Englishtranslationcopyright©2014byYuvalNoahHarariClotheditionpublished2014

Published simultaneously in the United Kingdom by Harvill Secker FirstpublishedinHebrewinIsraelin2011byKinneret,Zmora-Bitan,Dvir

SignalBooksisanimprintofMcClelland&Stewart,adivisionofRandomHouseofCanadaLimited,aPenguinRandomHouseCompany

All rights reserved. The use of any part of this publication reproduced,transmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recording,orotherwise,orstoredinaretrievalsystem,withoutthepriorwrittenconsent of the publisher – or, in case of photocopying or other reprographiccopying, a licence from the Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency – is aninfringementofthecopyrightlaw.LibraryandArchivesCanadaCataloguinginPublicationHarari,YuvalN.,author

Sapiens:abriefhistoryofhumankind/YuvalNoahHarari.Includesbibliographicalreferences.

ISBN978-0-7710-3850-1(bound).–ISBN978-0-7710-3852-5(html)1.Civilization–History.2.Humanbeings–History.I.Title.CB25.H372014909C2014-904589-1C2014-904590-5Jacketdesign©SuzanneDean

PictureresearchbyCarolineWood

MapsbyNeilGowerMcClelland&Stewart,

adivisionofRandomHouseofCanadaLimited,

aPenguinRandomHouseCompany

www.randomhouse.cav3.1

Inlovingmemoryofmyfather,ShlomoHarari

Contents

CoverTitlePageCopyrightDedicationTimelineofHistoryPartOneTheCognitiveRevolution1AnAnimalofNoSignificance2TheTreeofKnowledge3ADayintheLifeofAdamandEve4TheFloodPartTwoTheAgriculturalRevolution5History’sBiggestFraud6BuildingPyramids7MemoryOverload8ThereisNoJusticeinHistoryPartThreeTheUnificationofHumankind9TheArrowofHistory10TheScentofMoney11ImperialVisions12TheLawofReligion13TheSecretofSuccessPartFourTheScientificRevolution14TheDiscoveryofIgnorance15TheMarriageofScienceandEmpire16TheCapitalistCreed17TheWheelsofIndustry18APermanentRevolution19AndTheyLivedHappilyEverAfter20TheEndofHomoSapiensAfterword:

TheAnimalthatBecameaGodNotesAcknowledgementsImagecredits

TimelineofHistory

YearsBeforethePresent13.5billionMatter and energy appear. Beginning of physics. Atoms and molecules

appear.Beginningofchemistry.4.5billionFormationofplanetEarth.3.8billionEmergenceoforganisms.Beginningofbiology.6millionLastcommongrandmotherofhumansandchimpanzees.2.5millionEvolutionofthegenusHomoinAfrica.Firststonetools.2millionHumans spread from Africa to Eurasia. Evolution of different human

species.500,000NeanderthalsevolveinEuropeandtheMiddleEast.300,000Dailyusageoffire.200,000HomosapiensevolvesinEastAfrica.70,000TheCognitiveRevolution.Emergenceoffictivelanguage.

Beginningofhistory.SapiensspreadoutofAfrica.45,000SapienssettleAustralia.ExtinctionofAustralianmegafauna.30,000ExtinctionofNeanderthals.16,000SapienssettleAmerica.ExtinctionofAmericanmegafauna.

13,000ExtinctionofHomofloresiensis.Homosapienstheonlysurvivinghumanspecies.12,000The Agricultural Revolution. Domestication of plants and animals.

Permanentsettlements.5,000Firstkingdoms,scriptandmoney.Polytheisticreligions.4,250Firstempire–theAkkadianEmpireofSargon.2,500Inventionofcoinage–auniversalmoney.

The Persian Empire – a universal political order ‘for the benefit of allhumans’.

BuddhisminIndia–auniversaltruth‘toliberateallbeingsfromsuffering’.2,000HanEmpireinChina.RomanEmpireintheMediterranean.Christianity.1,400Islam.500The Scientific Revolution. Humankind admits its ignorance and begins to

acquire unprecedented power. Europeans begin to conquer America and theoceans. The entire planet becomes a single historical arena. The rise ofcapitalism.

200TheIndustrialRevolution.Familyandcommunityarereplacedbystateand

market.Massiveextinctionofplantsandanimals.ThePresentHumanstranscendtheboundariesofplanetEarth.Nuclearweaponsthreaten

the survival of humankind. Organisms are increasingly shaped by intelligentdesignratherthannaturalselection.

TheFutureIntelligentdesignbecomesthebasicprincipleoflife?Homosapiensisreplacedbysuperhumans?

PartOneTheCognitiveRevolution

1.Ahumanhandprintmadeabout30,000yearsago,onthewalloftheChauvet-Pont-d’Arc Cave in southern France. Somebody tried to say, ‘Iwashere!’

1

AnAnimalofNoSignificance

ABOUT13.5BILLIONYEARSAGO,MATTER, energy, timeand spacecame into being in what is known as the Big Bang. The story of thesefundamentalfeaturesofouruniverseiscalledphysics.

About 300,000 years after their appearance, matter and energy started tocoalesce into complex structures, called atoms, which then combined intomolecules. The story of atoms, molecules and their interactions is calledchemistry.

About 3.8 billion years ago, on a planet called Earth, certain moleculescombined to form particularly large and intricate structures called organisms.Thestoryoforganismsiscalledbiology.

About70,000yearsago,organismsbelonging to thespeciesHomosapiensstarted to form evenmore elaborate structures called cultures.The subsequentdevelopmentofthesehumanculturesiscalledhistory.

Three important revolutions shaped the course of history: the CognitiveRevolution kick-started history about 70,000 years ago. The AgriculturalRevolutionspeditupabout12,000yearsago.TheScientificRevolution,whichgot underway only 500 years ago,maywell end history and start somethingcompletely different. This book tells the story of how these three revolutionshaveaffectedhumansandtheirfelloworganisms.

There were humans long before there was history. Animals much likemodern humans first appeared about 2.5 million years ago. But for countlessgenerationstheydidnotstandoutfromthemyriadotherorganismswithwhichtheysharedtheirhabitats.

On a hike in East Africa 2 million years ago, you might well haveencounteredafamiliarcastofhumancharacters:anxiousmotherscuddlingtheirbabies and clutches of carefree children playing in the mud; temperamental

youthschafingagainstthedictatesofsocietyandwearyelderswhojustwantedtobeleftinpeace;chest-thumpingmachostryingtoimpressthelocalbeautyandwise oldmatriarchswho had already seen it all. These archaic humans loved,played,formedclosefriendshipsandcompetedforstatusandpower–butsodidchimpanzees, baboons and elephants. There was nothing special about them.Nobody,leastofallhumansthemselves,hadanyinklingthattheirdescendantswouldonedaywalkon themoon,split theatom, fathomthegeneticcodeandwritehistorybooks.Themostimportantthingtoknowaboutprehistorichumansisthattheywereinsignificantanimalswithnomoreimpactontheirenvironmentthangorillas,firefliesorjellyfish.

Biologistsclassifyorganismsintospecies.Animalsaresaidtobelongtothesame species if they tend to mate with each other, giving birth to fertileoffspring.Horsesanddonkeyshavearecentcommonancestorandsharemanyphysicaltraits.Buttheyshowlittlesexualinterestinoneanother.Theywillmateif inducedtodoso–but theiroffspring,calledmules,aresterile.MutationsindonkeyDNAcan thereforenever crossover tohorses, or viceversa.The twotypesofanimalsareconsequentlyconsideredtwodistinctspecies,movingalongseparateevolutionarypaths.Bycontrast,abulldogandaspanielmaylookverydifferent,buttheyaremembersofthesamespecies,sharingthesameDNApool.Theywill happilymate and their puppieswill grow up to pair offwith otherdogsandproducemorepuppies.

Species that evolved from a common ancestor are bunched together underthe heading ‘genus’ (plural genera). Lions, tigers, leopards and jaguars aredifferent specieswithin thegenusPanthera.Biologists label organismswith atwo-partLatinname,genusfollowedbyspecies.Lions,forexample,arecalledPanthera leo, the species leo of the genus Panthera. Presumably, everyonereading thisbook isaHomosapiens– thespeciessapiens (wise) of thegenusHomo(man).

Genera in their turn are grouped into families, such as the cats (lions,cheetahs, house cats), the dogs (wolves, foxes, jackals) and the elephants(elephants,mammoths,mastodons).Allmembersofafamilytracetheirlineageback to a founding matriarch or patriarch. All cats, for example, from thesmallesthousekittentothemostferociouslion,shareacommonfelineancestorwholivedabout25millionyearsago.

Homosapiens, too, belongs to a family.This banal fact used to be one ofhistory’s most closely guarded secrets.Homo sapiens long preferred to viewitselfassetapart fromanimals,anorphanbereftof family, lackingsiblingsorcousins,andmostimportantly,withoutparents.Butthat’sjustnotthecase.Likeitornot,wearemembersofalargeandparticularlynoisyfamilycalledthegreat

apes.Ourclosestlivingrelativesincludechimpanzees,gorillasandorang-utans.Thechimpanzeesare theclosest. Just6millionyearsago,a single femaleapehadtwodaughters.Onebecametheancestorofallchimpanzees,theotherisourowngrandmother.

SkeletonsintheClosetHomosapienshaskepthiddenanevenmoredisturbingsecret.Notonlydo

wepossessanabundanceofuncivilisedcousins,onceuponatimewehadquiteafewbrothersandsistersaswell.Weareusedtothinkingaboutourselvesastheonlyhumans,becauseforthelast10,000years,ourspecieshasindeedbeentheonly human species around. Yet the real meaning of the word human is ‘ananimalbelongingtothegenusHomo’,andthereusedtobemanyotherspeciesofthisgenusbesidesHomosapiens.Moreover,asweshallseeinthelastchapterof the book, in the not so distant futurewemight again have to contendwithnon-sapienshumans.Toclarifythispoint,Iwilloftenusetheterm‘Sapiens’todenotemembersofthespeciesHomosapiens,whilereservingtheterm‘human’torefertoallextantmembersofthegenusHomo.

Humans first evolved in East Africa about 2.5million years ago from anearlier genus of apes called Australopithecus, which means ‘Southern Ape’.About 2 million years ago, some of these archaic men and women left theirhomelandto journeythroughandsettlevastareasofNorthAfrica,EuropeandAsia.Sincesurvival in thesnowyforestsofnorthernEuroperequireddifferenttraits than those needed to stay alive in Indonesia’s steaming jungles, humanpopulations evolved in different directions. The result was several distinctspecies,toeachofwhichscientistshaveassignedapompousLatinname.

2.Oursiblings,accordingtospeculativereconstructions(lefttoright):

Homo rudolfensis (EastAfrica);Homo erectus (East Asia); andHomoneanderthalensis(EuropeandwesternAsia).Allarehumans.

Humans in Europe andwesternAsia evolved intoHomo neanderthalensis(‘ManfromtheNeanderValley),popularlyreferredtosimplyas‘Neanderthals’.Neanderthals,bulkierandmoremuscularthanusSapiens,werewelladaptedtothecoldclimateofIceAgewesternEurasia.ThemoreeasternregionsofAsiawerepopulatedbyHomoerectus,‘UprightMan’,whosurvivedthereforcloseto2millionyears,makingit themostdurablehumanspeciesever.Thisrecordisunlikely to be broken even by our own species. It is doubtful whetherHomosapiens will still be around a thousand years from now, so 2million years isreallyoutofourleague.

On the island of Java, in Indonesia, livedHomo soloensis, ‘Man from theSoloValley’,whowassuitedtolifeinthetropics.OnanotherIndonesianisland–thesmallislandofFlores–archaichumansunderwentaprocessofdwarfing.HumansfirstreachedFloreswhenthesealevelwasexceptionallylow,andtheislandwaseasilyaccessiblefromthemainland.Whentheseasroseagain,somepeopleweretrappedontheisland,whichwaspoorinresources.Bigpeople,whoneed a lot of food, died first. Smaller fellows survivedmuch better.Over thegenerations, thepeopleofFloresbecamedwarves.Thisuniquespecies,knownbyscientistsasHomofloresiensis,reachedamaximumheightofonlyonemetreandweighednomorethantwenty-fivekilograms.Theywereneverthelessabletoproducestonetools,andevenmanagedoccasionallytohuntdownsomeoftheisland’s elephants – though, to be fair, the elephantswere a dwarf species aswell.

In 2010 another lost sibling was rescued from oblivion, when scientistsexcavating the Denisova Cave in Siberia discovered a fossilised finger bone.Genetic analysis proved that the finger belonged to a previously unknownhumanspecies,whichwasnamedHomodenisova.Whoknowshowmany lostrelatives of ours arewaiting to be discovered in other caves, onother islands,andinotherclimes.

While these humanswere evolving in Europe andAsia, evolution in EastAfricadidnotstop.Thecradleofhumanitycontinuedtonurturenumerousnewspecies, such asHomo rudolfensis, ‘Man from Lake Rudolf’,Homo ergaster,‘Working Man’, and eventually our own species, which we’ve immodestlynamedHomosapiens,‘WiseMan’.

The members of some of these species were massive and others were

dwarves. Somewere fearsome hunters and othersmeek plant-gatherers. Somelived only on a single island, while many roamed over continents. But all ofthembelongedtothegenusHomo.Theywereallhumanbeings.

It’sacommonfallacytoenvisionthesespeciesasarrangedinastraightlineofdescent,withErgasterbegettingErectus,ErectusbegettingtheNeanderthals,and the Neanderthals evolving into us. This linear model gives the mistakenimpressionthatatanyparticularmomentonlyonetypeofhumaninhabitedtheearth, and that all earlier speciesweremerely oldermodels of ourselves. Thetruth is that fromabout2millionyearsagountilaround10,000yearsago, theworldwashome,atoneandthesametime,toseveralhumanspecies.Andwhynot? Today there are many species of foxes, bears and pigs. The earth of ahundredmillenniaagowaswalkedbyatleastsixdifferentspeciesofman.It’sourcurrentexclusivity,notthatmulti-speciespast,thatispeculiar–andperhapsincriminating.Aswewillshortlysee,weSapienshavegoodreasonstorepressthememoryofoursiblings.

TheCostofThinkingDespite their many differences, all human species share several defining

characteristics. Most notably, humans have extraordinarily large brainscomparedtootheranimals.Mammalsweighingsixtykilogramshaveanaveragebrain size of 200 cubic centimetres.The earliestmen andwomen, 2.5millionyears ago, hadbrains of about 600 cubic centimetres.ModernSapiens sport abrain averaging 1,200–1,400 cubic centimetres. Neanderthal brains were evenbigger.

Thatevolutionshouldselectforlargerbrainsmayseemtouslike,well,ano-brainer.Wearesoenamouredofourhighintelligencethatweassumethatwhenitcomes tocerebralpower,moremustbebetter.But if thatwere thecase, thefeline family would also have produced cats who could do calculus. Why isgenusHomo theonlyone in theentire animalkingdom tohavecomeupwithsuchmassivethinkingmachines?

Thefactisthatajumbobrainisajumbodrainonthebody.It’snoteasytocarryaround,especiallywhenencasedinsideamassiveskull.It’sevenhardertofuel. InHomosapiens, thebrainaccounts forabout2–3percentof totalbodyweight,but it consumes25per centof thebody’s energywhen thebody is atrest.Bycomparison,thebrainsofotherapesrequireonly8percentofrest-timeenergy. Archaic humans paid for their large brains in twoways. Firstly, theyspentmore time in search of food. Secondly, their muscles atrophied. Like agovernmentdivertingmoneyfromdefencetoeducation,humansdivertedenergy

from biceps to neurons. It’s hardly a foregone conclusion that this is a goodstrategyforsurvivalonthesavannah.Achimpanzeecan’twinanargumentwithaHomosapiens,buttheapecanripthemanapartlikearagdoll.

Todayourbigbrainspayoffnicely,becausewecanproducecarsandgunsthat enable us tomovemuch faster than chimps, and shoot them from a safedistance insteadofwrestling.Butcarsandgunsarea recentphenomenon.Formore than2millionyears,humanneuralnetworkskeptgrowingandgrowing,butapartfromsomeflintknivesandpointedsticks,humanshadpreciouslittletoshowforit.Whatthendroveforwardtheevolutionofthemassivehumanbrainduringthose2millionyears?Frankly,wedon’tknow.

Anothersingularhumantrait is thatwewalkuprightontwolegs.Standingup, it’s easier to scan the savannah for game or enemies, and arms that areunnecessaryforlocomotionarefreedforotherpurposes,likethrowingstonesorsignalling. The more things these hands could do, the more successful theirownerswere,soevolutionarypressurebroughtaboutanincreasingconcentrationofnervesandfinelytunedmusclesinthepalmsandfingers.Asaresult,humanscanperformveryintricatetaskswiththeirhands.Inparticular,theycanproduceand use sophisticated tools. The first evidence for tool production dates fromabout2.5millionyearsago,andthemanufactureanduseoftoolsarethecriteriabywhicharchaeologistsrecogniseancienthumans.

Yetwalkinguprighthasitsdownside.Theskeletonofourprimateancestorsdevelopedformillionsofyearstosupportacreaturethatwalkedonallfoursandhad a relatively small head. Adjusting to an upright position was quite achallenge,especiallywhenthescaffoldinghadtosupportanextra-largecranium.Humankindpaid for its loftyvisionand industrioushandswithbackaches andstiffnecks.

Womenpaidextra.Anuprightgait requirednarrowerhips,constricting thebirth canal– and this justwhenbabies’headsweregettingbigger andbigger.Death in childbirth became a major hazard for human females. Women whogavebirthearlier,whentheinfantsbrainandheadwerestillrelativelysmallandsupple, fared better and lived to have more children. Natural selectionconsequently favoured earlier births.And, indeed, compared to other animals,humansarebornprematurely,whenmanyoftheirvitalsystemsarestillunder-developed.Acoltcantrotshortlyafterbirth;akittenleavesitsmothertoforageon its own when it is just a few weeks old. Human babies are helpless,dependent for many years on their elders for sustenance, protection andeducation.

This fact has contributed greatly both to humankind’s extraordinary socialabilities and to its unique social problems. Lonemothers could hardly forage

enough food for their offspring and themselves with needy children in tow.Raising children required constant help from other family members andneighbours. It takes a tribe to raise a human. Evolution thus favoured thosecapable of forming strong social ties. In addition, since humans are bornunderdeveloped,theycanbeeducatedandsocialisedtoafargreaterextentthanany other animal. Most mammals emerge from the womb like glazedearthenwareemerging fromakiln– anyattempt at remouldingwill scratchorbreak them.Humansemergefromthewomblikemoltenglassfromafurnace.They can be spun, stretched and shapedwith a surprising degree of freedom.ThisiswhytodaywecaneducateourchildrentobecomeChristianorBuddhist,capitalistorsocialist,warlikeorpeace-loving.

*

Weassumethatalargebrain,theuseoftools,superiorlearningabilitiesandcomplex social structuresarehugeadvantages. It seems self-evident that thesehavemadehumankindthemostpowerfulanimalonearth.Buthumansenjoyedall of these advantages for a full 2million years duringwhich they remainedweak and marginal creatures. Thus humans who lived a million years ago,despitetheirbigbrainsandsharpstonetools,dweltinconstantfearofpredators,rarelyhuntedlargegame,andsubsistedmainlybygatheringplants,scoopingupinsects,stalkingsmallanimals,andeatingthecarrionleftbehindbyothermorepowerfulcarnivores.

Oneofthemostcommonusesofearlystonetoolswastocrackopenbonesin order to get to themarrow. Some researchers believe thiswas our originalniche. Just as woodpeckers specialise in extracting insects from the trunks oftrees, the first humans specialised in extracting marrow from bones. Whymarrow?Well, suppose you observe a pride of lions take down and devour agiraffe.Youwaitpatientlyuntilthey’redone.Butit’sstillnotyourturnbecausefirst thehyenasand jackals–andyoudon’tdare interferewith themscavengethe leftovers. Only thenwould you and your band dare approach the carcass,lookcautiouslyleftandright–anddigintotheedibletissuethatremained.

This is akey tounderstandingourhistory andpsychology.GenusHomo’sposition in the food chainwas, until quite recently, solidly in themiddle. Formillions of years, humans hunted smaller creatures and gathered what theycould,allthewhilebeinghuntedbylargerpredators.Itwasonly400,000yearsagothatseveralspeciesofmanbegantohuntlargegameonaregularbasis,andonlyinthelast100,000years–withtheriseofHomosapiens–thatmanjumpedtothetopofthefoodchain.

That spectacular leap from the middle to the top had enormousconsequences.Otheranimalsatthetopofthepyramid,suchaslionsandsharks,evolved into that positionverygradually, overmillionsof years.This enabledtheecosystemtodevelopchecksandbalancesthatpreventlionsandsharksfromwreakingtoomuchhavoc.Aslionsbecamedeadlier,sogazellesevolvedtorunfaster,hyenastocooperatebetter,andrhinocerosestobemorebad-tempered.Incontrast,humankindascendedtothetopsoquicklythattheecosystemwasnotgiven time to adjust.Moreover, humans themselves failed to adjust.Most toppredators of the planet are majestic creatures. Millions of years of dominionhavefilledthemwithself-confidence.Sapiensbycontrastismorelikeabananarepublicdictator.Havingsorecentlybeenoneoftheunderdogsofthesavannah,wearefulloffearsandanxietiesoverourposition,whichmakesusdoublycrueland dangerous. Many historical calamities, from deadly wars to ecologicalcatastrophes,haveresultedfromthisover-hastyjump.

ARaceofCooksAsignificantsteponthewaytothetopwasthedomesticationoffire.Some

humanspeciesmayhavemadeoccasionaluseoffireasearlyas800,000yearsago. By about 300,000 years ago, Homo erectus, Neanderthals and theforefathersofHomosapienswereusingfireonadailybasis.Humansnowhadadependablesourceof lightandwarmth,andadeadlyweaponagainstprowlinglions.Notlongafterwards,humansmayevenhavestarteddeliberatelytotorchtheir neighbourhoods. A carefully managed fire could turn impassable barrenthicketsintoprimegrasslandsteemingwithgame.Inaddition,oncethefiredieddown, StoneAge entrepreneurs couldwalk through the smoking remains andharvestcharcoaledanimals,nutsandtubers.

Butthebestthingfiredidwascook.Foodsthathumanscannotdigestintheirnatural forms – such aswheat, rice and potatoes – became staples of our dietthankstocooking.Firenotonlychangedfood’schemistry,itchangeditsbiologyaswell.Cookingkilledgermsandparasitesthatinfestedfood.Humansalsohadafareasiertimechewinganddigestingoldfavouritessuchasfruits,nuts,insectsandcarrion if theywerecooked.Whereaschimpanzeesspendfivehoursadaychewingrawfood,asinglehoursufficesforpeopleeatingcookedfood.

Theadventofcookingenabledhumanstoeatmorekindsoffood,todevoteless time to eating, and to make do with smaller teeth and shorter intestines.Somescholarsbelievethereisadirectlinkbetweentheadventofcooking,theshortening of the human intestinal track, and the growth of the human brain.Since long intestines and largebrains arebothmassive energy consumers, it’s

hard to have both. By shortening the intestines and decreasing their energyconsumption, cooking inadvertently opened the way to the jumbo brains ofNeanderthalsandSapiens.1

Firealsoopenedthefirstsignificantgulfbetweenmanandtheotheranimals.Thepowerofalmostall animalsdependson theirbodies: the strengthof theirmuscles, the size of their teeth, the breadth of their wings. Though theymayharnesswindsandcurrents,theyareunabletocontrolthesenaturalforces,andare always constrained by their physical design. Eagles, for example, identifythermalcolumnsrisingfromtheground,spreadtheirgiantwingsandallowthehot air to lift them upwards. Yet eagles cannot control the location of thecolumns, and theirmaximum carrying capacity is strictly proportional to theirwingspan.

When humans domesticated fire, they gained control of an obedient andpotentiallylimitlessforce.Unlikeeagles,humanscouldchoosewhenandwhereto ignite a flame, and theywere able to exploit fire for any number of tasks.Most importantly, the power of firewas not limited by the form, structure orstrengthofthehumanbody.Asinglewomanwithaflintorfirestickcouldburndownanentireforestinamatterofhours.Thedomesticationoffirewasasignofthingstocome.

OurBrothers’KeepersDespite the benefits of fire, 150,000years agohumanswere stillmarginal

creatures. They could now scare away lions, warm themselves during coldnights,andburndown theoccasional forest.Yetcountingall species together,there were still no more than perhaps a million humans living between theIndonesianarchipelagoandtheIberianpeninsula,amereblipontheecologicalradar.

Ourownspecies,Homosapiens,wasalreadypresentontheworldstage,butsofaritwasjustmindingitsownbusinessinacornerofAfrica.Wedon’tknowexactly where andwhen animals that can be classified asHomo sapiens firstevolved from some earlier type of humans, but most scientists agree that by150,000yearsago,EastAfricawaspopulatedbySapiensthatlookedjustlikeus.Ifoneofthemturnedupinamodernmorgue,thelocalpathologistwouldnoticenothingpeculiar.Thankstotheblessingsoffire,theyhadsmallerteethandjawsthantheirancestors,whereastheyhadmassivebrains,equalinsizetoours.

Scientistsalsoagreethatabout70,000yearsago,SapiensfromEastAfricaspreadintotheArabianpeninsula,andfromtheretheyquicklyoverrantheentireEurasianlandmass.

WhenHomosapiens landed inArabia,mostofEurasiawasalreadysettledbyotherhumans.Whathappened to them?There are twoconflicting theories.The‘InterbreedingTheory’tellsastoryofattraction,sexandmingling.AstheAfrican immigrants spread around the world, they bred with other humanpopulations,andpeopletodayaretheoutcomeofthisinterbreeding.

For example, when Sapiens reached the Middle East and Europe, theyencounteredtheNeanderthals.ThesehumansweremoremuscularthanSapiens,had largerbrains,andwerebetteradapted tocoldclimes.Theyused toolsandfire, were good hunters, and apparently took care of their sick and infirm.(ArchaeologistshavediscoveredthebonesofNeanderthalswholivedformanyyearswithseverephysicalhandicaps,evidencethattheywerecaredforbytheirrelatives.) Neanderthals are often depicted in caricatures as the archetypicalbrutishandstupid‘cavepeople’,butrecentevidencehaschangedtheirimage.

According to the Interbreeding Theory, when Sapiens spread intoNeanderthal lands, Sapiens bred with Neanderthals until the two populationsmerged.Ifthisisthecase,thentoday’sEurasiansarenotpureSapiens.Theyareamixture of Sapiens andNeanderthals. Similarly,when Sapiens reachedEastAsia, they interbredwith the local Erectus, so theChinese andKoreans are amixtureofSapiensandErectus.

The opposing view, called the ‘ReplacementTheory’ tells a very differentstory–oneofincompatibility,revulsion,andperhapsevengenocide.Accordingto this theory, Sapiens and other humans had different anatomies, and mostlikelydifferentmatinghabitsandevenbodyodours.Theywouldhavehadlittlesexualinterestinoneanother.AndevenifaNeanderthalRomeoandaSapiensJuliet fell in love, they could not produce fertile children, because the geneticgulf separating the two populations was already unbridgeable. The twopopulationsremainedcompletelydistinct,andwhentheNeanderthalsdiedout,orwerekilledoff, theirgenesdiedwiththem.Accordingtothisview,Sapiensreplacedalltheprevioushumanpopulationswithoutmergingwiththem.Ifthatis the case, the lineages of all contemporary humans can be traced back,exclusively,toEastAfrica,70,000yearsago.Weareall‘pureSapiens’.

Map1.Homosapiensconquerstheglobe.

Alothingesonthisdebate.Fromanevolutionaryperspective,70,000yearsis a relatively short interval. If the Replacement Theory is correct, all livinghumanshave roughly the samegeneticbaggage, and racialdistinctionsamongthemarenegligible.ButiftheInterbreedingTheoryisright,theremightwellbegenetic differences between Africans, Europeans and Asians that go backhundredsofthousandsofyears.Thisispoliticaldynamite,whichcouldprovidematerialforexplosiveracialtheories.

InrecentdecadestheReplacementTheoryhasbeenthecommonwisdominthefield.Ithadfirmerarchaeologicalbacking,andwasmorepoliticallycorrect(scientists had no desire to open up the Pandora’s box of racism by claimingsignificantgeneticdiversityamongmodernhumanpopulations).Butthatendedin2010,whentheresultsofafour-yeareffort tomaptheNeanderthalgenomewerepublished.GeneticistswereabletocollectenoughintactNeanderthalDNAfrom fossils to make a broad comparison between it and the DNA ofcontemporaryhumans.Theresultsstunnedthescientificcommunity.

It turned out that 1–4 per cent of the unique human DNA of modernpopulations in theMiddleEast andEurope isNeanderthalDNA.That’s not ahuge amount, but it’s significant. A second shock came severalmonths later,whenDNAextractedfromthefossilisedfingerfromDenisovawasmapped.Theresults proved that up to 6 per cent of the unique human DNA of modernMelanesiansandAboriginalAustraliansisDenisovanDNA.

