlisted soldiers andlabourers.Yet,withfewexceptions,theytendedtostayoutofthedailyaffairs of families and communities. Even if theywanted to intervene,most kings could do so only with difficulty. Traditional agriculturaleconomieshadfewsurpluseswithwhichtofeedcrowdsofgovernmentofficials,policemen,socialworkers,teachersanddoctors.Consequently,mostrulersdidnotdevelopmasswelfaresystems,health-caresystemsoreducationalsystems.Theyleftsuchmattersinthehandsoffamiliesandcommunities.Evenonrareoccasionswhenrulerstriedtointervenemoreintensivelyinthedailylivesofthepeasantry(ashappened,forexample,intheQinEmpireinChina),theydidsobyconvertingfamilyheadsandcommunityeldersintogovernmentagents.Oftenenough, transportationandcommunicationdifficultiesmade itsodifficulttointerveneintheaffairsofremotecommunitiesthatmanykingdoms preferred to cede even the most basic royal prerogatives –suchas taxationandviolence – to communities.TheOttomanEmpire,for instance, allowed family vendettas tomete out justice, rather thansupportinga large imperialpolice force. Ifmycousinkilledsomebody,thevictim’sbrothermightkillme insanctionedrevenge.Thesultan inIstanbuloreventheprovincialpashadidnotinterveneinsuchclashes,aslongasviolenceremainedwithinacceptablelimits.In the Chinese Ming Empire (1368–1644), the population wasorganised into thebaojia system.Ten familieswere grouped to formajia,andten jiaconstitutedabao.Whenamemberofabaocommitedacrime,otherbaomemberscouldbepunishedforit,inparticularthebaoelders.Taxestoowereleviedonthebao,anditwastheresponsibilityofthebaoeldersratherthanofthestateofficialstoassessthesituationofeach family and determine the amount of tax it should pay. From theempire’s perspective, this system had a huge advantage. Instead ofmaintainingthousandsofrevenueofficialsandtaxcollectors,whowouldhavetomonitor theearningsandexpensesofevery family, these taskswere left to the community elders. The elders knew how much each

villagerwasworthandtheycouldusuallyenforcetaxpaymentswithoutinvolvingtheimperialarmy.Many kingdoms and empires were in truth little more than largeprotection rackets. The king was the capo di tutti capi who collectedprotection money, and in return made sure that neighbouring crimesyndicatesandlocalsmall frydidnotharmthoseunderhisprotection.Hedidlittleelse.Life in the bosom of family and community was far from ideal.Familiesandcommunitiescouldoppresstheirmembersnolessbrutallythan domodern states andmarkets, and their internal dynamicswereoftenfraughtwithtensionandviolence–yetpeoplehadlittlechoice.Apersonwholostherfamilyandcommunityaround1750wasasgoodasdead.Shehadnojob,noeducationandnosupportintimesofsicknessanddistress.Nobodywouldloanhermoneyordefendherifshegotintotrouble.Therewerenopolicemen,nosocialworkersandnocompulsoryeducation. In order to survive, such a person quickly had to find analternative family or community. Boys and girls who ran away fromhomecouldexpect,atbest,tobecomeservantsinsomenewfamily.Atworst,therewasthearmyorthebrothel.

Allthischangeddramaticallyoverthelasttwocenturies.TheIndustrialRevolution gave the market immense new powers, provided the statewithnewmeansofcommunicationandtransportation,andplacedatthegovernment’sdisposalanarmyofclerks,teachers,policemenandsocialworkers.Atfirstthemarketandthestatediscoveredtheirpathblockedbytraditional familiesandcommunitieswhohadlittle loveforoutsideintervention. Parents and community elders were reluctant to let theyounger generation be indoctrinated by nationalist education systems,conscriptedintoarmiesorturnedintoarootlessurbanproletariat.Overtime,statesandmarketsusedtheirgrowingpowertoweakenthetraditionalbondsoffamilyandcommunity.Thestatesentitspolicemento stop family vendettas and replace them with court decisions. Themarket sent its hawkers to wipe out longstanding local traditions andreplacethemwithever-changingcommercialfashions.Yetthiswasnotenough. In order really to break the power of family and community,theyneededthehelpofafifthcolumn.

Thestateandthemarketapproachedpeoplewithanofferthatcouldnot be refused. ‘Become individuals,’ they said. ‘Marrywhomever youdesire,withoutaskingpermissionfromyourparents.Takeupwhateverjobsuitsyou,evenifcommunityeldersfrown.Livewhereveryouwish,evenifyoucannotmakeiteveryweektothefamilydinner.Youarenolongerdependentonyourfamilyoryourcommunity.We,thestateandthemarket,willtakecareofyouinstead.Wewillprovidefood,shelter,education, health,welfare and employment.Wewill provide pensions,insuranceandprotection.’Romanticliteratureoftenpresentstheindividualassomebodycaught

inastruggleagainstthestateandthemarket.Nothingcouldbefurtherfrom the truth.The stateand themarketare themotherand fatheroftheindividual,andtheindividualcansurviveonlythankstothem.Themarketprovidesuswithwork, insuranceandapension. Ifwewant tostudyaprofession,thegovernment’sschoolsaretheretoteachus.Ifwewanttoopenabusiness,thebankloansusmoney.Ifwewanttobuildahouse, a construction company builds it and the bank gives us amortgage, in somecases subsidisedor insuredby the state. If violenceflaresup,thepoliceprotectus.Ifwearesickforafewdays,ourhealthinsurance takes care of us. If we are debilitated for months, socialsecurity steps in. Ifweneedaround-the-clock assistance,we cango tothemarketandhireanurse–usuallysomestrangerfromtheothersideoftheworldwhotakescareofuswiththekindofdevotionthatwenolonger expect from our own children. If we have the means, we canspend our golden years at a senior citizens’ home. The tax authoritiestreat us as individuals, and do not expect us to pay the neighbours’taxes.Thecourts,too,seeusasindividuals,andneverpunishusforthecrimesofourcousins.Notonlyadultmen,butalsowomenandchildren,arerecognisedas

individuals.Throughoutmostofhistory,womenwereoftenseenasthepropertyoffamilyorcommunity.Modernstates,ontheotherhand,seewomenasindividuals,enjoyingeconomicandlegalrightsindependentlyoftheirfamilyandcommunity.Theymayholdtheirownbankaccounts,decidewhomtomarry,andevenchoosetodivorceorliveontheirown.Butthe liberationof the individualcomesatacost.Manyofusnow

bewail the loss of strong families and communities and feel alienatedandthreatenedbythepowertheimpersonalstateandmarketwieldover

our lives. States and markets composed of alienated individuals caninterveneinthelivesoftheirmembersmuchmoreeasilythanstatesandmarketscomposedofstrongfamiliesandcommunities.Whenneighboursinahigh-riseapartmentbuildingcannotevenagreeonhowmuchtopaytheirjanitor,howcanweexpectthemtoresistthestate?The deal between states, markets and individuals is an uneasy one.

The state and the market disagree about their mutual rights andobligations, and individuals complain thatbothdemand toomuchandprovide too little. Inmany cases individuals are exploited bymarkets,and states employ their armies, police forces and bureaucracies topersecute individuals insteadofdefending them.Yet it isamazing thatthisdealworks at all –however imperfectly. For it breaches countlessgenerationsofhumansocialarrangements.Millionsofyearsofevolutionhave designed us to live and think as community members. Within amere two centuries we have become alienated individuals. Nothingtestifiesbettertotheawesomepowerofculture.

The nuclear family did not disappear completely from the modernlandscape.When states and markets took from the family most of itseconomic and political roles, they left it some important emotionalfunctions. Themodern family is still supposed to provide for intimateneeds,which state andmarket are (so far) incapableof providing.Yetevenhere the family is subject to increasing interventions.Themarketshapestoanever-greaterdegreethewaypeopleconducttheirromanticand sexual lives. Whereas traditionally the family was the mainmatchmaker, todayit’s themarket that tailorsourromanticandsexualpreferences,andthenlendsahandinprovidingforthem–forafatfee.Previouslybrideandgroommet in the family living room,andmoneypassedfromthehandsofonefathertoanother.Todaycourtingisdoneat bars and cafés, and money passes from the hands of lovers towaitresses. Even more money is transferred to the bank accounts offashion designers, gym managers, dieticians, cosmeticians and plasticsurgeons,whohelpusarriveatthecafélookingassimilaraspossibletothemarketsidealofbeauty.

Familyandcommunityvs.stateandmarket

The state, too, keeps a sharper eye on family relations, especiallybetweenparentsandchildren.Parentsareobligedtosendtheirchildrento be educated by the state. Parents who are especially abusive orviolentwiththeirchildrenmayberestrainedbythestate.Ifneedbe,thestatemayeven imprisontheparentsor transfer theirchildrento fosterfamilies. Until not long ago, the suggestion that the state ought topreventparents frombeatingorhumiliating their childrenwouldhavebeenrejectedoutofhandasludicrousandunworkable.Inmostsocietiesparentalauthoritywassacred.Respectofandobediencetoone’sparentswere among the most hallowed values, and parents could do almostanythingtheywanted,includingkillingnewbornbabies,sellingchildreninto slavery andmarryingoff daughters tomenmore than twice theirage. Today, parental authority is in full retreat. Youngsters areincreasingly excused from obeying their elders, whereas parents areblamedforanythingthatgoeswronginthelifeoftheirchild.MumandDad are about as likely to get off in the Freudian courtroom as weredefendantsinaStalinistshowtrial.

ImaginedCommunities

Likethenuclearfamily,thecommunitycouldnotcompletelydisappearfromourworldwithoutanyemotionalreplacement.Marketsandstatestodayprovidemostofthematerialneedsonceprovidedbycommunities,buttheymustalsosupplytribalbonds.Markets and states do so by fostering ‘imagined communities’ that

contain millions of strangers, and which are tailored to national andcommercial needs. An imagined community is a community of peoplewho don’t really know each other, but imagine that they do. Suchcommunitiesarenotanovelinvention.Kingdoms,empiresandchurchesfunctioned for millennia as imagined communities. In ancient China,tensofmillionsofpeoplesawthemselvesasmembersofasinglefamily,with the emperor as its father. In theMiddleAges,millions of devoutMuslims imagined that they were all brothers and sisters in the greatcommunityofIslam.Yetthroughouthistory,suchimaginedcommunitiesplayed second fiddle to intimate communities of several dozen peoplewho knew each other well. The intimate communities fulfilled theemotional needs of their members and were essential for everyone’ssurvivalandwelfare.Inthelasttwocenturies,theintimatecommunitieshave withered, leaving imagined communities to fill in the emotionalvacuum.The two most important examples for the rise of such imagined

communities are the nation and the consumer tribe. The nation is theimagined community of the state. The consumer tribe is the imaginedcommunityof themarket.Bothare imaginedcommunitiesbecause it isimpossibleforallcustomersinamarketorforallmembersofanationreally toknowoneanother thewayvillagersknewoneanother in thepast.NoGermancanintimatelyknowtheother80millionmembersoftheGerman nation, or the other 500million customers inhabiting theEuropean Common Market (which evolved first into the EuropeanCommunityandfinallybecametheEuropeanUnion).Consumerismandnationalismwork extra hours tomakeus imagine

thatmillions of strangers belong to the same community as ourselves,that we all have a common past, common interests and a commonfuture. This isn’t a lie. It’s imagination. Like money, limited liabilitycompanies and human rights, nations and consumer tribes are inter-subjective realities. They exist only in our collective imagination, yettheirpower is immense.As longasmillionsofGermansbelieve in the

existenceofaGermannation,getexcitedatthesightofGermannationalsymbols, retell German national myths, and are willing to sacrificemoney,timeandlimbsfortheGermannation,Germanywillremainoneofthestrongestpowersintheworld.Thenationdoes itsbest tohide its imaginedcharacter.Mostnations

argue that they are a natural and eternal entity, created in someprimordialepochbymixingthesoilofthemotherlandwiththebloodofthepeople.Yetsuchclaimsareusuallyexaggerated.Nationsexisted inthe distant past, but their importance was much smaller than todaybecause the importance of the state was much smaller. A resident ofmedievalNurembergmighthavefeltsomeloyaltytowardstheGermannation, but she felt far more loyalty towards her family and localcommunity,whichtookcareofmostofherneeds.Moreover,whateverimportanceancientnationsmayhavehad, fewof themsurvived.MostexistingnationsevolvedonlyaftertheIndustrialRevolution.The Middle East provides ample examples. The Syrian, Lebanese,

JordanianandIraqinationsaretheproductofhaphazardbordersdrawninthesandbyFrenchandBritishdiplomatswhoignoredlocalhistory,geographyandeconomy.Thesediplomatsdetermined in1918 that thepeopleofKurdistan,BaghdadandBasrawouldhenceforthbe‘Iraqis’.Itwas primarily the Frenchwhodecidedwhowould be Syrian andwhoLebanese.SaddamHusseinandHafezel-AsadtriedtheirbesttopromoteandreinforcetheirAnglo-French-manufacturednationalconsciousnesses,buttheirbombasticspeechesabouttheallegedlyeternalIraqiandSyriannationshadahollowring.It goeswithout saying that nations cannot be created from thin air.

Those who worked hard to construct Iraq or Syria made use of realhistorical,geographicalandculturalrawmaterials–someofwhicharecenturies andmillennia old. SaddamHussein co-opted the heritage oftheAbbasidcaliphateandtheBabylonianEmpire,evencallingoneofhiscrack armoured units theHammurabiDivision. Yet that does not turntheIraqinationintoananciententity.IfIbakeacakefromflour,oilandsugar, all of which have been sitting in my pantry for the past twomonths,itdoesnotmeanthatthecakeitselfistwomonthsold.In recent decades, national communities have been increasingly

eclipsedbytribesofcustomerswhodonotknowoneanotherintimatelybutsharethesameconsumptionhabitsandinterests,andthereforefeel

partof the sameconsumer tribe–anddefine themselvesas such.Thissoundsverystrange,butwearesurroundedbyexamples.Madonnafans,forexample,constituteaconsumertribe.Theydefinethemselveslargelybyshopping.TheybuyMadonnaconcerttickets,CDs,posters,shirtsandring tones, and thereby definewho they are.Manchester United fans,vegetarians and environmentalists are other examples. They, too, aredefined above all by what they consume. It is the keystone of theiridentity. A German vegetarian might well prefer to marry a FrenchvegetarianthanaGermancarnivore.

PerpetuumMobile

Therevolutionsofthelasttwocenturieshavebeensoswiftandradicalthattheyhavechangedthemostfundamentalcharacteristicofthesocialorder.Traditionally,thesocialorderwashardandrigid.‘Order’impliedstability and continuity. Swift social revolutionswere exceptional, andmostsocialtransformationsresultedfromtheaccumulationofnumeroussmall steps. Humans tended to assume that the social structure wasinflexible and eternal. Families and communities might struggle tochangetheirplacewithintheorder,buttheideathatyoucouldchangethe fundamental structure of the order was alien. People tended toreconcile themselves to the status quo, declaring that ‘this is how italwayswas,andthisishowitalwayswillbe’.Overthelasttwocenturies,thepaceofchangebecamesoquickthatthesocialorderacquiredadynamicandmalleablenature.Itnowexistsinastateofpermanentflux.Whenwespeakofmodernrevolutionswetend to think of 1789 (the French Revolution), 1848 (the liberalrevolutions)or1917(theRussianRevolution).Butthefactisthat,thesedays, every year is revolutionary. Today, even a thirty-year-old canhonestly telldisbelievingteenagers, ‘WhenIwasyoung, theworldwascompletelydifferent.’ The Internet, for example, came intowideusageonly in the early 1990s, hardly twenty years ago. Today we cannotimaginetheworldwithoutit.Henceanyattempt todefine the characteristics ofmodern society isakin to defining the colour of a chameleon. The only characteristic of

whichwe can be certain is the incessant change. People have becomeused to this, andmostofus thinkabout the socialorderas somethingflexible,whichwecanengineerandimproveatwill.Themainpromiseofpremodernrulerswastosafeguardthetraditionalorderoreventogobacktosomelostgoldenage.Inthelasttwocenturies,thecurrencyofpolitics is that it promises to destroy the oldworld andbuild a betteroneinitsplace.Noteventhemostconservativeofpoliticalpartiesvowsmerely to keep things as they are. Everybody promises social reform,educational reform, economic reform – and they often fulfil thosepromises.

Just as geologists expect that tectonic movements will result inearthquakes and volcanic eruptions, so might we expect that drasticsocial movements will result in bloody outbursts of violence. Thepoliticalhistoryofthenineteenthandtwentiethcenturiesisoftentoldasaseriesofdeadlywars,holocaustsandrevolutions.Likeachildinnewboots leaping from puddle to puddle, this view sees history asleapfrogging from one bloodbath to the next, fromWorldWarOne toWorldWar Two to the ColdWar, from the Armenian genocide to theJewishgenocidetotheRwandangenocide,fromRobespierretoLenintoHitler.There is truth here, but this all too familiar list of calamities issomewhat misleading. We focus too much on the puddles and forgetabout the dry land separating them. The late modern era has seenunprecedentedlevelsnotonlyofviolenceandhorror,butalsoofpeaceandtranquillity.CharlesDickenswroteoftheFrenchRevolutionthat‘Itwas thebestof times, itwas theworstof times.’Thismaybe truenotonlyoftheFrenchRevolution,butoftheentireeraitheralded.It isespecially trueof the sevendecades thathaveelapsed since theendofWorldWarTwo.Duringthisperiodhumankindhasforthefirsttime faced the possibility of complete self-annihilation and hasexperienced a fair number of actual wars and genocides. Yet thesedecadeswere also themost peaceful era in humanhistory – and by awide margin. This is surprising because these very same decadesexperienced more economic, social and political change than anypreviousera.Thetectonicplatesofhistoryaremovingatafranticpace,

but thevolcanoesaremostly silent.Thenewelasticorder seems tobeable to contain and even initiate radical structural changes withoutcollapsingintoviolentconflict.3