If these results are valid – and it’s important to keep inmind that further

researchisunderwayandmayeitherreinforceormodifytheseconclusions–theInterbreeders got at least some things right. But that doesn’t mean that theReplacementTheory iscompletelywrong.SinceNeanderthalsandDenisovanscontributed only a small amount of DNA to our present-day genome, it isimpossible to speak of a ‘merger’ between Sapiens and other human species.Althoughdifferencesbetweenthemwerenotlargeenoughtocompletelypreventfertileintercourse,theyweresufficienttomakesuchcontactsveryrare.

How then should we understand the biological relatedness of Sapiens,Neanderthals and Denisovans? Clearly, they were not completely differentspecieslikehorsesanddonkeys.Ontheotherhand,theywerenotjustdifferentpopulationsofthesamespecies,likebulldogsandspaniels.Biologicalrealityisnotblackandwhite.Therearealsoimportantgreyareas.Everytwospeciesthatevolvedfromacommonancestor,suchashorsesanddonkeys,wereatonetimejusttwopopulationsofthesamespecies,likebulldogsandspaniels.Theremusthavebeenapointwhen the twopopulationswerealreadyquitedifferent fromone another, but still capable on rare occasions of having sex and producingfertileoffspring.Thenanothermutationseveredthislastconnectingthread,andtheywenttheirseparateevolutionaryways.

Itseemsthatabout50,000yearsago,Sapiens,NeanderthalsandDenisovanswereatthatborderlinepoint.Theywerealmost,butnotquite,entirelyseparatespecies.Asweshallseeinthenextchapter,SapienswerealreadyverydifferentfromNeanderthalsandDenisovansnotonly in theirgeneticcodeandphysicaltraits,butalsointheircognitiveandsocialabilities,yetitappearsitwasstilljustpossible,onrareoccasions,foraSapiensandaNeanderthaltoproduceafertileoffspring.Sothepopulationsdidnotmerge,butafewluckyNeanderthalgenesdidhitcharideontheSapiensExpress.Itisunsettling–andperhapsthrilling–to think that we Sapiens could at one time have sex with an animal from adifferentspecies,andproducechildrentogether.

3.AspeculativereconstructionofaNeanderthalchild.GeneticevidencehintsthatatleastsomeNeanderthalsmayhavehadfairskinandhair.

But if theNeanderthals,Denisovansandotherhumanspeciesdidn’tmergewithSapiens,whydidtheyvanish?OnepossibilityisthatHomosapiensdrovethem to extinction. Imagine a Sapiens band reaching a Balkan valley whereNeanderthals had lived for hundreds of thousands of years. The newcomersbegan to hunt the deer and gather the nuts and berries that were theNeanderthals’ traditional staples. Sapiens were more proficient hunters andgatherers – thanks to better technology and superior social skills – so theymultiplied and spread.The less resourcefulNeanderthals found it increasinglydifficulttofeedthemselves.Theirpopulationdwindledandtheyslowlydiedout,exceptperhapsforoneortwomemberswhojoinedtheirSapiensneighbours.

Anotherpossibilityis thatcompetitionforresourcesflaredupintoviolenceandgenocide.Tolerance is not aSapiens trademark. Inmodern times, a smalldifference in skin colour, dialect or religion has been enough to prompt onegroup of Sapiens to set about exterminating another group. Would ancientSapienshavebeenmoretoleranttowardsanentirelydifferenthumanspecies?ItmaywellbethatwhenSapiensencounteredNeanderthals,theresultwasthefirstandmostsignificantethnic-cleansingcampaigninhistory.

Whicheverwayithappened,theNeanderthals(andtheotherhumanspecies)poseoneofhistory’sgreatwhatifs.Imaginehowthingsmighthaveturnedouthad the Neanderthals or Denisovans survived alongsideHomo sapiens. Whatkindofcultures,societiesandpoliticalstructureswouldhaveemergedinaworld

where several different human species coexisted? How, for example, wouldreligious faiths haveunfolded?Would the bookofGenesis havedeclared thatNeanderthalsdescendfromAdamandEve,wouldJesushavediedforthesinsofthe Denisovans, and would the Qur’an have reserved seats in heaven for allrighteoushumans,whatever theirspecies?WouldNeanderthalshavebeenableto serve in the Roman legions, or in the sprawling bureaucracy of imperialChina?WouldtheAmericanDeclarationofIndependenceholdasaself-evidenttruththatallmembersofthegenusHomoarecreatedequal?WouldKarlMarxhaveurgedworkersofallspeciestounite?

Overthepast10,000years,Homosapienshasgrownsoaccustomedtobeingtheonlyhumanspeciesthatit’shardforustoconceiveofanyotherpossibility.Our lack of brothers and sisters makes it easier to imagine that we are theepitomeofcreation, and that a chasmseparatesus from the restof theanimalkingdom.WhenCharlesDarwin indicated thatHomosapienswas just anotherkindofanimal,peoplewereoutraged.Eventodaymanyrefusetobelieveit.Hadthe Neanderthals survived, would we still imagine ourselves to be a creatureapart? Perhaps this is exactly why our ancestors wiped out the Neanderthals.Theyweretoofamiliartoignore,buttoodifferenttotolerate.

WhetherSapiens are toblameornot, no soonerhad theyarrivedat anewlocation than the native population became extinct.The last remains ofHomosoloensis are dated to about 50,000 years ago. Homo denisova disappearedshortly thereafter.Neanderthalsmade their exit roughly30,000years ago.Thelast dwarf-like humans vanished from Flores Island about 12,000 years ago.Theyleftbehindsomebones,stonetools,afewgenesinourDNAandalotofunansweredquestions.Theyalso leftbehindus,Homosapiens, the lasthumanspecies.

Whatwas theSapiens’ secretof success?Howdidwemanage to settle sorapidlyinsomanydistantandecologicallydifferenthabitats?Howdidwepushall other human species into oblivion?Why couldn’t even the strong, brainy,cold-proofNeanderthals survive our onslaught? The debate continues to rage.Themostlikelyansweristheverythingthatmakesthedebatepossible:Homosapiensconqueredtheworldthanksabovealltoitsuniquelanguage.

2

TheTreeofKnowledge

IN THE PREVIOUS CHAPTERWE SAW THAT although Sapiens hadalreadypopulatedEastAfrica150,000yearsago,theybegantooverruntherestof planet Earth and drive the other human species to extinction only about70,000 years ago. In the intervening millennia, even though these archaicSapiens looked just like us and their brainswere as big as ours, they did notenjoy any marked advantage over other human species, did not produceparticularlysophisticatedtools,anddidnotaccomplishanyotherspecialfeats.

In fact, in the first recorded encounter between Sapiens andNeanderthals,theNeanderthalswon.About100,000yearsago,someSapiensgroupsmigratednorthtotheLevant,whichwasNeanderthalterritory,butfailedtosecureafirmfooting. It might have been due to nasty natives, an inclement climate, orunfamiliarlocalparasites.Whateverthereason,theSapienseventuallyretreated,leavingtheNeanderthalsasmastersoftheMiddleEast.

This poor record of achievement has led scholars to speculate that theinternal structure of the brains of these Sapiens was probably different fromours.Theylookedlikeus,buttheircognitiveabilities–learning,remembering,communicating – were far more limited. Teaching such an ancient SapiensEnglish, persuading him of the truth of Christian dogma, or getting him tounderstand the theory of evolution would probably have been hopelessundertakings. Conversely, we would have had a very hard time learning hislanguageandunderstandinghiswayofthinking.

But then, beginning about 70,000 years ago,Homo sapiens started doingveryspecialthings.AroundthatdateSapiensbandsleftAfricaforasecondtime.ThistimetheydrovetheNeanderthalsandallotherhumanspeciesnotonlyfromthe Middle East, but from the face of the earth. Within a remarkably shortperiod, Sapiens reached Europe and East Asia. About 45,000 years ago, theysomehow crossed the open sea and landed in Australia – a continent hitherto

untouchedbyhumans.Theperiodfromabout70,000yearsagotoabout30,000years ago witnessed the invention of boats, oil lamps, bows and arrows andneedles(essentialforsewingwarmclothing).Thefirstobjectsthatcanreliablybecalledartdatefromthisera(seetheStadellion-manonthispage),asdoesthefirstclearevidenceforreligion,commerceandsocialstratification.

Mostresearchersbelievethattheseunprecedentedaccomplishmentsweretheproduct of a revolution in Sapiens’ cognitive abilities. Theymaintain that thepeoplewhodrove theNeanderthals toextinction, settledAustralia, andcarvedtheStadel lion-manwereas intelligent,creativeandsensitiveasweare. IfweweretocomeacrosstheartistsoftheStadelCave,wecouldlearntheirlanguageandtheyours.We’dbeabletoexplaintothemeverythingweknow–fromtheadventuresofAlice inWonderlandto theparadoxesofquantumphysics–andtheycouldteachushowtheirpeopleviewtheworld.

The appearance of new ways of thinking and communicating, between70,000and30,000yearsago,constitutestheCognitiveRevolution.Whatcausedit?We’renotsure.Themostcommonlybelieved theoryargues thataccidentalgeneticmutations changed the innerwiring of the brains of Sapiens, enablingthem to think in unprecedentedways and to communicate using an altogethernewtypeof language.Wemightcall it theTreeofKnowledgemutation.WhydiditoccurinSapiensDNAratherthaninthatofNeanderthals?Itwasamatterofpurechance,asfaraswecantell.Butit’smoreimportanttounderstandtheconsequencesoftheTreeofKnowledgemutationthanitscauses.WhatwassospecialaboutthenewSapienslanguagethatitenabledustoconquertheworld?*

Itwasnotthefirstlanguage.Everyanimalhassomekindoflanguage.Eveninsects,suchasbeesandants,knowhowtocommunicateinsophisticatedways,informingoneanotherofthewhereaboutsoffood.Neitherwasitthefirstvocallanguage. Many animals, including all ape and monkey species, have vocallanguages. For example, green monkeys use calls of various kinds tocommunicate. Zoologists have identified one call that means, ‘Careful! Aneagle!’ A slightly different call warns, ‘Careful! A lion!’ When researchersplayedarecordingofthefirstcalltoagroupofmonkeys,themonkeysstoppedwhattheyweredoingandlookedupwardsinfear.Whenthesamegroupheardarecordingofthesecondcall,thelionwarning,theyquicklyscrambledupatree.Sapienscanproducemanymoredistinctsoundsthangreenmonkeys,butwhalesandelephantshaveequallyimpressiveabilities.AparrotcansayanythingAlbertEinstein could say, aswell asmimicking the sounds of phones ringing, doorsslammingandsirenswailing.WhateveradvantageEinsteinhadoveraparrot,itwasn’tvocal.What,then,issospecialaboutourlanguage?

Themostcommonansweristhatourlanguageisamazinglysupple.Wecan

connectalimitednumberofsoundsandsignstoproduceaninfinitenumberofsentences, each with a distinct meaning. We can thereby ingest, store andcommunicateaprodigiousamountofinformationaboutthesurroundingworld.A green monkey can yell to its comrades, ‘Careful! A lion!’ But a modernhumancantellherfriendsthatthismorning,nearthebendintheriver,shesawaliontrackingaherdofbison.Shecanthendescribetheexactlocation,includingthedifferentpathsleadingtothearea.Withthisinformation,themembersofherbandcanputtheirheadstogetheranddiscusswhethertheyoughttoapproachtheriverinordertochaseawaythelionandhuntthebison.

A second theory agrees that our unique language evolved as a means ofsharing information about the world. But themost important information thatneeded to be conveyed was about humans, not about lions and bison. Ourlanguageevolvedasawayofgossiping.AccordingtothistheoryHomosapiensis primarily a social animal. Social cooperation is our key for survival andreproduction. It is not enough for individual men and women to know thewhereaboutsoflionsandbison.It’smuchmoreimportantforthemtoknowwhointheirbandhateswhom,whoissleepingwithwhom,whoishonest,andwhoisacheat.

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

Theamountof informationthatonemustobtainandstore inorder to trackthe ever-changing relationships of a fewdozen individuals is staggering. (In abandoffiftyindividuals,thereare1,225one-on-onerelationships,andcountlessmorecomplexsocialcombinations.)Allapesshowakeeninterestinsuchsocialinformation, but they have trouble gossiping effectively. Neanderthals and

archaicHomosapiensprobablyalsohadahardtimetalkingbehindeachother’sbacks – amuchmaligned abilitywhich is in fact essential for cooperation inlarge numbers. The new linguistic skills that modern Sapiens acquired aboutseventy millennia ago enabled them to gossip for hours on end. Reliableinformation aboutwho could be trustedmeant that small bands could expandinto larger bands, and Sapiens could develop tighter and more sophisticatedtypesofcooperation.1

Thegossiptheorymightsoundlikeajoke,butnumerousstudiessupportit.Eventodaythevastmajorityofhumancommunication–whetherintheformofemails,phonecallsornewspapercolumns–isgossip.Itcomessonaturallytousthatitseemsasifourlanguageevolvedforthisverypurpose.DoyouthinkthathistoryprofessorschataboutthereasonsforWorldWarOnewhentheymeetforlunch, or that nuclear physicists spend their coffee breaks at scientificconferencestalkingaboutquarks?Sometimes.Butmoreoften,theygossipabouttheprofessorwhocaughtherhusbandcheating,orthequarrelbetweentheheadofthedepartmentandthedean,ortherumoursthatacolleagueusedhisresearchfundstobuyaLexus.Gossipusuallyfocusesonwrongdoings.Rumour-mongersare the original fourth estate, journalists who inform society about and thusprotectitfromcheatsandfreeloaders.

Most likely, both the gossip theory and the there-is-a-lion-near-the-rivertheoryarevalid.Yetthetrulyuniquefeatureofourlanguageisnotitsabilitytotransmit information about men and lions. Rather, it’s the ability to transmitinformationaboutthingsthatdonotexistatall.Asfarasweknow,onlySapienscan talk about entire kinds of entities that they have never seen, touched orsmelled.

Legends, myths, gods and religions appeared for the first time with theCognitiveRevolution.Manyanimals andhuman species couldpreviously say,‘Careful!Alion!’ThankstotheCognitiveRevolution,Homosapiensacquiredthe ability to say, ‘The lion is the guardian spirit of our tribe.’This ability tospeakaboutfictionsisthemostuniquefeatureofSapienslanguage.

It’srelativelyeasytoagree thatonlyHomosapienscanspeakabout thingsthatdon’t reallyexist, andbelieve six impossible thingsbeforebreakfast.Youcouldneverconvinceamonkeytogiveyouabananabypromisinghimlimitlessbananasafterdeathinmonkeyheaven.Butwhyisitimportant?Afterall,fictioncan be dangerously misleading or distracting. People who go to the forestlookingforfairiesandunicornswouldseemtohavelesschanceofsurvivalthanpeoplewhogolookingformushroomsanddeer.Andifyouspendhoursprayingto non-existing guardian spirits, aren’t youwasting precious time, time better

spentforaging,fightingandfornicating?But fiction has enabled us not merely to imagine things, but to do so

collectively.Wecanweavecommonmyths suchas thebiblical creation story,the Dreamtime myths of Aboriginal Australians, and the nationalist myths ofmodernstates.SuchmythsgiveSapienstheunprecedentedabilitytocooperateflexibly in large numbers. Ants and bees can also work together in hugenumbers, but they do so in a very rigidmanner and onlywith close relatives.Wolvesandchimpanzeescooperatefarmoreflexiblythanants,buttheycandoso only with small numbers of other individuals that they know intimately.Sapiens can cooperate in extremely flexible ways with countless numbers ofstrangers.That’swhySapiensruletheworld,whereasantseatourleftoversandchimpsarelockedupinzoosandresearchlaboratories.

TheLegendofPeugeotOur chimpanzee cousins usually live in small troops of several dozen

individuals. They form close friendships, hunt together and fight shoulder toshoulder against baboons, cheetahs and enemy chimpanzees. Their socialstructuretendstobehierarchical.Thedominantmember,whoisalmostalwaysamale, is termed the ‘alpha male’. Other males and females exhibit theirsubmission to the alpha male by bowing before him while making gruntingsounds, not unlike human subjects kowtowing before a king. The alphamalestrivestomaintainsocialharmonywithinhistroop.Whentwoindividualsfight,hewillinterveneandstoptheviolence.Lessbenevolently,hemightmonopoliseparticularly coveted foods and prevent lower-rankingmales frommatingwiththefemales.

When twomales are contesting the alpha position, they usually do so byformingextensive coalitionsof supporters, bothmale and female, fromwithinthegroup.Tiesbetweencoalitionmembersarebasedonintimatedailycontact–hugging, touching, kissing, grooming and mutual favours. Just as humanpoliticiansonelectioncampaignsgoaroundshakinghandsandkissingbabies,soaspirantstothetoppositioninachimpanzeegroupspendmuchtimehugging,back-slapping and kissing baby chimps. The alpha male usually wins hispositionnotbecauseheisphysicallystronger,butbecauseheleadsalargeandstable coalition. These coalitions play a central part not only during overtstrugglesforthealphaposition,butinalmostallday-to-dayactivities.Membersof a coalition spendmore time together, share food, and help one another intimesoftrouble.

Thereareclearlimitstothesizeofgroupsthatcanbeformedandmaintained

in such away. In order to function, allmembers of a groupmust know eachotherintimately.Twochimpanzeeswhohavenevermet,neverfought,andneverengagedinmutualgroomingwillnotknowwhethertheycantrustoneanother,whether itwouldbeworthwhile tohelponeanother,andwhichof themrankshigher.Undernatural conditions, a typical chimpanzee troopconsistsof abouttwentytofiftyindividuals.Asthenumberofchimpanzeesinatroopincreases,thesocialorderdestabilises,eventuallyleadingtoaruptureandtheformationofanewtroopbysomeoftheanimals.Onlyinahandfulofcaseshavezoologistsobservedgroups larger thanahundred.Separategroupsseldomcooperate,andtendtocompeteforterritoryandfood.Researchershavedocumentedprolongedwarfarebetweengroups,andevenonecaseof‘genocidal’activityinwhichonetroopsystematicallyslaughteredmostmembersofaneighbouringband.2

Similar patterns probably dominated the social lives of early humans,includingarchaicHomosapiens.Humans,likechimps,havesocialinstinctsthatenabledourancestors to form friendshipsandhierarchies, and tohuntor fighttogether. However, like the social instincts of chimps, those of humans wereadaptedonlyforsmallintimategroups.Whenthegroupgrewtoolarge,itssocialorderdestabilisedand thebandsplit.Even ifaparticularly fertilevalleycouldfeed500 archaicSapiens, therewasnoway that somany strangers could livetogether.Howcouldtheyagreewhoshouldbeleader,whoshouldhuntwhere,orwhoshouldmatewithwhom?

In the wake of the Cognitive Revolution, gossip helpedHomo sapiens toformlargerandmorestablebands.Butevengossiphas its limits.Sociologicalresearchhasshownthatthemaximum‘natural’sizeofagroupbondedbygossipis about 150 individuals.Most people canneither intimatelyknow,norgossipeffectivelyabout,morethan150humanbeings.

Even today, a critical threshold in human organisations falls somewherearoundthismagicnumber.Belowthisthreshold,communities,businesses,socialnetworksandmilitaryunitscanmaintain themselvesbasedmainlyon intimateacquaintance and rumour-mongering. There is no need for formal ranks, titlesandlawbookstokeeporder.3Aplatoonofthirtysoldiersorevenacompanyofa hundred soldiers can functionwell on the basis of intimate relations,with aminimumof formaldiscipline.Awell-respected sergeant canbecome ‘kingofthecompanyandexerciseauthorityevenovercommissionedofficers.A smallfamilybusinesscansurviveandflourishwithoutaboardofdirectors,aCEOoranaccountingdepartment.

But once the threshold of 150 individuals is crossed, things can no longerwork thatway.Youcannot runadivisionwith thousandsof soldiers thesame

wayyourunaplatoon.Successfulfamilybusinessesusuallyfaceacrisiswhentheygrow larger andhiremore personnel. If they cannot reinvent themselves,theygobust.

How didHomo sapiensmanage to cross this critical threshold, eventuallyfoundingcitiescomprising tensof thousandsof inhabitantsandempires rulinghundredsofmillions?Thesecretwasprobablytheappearanceoffiction.Largenumbersofstrangerscancooperatesuccessfullybybelievingincommonmyths.

Any large-scale human cooperation – whether amodern state, amedievalchurch,anancientcityoranarchaictribe–isrootedincommonmythsthatexistonlyinpeoplescollectiveimagination.Churchesarerootedincommonreligiousmyths. Two Catholics who have never met can nevertheless go together oncrusadeorpoolfundstobuildahospitalbecausetheybothbelievethatGodwasincarnated in human flesh and allowedHimself to be crucified to redeem oursins.States are rooted in commonnationalmyths.TwoSerbswhohavenevermet might risk their lives to save one another because both believe in theexistence of the Serbian nation, the Serbian homeland and the Serbian flag.Judicial systems are rooted in common legal myths. Two lawyers who havenever met can nevertheless combine efforts to defend a complete strangerbecause theybothbelieve in theexistenceof laws, justice,humanrights–andthemoneypaidoutinfees.

Yetnoneofthesethingsexistsoutsidethestoriesthatpeopleinventandtelloneanother.Therearenogodsintheuniverse,nonations,nomoney,nohumanrights,nolaws,andnojusticeoutsidethecommonimaginationofhumanbeings.

People easily understand that ‘primitives’ cement their social order bybelieving inghostsandspirits,andgatheringeachfullmoon todance togetheraroundthecampfire.Whatwefail toappreciate is thatourmodern institutionsfunction on exactly the same basis. Take for example the world of businesscorporations. Modern business-people and lawyers are, in fact, powerfulsorcerers. The principal difference between them and tribal shamans is thatmodernlawyerstellfarstrangertales.ThelegendofPeugeotaffordsusagoodexample.

AniconthatsomewhatresemblestheStadellion-manappearstodayoncars,trucksandmotorcyclesfromParistoSydney.It’sthehoodornamentthatadornsvehiclesmadebyPeugeot,oneoftheoldestandlargestofEurope’scarmakers.PeugeotbeganasasmallfamilybusinessinthevillageofValentigney,just300kilometres from the Stadel Cave. Today the company employs about 200,000peopleworldwide,most ofwhomare complete strangers to each other.Thesestrangerscooperatesoeffectivelythatin2008Peugeotproducedmorethan1.5

millionautomobiles,earningrevenuesofabout55billioneuros.Inwhat sense canwe say that Peugeot SA (the company’s official name)

exists? There are many Peugeot vehicles, but these are obviously not thecompany.Even ifeveryPeugeot in theworldweresimultaneously junkedandsold for scrap metal, Peugeot SA would not disappear. It would continue tomanufacturenewcarsandissueitsannualreport.Thecompanyownsfactories,machineryandshowrooms,andemploysmechanics,accountantsandsecretaries,butallthesetogetherdonotcomprisePeugeot.AdisastermightkilleverysingleoneofPeugeot’semployees,andgoontodestroyallof itsassemblylinesandexecutive offices. Even then, the company could borrow money, hire newemployees,buildnewfactoriesandbuynewmachinery.Peugeothasmanagersandshareholders,butneitherdotheyconstitutethecompany.Allthemanagerscouldbedismissedandallitssharessold,butthecompanyitselfwouldremainintact.

5.ThePeugeotLion

Itdoesn’tmeanthatPeugeotSAisinvulnerableorimmortal.Ifajudgeweretomandatethedissolutionofthecompany,itsfactorieswouldremainstandinganditsworkers,accountants,managersandshareholderswouldcontinuetolive– but Peugeot SAwould immediately vanish. In short, Peugeot SA seems tohavenoessentialconnectiontothephysicalworld.Doesitreallyexist?

Peugeotisafigmentofourcollectiveimagination.Lawyerscallthisa‘legalfiction’.Itcan’tbepointedat;itisnotaphysicalobject.Butitexistsasalegalentity.Just likeyouorme, it isboundbythelawsof thecountries inwhichitoperates.Itcanopenabankaccountandownproperty.Itpaystaxes,anditcanbesuedandevenprosecutedseparatelyfromanyofthepeoplewhoownorworkforit.

Peugeotbelongstoaparticulargenreoflegalfictionscalled‘limitedliabilitycompanies’. The idea behind such companies is among humanity’s mostingenious inventions.Homo sapiens lived for untold millennia without them.Duringmost of recorded history property could be owned only by flesh-and-blood humans, the kind that stood on two legs and had big brains. If inthirteenth-century France Jean set up a wagon-manufacturing workshop, hehimself was the business. If a wagon he’d made broke down a week afterpurchase, the disgruntled buyerwould have sued Jean personally. If Jean hadborrowed 1,000 gold coins to set up hisworkshop and the business failed, hewouldhavehadtorepaytheloanbysellinghisprivateproperty–hishouse,hiscow,hisland.Hemightevenhavehadtosellhischildrenintoservitude.Ifhecouldn’tcoverthedebt,hecouldbethrowninprisonbythestateorenslavedbyhiscreditors.Hewas fully liable,without limit, forallobligations incurredbyhisworkshop.

Ifyouhad livedback then,youwouldprobablyhave thought twicebeforeyou opened an enterprise of your own. And indeed this legal situationdiscouraged entrepreneurship. People were afraid to start new businesses andtakeeconomicrisks.Ithardlyseemedworthtakingthechancethattheirfamiliescouldenduputterlydestitute.

This is why people began collectively to imagine the existence of limitedliabilitycompanies.Suchcompanieswerelegallyindependentofthepeoplewhoset themup, or investedmoney in them, ormanaged them.Over the last fewcenturiessuchcompanieshavebecomethemainplayersintheeconomicarena,and we have grown so used to them that we forget they exist only in ourimagination. In theUS, the technical term for a limited liability company is a‘corporation’,whichisironic,becausethetermderivesfrom‘corpus’(‘body’inLatin) – the one thing these corporations lack. Despite their having no realbodies,theAmericanlegalsystemtreatscorporationsaslegalpersons,asiftheywereflesh-and-bloodhumanbeings.

And so did theFrench legal systemback in 1896,whenArmandPeugeot,whohadinheritedfromhisparentsametalworkingshopthatproducedsprings,sawsandbicycles,decided togo into theautomobilebusiness.To thatend,hesetupa limitedliabilitycompany.Henamedthecompanyafterhimself,but itwas independent of him. If one of the cars broke down, the buyer could suePeugeot,butnotArmandPeugeot.If thecompanyborrowedmillionsoffrancsandthenwentbust,ArmandPeugeotdidnotoweitscreditorsasinglefranc.Theloan,afterall,hadbeengiventoPeugeot,thecompany,nottoArmandPeugeot,theHomosapiens.ArmandPeugeotdiedin1915.Peugeot,thecompany,isstillaliveandwell.

HowexactlydidArmandPeugeot,theman,createPeugeot,thecompany?Inmuch the sameway that priests and sorcerers have created gods and demonsthroughouthistory, and inwhich thousandsofFrenchcuréswerestillcreatingChrist’sbodyeverySundayintheparishchurches.Itallrevolvedaroundtellingstories,andconvincingpeopletobelievethem.InthecaseoftheFrenchcurés,the crucial story was that of Christ’s life and death as told by the CatholicChurch. According to this story, if a Catholic priest dressed in his sacredgarmentssolemnlysaidtherightwordsattherightmoment,mundanebreadandwine turned intoGod’s fleshandblood.Thepriestexclaimed ‘Hoc est corpusmeum!’(Latinfor‘Thisismybody!’)andhocuspocus–thebreadturnedintoChrist’s flesh.Seeing that thepriesthadproperlyandassiduouslyobservedallthe procedures,millions of devout FrenchCatholics behaved as if God reallyexistedintheconsecratedbreadandwine.

In the case of Peugeot SA the crucial storywas the French legal code, aswritten by the French parliament. According to the French legislators, if acertifiedlawyerfollowedalltheproperliturgyandrituals,wrotealltherequiredspells and oaths on a wonderfully decorated piece of paper, and affixed hisornate signature to the bottom of the document, then hocus pocus – a newcompanywasincorporated.Whenin1896ArmandPeugeotwantedtocreatehiscompany,hepaidalawyertogothroughallthesesacredprocedures.Oncethelawyerhadperformedalltherightritualsandpronouncedallthenecessaryspellsand oaths, millions of upright French citizens behaved as if the Peugeotcompanyreallyexisted.

Tellingeffectivestoriesisnoteasy.Thedifficultyliesnotintellingthestory,but inconvincingeveryoneelse tobelieve it.Muchofhistoryrevolvesaroundthis question: how does one convincemillions of people to believe particularstories about gods, or nations, or limited liability companies? Yet when itsucceeds, it gives Sapiens immense power, because it enables millions ofstrangerstocooperateandworktowardscommongoals.Justtrytoimaginehowdifficultitwouldhavebeentocreatestates,orchurches,orlegalsystemsifwecouldspeakonlyaboutthingsthatreallyexist,suchasrivers,treesandlions.

Overtheyears,peoplehavewovenanincrediblycomplexnetworkofstories.Withinthisnetwork,fictionssuchasPeugeotnotonlyexist,butalsoaccumulateimmensepower.Thekindsofthingsthatpeoplecreatethroughthisnetworkofstories are known in academic circles as ‘fictions’, ‘social constructs’, or‘imaginedrealities’.Animaginedrealityisnotalie.IliewhenIsaythatthereisalionneartheriverwhenIknowperfectlywellthatthereisnolionthere.Thereisnothingspecialaboutlies.Greenmonkeysandchimpanzeescanlie.Agreen

monkey, forexample,hasbeenobservedcalling ‘Careful!A lion!’when therewasnolionaround.Thisalarmconvenientlyfrightenedawayafellowmonkeywhohadjustfoundabanana,leavingtheliarallalonetostealtheprizeforitself.

Unlikelying,animaginedrealityissomethingthateveryonebelievesin,andaslongasthiscommunalbeliefpersists,theimaginedrealityexertsforceintheworld. The sculptor from the Stadel Cavemay sincerely have believed in theexistence of the lion-man guardian spirit. Some sorcerers are charlatans, butmost sincerelybelieve in theexistenceofgodsanddemons.Mostmillionairessincerelybelieveintheexistenceofmoneyandlimitedliabilitycompanies.Mosthuman-rightsactivistssincerelybelieveintheexistenceofhumanrights.Noonewaslyingwhen,in2011,theUNdemandedthattheLibyangovernmentrespectthehumanrightsofitscitizens,eventhoughtheUN,Libyaandhumanrightsareallfigmentsofourfertileimaginations.

EversincetheCognitiveRevolution,Sapienshasthusbeenlivinginadualreality.Ontheonehand, theobjectiverealityofrivers, treesandlions;andontheotherhand, theimaginedrealityofgods,nationsandcorporations.Astimewentby,theimaginedrealitybecameevermorepowerful,sothattodaytheverysurvivalofrivers,treesandlionsdependsonthegraceofimaginedentitiessuchasgods,nationsandcorporations.

BypassingtheGenomeTheabilitytocreateanimaginedrealityoutofwordsenabledlargenumbers

of strangers to cooperate effectively. But it also did something more. Sincelarge-scalehumancooperationisbasedonmyths,thewaypeoplecooperatecanbealteredbychanging themyths–by tellingdifferentstories.Under therightcircumstances myths can change rapidly. In 1789 the French populationswitchedalmostovernightfrombelievinginthemythofthedivinerightofkingsto believing in the myth of the sovereignty of the people. Consequently,eversince the Cognitive Revolution Homo sapiens has been able to revise itsbehaviourrapidlyinaccordancewithchangingneeds.Thisopenedafastlaneofcultural evolution, bypassing the traffic jams of genetic evolution. Speedingdown this fast lane,Homo sapiens soon far outstripped all other human andanimalspeciesinitsabilitytocooperate.

Thebehaviourofothersocialanimalsisdeterminedtoalargeextentbytheirgenes. DNA is not an autocrat. Animal behaviour is also influenced byenvironmental factors and individual quirks. Nevertheless, in a givenenvironment,animalsofthesamespecieswilltendtobehaveinasimilarway.Significantchangesinsocialbehaviourcannotoccur,ingeneral,withoutgenetic

mutations.Forexample,commonchimpanzeeshaveagenetic tendency to livein hierarchical groups headed by an alphamale.Members of a closely relatedchimpanzeespecies,bonobos,usuallyliveinmoreegalitariangroupsdominatedby female alliances. Female common chimpanzees cannot take lessons fromtheir bonobo relatives and stage a feminist revolution. Male chimps cannotgather in a constitutional assembly to abolish the office of alpha male anddeclare that from here on out all chimps are to be treated as equals. Suchdramatic changes in behaviourwould occur only if something changed in thechimpanzees’DNA.

Forsimilarreasons,archaichumansdidnotinitiateanyrevolutions.Asfaraswecantell,changesinsocialpatterns,theinventionofnewtechnologiesandthesettlementof alienhabitats resulted fromgeneticmutations and environmentalpressures more than from cultural initiatives. This is why it took humanshundreds of thousands of years to make these steps. Two million years ago,genetic mutations resulted in the appearance of a new human species calledHomo erectus. Its emergencewas accompanied by the development of a newstone tool technology,nowrecognisedasadefiningfeatureof thisspecies.AslongasHomoerectusdidnotundergofurthergeneticalterations,itsstonetoolsremainedroughlythesame–forcloseto2millionyears!

Incontrast,eversincetheCognitiveRevolution,Sapienshavebeenabletochange their behaviour quickly, transmitting new behaviours to futuregenerationswithout any need of genetic or environmental change.As a primeexample, consider the repeated appearance of childless elites, such as theCatholic priesthood, Buddhist monastic orders and Chinese eunuchbureaucracies.The existence of such elites goes against themost fundamentalprinciples of natural selection, since these dominant members of societywillinglygiveupprocreation.Whereaschimpanzeealphamalesusetheirpowerto have sexwith asmany females as possible – and consequently sire a largeproportionoftheirtroop’syoung–theCatholicalphamaleabstainscompletelyfrom sexual intercourse and childcare. This abstinence does not result fromunique environmental conditions such as a severe lack of food or want ofpotential mates. Nor is it the result of some quirky genetic mutation. TheCatholicChurchhassurvivedforcenturies,notbypassingona‘celibacygene’fromonepopetothenext,butbypassingonthestoriesoftheNewTestamentandofCatholiccanonlaw.

In other words, while the behaviour patterns of archaic humans remainedfixed for tens of thousands of years, Sapiens could transform their socialstructures, the nature of their interpersonal relations, their economic activitiesand a host of other behaviourswithin a decadeor two.Consider a resident of

Berlin, born in 1900 and living to the ripe age of one hundred. She spent herchildhood in the Hohenzollern Empire of Wilhelm II; her adult years in theWeimarRepublic,theNaziThirdReichandCommunistEastGermany;andshediedacitizenofademocraticandreunifiedGermany.Shehadmanagedtobeapart of five very different sociopolitical systems, though her DNA remainedexactlythesame.

ThiswasthekeytoSapiens’success.Inaone-on-onebrawl,aNeanderthalwould probably have beaten a Sapiens. But in a conflict of hundreds,Neanderthals wouldn’t stand a chance. Neanderthals could share informationabout thewhereaboutsof lions,but theyprobablycouldnot tell–andrevise–storiesabout tribal spirits.Withoutanability tocompose fiction,Neanderthalswereunabletocooperateeffectivelyinlargenumbers,norcouldtheyadapttheirsocialbehaviourtorapidlychangingchallenges.

While we can’t get inside a Neanderthal mind to understand how theythought,wehaveindirectevidenceofthelimitstotheircognitioncomparedwiththeirSapiensrivals.Archaeologistsexcavating30,000-year-oldSapienssitesintheEuropeanheartlandoccasionallyfindthereseashellsfromtheMediterraneanandAtlanticcoasts.Inall likelihood,theseshellsgottothecontinentalinteriorthrough long-distance tradebetweendifferentSapiensbands.Neanderthal siteslack any evidenceof such trade.Eachgroupmanufactured its own tools fromlocalmaterials.4

6. The Catholic alpha male abstains from sexual intercourse andchildcare,eventhoughthereisnogeneticorecologicalreasonforhimtodoso.

AnotherexamplecomesfromtheSouthPacific.Sapiensbandsthatlivedonthe island ofNew Ireland, north ofNewGuinea, used a volcanic glass calledobsidian to manufacture particularly strong and sharp tools. New Ireland,however,hasnonaturaldepositsofobsidian.Laboratorytestsrevealedthattheobsidian they usedwas brought from deposits onNewBritain, an island 400kilometresaway.Someoftheinhabitantsoftheseislandsmusthavebeenskillednavigatorswhotradedfromislandtoislandoverlongdistances.5

Trademay seemaverypragmatic activity,one thatneedsno fictivebasis.Yet the fact is that no animal other thanSapiens engages in trade, and all theSapiens trade neworks aboutwhichwe have detailed evidencewere based onfictions. Trade cannot exist without trust, and it is very difficult to truststrangers. The global trade network of today is based on our trust in such

fictional entities as the dollar, the Federal Reserve Bank, and the totemictrademarksofcorporations.Whentwostrangersinatribalsocietywanttotrade,theywilloftenestablishtrustbyappealingtoacommongod,mythicalancestorortotemanimal.

If archaic Sapiens believing in such fictions traded shells and obsidian, itstands to reason that they could also have traded information, thus creating amuch denser and wider knowledge network than the one that servedNeanderthalsandotherarchaichumans.

Hunting techniques provide another illustration of these differences.Neanderthals usually hunted alone or in small groups. Sapiens, on the otherhand,developedtechniquesthatreliedoncooperationbetweenmanydozensofindividuals, and perhaps even between different bands. One particularlyeffectivemethodwastosurroundanentireherdofanimals,suchaswildhorses,then chase them into a narrow gorge,where itwas easy to slaughter them enmasse. If allwent according toplan, thebandscouldharvest tonsofmeat, fatandanimal skins ina singleafternoonofcollectiveeffort, andeitherconsumetheserichesinagiantpotlatch,ordry,smokeor(inArcticareas)freezethemforlater usage. Archaeologists have discovered sites where entire herds werebutchered annually in such ways. There are even sites where fences andobstacleswereerectedinordertocreateartificialtrapsandslaughteringgrounds.

WemaypresumethatNeanderthalswerenotpleasedtoseetheirtraditionalhunting grounds turned into Sapiens-controlled slaughterhouses. However, ifviolencebrokeoutbetweenthetwospecies,Neanderthalswerenotmuchbetteroff than wild horses. Fifty Neanderthals cooperating in traditional and staticpatternswerenomatchfor500versatileandinnovativeSapiens.AndeveniftheSapienslostthefirstround,theycouldquicklyinventnewstratagemsthatwouldenablethemtowinthenexttime.

WhathappenedintheCognitiveRevolution?NewabilityWiderconsequencesThe ability to transmit larger quantities of information about the world

surroundingHomosapiensPlanning and carrying out complex actions, such as avoiding lions and

huntingbisonTheabilitytotransmit largerquantitiesof informationaboutSapienssocial

relationships

Largerandmorecohesivegroups,numberingupto150individualsTheabilitytotransmitinformationaboutthingsthatdonotreallyexist,such

astribalspirits,nations,limitedliabilitycompanies,andhumanrightsa.Cooperationbetweenverylargenumbersofstrangers

b.Rapidinnovationofsocialbehaviour

HistoryandBiologyThe immensediversityof imagined realities thatSapiens invented, and the

resultingdiversityofbehaviourpatterns, are themaincomponentsofwhatwecall‘cultures’.Onceculturesappeared,theyneverceasedtochangeanddevelop,andtheseunstoppablealterationsarewhatwecall‘history’.

TheCognitiveRevolutionisaccordinglythepointwhenhistorydeclareditsindependence from biology. Until the Cognitive Revolution, the doings of allhumanspeciesbelongedtotherealmofbiology,or,ifyousoprefer,prehistory(I tend to avoid the term ‘prehistory’, because it wrongly implies that evenbeforetheCognitiveRevolution,humanswereinacategoryoftheirown).Fromthe Cognitive Revolution onwards, historical narratives replace biologicaltheoriesasourprimarymeansofexplainingthedevelopmentofHomosapiens.TounderstandtheriseofChristianityortheFrenchRevolution,itisnotenoughtocomprehendtheinteractionofgenes,hormonesandorganisms.Itisnecessarytotakeintoaccounttheinteractionofideas,imagesandfantasiesaswell.

Thisdoesnotmean thatHomosapiens andhumanculturebecameexemptfrom biological laws. We are still animals, and our physical, emotional andcognitiveabilitiesarestillshapedbyourDNA.OursocietiesarebuiltfromthesamebuildingblocksasNeanderthalorchimpanzeesocieties,andthemoreweexamine these building blocks – sensations, emotions, family ties – the lessdifferencewefindbetweenusandotherapes.

It is, however, a mistake to look for the differences at the level of theindividual or the family.One on one, even ten on ten,we are embarrassinglysimilar to chimpanzees. Significant differences begin to appear onlywhenwecross the threshold of 150 individuals, and when we reach 1,000–2,000individuals, the differences are astounding. If you tried to bunch togetherthousandsof chimpanzees intoTiananmenSquare,WallStreet, theVaticanortheheadquartersof theUnitedNations, the resultwouldbepandemonium.Bycontrast, Sapiens regularly gather by the thousands in such places. Together,they create orderly patterns – such as trade networks, mass celebrations andpolitical institutions– that theycouldneverhavecreated in isolation.The real

differencebetweenusandchimpanzeesisthemythicalgluethatbindstogetherlarge numbers of individuals, families and groups. This glue hasmade us themastersofcreation.

Ofcourse,wealsoneededotherskills, suchas theability tomakeandusetools. Yet tool-making is of little consequence unless it is coupled with theability to cooperate with many others. How is it that we now haveintercontinentalmissileswith nuclearwarheads,whereas 30,000 years agowehad only sticks with flint spearheads? Physiologically, there has been nosignificantimprovementinourtool-makingcapacityoverthelast30,000years.AlbertEinsteinwasfarlessdexterouswithhishandsthanwasanancienthunter-gatherer. However, our capacity to cooperatewith large numbers of strangershas improved dramatically. The ancient flint spearhead was manufactured inminutesbyasingleperson,whoreliedontheadviceandhelpofafewintimatefriends.Theproductionofamodernnuclearwarheadrequiresthecooperationofmillions of strangers all over the world – from the workers who mine theuraniumore in thedepthsof theearth to theoreticalphysicistswhowrite longmathematicalformulastodescribetheinteractionsofsubatomicparticles.

To summarise the relationship between biology and history after theCognitiveRevolution:a. Biology sets the basic parameters for the behaviour and capacities of

Homo sapiens. The whole of history takes place within the bounds of thisbiologicalarena.b.However, thisarenaisextraordinarily large,allowingSapienstoplayan

astounding variety of games. Thanks to their ability to invent fiction, Sapienscreate more and more complex games, which each generation develops andelaboratesevenfurther.c. Consequently, in order to understand how Sapiens behave, we must

describethehistoricalevolutionoftheiractions.Referringonlytoourbiologicalconstraints would be like a radio sports-caster who, attending theWorld Cupfootballchampionships,offershislistenersadetaileddescriptionoftheplayingfieldratherthananaccountofwhattheplayersaredoing.

WhatgamesdidourStoneAgeancestorsplayinthearenaofhistory?Asfarasweknow,thepeoplewhocarvedtheStadellion-mansome30,000yearsagohad the same physical, emotional and intellectual abilitieswe have.What didtheydowhentheywokeup in themorning?Whatdid theyeat forbreakfast–and lunch? What were their societies like? Did they have monogamousrelationships and nuclear families? Did they have ceremonies, moral codes,sportscontestsandreligiousrituals?Didtheyfightwars?Thenextchaptertakes

a peek behind the curtain of the ages, examining what life was like in themillenniaseparatingtheCognitiveRevolutionfromtheAgriculturalRevolution.

*Hereandinthefollowingpages,whenspeakingaboutSapienslanguage,Irefertothebasiclinguisticabilitiesofourspeciesandnottoaparticulardialect.English, Hindi and Chinese are all variants of Sapiens language. Apparently,even at the time of the Cognitive Revolution, different Sapiens groups haddifferentdialects.

3

ADayintheLifeofAdamandEve

TOUNDERSTANDOURNATURE,HISTORYandpsychology,wemustget inside the heads of our hunter-gatherer ancestors. For nearly the entirehistory of our species, Sapiens lived as foragers. The past 200 years, duringwhich ever increasing numbers of Sapiens have obtained their daily bread asurban labourers and office workers, and the preceding 10,000 years, duringwhich most Sapiens lived as farmers and herders, are the blink of an eyecompared to the tensof thousandsofyearsduringwhichourancestorshuntedandgathered.

The flourishing field of evolutionary psychology argues that many of ourpresent-day social and psychological characteristics were shaped during thislongpre-agriculturalera.Eventoday,scholarsinthisfieldclaim,ourbrainsandminds are adapted to a life of hunting and gathering. Our eating habits, ourconflictsandoursexualityarealltheresultofthewayourhunter-gatherermindsinteract with our current post-industrial environment, with its mega-cities,aeroplanes,telephonesandcomputers.Thisenvironmentgivesusmorematerialresourcesandlongerlivesthanthoseenjoyedbyanypreviousgeneration,butitoften makes us feel alienated, depressed and pressured. To understand why,evolutionary psychologists argue, we need to delve into the hunter-gathererworldthatshapedus,theworldthatwesubconsciouslystillinhabit.

Why,forexample,dopeoplegorgeonhigh-caloriefoodthat isdoinglittlegoodtotheirbodies?Today’saffluentsocietiesareinthethroesofaplagueofobesity,whichisrapidlyspreadingtodevelopingcountries.It’sapuzzlewhywebinge on the sweetest and greasiest food we can find, until we consider theeating habits of our forager forebears. In the savannahs and forests theyinhabited, high-calorie sweetswere extremely rare and food in generalwas inshortsupply.Atypicalforager30,000yearsagohadaccesstoonlyonetypeofsweetfood–ripefruit.IfaStoneAgewomancameacrossatreegroaningwith

figs,themostsensiblethingtodowastoeatasmanyofthemasshecouldonthespot,beforethelocalbaboonbandpickedthetreebare.Theinstincttogorgeonhigh-calorie foodwas hard-wired into our genes. Todaywemay be living inhigh-riseapartmentswithover-stuffedrefrigerators,butourDNAstillthinksweareinthesavannah.That’swhatmakesusspoondownanentiretubofBen&Jerry’swhenwefindoneinthefreezerandwashitdownwithajumboCoke.

This ‘gorginggene’ theory iswidely accepted.Other theories are farmorecontentious. For example, some evolutionary psychologists argue that ancientforagingbandswerenotcomposedofnuclearfamiliescentredonmonogamouscouples. Rather, foragers lived in communes devoid of private property,monogamousrelationshipsandevenfatherhood.Insuchaband,awomancouldhave sex and form intimate bonds with several men (and women)simultaneously,andalloftheband’sadultscooperatedinparentingitschildren.Since noman knew definitivelywhich of the childrenwere his,men showedequalconcernforallyoungsters.

Such a social structure is not an Aquarian utopia. It’s well documentedamong animals, notably our closest relatives, the chimpanzees and bonobos.There are even a number of present-day human cultures in which collectivefatherhoodispractised,asforexampleamongtheBaríIndians.Accordingtothebeliefsofsuchsocieties,achildisnotbornfromthespermofasingleman,butfromtheaccumulationofsperminawoman’swomb.Agoodmotherwillmakea point of having sex with several different men, especially when she ispregnant,sothatherchildwillenjoythequalities(andpaternalcare)notmerelyofthebesthunter,butalsoofthebeststoryteller, thestrongestwarriorandthemost considerate lover. If this sounds silly, bear in mind that before thedevelopmentofmodernembryologicalstudies,peoplehadnosolidevidencethatbabiesarealwayssiredbyasinglefatherratherthanbymany.

The proponents of this ‘ancient commune’ theory argue that the frequentinfidelitiesthatcharacterisemodernmarriages,andthehighratesofdivorce,nottomentionthecornucopiaofpsychologicalcomplexesfromwhichbothchildrenandadultssuffer,allresultfromforcinghumanstoliveinnuclearfamiliesandmonogamousrelationshipsthatareincompatiblewithourbiologicalsoftware.1

Manyscholarsvehementlyreject this theory, insisting thatbothmonogamyandtheformingofnuclearfamiliesarecorehumanbehaviours.Thoughancienthunter-gatherer societies tended to be more communal and egalitarian thanmodernsocieties, theseresearchersargue, theywereneverthelesscomprisedofseparate cells, each containing a jealous couple and the children they held incommon.Thisiswhytodaymonogamousrelationshipsandnuclearfamiliesarethenorminthevastmajorityofcultures,whymenandwomentendtobevery

possessiveoftheirpartnersandchildren,andwhyeveninmodernstatessuchasNorthKoreaandSyriapoliticalauthoritypassesfromfathertoson.

Inordertoresolvethiscontroversyandunderstandoursexuality,societyandpolitics,weneedtolearnsomethingaboutthelivingconditionsofourancestors,toexaminehowSapienslivedbetweentheCognitiveRevolutionof70,000yearsago,andthestartoftheAgriculturalRevolutionabout12,000yearsago.

Unfortunately, there are few certainties regarding the lives of our foragerancestors.Thedebatebetween the ‘ancient commune’and ‘eternalmonogamyschoolsisbasedonflimsyevidence.Weobviouslyhavenowrittenrecordsfromtheageofforagers,andthearchaeologicalevidenceconsistsmainlyoffossilisedbones and stone tools.Artefactsmade ofmore perishablematerials – such aswood,bambooorleather–surviveonlyunderuniqueconditions.Thecommonimpression that pre-agricultural humans lived in an age of stone is amisconception based on this archaeological bias. The StoneAge shouldmoreaccuratelybecalled theWoodAge,becausemostof the toolsusedbyancienthunter-gatherersweremadeofwood.

Any reconstruction of the lives of ancient hunter-gatherers from thesurvivingartefactsisextremelyproblematic.Oneofthemostglaringdifferencesbetweentheancientforagersandtheiragriculturalandindustrialdescendantsisthat foragers had very few artefacts to begin with, and these played acomparativelymodest role in their lives.Over the course of his or her life, atypicalmemberofamodernaffluentsocietywillownseveralmillionartefacts–fromcarsandhousestodisposablenappiesandmilkcartons.There’shardlyanactivity,abelief,orevenanemotionthatisnotmediatedbyobjectsofourowndevising.Oureatinghabitsaremediatedbyamind-bogglingcollectionofsuchitems,fromspoonsandglassestogeneticengineeringlabsandgiganticocean-going ships. Inplay,weuseaplethoraof toys, fromplastic cards to100,000-seaterstadiums.Ourromanticandsexualrelationsareaccoutredbyrings,beds,nice clothes, sexy underwear, condoms, fashionable restaurants, cheapmotels,airport lounges, wedding halls and catering companies. Religions bring thesacred into our liveswithGothic churches,Muslimmosques,Hindu ashrams,Torah scrolls, Tibetan prayer wheels, priestly cassocks, candles, incense,Christmastrees,matzahballs,tombstonesandicons.

Wehardlynoticehowubiquitousourstuff isuntilwehavetomoveit toanew house. Foragers moved house every month, every week, and sometimeseveneveryday,totingwhatevertheyhadontheirbacks.Therewerenomovingcompanies, wagons, or even pack animals to share the burden. Theyconsequently had to make do with only the most essential possessions. It’s

reasonable topresume, then, that thegreaterpartof theirmental, religiousandemotional liveswas conductedwithout the help of artefacts.An archaeologistworking 100,000 years fromnow could piece together a reasonable picture ofMuslim belief and practice from themyriad objects he unearthed in a ruinedmosque. Butwe are largely at a loss in trying to comprehend the beliefs andrituals of ancient hunter-gatherers. It’s much the same dilemma that a futurehistorianwouldfaceifhehadtodepictthesocialworldoftwenty-first-centuryteenagerssolelyonthebasisoftheirsurvivingsnailmail–sincenorecordswillremainoftheirphoneconversations,emails,blogsandtextmessages.

A relianceonartefactswill thusbiasanaccountofancienthunter-gathererlife.Onewaytoremedythisistolookatmodernforagersocieties.Thesecanbestudieddirectly,byanthropologicalobservation.But therearegood reasons tobeverycarefulinextrapolatingfrommodernforagersocietiestoancientones.

Firstly,allforagersocietiesthathavesurvivedintothemodernerahavebeeninfluencedby neighbouring agricultural and industrial societies.Consequently,it’sriskytoassumethatwhatistrueofthemwasalsotruetensofthousandsofyearsago.

Secondly, modern forager societies have survived mainly in areas withdifficult climatic conditions and inhospitable terrain, ill-suited for agriculture.Societies that have adapted to the extreme conditions of places such as theKalahariDesert in southernAfricamaywellprovide averymisleadingmodelfor understanding ancient societies in fertile areas such as the Yangtze RiverValley.Inparticular,populationdensityinanarealiketheKalahariDesertisfarlower than it was around the ancient Yangtze, and this has far-reachingimplicationsforkeyquestionsaboutthesizeandstructureofhumanbandsandtherelationsbetweenthem.

Thirdly, themost notable characteristic of hunter-gatherer societies is howdifferenttheyareonefromtheother.Theydiffernotonlyfromonepartoftheworld to another but even in the same region.One good example is the hugevariety the first European settlers found among the Aborigine peoples ofAustralia.JustbeforetheBritishconquest,between300,000and700,000hunter-gatherers lived on the continent in 200–600 tribes, each ofwhichwas furtherdividedintoseveralbands.2Eachtribehaditsownlanguage,religion,normsandcustoms.LivingaroundwhatisnowAdelaideinsouthernAustraliawereseveralpatrilinealclansthatreckoneddescentfromthefather’sside.Theseclansbondedtogether into tribes on a strictly territorial basis. In contrast, some tribes innorthernAustraliagavemoreimportancetoaperson’smaternalancestry,andaperson’stribalidentitydependedonhisorhertotemratherthanhisterritory.

Itstandstoreasonthattheethnicandculturalvarietyamongancienthunter-

gathererswas equally impressive, and that the 5million to 8million foragerswhopopulatedtheworldontheeveoftheAgriculturalRevolutionweredividedinto thousands of separate tribes with thousands of different languages andcultures.3 This, after all, was one of the main legacies of the CognitiveRevolution. Thanks to the appearance of fiction, even people with the samegenetic make-up who lived under similar ecological conditions were able tocreateverydifferentimaginedrealities,whichmanifestedthemselvesindifferentnormsandvalues.

For example, there’s every reason tobelieve that a foragerband that lived30,000yearsagoonthespotwhereOxfordUniversitynowstandswouldhavespokenadifferent languagefromone livingwhereCambridge isnowsituated.One band might have been belligerent and the other peaceful. Perhaps theCambridgebandwascommunalwhiletheoneatOxfordwasbasedonnuclearfamilies.TheCantabrigiansmighthavespentlonghourscarvingwoodenstatuesof their guardian spirits,whereas theOxoniansmay haveworshipped throughdance.Theformerperhapsbelievedinreincarnation,whilethelatterthoughtthiswas nonsense. In one society, homosexual relationships might have beenaccepted,whileintheothertheyweretaboo.

Inotherwords,while anthropologicalobservationsofmodern foragers canhelp us understand some of the possibilities available to ancient foragers, theancienthorizonofpossibilitieswasmuchbroader,andmostofitishiddenfromourview.*TheheateddebatesaboutHomosapiens’ ‘naturalwayof life’missthemainpoint.EversincetheCognitiveRevolution,therehasn’tbeenasinglenaturalwayof life forSapiens.Thereareonlyculturalchoices, fromamongabewilderingpaletteofpossibilities.

TheOriginalAffluentSocietyWhat generalisations canwemake about life in the pre-agriculturalworld

nevertheless?Itseemssafetosaythatthevastmajorityofpeoplelivedinsmallbandsnumberingseveraldozenoratmostseveralhundredindividuals,andthatalltheseindividualswerehumans.Itisimportanttonotethislastpoint,becauseitisfarfromobvious.Mostmembersofagriculturalandindustrialsocietiesaredomesticatedanimals.Theyarenotequaltotheirmasters,ofcourse,buttheyaremembers all the same.Today, the societycalledNewZealand is composedof4.5millionSapiensand50millionsheep.

Therewasjustoneexceptiontothisgeneralrule:thedog.Thedogwasthefirst animal domesticated by Homo sapiens, and this occurred before theAgricultural Revolution. Experts disagree about the exact date, but we have

incontrovertible evidence of domesticated dogs from about 15,000 years ago.Theymayhavejoinedthehumanpackthousandsofyearsearlier.

Dogswere used for hunting and fighting, and as an alarm system againstwild beasts and human intruders. With the passing of generations, the twospeciesco-evolved tocommunicatewellwitheachother.Dogs thatweremostattentivetotheneedsandfeelingsoftheirhumancompanionsgotextracareandfood, and were more likely to survive. Simultaneously, dogs learned tomanipulatepeoplefortheirownneeds.A15,000-yearbondhasyieldedamuchdeeper understanding and affection between humans and dogs than betweenhumans and any other animal.4 In some cases dead dogs were even buriedceremoniously,muchlikehumans.

Membersofabandkneweachothervery intimately,andwere surroundedthroughouttheirlivesbyfriendsandrelatives.Lonelinessandprivacywererare.Neighbouring bands probably competed for resources and even fought oneanother,but theyalsohadfriendlycontacts.Theyexchangedmembers,huntedtogether, traded rare luxuries, cemented political alliances and celebratedreligious festivals. Such cooperation was one of the important trademarks ofHomosapiens,andgaveitacrucialedgeoverotherhumanspecies.Sometimesrelations with neighbouring bands were tight enough that together theyconstituted a single tribe, sharing a common language, common myths, andcommonnormsandvalues.