PeaceinOurTime

Mostpeopledon’tappreciatejusthowpeacefulanerawelivein.Noneofuswasaliveathousandyearsago,soweeasilyforgethowmuchmoreviolenttheworldusedtobe.Andaswarsbecomemoreraretheyattractmoreattention.ManymorepeoplethinkaboutthewarsragingtodayinAfghanistanandIraqthanaboutthepeaceinwhichmostBraziliansandIndianslive.Even more importantly, it’s easier to relate to the suffering ofindividualsthanofentirepopulations.However,inordertounderstandmacro-historical processes, we need to examine mass statistics ratherthan individual stories. In the year 2000, wars caused the deaths of310,000individuals,andviolentcrimekilledanother520,000.Eachandeveryvictimisaworlddestroyed,afamilyruined,friendsandrelativesscarred for life. Yet from a macro perspective these 830,000 victimscomprisedonly1.5percentofthe56millionpeoplewhodiedin2000.That year 1.26million people died in car accidents (2.25 per cent oftotalmortality)and815,000peoplecommittedsuicide(1.45percent).4Thefiguresfor2002areevenmoresurprising.Outof57milliondead,only172,000peopledied inwarand569,000diedofviolentcrime (atotalof741,000victimsofhumanviolence).Incontrast,873,000peoplecommitted suicide.5 It turns out that in the year following the 9/11attacks,despiteallthetalkofterrorismandwar,theaveragepersonwasmorelikelytokillhimselfthantobekilledbyaterrorist,asoldieroradrugdealer.Inmostpartsoftheworld,peoplegotosleepwithoutfearingthatinthemiddleofthenightaneighbouringtribemightsurroundtheirvillageand slaughter everyone. Well-off British subjects travel daily fromNottingham to London through Sherwood Forest without fear that agang of merry green-clad brigands will ambush them and take theirmoney togive to thepoor (or,more likely,murder themand take the

money for themselves). Studentsbrooknocanings from their teachers,children need not fear that they will be sold into slavery when theirparentscan’tpaytheirbills,andwomenknowthatthelawforbidstheirhusbands from beating them and forcing them to stay at home.Increasingly,aroundtheworld,theseexpectationsarefulfilled.The decline of violence is due largely to the rise of the state.Throughout history, most violence resulted from local feuds betweenfamilies and communities. (Even today, as the above figures indicate,localcrimeisafardeadlierthreatthaninternationalwars.)Aswehaveseen,earlyfarmers,whoknewnopoliticalorganisationslargerthanthelocalcommunity,sufferedrampantviolence.6Askingdomsandempiresbecame stronger, they reined in communities and the levelof violencedecreased. In the decentralised kingdoms of medieval Europe, abouttwenty to forty people were murdered each year for every 100,000inhabitants. In recent decades, when states andmarkets have becomeall-powerful and communities have vanished, violence rates havedroppedevenfurther.Todaytheglobalaverageisonlyninemurdersayearper100,000people,andmostofthesemurderstakeplaceinweakstatessuchasSomaliaandColombia.InthecentralisedstatesofEurope,theaverageisonemurderayearper100,000people.7Therearecertainlycaseswherestatesusetheirpowertokilltheirowncitizens,and theseoften loomlarge inourmemoriesand fears.Duringthe twentieth century, tens of millions if not hundreds of millions ofpeoplewerekilledbythesecurityforcesoftheirownstates.Still,fromamacro perspective, state-run courts and police forces have probablyincreased the level of security worldwide. Even in oppressivedictatorships, theaveragemodernperson is far less likely todieat thehandsofanotherpersonthaninpremodernsocieties.In1964amilitarydictatorshipwas established in Brazil. It ruled the country until 1985.During these twenty years, several thousandBraziliansweremurderedbytheregime.Thousandsmorewereimprisonedandtortured.Yetevenintheworstyears, theaverageBrazilianinRiodeJaneirowasfar lesslikely to die at human hands than the average Waorani, Arawete orYanomamo. The Waorani, Arawete and Yanomamo are indigenouspeoplewholiveinthedepthsoftheAmazonforest,withoutarmy,policeor prisons. Anthropological studies have indicated that between aquarterandahalfoftheirmenfolkdiesoonerorlaterinviolentconflicts

overproperty,womenorprestige.8

ImperialRetirement

It isperhapsdebatablewhetherviolencewithinstateshasdecreasedorincreased since 1945. What nobody can deny is that internationalviolence has dropped to an all-time low. Perhaps the most obviousexample is the collapse of the European empires. Throughout historyempires have crushed rebellions with an iron fist, and when its daycame, a sinking empire used all its might to save itself, usuallycollapsingintoabloodbath.Itsfinaldemisegenerallyledtoanarchyandwars of succession. Since 1945 most empires have opted for peacefulearlyretirement.Theirprocessofcollapsebecamerelativelyswift,calmandorderly.In1945Britainruledaquarteroftheglobe.Thirtyyearslateritruled

just a few small islands. In the intervening decades it retreated frommostof itscolonies inapeacefulandorderlymanner.ThoughinsomeplacessuchasMalayaandKenyatheBritishtriedtohangonbyforceofarms,inmostplacestheyacceptedtheendofempirewithasighratherthanwithatempertantrum.Theyfocusedtheireffortsnotonretainingpower,buton transferring it as smoothlyaspossible.At least someofthepraiseusuallyheapedonMahatmaGandhiforhisnon-violentcreedisactuallyowedtotheBritishEmpire.Despitemanyyearsofbitterandoftenviolentstruggle,whentheendoftheRajcame,theIndiansdidnothavetofighttheBritishinthestreetsofDelhiandCalcutta.Theempire’splacewas taken by a slew of independent states,most of which havesinceenjoyedstablebordersandhaveforthemostpartlivedpeacefullyalongsidetheirneighbours.True,tensofthousandsofpeopleperishedatthehandsofthethreatenedBritishEmpire,andinseveralhotspots itsretreat led to theeruptionofethnicconflicts thatclaimedhundredsofthousands of lives (particularly in India). Yet when compared to thelong-termhistoricalaverage,theBritishwithdrawalwasanexemplarofpeace and order. The French Empire was more stubborn. Its collapseinvolved bloody rearguard actions in Vietnam and Algeria that costhundredsof thousandsof lives.Yet theFrench, too, retreated fromthe

rest of their dominions quickly and peacefully, leaving behind orderlystatesratherthanachaoticfree-for-all.The Soviet collapse in 1989 was even more peaceful, despite the

eruptionofethnicconflictintheBalkans,theCaucasusandCentralAsia.Never before has such amighty empire disappeared so swiftly and soquietly. The Soviet Empire of 1989 had suffered no military defeatexcept in Afghanistan, no external invasions, no rebellions, nor evenlarge-scaleMartinLutherKing-stylecampaignsofcivildisobedience.TheSoviets still had millions of soldiers, tens of thousands of tanks andaeroplanes, and enough nuclear weapons to wipe out the whole ofhumankind several times over. The Red Army and the other WarsawPact armies remained loyal. Had the last Soviet ruler, MikhailGorbachev, given theorder, theRedArmywouldhaveopened fire onthesubjugatedmasses.Yet the Soviet elite, and the Communist regimes through most of

easternEurope(RomaniaandSerbiaweretheexceptions),chosenottouse even a tiny fraction of this military power. When its membersrealisedthatCommunismwasbankrupt,theyrenouncedforce,admittedtheirfailure,packedtheirsuitcasesandwenthome.Gorbachevandhiscolleaguesgaveupwithouta strugglenotonly theSovietconquestsofWorldWarTwo,butalsothemucholdertsaristconquestsintheBaltic,theUkraine,theCaucasusandCentralAsia.Itischillingtocontemplatewhatmighthavehappened ifGorbachevhadbehaved like theSerbianleadership–orliketheFrenchinAlgeria.

PaxAtomica

The independent states thatcameafter theseempireswere remarkablyuninterested in war. With very few exceptions, since 1945 states nolonger invade other states in order to conquer and swallow them up.Suchconquestshadbeenthebreadandbutterofpoliticalhistorysincetimeimmemorial.Itwashowmostgreatempireswereestablished,andhowmostrulersandpopulationsexpectedthingstostay.Butcampaignsof conquest like those of the Romans, Mongols and Ottomans cannottake place today anywhere in the world. Since 1945, no independent

country recognised by the UN has been conquered and wiped off themap. Limited international wars still occur from time to time, andmillionsstilldieinwars,butwarsarenolongerthenorm.Many people believe that the disappearance of international war is

uniquetotherichdemocraciesofwesternEurope.Infact,peacereachedEuropeafteritprevailedinotherpartsoftheworld.Thusthelastseriousinternational wars between South American countries were the Peru-Ecuador War of 1941 and the Bolivia-Paraguay War of 1932–5. Andbefore that there hadn’t been a serious war between South Americancountriessince1879–84,withChileononesideandBoliviaandPeruontheother.WeseldomthinkoftheArabworldasparticularlypeaceful.Yetonly

oncesincetheArabcountrieswontheirindependencehasoneofthemmountedafull-scaleinvasionofanother(theIraqiinvasionofKuwaitin1990).Therehavebeenquiteafewborderclashes(e.g.SyriavsJordanin1970),manyarmedinterventionsofoneintheaffairsofanother(e.g.SyriainLebanon),numerouscivilwars(Algeria,Yemen,Libya)andanabundance of coups and revolts. Yet there have been no full-scaleinternational wars among the Arab states except the Gulf War. Evenwidening the scope to include the entireMuslimworld adds only onemore example, the Iran-Iraq War. There was no Turkey—Iran War,Pakistan-AfghanistanWar,orIndonesia-MalaysiaWar.In Africa things are far less rosy. But even there,most conflicts are

civilwarsandcoups.SinceAfricanstateswontheirindependenceinthe1960s and1970s, very few countries have invadedone another in thehopeofconquest.Therehavebeenperiods of relative calmbefore, as, for example, in

Europebetween1871and1914,andtheyalwaysendedbadly.Butthistimeitisdifferent.Forrealpeaceisnotthemereabsenceofwar.Realpeaceistheimplausibilityofwar.Therehasneverbeenrealpeaceintheworld. Between1871 and1914, a Europeanwar remained a plausibleeventuality, and the expectation of war dominated the thinking ofarmies,politiciansandordinarycitizensalike.Thisforebodingwastruefor all other peaceful periods in history. An iron law of internationalpolitics decreed, ‘For every two nearby polities, there is a plausiblescenario thatwill cause them togo towaragainst oneanotherwithinoneyear.’Thislawofthejunglewasinforceinlatenineteenth-century

Europe,inmedievalEurope,inancientChinaandinclassicalGreece.IfSparta and Athens were at peace in 450 BC, there was a plausiblescenariothattheywouldbeatwarby449BC.Todayhumankindhas broken the lawof the jungle. There is at last

real peace, and not just absence ofwar. Formost polities, there is noplausible scenario leading to full-scale conflict within one year. WhatcouldleadtowarbetweenGermanyandFrancenextyear?OrbetweenChinaandJapan?OrbetweenBrazilandArgentina?Someminorborderclashmightoccur,butonlyatrulyapocalypticscenariocouldresult inan old-fashioned full-scalewar between Brazil andArgentina in 2014,withArgentinianarmoureddivisionssweeping to thegatesofRio,andBrazilian carpet-bombers pulverising the neighbourhoods of BuenosAires. Suchwarsmight still erupt between several pairs of states, e.g.betweenIsraelandSyria,EthiopiaandEritrea,ortheUSAandIran,buttheseareonlytheexceptionsthatprovetherule.This situation might of course change in the future and, with

hindsight, theworldof todaymight seem incrediblynaïve.Yet fromahistoricalperspective,ourverynaïvety is fascinating.Neverbeforehaspeacebeensoprevalentthatpeoplecouldnotevenimaginewar.

Scholars have sought to explain this happy development in morebooksandarticlesthanyouwouldeverwanttoreadyourself,andtheyhaveidentifiedseveralcontributingfactors.Firstandforemost,theprice

ofwarhasgoneupdramatically.TheNobelPeacePrizetoendallpeaceprizes should have been given to Robert Oppenheimer and his fellowarchitects of the atomic bomb. Nuclear weapons have turned warbetweensuperpowers intocollectivesuicide,andmadeit impossible toseekworlddominationbyforceofarms.Secondly,whilethepriceofwarsoared,itsprofitsdeclined.Formost

of history, polities could enrich themselves by looting or annexingenemyterritories.Mostwealthconsistedoffields,cattle,slavesandgold,so itwaseasy to loot itoroccupy it.Today,wealthconsistsmainlyofhuman capital, technical know-how and complex socio-economicstructures such as banks. Consequently it is difficult to carry it off orincorporateitintoone’sterritory.ConsiderCalifornia. Itswealthwas initiallybuilt ongoldmines.But

todayitisbuiltonsiliconandcelluloid–SiliconValleyandthecelluloidhillsofHollywood.WhatwouldhappeniftheChineseweretomountanarmed invasionofCalifornia, landamillion soldierson thebeachesofSan Francisco and storm inland? Theywould gain little. There are nosilicon mines in Silicon Valley. The wealth resides in the minds ofGoogle engineers and Hollywood script doctors, directors and special-effectswizards,whowouldbeonthefirstplanetoBangaloreorMumbailong before the Chinese tanks rolled into Sunset Boulevard. It is notcoincidentalthatthefewfull-scaleinternationalwarsthatstilltakeplaceintheworld,suchastheIraqiinvasionofKuwait,occurinplaceswerewealthisold-fashionedmaterialwealth.TheKuwaitisheikhscouldfleeabroad,buttheoilfieldsstayedputandwereoccupied.

43.and44.GoldminersinCaliforniaduringtheGoldRush,andFacebook’sheadquartersnearSanFrancisco.In1849Californiabuiltitsfortunesongold.Today,Californiabuildsitsfortunesonsilicon.Butwhereasin1849thegoldactuallylaythereintheCalifornian

soil,therealtreasuresofSiliconValleyarelockedinsidetheheadsofhigh-techemployees.

Whilewarbecame lessprofitable,peacebecamemore lucrative thanever. In traditional agricultural economies long-distance trade andforeign investmentwere sideshows. Consequently, peace brought littleprofit,asidefromavoidingthecostsofwar.If,say,in1400EnglandandFrancewereatpeace, theFrenchdidnothave topayheavywar taxesand to suffer destructive English invasions, but otherwise it did notbenefit theirwallets. Inmoderncapitalisteconomies, foreigntradeandinvestments have become all-important. Peace therefore brings uniquedividends.AslongasChinaandtheUSAareatpeace,theChinesecanprosper by selling products to the USA, trading in Wall Street andreceivingUSinvestments.Lastbutnot least, a tectonic shifthas takenplace inglobalpolitical

culture.Many elites in history –Hun chieftains, Viking noblemen andAztec priests, for example – viewed war as a positive good. Othersvieweditasevil,butaninevitableone,whichwehadbetterturntoourown advantage. Ours is the first time in history that the world isdominated by a peace-loving elite – politicians, business people,

intellectuals and artists who genuinely see war as both evil andavoidable.(Therewerepacifistsinthepast,suchastheearlyChristians,butintherarecasesthattheygainedpower,theytendedtoforgetabouttheirrequirementto‘turntheothercheek’.)There isapositive feedback loopbetweenall these four factors.The

threatofnuclearholocaustfosterspacifism;whenpacifismspreads,warrecedes and trade flourishes; and trade increases both the profits ofpeaceandthecostsofwar.Overtime,thisfeedbackloopcreatesanotherobstacletowar,whichmayultimatelyprovethemostimportantofall.The tightening web of international connections erodes theindependence ofmost countries, lessening the chance that any one ofthemmightsingle-handedly letslipthedogsofwar.Mostcountriesnolonger engage in full-scalewar for the simple reason that they are nolongerindependent.ThoughcitizensinIsrael,Italy,MexicoorThailandmay harbour illusions of independence, the fact is that theirgovernmentscannotconduct independenteconomicor foreignpolicies,and they are certainly incapable of initiating and conducting full-scalewar on their own. As explained in Chapter 11, we are witnessing theformation of a global empire. Like previous empires, this one, too,enforcespeacewithinitsborders.Andsinceitsborderscovertheentireglobe,theWorldEmpireeffectivelyenforcesworldpeace.

So, is themodern era one ofmindless slaughter, war and oppression,typifiedbythetrenchesofWorldWarOne,thenuclearmushroomcloudoverHiroshimaandthegorymaniasofHitlerandStalin?Orisitaneraof peace, epitomised by the trenches never dug in SouthAmerica, themushroomcloudsthatneverappearedoverMoscowandNewYork,andtheserenevisagesofMahatmaGandhiandMartinLutherKing?Theanswer is amatterof timing. It is sobering to realisehowoften

ourviewof thepast isdistortedbyeventsof the last fewyears. If thischapterhadbeenwrittenin1945or1962,itwouldprobablyhavebeenmuch more glum. Since it was written in 2014, it takes a relativelybuoyantapproachtomodernhistory.Tosatisfybothoptimistsandpessimists,wemayconcludebysaying

thatweareonthethresholdofbothheavenandhell,movingnervouslybetweenthegatewayoftheoneandtheanteroomoftheother.History

hasstillnotdecidedwherewewillendup,andastringofcoincidencesmightyetsendusrollingineitherdirection.

*An‘intimatecommunity’isagroupofpeoplewhoknowoneanotherwellanddependoneachotherforsurvival.

19

AndTheyLivedHappilyEverAfter

THE LAST 500 YEARS HAVE WITNESSED A breathtaking series ofrevolutions. The earth has been united into a single ecological andhistorical sphere. The economy has grown exponentially, andhumankindtodayenjoysthekindofwealththatusedtobethestuffoffairytales.ScienceandtheIndustrialRevolutionhavegivenhumankindsuperhuman powers and practically limitless energy. The social orderhasbeencompletelytransformed,ashavepolitics,dailylifeandhumanpsychology.Butarewehappier?Didthewealthhumankindaccumulatedoverthe

last five centuries translate into a new-found contentment? Did thediscoveryofinexhaustibleenergyresourcesopenbeforeusinexhaustiblestores of bliss? Going further back, have the seventy or so turbulentmillenniasincetheCognitiveRevolutionmadetheworldabetterplacetolive?WasthelateNeilArmstrong,whosefootprintremainsintactonthe windless moon, happier than the nameless hunter-gatherer who30,000yearsagoleftherhandprintonawall inChauvetCave?Ifnot,what was the point of developing agriculture, cities, writing, coinage,empires,scienceandindustry?Historians seldom ask such questions. They do not ask whether the

citizensofUrukandBabylonwerehappierthantheirforagingancestors,whethertheriseofIslammadeEgyptiansmorepleasedwiththeirlives,orhowthecollapseof theEuropeanempires inAfricahave influencedthe happiness of countless millions. Yet these are the most importantquestions one can ask of history.Most current ideologies and politicalprogrammesarebasedonratherflimsyideasconcerningtherealsource

ofhumanhappiness.Nationalistsbelievethatpoliticalself-determinationis essential for our happiness. Communists postulate that everyonewould be blissful under the dictatorship of the proletariat. Capitalistsmaintainthatonlythefreemarketcanensurethegreatesthappinessofthe greatest number, by creating economic growth and materialabundanceandbyteachingpeopletobeself-reliantandenterprising.What would happen if serious research were to disprove thesehypotheses? If economic growth and self-reliance do notmake peoplehappier,what’s thebenefitofCapitalism?What if it turnsout that thesubjects of large empires are generally happier than the citizens ofindependentstatesandthat,forexample,AlgerianswerehappierunderFrench rule than under their own? What would that say about theprocessofdecolonisationandthevalueofnationalself-determination?Theseareallhypotheticalpossibilities,becausesofarhistorianshaveavoidedraisingthesequestions–nottomentionansweringthem.Theyhave researched the history of just about everything politics, society,economics, gender, diseases, sexuality, food, clothing – yet they haveseldomstoppedtoaskhowtheseinfluencehumanhappiness.Though fewhave studied the long-termhistory of happiness, almosteveryscholarandlaypersonhassomevaguepreconceptionaboutit. Inone common view, human capabilities have increased throughouthistory. Since humans generally use their capabilities to alleviatemiseriesand fulfil aspirations, it follows thatwemustbehappier thanourmedieval ancestors, and theymust have been happier than StoneAgehunter-gatherers.But this progressive account is unconvincing.Aswe have seen, newaptitudes,behavioursandskillsdonotnecessarilymakeforabetterlife.When humans learned to farm in the Agricultural Revolution, theircollective power to shape their environment increased, but the lot ofmany individual humans grew harsher. Peasants had to work harderthanforagerstoekeout lessvariedandnutritious food,andtheywerefarmore exposed to disease and exploitation. Similarly, the spread ofEuropeanempiresgreatlyincreasedthecollectivepowerofhumankind,bycirculating ideas, technologiesandcrops,andopeningnewavenuesof commerce. Yet this was hardly good news for millions of Africans,NativeAmericansandAboriginalAustralians.Given theprovenhumanpropensity formisusingpower, it seemsnaïve tobelievethat themore