Yetwe should not overestimate the importance of such external relations.Evenif intimesofcrisisneighbouringbandsdrewclosertogether,andevenifthey occasionally gathered to hunt or feast together, they still spent the vastmajorityoftheirtimeincompleteisolationandindependence.Tradewasmostlylimited to prestige items such as shells, amber and pigments. There is noevidence that people traded staple goods like fruits and meat, or that theexistence of one band depended on the importing of goods from another.Sociopoliticalrelations,too,tendedtobesporadic.Thetribedidnotserveasapermanentpoliticalframework,andevenifithadseasonalmeetingplaces,therewerenopermanenttownsorinstitutions.Theaveragepersonlivedmanymonthswithout seeing or hearing a human from outside of her own band, and sheencountered throughout her life no more than a few hundred humans. TheSapiens population was thinly spread over vast territories. Before theAgriculturalRevolution, thehumanpopulationof theentireplanetwassmallerthanthatoftoday’sCairo.

7. First pet? A 12,000-year-old tomb found in northern Israel. Itcontains the skeleton of a fifty-year-old woman next to that of a puppy(bottomleftcorner).Thepuppywasburiedclosetothewoman’shead.Herleft hand is resting on the dog in away thatmight indicate an emotionalconnection.Thereare,ofcourse,otherpossibleexplanations.Perhaps, forexample,thepuppywasagifttothegatekeeperofthenextworld.

MostSapiensbandslivedontheroad,roamingfromplacetoplaceinsearchoffood.Theirmovementswereinfluencedbythechangingseasons,theannualmigrations of animals and the growth cycles of plants. They usually travelledbackandforthacrossthesamehometerritory,anareaofbetweenseveraldozenandmanyhundredsofsquarekilometres.

Occasionally, bands wandered outside their turf and explored new lands,whetherduetonaturalcalamities,violentconflicts,demographicpressuresortheinitiativeofacharismatic leader.Thesewanderingswere theengineofhumanworldwide expansion. If a forager band split once every forty years and itssplintergroupmigratedtoanewterritoryahundredkilometres to theeast, thedistance fromEastAfrica toChinawould have been covered in about 10,000years.

Insomeexceptionalcases,whenfoodsourceswereparticularlyrich,bandssettled down in seasonal and even permanent camps. Techniques for drying,smokingandfreezingfoodalsomadeitpossibletostayputforlongerperiods.Most importantly, alongside seas and rivers rich in seafood and waterfowl,humans set up permanent fishing villages – the first permanent settlements inhistory,longpredatingtheAgriculturalRevolution.Fishingvillagesmighthave

appearedonthecoastsofIndonesianislandsasearlyas45,000yearsago.ThesemayhavebeenthebasefromwhichHomosapienslauncheditsfirsttransoceanicenterprise:theinvasionofAustralia.

In most habitats, Sapiens bands fed themselves in an elastic andopportunisticfashion.Theyscroungedfortermites,pickedberries,dugforroots,stalked rabbits and hunted bison and mammoth. Notwithstanding the popularimageof‘manthehunter’,gatheringwasSapiens’mainactivity,anditprovidedmostoftheircalories,aswellasrawmaterialssuchasflint,woodandbamboo.

Sapiens did not forage only for food and materials. They foraged forknowledge as well. To survive, they needed a detailed mental map of theirterritory.Tomaximisetheefficiencyoftheirdailysearchforfood,theyrequiredinformation about the growth patterns of each plant and the habits of eachanimal. They needed to knowwhich foodswere nourishing,whichmade yousick,andhowtouseothersascures.Theyneededtoknowtheprogressof theseasons andwhatwarning signspreceded a thunderstormor a dry spell.Theystudiedeverystream,everywalnut tree,everybearcave,andevery flint-stonedepositintheirvicinity.Eachindividualhadtounderstandhowtomakeastoneknife, how to mend a torn cloak, how to lay a rabbit trap, and how to faceavalanches, snakebites or hungry lions.Mastery of each of these many skillsrequiredyearsofapprenticeshipandpractice.Theaverageancientforagercouldturnaflintstoneintoaspearpointwithinminutes.Whenwetrytoimitatethisfeat,weusuallyfailmiserably.Mostofuslackexpertknowledgeoftheflakingproperties of flint and basalt and the fine motor skills needed to work themprecisely.

In other words, the average forager had wider, deeper and more variedknowledgeofherimmediatesurroundingsthanmostofhermoderndescendants.Today,mostpeople in industrial societiesdon’tneed toknowmuchabout thenaturalworldinordertosurvive.Whatdoyoureallyneedtoknowinordertogetbyasacomputerengineer,aninsuranceagent,ahistoryteacherorafactoryworker?Youneedtoknowalotaboutyourowntinyfieldofexpertise,butforthe vast majority of life’s necessities you rely blindly on the help of otherexperts,whoseownknowledge isalso limited toa tiny fieldofexpertise.Thehumancollectiveknows farmore today thandid the ancientbands.But at theindividual level, ancient foragers were the most knowledgeable and skilfulpeopleinhistory.

There is some evidence that the size of the average Sapiens brain hasactually decreased since the age of foraging.5 Survival in that era requiredsuperb mental abilities from everyone. When agriculture and industry came

alongpeoplecouldincreasinglyrelyontheskillsofothersforsurvival,andnew‘niches for imbeciles’ were opened up. You could survive and pass yourunremarkablegenes to thenextgenerationbyworkingasawatercarrieroranassembly-lineworker.

Foragers mastered not only the surrounding world of animals, plants andobjects,butalsotheinternalworldoftheirownbodiesandsenses.Theylistenedtotheslightestmovementinthegrasstolearnwhetherasnakemightbelurkingthere. They carefully observed the foliage of trees in order to discover fruits,beehivesandbirdnests.Theymovedwithaminimumofeffortandnoise,andknewhowtosit,walkandruninthemostagileandefficientmanner.Variedandconstant use of their bodiesmade them as fit asmarathon runners. They hadphysical dexterity that people today are unable to achieve even after years ofpractisingyogaort’aichi.

Thehunter-gathererwayof lifedifferedsignificantlyfromregiontoregionand fromseason to season, buton thewhole foragers seem tohave enjoyed amorecomfortableandrewardinglifestylethanmostofthepeasants,shepherds,labourersandofficeclerkswhofollowedintheirfootsteps.

Whilepeopleintoday’saffluentsocietiesworkanaverageoffortytoforty-five hours a week, and people in the developing world work sixty and eveneighty hours aweek, hunter-gatherers living today in themost inhospitable ofhabitats – such as the Kalahari Desert work on average for just thirty-five toforty-fivehoursaweek.Theyhuntonlyonedayoutofthree,andgatheringtakesupjustthreetosixhoursdaily.Innormaltimes,thisisenoughtofeedtheband.Itmaywellbethatancienthunter-gathererslivinginzonesmorefertilethantheKalaharispentevenlesstimeobtainingfoodandrawmaterials.Ontopofthat,foragersenjoyedalighterloadofhouseholdchores.Theyhadnodishestowash,nocarpetstovacuum,nofloorstopolish,nonappiestochangeandnobills topay.

Theforagereconomyprovidedmostpeoplewithmoreinterestinglivesthanagricultureor industrydo.Today, aChinese factoryhand leaveshomearoundseven in themorning,makesherway throughpolluted streets to a sweatshop,andthereoperatesthesamemachine,inthesameway,dayin,dayout,fortenlongandmind-numbinghours, returninghomearoundseven in theevening inorder towashdishesanddo the laundry.Thirty thousandyearsago,aChineseforagermight leave campwith her companions at, say, eight in themorning.They’droamthenearbyforestsandmeadows,gatheringmushrooms,diggingupedibleroots,catchingfrogsandoccasionallyrunningawayfromtigers.Byearlyafternoon, theywerebackat thecamptomake lunch.That left themplentyof

timetogossip,tellstories,playwiththechildrenandjusthangout.Ofcoursethetigers sometimescaught them,ora snakebit them,buton theotherhand theydidn’thavetodealwithautomobileaccidentsandindustrialpollution.

Inmostplacesandatmost times,foragingprovidedidealnutrition.That ishardly surprising– thishadbeen thehumandiet forhundredsof thousandsofyears, and the human body was well adapted to it. Evidence from fossilisedskeletonsindicatesthatancientforagerswerelesslikelytosufferfromstarvationor malnutrition, and were generally taller and healthier than their peasantdescendants.Average life expectancywas apparently just thirty to fortyyears,but thiswasduelargelytothehighincidenceofchildmortality.Childrenwhomadeitthroughtheperilousfirstyearshadagoodchanceofreachingtheageofsixty,andsomeevenmade it to theireighties.Amongmodern foragers, forty-five-year-oldwomencanexpecttoliveanothertwentyyears,andabout5–8percentofthepopulationisoversixty.6

The foragers’ secret of success,which protected them from starvation andmalnutrition, was their varied diet. Farmers tend to eat a very limited andunbalanceddiet.Especiallyinpremoderntimes,mostofthecaloriesfeedinganagriculturalpopulationcamefromasinglecrop–suchaswheat,potatoesorrice– that lacks some of the vitamins, minerals and other nutritional materialshumansneed.ThetypicalpeasantintraditionalChinaatericeforbreakfast,riceforlunch,andricefordinner.Ifshewerelucky,shecouldexpecttoeatthesameon the following day. By contrast, ancient foragers regularly ate dozens ofdifferentfoodstuffs.Thepeasant’sancientancestor,theforager,mayhaveeatenberries and mushrooms for breakfast; fruits, snails and turtle for lunch; andrabbit steak with wild onions for dinner. Tomorrows menu might have beencompletelydifferent.Thisvarietyensuredthat theancientforagersreceivedallthenecessarynutrients.

Furthermore,bynotbeingdependentonanysinglekindoffood,theywerelessliabletosufferwhenoneparticularfoodsourcefailed.Agriculturalsocietiesare ravaged by faminewhen drought, fire or earthquake devastates the annualriceorpotato crop.Forager societieswerehardly immune tonaturaldisasters,andsufferedfromperiodsofwantandhunger,buttheywereusuallyabletodealwith such calamitiesmore easily. If they lost some of their staple foodstuffs,theycouldgatherorhuntotherspecies,ormovetoalessaffectedarea.

Ancient foragers also suffered less from infectious diseases. Most of theinfectiousdiseases thathaveplaguedagricultural and industrial societies (suchas smallpox,measles and tuberculosis)originated indomesticatedanimals andwere transferred to humans only after the Agricultural Revolution. Ancientforagers, who had domesticated only dogs, were free of these scourges.

Moreover, most people in agricultural and industrial societies lived in dense,unhygienicpermanentsettlements–idealhotbedsfordisease.Foragersroamedthelandinsmallbandsthatcouldnotsustainepidemics.

Thewholesomeandvarieddiet, the relativelyshortworkingweek,and therarity of infectious diseases have led many experts to define pre-agriculturalforager societies as ‘the original affluent societies’. It would be a mistake,however, to idealise the livesof these ancients.Though they livedbetter livesthanmostpeopleinagriculturalandindustrialsocieties,theirworldcouldstillbeharshandunforgiving.Periodsofwantandhardshipwerenotuncommon,childmortalitywashigh, andan accidentwhichwouldbeminor today could easilybecomeadeath sentence.Mostpeopleprobablyenjoyed theclose intimacyoftheroamingband,butthoseunfortunateswhoincurredthehostilityormockeryof their fellow band members probably suffered terribly. Modern foragersoccasionallyabandonandevenkilloldordisabledpeoplewhocannotkeepupwith theband.Unwantedbabiesandchildrenmaybeslain,and thereareevencasesofreligiouslyinspiredhumansacrifice.

TheAchépeople,hunter-gathererswholivedinthejunglesofParaguayuntilthe1960s,offeraglimpseintothedarkersideofforaging.Whenavaluedbandmember died, the Aché customarily killed a little girl and buried the twotogether.AnthropologistswhointerviewedtheAchérecordedacaseinwhichaband abandoned amiddle-agedmanwho fell sick andwas unable to keep upwiththeothers.Hewasleftunderatree.Vulturesperchedabovehim,expectinga heartymeal. But theman recuperated, and,walking briskly, hemanaged torejoin the band. His body was covered with the birds’ faeces, so he washenceforthnicknamed‘VultureDroppings’.

WhenanoldAchéwomanbecameaburdentotherestof theband,oneoftheyoungermenwouldsneakbehindherandkillherwithanaxe-blow to thehead.AnAchémantoldtheinquisitiveanthropologistsstoriesofhisprimeyearsin the jungle. ‘I customarilykilledoldwomen. Iused tokillmyaunts…Thewomenwereafraidofme…Now,herewiththewhites,Ihavebecomeweak.’Babies born without hair, who were considered underdeveloped, were killedimmediately.Onewomanrecalledthatherfirstbabygirlwaskilledbecausethemeninthebanddidnotwantanothergirl.Onanotheroccasionamankilledasmall boybecausehewas ‘in a badmood and the childwas crying’.Anotherchild was buried alive because ‘it was funny-looking and the other childrenlaughedatit’.7

We should be careful, though, not to judge the Aché too quickly.Anthropologists who lived with them for years report that violence between

adultswasveryrare.Bothwomenandmenwerefreetochangepartnersatwill.Theysmiledandlaughedconstantly,hadnoleadershiphierarchy,andgenerallyshunned domineering people. They were extremely generous with their fewpossessions, and were not obsessed with success or wealth. The things theyvaluedmost in lifeweregoodsocial interactionsandhigh-qualityfriendships.8Theyviewedthekillingofchildren,sickpeopleandtheelderlyasmanypeopletodayviewabortionandeuthanasia.ItshouldalsobenotedthattheAchéwerehuntedandkilledwithoutmercybyParaguayanfarmers.Theneedtoevadetheirenemies probably caused the Aché to adopt an exceptionally harsh attitudetowardsanyonewhomightbecomealiabilitytotheband.

ThetruthisthatAchésociety,likeeveryhumansociety,wasverycomplex.We should beware of demonising or idealising it on the basis of a superficialacquaintance.TheAchéwereneitherangelsnorfiends–theywerehumans.So,too,weretheancienthunter-gatherers.

TalkingGhostsWhat canwe say about the spiritual andmental life of the ancient hunter-

gatherers?Thebasics of the forager economycanbe reconstructedwith someconfidence based on quantifiable and objective factors. For example, we cancalculatehowmanycaloriesperdayapersonneeded inorder to survive,howmanycalorieswereobtainedfromakilogramofwalnuts,andhowmanywalnutscouldbegatheredfromasquarekilometreofforest.Withthisdata,wecanmakeaneducatedguessabouttherelativeimportanceofwalnutsintheirdiet.

But did they consider walnuts a delicacy or a humdrum staple? Did theybelievethatwalnuttreeswereinhabitedbyspirits?Didtheyfindwalnutleavespretty?Ifaforagerboywantedtotakeaforagergirltoaromanticspot,didtheshade of awalnut tree suffice?Theworld of thought, belief and feeling is bydefinitionfarmoredifficulttodecipher.

Most scholars agree that animistic beliefs were common among ancientforagers.Animism (from ‘anima’, ‘soul’ or ‘spirit’ in Latin) is the belief thatalmosteveryplace,everyanimal,everyplantandeverynaturalphenomenonhasawareness and feelings, and can communicate directly with humans. Thus,animistsmaybelievethatthebigrockatthetopofthehillhasdesiresandneeds.Therockmightbeangryaboutsomethingthatpeopledidandrejoiceoversomeotheraction.Therockmightadmonishpeopleoraskfor favours.Humans, fortheirpart,canaddresstherock,tomollifyorthreatenit.Notonlytherock,butalso the oak tree at the bottomof the hill is an animated being, and so is thestream flowing below the hill, the spring in the forest clearing, the bushes

growingaroundit,thepathtotheclearing,andthefieldmice,wolvesandcrowsthatdrinkthere.Intheanimistworld,objectsandlivingthingsarenottheonlyanimatedbeings.Therearealsoimmaterialentities–thespiritsofthedead,andfriendlyandmalevolentbeings,thekindthatwetodaycalldemons,fairiesandangels.

Animistsbelieve that there isnobarrierbetweenhumansandotherbeings.Theycanallcommunicatedirectlythroughspeech,song,danceandceremony.Ahuntermayaddressaherdofdeerandaskthatoneofthemsacrificeitself.Ifthe hunt succeeds, the huntermay ask the dead animal to forgive him.Whensomeonefallssick,ashamancancontactthespiritthatcausedthesicknessandtry topacify itorscare itaway.Ifneedbe, theshamanmayaskforhelpfromother spirits. What characterises all these acts of communication is that theentitiesbeingaddressedarelocalbeings.Theyarenotuniversalgods,butratheraparticulardeer,aparticulartree,aparticularstream,aparticularghost.

Justasthereisnobarrierbetweenhumansandotherbeings,neitheristhereastricthierarchy.Non-humanentitiesdonotexistmerelytoprovidefortheneedsofman.Nor are they all-powerful godswho run theworld as theywish. Theworlddoesnotrevolvearoundhumansoraroundanyotherparticulargroupofbeings.

Animismisnotaspecificreligion.Itisagenericnameforthousandsofverydifferent religions, cults and beliefs.Whatmakes all of them ‘animist’ is thiscommon approach to the world and to man’s place in it. Saying that ancientforagerswereprobablyanimistsislikesayingthatpremodernagriculturistsweremostly theists. Theism (from ‘theos’, ‘god’ in Greek) is the view that theuniversal order is based on a hierarchical relationship between humans and asmall group of ethereal entities called gods. It is certainly true to say thatpremodernagriculturiststendedtobetheists,butitdoesnotteachusmuchaboutthe particulars. The generic rubric ‘theists’ covers Jewish rabbis fromeighteenth-century Poland, witch-burning Puritans from seventeenth-centuryMassachusetts,Aztecpriests fromfifteenth-centuryMexico,Sufimystics fromtwelfth-century Iran, tenth-century Viking warriors, second-century Romanlegionnaires, and first-century Chinese bureaucrats. Each of these viewed theothers’beliefsandpracticesasweirdandheretical.Thedifferencesbetweenthebeliefsandpracticesofgroupsof‘animistic’foragerswereprobablyjustasbig.Their religious experience may have been turbulent and filled withcontroversies,reformsandrevolutions.

Butthesecautiousgeneralisationsareaboutasfaraswecango.Anyattempttodescribe thespecificsofarchaicspirituality ishighlyspeculative,as there isnext to no evidence to go by and the little evidence we have – a handful of

artefactsandcavepaintings–canbeinterpretedinmyriadways.ThetheoriesofscholarswhoclaimtoknowwhattheforagersfeltshedmuchmorelightontheprejudicesoftheirauthorsthanonStoneAgereligions.

Insteadoferectingmountainsoftheoryoveramolehilloftombrelics,cavepaintingsandbonestatuettes,itisbettertobefrankandadmitthatwehaveonlythehaziestnotionsaboutthereligionsofancientforagers.Weassumethattheywereanimists,butthat’snotveryinformative.Wedon’tknowwhichspiritstheyprayedto,whichfestivalstheycelebrated,orwhichtaboostheyobserved.Mostimportantly,wedon’tknowwhatstoriestheytold.It’soneofthebiggestholesinourunderstandingofhumanhistory.

Thesociopoliticalworldoftheforagersisanotherareaaboutwhichweknownext tonothing.Asexplainedabove,scholarscannotevenagreeon thebasics,such as the existence of private property, nuclear families and monogamousrelationships.It’slikelythatdifferentbandshaddifferentstructures.Somemayhave been as hierarchical, tense and violent as the nastiest chimpanzee group,whileotherswereaslaid-back,peacefulandlasciviousasabunchofbonobos.

8. A painting from Lascaux Cave, c.15,000–20,000 years ago. Whatexactlydowesee,andwhatisthepainting’smeaning?Somearguethatwe

seeamanwiththeheadofabirdandanerectpenis,beingkilledbyabison.Beneaththeman isanotherbirdwhichmightsymbolise thesoul,releasedfrom the body at the moment of death. If so, the picture depicts not aprosaichuntingaccident,butratherthepassagefromthisworldtothenext.Butwehavenowayofknowingwhetheranyofthesespeculationsaretrue.It’saRorschachtestthatrevealsmuchaboutthepreconceptionsofmodernscholars,andlittleaboutthebeliefsofancientforagers.

InSungir,Russia,archaeologistsdiscoveredin1955a30,000-year-oldburialsite belonging to a mammoth-hunting culture. In one grave they found theskeletonofafifty-year-oldman,coveredwithstringsofmammothivorybeads,containing about 3,000 beads in total. On the dead man’s head was a hatdecoratedwith fox teeth, and on his wrists twenty-five ivory bracelets. Othergravesfromthesamesitecontainedfarfewergoods.ScholarsdeducedthattheSungirmammoth-hunterslivedinahierarchicalsociety,andthatthedeadmanwasperhapstheleaderofabandorofanentiretribecomprisingseveralbands.Itisunlikelythatafewdozenmembersofasinglebandcouldhaveproducedsomanygravegoodsbythemselves.

9.Hunter-gatherersmadethesehandprintsabout9,000yearsagointhe

‘Hands Cave’, in Argentina. It looks as if these long-dead hands arereachingtowardsusfromwithintherock.This isoneof themostmovingrelicsoftheancientforagerworld–butnobodyknowswhatitmeans.

Archaeologiststhendiscoveredanevenmoreinterestingtomb.Itcontainedtwoskeletons,buriedheadtohead.Onebelongedtoaboyagedabouttwelveorthirteen,andtheothertoagirlofaboutnineorten.Theboywascoveredwith5,000ivorybeads.Heworeafox-toothhatandabeltwith250foxteeth(atleastsixtyfoxeshadtohavetheirteethpulledtogetthatmany).Thegirlwasadornedwith5,250ivorybeads.Bothchildrenweresurroundedbystatuettesandvariousivory objects. A skilled craftsman (or craftswoman) probably needed aboutforty-fiveminutestoprepareasingleivorybead.Inotherwords,fashioningthe10,000 ivory beads that covered the two children, not to mention the otherobjects, required some 7,500 hours of delicatework,well over three years oflabourbyanexperiencedartisan!

ItishighlyunlikelythatatsuchayoungagetheSungirchildrenhadprovedthemselves as leaders or mammoth-hunters. Only cultural beliefs can explainwhytheyreceivedsuchanextravagantburial.Onetheoryisthattheyowedtheirrank to theirparents.Perhaps theywere thechildrenof the leader, inaculturethatbelievedineitherfamilycharismaorstrictrulesofsuccession.Accordingtoasecondtheory, thechildrenhadbeenidentifiedatbirthastheincarnationsofsome long-deadspirits.A third theoryargues that thechildren’sburial reflectsthewaytheydiedratherthantheirstatusinlife.Theywererituallysacrificed–perhapsaspartoftheburialritesoftheleader–andthenentombedwithpompandcircumstance.9

Whateverthecorrectanswer,theSungirchildrenareamongthebestpiecesofevidencethat30,000yearsagoSapienscouldinventsociopoliticalcodesthatwent far beyond the dictates of ourDNA and the behaviour patterns of otherhumanandanimalspecies.

PeaceorWar?Finally, there’s the thorny question of the role ofwar in forager societies.

Some scholars imagine ancient hunter-gatherer societies as peaceful paradises,and argue thatwar and violence began onlywith theAgriculturalRevolution,whenpeoplestartedtoaccumulateprivateproperty.Otherscholarsmaintainthatthe world of the ancient foragers was exceptionally cruel and violent. Bothschools of thought are castles in the air, connected to the ground by the thinstrings of meagre archaeological remains and anthropological observations of

present-dayforagers.The anthropological evidence is intriguing but very problematic. Foragers

today livemainly in isolated and inhospitable areas such as theArctic or theKalahari,wherepopulationdensity isvery lowandopportunities tofightotherpeople are limited. Moreover, in recent generations, foragers have beenincreasinglysubjecttotheauthorityofmodernstates,whichpreventtheeruptionof large-scale conflicts. European scholars have had only two opportunities toobservelargeandrelativelydensepopulationsofindependentforagers:innorth-western North America in the nineteenth century, and in northern Australiaduring the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Both Amerindian andAboriginal Australian cultures witnessed frequent armed conflicts. It isdebatable,however,whetherthisrepresentsa‘timeless’conditionortheimpactofEuropeanimperialism.

Thearchaeologicalfindingsarebothscarceandopaque.Whattelltalecluesmightremainofanywarthattookplacetensofthousandsofyearsago?Therewerenofortificationsandwallsbackthen,noartilleryshellsorevenswordsandshields.Anancientspearpointmighthavebeenusedinwar,but itcouldhavebeenusedinahuntaswell.Fossilisedhumanbonesarenolesshardtointerpret.A fracturemight indicate a warwound or an accident. Nor is the absence offractures and cuts on an ancient skeleton conclusive proof that the person towhomtheskeletonbelongeddidnotdieaviolentdeath.Deathcanbecausedbytrauma to soft tissues that leaves no marks on bone. Even more importantly,duringpre-industrialwarfaremorethan90percentofwardeadwerekilledbystarvation,coldanddiseaserather thanbyweapons. Imagine that30,000yearsago one tribe defeated its neighbour and expelled it from coveted foraginggrounds.Inthedecisivebattle,tenmembersofthedefeatedtribewerekilled.Inthe following year, another hundred members of the losing tribe died fromstarvation,coldanddisease.Archaeologistswhocomeacrossthesenoskeletonsmay too easily conclude that most fell victim to some natural disaster. Howwouldwebeabletotellthattheywereallvictimsofamercilesswar?

Dulywarned,wecannowturntothearchaeologicalfindings.InPortugal,asurveywasmade of 400 skeletons from the period immediately predating theAgriculturalRevolution.Onlytwoskeletonsshowedclearmarksofviolence.Asimilar survey of 400 skeletons from the same period in Israel discovered asinglecrackinasingleskullthatcouldbeattributedtohumanviolence.Athirdsurveyof400skeletonsfromvariouspre-agriculturalsitesintheDanubeValleyfoundevidenceofviolenceoneighteenskeletons.Eighteenoutof400maynotsoundlikea lot,but it’sactuallyaveryhighpercentage. Ifalleighteen indeeddiedviolently,itmeansthatabout4.5percentofdeathsintheancientDanube

Valleywere causedbyhumanviolence.Today, theglobal average is only1.5percent,takingwarandcrimetogether.Duringthetwentiethcentury,only5percentofhumandeathsresultedfromhumanviolence–andthisinacenturythatsawthebloodiestwarsandmostmassivegenocidesinhistory.Ifthisrevelationistypical,theancientDanubeValleywasasviolentasthetwentiethcentury.*

ThedepressingfindingsfromtheDanubeValleyaresupportedbyastringofequallydepressingfindingsfromotherareas.AtJablSahabainSudan,a12,000-year-old cemetery containing fifty-nine skeletonswas discovered.Arrowheadsandspearpointswerefoundembeddedinorlyingnearthebonesoftwenty-fourskeletons,40percentof thefind.Theskeletonofonewomanrevealed twelveinjuries. In Ofnet Cave in Bavaria, archaeologists discovered the remains ofthirty-eightforagers,mainlywomenandchildren,whohadbeenthrownintotwoburialpits.Halftheskeletons,includingthoseofchildrenandbabies,boreclearsignsofdamagebyhumanweaponssuchasclubsandknives.Thefewskeletonsbelongingtomaturemalesboretheworstmarksofviolence.Inallprobability,anentireforagerbandwasmassacredatOfnet.

Which better represents the world of the ancient foragers: the peacefulskeletons from Israel andPortugal, or the abattoirs of JablSahaba andOfnet?Theanswer isneither. Just as foragers exhibited awide arrayof religions andsocial structures, so, too, did they probably demonstrate a variety of violencerates.Whilesomeareasandsomeperiodsoftimemayhaveenjoyedpeaceandtranquillity,otherswererivenbyferociousconflicts.10

TheCurtainofSilence

If the largerpictureofancient forager life ishard to reconstruct,particularevents are largely irretrievable. When a Sapiens band first entered a valleyinhabited by Neanderthals, the following years might have witnessed abreathtakinghistoricaldrama.Unfortunately,nothingwouldhavesurvivedfromsuchanencounterexcept,atbest,afewfossilisedbonesandahandfulofstonetools that remainmute under themost intense scholarly inquisitions.Wemayextractfromtheminformationabouthumananatomy,humantechnology,humandiet,andperhapsevenhumansocialstructure.Buttheyrevealnothingaboutthepoliticalalliance forgedbetweenneighbouringSapiensbands,about the spiritsofthedeadthatblessedthisalliance,orabouttheivorybeadssecretlygiventothelocalwitchdoctorinordertosecuretheblessingofthespirits.

Thiscurtainofsilenceshroudstensofthousandsofyearsofhistory.Theselongmillenniamaywellhavewitnessedwarsandrevolutions,ecstaticreligiousmovements,profoundphilosophicaltheories,incomparableartisticmasterpieces.Theforagersmayhavehadtheirall-conqueringNapoleons,whoruledempireshalf the size of Luxembourg; gifted Beethovens who lacked symphonyorchestrasbutbroughtpeopletotearswiththesoundoftheirbambooflutes;andcharismaticprophetswhorevealedthewordsofalocaloaktreeratherthanthoseofauniversalcreatorgod.Buttheseareallmereguesses.Thecurtainofsilenceissothickthatwecannotevenbesuresuchthingsoccurred–letalonedescribethemindetail.