cloutpeoplehave,thehappiertheywillbe.Somechallengersof thisview takeadiametricallyopposedposition.They argue for a reverse correlation between human capabilities andhappiness.Powercorrupts,theysay,andashumankindgainedmoreandmore power, it created a coldmechanisticworld ill-suited to our realneeds. Evolutionmoulded ourminds and bodies to the life of hunter-gatherers. The transition first to agriculture and then to industry hascondemnedustolivingunnatural livesthatcannotgivefullexpressionto our inherent inclinations and instincts, and therefore cannot satisfyour deepest yearnings. Nothing in the comfortable lives of the urbanmiddle class can approach the wild excitement and sheer joyexperienced by a forager band on a successful mammoth hunt. Everynew invention just puts another mile between us and the Garden ofEden.Yet this romantic insistence on seeing a dark shadow behind eachinvention is as dogmatic as the belief in the inevitability of progress.Perhapsweareoutoftouchwithourinnerhunter-gatherer,butit’snotallbad.For instance,over the last twocenturiesmodernmedicinehasdecreasedchildmortalityfrom33percenttolessthan5percent.Cananyonedoubt that thismadeahuge contribution to thehappinessnotonlyofthosechildrenwhowouldotherwisehavedied,butalsooftheirfamiliesandfriends?Amore nuanced position takes themiddle road. Until the ScientificRevolutiontherewasnoclearcorrelationbetweenpowerandhappiness.Medieval peasants may indeed have been more miserable than theirhunter-gatherer forebears. But in the last few centuries humans havelearned to use their capacities more wisely. The triumphs of modernmedicine are just one example. Other unprecedented achievementsinclude the steep drop in violence, the virtual disappearance ofinternationalwars,andtheneareliminationoflarge-scalefamines.Yet this, too, is an oversimplification. Firstly, it bases its optimisticassessment on a very small sample of years. The majority of humansbegantoenjoythefruitsofmodernmedicinenoearlierthan1850,andthedrasticdrop inchildmortality isa twentieth-centuryphenomenon.Massfaminescontinuedtoblightmuchofhumanityuptothemiddleofthetwentiethcentury.DuringCommunistChinasGreatLeapForwardof1958–61,somewherebetween10and50millionhumanbeingsstarved

todeath.Internationalwarsbecamerareonlyafter1945,largelythanksto the new threat of nuclear annihilation. Hence, though the last fewdecadeshavebeenanunprecedentedgoldenageforhumanity,itistooearlytoknowwhetherthisrepresentsafundamentalshiftinthecurrentsof history or an ephemeral eddy of good fortune. When judgingmodernity,itisalltootemptingtotaketheviewpointofatwenty-first-centurymiddle-classWesterner.Wemustnotforgettheviewpointsofanineteenth-century Welsh coal miner, Chinese opium addict orTasmanian Aborigine. Truganini is no less important than HomerSimpson.Secondly,eventhebriefgoldenageofthelasthalf-centurymayturn

out to have sown the seeds of future catastrophe. Over the last fewdecades, we have been disturbing the ecological equilibrium of ourplanet in myriad new ways, with what seem likely to be direconsequences. A lot of evidence indicates that we are destroying thefoundationsofhumanprosperityinanorgyofrecklessconsumption.Finally, we can congratulate ourselves on the unprecedented

accomplishments of modern Sapiens only if we completely ignore thefate of all other animals. Much of the vaunted material wealth thatshieldsus fromdiseaseand faminewasaccumulatedat theexpenseoflaboratory monkeys, dairy cows and conveyor-belt chickens. Over thelast two centuries tens of billions of them have been subjected to aregimeof industrialexploitationwhosecrueltyhasnoprecedentintheannalsofplanetEarth.Ifweacceptameretenthofwhatanimal-rightsactivistsareclaiming,thenmodernindustrialagriculturemightwellbethe greatest crime in history. When evaluating global happiness, it iswrongtocountthehappinessonlyoftheupperclasses,ofEuropeansorof men. Perhaps it is also wrong to consider only the happiness ofhumans.

CountingHappiness

So far we have discussed happiness as if it were largely a product ofmaterialfactors,suchashealth,dietandwealth.Ifpeoplearericherandhealthier,thentheymustalsobehappier.Butisthatreallysoobvious?

Philosophers, priests and poets have brooded over the nature ofhappiness formillennia, andmany have concluded that social, ethicaland spiritual factors have as great an impact on our happiness asmaterial conditions. Perhaps people inmodern affluent societies suffergreatly from alienation and meaninglessness despite their prosperity.And perhaps our lesswell-to-do ancestors foundmuch contentment incommunity,religionandabondwithnature.In recent decades, psychologists and biologists have taken up thechallengeofstudyingscientificallywhatreallymakespeoplehappy.Isitmoney, family, genetics or perhaps virtue? The first step is to definewhatistobemeasured.Thegenerallyaccepteddefinitionofhappinessis‘subjectivewell-being’.Happiness,accordingtothisview,issomethingIfeel inside myself, a sense of either immediate pleasure or long-termcontentmentwiththewaymylifeisgoing.Ifit’ssomethingfeltinside,how can it be measured from outside? Presumably, we can do so byaskingpeopletotellushowtheyfeel.Sopsychologistsorbiologistswhowanttoassesshowhappypeoplefeelgivethemquestionnairestofilloutandtallytheresults.A typical subjective well-being questionnaire asks interviewees togradeonascaleofzerototentheiragreementwithstatementssuchas‘IfeelpleasedwiththewayIam’,‘Ifeelthatlifeisveryrewarding’,‘Iamoptimisticaboutthefuture’and‘Lifeisgood’.Theresearcherthenaddsup all the answers and calculates the interviewee’s general level ofsubjectivewell-being.Such questionnaires are used in order to correlate happiness withvarious objective factors.One studymight compare a thousandpeoplewhoearn$100,000ayearwithathousandpeoplewhoearn$50,000.Ifthestudydiscovers that the firstgrouphasanaveragesubjectivewell-being level of 8.7, while the latter has an average of only 7.3, theresearchermayreasonablyconclude that there isapositivecorrelationbetweenwealthand subjectivewell-being.Toput it in simple English,money brings happiness. The same method can be used to examinewhetherpeoplelivingindemocraciesarehappierthanpeoplelivingindictatorships, and whether married people are happier than singles,divorceesorwidowers.This provides a grounding for historians, who can examine wealth,politicalfreedomanddivorceratesinthepast.Ifpeoplearehappierin

democraciesandmarriedpeoplearehappierthandivorcees,ahistorianhasabasis forarguingthatthedemocratisationprocessofthelast fewdecades contributed to the happiness of humankind, whereas thegrowingratesofdivorceindicateanoppositetrend.Thiswayofthinkingisnotflawless,butbeforepointingoutsomeof

theholes,itisworthconsideringthefindings.Oneinterestingconclusionisthatmoneydoesindeedbringhappiness.

Butonlyuptoapoint,andbeyondthatpoint ithas littlesignificance.For people stuck at the bottom of the economic ladder, more moneymeansgreaterhappiness.IfyouareanAmericansinglemotherearning$12,000ayearcleaninghousesandyousuddenlywin$500,000inthelottery,youwillprobablyexperienceasignificantandlong-termsurgeinyour subjective well-being. You’ll be able to feed and clothe yourchildren without sinking further into debt. However, if you’re a topexecutiveearning$250,000ayearandyouwin$1millioninthelottery,or your company board suddenly decides to double your salary, yoursurge is likely to last only a few weeks. According to the empiricalfindings, it’salmostcertainlynotgoingtomakeabigdifferencetothewayyou feelover the longrun.You’llbuyasnazziercar,move intoapalatialhome,getusedtodrinkingChateauPétrusinsteadofCaliforniaCabernet,butit’llsoonallseemroutineandunexceptional.Another interesting finding is that illness decreases happiness in the

short term, but is a source of long-term distress only if a person’scondition is constantly deteriorating or if the disease involves ongoingand debilitating pain. People who are diagnosed with chronic illnesssuchasdiabetesareusuallydepressedforawhile,butiftheillnessdoesnotgetworsetheyadjusttotheirnewconditionandratetheirhappinessashighlyashealthypeopledo.ImaginethatLucyandLukearemiddle-classtwins,whoagreetotakepartinasubjectivewell-beingstudy.Onthewaybackfromthepsychologylaboratory,Lucy’scarishitbyabus,leaving Lucywith a number of broken bones and a permanently lameleg.Justastherescuecrewiscuttingheroutofthewreckage,thephoneringsandLukeshoutsthathehaswonthelottery’s$10,000,000jackpot.Twoyearslatershe’llbelimpingandhe’llbealotricher,butwhenthepsychologistcomesaroundforafollow-upstudy,theyarebothlikelytogivethesameanswerstheydidonthemorningofthatfatefulday.Family and community seem tohavemore impact onourhappiness

thanmoney andhealth. Peoplewith strong familieswho live in tight-knit and supportive communities are significantly happier than peoplewhose families are dysfunctional andwhohave never found (or neversought) a community tobepartof.Marriage isparticularly important.Repeated studies have found that there is a very close correlationbetween good marriages and high subjective well-being, and betweenbadmarriages andmisery. This holds true irrespective of economic oreven physical conditions. An impecunious invalid surrounded by aloving spouse,adevoted familyandawarmcommunitymaywell feelbetterthananalienatedbillionaire,providedthattheinvalid’spovertyisnottoosevereandthathisillnessisnotdegenerativeorpainful.Thisraises thepossibility that the immense improvement inmaterial

conditionsover the last twocenturieswasoffsetby thecollapseof thefamilyand the community. If so, theaveragepersonmightwellbenohappiertodaythanin1800.Eventhefreedomwevaluesohighlymaybe working against us. We can choose our spouses, friends andneighbours, but they can choose to leave us. With the individualwieldingunprecedentedpowertodecideherownpathinlife,wefinditever harder to make commitments. We thus live in an increasinglylonelyworldofunravellingcommunitiesandfamilies.Butthemostimportantfindingofallisthathappinessdoesnotreally

depend on objective conditions of either wealth, health or evencommunity. Rather, it depends on the correlation between objectiveconditions and subjective expectations. If youwant a bullock-cart andgetabullock-cart,youarecontent.Ifyouwantabrand-newFerrariandgetonlyasecond-handFiatyoufeeldeprived.Thisiswhywinningthelottery has, over time, the same impact on people’s happiness as adebilitating car accident. When things improve, expectations balloon,and consequently even dramatic improvements in objective conditionscan leave us dissatisfied.When things deteriorate, expectations shrink,andconsequentlyevenasevere illnessmight leaveyouprettymuchashappyasyouwerebefore.Youmightsaythatwedidn’tneedabunchofpsychologistsandtheir

questionnairestodiscoverthis.Prophets,poetsandphilosophersrealisedthousandsofyearsagothatbeingsatisfiedwithwhatyoualreadyhaveisfarmoreimportantthangettingmoreofwhatyouwant.Still,it’snicewhen modern research – bolstered by lots of numbers and charts –

reachesthesameconclusionstheancientsdid.

The crucial importance of human expectations has far-reachingimplications for understanding the history of happiness. If happinessdependedonlyonobjectiveconditionssuchaswealth,healthandsocialrelations, it would have been relatively easy to investigate its history.Thefindingthatitdependsonsubjectiveexpectationsmakesthetaskofhistoriansfarharder.Wemodernshaveanarsenaloftranquillisersandpainkillers at our disposal, but our expectations of ease and pleasure,andourintoleranceofinconvenienceanddiscomfort,haveincreasedtosuch an extent that we may well suffer from pain more than ourancestorseverdid.It’s hard to accept this line of thinking. The problem is a fallacy ofreasoning embedded deep in our psyches. When we try to guess orimagine how happy other people are now, or how people in the pastwere, we inevitably imagine ourselves in their shoes. But that won’tworkbecauseitpastesourexpectationsontothematerialconditionsofothers.Inmodernaffluentsocietiesitiscustomarytotakeashowerandchangeyourclotheseveryday.Medievalpeasantswentwithoutwashingfor months on end, and hardly ever changed their clothes. The verythoughtoflivinglikethat,filthyandreekingtothebone,isabhorrenttous.Yetmedievalpeasantsseemnottohaveminded.Theywereusedtothefeelandsmellofalong-unlaunderedshirt.It’snotthattheywantedachangeofclothesbutcouldn’tgetit–theyhadwhattheywanted.So,atleastasfarasclothinggoes,theywerecontent.That’s not so surprising, when you think of it. After all, ourchimpanzee cousins seldomwash and never change their clothes. Norarewedisgustedbythefactthatourpetdogsandcatsdon’tshowerorchangetheircoatsdaily.Wepat,hugandkissthemallthesame.Smallchildreninaffluentsocietiesoftendislikeshowering,andit takesthemyears of education and parental discipline to adopt this supposedlyattractivecustom.Itisallamatterofexpectations.If happiness is determined by expectations, then two pillars of oursociety–massmediaandtheadvertisingindustry–mayunwittinglybedepletingtheglobe’sreservoirsofcontentment.Ifyouwereaneighteen-year-oldyouth inasmallvillage5,000yearsagoyou’dprobably think

youweregood-lookingbecausetherewereonlyfiftyothermeninyourvillageandmostofthemwereeitherold,scarredandwrinkled,orstilllittlekids.But ifyouarea teenager todayyouarea lotmore likely tofeel inadequate. Even if the other guys at school are an ugly lot, youdon’tmeasureyourselfagainstthembutagainstthemoviestars,athletesand supermodels you see all day on television, Facebook and giantbillboards.SomaybeThirdWorlddiscontentisfomentednotmerelybypoverty,disease,corruptionandpoliticaloppressionbutalsobymereexposuretoFirstWorld standards. The average Egyptianwas far less likely to diefrom starvation, plague or violence under Hosni Mubarak than underRamses II or Cleopatra. Never had the material condition of mostEgyptiansbeensogood.You’d think theywouldhavebeendancing inthestreets in2011, thankingAllahfor theirgoodfortune. Insteadtheyrose up furiously to overthrow Mubarak. They weren’t comparingthemselves to their ancestors under the pharaohs, but rather to theircontemporariesinObama’sAmerica.Ifthat’sthecase,evenimmortalitymightleadtodiscontent.Supposescience comes up with cures for all diseases, effective anti-ageingtherapies and regenerative treatments that keep people indefinitelyyoung.Inalllikelihood,theimmediateresultwillbeanunprecedentedepidemicofangerandanxiety.Thoseunabletoaffordthenewmiracletreatments–thevastmajorityofpeople–willbebesidethemselveswithrage.Throughouthistory,thepoorandoppressedcomfortedthemselveswiththethoughtthatatleastdeathiseven-handed–thattherichandpowerfulwillalsodie.Thepoorwillnotbecomfortablewiththethoughtthattheyhavetodie,whiletherichwillremainyoungandbeautifulforever.

45.Inpreviouserasthestandardofbeautywassetbythehandfulofpeoplewholivednextdoortoyou.Todaythemediaandthefashionindustryexposeustoatotally

unrealisticstandardofbeauty.Theysearchoutthemostgorgeouspeopleontheplanet,andthenparadethemconstantlybeforeoureyes.Nowonderwearefarlesshappywith

thewaywelook.

But the tinyminority able to afford the new treatmentswill not beeuphoriceither.Theywillhavemuchtobeanxiousabout.Althoughthenewtherapiescouldextend lifeandyouth, theycannot revivecorpses.Howdreadful to think that I andmy lovedones can live for ever,butonlyifwedon’tgethitbyatruckorblowntosmithereensbyaterrorist!Potentiallya-mortalpeoplearelikelytogrowaversetotakingeventheslightestrisk,andtheagonyoflosingaspouse,childorclosefriendwillbeunbearable.

ChemicalHappiness

Social scientists distribute subjective well-being questionnaires andcorrelate the results with socio-economic factors such as wealth and

political freedom.Biologists use the samequestionnaires, but correlatethe answers people give them with biochemical and genetic factors.Theirfindingsareshocking.Biologists hold that ourmental and emotionalworld is governed by

biochemicalmechanismsshapedbymillionsofyearsofevolution.Likeall othermental states, our subjectivewell-being is not determined byexternal parameters such as salary, social relations or political rights.Rather, it is determined by a complex system of nerves, neurons,synapses and various biochemical substances such as serotonin,dopamineandoxytocin.Nobody isevermadehappybywinning the lottery,buyingahouse,

gettingapromotionorevenfindingtruelove.Peoplearemadehappybyone thing and one thing only – pleasant sensations in their bodies. Apersonwhojustwonthelotteryorfoundnewloveandjumpsfromjoyisnotreallyreactingtothemoneyorthelover.Sheisreactingtovarioushormonescoursingthroughherbloodstream,andtothestormofelectricsignalsflashingbetweendifferentpartsofherbrain.Unfortunately forallhopesofcreatingheavenonearth,our internal

biochemical system seems to be programmed to keep happiness levelsrelativelyconstant.There’snonaturalselectionforhappinessassuch–ahappy hermit’s genetic line will go extinct as the genes of a pair ofanxious parents get carried on to the next generation. Happiness andmiseryplayaroleinevolutiononlytotheextentthattheyencourageordiscourage survival and reproduction.Perhaps it’snot surprising, then,that evolution has moulded us to be neither too miserable nor toohappy. Itenablesustoenjoyamomentaryrushofpleasantsensations,buttheseneverlastforever.Soonerorlatertheysubsideandgiveplacetounpleasantsensations.Forexample,evolutionprovidedpleasantfeelingsasrewardstomales

who spread their genesbyhaving sexwith fertile females. If sexwerenotaccompaniedbysuchpleasure,fewmaleswouldbother.Atthesametime,evolutionmadesurethatthesepleasantfeelingsquicklysubsided.If orgasms were to last for ever, the very happy males would die ofhunger for lack of interest in food, andwould not take the trouble tolookforadditionalfertilefemales.Some scholars compare human biochemistry to an air-conditioning

system that keeps the temperature constant, come heatwave or

snowstorm.Eventsmightmomentarilychangethetemperature,buttheair-conditioningsystemalwaysreturnsthetemperaturetothesamesetpoint.Someair-conditioning systemsare set at twenty-fivedegreesCelsius.

Othersaresetattwentydegrees.Humanhappinessconditioningsystemsalso differ from person to person. On a scale from one to ten, somepeople are born with a cheerful biochemical system that allows theirmoodtoswingbetweenlevelssixandten,stabilisingwithtimeateight.Suchapersonisquitehappyevenifshelivesinanalienatingbigcity,loses all her money in a stock-exchange crash and is diagnosed withdiabetes. Other people are cursed with a gloomy biochemistry thatswingsbetweenthreeandsevenandstabilisesatfive.Suchanunhappypersonremainsdepressedeven if sheenjoys thesupportofa tight-knitcommunity,winsmillionsinthelotteryandisashealthyasanOlympicathlete. Indeed, even if our gloomy friend wins $50,000,000 in themorning,discovers the cure forbothAIDSandcancerbynoon,makespeacebetweenIsraelisandPalestinians thatafternoon,andthen in theevening reuniteswithher long-lost childwhodisappearedyears ago –shewouldstillbeincapableofexperiencinganythingbeyondlevelsevenhappiness. Her brain is simply not built for exhilaration, come whatmay.Think for a moment of your family and friends. You know some

peoplewhoremainrelatively joyful,nomatterwhatbefalls them.Andthen there are thosewho are alwaysdisgruntled, nomatterwhat giftsthe world lays at their feet. We tend to believe that if we could justchangeourworkplace,getmarried,finishwritingthatnovel,buyanewcarorrepaythemortgage,wewouldbeontopoftheworld.Yetwhenwegetwhatwedesirewedon’tseemtobeanyhappier.Buyingcarsandwritingnovelsdonotchangeourbiochemistry.Theycanstartleitforafleetingmoment,butitissoonbacktoitssetpoint.