Scholarstendtoaskonlythosequestionsthattheycanreasonablyexpecttoanswer. Without the discovery of as yet unavailable research tools, we willprobablyneverknowwhattheancientforagersbelievedorwhatpoliticaldramasthey experienced. Yet it is vital to ask questions for which no answers areavailable,otherwisewemightbetemptedtodismiss60,000of70,000yearsofhumanhistorywiththeexcusethat‘thepeoplewholivedbackthendidnothingofimportance’.

Thetruthisthattheydidalotofimportantthings.Inparticular,theyshapedtheworldaroundustoamuchlargerdegreethanmostpeoplerealise.TrekkersvisitingtheSiberiantundra,thedesertsofcentralAustraliaandtheAmazonianrainforestbelievethattheyhaveenteredpristinelandscapes,virtuallyuntouchedbyhumanhands.But that’san illusion.The foragerswere therebeforeusandtheybrought aboutdramatic changeseven in thedensest jungles and themostdesolatewildernesses. The next chapter explains how the foragers completelyreshapedtheecologyofourplanetlongbeforethefirstagriculturalvillagewasbuilt.ThewanderingbandsofstorytellingSapienswerethemostimportantandmostdestructiveforcetheanimalkingdomhadeverproduced.

*A‘horizonofpossibilities’meanstheentirespectrumofbeliefs,practicesand experiences that are open before a particular society, given its ecological,technologicalandcultural limitations.Eachsocietyandeachindividualusuallyexploreonlyatinyfractionoftheirhorizonofpossibilities.

* Itmight be argued that not all eighteen ancientDanubians actually diedfromtheviolencewhosemarkscanbeseenon their remains.Somewereonlyinjured. However, this is probably counterbalanced by deaths from trauma tosofttissuesandfromtheinvisibledeprivationsthataccompanywar.

4

TheFlood

PRIORTOTHECOGNITIVEREVOLUTION,humansofallspecieslivedexclusivelyontheAfro-Asianlandmass.True,theyhadsettledafewislandsbyswimmingshortstretchesofwaterorcrossingthemonimprovisedrafts.Flores,for example, was colonised as far back as 850,000 years ago. Yet they wereunable to venture into the open sea, and none reachedAmerica, Australia, orremoteislandssuchasMadagascar,NewZealandandHawaii.

The seabarrierpreventednot justhumansbut alsomanyotherAfro-Asiananimalsandplantsfromreachingthis‘OuterWorld’.Asaresult,theorganismsofdistantlandslikeAustraliaandMadagascarevolvedinisolationformillionsuponmillionsofyears,takingonshapesandnaturesverydifferentfromthoseoftheir distant Afro-Asian relatives. Planet Earth was separated into severaldistinctecosystems,eachmadeupofauniqueassemblyofanimalsandplants.Homosapienswasabouttoputanendtothisbiologicalexuberance.

Following the Cognitive Revolution, Sapiens acquired the technology, theorganisationalskills,andperhapseventhevisionnecessarytobreakoutofAfro-AsiaandsettletheOuterWorld.TheirfirstachievementwasthecolonisationofAustraliasome45,000yearsago.Expertsarehard-pressedtoexplainthisfeat.Inorder to reachAustralia,humanshad tocrossanumberof seachannels, somemorethanahundredkilometreswide,anduponarrivaltheyhadtoadaptnearlyovernighttoacompletelynewecosystem.

The most reasonable theory suggests that, about 45,000 years ago, theSapienslivingintheIndonesianarchipelago(agroupofislandsseparatedfromAsia and fromeachotherbyonlynarrow straits) developed the first seafaringsocieties. They learned how to build andmanoeuvre ocean-going vessels andbecamelong-distancefishermen,tradersandexplorers.Thiswouldhavebroughtabout an unprecedented transformation in human capabilities and lifestyles.Everyothermammalthatwenttosea–seals,seacows,dolphins–hadtoevolve

foraeonstodevelopspecialisedorgansandahydrodynamicbody.TheSapiensin Indonesia, descendants of apeswho livedon theAfrican savannah, becamePacific seafarerswithoutgrowing flippersandwithouthaving towait for theirnosestomigratetothetopoftheirheadsaswhalesdid.Instead,theybuiltboatsandlearnedhowtosteerthem.AndtheseskillsenabledthemtoreachandsettleAustralia.

True, archaeologists have yet to unearth rafts, oars or fishing villages thatdatebackasfaras45,000yearsago(theywouldbedifficulttodiscover,becauserising sea levelshaveburied theancient Indonesian shorelineunderahundredmetresofocean).Nevertheless,thereisstrongcircumstantialevidencetosupportthis theory, especially the fact that in the thousands of years following thesettlementofAustralia,Sapienscolonisedalargenumberofsmallandisolatedislands to its north. Some, such asBuka andManus,were separated from theclosest landby200kilometres of openwater. It’s hard to believe that anyonecould have reached and colonised Manus without sophisticated vessels andsailing skills.Asmentioned earlier, there is also firmevidence for regular seatradebetweensomeoftheseislands,suchasNewIrelandandNewBritain.1

The journey of the first humans toAustralia is one of themost importanteventsinhistory,atleastasimportantasColumbus’journeytoAmericaortheApollo11expeditiontothemoon.Itwasthefirsttimeanyhumanhadmanagedto leave the Afro-Asian ecological system – indeed, the first time any largeterrestrialmammalhadmanagedtocrossfromAfro-AsiatoAustralia.Ofevengreater importance was what the human pioneers did in this new world. Themomentthefirsthunter-gatherersetfootonanAustralianbeachwasthemomentthatHomo sapiens climbed to the top rung in the food chain on a particularlandmass and thereafter became the deadliest species in the annals of planetEarth.

Up until then humans had displayed some innovative adaptations andbehaviours,buttheireffectontheirenvironmenthadbeennegligible.Theyhaddemonstrated remarkable success in moving into and adjusting to varioushabitats,buttheydidsowithoutdrasticallychangingthosehabitats.Thesettlersof Australia, or more accurately, its conquerors, didn’t just adapt, theytransformedtheAustralianecosystembeyondrecognition.

The first human footprint on a sandy Australian beach was immediatelywashed away by thewaves.Yetwhen the invaders advanced inland, they leftbehindadifferentfootprint,onethatwouldneverbeexpunged.Astheypushedon, they encountered a strange universe of unknown creatures that included a200-kilogram, two-metre kangaroo, and a marsupial lion, as massive as amoderntiger,thatwasthecontinent’slargestpredator.Koalasfartoobigtobe

cuddlyandcuterustledinthetreesandflightlessbirdstwicethesizeofostrichessprintedontheplains.Dragon-likelizardsandsnakesfivemetreslongslitheredthrough the undergrowth. The giant diprotodon, a two-and-a-half-tonwombat,roamed the forests. Except for the birds and reptiles, all these animals weremarsupials– likekangaroos, theygavebirth to tiny,helpless, fetus-likeyoungwhichtheythennurturedwithmilkinabdominalpouches.MarsupialmammalswerealmostunknowninAfricaandAsia,butinAustraliatheyreignedsupreme.

Within a few thousandyears, virtually all of these giants vanished.Of thetwenty-fourAustraliananimalspeciesweighingfiftykilogramsormore,twenty-threebecameextinct.2Alargenumberofsmallerspeciesalsodisappeared.FoodchainsthroughouttheentireAustralianecosystemwerebrokenandrearranged.It was the most important transformation of the Australian ecosystem formillionsofyears.WasitallthefaultofHomosapiens?

GuiltyasChargedSomescholarstrytoexonerateourspecies,placingtheblameonthevagaries

oftheclimate(theusualscapegoatinsuchcases).YetitishardtobelievethatHomosapienswascompletelyinnocent.Therearethreepiecesofevidencethatweaken the climate alibi, and implicate our ancestors in the extinction of theAustralianmegafauna.

Firstly,even thoughAustralia’sclimatechangedsome45,000yearsago, itwasn’t a very remarkable upheaval. It’s hard to see how the new weatherpatternsalonecouldhavecausedsuchamassiveextinction.It’scommontodaytoexplainanythingandeverythingastheresultofclimatechange,butthetruthis thatearth’sclimatenever rests. It is inconstant flux.Everyevent inhistoryoccurredagainstthebackgroundofsomeclimatechange.

In particular, our planet has experienced numerous cycles of cooling andwarming.During the lastmillion years, there has been an ice age on averageevery100,000years.The lastone ran fromabout75,000 to15,000years ago.Not unusually severe for an ice age, it had twin peaks, the first about 70,000years ago and the second at about 20,000 years ago. The giant diprotodonappeared in Australia more than 1.5 million years ago and successfullyweatheredatleasttenpreviousiceages.Italsosurvivedthefirstpeakofthelasticeage,around70,000yearsago.Why,then,diditdisappear45,000yearsago?Of course, if diprotodons had been the only large animal to disappear at thistime, itmighthavebeen justa fluke.Butmore than90percentofAustralia’smegafauna disappeared along with the diprotodon. The evidence iscircumstantial,butit’shardtoimaginethatSapiens,justbycoincidence,arrived

inAustraliaattheprecisepointthatalltheseanimalsweredroppingdeadofthechills.3

Secondly, when climate change causesmass extinctions, sea creatures areusuallyhitashardaslanddwellers.Yetthereisnoevidenceofanysignificantdisappearanceofoceanicfauna45,000yearsago.Humaninvolvementcaneasilyexplain why the wave of extinction obliterated the terrestrial megafauna ofAustralia while sparing that of the nearby oceans. Despite its burgeoningnavigational abilities, Homo sapiens was still overwhelmingly a terrestrialmenace.

Thirdly, mass extinctions akin to the archetypal Australian decimationoccurred again and again in the ensuing millennia – whenever people settledanotherpartof theOuterWorld.InthesecasesSapiensguilt is irrefutable.Forexample, the megafauna of New Zealand – which had weathered the alleged‘climatechange’ofc.45,000yearsagowithoutascratch–suffereddevastatingblows immediately after the first humans set foot on the islands. TheMaoris,NewZealand’sfirstSapienscolonisers,reachedtheislandsabout800yearsago.Withina coupleof centuries, themajorityof the localmegafaunawasextinct,alongwith60percentofallbirdspecies.

A similar fate befell the mammoth population of Wrangel Island in theArctic Ocean (200 kilometres north of the Siberian coast). Mammoths hadflourished formillions of years overmost of the northern hemisphere, but asHomosapiens spread – first over Eurasia and then overNorthAmerica – themammothsretreated.By10,000yearsagotherewasnotasinglemammothtobefoundintheworld,exceptonafewremoteArcticislands,mostconspicuouslyWrangel. The mammoths of Wrangel continued to prosper for a few moremillennia,thensuddenlydisappearedabout4,000yearsago,justwhenthefirsthumansreachedtheisland.

WeretheAustralianextinctionanisolatedevent,wecouldgranthumansthebenefitofthedoubt.ButthehistoricalrecordmakesHomosapienslooklikeanecologicalserialkiller.

AllthesettlersofAustraliahadattheirdisposalwasStoneAgetechnology.Howcouldtheycauseanecologicaldisaster?Therearethreeexplanationsthatmeshquitenicely.

Large animals – the primary victims of the Australian extinction – breedslowly.Pregnancyis long,offspringperpregnancyarefew,andthereare longbreaks between pregnancies. Consequently, if humans cut down even onediprotodoneveryfewmonths,itwouldbeenoughtocausediprotodondeathstooutnumber births.Within a few thousand years the last, lonesome diprotodon

wouldpassaway,andwithhertheentirespecies.4In fact, for all their size,diprotodonsandAustralia’sothergiantsprobably

wouldn’thavebeenthathardtohuntbecausetheywouldhavebeentakentotallyby surprise by their two-legged assailants. Various human species had beenprowlingandevolvinginAfro-Asiafor2millionyears.Theyslowlyhonedtheirhunting skills, and began going after large animals around 400,000 years ago.Thebig beasts ofAfrica andAsia learned to avoid humans, sowhen the newmega-predator –Homo sapiens– appeared on theAfro-Asian scene, the largeanimalsalreadyknewtokeeptheirdistancefromcreaturesthatlookedlikeit.Incontrast, theAustraliangiantshadnotimetolearntorunaway.Humansdon’tcome across as particularly dangerous. They don’t have long, sharp teeth ormuscular,lithebodies.Sowhenadiprotodon,thelargestmarsupialevertowalkthe earth, set eyes for the first time on this frail-looking ape, he gave it oneglanceandthenwentbacktochewingleaves.Theseanimalshadtoevolveafearofhumankind,butbeforetheycoulddosotheyweregone.

Thesecondexplanation is thatby the timeSapiens reachedAustralia, theyhad already mastered fire agriculture. Faced with an alien and threateningenvironment, they deliberately burned vast areas of impassable thickets anddense forests to create open grasslands, which attracted more easily huntedgame, andwerebetter suited to theirneeds.They therebycompletely changedtheecologyoflargepartsofAustraliawithinafewshortmillennia.

One body of evidence supporting this view is the fossil plant record.Eucalyptus trees were rare in Australia 45,000 years ago. But the arrival ofHomosapiens inauguratedagoldenagefor thespecies.Sinceeucalyptusesareparticularly resistant to fire, they spread far and wide while other trees andshrubsdisappeared.

These changes in vegetation influenced the animals that ate the plants andthe carnivores that ate the vegetarians. Koalas, which subsist exclusively oneucalyptus leaves, happilymunched theirway into new territories.Most otheranimals suffered greatly. Many Australian food chains collapsed, driving theweakestlinksintoextinction.5

A third explanation agrees that hunting and fire agriculture played asignificantroleintheextinction,butemphasisesthatwecan’tcompletelyignoretheroleofclimate.TheclimatechangesthatbesetAustraliaabout45,000yearsago destabilised the ecosystem and made it particularly vulnerable. Undernormal circumstances the system would probably have recuperated, as hadhappenedmany times previously. However, humans appeared on the stage atjust this critical juncture and pushed the brittle ecosystem into the abyss. The

combinationofclimatechangeandhumanhuntingisparticularlydevastatingforlarge animals, since it attacks them from different angles. It is hard to find agoodsurvivalstrategythatwillworksimultaneouslyagainstmultiplethreats.

Without further evidence, there’s no way of deciding between the threescenarios.But therearecertainlygoodreasons tobelieve that ifHomosapienshad never gone Down Under, it would still be home to marsupial lions,diprotodonsandgiantkangaroos.

TheEndofSlothTheextinctionoftheAustralianmegafaunawasprobablythefirstsignificant

mark Homo sapiens left on our planet. It was followed by an even largerecologicaldisaster, this time inAmerica.Homosapienswas the first andonlyhumanspeciestoreachthewesternhemispherelandmass,arrivingabout16,000yearsago,thatisinoraround14,000BC.ThefirstAmericansarrivedonfoot,whichtheycoulddobecause,atthetime,sealevelswerelowenoughthatalandbridge connected north-eastern Siberia with north-western Alaska. Not that itwaseasy–thejourneywasanarduousone,perhapsharderthantheseapassagetoAustralia.Tomakethecrossing,Sapiensfirsthadtolearnhowtowithstandthe extreme Arctic conditions of northern Siberia, an area on which the sunnevershinesinwinter,andwheretemperaturescandroptominusfiftydegreesCelsius.

No previous human species hadmanaged to penetrate places like northernSiberia.Even the cold-adaptedNeanderthals restricted themselves to relativelywarmer regions further south.ButHomosapiens,whose bodywas adapted tolivingintheAfricansavannahratherthaninthelandsofsnowandice,devisedingenious solutions. When roaming bands of Sapiens foragers migrated intocolderclimates,theylearnedtomakesnowshoesandeffectivethermalclothingcomposed of layers of furs and skins, sewn together tightly with the help ofneedles.Theydevelopednewweaponsandsophisticatedhuntingtechniquesthatenabled them to track and kill mammoths and the other big game of the farnorth.Astheirthermalclothingandhuntingtechniquesimproved,Sapiensdaredtoventuredeeperanddeeperintothefrozenregions.Andastheymovednorth,theirclothes,huntingstrategiesandothersurvivalskillscontinuedtoimprove.

Butwhydidtheybother?WhybanishoneselftoSiberiabychoice?Perhapssome bands were driven north by wars, demographic pressures or naturaldisasters.Othersmight have been lured northwards bymore positive reasons,suchasanimalprotein.TheArcticlandswerefulloflarge,juicyanimalssuchasreindeer andmammoths. Everymammoth was a source of a vast quantity of

meat(which,giventhefrostytemperatures,couldevenbefrozenforlateruse),tasty fat, warm fur and valuable ivory. As the findings from Sungir testify,mammoth-huntersdidnotjustsurviveinthefrozennorth–theythrived.Astimepassed, the bands spread far and wide, pursuing mammoths, mastodons,rhinoceroses and reindeer. Around 14,000 BC, the chase took some of themfrom north-eastern Siberia to Alaska. Of course, they didn’t know they werediscovering a new world. For mammoth and man alike, Alaska was a mereextensionofSiberia.

At first, glaciers blocked the way from Alaska to the rest of America,allowingnomore thanperhapsa fewisolatedpioneers to investigate the landsfurther south.However,around12,000BCglobalwarmingmelted the iceandopenedaneasierpassage.Makinguseofthenewcorridor,peoplemovedsouthen masse, spreading over the entire continent. Though originally adapted tohunting largegame in theArctic, they soon adjusted to an amazingvarietyofclimatesandecosystems.DescendantsoftheSiberianssettledthethickforestsofthe easternUnited States, the swamps of theMississippiDelta, the deserts ofMexicoandsteamingjunglesofCentralAmerica.SomemadetheirhomesintheriverworldoftheAmazonbasin,othersstruckrootsinAndeanmountainvalleysortheopenpampasofArgentina.Andallthishappenedinameremillenniumortwo! By 10,000 BC, humans already inhabited the most southern point inAmerica, the island of Tierra del Fuego at the continent’s southern tip. ThehumanblitzkriegacrossAmericatestifiestotheincomparableingenuityandtheunsurpassedadaptabilityofHomosapiens.Nootheranimalhadevermovedintosuchahugevarietyofradicallydifferenthabitatssoquickly,everywhereusingvirtuallythesamegenes.6

The settlingofAmericawashardlybloodless. It leftbehinda long trailofvictims.Americanfauna14,000yearsagowasfarricherthanitistoday.WhenthefirstAmericansmarchedsouthfromAlaskaintotheplainsofCanadaandthewesternUnitedStates,theyencounteredmammothsandmastodons,rodentsthesize of bears, herds of horses and camels, oversized lions anddozens of largespeciesthelikesofwhicharecompletelyunknowntoday,amongthemfearsomesabre-tooth cats and giant ground sloths that weighed up to eight tons andreached a height of six metres. South America hosted an even more exoticmenagerie of large mammals, reptiles and birds. The Americas were a greatlaboratory of evolutionary experimentation, a place where animals and plantsunknowninAfricaandAsiahadevolvedandthrived.

But no longer. Within 2,000 years of the Sapiens arrival, most of theseunique species were gone. According to current estimates, within that shortinterval, North America lost thirty-four out of its forty-seven genera of large

mammals. South America lost fifty out of sixty. The sabre-tooth cats, afterflourishing for more than 30 million years, disappeared, and so did the giantground sloths, the oversized lions, native American horses, native Americancamels, thegiant rodents and themammoths.Thousandsof speciesof smallermammals, reptiles, birds, and even insects and parasites also became extinct(whenthemammothsdiedout,allspeciesofmammothticksfollowedthemtooblivion).

Fordecades,palaeontologistsandzooarchaeologists–peoplewhosearchforandstudyanimalremains–havebeencombingtheplainsandmountainsoftheAmericas in search of the fossilised bones of ancient camels and the petrifiedfaecesofgiantgroundsloths.Whentheyfindwhattheyseek,thetreasuresarecarefully packed up and sent to laboratories, where every bone and everycoprolite (the technical name for fossilised turds) is meticulously studied anddated.Timeandagain, theseanalysesyield thesameresults: thefreshestdungballsandthemostrecentcamelbonesdatetotheperiodwhenhumansfloodedAmerica,thatis,betweenapproximately12,000and9000BC.Onlyinoneareahavescientistsdiscoveredyoungerdungballs:onseveralCaribbeanislands, inparticularCubaandHispaniola,theyfoundpetrifiedground-slothscatdatingtoabout5000BC.ThisisexactlythetimewhenthefirsthumansmanagedtocrosstheCaribbeanSeaandsettlethesetwolargeislands.

Again, some scholars try to exonerate Homo sapiens and blame climatechange (which requires them to posit that, for some mysterious reason, theclimateintheCaribbeanislandsremainedstaticfor7,000yearswhiletherestofthe western hemisphere warmed). But in America, the dung ball cannot bedodged.Wearetheculprits.Thereisnowayaroundthattruth.Evenifclimatechangeabettedus,thehumancontributionwasdecisive.7

Noah’sArkIfwecombine themassextinctions inAustralia andAmerica, andadd the

smaller-scaleextinctionsthattookplaceasHomosapiensspreadoverAfro-Asia– such as the extinction of all other human species – and the extinctions thatoccurred when ancient foragers settled remote islands such as Cuba, theinevitable conclusion is that the firstwaveofSapiens colonisationwasoneofthe biggest and swiftest ecological disasters to befall the animal kingdom.Hardest hit were the large furry creatures. At the time of the CognitiveRevolution, the planet was home to about 200 genera of large terrestrialmammals weighing over fifty kilograms. At the time of the AgriculturalRevolution,onlyaboutahundred remained.Homosapiens drove to extinction

about half of the planet’s big beasts long before humans invented the wheel,writing,orirontools.

This ecological tragedywas restaged inminiaturecountless timesafter theAgriculturalRevolution.Thearchaeologicalrecordofislandafterislandtellsthesame sad story. The tragedy opens with a scene showing a rich and variedpopulationoflargeanimals,withoutanytraceofhumans.Inscenetwo,Sapiensappear,evidencedbyahumanbone,aspearpoint,orperhapsapotsherd.Scenethreequicklyfollows, inwhichmenandwomenoccupycentrestageandmostlargeanimals,alongwithmanysmallerones,aregone.

The large island ofMadagascar, about 400 kilometres east of the Africanmainland, offers a famous example. Throughmillions of years of isolation, auniquecollectionofanimalsevolvedthere.Theseincludedtheelephantbird,aflightlesscreaturethreemetrestallandweighingalmosthalfaton–thelargestbird in the world – and the giant lemurs, the globe’s largest primates. Theelephantbirdsandthegiantlemurs,alongwithmostoftheotherlargeanimalsofMadagascar, suddenlyvanishedabout1,500yearsago–preciselywhen thefirsthumanssetfootontheisland.

10. Reconstructions of two giant ground sloths (Megatherium) andbehind them two giant armadillos (Glyptodon). Now extinct, giantarmadillosmeasured over threemetres in length and weighed up to twotons,whereasgiantgroundslothsreachedheightsofuptosixmetres,andweigheduptoeighttons.

InthePacificOcean,themainwaveofextinctionbeganinabout1500BC,whenPolynesianfarmerssettledtheSolomonIslands,FijiandNewCaledonia.Theykilledoff,directlyorindirectly,hundredsofspeciesofbirds,insects,snailsandotherlocalinhabitants.Fromthere,thewaveofextinctionmovedgraduallyto the east, the south and the north, into the heart of the Pacific Ocean,obliterating on itsway the unique fauna of Samoa andTonga (1200BC); theMarquisIslands(AD1);EasterIsland,theCookIslandsandHawaii(AD500);andfinallyNewZealand(AD1200).

Similarecologicaldisastersoccurredonalmosteveryoneofthethousandsofislands that pepper the Atlantic Ocean, Indian Ocean, Arctic Ocean andMediterraneanSea.Archaeologists have discoveredon even the tiniest islandsevidenceoftheexistenceofbirds,insectsandsnailsthatlivedthereforcountlessgenerations, only to vanishwhen the first human farmers arrived.None but afew extremely remote islands escapedman’s notice until themodern age, andtheseislandskepttheirfaunaintact.TheGalapagosIslands,togiveonefamousexample, remained uninhabited by humans until the nineteenth century, thuspreservingtheiruniquemenagerie,includingtheirgianttortoises,which,liketheancientdiprotodons,shownofearofhumans.

TheFirstWaveExtinction,whichaccompanied the spreadof the foragers,wasfollowedbytheSecondWaveExtinction,whichaccompaniedthespreadofthe farmers, and gives us an important perspective on the Third WaveExtinction,whichindustrialactivityiscausingtoday.Don’tbelievetree-huggerswho claim that our ancestors lived in harmony with nature. Long before theIndustrial Revolution,Homo sapiens held the record among all organisms fordriving the most plant and animal species to their extinctions. We have thedubiousdistinctionofbeingthedeadliestspeciesintheannalsofbiology.

Perhaps if more people were aware of the FirstWave and SecondWaveextinctions,they’dbelessnonchalantabouttheThirdWavetheyarepartof.Ifwe knew how many species we’ve already eradicated, we might be moremotivated to protect those that still survive. This is especially relevant to thelarge animals of the oceans.Unlike their terrestrial counterparts, the large seaanimals suffered relatively little from the Cognitive and AgriculturalRevolutions.Butmanyofthemareonthebrinkofextinctionnowasaresultofindustrialpollutionandhumanoveruseofoceanicresources.If thingscontinueatthepresentpace,itislikelythatwhales,sharks,tunaanddolphinswillfollowthe diprotodons, ground sloths and mammoths to oblivion. Among all theworld’s largecreatures, theonly survivorsof thehuman floodwillbehumansthemselves,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.HomosapiensspreadfromEastAfricatotheMiddleEast,toEuropeandAsia,and finally toAustraliaandAmerica–buteverywhere theywent,Sapiens toocontinued to live by gatheringwild plants and huntingwild animals.Why doanythingelsewhenyourlifestylefeedsyouamplyandsupportsarichworldofsocialstructures,religiousbeliefsandpoliticaldynamics?

All this changed about 10,000 years ago, when Sapiens began to devotealmost all their time and effort tomanipulating the lives of a few animal andplant species. From sunrise to sunset humans sowed seeds, watered plants,pluckedweedsfromthegroundandledsheeptoprimepastures.Thiswork,theythought,wouldprovidethemwithmorefruit,grainandmeat.Itwasarevolutioninthewayhumanslived–theAgriculturalRevolution.

Thetransitiontoagriculturebeganaround9500–8500BCinthehillcountryofsouth-easternTurkey,westernIran,andtheLevant.Itbeganslowlyandinarestricted geographical area. Wheat and goats were domesticated byapproximately9000BC;peasand lentilsaround8000BC;olive treesby5000BC;horsesby4000BC;andgrapevinesin3500BC.Someanimalsandplants,suchascamelsandcashewnuts,weredomesticatedevenlater,butby3500BCthemainwave of domesticationwas over. Even today,with all our advancedtechnologies, more than 90 per cent of the calories that feed humanity comefrom the handful of plants that our ancestors domesticated between 9500 and3500 BC – wheat, rice, maize (called ‘corn’ in the US), potatoes, millet andbarley.Nonoteworthyplantoranimalhasbeendomesticated in the last2,000

years. Ifourmindsare thoseofhunter-gatherers,ourcuisine is thatofancientfarmers.

ScholarsoncebelievedthatagriculturespreadfromasingleMiddleEasternpoint of origin to the four corners of the world. Today, scholars agree thatagriculture sprang up in other parts of theworld not by the action ofMiddleEasternfarmersexportingtheirrevolutionbutentirelyindependently.PeopleinCentralAmericadomesticatedmaizeandbeanswithoutknowinganythingaboutwheatandpeacultivationintheMiddleEast.SouthAmericanslearnedhowtoraisepotatoesandllamas,unawareofwhatwasgoingonineitherMexicoortheLevant. Chinas first revolutionaries domesticated rice, millet and pigs. NorthAmerica’sfirstgardenerswerethosewhogottiredofcombingtheundergrowthforediblegourdsanddecidedtocultivatepumpkins.NewGuineanstamedsugarcane and bananas, while the firstWest African farmers made African millet,Africanrice,sorghumandwheatconformtotheirneeds.Fromtheseinitialfocalpoints,agriculturespreadfarandwide.BythefirstcenturyADthevastmajorityofpeoplethroughoutmostoftheworldwereagriculturists.

WhydidagriculturalrevolutionseruptintheMiddleEast,ChinaandCentralAmerica but not in Australia, Alaska or South Africa? The reason is simple:mostspeciesofplantsandanimalscan’tbedomesticated.Sapienscoulddigupdelicious truffles and hunt down woolly mammoths, but domesticating eitherspecieswasoutofthequestion.Thefungiwerefartooelusive,thegiantbeaststoo ferocious. Of the thousands of species that our ancestors hunted andgathered, only a fewwere suitable candidates for farming and herding.Thosefewspecieslivedinparticularplaces,andthosearetheplaceswhereagriculturalrevolutionsoccurred.

Scholars once proclaimed that the agricultural revolutionwas a great leapforward for humanity. They told a tale of progress fuelled by human brainpower.Evolutiongraduallyproducedevermore intelligentpeople.Eventually,peopleweresosmart that theywereable todeciphernature’ssecrets,enablingthem to tame sheep and cultivate wheat. As soon as this happened, theycheerfullyabandonedthegruelling,dangerous,andoftenspartanlifeofhunter-gatherers,settlingdowntoenjoythepleasant,satiatedlifeoffarmers.

Map 2. Locations and dates of agricultural revolutions. The data iscontentious, and the map is constantly being redrawn to incorporate thelatestarchaeologicaldiscoveries.1

That tale is a fantasy. There is no evidence that people became moreintelligent with time. Foragers knew the secrets of nature long before theAgriculturalRevolution,sincetheirsurvivaldependedonanintimateknowledgeoftheanimalstheyhuntedandtheplantstheygathered.Ratherthanheraldinganew era of easy living, the Agricultural Revolution left farmers with livesgenerally more difficult and less satisfying than those of foragers. Hunter-gatherersspenttheirtimeinmorestimulatingandvariedways,andwerelessindangerofstarvationanddisease.TheAgriculturalRevolutioncertainlyenlargedthe sum totalof foodat thedisposalofhumankind,but theextra fooddidnottranslate intoabetterdietormore leisure.Rather, it translated intopopulationexplosions and pampered elites. The average farmer worked harder than theaverageforager,andgotaworsedietinreturn.TheAgriculturalRevolutionwashistory’sbiggestfraud.2

Whowasresponsible?Neitherkings,norpriests,normerchants.Theculpritswereahandfulofplantspecies,includingwheat,riceandpotatoes.TheseplantsdomesticatedHomosapiens,ratherthanviceversa.

ThinkforamomentabouttheAgriculturalRevolutionfromtheviewpointofwheat. Ten thousand years ago wheat was just a wild grass, one of many,confinedtoasmallrangeintheMiddleEast.Suddenly,withinjustafewshort

millennia,itwasgrowingallovertheworld.Accordingtothebasicevolutionarycriteria of survival and reproduction, wheat has become one of the mostsuccessfulplantsinthehistoryoftheearth.InareassuchastheGreatPlainsofNorthAmerica,wherenotasinglewheatstalkgrew10,000yearsago,youcantodaywalkforhundredsuponhundredsofkilometreswithoutencounteringanyother plant.Worldwide,wheat covers about 2.25million square kilometres oftheglobessurface,almosttentimesthesizeofBritain.Howdidthisgrassturnfrominsignificanttoubiquitous?

Wheatdid itbymanipulatingHomosapiens to itsadvantage.Thisapehadbeen living a fairly comfortable life hunting and gathering until about 10,000yearsago,but thenbegan to investmoreandmoreeffort incultivatingwheat.Within a couple ofmillennia, humans inmany parts of theworldwere doinglittlefromdawntoduskotherthantakingcareofwheatplants.Itwasn’teasy.Wheatdemandedalotofthem.Wheatdidn’tlikerocksandpebbles,soSapiensbroketheirbacksclearingfields.Wheatdidn’tlikesharingitsspace,waterandnutrients with other plants, so men and women laboured long days weedingunderthescorchingsun.Wheatgotsick,soSapienshadtokeepawatchoutforwormsandblight.Wheatwasdefencelessagainstotherorganismsthatlikedtoeatit,fromrabbitstolocustswarms,sothefarmershadtoguardandprotectit.Wheatwasthirsty,sohumansluggedwaterfromspringsandstreamstowaterit.ItshungerevenimpelledSapienstocollectanimalfaecestonourishthegroundinwhichwheatgrew.

ThebodyofHomosapienshadnotevolvedforsuchtasks.Itwasadaptedtoclimbing apple trees and running after gazelles, not to clearing rocks andcarryingwaterbuckets.Humanspines,knees,necksandarchespaid theprice.Studies of ancient skeletons indicate that the transition to agriculture broughtabout a plethora of ailments, such as slipped discs, arthritis and hernias.Moreover, thenewagricultural tasksdemandedsomuchtimethatpeoplewereforcedtosettlepermanentlynexttotheirwheatfields.Thiscompletelychangedtheirwayof life.Wedidnotdomesticatewheat. Itdomesticatedus.Theword‘domesticate’comesfromtheLatindomus,whichmeans‘house’.Who’stheonelivinginahouse?Notthewheat.It’stheSapiens.

HowdidwheatconvinceHomosapienstoexchangearathergoodlifeforamoremiserableexistence?Whatdid itoffer in return? Itdidnotofferabetterdiet.Remember,humansareomnivorousapeswhothriveonawidevarietyoffoods. Grains made up only a small fraction of the human diet before theAgricultural Revolution. A diet based on cereals is poor in minerals andvitamins,hardtodigest,andreallybadforyourteethandgums.

Wheatdidnotgivepeople economic security.The lifeof apeasant is less

secure than that of a hunter-gatherer. Foragers relied on dozens of species tosurvive, and could therefore weather difficult years even without stocks ofpreservedfood.Iftheavailabilityofonespecieswasreduced,theycouldgatherand hunt more of other species. Farming societies have, until very recently,reliedforthegreatbulkoftheircalorieintakeonasmallvarietyofdomesticatedplants.Inmanyareas,theyreliedonjustasinglestaple,suchaswheat,potatoesorrice.Iftherainsfailedorcloudsoflocustsarrivedorifafunguslearnedhowtoinfectthatstaplespecies,peasantsdiedbythethousandsandmillions.

Nor couldwheat offer security against human violence. The early farmerswereat least asviolentas their foragerancestors, ifnotmore so.Farmershadmore possessions and needed land for planting. The loss of pasture land toraiding neighbours could mean the difference between subsistence andstarvation,sotherewasmuchlessroomforcompromise.Whenaforagingbandwashard-pressedbyastrongerrival, itcouldusuallymoveon. Itwasdifficultand dangerous, but it was feasible. When a strong enemy threatened anagriculturalvillage,retreatmeantgivingupfields,housesandgranaries.Inmanycases,thisdoomedtherefugeestostarvation.Farmers,therefore,tendedtostayputandfighttothebitterend.

12. Tribal warfare in NewGuinea between two farming communities(1960). Such scenes were probably widespread in the thousands of yearsfollowingtheAgriculturalRevolution.

Many anthropological and archaeological studies indicate that in simpleagricultural societies with no political frameworks beyond village and tribe,humanviolencewasresponsibleforabout15percentofdeaths,including25percentofmaledeaths.IncontemporaryNewGuinea,violenceaccountsfor30percentofmaledeathsinoneagriculturaltribalsociety,theDani,and35percentinanother, the Enga. In Ecuador, perhaps 50 per cent of adultWaoranismeet aviolent death at the hands of another human!3 In time, human violence wasbrought under control through the development of larger social frameworks –cities,kingdomsandstates.Butittookthousandsofyearstobuildsuchhugeandeffectivepoliticalstructures.

Villagelifecertainlybroughtthefirstfarmerssomeimmediatebenefits,suchas better protection against wild animals, rain and cold. Yet for the averageperson,thedisadvantagesprobablyoutweighedtheadvantages.Thisishardforpeople in today’s prosperous societies to appreciate. Sincewe enjoy affluenceandsecurity,andsinceouraffluenceandsecurityarebuiltonfoundations laidbytheAgriculturalRevolution,weassumethattheAgriculturalRevolutionwasawonderfulimprovement.Yetitiswrongtojudgethousandsofyearsofhistoryfromtheperspectiveoftoday.Amuchmorerepresentativeviewpointisthatofathree-year-old girl dying frommalnutrition in first-century China because herfather’scropshavefailed.Wouldshesay‘Iamdyingfrommalnutrition,butin2,000years,peoplewillhaveplentytoeatandliveinbigair-conditionedhouses,somysufferingisaworthwhilesacrifice’?

What then did wheat offer agriculturists, including that malnourishedChinese girl? It offered nothing for people as individuals. Yet it did bestowsomethingonHomosapiensasaspecies.Cultivatingwheatprovidedmuchmorefood per unit of territory, and thereby enabled Homo sapiens to multiplyexponentially. Around 13,000 BC, when people fed themselves by gatheringwild plants and huntingwild animals, the area around the oasis of Jericho, inPalestine,couldsupportatmostoneroamingbandofaboutahundredrelativelyhealthy and well-nourished people. Around 8500 BC, when wild plants gaveway towheat fields, the oasis supported a large but cramped village of 1,000people,whosufferedfarmorefromdiseaseandmalnourishment.

The currency of evolution is neither hunger nor pain, but rather copies ofDNAhelixes.Justas theeconomicsuccessofacompanyismeasuredonlybythenumberofdollarsinitsbankaccount,notbythehappinessofitsemployees,sotheevolutionarysuccessofaspeciesismeasuredbythenumberofcopiesofits DNA. If no more DNA copies remain, the species is extinct, just as acompanywithoutmoneyisbankrupt.IfaspeciesboastsmanyDNAcopies,itisasuccess,andthespeciesflourishes.Fromsuchaperspective,1,000copiesare

always better than a hundred copies. This is the essence of the AgriculturalRevolution:theabilitytokeepmorepeoplealiveunderworseconditions.

Yet why should individuals care about this evolutionary calculus? Whywouldany saneperson lowerhisorher standardof living just tomultiply thenumberofcopiesoftheHomosapiensgenome?Nobodyagreedtothisdeal:theAgriculturalRevolutionwasatrap.

TheLuxuryTrapThe rise of farming was a very gradual affair spread over centuries and

millennia.AbandofHomosapiensgatheringmushroomsandnutsandhuntingdeerandrabbitdidnotallofasuddensettle inapermanentvillage,ploughingfields, sowingwheatandcarryingwater from the river.Thechangeproceededbystages,eachofwhichinvolvedjustasmallalterationindailylife.

Homo sapiens reached theMiddle East around 70,000 years ago. For thenext50,000yearsourancestorsflourishedtherewithoutagriculture.Thenaturalresourcesoftheareawereenoughtosupportitshumanpopulation.Intimesofplentypeoplehadafewmorechildren,andintimesofneedafewless.Humans,likemanymammals,havehormonalandgeneticmechanisms thathelpcontrolprocreation. In good times females reach puberty earlier, and their chances ofgetting pregnant are a bit higher. In bad times puberty is late and fertilitydecreases.

Tothesenaturalpopulationcontrolswereaddedculturalmechanisms.Babiesandsmallchildren,whomoveslowlyanddemandmuchattention,wereaburdenon nomadic foragers. People tried to space their children three to four yearsapart.Womendidsobynursingtheirchildrenaroundtheclockanduntilalateage (around-the-clock suckling significantly decreases the chances of gettingpregnant). Other methods included full or partial sexual abstinence (backedperhapsbyculturaltaboos),abortionsandoccasionallyinfanticide.4

Duringtheselongmillenniapeopleoccasionallyatewheatgrain,butthiswasamarginalpartoftheirdiet.About18,000yearsago,thelasticeagegavewayto a periodof globalwarming.As temperatures rose, sodid rainfall.ThenewclimatewasidealforMiddleEasternwheatandothercereals,whichmultipliedandspread.Peoplebeganeatingmorewheat,andinexchangetheyinadvertentlyspread its growth. Since it was impossible to eat wild grains without firstwinnowing, grinding and cooking them, people who gathered these grainscarriedthembacktotheirtemporarycampsitesforprocessing.Wheatgrainsaresmallandnumerous,sosomeoftheminevitablyfellonthewaytothecampsiteandwere lost. Over time,more andmorewheat grew along favourite human

trailsandnearcampsites.Whenhumansburneddownforestsandthickets,thisalsohelpedwheat.Fire

clearedawaytreesandshrubs,allowingwheatandothergrassestomonopolisethe sunlight, water and nutrients.Where wheat became particularly abundant,and game and other food sources were also plentiful, human bands couldgraduallygiveup theirnomadic lifestyleandsettledowninseasonalandevenpermanentcamps.

At first they might have camped for four weeks during the harvest. Agenerationlater,aswheatplantsmultipliedandspread,theharvestcampmighthavelastedforfiveweeks,thensix,andfinallyitbecameapermanentvillage.Evidenceof suchsettlementshasbeendiscovered throughout theMiddleEast,particularlyintheLevant,wheretheNatufiancultureflourishedfrom12,500BCto 9500BC.TheNatufianswere hunter-gathererswho subsisted on dozens ofwild species, but they lived in permanent villages and devotedmuch of theirtimetotheintensivegatheringandprocessingofwildcereals.Theybuiltstonehousesandgranaries.They storedgrain for timesofneed.They inventednewtools such as stone scythes for harvesting wild wheat, and stone pestles andmortarstogrindit.

Intheyearsfollowing9500BC,thedescendantsoftheNatufianscontinuedtogatherandprocesscereals,buttheyalsobegantocultivatetheminmoreandmore elaborateways.When gatheringwild grains, they took care to lay asidepartoftheharvesttosowthefieldsnextseason.Theydiscoveredthattheycouldachievemuchbetterresultsbysowingthegrainsdeepinthegroundratherthanhaphazardly scattering themon the surface.So theybegan to hoe andplough.Gradually theyalsostarted toweed the fields, toguard themagainstparasites,and to water and fertilise them. As more effort was directed towards cerealcultivation, there was less time to gather and hunt wild species. The foragersbecamefarmers.

Nosinglestepseparatedthewomangatheringwildwheatfromthewomanfarming domesticated wheat, so it’s hard to say exactly when the decisivetransition to agriculture took place. But, by 8500 BC, the Middle East waspepperedwithpermanentvillagessuchasJericho,whoseinhabitantsspentmostoftheirtimecultivatingafewdomesticatedspecies.

With themove to permanent villages and the increase in food supply, thepopulation began to grow.Giving up the nomadic lifestyle enabledwomen tohaveachildeveryyear.Babieswereweanedatanearlierage– theycouldbefedonporridgeandgruel.Theextrahandsweresorelyneededinthefields.Buttheextramouthsquicklywipedoutthefoodsurpluses,soevenmorefieldshadtobeplanted.Aspeoplebeganlivingindisease-riddensettlements,aschildren

fedmoreoncerealsandlessonmother’smilk,andaseachchildcompetedforhisorherporridgewithmoreandmoresiblings,childmortalitysoared.Inmostagriculturalsocietiesatleastoneoutofeverythreechildrendiedbeforereachingtwenty.5Yettheincreaseinbirthsstilloutpacedtheincreaseindeaths;humanskepthavinglargernumbersofchildren.

With time, the ‘wheat bargain’ became more and more burdensome.Childrendied indroves,andadultsatebreadby thesweatof theirbrows.TheaveragepersoninJerichoof8500BClivedaharderlifethantheaveragepersoninJerichoof9500BCor13,000BC.Butnobodyrealisedwhatwashappening.Every generation continued to live like the previous generation, making onlysmallimprovementshereandthereinthewaythingsweredone.Paradoxically,aseriesof‘improvements’,eachofwhichwasmeanttomakelifeeasier,addeduptoamillstonearoundthenecksofthesefarmers.

Whydidpeoplemakesuchafatefulmiscalculation?Forthesamereasonthatpeoplethroughouthistoryhavemiscalculated.Peoplewereunabletofathomthefullconsequencesoftheirdecisions.Whenevertheydecidedtodoabitofextrawork–say,tohoethefieldsinsteadofscatteringseedsonthesurface–peoplethought,‘Yes,wewillhavetoworkharder.Buttheharvestwillbesobountiful!Wewon’thavetoworryanymoreaboutleanyears.Ourchildrenwillnevergotosleephungry.’Itmadesense.Ifyouworkedharder,youwouldhaveabetterlife.Thatwastheplan.

Thefirstpartoftheplanwentsmoothly.Peopleindeedworkedharder.Butpeopledidnotforeseethatthenumberofchildrenwouldincrease,meaningthattheextrawheatwouldhavetobesharedbetweenmorechildren.Neitherdidtheearly farmers understand that feeding children with more porridge and lessbreastmilkwouldweakentheirimmunesystem,andthatpermanentsettlementswouldbehotbedsforinfectiousdiseases.Theydidnotforeseethatbyincreasingtheir dependence on a single source of food, they were actually exposingthemselves even more to the depredations of drought. Nor did the farmersforesee that in good years their bulging granaries would tempt thieves andenemies,compellingthemtostartbuildingwallsanddoingguardduty.

Thenwhydidn’thumansabandonfarmingwhentheplanbackfired?Partlybecause it tookgenerations for thesmallchanges toaccumulateand transformsociety and, by then, nobody remembered that theyhad ever liveddifferently.Andpartlybecausepopulationgrowthburnedhumanity’sboats.Iftheadoptionofploughing increasedavillage’spopulation fromahundred tono,which tenpeoplewouldhavevolunteeredtostarvesothattheotherscouldgobacktothegoodoldtimes?Therewasnogoingback.Thetrapsnappedshut.

Thepursuitofaneasier liferesulted inmuchhardship,andnot for the last

time. It happens to us today. Howmany young college graduates have takendemandingjobsinhigh-poweredfirms,vowingthattheywillworkhardtoearnmoney thatwillenable themtoretireandpursue their real interestswhen theyarethirty-five?Butbythetimetheyreachthatage,theyhavelargemortgages,children to school, houses in the suburbs that necessitate at least two cars perfamily, and a sense that life is notworth livingwithout really goodwine andexpensiveholidaysabroad.Whataretheysupposedtodo,gobacktodigginguproots?No,theydoubletheireffortsandkeepslavingaway.

Oneofhistory’sfewironlawsisthatluxuriestendtobecomenecessitiesandtospawnnewobligations.Oncepeoplegetusedtoacertainluxury,theytakeitforgranted.Thentheybegintocountonit.Finallytheyreachapointwheretheycan’t livewithout it. Let’s take another familiar example from our own time.Overthelastfewdecades,wehaveinventedcountlesstime-savingdevicesthataresupposedtomakelifemorerelaxed–washingmachines,vacuumcleaners,dishwashers,telephones,mobilephones,computers,email.Previouslyit tookalotofwork towritea letter,addressandstampanenvelope,and take it to themailbox.Ittookdaysorweeks,maybeevenmonths,togetareply.NowadaysIcandashoffanemail,sendithalfwayaroundtheglobe,and(ifmyaddresseeisonline)receiveareplyaminutelater.I’vesavedallthattroubleandtime,butdoIliveamorerelaxedlife?

Sadlynot.Backinthesnail-mailera,peopleusuallyonlywroteletterswhentheyhad something important to relate.Rather thanwriting the first thing thatcame into their heads, they considered carefullywhat theywanted to say andhowtophraseit.Theyexpectedtoreceiveasimilarlyconsideredanswer.Mostpeoplewroteandreceivednomorethanahandfuloflettersamonthandseldomfeltcompelledtoreplyimmediately.TodayIreceivedozensofemailseachday,all frompeoplewhoexpectaprompt reply.We thoughtwewere saving time;insteadwerevvedupthetreadmilloflifetotentimesitsformerspeedandmadeourdaysmoreanxiousandagitated.

Hereand thereaLudditeholdout refuses toopenanemailaccount, justasthousands of years ago some human bands refused to take up farming and soescapedtheluxurytrap.ButtheAgriculturalRevolutiondidn’tneedeverybandinagivenregiontojoinup.Itonlytookone.Onceonebandsettleddownandstarted tilling,whether in theMiddleEastorCentralAmerica, agriculturewasirresistible.Sincefarmingcreatedtheconditionsforswiftdemographicgrowth,farmers could usually overcome foragers by sheer weight of numbers. Theforagers could either run away, abandoning their hunting grounds to field andpasture, or take up the ploughshare themselves. Either way, the old life wasdoomed.

Thestoryoftheluxurytrapcarrieswithitanimportantlesson.Humanity’ssearchforaneasierlifereleasedimmenseforcesofchangethattransformedtheworld inways nobody envisioned orwanted.Nobody plotted theAgriculturalRevolutionorsoughthumandependenceoncerealcultivation.Aseriesoftrivialdecisionsaimedmostlyatfillingafewstomachsandgainingalittlesecurityhadthe cumulative effect of forcing ancient foragers to spend their days carryingwaterbucketsunderascorchingsun.

DivineInterventionTheabovescenarioexplainstheAgriculturalRevolutionasamiscalculation.

It’sveryplausible.Historyisfulloffarmoreidioticmiscalculations.Butthere’sanother possibility.Maybe it wasn’t the search for an easier life that broughtabout the transformation. Maybe Sapiens had other aspirations, and wereconsciouslywillingtomaketheirlivesharderinordertoachievethem.

Scientistsusuallyseektoattributehistoricaldevelopmentstocoldeconomicand demographic factors. It sits better with their rational and mathematicalmethods. In the case of modern history, scholars cannot avoid taking intoaccountnon-materialfactorssuchasideologyandculture.Thewrittenevidenceforcestheirhand.Wehaveenoughdocuments,lettersandmemoirstoprovethatWorldWarTwowas not caused by food shortages or demographic pressures.But we have no documents from the Natufian culture, so when dealing withancientperiodsthematerialistschoolreignssupreme.Itisdifficulttoprovethatpreliteratepeopleweremotivatedbyfaithratherthaneconomicnecessity.

Yet, insomerarecases,weareluckyenoughtofindtelltaleclues.In1995archaeologists began to excavate a site in south-east Turkey called GöbekliTepe. In theoldeststratumtheydiscoverednosignsofasettlement,housesordaily activities. They did, however, find monumental pillared structuresdecoratedwith spectacular engravings. Each stone pillarweighed up to seventonsandreachedaheightoffivemetres.Inanearbyquarrytheyfoundahalf-chiselled pillar weighing fifty tons. Altogether, they uncoveredmore than tenmonumentalstructures,thelargestofthemnearlythirtymetresacross.

Archaeologists are familiar with such monumental structures from sitesaroundtheworld–thebest-knownexampleisStonehengeinBritain.Yetastheystudied Göbekli Tepe, they discovered an amazing fact. Stonehenge dates to2500BC, andwas built by a developed agricultural society. The structures atGöbekliTepearedated toabout9500BC,andallavailableevidence indicatesthattheywerebuiltbyhunter-gatherers.Thearchaeologicalcommunityinitiallyfound it difficult to credit these findings, but one test after another confirmed

both the early date of the structures and the pre-agricultural society of theirbuilders. The capabilities of ancient foragers, and the complexity of theircultures,seemtobefarmoreimpressivethanwaspreviouslysuspected.

13. Opposite: The remains of a monumental structure from GöbekliTepe.Right:Oneofthedecoratedstonepillars(aboutfivemetreshigh).

Whywoulda foraging societybuild such structures?Theyhadnoobviousutilitarianpurpose.Theywereneithermammoth slaughterhousesnorplaces toshelter from rain or hide from lions. That leaves uswith the theory that theywerebuiltforsomemysteriousculturalpurposethatarchaeologistshaveahardtimedeciphering.Whateveritwas,theforagersthoughtitworthahugeamountof effort and time.The onlyway to buildGöbekliTepewas for thousands offoragersbelonging todifferentbandsand tribes tocooperateoveranextendedperiodoftime.Onlyasophisticatedreligiousorideologicalsystemcouldsustainsuchefforts.

Göbekli Tepe held another sensational secret. For many years, geneticistshavebeentracingtheoriginsofdomesticatedwheat.Recentdiscoveriesindicatethat at least one domesticated variant, einkorn wheat, originated in the

KaraçadagHills–aboutthirtykilometresfromGöbekliTepe.6

This can hardly be a coincidence. It’s likely that the cultural centre ofGöbekliTepewassomehowconnectedtotheinitialdomesticationofwheatbyhumankindandofhumankindbywheat. Inorder to feed thepeoplewhobuiltandused themonumental structures, particularly largequantities of foodwererequired. It maywell be that foragers switched from gatheringwildwheat tointensewheatcultivation,nottoincreasetheirnormalfoodsupply,butrathertosupport the building and running of a temple. In the conventional picture,pioneersfirstbuiltavillage,andwhenitprospered,theysetupatempleinthemiddle.ButGöbekliTepesuggeststhatthetemplemayhavebeenbuiltfirst,andthatavillagelatergrewuparoundit.

VictimsoftheRevolutionTheFaustianbargainbetweenhumansandgrainswasnottheonlydealour

speciesmade.Anotherdealwas struck concerning the fateof animals such assheep, goats, pigs and chickens. Nomadic bands that stalked wild sheepgradually altered the constitutions of the herds on which they preyed. This

process probably beganwith selective hunting.Humans learned that itwas totheiradvantagetohuntonlyadultramsandoldorsicksheep.Theysparedfertilefemalesandyounglambsinordertosafeguardthelong-termvitalityofthelocalherd. The second step might have been to actively defend the herd againstpredators, drivingaway lions,wolves and rivalhumanbands.Thebandmightnexthavecorralled theherd intoanarrowgorge inorder tobettercontrolanddefend it. Finally, people began to make a more careful selection among thesheepinordertotailor themtohumanneeds.Themostaggressiverams, thosethatshowedthegreatestresistancetohumancontrol,wereslaughteredfirst.Sowere the skinniest and most inquisitive females. (Shepherds are not fond ofsheep whose curiosity takes them far from the herd.) With each passinggeneration, the sheep became fatter,more submissive and less curious.Voilà!MaryhadalittlelambandeverywherethatMarywentthelambwassuretogo.

Alternatively, hunters may have caught and adopted’ a lamb, fattening itduring themonths of plenty and slaughtering it in the leaner season.At somestagetheybegankeepingagreaternumberofsuchlambs.Someofthesereachedpubertyandbegantoprocreate.Themostaggressiveandunrulylambswerefirstto the slaughter. Themost submissive,most appealing lambswere allowed tolivelongerandprocreate.Theresultwasaherdofdomesticatedandsubmissivesheep.

Suchdomesticatedanimals–sheep,chickens,donkeysandothers–suppliedfood (meat, milk, eggs), raw materials (skins, wool), and muscle power.Transportation, ploughing, grinding and other tasks, hitherto performed byhuman sinew, were increasingly carried out by animals. In most farmingsocieties people focused on plant cultivation; raising animalswas a secondaryactivity.Butanewkindofsocietyalsoappearedinsomeplaces,basedprimarilyontheexploitationofanimals:tribesofpastoralistherders.

Ashumansspreadaroundtheworld,sodidtheirdomesticatedanimals.Tenthousandyearsago,notmorethanafewmillionsheep,cattle,goats,boarsandchickenslivedinrestrictedAfro-Asianniches.Todaytheworldcontainsaboutabillionsheep,abillionpigs,morethanabillioncattle,andmorethan25billionchickens.Andtheyareallovertheglobe.Thedomesticatedchickenisthemostwidespread fowl ever. FollowingHomosapiens, domesticated cattle, pigs andsheep are the second, third and fourthmostwidespread largemammals in theworld.Fromanarrowevolutionaryperspective,whichmeasuressuccessbythenumberofDNAcopies, theAgriculturalRevolutionwasawonderfulboonforchickens,cattle,pigsandsheep.

Unfortunately, the evolutionary perspective is an incomplete measure ofsuccess.Itjudgeseverythingbythecriteriaofsurvivalandreproduction,withno

regardforindividualsufferingandhappiness.Domesticatedchickensandcattlemaywell be an evolutionary success story, but they are also among themostmiserablecreatures thatever lived.Thedomesticationofanimalswas foundedonaseriesofbrutalpracticesthatonlybecamecruellerwiththepassingofthecenturies.

Thenaturallifespanofwildchickensisaboutseventotwelveyears,andofcattle about twenty to twenty-fiveyears. In thewild,most chickens and cattlediedlongbeforethat,buttheystillhadafairchanceoflivingforarespectablenumber of years. In contrast, the vast majority of domesticated chickens andcattle are slaughtered at the age of between a few weeks and a fewmonths,because this has always been the optimal slaughtering age from an economicperspective.(Whykeepfeedingacockforthreeyearsif ithasalreadyreacheditsmaximumweightafterthreemonths?)

Egg-layinghens,dairycowsanddraughtanimalsaresometimesallowedtoliveformanyyears.Butthepriceissubjugationtoawayoflifecompletelyaliento their urges and desires. It’s reasonable to assume, for example, that bullsprefertospendtheirdayswanderingoveropenprairiesinthecompanyofotherbulls and cows rather thanpulling carts andploughsharesunder theyokeof awhip-wieldingape.

In order to turn bulls, horses, donkeys and camels into obedient draughtanimals,theirnaturalinstinctsandsocialtieshadtobebroken,theiraggressionand sexuality contained, and their freedom of movement curtailed. Farmersdeveloped techniques such as locking animals inside pens and cages, bridlingthem inharnesses and leashes, training themwithwhips and cattle prods, andmutilatingthem.Theprocessoftamingalmostalwaysinvolvesthecastrationofmales.Thisrestrainsmaleaggressionandenableshumansselectivelytocontroltheherd’sprocreation.

14. A painting from an Egyptian grave, c.1200 BC: A pair of oxenploughingafield.Inthewild,cattleroamedastheypleasedinherdswithacomplex social structure.The castratedanddomesticatedoxwastedawayhislifeunderthelashandinanarrowpen,labouringaloneorinpairsinawaythatsuitedneitheritsbodynoritssocialandemotionalneeds.Whenanoxcouldno longerpull theplough, itwas slaughtered. (Note thehunchedpositionoftheEgyptianfarmerwho,muchliketheox,spenthislifeinhardlabouroppressivetohisbody,hismindandhissocialrelationships.)