How can this be squaredwith the above-mentioned psychological andsociological findings that, for example,married people are happier onaveragethansingles?First,thesefindingsarecorrelations–thedirectionof causation may be the opposite of what some researchers haveassumed. It is true that married people are happier than singles and

divorcees, but that does not necessarily mean that marriage produceshappiness.Itcouldbethathappinesscausesmarriage.Ormorecorrectly,that serotonin, dopamine and oxytocin bring about and maintain amarriage. People who are born with a cheerful biochemistry aregenerallyhappyand content. Suchpeople aremoreattractive spouses,and consequently theyhave a greater chance of gettingmarried. Theyarealsolesslikelytodivorce,becauseitisfareasiertolivewithahappyand content spouse than with a depressed and dissatisfied one.Consequently,it’struethatmarriedpeoplearehappieronaveragethansingles,butasinglewomanpronetogloombecauseofherbiochemistrywould not necessarily become happier if she were to hook up with ahusband.In addition, most biologists are not fanatics. They maintain that

happiness is determined mainly by biochemistry, but they agree thatpsychologicalandsociologicalfactorsalsohavetheirplace.Ourmentalair-conditioning system has some freedom of movement withinpredeterminedborders.It isalmostimpossibletoexceedtheupperandlower emotional boundaries, but marriage and divorce can have animpactintheareabetweenthetwo.Somebodybornwithanaverageoflevelfivehappinesswouldneverdancewildlyinthestreets.Butagoodmarriageshouldenablehertoenjoylevelsevenfromtimetotime,andtoavoidthedespondencyoflevelthree.Ifweaccept thebiologicalapproachtohappiness, thenhistory turns

outtobeofminorimportance,sincemosthistoricaleventshavehadnoimpactonourbiochemistry.Historycanchangetheexternalstimulithatcause serotonin to be secreted, yet it does not change the resultingserotoninlevels,andhenceitcannotmakepeoplehappier.CompareamedievalFrenchpeasanttoamodernParisianbanker.The

peasantlivedinanunheatedmudhutoverlookingthelocalpigsty,whilethe banker goes home to a splendid penthouse with all the latesttechnologicalgadgetsandaviewtotheChamps-Elysées.Intuitively,wewouldexpectthebankertobemuchhappierthanthepeasant.However,mud huts, penthouses and the Champs-Elysées don’t really determineourmood. Serotonin does.When themedieval peasant completed theconstruction of his mud hut, his brain neurons secreted serotonin,bringing it up to level X. When in 2014 the banker made the lastpayment onhiswonderful penthouse, brainneurons secreted a similar

amount of serotonin, bringing it up to a similar level X. It makes nodifferencetothebrainthatthepenthouseisfarmorecomfortablethanthemudhut.TheonlythingthatmattersisthatatpresentthelevelofserotoninisX.Consequentlythebankerwouldnotbeoneiotahappierthanhisgreat-great-great-grandfather,thepoormedievalpeasant.Thisistruenotonlyofprivatelives,butalsoofgreatcollectiveevents.

Take, for example, the French Revolution. The revolutionaries werebusy: they executed the king, gave lands to thepeasants, declared therights of man, abolished noble privileges and waged war against thewhole of Europe. Yet none of that changed French biochemistry.Consequently,despiteall thepolitical,social, ideologicalandeconomicupheavals brought about by the revolution, its impact on Frenchhappiness was small. Those who won a cheerful biochemistry in thegenetic lotterywere justashappybeforetherevolutionasafter.Thosewith a gloomy biochemistry complained about Robespierre andNapoleonwith thesamebitternesswithwhich theyearliercomplainedaboutLouisXVIandMarieAntoinette.Ifso,whatgoodwastheFrenchRevolution?Ifpeopledidnotbecome

anyhappier,thenwhatwasthepointofallthatchaos,fear,bloodandwar?BiologistswouldneverhavestormedtheBastille.Peoplethinkthatthispoliticalrevolutionorthatsocialreformwillmakethemhappy,buttheirbiochemistrytricksthemtimeandagain.There is only one historical development that has real significance.

Today, when we finally realise that the keys to happiness are in thehands of our biochemical system, we can stop wasting our time onpoliticsandsocialreforms,putschesandideologies,andfocusinsteadonthe only thing that can make us truly happy: manipulating ourbiochemistry.Ifweinvestbillionsinunderstandingourbrainchemistryanddevelopingappropriatetreatments,wecanmakepeoplefarhappierthaneverbefore,withoutanyneedofrevolutions.Prozac,forexample,doesnot change regimes, but by raising serotonin levels it lifts peopleoutoftheirdepression.NothingcapturesthebiologicalargumentbetterthanthefamousNew

Age slogan: ‘Happiness Begins Within.’ Money, social status, plasticsurgery,beautifulhouses,powerfulpositions–noneofthesewillbringyouhappiness.Lastinghappinesscomesonlyfromserotonin,dopamineandoxytocin.1

In Aldous Huxley’s dystopian novel Brave New World, published in1932 at the height of the Great Depression, happiness is the supremevalue and psychiatric drugs replace the police and the ballot as thefoundationofpolitics.Eachday, eachperson takesadoseof ‘soma’, asynthetic drug which makes people happy without harming theirproductivity and efficiency. The World State that governs the entireglobe is never threatened by wars, revolutions, strikes ordemonstrations, because all people are supremely content with theircurrentconditions,whatevertheymaybe.Huxley’svisionofthefutureisfarmoretroublingthanGeorgeOrwell’sNineteenEighty-Four.Huxley’sworld seemsmonstrous tomost readers,but it ishard toexplainwhy.Everybodyishappyallthetime–whatcouldbewrongwiththat?

TheMeaningofLife

Huxley’sdisconcertingworldisbasedonthebiologicalassumptionthathappiness equals pleasure. To be happy is no more and no less thanexperiencing pleasant bodily sensations. Since our biochemistry limitsthe volume and duration of these sensations, the only way to makepeopleexperienceahighlevelofhappinessoveranextendedperiodoftimeistomanipulatetheirbiochemicalsystem.But that definition of happiness is contested by some scholars. In afamous study, Daniel Kahneman, winner of the Nobel Prize ineconomics,askedpeopletorecountatypicalworkday,goingthroughitepisodeby episodeandevaluatinghowmuch they enjoyedordislikedeach moment. He discovered what seems to be a paradox in mostpeople’sviewof their lives.Take thework involved in raisinga child.Kahneman found thatwhen countingmoments of joy andmoments ofdrudgery,bringingupachildturnsouttobearatherunpleasantaffair.Itconsistslargelyofchangingnappies,washingdishesanddealingwithtemper tantrums, which nobody likes to do. Yet most parents declarethattheirchildrenaretheirchiefsourceofhappiness.Doesitmeanthatpeopledon’treallyknowwhat’sgoodforthem?That’s one option. Another is that the findings demonstrate thathappiness is not the surplus of pleasant over unpleasant moments.

Rather, happiness consists in seeing one’s life in its entirety asmeaningfulandworthwhile.Thereisanimportantcognitiveandethicalcomponenttohappiness.Ourvaluesmakeallthedifferencetowhetherweseeourselvesas ‘miserableslavestoababydictator’oras ‘lovinglynurturinganewlife’.2AsNietzscheputit,ifyouhaveawhytolive,youcanbearalmostanyhow.Ameaningfullifecanbeextremelysatisfyingeven in themidst of hardship,whereas ameaningless life is a terribleordealnomatterhowcomfortableitis.Though people in all cultures and eras have felt the same type ofpleasuresandpains,themeaningtheyhaveascribedtotheirexperienceshas probably variedwidely. If so, thehistory of happinessmight havebeen farmore turbulent than biologists imagine. It’s a conclusion thatdoesnotnecessarilyfavourmodernity.Assessinglifeminutebyminute,medieval people certainly had it rough.However, if they believed thepromiseofeverlastingbliss intheafterlife, theymaywellhaveviewedtheirlivesasfarmoremeaningfulandworthwhilethanmodernsecularpeople, who in the long term can expect nothing but complete andmeaningless oblivion. Asked ‘Are you satisfied with your life as awhole?’,peopleintheMiddleAgesmighthavescoredquitehighlyinasubjectivewell-beingquestionnaire.Soourmedievalancestorswerehappybecausetheyfoundmeaningtolife in collective delusions about the afterlife? Yes. As long as nobodypuncturedtheirfantasies,whyshouldn’tthey?Asfaraswecantell,froma purely scientific viewpoint, human life has absolutely no meaning.Humans are the outcome of blind evolutionary processes that operatewithoutgoalorpurpose.Ouractionsarenotpartofsomedivinecosmicplan, and if planet Earth were to blow up tomorrow morning, theuniversewouldprobablykeepgoingaboutitsbusinessasusual.Asfaraswecantellatthispoint,humansubjectivitywouldnotbemissed.Henceany meaning that people ascribe to their lives is just a delusion. Theother-worldly meanings medieval people found in their lives were nomore deluded than the modern humanist, nationalist and capitalistmeanings modern people find. The scientist who says her life ismeaningful because she increases the store of human knowledge, thesoldier who declares that his life is meaningful because he fights todefend his homeland, and the entrepreneur who finds meaning inbuilding a new company are no less delusional than their medieval

counterparts who found meaning in reading scriptures, going on acrusadeorbuildinganewcathedral.So perhaps happiness is synchronising one’s personal delusions ofmeaningwiththeprevailingcollectivedelusions.Aslongasmypersonalnarrative is in linewith thenarrativesof thepeople aroundme, I canconvincemyself thatmy life ismeaningful, and findhappiness in thatconviction.Thisisquiteadepressingconclusion.Doeshappinessreallydependonself-delusion?

KnowThyself

Ifhappinessisbasedonfeelingpleasantsensations,theninordertobehappierweneedtore-engineerourbiochemicalsystem.Ifhappiness isbasedonfeelingthatlifeismeaningful,theninordertobehappierweneedtodeludeourselvesmoreeffectively.Isthereathirdalternative?Boththeaboveviewssharetheassumptionthathappinessissomesortofsubjectivefeeling(ofeitherpleasureormeaning),andthatinordertojudgepeople’shappiness,allweneedtodoisaskthemhowtheyfeel.Tomanyofus,thatseemslogicalbecausethedominantreligionofourageisliberalism.Liberalismsanctifiesthesubjectivefeelingsofindividuals.Itviewsthesefeelingsasthesupremesourceofauthority.Whatisgoodandwhat isbad,what isbeautifulandwhat isugly,whatought tobeandwhat ought not to be, are all determinedbywhat each one of usfeels.Liberal politics is based on the idea that the voters know best, andthere isnoneed forBigBrother to telluswhat isgood forus.Liberaleconomicsisbasedontheideathatthecustomerisalwaysright.Liberalartdeclaresthatbeautyisintheeyeofthebeholder.Studentsinliberalschoolsanduniversitiesaretaughttothinkforthemselves.Commercialsurgeus to ‘Just do it!’Action films, stagedramas, soapoperas, novelsand catchy pop songs indoctrinate us constantly: ‘Be true to yourself’,‘Listen to yourself’, ‘Follow your heart’. Jean-Jacques Rousseau statedthisviewmostclassically:‘WhatIfeeltobegood–isgood.WhatIfeeltobebad–isbad.’

Peoplewhohavebeen raised from infancyonadietof such slogansarepronetobelievethathappinessisasubjectivefeelingandthateachindividualbestknowswhethersheishappyormiserable.Yetthisviewisuniquetoliberalism.Mostreligionsandideologiesthroughouthistorystated that thereareobjectiveyardsticks forgoodnessandbeauty,andfor how things ought to be. They were suspicious of the feelings andpreferences of the ordinary person. At the entrance of the temple ofApollo at Delphi, pilgrims were greeted by the inscription: ‘Knowthyself!’The implicationwas that theaverageperson is ignorantofhistrueself,andisthereforelikelytobeignorantoftruehappiness.Freudwouldprobablyconcur.*And sowould Christian theologians. St Paul and St Augustine knewperfectly well that if you asked people about it, most of them wouldprefertohavesexthanpraytoGod.Doesthatprovethathavingsexisthe key to happiness? Not according to Paul and Augustine. It provesonly that humankind is sinful by nature, and that people are easilyseduced by Satan. From a Christian viewpoint, the vast majority ofpeopleareinmoreorlessthesamesituationasheroinaddicts.Imaginethatapsychologistembarksonastudyofhappinessamongdrugusers.Hepollsthemandfindsthattheydeclare,everysingleoneofthem,thattheyareonlyhappywhentheyshootup.Wouldthepsychologistpublishapaperdeclaringthatheroinisthekeytohappiness?The idea that feelings are not to be trusted is not restricted toChristianity.Atleastwhenitcomestothevalueoffeelings,evenDarwinandDawkinsmightfindcommongroundwithStPaulandStAugustine.Accordingtotheselfishgenetheory,naturalselectionmakespeople,likeother organisms, choose what is good for the reproduction of theirgenes,evenif it isbadforthemasindividuals.Mostmalesspendtheirlives toiling, worrying, competing and fighting, instead of enjoyingpeacefulbliss,because theirDNAmanipulates them for its own selfishaims.LikeSatan,DNAusesfleetingpleasurestotemptpeopleandplacetheminitspower.Most religions and philosophies have consequently taken a verydifferent approach to happiness than liberalism does.3 The Buddhistposition isparticularly interesting.Buddhismhasassignedthequestionofhappinessmoreimportancethanperhapsanyotherhumancreed.For2,500 years, Buddhists have systematically studied the essence and

causesofhappiness,whichiswhythereisagrowinginterestamongthescientific community both in their philosophy and their meditationpractices.Buddhism shares the basic insight of the biological approach to

happiness, namely that happiness results from processes occurringwithinone’sbody,andnotfromeventsintheoutsideworld.However,starting from the same insight, Buddhism reaches very differentconclusions.AccordingtoBuddhism,mostpeopleidentifyhappinesswithpleasant

feelings, while identifying suffering with unpleasant feelings. Peopleconsequentlyascribeimmenseimportancetowhattheyfeel,cravingtoexperiencemoreandmorepleasures,whileavoidingpain.Whateverwedothroughoutourlives,whetherscratchingourleg,fidgetingslightlyinthe chair, or fighting world wars, we are just trying to get pleasantfeelings.Theproblem,accordingtoBuddhism,isthatourfeelingsarenomore

thanfleetingvibrations,changingeverymoment, liketheoceanwaves.If fiveminutes ago I felt joyful andpurposeful, now these feelings aregone,andImightwellfeelsadanddejected.SoifIwanttoexperiencepleasant feelings, I have to constantly chase them,while driving awaytheunpleasantfeelings.EvenifIsucceed,Iimmediatelyhavetostartalloveragain,withoutevergettinganylastingrewardformytroubles.What is so important about obtaining such ephemeral prizes? Why

strugglesohardtoachievesomethingthatdisappearsalmostassoonasit arises? According to Buddhism, the root of suffering is neither thefeelingofpainnorofsadnessnorevenofmeaninglessness.Rather, thereal root of suffering is this never-ending and pointless pursuit ofephemeralfeelings,whichcausesustobeinaconstantstateoftension,restlessness and dissatisfaction. Due to this pursuit, themind is neversatisfied.Evenwhenexperiencingpleasure,itisnotcontent,becauseitfears this feeling might soon disappear, and craves that this feelingshouldstayandintensify.Peopleare liberated fromsufferingnotwhen theyexperience thisor

thatfleetingpleasure,butratherwhentheyunderstandtheimpermanentnature of all their feelings, and stop craving them. This is the aim ofBuddhist meditation practices. In meditation, you are supposed toclosely observe yourmind andbody,witness the ceaseless arising and

passing of all your feelings, and realise how pointless it is to pursuethem.Whenthepursuitstops,themindbecomesveryrelaxed,clearandsatisfied. All kinds of feelings go on arising and passing – joy, anger,boredom, lust –butonceyou stop cravingparticular feelings, youcanjust accept them for what they are. You live in the present momentinsteadoffantasisingaboutwhatmighthavebeen.Theresultingserenityissoprofoundthatthosewhospendtheirlives

in the frenzied pursuit of pleasant feelings can hardly imagine it. It islike a man standing for decades on the seashore, embracing certain‘good’ waves and trying to prevent them from disintegrating, whilesimultaneouslypushingback ‘bad’waves toprevent them fromgettingnearhim.Dayin,dayout,themanstandsonthebeach,drivinghimselfcrazywith this fruitless exercise.Eventually,he sitsdownon the sandandjustallowsthewavestocomeandgoastheyplease.Howpeaceful!ThisideaissoalientomodernliberalculturethatwhenWesternNew

Age movements encountered Buddhist insights, they translated theminto liberal terms, thereby turning themon their head.NewAge cultsfrequentlyargue: ‘Happinessdoesnotdependonexternalconditions.Itdepends only on what we feel inside. People should stop pursuingexternal achievements such as wealth and status, and connect insteadwiththeirinnerfeelings.’Ormoresuccinctly,‘HappinessBeginsWithin.’This is exactlywhat biologists argue, butmore or less the opposite ofwhatBuddhasaid.Buddha agreed withmodern biology and New Agemovements that

happinessisindependentofexternalconditions.Yethismoreimportantand far more profound insight was that true happiness is alsoindependentofourinnerfeelings.Indeed,themoresignificancewegiveourfeelings,themorewecravethem,andthemorewesuffer.Buddha’srecommendation was to stop not only the pursuit of externalachievements,butalsothepursuitofinnerfeelings.

Tosumup,subjectivewell-beingquestionnairesidentifyourwell-beingwithoursubjective feelings,and identify thepursuitofhappinesswiththe pursuit of particular emotional states. In contrast, for manytraditional philosophies and religions, such as Buddhism, the key tohappiness is toknowthe truthaboutyourself– tounderstandwho,or

what,youreallyare.Mostpeoplewronglyidentifythemselveswiththeirfeelings,thoughts,likesanddislikes.Whentheyfeelanger,theythink,‘Iamangry.Thisismyanger.’Theyconsequentlyspendtheirlifeavoidingsomekindsoffeelingsandpursuingothers.Theyneverrealisethattheyare not their feelings, and that the relentless pursuit of particularfeelingsjusttrapstheminmisery.Ifthisisso,thenourentireunderstandingofthehistoryofhappiness

might be misguided. Maybe it isn’t so important whether people’sexpectationsarefulfilledandwhethertheyenjoypleasantfeelings.Themainquestioniswhetherpeopleknowthetruthaboutthemselves.Whatevidencedowehavethatpeopletodayunderstandthistruthanybetterthanancientforagersormedievalpeasants?Scholarsbegantostudythehistoryofhappinessonlyafewyearsago,

and we are still formulating initial hypotheses and searching forappropriate research methods. It’s much too early to adopt rigidconclusionsandendadebatethat’shardlyyetbegun.Whatisimportantistogettoknowasmanydifferentapproachesaspossibleandtoasktherightquestions.Mosthistorybooksfocusontheideasofgreatthinkers,thebraveryof

warriors, the charity of saints and the creativity of artists. They havemuch to tell about the weaving and unravelling of social structures,about the rise and fall of empires, about the discovery and spread oftechnologies. Yet they say nothing about how all this influenced thehappinessandsufferingofindividuals.Thisisthebiggestlacunainourunderstandingofhistory.Wehadbetterstartfillingit.

*Paradoxically,whilepsychological studiesof subjectivewell-being relyonpeople’sability todiagnose theirhappinesscorrectly, thebasicraisond’êtreofpsychotherapy is thatpeopledon’treally know themselves and that they sometimes need professional help to free themselves ofself-destructivebehaviours.

20

TheEndofHomoSapiens

THISBOOKBEGANBYPRESENTINGHISTORYasthenextstageinthecontinuumofphysicstochemistrytobiology.Sapiensaresubjecttothesamephysicalforces,chemicalreactionsandnatural-selectionprocessesthatgovernalllivingbeings.NaturalselectionmayhaveprovidedHomosapienswithamuch largerplaying field than ithasgiven toanyotherorganism,butthefieldhasstillhaditsboundaries.Theimplicationhasbeen that, nomatterwhat their efforts and achievements, Sapiens areincapableofbreakingfreeoftheirbiologicallydeterminedlimits.But at the dawn of the twenty-first century, this is no longer true:

Homosapiens is transcending those limits. It isnowbeginning tobreakthelawsofnaturalselection,replacingthemwiththelawsofintelligentdesign.For close to 4 billion years, every single organism on the planet

evolved subject tonatural selection.Not evenonewasdesignedbyanintelligentcreator.Thegiraffe,forexample,gotits longneckthankstocompetition between archaic giraffes rather than to the whims of asuper-intelligentbeing.Proto-giraffeswhohad longerneckshadaccesstomorefoodandconsequentlyproducedmoreoffspringthandidthosewithshorternecks.Nobody,certainlynotthegiraffes,said,‘Alongneckwouldenablegiraffes tomunchleavesoff thetreetops.Let’sextendit.’The beauty of Darwin’s theory is that it does not need to assume anintelligentdesignertoexplainhowgiraffesendedupwithlongnecks.For billions of years, intelligent design was not even an option,

because there was no intelligence which could design things.Microorganisms,whichuntil quite recentlywere theonly living things

around,arecapableofamazingfeats.Amicroorganismbelongingtoonespeciescanincorporategeneticcodesfromacompletelydifferentspeciesinto its cell and thereby gain new capabilities, such as resistance toantibiotics. Yet, as best we know, microorganisms have noconsciousness,noaimsinlife,andnoabilitytoplanahead.Atsomestageorganismssuchasgiraffes,dolphins,chimpanzeesandNeanderthals evolved consciousness and the ability to plan ahead. ButevenifaNeanderthalfantasisedaboutfowlssofatandslow-movingthathecouldjustscoopthemupwheneverhewashungry,hehadnowayofturningthatfantasyintoreality.Hehadtohuntthebirdsthathadbeennaturallyselected.The first crack in the old regime appeared about 10,000 years ago,during theAgriculturalRevolution. Sapienswhodreamedof fat, slow-movingchickensdiscoveredthat if theymatedthefattesthenwiththeslowestcock,someoftheiroffspringwouldbebothfatandslow.Ifyoumatedthoseoffspringwitheachother,youcouldproducealineoffat,slowbirds.Itwasaraceofchickensunknowntonature,producedbytheintelligentdesignnotofagodbutofahuman.Still, compared to an all-powerful deity, Homo sapiens had limiteddesignskills.Sapienscoulduseselectivebreedingtodetouraroundandaccelerate the natural-selection processes that normally affectedchickens, but they could not introduce completely new characteristicsthatwereabsent fromthegeneticpoolofwildchickens. Inaway, therelationship betweenHomo sapiens and chickens was similar to manyothersymbiotic relationships thathavesooftenarisenon theirown innature. Sapiens exerted peculiar selective pressures on chickens thatcausedthefatandslowonestoproliferate,justaspollinatingbeesselectflowers,causingthebrightcolourfulonestoproliferate.Today, the 4-billion-year-old regime of natural selection is facing acompletely different challenge. In laboratories throughout the world,scientistsareengineering livingbeings.Theybreak the lawsofnaturalselection with impunity, unbridled even by an organisms originalcharacteristics. Eduardo Kac, a Brazilian bio-artist, decided in 2000 tocreate a newwork of art: a fluorescent green rabbit. Kac contacted aFrench laboratory and offered it a fee to engineer a radiant bunnyaccording tohis specifications.TheFrench scientists tooka run-of-the-mill white rabbit embryo, implanted in its DNA a gene taken from a

greenfluorescentjellyfish,andvoilà!Onegreenfluorescentrabbitforlemonsieur.KacnamedtherabbitAlba.It is impossible to explain the existenceofAlba through the lawsofnatural selection.She is theproductof intelligentdesign.She isalsoaharbingerofthingstocome.IfthepotentialAlbasignifiesisrealisedinfull – and if humankind doesn’t annihilate itself meanwhile – theScientificRevolutionmightproveitselffargreaterthanamerehistoricalrevolution.Itmayturnouttobethemostimportantbiologicalrevolutionsince the appearance of life on earth. After 4 billion years of naturalselection,Albastandsatthedawnofanewcosmicera,inwhichlifewillbe ruled by intelligent design. If this happens, the whole of humanhistory up to that point might, with hindsight, be reinterpreted as aprocess of experimentation and apprenticeship that revolutionised thegame of life. Such a process should be understood from a cosmicperspectiveofbillionsofyears,ratherthanfromahumanperspectiveofmillennia.Biologists the world over are locked in battle with the intelligent-designmovement,whichopposestheteachingofDarwinianevolutioninschools and claims that biological complexity proves there must be acreatorwhothoughtoutallbiologicaldetailsinadvance.Thebiologistsarerightaboutthepast,buttheproponentsofintelligentdesignmight,ironically,berightaboutthefuture.At the time of writing, the replacement of natural selection byintelligentdesigncouldhappeninanyofthreeways:throughbiologicalengineering, cyborg engineering (cyborgs are beings that combineorganicwithnon-organicparts)ortheengineeringofinorganiclife.

OfMiceandMen

Biologicalengineeringisdeliberatehumaninterventiononthebiologicallevel (e.g. implantingagene)aimedatmodifyinganorganisms shape,capabilities, needs or desires, in order to realize some preconceivedculturalidea,suchastheartisticpredilectionsofEduardoKac.Thereisnothingnewaboutbiologicalengineering,perse.Peoplehavebeen using it for millennia in order to reshape themselves and other

organisms.Asimpleexampleiscastration.Humanshavebeencastratingbulls for perhaps 10,000 years in order to create oxen. Oxen are lessaggressive, and are thus easier to train to pull ploughs. Humans alsocastrated their own young males to create soprano singers withenchanting voices and eunuchs who could safely be entrusted withoverseeingthesultansharem.But recent advances in our understanding of how organisms work,

down to the cellular and nuclear levels, have opened up previouslyunimaginable possibilities. For instance, we can today not merelycastrateaman,butalsochangehissex throughsurgicalandhormonaltreatments. But that’s not all. Consider the surprise, disgust andconsternation that ensued when, in 1996, the following photographappearedinnewspapersandontelevision:

46.Amouseonwhosebackscientistsgrewan‘ear’madeofcattlecartilagecells.Itisaneerieechoofthelion-manstatuefromtheStadelCave.Thirtythousandyearsago,humanswerealreadyfantasisingaboutcombiningdifferentspecies.Today,theycanactually

producesuchchimeras.

No, Photoshop was not involved. It’s an untouched photo of a realmouse on whose back scientists implanted cattle cartilage cells. Thescientistswereabletocontrolthegrowthofthenewtissue,shapingitin

thiscase into something that looks likeahumanear.Theprocessmaysoonenablescientiststomanufactureartificialears,whichcouldthenbeimplantedinhumans.1Even more remarkable wonders can be performed with geneticengineering, which is why it raises a host of ethical, political andideological issues. And it’s not just piousmonotheistswho object thatman should not usurpGod’s role.Many confirmed atheists are no lessshocked by the idea that scientists are stepping into nature’s shoes.Animal-rights activists decry the suffering caused to lab animals ingenetic engineering experiments, and to the farmyardanimals that areengineered in complete disregard of their needs and desires. Human-rights activists are afraid that genetic engineering might be used tocreate supermenwhowillmake serfsof the restofus.Jeremiahsofferapocalyptic visions of bio-dictatorships thatwill clone fearless soldiersand obedient workers. The prevailing feeling is that too manyopportunities are opening too quickly and that our ability to modifygenes isoutpacingourcapacity formakingwiseand far-sighteduseoftheskill.Theresultisthatwe’reatpresentusingonlyafractionofthepotentialofgeneticengineering.Mostoftheorganismsnowbeingengineeredarethose with the weakest political lobbies – plants, fungi, bacteria andinsects.Forexample,linesofE.coli,abacteriumthatlivessymbioticallyin thehumangut (andwhichmakesheadlineswhen it getsoutof thegut and causesdeadly infections), havebeengenetically engineered toproduce biofuel.2 E. coli and several species of fungi have also beenengineered to produce insulin, thereby lowering the cost of diabetestreatment.3AgeneextractedfromanArcticfishhasbeeninsertedintopotatoes,makingtheplantsmorefrost-resistant.4Afewmammalshavealsobeensubjecttogeneticengineering.Everyyear the dairy industry suffers billions of dollars in damages due tomastitis,adiseasethatstrikesdairy-cowudders.Scientistsarecurrentlyexperimenting with genetically engineered cows whose milk containslysostaphin, abiochemical that attacks thebacteria responsible for thedisease.5 The pork industry, which has suffered from falling salesbecauseconsumersarewaryoftheunhealthyfatsinhamandbacon,hashopes for a still-experimental line of pigs implanted with geneticmaterialfromaworm.Thenewgenescausethepigstoturnbadomega

6fattyacidintoitshealthycousin,omega3.6Thenextgenerationofgeneticengineeringwillmakepigswithgood

fatlooklikechild’splay.Geneticistshavemanagednotmerelytoextendsixfoldtheaveragelifeexpectancyofworms,butalsotoengineergeniusmicethatdisplaymuch-improvedmemoryandlearningskills.7Volesaresmall, stout rodents resembling mice, and most varieties of voles arepromiscuous.Butthereisonespeciesinwhichboyandgirlvolesformlastingandmonogamousrelationships.Geneticistsclaimtohaveisolatedthegenesresponsibleforvolemonogamy.Iftheadditionofagenecanturn a vole Don Juan into a loyal and loving husband, arewe far offfrombeingabletogeneticallyengineernotonlytheindividualabilitiesofrodents(andhumans),butalsotheirsocialstructures?8

TheReturnoftheNeanderthals

Butgeneticistsdonotonlywanttotransformlivinglineages.Theyaimtoreviveextinctcreaturesaswell.Andnotjustdinosaurs,asinJurassicPark. A team of Russian, Japanese and Korean scientists has recentlymappedthegenomeofancientmammoths,foundfrozenintheSiberianice.Theynowplantotakeafertilisedegg-cellofapresent-dayelephant,replacetheelephantineDNAwithareconstructedmammothDNA,andimplant the egg in the womb of an elephant. After about twenty-twomonths,theyexpectthefirstmammothin5,000yearstobeborn.9But why stop at mammoths? Professor George Church of Harvard

University recently suggested that, with the completion of theNeanderthal Genome Project, we can now implant reconstructedNeanderthal DNA into a Sapiens ovum, thus producing the firstNeanderthalchildin30,000years.Churchclaimedthathecoulddothejobforapaltry$30million.Severalwomenhavealreadyvolunteeredtoserveassurrogatemothers.10WhatdoweneedNeanderthalsfor?Somearguethatifwecouldstudy

liveNeanderthals,wecouldanswersomeofthemostnaggingquestionsabout the origins and uniqueness of Homo sapiens. By comparing aNeanderthal to a Homo sapiens brain, and mapping out where theirstructures differ, perhaps we could identify what biological change

produced consciousness aswe experience it. There’s an ethical reason,too – some have argued that ifHomo sapiens was responsible for theextinction of the Neanderthals, it has amoral duty to resurrect them.And having some Neanderthals around might be useful. Lots ofindustrialists would be glad to pay one Neanderthal to do themenialworkoftwoSapiens.But why stop even at Neanderthals? Why not go back to God’s

drawing board and design a better Sapiens? The abilities, needs anddesiresofHomosapienshaveageneticbasis,andtheSapiensgenomeisno more complex than that of voles and mice. (The mouse genomecontains about 2.5 billion nucleobases, the Sapiens genome about 2.9billion bases –meaning the latter is only 14 per cent larger.)11 In themedium range – perhaps in a few decades – genetic engineering andother forms of biological engineering might enable us to make far-reachingalterationsnotonlytoourphysiology,immunesystemandlifeexpectancy, but also to our intellectual and emotional capacities. Ifgeneticengineeringcancreategeniusmice,whynotgeniushumans?Ifitcancreatemonogamousvoles,whynothumanshard-wiredtoremainfaithfultotheirpartners?The Cognitive Revolution that turned Homo sapiens from an

insignificant ape into the master of the world did not require anynoticeablechangeinphysiologyoreveninthesizeandexternalshapeofthe Sapiens brain. It apparently involved no more than a few smallchangestointernalbrainstructure.PerhapsanothersmallchangewouldbeenoughtoigniteaSecondCognitiveRevolution,createacompletelynewtypeofconsciousness,and transformHomosapiens into somethingaltogetherdifferent.True,westilldon’thavetheacumentoachievethis,butthereseems

tobenoinsurmountabletechnicalbarrierpreventingusfromproducingsuperhumans.Themainobstaclesaretheethicalandpoliticalobjectionsthat have slowed down research on humans. And no matter howconvincingtheethicalargumentsmaybe,itishardtoseehowtheycanhold back the next step for long, especially if what is at stake is thepossibility of prolonging human life indefinitely, conquering incurablediseases,andupgradingourcognitiveandemotionalabilities.What would happen, for example, if we developed a cure for

Alzheimer’s disease that, as a side benefit, could dramatically improve

the memories of healthy people? Would anyone be able to halt therelevant research? And when the cure is developed, could any lawenforcementagencylimitittoAlzheimer’spatientsandpreventhealthypeoplefromusingittoacquiresuper-memories?It’s unclear whether bioengineering could really resurrect theNeanderthals,butitwouldverylikelybringdownthecurtainonHomosapiens.Tinkeringwithourgeneswon’tnecessarilykillus.ButwemightfiddlewithHomosapienstosuchanextentthatwewouldnolongerbeHomosapiens.

BionicLife

There is another new technologywhich could change the laws of life:cyborg engineering. Cyborgs are beings which combine organic andinorganicparts,suchasahumanwithbionichands.Inasense,nearlyallof us are bionic these days, since our natural senses and functions aresupplementedbydevicessuchaseyeglasses,pacemakers,orthotics,andevencomputersandmobilephones(whichrelieveourbrainsofsomeoftheirdatastorageandprocessingburdens).Westandpoisedonthebrinkof becoming true cyborgs, of having inorganic features that areinseparable fromourbodies, features thatmodifyourabilities,desires,personalitiesandidentities.The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), a USmilitaryresearchagency,isdevelopingcyborgsoutofinsects.Theideaistoimplantelectronicchips,detectorsandprocessorsinthebodyofafly or cockroach, which will enable either a human or an automaticoperatortocontrol the insect’smovementsremotelyandtoabsorbandtransmit information.Sucha fly couldbe sittingon thewallat enemyheadquarters,eavesdroponthemostsecretconversations,andifitisn’tcaught first by a spider, could inform us exactly what the enemy isplanning.12In2006theUSNavalUnderseaWarfareCenterreporteditsintention to develop cyborg sharks, declaring, ‘NUWC is developing afish tag whose goal is behaviour control of host animals via neuralimplants.’ The developers hope to identify underwater electromagneticfields made by submarines and mines, by exploiting the natural

magneticdetectingcapabilitiesofsharks,whicharesuperiortothoseofanyman-madedetectors.13Sapiens,too,arebeingturnedintocyborgs.Thenewestgenerationofhearing aids are sometimes referred to as ‘bionic ears’. The deviceconsistsofanimplantthatabsorbssoundthroughamicrophonelocatedin the outer part of the ear. The implant filters the sounds, identifieshuman voices, and translates them into electric signals that are sentdirectlytothecentralauditorynerveandfromtheretothebrain.14Retina Implant, a government-sponsored German company, isdeveloping a retinal prosthesis that may allow blind people to gainpartial vision. It involves implanting a small microchip inside thepatient’seye.Photocellsabsorblightfallingontheeyeandtransformitinto electrical energy, which stimulates the intact nerve cells in theretina.Thenervousimpulsesfromthesecellsstimulatethebrain,wheretheyaretranslatedintosight.Atpresentthetechnologyallowspatientsto orientate themselves in space, identify letters, and even recognisefaces.15Jesse Sullivan, an American electrician, lost both arms up to theshoulderina2001accident.Todayheusestwobionicarms,courtesyoftheRehabilitationInstituteofChicago.ThespecialfeatureofJesse’snewarmsisthattheyareoperatedbythoughtalone.Neuralsignalsarrivingfrom Jesse’s brain are translated by micro-computers into electricalcommands,andthearmsmove.WhenJessewants toraisehisarm,hedoeswhat anynormal personunconsciously does – and the arm rises.Thesearmscanperformamuchmorelimitedrangeofmovementsthanorganicarms,buttheyenableJessetocarryoutsimpledailyfunctions.AsimilarbionicarmhasrecentlybeenoutfittedforClaudiaMitchell,anAmerican soldierwho lostherarm inamotorcycleaccident.Scientistsbelievethatwewillsoonhavebionicarmsthatwillnotonlymovewhenwilled to move, but will also be able to transmit signals back to thebrain, thereby enabling amputees to regain even the sensation oftouch!16

47.JesseSullivanandClaudiaMitchellholdinghands.Theamazingthingabouttheirbionicarmsisthattheyareoperatedbythought.

Atpresent thesebionicarmsareapoor replacement forourorganicoriginals,buttheyhavethepotentialforunlimiteddevelopment.Bionicarms, for example, can bemade farmore powerful than their organickin, making even a boxing champion feel like a weakling. Moreover,bionic arms have the advantage that they can be replaced every fewyears,ordetachedfromthebodyandoperatedatadistance.Scientists at Duke University in North Carolina have recently

demonstrated this with rhesus monkeys whose brains have beenimplantedwithelectrodes.Theelectrodesgathersignalsfromthebrainandtransmit themtoexternaldevices.Themonkeyshavebeentrainedto control detached bionic arms and legs through thought alone. Onemonkey, named Aurora, learned to thought-control a detached bionicarm while simultaneously moving her two organic arms. Like someHindugoddess,Auroranowhasthreearms,andherarmscanbelocatedindifferentrooms–orevencities.ShecansitinherNorthCarolinalab,scratchherbackwithonehand, scratchherheadwitha secondhand,andsimultaneouslystealabananainNewYork(althoughtheabilitytoeat a purloined fruit at a distance remains a dream). Another rhesusmonkey,Idoya,wonworldfamein2008whenshethought-controlleda

pairofbioniclegsinKyoto,Japan,fromherNorthCarolinachair.ThelegsweretwentytimesIdoya’sweight.17Locked-in syndrome is a condition in which a person loses all or

nearlyallherabilitytomoveanypartofherbody,whilehercognitiveabilitiesremainintact.Patientssufferingfromthesyndromehaveuptillnow been able to communicate with the outside world only throughsmall eyemovements. However, a few patients have had brain-signal-gatheringelectrodesimplantedintheirbrains.Effortsarebeingmadetotranslatesuchsignalsnotmerelyintomovementsbutalsointowords.Iftheexperimentssucceed, locked-inpatientscould finallyspeakdirectlywith the outside world, and we might eventually be able to use thetechnologytoreadotherpeoplesminds.18Yet of all the projects currently under development, the most

revolutionary is theattempttodeviseadirect two-waybrain-computerinterface that will allow computers to read the electrical signals of ahumanbrain,simultaneouslytransmittingsignalsthatthebraincanreadin turn.What if such interfacesareused todirectly linkabrain to theInternet,ortodirectlylinkseveralbrainstoeachother,therebycreatingasortofInter-brain-net?Whatmighthappentohumanmemory,humanconsciousness and human identity if the brain has direct access to acollective memory bank? In such a situation, one cyborg could, forexample, retrieve thememoriesof another –nothear about them,notread about them in an autobiography, not imagine them, but directlyrememberthemasiftheywerehisown.Orherown.Whathappenstoconcepts such as the self and gender identity when minds becomecollective? How could you know thyself or follow your dream if thedream is not in your mind but in some collective reservoir ofaspirations?Suchacyborgwouldnolongerbehuman,orevenorganic. Itwould

besomethingcompletelydifferent.Itwouldbesofundamentallyanotherkindofbeingthatwecannotevengraspthephilosophical,psychologicalorpoliticalimplications.