InmanyNewGuineansocieties,thewealthofapersonhastraditionallybeendeterminedbythenumberofpigsheorsheowns.Toensurethatthepigscan’trunaway,farmersinnorthernNewGuineasliceoffachunkofeachpig’snose.This causes severe painwhenever the pig tries to sniff. Since the pigs cannotfindfoodorevenfindtheirwayaroundwithoutsniffing,thismutilationmakesthem completely dependent on their human owners. In another area of NewGuinea,ithasbeencustomarytogougeoutpigs’eyes,sothattheycannotevenseewherethey’regoing.7

Thedairyindustryhasitsownwaysofforcinganimalstodoitswill.Cows,goatsandsheepproducemilkonlyaftergivingbirthtocalves,kidsandlambs,andonlyaslongastheyoungstersaresuckling.Tocontinueasupplyofanimalmilk,afarmerneedstohavecalves,kidsorlambsforsuckling,butmustpreventthemfrommonopolisingthemilk.Onecommonmethodthroughouthistorywas

tosimplyslaughterthecalvesandkidsshortlyafterbirth,milkthemotherforallshewasworth,andthengetherpregnantagain.Thisisstillaverywidespreadtechnique.Inmanymoderndairyfarmsamilkcowusuallylivesforaboutfiveyearsbeforebeingslaughtered.Duringthesefiveyearssheisalmostconstantlypregnant, and is fertilisedwithin 60 to 120 days after giving birth in order topreservemaximummilkproduction.Hercalvesare separated fromher shortlyafterbirth.Thefemalesarerearedtobecomethenextgenerationofdairycows,whereasthemalesarehandedovertothecareofthemeatindustry.8

Anothermethodistokeepthecalvesandkidsneartheirmothers,butpreventthembyvariousstratagemsfromsucklingtoomuchmilk.Thesimplestwaytodo that is to allow thekidor calf to start suckling,butdrive it awayonce themilkstartsflowing.Thismethodusuallyencountersresistancefrombothkidandmother.Someshepherd tribesused tokill theoffspring, eat its flesh, and thenstufftheskin.Thestuffedoffspringwasthenpresentedtothemothersothatitspresence would encourage her milk production. The Nuer tribe in the Sudanwent so far as to smear stuffed animalswith theirmother’s urine, to give thecounterfeitcalvesafamiliar,livescent.AnotherNuertechniquewastotiearingof thornsaroundacalf’smouth, so that itpricks themotherandcausesher toresistsuckling.9TuaregcamelbreedersintheSaharausedtopunctureorcutoffparts of the nose and upper lip of young camels in order to make sucklingpainful,therebydiscouragingthemfromconsumingtoomuchmilk.10

Notallagriculturalsocietieswerethiscrueltotheirfarmanimals.Thelivesofsomedomesticatedanimalscouldbequitegood.Sheep raised forwool,petdogsandcats,warhorsesandracehorsesoftenenjoyedcomfortableconditions.TheRomanemperorCaligulaallegedlyplanned toappointhis favouritehorse,Incitatus, to the consulship. Shepherds and farmers throughout history showedaffection for their animals and have taken great care of them, just as manyslaveholders felt affectionandconcern for their slaves. Itwasnoaccident thatkingsandprophetsstyledthemselvesasshepherdsandlikenedthewaytheyandthegodscaredfortheirpeopletoashepherd’scareforhisflock.

15.Amoderncalf inan industrialmeat farm. Immediatelyafterbirththecalfisseparatedfromitsmotherandlockedinsideatinycagenotmuchbiggerthanthecalf’sownbody.Therethecalfspendsitsentirelife–aboutfourmonths onaverage. It never leaves its cage, nor is it allowed toplaywithothercalvesorevenwalk–allsothatitsmuscleswillnotgrowstrong.Softmusclesmeanasoftandjuicysteak.Thefirsttimethecalfhasachanceto walk, stretch its muscles and touch other calves is on its way to theslaughterhouse. In evolutionary terms, cattle represent one of the mostsuccessfulanimalspeciesever toexist.At thesametime, theyaresomeofthemostmiserableanimalsontheplanet.

Yetfromtheviewpointoftheherd,ratherthanthatoftheshepherd,it’shardtoavoid the impression that for thevastmajorityofdomesticatedanimals, theAgriculturalRevolutionwasaterriblecatastrophe.Theirevolutionary‘success’is meaningless. A rare wild rhinoceros on the brink of extinction is probablymoresatisfiedthanacalfwhospendsitsshortlifeinsideatinybox,fattenedtoproduce juicy steaks. The contented rhinoceros is no less content for beingamong the lastof itskind.Thenumerical successof the calf’s species is littleconsolationforthesufferingtheindividualendures.

This discrepancy between evolutionary success and individual suffering isperhaps the most important lesson we can draw from the Agricultural

Revolution.Whenwe study the narrative of plants such as wheat andmaize,maybe the purely evolutionary perspective makes sense. Yet in the case ofanimals such as cattle, sheep and Sapiens, each with a complex world ofsensations and emotions, we have to consider how evolutionary successtranslatesintoindividualexperience.Inthefollowingchapterswewillseetimeandagainhowadramaticincreaseinthecollectivepowerandostensiblesuccessofourspecieswenthandinhandwithmuchindividualsuffering.

6

BuildingPyramids

THEAGRICULTURALREVOLUTIONISONEofthemostcontroversialeventsinhistory.Somepartisansproclaimthatitsethumankindontheroadtoprosperity and progress. Others insist that it led to perdition. This was theturningpoint,theysay,whereSapienscastoffitsintimatesymbiosiswithnatureand sprinted towards greed and alienation. Whichever direction the road led,therewasnogoingback.Farmingenabledpopulations to increaseso radicallyandrapidlythatnocomplexagriculturalsocietycouldeveragainsustainitselfifitreturnedtohuntingandgathering.Around10,000BC,beforethetransitiontoagriculture,earthwashometoabout5–8millionnomadicforagers.BythefirstcenturyAD,only1–2millionforagersremained(mainlyinAustralia,Americaand Africa), but their numbers were dwarfed by the world’s 250 millionfarmers.1

Thevastmajorityoffarmerslivedinpermanentsettlements;onlyafewwerenomadic shepherds. Settling down caused most peoples turf to shrinkdramatically.Ancienthunter-gatherersusuallylivedinterritoriescoveringmanydozensandevenhundredsofsquarekilometres.‘Home’wastheentireterritory,with itshills, streams,woodsandopensky.Peasants,on theotherhand,spentmost of their days working a small field or orchard, and their domestic livescentredonacrampedstructureofwood,stoneormud,measuringnomorethanafew dozen metres – the house. The typical peasant developed a very strongattachment to this structure.Thiswas a far-reaching revolution,whose impactwas psychological as much as architectural. Henceforth, attachment to ‘myhouse’andseparation from theneighboursbecame thepsychologicalhallmarkofamuchmoreself-centredcreature.

The new agricultural territories were not only far smaller than those ofancientforagers,butalsofarmoreartificial.Asidefromtheuseoffire,hunter-gatherers made few deliberate changes to the lands in which they roamed.

Farmers,ontheotherhand,livedinartificialhumanislandsthattheylaboriouslycarvedoutofthesurroundingwilds.Theycutdownforests,dugcanals,clearedfields,builthouses,ploughedfurrows,andplantedfruit treesintidyrows.Theresulting artificial habitat was meant only for humans and ‘their’ plants andanimals,andwasoftenfencedoffbywallsandhedges.Farmerfamiliesdidallthey could to keep out wayward weeds and wild animals. If such interlopersmade their way in, they were driven out. If they persisted, their humanantagonistssoughtwaystoexterminatethem.Particularlystrongdefenceswereerected around the home. From the dawn of agriculture until this very day,billionsofhumansarmedwithbranches,swatters,shoesandpoisonsprayshavewaged relentless war against the diligent ants, furtive roaches, adventurousspidersandmisguidedbeetlesthatconstantlyinfiltratethehumandomicile.

For most of history these man-made enclaves remained very small,surroundedbyexpansesofuntamednature.Theearth’ssurfacemeasuresabout510millionsquarekilometres,ofwhich155millionisland.AslateasAD1400,the vast majority of farmers, along with their plants and animals, clusteredtogether in an area of just 11 million square kilometres – 2 per cent of theplanet’ssurface.2 Everywhere elsewas too cold, too hot, too dry, toowet, orotherwise unsuited for cultivation. This minuscule 2 per cent of the earth’ssurfaceconstitutedthestageonwhichhistoryunfolded.

People found it difficult to leave their artificial islands. They could notabandon their houses, fields and granaries without grave risk of loss.Furthermore,astimewentontheyaccumulatedmoreandmorethings–objects,noteasilytransportable,thattiedthemdown.Ancientfarmersmightseemtousdirt poor, but a typical family possessedmore artefacts than an entire foragertribe.

TheComingoftheFutureWhile agricultural space shrank, agricultural time expanded. Foragers

usually didn’t waste much time thinking about next week or next month.Farmerssailedintheirimaginationyearsanddecadesintothefuture.

Foragersdiscounted the futurebecause they lived fromhand tomouthandcouldonlypreserve foodoraccumulatepossessionswithdifficulty.Ofcourse,they clearly engaged in some advanced planning. The creators of the cavepaintingsofChauvet,LascauxandAltamira almost certainly intended them tolast for generations. Social alliances and political rivalries were long-termaffairs.Itoftentookyearstorepayafavourortoavengeawrong.Nevertheless,inthesubsistenceeconomyofhuntingandgathering,therewasanobviouslimit

to such long-termplanning. Paradoxically, it saved foragers a lot of anxieties.Therewasnosenseinworryingaboutthingsthattheycouldnotinfluence.

TheAgriculturalRevolutionmadethefuturefarmoreimportantthanithadeverbeenbefore.Farmersmustalwayskeepthefutureinmindandmustworkinits service. The agricultural economy was based on a seasonal cycle ofproduction, comprising long months of cultivation followed by short peakperiods of harvest. On the night following the end of a plentiful harvest thepeasantsmightcelebrate forall theywereworth,butwithinaweekorso theywereagainupatdawnfora longday in the field.Although therewasenoughfoodfor today,nextweek,andevennextmonth, theyhadtoworryaboutnextyearandtheyearafterthat.

Concern about the future was rooted not only in seasonal cycles ofproduction, but also in the fundamental uncertainty of agriculture. Sincemostvillages lived by cultivating a very limited variety of domesticated plants andanimals, they were at the mercy of droughts, floods and pestilence. Peasantswereobliged toproducemore than theyconsumedso that theycouldbuildupreserves.Withoutgrain in the silo, jarsofoliveoil in thecellar, cheese in thepantry and sausages hanging from the rafters, theywould starve in bad years.And bad years were bound to come, sooner or later. A peasant living on theassumptionthatbadyearswouldnotcomedidn’tlivelong.

Consequently,fromtheveryadventofagriculture,worriesabout thefuturebecame major players in the theatre of the human mind. Where farmersdependedonrainstowatertheirfields,theonsetoftherainyseasonmeantthateach morning the farmers gazed towards the horizon, sniffing the wind andstrainingtheireyes.Isthatacloud?Wouldtherainscomeontime?Wouldtherebe enough? Would violent storms wash the seeds from the fields and batterdownseedlings?Meanwhile,inthevalleysoftheEuphrates,IndusandYellowrivers,otherpeasantsmonitored,withnolesstrepidation,theheightofthewater.Theyneededtheriverstoriseinordertospreadthefertiletopsoilwasheddownfromthehighlands,andtoenabletheirvastirrigationsystemstofillwithwater.But floods that surged toohighor cameat thewrong timecoulddestroy theirfieldsasmuchasadrought.

Peasantswereworriedaboutthefuturenotjustbecausetheyhadmorecauseforworry,butalsobecausetheycoulddosomethingaboutit.Theycouldclearanotherfield,diganotherirrigationcanal,sowmorecrops.Theanxiouspeasantwasasfreneticandhardworkingasaharvesterant in thesummer,sweating toplantolivetreeswhoseoilwouldbepressedbyhischildrenandgrandchildren,puttingoffuntilthewinterorthefollowingyeartheeatingofthefoodhecravedtoday.

Thestressoffarminghadfar-reachingconsequences.Itwasthefoundationof large-scale political and social systems. Sadly, the diligent peasants almostnever achieved the future economic security they so craved through theirhardwork in the present. Everywhere, rulers and elites sprang up, living off thepeasants’surplusfoodandleavingthemwithonlyabaresubsistence.

These forfeited food surpluses fuelled politics, wars, art and philosophy.They built palaces, forts, monuments and temples. Until the late modern era,morethan90percentofhumanswerepeasantswhoroseeachmorningtotillthelandbythesweatoftheirbrows.Theextratheyproducedfedthetinyminorityof elites – kings, government officials, soldiers, priests, artists and thinkers –whofillthehistorybooks.Historyissomethingthatveryfewpeoplehavebeendoingwhileeveryoneelsewasploughingfieldsandcarryingwaterbuckets.

AnImaginedOrderThe food surplusesproducedbypeasants, coupledwithnew transportation

technology,eventuallyenabledmoreandmorepeopletocramtogetherfirstintolargevillages,thenintotowns,andfinallyintocities,allofthemjoinedtogetherbynewkingdomsandcommercialnetworks.

Yetinordertotakeadvantageofthesenewopportunities,foodsurplusesandimproved transportation were not enough. The mere fact that one can feed athousandpeopleinthesametownoramillionpeopleinthesamekingdomdoesnotguaranteethattheycanagreehowtodividethelandandwater,howtosettledisputes and conflicts, and how to act in times of drought or war. And if noagreementcanbereached,strifespreads,evenifthestorehousesarebulging.Itwasnotfoodshortagesthatcausedmostofhistory’swarsandrevolutions.TheFrench Revolution was spearheaded by affluent lawyers, not by famishedpeasants. The Roman Republic reached the height of its power in the firstcenturyBC,when treasure fleets from throughout theMediterranean enrichedtheRomansbeyondtheirancestors’wildestdreams.Yetitwasatthatmomentofmaximum affluence that the Roman political order collapsed into a series ofdeadlycivilwars.Yugoslavia in1991hadmore thanenoughresources tofeedallitsinhabitants,andstilldisintegratedintoaterriblebloodbath.

The problem at the root of such calamities is that humans evolved formillions of years in small bands of a few dozen individuals. The handful ofmillenniaseparating theAgriculturalRevolution from theappearanceofcities,kingdoms and empires was not enough time to allow an instinct for masscooperationtoevolve.

Despite the lack of such biological instincts, during the foraging era,

hundreds of strangers were able to cooperate thanks to their shared myths.However,thiscooperationwaslooseandlimited.EverySapiensbandcontinuedtorunitslifeindependentlyandtoprovideformostofitsownneeds.Anarchaicsociologistliving20,000yearsago,whohadnoknowledgeofeventsfollowingtheAgriculturalRevolution,mightwell have concluded thatmythology had afairlylimitedscope.Storiesaboutancestralspiritsandtribaltotemswerestrongenough to enable500people to trade seashells, celebrate theodd festival, andjoinforces towipeoutaNeanderthalband,butnomorethanthat.Mythology,theancientsociologistwouldhavethought,couldnotpossiblyenablemillionsofstrangerstocooperateonadailybasis.

But that turned out to be wrong. Myths, it transpired, are stronger thananyone could have imagined. When the Agricultural Revolution openedopportunities for the creation of crowded cities and mighty empires, peopleinvented stories about great gods, motherlands and joint stock companies toprovidetheneededsociallinks.Whilehumanevolutionwascrawlingatitsusualsnail’space,thehumanimaginationwasbuildingastoundingnetworksofmasscooperation,unlikeanyothereverseenonearth.

Around8500BCthe largestsettlements in theworldwerevillagessuchasJericho,which contained a fewhundred individuals.By7000BC the townofÇatalhöyükinAnatolianumberedbetween5,000and10,000individuals.Itmaywellhavebeen theworld’sbiggestsettlementat the time.During thefifthandfourthmillenniaBC,citieswithtensofthousandsofinhabitantssproutedintheFertileCrescent,andeachoftheseheldswayovermanynearbyvillages.In3100BCtheentirelowerNileValleywasunitedintothefirstEgyptiankingdom.Itspharaohs ruled thousands of square kilometres and hundreds of thousands ofpeople.Around2250BCSargontheGreatforgedthefirstempire,theAkkadian.It boasted over a million subjects and a standing army of 5,400 soldiers.Between1000BCand500BC, thefirstmega-empiresappeared in theMiddleEast:theLateAssyrianEmpire,theBabylonianEmpire,andthePersianEmpire.Theyruledovermanymillionsofsubjectsandcommandedtensofthousandsofsoldiers.

In221BCtheQindynastyunitedChina,andshortlyafterwardsRomeunitedthe Mediterranean basin. Taxes levied on 40 million Qin subjects paid for astandingarmyofhundredsofthousandsofsoldiersandacomplexbureaucracythat employed more than 100,000 officials. The Roman Empire at its zenithcollectedtaxesfromupto100millionsubjects.Thisrevenuefinancedastandingarmyof250,000–500,000soldiers,aroadnetworkstillinuse1,500yearslater,andtheatresandamphitheatresthathostspectaclestothisday.

16.AstonestelainscribedwiththeCodeofHammurabi,c.1776BC.

Impressive, no doubt, but we mustn’t harbour rosy illusions about ‘masscooperation networks’ operating in pharaonic Egypt or the Roman Empire.‘Cooperation’ sounds very altruistic, but is not always voluntary and seldomegalitarian. Most human cooperation networks have been geared towardsoppression and exploitation.Thepeasants paid for theburgeoning cooperationnetworkswith their precious food surpluses, despairingwhen the tax collectorwipedoutanentireyearofhardlabourwithasinglestrokeofhisimperialpen.ThefamedRomanamphitheatreswereoftenbuiltbyslavessothatwealthyandidle Romans could watch other slaves engage in vicious gladiatorial combat.Even prisons and concentration camps are cooperation networks, and canfunction only because thousands of strangers somehowmanage to coordinatetheiractions.

17.TheDeclarationofIndependenceoftheUnitedStates,signed4July1776.

Allthesecooperationnetworks–fromthecitiesofancientMesopotamiatotheQin andRoman empires –were ‘imagined orders’. The social norms thatsustained them were based neither on ingrained instincts nor on personalacquaintances,butratheronbeliefinsharedmyths.

Howcanmythssustainentireempires?Wehavealreadydiscussedonesuchexample:Peugeot.Nowlet’sexaminetwoof thebest-knownmythsofhistory:theCodeofHammurabiofc.1776BC,whichservedasacooperationmanualforhundredsofthousandsofancientBabylonians;andtheAmericanDeclarationofIndependenceof1776AD,whichtodaystillservesasacooperationmanualforhundredsofmillionsofmodernAmericans.

In1776BCBabylonwas theworld’sbiggestcity.TheBabylonianEmpire

was probably the world’s largest, with more than a million subjects. It ruledmostofMesopotamia, including thebulkofmodern Iraqandpartsofpresent-daySyriaand Iran.TheBabyloniankingmost famous todaywasHammurabi.His fame is due primarily to the text that bears his name, the Code ofHammurabi.ThiswasacollectionoflawsandjudicialdecisionswhoseaimwastopresentHammurabiasarolemodelofajustking,serveasabasisforamoreuniform legal system across the Babylonian Empire, and teach futuregenerationswhatjusticeisandhowajustkingacts.

Future generations took notice. The intellectual and bureaucratic elite ofancient Mesopotamia canonised the text, and apprentice scribes continued tocopy it long afterHammurabi died and his empire lay in ruins.Hammurabi’sCodeis thereforeagoodsourceforunderstandingtheancientMesopotamians’idealofsocialorder.3

ThetextbeginsbysayingthatthegodsAnu,EnlilandMarduk–theleadingdeitiesoftheMesopotamianpantheon–appointedHammurabi‘tomakejusticeprevailintheland,toabolishthewickedandtheevil,topreventthestrongfromoppressing the weak’.4 It then lists about 300 judgements, given in the setformula‘Ifsuchandsuchathinghappens,suchisthejudgment.’Forexample,judgements196–9and209–14read:

196.If a superiorman shouldblind the eyeof another superiorman, they shall

blindhiseye.197.If he should break the bone of another superiorman, they shall break his

bone.198.Ifheshouldblindtheeyeofacommonerorbreaktheboneofacommoner,

heshallweighanddeliver60shekelsofsilver.199.Ifheshouldblindtheeyeofaslaveofasuperiormanorbreaktheboneofa

slaveofasuperiorman,heshallweighanddeliverone-halfoftheslave’svalue(insilver).

5

209.Ifasuperiormanstrikesawomanofsuperiorclassandtherebycausesherto

miscarryherfetus,heshallweighanddelivertenshekelsofsilverforherfetus.210.

Ifthatwomanshoulddie,theyshallkillhisdaughter.211.Ifheshouldcauseawomanofcommonerclasstomiscarryherfetusbythe

beating,heshallweighanddeliverfiveshekelsofsilver.212.Ifthatwomanshoulddie,heshallweighanddeliverthirtyshekelsofsilver.213.If he strikes a slave-woman of a superior man and thereby causes her to

miscarryherfetus,heshallweighanddelivertwoshekelsofsilver.214.Ifthatslave-womanshoulddie,heshallweighanddelivertwentyshekelsof

silver.6

Afterlistinghisjudgements,HammurabiagaindeclaresthatThesearethejustdecisionswhichHammurabi,theableking,hasestablished

andtherebyhasdirectedthelandalongthecourseoftruthandthecorrectwayoflife … I am Hammurabi, noble king. I have not been careless or negligenttoward humankind, granted to my care by the god Enlil, and with whoseshepherdingthegodMardukchargedme.7

Hammurabi’sCodeassertsthatBabyloniansocialorderisrootedinuniversalandeternalprinciplesofjustice,dictatedbythegods.Theprincipleofhierarchyisofparamountimportance.Accordingtothecode,peoplearedividedintotwogendersandthreeclasses:superiorpeople,commonersandslaves.Membersofeachgenderandclasshavedifferentvalues.The lifeofa femalecommoner isworth thirty silver shekels and that of a slave-woman twenty silver shekels,whereastheeyeofamalecommonerisworthsixtysilvershekels.

The code also establishes a strict hierarchy within families, according towhich children are not independent persons, but rather the property of theirparents.Hence,ifonesuperiormankillsthedaughterofanothersuperiorman,thekiller’sdaughterisexecutedinpunishment.Tousitmayseemstrangethatthe killer remains unharmed whereas his innocent daughter is killed, but toHammurabiandtheBabyloniansthisseemedperfectlyjust.Hammurabi’sCodewasbasedonthepremisethatiftheking’ssubjectsallacceptedtheirpositionsinthehierarchyandactedaccordingly, theempire’smillion inhabitantswouldbeabletocooperateeffectively.Theirsocietycouldthenproduceenoughfoodforits members, distribute it efficiently, protect itself against its enemies, and

expanditsterritorysoastoacquiremorewealthandbettersecurity.About 3,500 years after Hammurabi’s death, the inhabitants of thirteen

BritishcoloniesinNorthAmericafeltthatthekingofEnglandwastreatingthemunjustly.TheirrepresentativesgatheredinthecityofPhiladelphia,andon4July1776thecoloniesdeclaredthat their inhabitantswerenolongersubjectsoftheBritish Crown. Their Declaration of Independence proclaimed universal andeternalprinciplesofjustice,which,likethoseofHammurabi,wereinspiredbyadivinepower.However, themost importantprincipledictatedbytheAmericangodwassomewhatdifferentfromtheprincipledictatedbythegodsofBabylon.TheAmericanDeclarationofIndependenceassertsthat:

Wehold these truths tobeself-evident, thatallmenarecreatedequal, thatthey are endowed by theirCreatorwith certain unalienable rights, that amongthesearelife,liberty,andthepursuitofhappiness.

LikeHammurabi’sCode,theAmericanfoundingdocumentpromisesthatifhumansactaccordingtoitssacredprinciples,millionsofthemwouldbeabletocooperate effectively, living safely and peacefully in a just and prosperoussociety. Like the Code of Hammurabi, the American Declaration ofIndependencewasnotjustadocumentofitstimeandplace–itwasacceptedbyfuture generations aswell. Formore than 200 years,American schoolchildrenhavebeencopyingandlearningitbyheart.

The two texts present us with an obvious dilemma. Both the Code ofHammurabi and the American Declaration of Independence claim to outlineuniversal and eternal principles of justice, but according to theAmericans allpeople are equal, whereas according to the Babylonians people are decidedlyunequal. The Americans would, of course, say that they are right, and thatHammurabi iswrong.Hammurabi, naturally,would retort thathe is right, andthattheAmericansarewrong.Infact,theyarebothwrong.HammurabiandtheAmericanFoundingFathersalikeimaginedarealitygovernedbyuniversalandimmutableprinciplesofjustice,suchasequalityorhierarchy.YettheonlyplacewheresuchuniversalprinciplesexistisinthefertileimaginationofSapiens,andinthemythstheyinventandtelloneanother.Theseprincipleshavenoobjectivevalidity.

It is easy for us to accept that the division of people into ‘superiors’ andcommoners’ is a figment of the imagination.Yet the idea that all humans areequalisalsoamyth.Inwhatsensedoallhumansequaloneanother?Isthereanyobjective reality,outside thehuman imagination, inwhichweare truly equal?Areallhumansequaltooneanotherbiologically?LetustrytotranslatethemostfamouslineoftheAmericanDeclarationofIndependenceintobiologicalterms:

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

According to the science of biology, peoplewere not created’. They haveevolved.Andtheycertainlydidnotevolvetobe‘equal’.Theideaofequalityisinextricablyintertwinedwiththeideaofcreation.TheAmericansgottheideaofequalityfromChristianity,whicharguesthateverypersonhasadivinelycreatedsoul,andthatallsoulsareequalbeforeGod.However,ifwedonotbelieveintheChristianmyths aboutGod, creation and souls,what does itmean that allpeople are ‘equal’? Evolution is based on difference, not on equality. Everypersoncarriesasomewhatdifferentgeneticcode,and isexposedfrombirth todifferent environmental influences. This leads to the development of differentqualities that carry with them different chances of survival. ‘Created equal’shouldthereforebetranslatedinto‘evolveddifferently’.

Just as people were never created, neither, according to the science ofbiology,istherea‘Creator’who‘endows’themwithanything.Thereisonlyablind evolutionary process, devoid of any purpose, leading to the birth ofindividuals.‘Endowedbytheircreator’shouldbetranslatedsimplyinto‘born.

Equally,therearenosuchthingsasrightsinbiology.Thereareonlyorgans,abilities and characteristics.Birds flynot because theyhave a right to fly, butbecause they have wings. And it’s not true that these organs, abilities andcharacteristicsare‘unalienable’.Manyofthemundergoconstantmutations,andmaywellbecompletelylostovertime.Theostrichisabirdthatlostitsabilitytofly.So‘unalienablerights’shouldbetranslatedinto‘mutablecharacteristics’.

Andwhat are the characteristics that evolved in humans? ‘Life’, certainly.But ‘liberty’? There is no such thing in biology. Just like equality, rights andlimited liability companies, liberty is something that people invented and thatexistsonlyintheirimagination.Fromabiologicalviewpoint,itismeaninglesstosay that humans in democratic societies are free, whereas humans indictatorshipsareunfree.Andwhatabout‘happiness’?Sofarbiologicalresearchhasfailedtocomeupwithacleardefinitionofhappinessorawaytomeasureitobjectively.Mostbiologicalstudiesacknowledgeonlytheexistenceofpleasure,whichismoreeasilydefinedandmeasured.So‘life, liberty,andthepursuitofhappiness’shouldbetranslatedinto‘lifeandthepursuitofpleasure’.

So here is that line from the American Declaration of Independencetranslatedintobiologicalterms:

Weholdthesetruthstobeself-evident,thatallmenevolveddifferently,thattheyarebornwithcertainmutablecharacteristics,andthatamongthesearelife

andthepursuitofpleasure.

Advocates of equality and human rights may be outraged by this line ofreasoning.Their response is likely to be, ‘We know that people are not equalbiologically!Butifwebelievethatweareallequalinessence,itwillenableustocreateastableandprosperoussociety.’Ihavenoargumentwiththat.Thisisexactlywhat Imeanby ‘imaginedorder’.Webelieve inaparticularordernotbecauseitisobjectivelytrue,butbecausebelievinginitenablesustocooperateeffectivelyandforgeabettersociety.Imaginedordersarenotevilconspiraciesoruselessmirages.Rather,theyaretheonlywaylargenumbersofhumanscancooperate effectively. Bear in mind, though, that Hammurabi might havedefendedhisprincipleofhierarchyusingthesamelogic:‘Iknowthatsuperiors,commoners and slaves are not inherently different kinds of people. But ifwebelievethattheyare,itwillenableustocreateastableandprosperoussociety.’