AnotherLife

The third way to change the laws of life is to engineer completelyinorganic beings. The most obvious examples are computer programsandcomputervirusesthatcanundergoindependentevolution.Thefieldofgeneticprogrammingistodayoneofthemostinteresting

spotsinthecomputerscienceworld.Ittriestoemulatethemethodsofgeneticevolution.Manyprogrammersdreamofcreatingaprogramthatcould learnandevolve completely independentlyof its creator. In thiscase, theprogrammerwouldbeaprimummobile,a firstmover,buthiscreationwouldbefreetoevolveindirectionsneitheritsmakernoranyotherhumancouldeverhaveenvisaged.Aprototypeforsuchaprogramalreadyexists–it’scalledacomputer

virus. As it spreads through the Internet, the virus replicates itselfmillionsuponmillionsoftimes,allthewhilebeingchasedbypredatoryantivirus programs and competing with other viruses for a place incyberspace.Onedaywhenthevirusreplicatesitselfamistakeoccurs–acomputerisedmutation.Perhapsthemutationoccursbecausethehumanengineerprogrammed thevirus tomakeoccasional randomreplicationmistakes. Perhaps the mutation was due to a random error. If, bychance, the modified virus is better at evading antivirus programswithout losing its ability to invade other computers, it will spreadthrough cyberspace. If so, themutantswill survive and reproduce. Astime goes by, cyberspace would be full of new viruses that nobodyengineered,andthatundergonon-organicevolution.Are these living creatures? It depends onwhat youmean by ‘living

creatures’. They have certainly been produced by a new evolutionaryprocess, completely independentof the lawsand limitationsoforganicevolution.Imagineanotherpossibility–supposeyoucouldbackupyourbrainto

aportableharddriveandthenrunitonyourlaptop.Wouldyourlaptopbeable to thinkand feel just likeaSapiens? If so,would itbeyouorsomeoneelse?What if computerprogrammerscouldcreateanentirelynew but digital mind, composed of computer code, complete with asenseofself,consciousnessandmemory?Ifyourantheprogramonyourcomputer,woulditbeaperson?Ifyoudeleteditcouldyoubechargedwithmurder?Wemightsoonhavetheanswertosuchquestions.TheHumanBrain

Project, founded in 2005, hopes to recreate a complete human brain

inside a computer, with electronic circuits in the computer emulatingneuralnetworks in thebrain.Theprojectsdirectorhasclaimedthat, iffunded properly, within a decade or two we could have an artificialhumanbraininsideacomputerthatcouldtalkandbehaveverymuchasahumandoes.Ifsuccessful,thatwouldmeanthatafter4billionyearsofmilling around inside the small world of organic compounds, life willsuddenly break out into the vastness of the inorganic realm, ready totakeup shapesbeyondourwildest dreams.Not all scholars agree thatthemindworks in amanner analogous to today’s digital computers –andifitdoesn’t,present-daycomputerswouldnotbeabletosimulateit.Yet it would be foolish to categorically dismiss the possibility beforegivingitatry.In2013theprojectreceivedagrantof€1billionfromtheEuropeanUnion.19

TheSingularity

Presently, only a tiny fraction of these new opportunities have beenrealised. Yet theworld of 2014 is already aworld inwhich culture isreleasingitselffromtheshacklesofbiology.Ourabilitytoengineernotmerely theworldaroundus,butaboveall theworld insideourbodiesandminds,isdevelopingatbreakneckspeed.Moreandmorespheresofactivityarebeingshakenoutoftheircomplacentways.Lawyersneedtorethink issues of privacy and identity; governments are faced withrethinkingmatters of health care and equality; sports associations andeducational institutions need to redefine fair play and achievement;pension fundsand labourmarkets should readjust toaworld inwhichsixtymightbethenewthirty.Theymustalldealwiththeconundrumsofbioengineering,cyborgsandinorganiclife.Mappingthefirsthumangenomerequiredfifteenyearsand$3billion.

Todayyoucanmapaperson’sDNAwithinafewweeksandatthecostofafewhundreddollars.20Theeraofpersonalizedmedicine–medicinethatmatches treatment to DNA – has begun. The family doctor couldsoon tell you with greater certainty that you face high risks of livercancer,whereas you needn’tworry toomuch about heart attacks. Shecould determine that a popular medication that helps 92 per cent of

peopleisuselesstoyou,andyoushouldinsteadtakeanotherpill,fataltomanypeoplebutjustrightforyou.Theroadtonear-perfectmedicinestandsbeforeus.However, with improvements in medical knowledge will come new

ethical conundrums. Ethicists and legal experts are already wrestlingwith the thorny issueofprivacyas it relates toDNA.Would insurancecompaniesbeentitledtoaskforourDNAscansandtoraisepremiumsifthey discover a genetic tendency to reckless behaviour?Wouldwe berequired to fax our DNA, rather than our CV, to potential employers?CouldanemployerfavouracandidatebecausehisDNAlooksbetter?Orcouldwesueinsuchcasesfor‘geneticdiscrimination’?CouldacompanythatdevelopsanewcreatureoraneworganregisterapatentonitsDNAsequences?Itisobviousthatonecanownaparticularchicken,butcanoneownanentirespecies?Such dilemmas are dwarfed by the ethical, social and political

implicationsoftheGilgameshProjectandofourpotentialnewabilitiesto create superhumans. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights,governmentmedicalprogrammesthroughouttheworld,nationalhealthinsurance programmes and national constitutions worldwide recognisethat a humane society ought to give all its members fair medicaltreatmentandkeeptheminrelativelygoodhealth.Thatwasallwellandgoodaslongasmedicinewaschieflyconcernedwithpreventingillnessand healing the sick. What might happen once medicine becomespreoccupied with enhancing human abilities? Would all humans beentitledtosuchenhancedabilities,orwouldtherebeanewsuperhumanelite?Ourlatemodernworldpridesitselfonrecognising,forthefirsttimein

history,thebasicequalityofallhumans,yetitmightbepoisedtocreatethemostunequalofallsocieties.Throughouthistory,theupperclassesalways claimed to be smarter, stronger and generally better than theunderclass. They were usually deluding themselves. A baby born to apoorpeasantfamilywaslikelytobeasintelligentasthecrownprince.Withthehelpofnewmedicalcapabilities,thepretensionsoftheupperclassesmightsoonbecomeanobjectivereality.Thisisnotsciencefiction.Mostscience-fictionplotsdescribeaworld

inwhichSapiens– identical tous–enjoy superior technology suchaslight-speedspaceshipsandlaserguns.Theethicalandpoliticaldilemmas

central to these plots are taken fromour ownworld, and theymerelyrecreateouremotionalandsocialtensionsagainstafuturisticbackdrop.Yet the real potential of future technologies is to changeHomosapiensitself, includingour emotionsanddesires, andnotmerelyourvehiclesand weapons. What is a spaceship compared to an eternally youngcyborgwhodoesnotbreedandhasnosexuality,whocansharethoughtsdirectlywithotherbeings,whoseabilitiestofocusandrememberareathousandtimesgreaterthanourown,andwhoisneverangryorsad,buthasemotionsanddesiresthatwecannotbegintoimagine?Science fiction rarely describes such a future, because an accuratedescriptionisbydefinitionincomprehensible.Producingafilmaboutthelifeofsomesuper-cyborgisakintoproducingHamletforanaudienceofNeanderthals. Indeed, the futuremastersof theworldwillprobablybemoredifferentfromusthanwearefromNeanderthals.WhereasweandtheNeanderthalsareatleasthuman,ourinheritorswillbegodlike.PhysicistsdefinetheBigBangasasingularity.Itisapointatwhichalltheknownlawsofnaturedidnotexist.Timetoodidnotexist.Itisthusmeaninglesstosaythatanythingexisted‘before’theBigBang.Wemaybe fast approachinganewsingularity,whenall the concepts thatgivemeaning to our world – me, you, men, women, love and hate – willbecomeirrelevant.Anythinghappeningbeyondthatpointismeaninglesstous.

TheFrankensteinProphecy

In1818MaryShelleypublishedFrankenstein,thestoryofascientistwhocreatesanartificialbeingthatgoesoutofcontrolandwreakshavoc.Inthelasttwocenturies,thesamestoryhasbeentoldoverandoveragainincountlessversions.Ithasbecomeacentralpillarofournewscientificmythology.Atfirstsight,theFrankensteinstoryappearstowarnusthatifwetrytoplayGodandengineerlifewewillbepunishedseverely.Yetthestoryhasadeepermeaning.TheFrankensteinmythconfrontsHomosapienswith the fact that thelast days are fast approaching. Unless some nuclear or ecologicalcatastrophe intervenes, so goes the story, the pace of technological

development will soon lead to the replacement of Homo sapiens bycompletely different beings who possess not only different physiques,butalsoverydifferentcognitiveandemotionalworlds.ThisissomethingmostSapiensfindextremelydisconcerting.Weliketobelievethatinthefuture people just like us will travel from planet to planet in fastspaceships. We don’t like to contemplate the possibility that in thefuture,beingswithemotionsandidentitieslikeourswillnolongerexist,andourplacewillbetakenbyalienlifeformswhoseabilitiesdwarfourown.WesomehowfindcomfortintheideathatDrFrankensteincreatedaterriblemonster,whomwehadtodestroyinordertosaveourselves.Weliketotellthestorythatwaybecauseitimpliesthatwearethebestofallbeings,thatthereneverwasandneverwillbesomethingbetterthanus.Anyattempt to improveuswill inevitably fail,becauseeven ifourbodiesmightbeimproved,youcannottouchthehumanspirit.Wewouldhaveahardtimeswallowingthe fact thatscientistscouldengineerspiritsaswellasbodies,andthatfutureDrFrankensteinscouldthereforecreatesomethingtrulysuperiortous,somethingthatwilllookatusascondescendinglyaswelookattheNeanderthals.

We cannot be certain whether today’s Frankensteins will indeed fulfilthisprophecy.Thefutureisunknown,anditwouldbesurprisingiftheforecastsof the last fewpageswere realised in full.History teachesusthatwhatseemstobejustaroundthecornermaynevermaterialiseduetounforeseenbarriers,andthatotherunimaginedscenarioswillinfactcome to pass. When the nuclear age erupted in the 1940S, manyforecastsweremade about the future nuclearworld of the year 2000.WhensputnikandApollo11firedtheimaginationoftheworld,everyonebeganpredictingthatbytheendofthecentury,peoplewouldbelivinginspacecoloniesonMarsandPluto.Fewof these forecastscametrue.Ontheotherhand,nobodyforesawtheInternet.So don’t go out just yet to buy liability insurance to indemnify youagainst lawsuits filed by digital beings. The above fantasies – ornightmares–are juststimulants foryour imagination.Whatweshouldtakeseriouslyistheideathatthenextstageofhistorywill includenotonly technological and organisational transformations, but also

fundamentaltransformationsinhumanconsciousnessandidentity.Andthese could be transformations so fundamental that they will call theveryterm‘human’ intoquestion.Howlongdowehave?Noonereallyknows.Asalreadymentioned,somesaythatby2050afewhumanswillalreadybea-mortal.Lessradicalforecastsspeakofthenextcentury,orthenextmillennium.Yetfromtheperspectiveof70,000yearsofSapienshistory,whatareafewmillennia?IfthecurtainisindeedabouttodroponSapienshistory,wemembersofoneofitsfinalgenerationsshoulddevotesometimetoansweringonelast question: what do we want to become? This question, sometimesknown as the Human Enhancement question, dwarfs the debates thatcurrently preoccupy politicians, philosophers, scholars and ordinarypeople. After all, today’s debate between today’s religions, ideologies,nations and classes will in all likelihood disappear along with Homosapiens. If our successors indeed function on a different level ofconsciousness(orperhapspossesssomethingbeyondconsciousnessthatwe cannot even conceive), it seemsdoubtful thatChristianity or Islamwill be of interest to them, that their social organisation could beCommunistorcapitalist,orthattheirgenderscouldbemaleorfemale.Andyetthegreatdebatesofhistoryareimportantbecauseatleastthefirstgenerationof thesegodswouldbeshapedby thecultural ideasoftheir human designers. Would they be created in the image ofcapitalism,ofIslam,oroffeminism?Theanswertothisquestionmightsendthemcareeninginentirelydifferentdirections.Most people prefer not to think about it. Even the field of bioethicsprefers to address another question, ‘What is it forbidden to do?’ Is itacceptabletocarryoutgeneticexperimentsonlivinghumanbeings?Onaborted fetuses? On stem cells? Is it ethical to clone sheep? Andchimpanzees? And what about humans? All of these are importantquestions,butitisnaïvetoimaginethatwemightsimplyhitthebrakesand stop the scientific projects that areupgradingHomosapiens into adifferent kind of being. For these projects are inextricably meshedtogetherwith theGilgameshProject.Ask scientistswhy they study thegenome,ortrytoconnectabraintoacomputer,ortrytocreateamindinside a computer.Nine out of ten times you’ll get the same standardanswer: we are doing it to cure diseases and save human lives. Eventhough the implications of creating a mind inside a computer are far

more dramatic than curing psychiatric illnesses, this is the standardjustification given, because nobody can arguewith it. This iswhy theGilgamesh Project is the flagship of science. It serves to justifyeverythingsciencedoes.DrFrankensteinpiggybacksontheshouldersofGilgamesh.SinceitisimpossibletostopGilgamesh,itisalsoimpossibletostopDrFrankenstein.Theonlythingwecantrytodoistoinfluencethedirectionscientistsare taking. Since we might soon be able to engineer our desires too,perhapstherealquestionfacingusisnot‘Whatdowewanttobecome?’,but ‘What do we want to want?’ Those who are not spooked by thisquestionprobablyhaven’tgivenitenoughthought.

Afterword:TheAnimalthatBecameaGod

SEVENTY THOUSAND YEARS AGO, HOMO sapiens was still aninsignificant animalminding its ownbusiness in a cornerofAfrica. Inthefollowingmillenniaittransformeditselfintothemasteroftheentireplanetandtheterroroftheecosystem.Todayitstandsonthevergeofbecomingagod,poisedtoacquirenotonlyeternalyouth,butalso thedivineabilitiesofcreationanddestruction.Unfortunately,theSapiensregimeonearthhassofarproducedlittle

thatwecanbeproudof.Wehavemasteredoursurroundings,increasedfood production, built cities, established empires and created far-flungtrade networks. But did we decrease the amount of suffering in theworld? Time and again, massive increases in human power did notnecessarily improve the well-being of individual Sapiens, and usuallycausedimmensemiserytootheranimals.Inthelastfewdecadeswehaveatlastmadesomerealprogressasfar

as the human condition is concerned, with the reduction of famine,plagueandwar.Yetthesituationofotheranimalsisdeterioratingmorerapidlythaneverbefore,andtheimprovementinthelotofhumanityistoorecentandfragiletobecertainof.Moreover,despite theastonishing things thathumansare capableof

doing,weremainunsureofourgoalsandweseemtobeasdiscontentedasever.Wehaveadvancedfromcanoestogalleystosteamshipstospaceshuttles–butnobodyknowswherewe’regoing.Wearemorepowerfulthan ever before, but have very little idea what to do with all thatpower. Worse still, humans seem to be more irresponsible than ever.Self-madegodswithonly the lawsof physics to keepus company,we

areaccountabletonoone.Weareconsequentlywreakinghavoconourfellow animals and on the surrounding ecosystem, seeking little morethanourowncomfortandamusement,yetneverfindingsatisfaction.Is there anythingmore dangerous than dissatisfied and irresponsiblegodswhodon’tknowwhattheywant?

Notes

1AnAnimalofNoSignificance

1 Ann Gibbons, ‘Food for Thought: Did the First Cooked Meals Help Fuel the DramaticEvolutionaryExpansionoftheHumanBrain?’,Science316:5831(2007),1,558–60.

2TheTreeofKnowledge

1 Robin Dunbar, Grooming, Gossip and the Evolution of Language (Cambridge, Mass.: HarvardUniversityPress,1998).

2 Frans de Waal, Chimpanzee Politics: Power and Sex among Apes (Baltimore: Johns HopkinsUniversityPress,2000);FransdeWaal,OurInnerApe:ALeadingPrimatologistExplainsWhyWeAre Who We Are (New York: Riverhead Books, 2005); Michael L. Wilson and Richard W.Wrangham, ‘Intergroup Relations in Chimpanzees’, Annual Review of Anthropology 32 (2003),363–92; M. McFarland Symington, ‘Fission-Fusion Social Organization in Ateles and Pan,InternationalJournalofPrimatology11:1(1990),49;ColinA.ChapmanandLaurenJ.Chapman,‘DeterminantsofGroupsSizeinPrimates:TheImportanceofTravelCosts’,inOntheMove:HowandWhyAnimalsTravel inGroups, ed.SueBoinskyandPaulA.Garber (Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,2000),26.

3Dunbar,Grooming,Gossip and the Evolution of Language, 69–79; LeslieC.Aiello andR. I.M.Dunbar,‘NeocortexSize,GroupSize,andtheEvolutionofLanguage’,CurrentAnthropology34:2(1993), 189. For criticism of this approach see: ChristopherMcCarthy et al., ‘Comparing TwoMethodsforEstimatingNetworkSize’,HumanOrganization60:1(2001),32;R.A.HillandR.I.M.Dunbar,‘SocialNetworkSizeinHumans’,HumanNature14:1(2003),65.

4 Yvette Taborin, ‘Shells of the French Aurignacian and Perigordian’, in Before Lascaux: TheCompleteRecordoftheEarlyUpperPaleolithic,ed.HeidiKnecht,AnnePike-TayandRandallWhite(BocaRaton:CRCPress,1993),211–28.

5 G. R. Summerhayes, ‘Application of PIXE-PIGME to Archaeological Analysis of ChangingPatterns of ObsidianUse inWest NewBritain, PapuaNewGuinea’, inArchaeologicalObsidianStudies:MethodandTheory,ed.StevenM.Shackley(NewYork:PlenumPress,1998),129–58.

3ADayintheLifeofAdamandEve

1ChristopherRyanandCacildaJethá,SexatDawn:ThePrehistoricOrigins ofModernSexuality(NewYork:Harper,2010);S.BeckermanandP.Valentine(eds.),CulturesofMultipleFathers.TheTheoryandPracticeofPartiblePaternityinLowlandSouthAmerica(Gainesville:UniversityPressofFlorida,2002).

2NoelG. Butlin,Economics and the Dreamtime: AHypothetical History (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress,1993),98–101;RichardBroome,AboriginalAustralians(Sydney:Allen&Unwin,2002), 15; William Howell Edwards, An Introduction to Aboriginal Societies (Wentworth Falls,NSW:SocialSciencePress,1988),52.

3 FekriA.Hassan,DemographicArchaeology (New York: Academic Press, 1981), 196–9; LewisRobertBinford,ConstructingFramesofReference:AnAnalyticalMethod forArchaeologicalTheoryBuilding Using Hunter-Gatherer and Environmental Data Sets (Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress,2001),143.

4BrianHare,TheGeniusofDogs:HowDogsAreSmarterThanYouThink(Dutton:PenguinGroup,2013).

5ChristopherB.Ruff,ErikTrinkausandTrentonW.Holliday,‘BodyMassandEncephalizationinPleistoceneHomo’,Nature 387 (1997), 173–6;M.Henneberg andM. Steyn, ‘Trends inCranialCapacity and Cranial Index in Subsaharan Africa During the Holocene’, American Journal ofHumanBiology5:4(1993):473–9;DrewH.BaileyandDavidC.Geary,‘HominidBrainEvolution:TestingClimatic, Ecological and SocialCompetitionModels’,HumanNature 20 (2009):67–79;Daniel J. Wescott and Richard L. Jantz, ‘Assessing Craniofacial Secular Change in AmericanBlacks and Whites Using Geometric Morphometry’, in Modern Morphometrics in PhysicalAnthropology:DevelopmentsinPrimatology:ProgressandProspects,ed.DennisE.Slice(NewYork:PlenumPublishers,2005),231–45.

6NicholasG.BlurtonJonesetal.,‘AntiquityofPostreproductiveLife:AreThereModernImpactsonHunter-GathererPostreproductiveLifeSpans?’,AmericanJournalofHumanBiology14(2002),184–205.

7 Kim Hill and A. Magdalena Hurtado, Aché Life History: The Ecology and Demography of aForagingPeople(NewYork:AldinedeGruyter,1996),164,236.

8Ibid.,78.

9VincenzoFormicolaandAlexandraP.Buzhilova, ‘DoubleChildBurial fromSunghir(Russia):PathologyandInferencesforUpperPaleolithicFuneraryPractices’,AmericanJournalofPhysicalAnthropology124:3(2004),189–98;GiacomoGiacobini,‘RichnessandDiversityofBurialRitualsintheUpperPaleolithic’,Diogenes54:2(2007),19–39.

10 I. J.N.Thorpe, ‘Anthropology,Archaeology and theOriginofWarfare’,WorldArchaeology35:1 (2003), 145–65; Raymond C. Kelly,Warless Societies and the Origin of War (Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press, 2000); Azar Gat, War in Human Civilization (Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 2006); Lawrence H. Keeley,War before Civilization: TheMyth of the PeacefulSavage(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1996);SlavomilVend, ‘StoneAgeWarfare’, inAncientWarfare: Archaeological Perspectives, ed. John Carman and Anthony Harding (Stroud: SuttonPublishing,1999),57–73.

4TheFlood

1JamesF.O’ConnelandJimAllen, ‘Pre-LGMSahul (PleistoceneAustralia–NewGuinea)andtheArchaeologyofEarlyModernHumans’,inRethinkingtheHumanRevolution:NewBehaviouralandBiologicalPerspectives on theOrigin andDispersal ofModernHumans, ed.PaulMellars,OferBar-Yosef,KatieBoyle(Cambridge:McDonaldInstituteforArchaeologicalResearch,2007),395–410;JamesF.O’ConnelandJimAllen,‘WhenDidHumansFirstArriveinGreaterAustraliaandWhyisitImportanttoKnow?’,EvolutionaryAnthropology6:4(1998),132–46;JamesF.O’ConnelandJimAllen,‘DatingtheColonizationofSahul(PleistoceneAustralia–NewGuinea):AReviewof Recent Research’, Journal of Radiological Science 31:6 (2004), 835–53; Jon M. Erlandson,‘Anatomically Modern Humans, Maritime Voyaging and the Pleistocene Colonization of theAmericas’, in The First Americans: The Pleistocene Colonization of the New World, ed. Nina G.Jablonski(SanFrancisco:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2002),59–60,63–4;JonM.ErlandsonandTorbenC.Rick,‘ArchaeologyMeetsMarineEcology:TheAntiquityofMaritimeCulturesandHumanImpactsonMarineFisheriesandEcosystems’,AnnualReviewofMarineScience2(2010),231–51; Atholl Anderson, ‘Slow Boats from China: Issues in the Prehistory of Indo-ChinaSeafaring’,ModernQuaternaryResearchinSoutheastAsia16(2000),13–50;RobertG.Bednarik,‘Maritime Navigation in the Lower and Middle Paleolithic’, Earth and Planetary Sciences 328(1999), 559–60; Robert G. Bednarik, ‘Seafaring in the Pleistocene’, Cambridge ArchaeologicalJournal13:1(2003),41–66.

2 Timothy F. Flannery, The Future Eaters: An Ecological History of the Australasian Lands andPeoples(PortMelbourne:ReedBooksAustralia,1994);AnthonyD.Barnoskyetal.,‘AssessingtheCausesofLatePleistoceneExtinctionsontheContinents’,Science306:5693(2004):70–5;BarryW. Brook and David M. J. S. Bowman, ‘The Uncertain Blitzkrieg of Pleistocene Megafauna’,

Journal of Biogeography 31:4 (2004), 517–23; Gifford H. Miller et al., ‘Ecosystem Collapse inPleistocene Australia and a Human Role in Megafaunal Extinction’, Science 309:5732 (2005),287–90;RichardG.Robertsetal.,‘NewAgesfortheLastAustralianMegafauna:ContinentWideExtinctionabout46,000YearsAgo’,Science292:5523(2001),1,888–92.

3StephenWroeandJudithField,‘AReviewofEvidenceforaHumanRoleintheExtinctionofAustralian Megafauna and an Alternative Explanation’, Quaternary Science Reviews 25:21–2(2006),2,692–703;BarryW.Brooketal.,‘WouldtheAustralianMegafaunaHaveBecomeExtinctifHumansHadNeverColonisedtheContinent?Commentson“AReviewoftheEvidenceforaHumanRole in the Extinction ofAustralianMegafauna and anAlternative Explanation” by S.WroeandJ.Field’,QuaternaryScienceReviews26:3–4(2007),560–4;ChrisS.M.Turneyetal.,‘Late-Surviving Megafauna in Tasmania, Australia, Implicate Human Involvement in theirExtinction’,ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences105:34(2008),12,150–3.

4 John Alroy, ‘A Multispecies Overkill Simulation of the End-Pleistocene Megafaunal MassExtinction,Science,292:5523(2001),1,893–6;O’ConnelandAllen,‘Pre-LGMSahul’,400–1.

5L.H.Keeley,‘Proto-AgriculturalPracticesAmongHunter-Gatherers:ACross-CulturalSurvey’,inLastHunters, First Farmers:NewPerspectives on the Prehistoric Transition toAgriculture, ed.T.DouglasPriceandAnneBirgitteGebauer(SantaFe:SchoolofAmericanResearchPress,1995),243–72;R.Jones,‘FirestickFarming’,AustralianNaturalHistory16(1969),224–8.

6DavidJ.Meitzer,FirstPeoplesinaNewWorld:ColonizingIceAgeAmerica(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2009).

7 Paul L. Koch and Anthony D. Barnosky, ‘Late Quaternary Extinctions: State of the Debate’,AnnualReviewofEcology,Evolution,andSystematics37(2006),215–50;AnthonyD.Barnoskyetal.,‘AssessingtheCausesofLatePleistoceneExtinctionsontheContinents’,70–5.

5History’sBiggestFraud

1Themapisbasedmainlyon:PeterBellwood,FirstFarmers:TheOriginsofAgriculturalSocieties(Malden:BlackwellPublishing,2005).

2JaredDiamond,Guns,Germs,andSteel:TheFatesofHumanSocieties(NewYork:W.W.Norton,1997).

3Gat,WarinHumanCivilization,130–1;RobertS.WalkerandDrewH.Bailey,‘BodyCountsinLowlandSouthAmericanViolence’,EvolutionandHumanBehavior34(2013),29–34.

4 KatherineA. Spielmann, ‘AReview:DietaryRestriction onHunter-GathererWomen and theImplications for Fertility and InfantMortality’,HumanEcology 17:3 (1989), 321–45. See also:Bruce Winterhalder and Eric Alder Smith, ‘Analyzing Adaptive Strategies: Human Behavioral

EcologyatTwenty-Five’,EvolutionaryAnthropology9:2(2000),51–72.

5AlainBideau,BertrandDesjardinsandHectorPerez-Brignoli(eds.),InfantandChildMortalityinthe Past (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997); Edward Anthony Wrigley et al., English PopulationHistory from FamilyReconstitution, 1580–1837 (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1997),295–6,303.

6ManfredHeun et al., ‘Site of EinkornWheatDomestication Identified byDNAFingerprints’,Science278:5341(1997),1,312–14.

7 Charles Patterson,Eternal Treblinka: Our Treatment of Animals and the Holocaust (New York:Lantern Books, 2002), 9–10; Peter J. Ucko and G.W. Dimbleby (eds.),The Domestication andExploitationofPlantsandAnimals(London:Duckworth,1969),259.

8 Avi Pinkas (ed.), Farmyard Animals in Israel – Research, Humanism and Activity (Rishon Le-Ziyyon:TheAssociationforFarmyardAnimals,2009[Hebrew]),169–99;“MilkProduction–theCow’ [Hebrew], The Dairy Council, accessed 22 March 2012, http://www.milk.org.il/cgi-webaxy/sal/sal.pl?lang=he&ID=645657_milk&act=show&dbid=katavot&dataid=cow.htm.

9EdwardEvanEvans-Pritchard,TheNuer:ADescriptionof theModesofLivelihoodandPoliticalInstitutionsofaNiloticPeople (Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1969);E.C.AmorosoandP.A.Jewell, ‘The Exploitation of theMilk-Ejection Reflex by Primitive People’, inMan and Cattle:Proceedings of the Symposium onDomestication at the Royal Anthropological Institute, 24–26May1960,ed.A.E.MourantandF.E.Zeuner(London:TheRoyalAnthropologicalInstitute,1963),129–34.

10 Johannes Nicolaisen, Ecology and Culture of the Pastoral Tuareg (Copenhagen: NationalMuseum,1963),63.

6BuildingPyramids

1AngusMaddison,TheWorldEconomy,vol.2(Paris:DevelopmentCentreoftheOrganizationofEconomicCo-operationandDevelopment,2006),636;‘HistoricalEstimatesofWorldPopulation’,U.S. Census Bureau, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldhis.html.

2RobertB.Mark,TheOriginsof theModernWorld:AGlobalandEcologicalNarrative (Lanham,MD:Rowman&LittlefieldPublishers,2002),24.

3RaymondWestbrook,‘OldBabylonianPeriod’,inAHistoryofAncientNearEasternLaw,vol.1,ed. RaymondWestbrook (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 361–430;Martha T. Roth, Law Collections fromMesopotamia and Asia Minor, 2nd edn (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 71–142; M. E. J.Richardson,Hammurabi’sLaws:Text,TranslationandGlossary(London:T&TClarkInternational,

2000).

4Roth,LawCollectionsfromMesopotamia,76.

5Ibid.,121.

6Ibid.,122–3.

7Ibid.,133–3.

8ConstanceBrittaineBouchard,StrongofBody,BraveandNoble:ChivalryandSocietyinMedievalFrance(NewYork:CornellUniversityPress,1998),99;MaryMartinMcLaughlin,‘SurvivorsandSurrogates:ChildrenandParents from theNinth toThirteenthCenturies’, inMedieval Families:PerspectivesonMarriage,HouseholdandChildren,ed.CarolNeel(Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress,2004),81n.;LiseE.Hull,Britain’sMedievalCastles(Westport:Praeger,2006),144.

7MemoryOverload

1AndrewRobinson,The Story ofWriting (NewYork: Thames andHudson, 1995), 63;Hans J.Nissen, PeterDamerow andRobert K. Englung,Archaic Bookkeeping:Writing andTechniques ofEconomic Administration in the Ancient Near East (Chicago, London: The University of ChicagoPress,1993),36.

2 Marcia and Robert Ascher,Mathematics of the Incas – Code of the Quipu (New York: DoverPublications,1981).

3GaryUrton,SignsoftheInkaKhipu(Austin:UniversityofTexasPress,2003);GalenBrokaw,AHistoryoftheKhipu(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2010).

4StephenD.Houston(ed.),TheFirstWriting:ScriptInventionasHistoryandProcess(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2004),222.

8ThereisNoJusticeinHistory

1SheldonPollock,‘AxialismandEmpire’,inAxialCivilizationsandWorldHistory,ed.JohannP.Arnason,S.N.EisenstadtandBjörnWittrock(Leiden:Brill,2005),397–451.

2HaroldM.Tanner,China:AHistory(Indianapolis:HackettPub.Co.,2009),34.

3 Ramesh Chandra, Identity and Genesis of Caste System in India (Delhi: Kalpaz Publications,2005);Michael Bamshad et al., ‘Genetic Evidence on theOrigins of Indian Caste Population’,GenomeResearch11(2001):904–1,004;SusanBayly,Caste,SocietyandPoliticsinIndiafromtheEighteenthCenturytotheModernAge(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1999).

4Houston,FirstWriting,196.

5Thesecretarygeneral,UnitedNations,Reportof theSecretaryGeneralontheIn-depthStudyonAll Forms of Violence Against Women, delivered to the General Assembly, UN Doc.A/16/122/Add.1(6July2006),89.

6 Sue Blundell,Women inAncient Greece (Cambridge,Mass.: HarvardUniversity Press, 1995).113–2.9.131–3.

10TheScentofMoney

1FranciscoLópezdeGómara,HistoriadelaConquistadeMexico,vol.1,ed.D.JoaquinRamirezCabanes(MexicoCity:EditorialPedroRobredo,1943),106.

2AndrewM.Watson,‘BacktoGold–andSilver’,EconomicHistoryReview20:1(1967),11–12;JasimAlubudi,RepertorioBibliográficodelIslam(Madrid:VisionLibros,2003),194.

3Watson,‘BacktoGold–andSilver’,17–18.

4DavidGraeber,Debt:TheFirst5,000Years(Brooklyn,NY:MelvilleHouse,2011).

5GlynDavies,AHistoryofMoney:FromAncientTimestothePresentDay(Cardiff:UniversityofWalesPress,1994),15.

6 Szymon Laks,Music of AnotherWorld, trans. ChesterA. Kisiel (Evanston, Ill.: North-westernUniversity Press, 1989), 88–9. The Auschwitz ‘market’ was restricted to certain classes ofprisonersandconditionschangeddramaticallyacrosstime.

7NiallFerguson,TheAscentofMoney(NewYork:ThePenguinPress,2008),4.

8 For information on barley money I have relied on an unpublished PhD thesis: RefaelBenvenisti, ‘Economic Institutions of Ancient Assyrian Trade in the Twentieth to EighteenthCenturiesBC’(HebrewUniversityofJerusalem,unpublishedPhDthesis,2011).SeealsoNormanYoffee,‘TheEconomyofAncientWesternAsia’,inCivilizationsoftheAncientNearEast,vol.1,ed.J.M.Sasson (NewYork:C.Scribner’sSons,1995),1,387–99;R.K.Englund, ‘Proto-CuneiformAccount-BooksandJournals’,inCreatingEconomicOrder:Record-keeping,StandardizationandtheDevelopment of Accounting in the Ancient Near East, ed.Michael Hudson and CorneliaWunsch(Bethesda,Md.:CDLPress, 2004), 21–46;MarvinA.Powell, ‘AContribution to theHistoryofMoney inMesopotamia Prior to the Invention of Coinage’, in Festschrift Lubor Matouš, ed. B.HruškaandG.Komoróczy(Budapest:EötvösLorándTudományegyetem,1978),211–43;MarvinA.Powell,‘MoneyinMesopotamia’,JournaloftheEconomicandSocialHistoryoftheOrient39:3(1996), 224–42; John F. Robertson, ‘The Social and Economic Organization of AncientMesopotamianTemples’,inCivilizationsoftheAncientNearEast,vol.1,ed.Sasson,443–500;M.

Silver, ‘Modern Ancients’, in Commerce and Monetary Systems in the Ancient World: Means ofTransmissionandCulturalInteraction,ed.R.RollingerandU.Christoph(Stuttgart:Steiner,2004),65–87; Daniel C. Snell, ‘Methods of Exchange and Coinage in Ancient Western Asia’, inCivilizationsoftheAncientNearEast,vol.1,ed.Sasson,1,487–97.

11ImperialVisions

1NahumMegged,TheAztecs(TelAviv:Dvir,1999[Hebrew]),103.

2Tacitus,Agricola,ch.30(Cambridge,Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress,1958),220–1.

3A.Fienup-Riordan,TheNelsonIslandEskimo:SocialStructureandRitualDistribution(Anchorage:AlaskaPacificUniversityPress,1983),10.

4YuriPines,‘NationStates,GlobalizationandaUnitedEmpire–theChineseExperience(thirdtofifthcenturiesBC)’,Historia15(1995),54[Hebrew].

5 Alexander Yakobson, ‘Us and Them: Empire, Memory and Identity in Claudius’ Speech onBringingGauls intotheRomanSenate’, inOnMemory:AnInterdisciplinaryApproach, ed.DoronMendels(Oxford:PeterLand,2007),23–4.

12TheLawofReligion

1W.H.C.Frend,MartyrdomandPersecutionintheEarlyChurch(Cambridge:JamesClarke&Co.,2008),536–7.

2 Robert Jean Knecht, The Rise and Fall of Renaissance France, 1483–1610 (London: FontanaPress,1996),424.

3MarieHarmandHermannWiehle,LebenskundefuerMittelschulen–FuenfterTeil.Klasse5fuerJungen(Halle:HermannSchroedelVerlag,1942),152–7.

13TheSecretofSuccess

1SusanBlackmore,TheMemeMachine(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1999).

14TheDiscoveryofIgnorance

1DavidChristian,MapsofTime:AnIntroductiontoBigHistory(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2004),344–5;AngusMaddison,TheWorldEconomy,vol.2(Paris:DevelopmentCentreoftheOrganizationofEconomicCo-operationandDevelopment,2001),636; ‘HistoricalEstimatesof World Population’, US Census Bureau, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldhis.html.

2Maddison,TheWorldEconomy,vol.1,261.

3 ‘Gross Domestic Product 2009’, theWorld Bank, Data and Statistics, accessed 10December2010,http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GDP.pdf.

4Christian,MapsofTime,141.

5 The largest contemporary cargo ship can carry about 100,000 tons. In 1470 all theworld’sfleetscouldtogethercarrynomorethan320,000tons.By1570totalglobaltonnagewasupto730,000tons(Maddison,TheWorldEconomy,vol.1,97).

6Theworld’slargestbank–theRoyalBankofScotland–hasreportedin2007depositsworth$1.3 trillion. That’s five times the annual global production in 1500. See ‘Annual Report andAccounts 2008’, the Royal Bank of Scotland, 35, accessed 10 December 2010,http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/RBS/6265700330278481/eb7a003a-5c9b-41ef-bad3–81fb98a6c823/RBS_GRA_2008_09_03_09.pdf.

7Ferguson,AscentofMoney,185–98.

8Maddison,TheWorldEconomy,vol.1,31;Wrigley,EnglishPopulationHistory, 295;Christian,MapsofTime,450,452;‘WorldHealthStatisticReport2009’,35–45,WorldHealthOrganization,accessed10December2010http://www.who.int/whosis/whostat/EN_WHS09_Full.pdf.

9Wrigley,EnglishPopulationHistory,296.

10‘England,InterimLifeTables,1980–82to2007–09’,OfficeforNationalStatistics,accessed22March 2012 http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77–61850.

11MichaelPrestwich,EdwardI(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1988),125–6.

12 Jennie B. Dorman et al., ‘The age-1 and daf-2 Genes Function in a Common Pathway toControl the Lifespan of Caenorhabditis elegans’, Genetics 141:4 (1995), 1,399–406; KoenHouthoofd et al., ‘Life Extension via Dietary Restriction is Independent of the Ins/IGF-1SignallingPathwayinCaenorhabditiselegans’,ExperimentalGerontology38:9(2003),947–54.

13 Shawn M. Douglas, Ido Bachelet and George M. Church, ‘A Logic-Gated Nanorobot forTargeted Transport of Molecular Payloads’, Science 335:6070 (2012): 831–4; Dan Peer et al.,‘Nanocarriers As An Emerging Platform for Cancer Therapy’,NatureNanotechnology 2 (2007):751–60;DanPeeretal.,‘SystemicLeukocyte-DirectedsiRNADeliveryRevealingCyclinDiasanAnti-InflammatoryTarget’,Science319:5863(2008):627–30.

15TheMarriageofScienceandEmpire

1StephenR.Bown,Scurvy:HowaSurgeon,aMarinerandaGentlemanSolvedtheGreatestMedicalMysteryof theAgeofSail (NewYork:ThomasDunneBooks,St.Martin’sPress,2004);KennethJohnCarpenter,TheHistory of Scurvy andVitamin C (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1986).

2JamesCook,TheExplorationsofCaptainJamesCook in thePacific,asToldbySelectionsofhisOwnJournals1768–1779,ed.ArchibaldGrenfellPrice(NewYork:DoverPublications,1971),16–17;GananathObeyesekere,TheApotheosis of CaptainCook: EuropeanMythmaking in the Pacific(Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1992), 5; J. C. Beaglehole, ed.,The Journals of CaptainJamesCookonHisVoyagesofDiscovery,vol.1 (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1968),588.

3Mark,OriginsoftheModernWorld,81.

4Christian,MapsofTime,436.

5 JohnDarwin,After Tamerlane: TheGlobalHistory of Empire Since 1405 (London: Allen Lane,2007),239.

6 Soli Shahvar, ‘Railroads i. The First Railroad Built and Operated in Persia’, in the OnlineEdition of Encyclopaedia Iranica, last modified 7 April 2008,http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/railroads-i; Charles Issawi, ‘The Iranian Economy 1925–1975:FiftyYearsofEconomicDevelopment’, in Iranunder thePahlavis,ed.GeorgeLenczowski(Stanford:HooverInstitutionPress,1978),156.

7Mark,OriginsoftheModernWorld,46.

8 Kirkpatrick Sale, Christopher Columbus and the Conquest of Paradise (London: Tauris ParkePaperbacks,2006),7–13.

9 EdwardM. Spiers,TheArmy and Society: 1819–1914 (London: Longman, 1980), 121; RobinMoore, ‘Imperial India, 1858–1914’, inTheOxfordHistory of the British Empire: TheNineteenthCentury,vol.3,ed.AndrewPorter(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1999),442.

10VinitaDamodaran,‘FamineinBengal:AComparisonofthe1770FamineinBengalandthe1897FamineinChotanagpur’,TheMedievalHistoryJournal10:1–2(2007),151.

16TheCapitalistCreed

1Maddison,WorldEconomy, vol. 1, 261, 264; ‘GrossNational Income Per Capita 2009, AtlasMethod and PPP’, the World Bank, accessed 10 December 2010,

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GNIPC.pdf.

2Themathematicsofmybakeryexamplearenotasaccurateastheycouldbe.Sincebanksareallowed to loan $10 for every dollar they keep in their possession, of every million dollarsdeposited in the bank, the bank can loan out to entrepreneurs only about $909,000 whilekeeping$91,000 in itsvaults.But tomake lifeeasier for the readers Ipreferred toworkwithroundnumbers.Besides,banksdonotalwaysfollowtherules.

3CarlTrocki,Opium,EmpireandtheGlobalPoliticalEconomy(NewYork:Routledge,1999),91.

4GeorgesNzongola-Ntalaja,TheCongo fromLeopold toKabila:APeople’sHistory (London:ZedBooks,2002),22.

17TheWheelsofIndustry

1Mark,OriginsoftheModernWorld,109.

2 Nathan S. Lewis and Daniel G. Nocera, ‘Powering the Planet: Chemical Challenges in SolarEnergyUtilization’,ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences103:43(2006),15,731.

3 KazuhisaMiyamoto (ed.), ‘Renewable Biological Systems for Alternative Sustainable EnergyProduction,FAOAgriculturalServicesBulletin128(Osaka:OsakaUniversity,1997),Chapter2.1.1,accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.fao.org/docrep/W7241E/w7241eo6.htm#2.1.1percent20solarpercent20energy;JamesBarber,‘BiologicalSolarEnergy’,PhilosophicalTransactionsoftheRoyalSocietyA365:1853(2007),1007.

4 ‘International EnergyOutlook 2010’, US Energy Information Administration, 9, accessed 10December2010,http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/pdf/0484(2010).pdf.

5S.Venetsky,‘“Silver”fromClay’,Metallurgist13:7(1969),451;FredAftalion,AHistoryoftheInternationalChemical Industry (Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress, 1991),64;A. J.Downs, Chemistry of Aluminium, Gallium, Indium and Thallium (Glasgow: Blackie Academic &Professional,1993),15.

6JanWillemErismanetal.,‘HowaCenturyofAmmoniaSynthesisChangedtheWorld’,NatureGeoscience1(2008),637.

7G.J.BensonandB.E.Rollin (eds.),TheWell-beingofFarmAnimals:ChallengesandSolutions(Ames,IA:Blackwell,2004);M.C.Appleby,J.A.MenchandB.O.Hughes,PoultryBehaviourandWelfare(Wallingford:CABIPublishing,2004);J.Webster,AnimalWelfare:LimpingTowardsEden(Oxford:BlackwellPublishing,2005);C.DruceandP.Lymbery,OutlawedinEurope:HowAmericaisFallingBehindEuropeinFarmAnimalWelfare(NewYork:ArchimedeanPress,2002).

8HarryHarlowandRobertZimmermann,‘AffectionalResponsesintheInfantMonkey’,Science130:3373(1959),421–32;HarryHarlow,‘TheNatureofLove’,AmericanPsychologist13(1958),673–85; Laurens D. Young et al., ‘Early stress and later response to separation in rhesusmonkeys’,AmericanJournalofPsychiatry130:4(1973),400–5;K.D.Broad,J.P.CurleyandE.B.Keverne, ‘Mother-infant bonding and the evolution of mammalian social relationships’,PhilosophicalTransactionsoftheRoyalSocietyB361:1476(2006),2,199–214;FlorentPittetetal.,‘Effectsofmaternalexperienceonfearfulnessandmaternalbehaviourinaprecocialbird’,AnimalBehaviour (March 2013), In Press – available online at:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347213000547).

9‘NationalInstituteofFoodandAgriculture’,UnitedStatesDepartmentofAgriculture,accessed10December2010,http://www.csrees.usda.gov/qlinks/extension.html.

18APermanentRevolution

1 Vaclav Smil, The Earth’s Biosphere: Evolution,Dynamics and Change (Cambridge, Mass.: MITPress, 2002); Sarah CatherineWalpole et al., ‘TheWeight of Nations: An Estimation of AdultHuman Biomass’, BMC Public Health 12:439 (2012), http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471–2458/12/439.

2WilliamT.Jackman,TheDevelopmentofTransportationinModernEngland(London:FrankCass&Co.,1966),324–7;H.J.DyosandD.H.Aldcroft,BritishTransport-AnEconomicSurveyFromtheSeventeenth Century to the Twentieth (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1969), 124–31;WolfgangSchivelbusch,TheRailwayJourney:The IndustrializationofTimeandSpace in the19thCentury(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1986).

3 For a detailed discussion of the unprecedented peacefulness of the last few decades, see inparticularStevenPinker,TheBetterAngelsofOurNature:WhyViolenceHasDeclined(NewYork:Viking, 2011); Joshua S. Goldstein,Winning the War on War: The Decline of Armed ConflictWorldwide(NewYork:Dutton,2011);Gat,WarinHumanCivilization.

4 ‘WorldReportonViolenceandHealth:Summary,Geneva2002’,WorldHealthOrganization,accessed 10 December 2010, http://www.who.int/whr/2001/en/whr01_annex_en.pdf. Formortalityratesinpreviouserassee:LawrenceH.Keeley,WarbeforeCivilization:TheMythofthePeacefulSavage(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1996).

5 ‘WorldHealthReport, 2004’,WorldHealthOrganization, 124, accessed10December 2010,http://www.who.int/whr/2004/en/reporto4_en.pdf.

6RaymondC.Kelly,WarlessSocietiesandtheOriginofWar(AnnArbor:UniversityofMichiganPress,2000),21.SeealsoGat,WarinHumanCivilization,129–31;Keeley,WarbeforeCivilization.

7ManuelEisner,‘Modernization,Self-ControlandLethalViolence’,BritishJournalofCriminology41:4(2001),618–638;ManuelEisner,‘Long-TermHistoricalTrendsinViolentCrime’,CrimeandJustice: A Review of Research 30 (2003), 83–142; ‘World Report on Violence and Health:Summary, Geneva 2002’, World Health Organization, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.who.int/whr/2001/en/whr01_annex_en.pdf; ‘World Health Report, 2004’, WorldHealth Organization, 124, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.who.int/whr/2004/en/reporto4_en.pdf.

8WalkerandBailey,‘BodyCountsinLowlandSouthAmericanViolence’,30.

19AndTheyLivedHappilyEverAfter

1Forboththepsychologyandbiochemistryofhappiness,thefollowingaregoodstartingpoints:JonathanHaidt,TheHappinessHypothesis: FindingModern Truth inAncientWisdom (New York:BasicBooks,2006);R.Wright,TheMoralAnimal:EvolutionaryPsychologyandEverydayLife(NewYork:VintageBooks,1994);M.Csikszentmihalyi, ‘IfWeAreSoRich,WhyAren’tWeHappy?’,AmericanPsychologist54:10 (1999):821–7;F.A.Huppert,N.BaylisandB.Keverne (eds.),TheScienceofWell-Being(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2005);MichaelArgyle,ThePsychologyofHappiness,2ndedition (NewYork:Routledge,2001);EdDiener (ed.),AssessingWell-Being:TheCollectedWorksofEdDiener(NewYork:Springer,2009);MichaelEidandRandyJ.Larsen(eds.),TheScienceofSubjectiveWell-Being(NewYork:GuilfordPress,2008);RichardA.Easterlin(ed.),HappinessinEconomics(Cheltenham:EdwardElgarPublishing,2002);RichardLayard,Happiness:LessonsfromaNewScience(NewYork:Penguin,2005).

2 Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011);Inglehartetal.,‘Development,FreedomandRisingHappiness’,278–81.

3D.M.McMahon,ThePursuitofHappiness:AHistoryfromtheGreekstothePresent(London:AllenLane,2006).

20TheEndofHomoSapiens

1 Keith T. Paige et al., ‘De Novo Cartilage Generation Using Calcium Alginate-ChondrocyteConstructs’,PlasticandReconstructiveSurgery97:1(1996),168–78.

2 David Biello, ‘Bacteria Transformed into Biofuels Refineries’,ScientificAmerican, 27 January2010,accessed10December2010,http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=bacteria-transformed-into-biofuel-refineries.

3GaryWalsh,‘TherapeuticInsulinsandTheirLarge-ScaleManufacture’,AppliedMicrobiologyandBiotechnology67:2(2005),151–9.

4 James G. Wallis et al., ‘Expression of a Synthetic Antifreeze Protein in Potato ReducesElectrolyteReleaseatFreezingTemperatures’,PlantMolecularBiology35:3(1997),323–30.

5RobertJ.Walletal.,‘GeneticallyEnhancedCowsResistIntramammaryStaphylococcusAureusInfection’,NatureBiotechnology23:4(2005),445–51.

6LiangxueLaietal.,‘GenerationofClonedTransgenicPigsRichinOmega-3FattyAcids’,NatureBiotechnology24:4(2006),435–6.

7 Ya-Ping Tang et al., ‘Genetic Enhancement of Learning and Memory in Mice’, Nature 401(1999),63–9.

8 Zoe R. Donaldson and Larry J. Young, ‘Oxytocin, Vasopressin and the Neurogenetics ofSociality’, Science 322:5903 (2008), 900–904; Zoe R. Donaldson, ‘Production of GermlineTransgenicPrairieVoles(MicrotusOchrogaster)UsingLentiviralVectors’,BiologyofReproduction81:6(2009),1,189–95.

9 Terri Pous, ‘Siberian Discovery Could Bring Scientists Closer to CloningWoollyMammoth’,Time, 17 September 2012, accessed 19 February 2013; Pasqualino Loi et al, ‘Biological timemachines:a realisticapproach for cloninganextinctmammal’,EndangeredSpeciesResearch 14(2011), 227–33; Leon Huynen, Craig D. Millar and David M. Lambert, ‘Resurrecting ancientanimalgenomes:Theextinctmoaandmore’,Bioessays34(2012),661–9.

10 Nicholas Wade, ‘Scientists in Germany Draft Neanderthal Genome’, New York Times, 12February 2009, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/science/13neanderthal.html?_r=2&ref=science; ZackZorich,‘ShouldWeCloneNeanderthals?’,Archaeology63:2(2009),accessed10December2010,http://www.archaeology.org/1003/etc/neanderthals.html.

11 Robert H. Waterston et al., ‘Initial Sequencing and Comparative Analysis of the MouseGenome’,Nature420:6915(2002),520.

12 ‘Hybrid Insect Micro Electromechanical Systems (HI-MEMS)’, Microsystems TechnologyOffice, DARPA, accessed 22 March 2012,http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/MTO/Programs/Hybrid_Insect_Micro_Electromechanical_Systems_percent28HI-MEMSpercent29.aspx. See also: Sally Adee, ‘NuclearPowered Transponder for Cyborg Insect’,IEEE Spectrum, December 2009, accessed 10 December 2010,http://spectrum.ieee.org/semiconductors/devices/nuclearpowered-transponder-for-cyborg-insect?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feedpercent3A+IeeeSpectrum+percent28IEEE+Spectrumpercent29&utm_content=Google+Reader; JessicaMarshall,‘TheFlyWhoBuggedMe’,NewScientist197:2646(2008),40–3;EmilySinger,‘Sendin

theRescueRats’,NewScientist183:2466(2004),21–2;SusanBrown,‘StealthSharkstoPatroltheHighSeas’,NewScientist189:2541(2006),30–1.

13 Bill Christensen, ‘Military Plans Cyborg Sharks’, Live Science, 7 March 2006, accessed 10December2010,http://www.livescience.com/technology/060307_shark_implant.html.

14 ‘Cochlear Implants’, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders,accessed22March2012,http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/pages/coch.aspx.

15RetinaImplant,http://www.retina-implant.de/en/doctors/technology/default.aspx.

16DavidBrown,‘For1stWomanWithBionicArm,aNewLifeisWithinReach’,WashingtonPost,14 September 2006, accessed 10 December 2010, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/o9/13/AR2006091302271.html?nav=E8.

17MiguelNicolelis,BeyondBoundaries:TheNewNeuroscienceofConnectingBrainsandMachines–andHowitWillChangeOurLives(NewYork:TimesBooks,2011).

18ChrisBerdik,‘TurningThoughtintoWords’,BUToday,15October2008,accessed22March2012,http://www.bu.edu/today/2008/turning-thoughts-into-words/.

19 Jonathan Fildes, ‘Artificial Brain “10 years away” ’,BBCNews, 22 July 2009, accessed 19September2012,http://news.bbc.c0.uk/2/hi/8164060.stm.

20 RadojeDrmanac et al., ‘HumanGenome SequencingUsingUnchained BaseReads on Self-Assembling DNANanoarrays’, Science 327:5961 (2010), 78–81; ‘Complete Genomics’ website:http://www.completegenomics.com/; RobWaters, ‘Complete Genomics Gets Gene Sequencingunder $5000 (Update 1)’, Bloomberg, 5 November 2009, accessed 10 December 2010;http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aWutnyE4S0Ww; FergusWalsh,‘EraofPersonalizedMedicineAwaits’,BBCNews,lastupdated8April2009,accessed22March 2012, http://news.bbc.co.Uk/2/hi/health/7954968.stm; Leena Rao, ‘PayPal Co-Founderand Founders Fund Partner Joins DNA Sequencing Firm Halcyon Molecular’, TechCrunch, 24September 2009, accessed 10 December 2010, http://techcrunch.com/2009/09/24/paypal-co-founder-and-founders-fund-partner-joins-dna-sequencing-firm-halcyon-molecular/.

Acknowledgements

Fortheiradviceandassistance,thanksto:SaraiAharoni,DoritAharonov,AmosAvisar,TzafrirBarzilai, Noah Beninga, Suzanne Dean, Caspian Dennis, Tirza Eisenberg, Amir Fink, SaraHolloway, Benjamin Z. Kedar, Yossi Maurey, Eyal Miller, David Milner, John Purcell, SimonRhodes,ShmuelRosner,RamiRotholz,MichalShavit,MichaelShenkar,IdanSherer,EllieSteel,Ofer Steinitz, HaimWatzman, Guy Zaslavsky and all the teachers and students in theWorldHistoryprogrammeoftheHebrewUniversityofJerusalem.SpecialthankstoJaredDiamond,whotaughtmetoseethebigpicture;toDiegoOlstein,who

inspiredmetowriteastory;andtoItzikYahavandDeborahHarris,whohelpedspreadthestoryaround.

Imagecredits

1.©ImageBank/GettyImagesIsrael.2.©Visual/Corbis.3.©AnthropologischesInstitutundMuseum,UniversitätZurich.4.Photo:ThomasStephan©UlmerMuseum.5.©magiccarpics.co.uk.6.©AndreasSolaro/AFP/GettyImages.7.Photo:TheUpperGalileeMuseumofPrehistory.8.©Visual/Corbis.9.©Visual/Corbis.10.Poster:WaterhouseHawkins,c.1862©TheTrusteesoftheNaturalHistoryMuseum.11.©Visual/Corbis.12. Photo: Karl G. Heider © President and Fellows of Harvard College, Peabody Museum ofArchaeologyandEthnology,PM#2006.17.1.89.2(digitalfile#98770053).13.Photosand©DeutschesArchäologischesInstitut.14.©Visual/Corbis.15.Photoand©AnonymousforAnimalRights(Israel).16.©DeAgostiniPictureLibrary/G.DagliOrti/TheBridgemanArtLibrary.17.Engraving:WilliamJ.Stone,1823©TheArtArchive/NationalArchivesWashingtonDC(ref:AA399024).18.©AdamJones/Corbis.19.©TheSchøyenCollection,OsloandLondon,MS1717.http://www.schoyencollection.com/.20. Manuscript: History of the Inca Kingdom, Nueva Coronica y buen Gobierno, c.1587,illustrations by Guarnan Poma de Ayala, Peru © The Art Archive/Archaeological MuseumLima/GianniDagliOrti(ref:AA365957).21.Photo:GuyTillim/AfricaMediaOnline,1989©africanpictures/akg.22.©Réuniondesmuséesnationaux/GérardBlot.23.©Visual/Corbis.

24.©Visual/Corbis.25.©UniversalHistoryArchive/UIG/TheBridgemanArtLibrary.26. Illustration based on: Joe Cribb (ed.),Money: From Cowrie Shells to Credit Cards (London:PublishedfortheTrusteesoftheBritishMuseumbyBritishMuseumPublications,1986),27.27.©akg/BibleLandPictures.28.©StuartBlack/RobertHardingWorldImagery/GettyImages.29.©TheArtArchive/GianniDagliOrti(ref:AA423796).30.LibraryofCongress,BildarchivPreussischerKulturbesitz,UnitedStatesHolocaustMemorialMuseum©courtesyofRolandKlemig.31.Photo:BoazNeumann.FromKladderadatsch49(1933),7.32.©Visual/Corbis.33.©RiaNovosti/SciencePhotoLibrary.34.Painting:Franklin’sExperiment,June1752,publishedbyCurrier&Ives©MuseumoftheCityofNewYork/Corbis.35.Portrait:C.A.Woolley,1866,NationalLibraryofAustralia(ref:an23378504).36.©BritishLibraryBoard(shelfmarkadd.11267).37.©Firenze,BibliotecaMediceaLaurenziana,Ms.Laur.Med.Palat.249(mappaSalviati).38.Illustration©NeilGower.39. Redraft of the Castello Plan, John Wolcott Adams, 1916 © Collection of the New-YorkHistoricalSociety/TheBridgemanArtLibrary.40.Photoand©AnonymousforAnimalRights(Israel).41.©PhotoResearchers/Visualphotos.com.42.©Chaplin/UnitedArtists/TheKobalCollection/MaxMunnAutrey.43.LithographfromaphotobyFishbourne&Gow,SanFrancisco,1850s©Corbis.44.©ProehlStudios/Corbis.45.EuropaPressviaGettyImages.46.Photoand©CharlesVacanti.47.©ImageBank/GettyImagesIsrael.