TrueBelieversIt’slikelythatmorethanafewreaderssquirmedintheirchairswhilereading

theprecedingparagraphs.Mostofustodayareeducatedtoreactinsuchaway.ItiseasytoacceptthatHammurabi’sCodewasamyth,butwedonotwanttohearthathumanrightsarealsoamyth.Ifpeoplerealisethathumanrightsexistonly in the imagination, isn’t there a danger that our society will collapse?VoltairesaidaboutGodthat‘thereisnoGod,butdon’ttellthattomyservant,lest hemurderme at night’. Hammurabiwould have said the same about hisprincipleofhierarchy,andThomasJeffersonabouthumanrights.Homosapienshasnonatural rights, just as spiders, hyenas andchimpanzeeshavenonaturalrights.Butdon’ttellthattoourservants,lesttheymurderusatnight.

Such fears arewell justified.Anaturalorder is a stableorder.There isnochance that gravity will cease to function tomorrow, even if people stopbelieving in it. In contrast, an imaginedorder is always indangerof collapse,becauseitdependsuponmyths,andmythsvanishoncepeoplestopbelievinginthem.Inordertosafeguardanimaginedorder,continuousandstrenuouseffortsare imperative.Someof these efforts take the shapeofviolence and coercion.Armies,policeforces,courtsandprisonsareceaselesslyatworkforcingpeopletoact inaccordancewiththeimaginedorder.IfanancientBabylonianblindedhisneighbour,someviolencewasusuallynecessaryinordertoenforcethelawof ‘an eye for an eye’. When, in 1860, a majority of American citizensconcluded thatAfrican slaves are human beings andmust therefore enjoy therightofliberty,ittookabloodycivilwartomakethesouthernstatesacquiesce.

However, an imagined order cannot be sustained by violence alone. Itrequires some true believers as well. Prince Talleyrand, who began hischameleon-like career under Louis XVI, later served the revolutionary andNapoleonicregimes,andswitchedloyaltiesintimetoendhisdaysworkingforthe restored monarchy, summed up decades of governmental experience bysaying that ‘You can do many things with bayonets, but it is ratheruncomfortabletositonthem.’Asinglepriestoftendoestheworkofahundredsoldiers far more cheaply and effectively. Moreover, no matter how efficientbayonets are, somebody must wield them. Why should the soldiers, jailors,judgesandpolicemaintainanimaginedorderinwhichtheydonotbelieve?Ofallhumancollectiveactivities,theonemostdifficulttoorganiseisviolence.Tosay that a social order is maintained bymilitary force immediately raises thequestion:whatmaintainsthemilitaryorder?Itisimpossibletoorganiseanarmysolely by coercion. At least some of the commanders and soldiersmust trulybelieveinsomething,beitGod,honour,motherland,manhoodormoney.

Anevenmoreinterestingquestionconcernsthosestandingatthetopofthesocial pyramid. Why should they wish to enforce an imagined order if theythemselvesdon’tbelieveinit?Itisquitecommontoarguethattheelitemaydosoout of cynical greed.Yet a cynicwhobelieves innothing is unlikely tobegreedy.ItdoesnottakemuchtoprovidetheobjectivebiologicalneedsofHomosapiens. After those needs are met, more money can be spent on buildingpyramids, taking holidays around the world, financing election campaigns,fundingyourfavouriteterroristorganisation,orinvestinginthestockmarketandmakingyetmoremoney–allofwhichareactivitiesthatatruecynicwouldfindutterlymeaningless.Diogenes,theGreekphilosopherwhofoundedtheCynicalschool,livedinabarrel.WhenAlexandertheGreatoncevisitedDiogenesashewasrelaxinginthesun,andaskediftherewereanythinghemightdoforhim,theCynicansweredtheall-powerfulconqueror,‘Yes,thereissomethingyoucandoforme.Pleasemovealittletotheside.Youareblockingthesunlight.’

This iswhycynicsdon’tbuildempiresandwhyan imaginedordercanbemaintained only if large segments of the population – and in particular largesegments of the elite and the security forces – truly believe in it. Christianitywouldnothavelasted2,000yearsifthemajorityofbishopsandpriestsfailedtobelieve inChrist.Americandemocracywouldnothave lasted250years if themajorityofpresidents andcongressmen failed tobelieve inhuman rights.Themoderneconomicsystemwouldnothavelastedasingledayif themajorityofinvestorsandbankersfailedtobelieveincapitalism.

ThePrisonWallsHow do you cause people to believe in an imagined order such as

Christianity, democracyor capitalism?First, younever admit that the order isimagined. You always insist that the order sustaining society is an objectiverealitycreatedbythegreatgodsorbythelawsofnature.Peopleareunequal,notbecauseHammurabi said so, but becauseEnlil andMardukdecreed it. Peopleareequal,notbecauseThomasJeffersonsaidso,butbecauseGodcreatedthemthatway.Freemarketsarethebesteconomicsystem,notbecauseAdamSmithsaidso,butbecausethesearetheimmutablelawsofnature.

Youalso educatepeople thoroughly.From themoment they areborn, youconstantly remind them of the principles of the imagined order, which areincorporatedintoanythingandeverything.Theyareincorporatedintofairytales,dramas, paintings, songs, etiquette, political propaganda, architecture, recipesandfashions.Forexample,todaypeoplebelieveinequality,soit’sfashionablefor rich kids towear jeans, whichwere originallyworking-class attire. In theMiddleAgespeoplebelieved in classdivisions, sonoyoungnoblemanwouldhavewornapeasant’ssmock.Back then, tobeaddressedas ‘Sir’or ‘Madam’wasa rareprivilege reserved for thenobility, andoftenpurchasedwithblood.Todayallpolitecorrespondence, regardlessof the recipient,beginswith ‘DearSirorMadam’.

The humanities and social sciences devote most of their energies toexplainingexactlyhowtheimaginedorderiswovenintothetapestryoflife.Inthe limited space at our disposalwe can only scratch the surface. Threemainfactorspreventpeoplefromrealisingthattheorderorganisingtheirlivesexistsonlyintheirimagination:

a.The imagined order is embedded in thematerialworld. Though theimaginedorderexistsonlyinourminds,itcanbewovenintothematerialrealityaround us, and even set in stone. Most Westerners today believe inindividualism. They believe that every human is an individual, whose worthdoesnotdependonwhatotherpeoplethinkofhimorher.Eachofushaswithinourselves a brilliant ray of light that gives value andmeaning to our lives. Inmodern Western schools teachers and parents tell children that if theirclassmatesmakefunof them, theyshould ignore it.Only they themselves,notothers,knowtheirtrueworth.

Inmodernarchitecture,thismythleapsoutoftheimaginationtotakeshapeinstoneandmortar.Theidealmodernhouseisdividedintomanysmallroomsso that each child can have a private space, hidden from view, providing formaximum autonomy. This private room almost invariably has a door, and in

manyhouseholdsitisacceptedpracticeforthechildtoclose,andperhapslock,the door. Even parents are forbidden to enter without knocking and askingpermission.Theroomisdecoratedasthechildseesfit,withrock-starpostersonthewall and dirty socks on the floor. Somebody growing up in such a spacecannothelpbutimaginehimself‘anindividual’,histrueworthemanatingfromwithinratherthanfromwithout.

Medievalnoblemendidnotbelieveinindividualism.Someone’sworthwasdeterminedbytheirplaceinthesocialhierarchy,andbywhatotherpeoplesaidabout them.Being laughed atwas a horrible indignity.Noblemen taught theirchildren to protect their good name whatever the cost. Like modernindividualism, the medieval value system left the imagination and wasmanifestedinthestoneofmedievalcastles.Thecastlerarelycontainedprivaterooms for children (or anyone else, for that matter). The teenage son of amedievalbarondidnothave aprivate roomon the castle’s second floor,withpostersofRichardtheLionheartandKingArthuronthewallsandalockeddoorthathisparentswerenotallowedtoopen.Hesleptalongsidemanyotheryouthsina largehall.Hewasalwaysondisplayandalwayshad to take intoaccountwhat others saw and said. Someone growing up in such conditions naturallyconcluded that a man’s true worth was determined by his place in the socialhierarchyandbywhatotherpeoplesaidofhim.8

b. The imagined order shapes our desires.Most people do not wish toacceptthattheordergoverningtheirlivesisimaginary,butinfacteverypersonisbornintoapre-existingimaginedorder,andhisorherdesiresareshapedfrombirthbyitsdominantmyths.Ourpersonaldesirestherebybecometheimaginedorder’smostimportantdefences.

For instance, the most cherished desires of present-day Westerners areshaped by romantic, nationalist, capitalist and humanistmyths that have beenaround for centuries.Friendsgivingadviceoften tell eachother, ‘Followyourheart.’Buttheheartisadoubleagentthatusuallytakesitsinstructionsfromthedominantmythsoftheday,andtheveryrecommendationto‘Followyourheart’was implanted inourmindsbya combinationofnineteenth-centuryRomanticmythsand twentieth-centuryconsumeristmyths.TheCoca-ColaCompany, forexample, has marketed Diet Coke around the world under the slogan, ‘DietCoke.Dowhatfeelsgood.’

Even what people take to be their most personal desires are usuallyprogrammed by the imagined order. Let’s consider, for example, the populardesiretotakeaholidayabroad.Thereisnothingnaturalorobviousaboutthis.Achimpanzeealphamalewouldneverthinkofusinghispowerinordertogoon

holiday into the territory of a neighbouring chimpanzee band. The elite ofancient Egypt spent their fortunes building pyramids and having their corpsesmummified,butnoneofthemthoughtofgoingshoppinginBabylonortakingaskiing holiday in Phoenicia. People today spend a great deal of money onholidays abroad because they are true believers in the myths of romanticconsumerism.

Romanticismtellsusthatinordertomakethemostofourhumanpotentialwemusthaveasmanydifferentexperiencesaswecan.Wemustopenourselvestoawidespectrumofemotions;wemustsamplevariouskindsofrelationships;wemust try different cuisines;wemust learn to appreciate different styles ofmusic.Oneofthebestwaystodoallthatistobreakfreefromourdailyroutine,leave behind our familiar setting, and go travelling in distant lands,wherewecan‘experience’theculture,thesmells,thetastesandthenormsofotherpeople.We hear again and again the romantic myths about ‘how a new experienceopenedmyeyesandchangedmylife’.

Consumerismtellsus that inorder tobehappywemustconsumeasmanyproducts and services as possible. Ifwe feel that something ismissing or notquiteright,thenweprobablyneedtobuyaproduct(acar,newclothes,organicfood) or a service (housekeeping, relationship therapy, yoga classes). Everytelevision commercial is another little legend about how consuming someproductorservicewillmakelifebetter.

Romanticism, which encourages variety, meshes perfectly withconsumerism. Their marriage has given birth to the infinite ‘market ofexperiences’, on which the modern tourism industry is founded. The tourismindustry does not sell flight tickets and hotel bedrooms. It sells experiences.Paris is not a city, nor India a country – they are both experiences, theconsumption of which is supposed to widen our horizons, fulfil our humanpotential,andmakeushappier.Consequently,whentherelationshipbetweenamillionaire and his wife is going through a rocky patch, he takes her on anexpensivetrip toParis.Thetrip isnotareflectionofsomeindependentdesire,butratherofanardentbeliefinthemythsofromanticconsumerism.AwealthymaninancientEgyptwouldneverhavedreamedofsolvingarelationshipcrisisbytakinghiswifeonholidaytoBabylon.Instead,hemighthavebuiltforherthesumptuoustombshehadalwayswanted.

18.TheGreatPyramidofGiza.ThekindofthingrichpeopleinancientEgyptdidwiththeirmoney.

Like theeliteofancientEgypt,mostpeople inmostculturesdedicate theirlivestobuildingpyramids.Onlythenames,shapesandsizesofthesepyramidschangefromoneculturetotheother.Theymaytaketheform,forexample,ofasuburbancottagewithaswimmingpoolandanevergreen lawn,oragleamingpenthousewithanenviableview.Fewquestionthemythsthatcauseustodesirethepyramidinthefirstplace.

c. The imagined order is inter-subjective. Even if by some superhumaneffort I succeed in freeingmy personal desires from the grip of the imaginedorder, I am just one person. In order to change the imagined order I mustconvincemillionsofstrangers tocooperatewithme.For the imaginedorder isnot a subjective order existing inmy own imagination – it is rather an inter-subjectiveorder,existinginthesharedimaginationofthousandsandmillionsofpeople.

In order to understand this,we need to understand the difference between‘objective’,‘subjective’,and‘inter-subjective’.

Anobjectivephenomenonexistsindependentlyofhumanconsciousnessandhumanbeliefs.Radioactivity,forexample,isnotamyth.Radioactiveemissionsoccurredlongbeforepeoplediscoveredthem,andtheyaredangerousevenwhenpeople do not believe in them. Marie Curie, one of the discoverers ofradioactivity, did not know, during her long years of studying radioactive

materials, that they could harm her body. While she did not believe thatradioactivitycouldkillher,sheneverthelessdiedofaplasticanaemia,adiseasecausedbyoverexposuretoradioactivematerials.

Thesubjectiveissomethingthatexistsdependingontheconsciousnessandbeliefs of a single individual. It disappears or changes if that particularindividualchangeshisorherbeliefs.Manyachildbelievesintheexistenceofanimaginaryfriendwhoisinvisibleandinaudibletotherestoftheworld.Theimaginaryfriendexistssolelyinthechild’ssubjectiveconsciousness,andwhenthechildgrowsupandceasestobelieveinit,theimaginaryfriendfadesaway.

The inter-subjective is something that exists within the communicationnetwork linking the subjective consciousness of many individuals. If a singleindividual changes his or her beliefs, or even dies, it is of little importance.However,ifmostindividualsinthenetworkdieorchangetheirbeliefs,theinter-subjective phenomenon will mutate or disappear. Inter-subjective phenomenaareneithermalevolentfraudsnorinsignificantcharades.Theyexistinadifferentway from physical phenomena such as radioactivity, but their impact on theworldmaystillbeenormous.Manyofhistory’smostimportantdriversareinter-subjective:law,money,gods,nations.

Peugeot, for example, is not the imaginary friend of Peugeot’s CEO. Thecompany exists in the shared imagination of millions of people. The CEObelievesinthecompany’sexistencebecausetheboardofdirectorsalsobelievesinit,asdothecompany’slawyers,thesecretariesinthenearbyoffice,thetellersinthebank, thebrokersonthestockexchange,andcardealersfromFrancetoAustralia. If the CEO alone were suddenly to stop believing in Peugeot’sexistence, he’d quickly land in the nearest mental hospital and someone elsewouldoccupyhisoffice.

Similarly,thedollar,humanrightsandtheUnitedStatesofAmericaexistinthe shared imagination of billions, and no single individual can threaten theirexistence.IfIaloneweretostopbelievinginthedollar, inhumanrights,orinthe United States, it wouldn’t much matter. These imagined orders are inter-subjective, so in order to change them we must simultaneously change theconsciousness of billions of people, which is not easy. A change of suchmagnitudecanbeaccomplishedonlywith thehelpof acomplexorganisation,suchasapoliticalparty,anideologicalmovement,orareligiouscult.However,in order to establish such complex organisations, it’s necessary to convincemanystrangerstocooperatewithoneanother.Andthiswillhappenonlyifthesestrangers believe in some sharedmyths. It follows that in order to change anexistingimaginedorder,wemustfirstbelieveinanalternativeimaginedorder.

Inorder todismantlePeugeot, forexample,weneed to imaginesomething

morepowerful,suchastheFrenchlegalsystem.InordertodismantletheFrenchlegal systemwe need to imagine something evenmore powerful, such as theFrenchstate.Andifwewouldliketodismantlethattoo,wewillhavetoimaginesomethingyetmorepowerful.

Thereisnowayoutoftheimaginedorder.Whenwebreakdownourprisonwalls and run towards freedom,weare in fact running into themore spaciousexerciseyardofabiggerprison.

7

MemoryOverload

EVOLUTION DID NOT ENDOW HUMANS with the ability to playfootball.True, itproduced legs forkicking,elbowsfor foulingandmouths forcursing, but all that this enables us to do is perhaps practise penalty kicks byourselves.Togetintoagamewiththestrangerswefindintheschoolyardonanygiven afternoon,we not only have towork in concertwith ten teammateswemayneverhavemetbefore,wealsoneedtoknowthattheelevenplayersontheopposing team are playing by the same rules. Other animals that engagestrangersinritualisedaggressiondosolargelybyinstinct–puppiesthroughouttheworldhavetherulesforrough-and-tumbleplayhard-wiredintotheirgenes.Buthumanteenagershavenogenesforfootball.Theycanneverthelessplaythegamewithcompletestrangersbecause theyhaveall learnedan identicalsetofideasaboutfootball.These ideasareentirely imaginary,but ifeveryonesharesthem,wecanallplaythegame.

The same applies, on a larger scale, to kingdoms, churches and tradenetworks, with one important difference. The rules of football are relativelysimpleandconcise,muchlikethosenecessaryforcooperationinaforagerbandor small village. Each player can easily store them in his brain and still haveroomforsongs,imagesandshoppinglists.Butlargesystemsofcooperationthatinvolve not twenty-two but thousands or evenmillions of humans require thehandling and storage of huge amounts of information, much more than anysinglehumanbraincancontainandprocess.

The largesocieties found insomeotherspecies, suchasantsandbees,arestable and resilient becausemost of the information needed to sustain them isencodedinthegenome.Afemalehoneybeelarvacan,forexample,growuptobe either a queen or a worker, depending on what food it is fed. Its DNAprogrammes the necessary behaviours for whatever role it will fulfil in life.Hivescanbeverycomplexsocialstructures,containingmanydifferentkindsof

workers, such as harvesters, nurses and cleaners. But so far researchers havefailedtolocatelawyerbees.Beesdon’tneedlawyers,becausethereisnodangerthattheymightforgetorviolatethehiveconstitution.Thequeendoesnotcheatthe cleaner bees of their food, and they never go on strike demanding higherwages.

Buthumansdosuchthingsallthetime.BecausetheSapienssocialorderisimagined,humanscannotpreservethecriticalinformationforrunningitsimplyby making copies of their DNA and passing these on to their progeny. Aconscious effort has to be made to sustain laws, customs, procedures andmanners,otherwisethesocialorderwouldquicklycollapse.Forexample,KingHammurabi decreed that people are divided into superiors, commoners andslaves.Unlikethebeehiveclasssystem,thisisnotanaturaldivision–thereisnotraceofitinthehumangenome.IftheBabylonianscouldnotkeepthis‘truth’inmind,theirsocietywouldhaveceasedtofunction.Similarly,whenHammurabipassedhisDNAtohisoffspring,itdidnotencodehisrulingthatasuperiormanwho killed a commoner woman must pay thirty silver shekels. Hammurabideliberatelyhadtoinstructhissonsinthelawsofhisempire,andhissonsandgrandsonshadtodothesame.

Empiresgeneratehugeamountsofinformation.Beyondlaws,empireshavetokeepaccountsof transactionsand taxes, inventoriesofmilitarysuppliesandmerchantvessels,andcalendarsoffestivalsandvictories.Formillionsofyearspeople stored information in a single place – their brains. Unfortunately, thehumanbrain isnotagoodstoragedevice forempire-sizeddatabases, for threemainreasons.

First, itscapacityislimited.True,somepeoplehaveastonishingmemories,andinancient times therewerememoryprofessionalswhocouldstore in theirheads the topographies ofwhole provinces and the law codes of entire states.Nevertheless, thereisalimitthatevenmastermnemonistscannottranscend.Alawyer might know by heart the entire law code of the Commonwealth ofMassachusetts, but not thedetails of every legal proceeding that tookplace inMassachusettsfromtheSalemwitchtrialsonward.

Secondly, humans die, and their brains die with them. Any informationstoredinabrainwillbeerasedinlessthanacentury.Itis,ofcourse,possibletopass memories from one brain to another, but after a few transmissions, theinformationtendstogetgarbledorlost.

Thirdlyandmostimportantly,thehumanbrainhasbeenadaptedtostoreandprocessonlyparticulartypesofinformation.Inordertosurvive,ancienthunter-gatherers had to remember the shapes, qualities and behaviour patterns ofthousandsof plant and animal species.Theyhad to remember that awrinkled

yellow mushroom growing in autumn under an elm tree is most probablypoisonous,whereasasimilar-lookingmushroomgrowinginwinterunderanoaktreeisagoodstomach-acheremedy.Hunter-gatherersalsohadtobearinmindthe opinions and relations of several dozen bandmembers. If Lucy needed abandmember’shelptogetJohntostopharassingher,itwasimportantforhertoremember that Johnhad fallenout lastweekwithMary,whowould thusbealikelyandenthusiastically.Consequently,evolutionarypressureshaveadaptedthe human brain to store immense quantities of botanical, zoological,topographicalandsocialinformation.

ButwhenparticularlycomplexsocietiesbegantoappearinthewakeoftheAgriculturalRevolution, a completelynew typeof informationbecamevital –numbers.Foragerswereneverobligedtohandlelargeamountsofmathematicaldata.Noforagerneededtoremember,say,thenumberoffruitoneachtreeintheforest.Sohumanbrainsdidnotadapttostoringandprocessingnumbers.Yetinorder tomaintain a large kingdom,mathematical datawas vital. It was neverenough to legislate laws and tell stories about guardiangods.One also had tocollecttaxes.Inordertotaxhundredsofthousandsofpeople,itwasimperativeto collect data about peoples incomes and possessions; data about paymentsmade;dataaboutarrears,debtsandfines;dataaboutdiscountsandexemptions.This added up tomillions of data bits,which had to be stored and processed.Without this capacity, the state would never knowwhat resources it had andwhatfurtherresourcesitcouldtap.Whenconfrontedwiththeneedtomemorise,recallandhandleallthesenumbers,mosthumanbrainsoverdosedorfellasleep.

This mental limitation severely constrained the size and complexity ofhuman collectives. When the amount of people and property in a particularsociety crossed a critical threshold, it became necessary to store and processlargeamountsofmathematicaldata.Sincethehumanbraincouldnotdoit,thesystem collapsed. For thousands of years after the Agricultural Revolution,humansocialnetworksremainedrelativelysmallandsimple.

ThefirsttoovercometheproblemweretheancientSumerians,wholivedinsouthernMesopotamia.There,ascorchingsunbeatinguponrichmuddyplainsproducedplentifulharvestsandprosperoustowns.Asthenumberofinhabitantsgrew, so did the amount of information required to coordinate their affairs.Between the years 3500BC and 3000BC, someunknownSumerian geniusesinvented a system for storing and processing information outside their brains,one thatwas custom-built to handle large amounts ofmathematical data. TheSumerianstherebyreleasedtheirsocialorderfromthelimitationsofthehumanbrain,openingthewayfortheappearanceofcities,kingdomsandempires.Thedata-processingsysteminventedbytheSumeriansiscalled‘writing’.

Signed,KushimWriting is a method for storing information through material signs. The

Sumerianwriting systemdid sobycombining two typesof signs,whichwerepressedinclaytablets.Onetypeofsignsrepresentednumbers.Thereweresignsfor 1, 10, 60, 600, 3,600 and 36,000. (The Sumerians used a combination ofbase-6 and base-10 numeral systems. Their base-6 system bestowed on usseveralimportantlegacies,suchasthedivisionofthedayintotwenty-fourhoursandofthecircleinto360degrees.)Theothertypeofsignsrepresentedpeople,animals,merchandise,territories,datesandsoforth.BycombiningbothtypesofsignstheSumerianswereable topreservefarmoredata thananyhumanbraincouldrememberoranyDNAchaincouldencode.

19. A clay tablet with an administrative text from the city of Uruk,c.3400–3000BC.‘Kushim’maybethegenerictitleofanofficeholder,orthenameofaparticularindividual.IfKushimwasindeedaperson,hemaybethe first individual in historywhose name is known to us!All the namesappliedearlierinhumanhistory–theNeanderthals,theNatufians,ChauvetCave, Göbekli Tepe – aremodern inventions.We have no idea what thebuildersofGöbekliTepeactuallycalledtheplace.Withtheappearanceofwriting, we are beginning to hear history through the ears of itsprotagonists. When Kushim’s neighbours called out to him, they mightreallyhave shouted ‘Kushim!’ It is telling that the first recordedname inhistorybelongs toanaccountant,rather thanaprophet,apoetoragreat

conqueror.1

At this early stage, writing was limited to facts and figures. The greatSumerian novel, if there ever was one, was never committed to clay tablets.Writing was time-consuming and the reading public tiny, so no one saw anyreasontouseitforanythingotherthanessentialrecord-keeping.Ifwelookforthefirstwordsofwisdomreachingusfromourancestors,5,000yearsago,we’rein for a big disappointment. The earliest messages our ancestors have left usread, for example, ‘29,086 measures barley 37 months Kushim.’ The mostprobablereadingofthissentenceis:‘Atotalof29,086measuresofbarleywerereceivedoverthecourseof37months.Signed,Kushim.’Alas,thefirsttextsofhistorycontainnophilosophicalinsights,nopoetry,legends,laws,orevenroyaltriumphs. They are humdrum economic documents, recording the payment oftaxes,theaccumulationofdebtsandtheownershipofproperty.

Partialscriptcannotexpresstheentirespectrumofaspokenlanguage,but it can express things that fall outside the scope of spoken language.Partial scripts such as the Sumerian andmathematical scripts cannot beusedtowritepoetry,buttheycankeeptaxaccountsveryeffectively.

Onlyoneothertypeoftextsurvivedfromtheseancientdays,anditisevenlessexciting:listsofwords,copiedoverandoveragainbyapprenticescribesastraining exercises. Even had a bored studentwanted towrite out some of hispoems instead of copy a bill of sale, he could not have done so. The earliestSumerianwritingwasapartialratherthanafullscript.Fullscriptisasystemofmaterialsignsthatcanrepresentspokenlanguagemoreorlesscompletely.Itcan

thereforeexpresseverythingpeoplecansay,includingpoetry.Partialscript,ontheotherhand, is a systemofmaterial signs that can representonlyparticulartypesofinformation,belongingtoalimitedfieldofactivity.Latinscript,ancientEgyptianhieroglyphicsandBraillearefullscripts.Youcanusethemtowritetaxregisters,lovepoems,historybooks,foodrecipesandbusinesslaw.Incontrast,the earliest Sumerian script, like modern mathematical symbols and musicalnotation, are partial scripts. You can use mathematical script to makecalculations,butyoucannotuseittowritelovepoems.

20. A man holding a quipu, as depicted in a Spanish manuscriptfollowingthefalloftheIncaEmpire.

It didn’t disturb the Sumerians that their script was ill-suited for writingpoetry.Theydidn’tinventitinordertocopyspokenlanguage,butrathertodothingsthatspokenlanguagefailedat.Thereweresomecultures,suchasthoseofthepre-ColumbianAndes,whichusedonlypartialscriptsthroughouttheirentirehistories, unfazed by their scripts’ limitations and feeling no need for a fullversion.AndeanscriptwasverydifferentfromitsSumeriancounterpart.Infact,itwassodifferentthatmanypeoplewouldargueitwasn’tascriptatall.Itwasnotwritten on clay tablets or pieces of paper. Rather, itwaswritten by tying

knotsoncolourfulcordscalledquipus.Eachquipuconsistedofmanycordsofdifferentcolours,madeofwoolorcotton.Oneachcord,severalknotsweretiedin different places. A single quipu could contain hundreds of cords andthousands of knots. By combining different knots on different cords withdifferentcolours, itwaspossible to record largeamountsofmathematicaldatarelatingto,forexample,taxcollectionandpropertyownership.2

For hundreds, perhaps thousands of years, quipus were essential to thebusiness of cities, kingdoms and empires.3 They reached their full potentialunder the IncaEmpire,which ruled10–12millionpeopleandcovered today’sPeru,EcuadorandBolivia,aswellaschunksofChile,ArgentinaandColombia.Thanks to quipus, the Incas could save and process large amounts of data,without which they would not have been able to maintain the complexadministrativemachinerythatanempireofthatsizerequires.

In fact, quipus were so effective and accurate that in the early yearsfollowing the Spanish conquest of South America, the Spaniards themselvesemployedquipus in theworkof administering their newempire.TheproblemwasthattheSpaniardsdidnotthemselvesknowhowtorecordandreadquipus,making them dependent on local professionals. The continent’s new rulersrealised that this placed them in a tenuous position – the native quipu expertscould easilymislead and cheat their overlords.SoonceSpain’sdominionwasmorefirmlyestablished,quipuswerephasedoutandthenewempire’srecordswerekept entirely inLatin script andnumerals.Very fewquipus survived theSpanish occupation, and most of those remaining are undecipherable, since,unfortunately,theartofreadingquipushasbeenlost.

TheWondersofBureaucracyTheMesopotamians eventually started towant towrite down things other

thanmonotonousmathematicaldata.Between3000BCand2500BCmoreandmoresignswereaddedtotheSumeriansystem,graduallytransformingitintoafull script that we today call cuneiform. By 2500 BC, kings were usingcuneiform to issue decrees, priests were using it to record oracles, and lessexaltedcitizenswereusingittowritepersonalletters.Atroughlythesametime,Egyptians developed another full script known as hieroglyphics. Other fullscriptsweredevelopedinChinaaround1200BCandinCentralAmericaaround1000–500BC.

Fromtheseinitialcentres,fullscriptsspreadfarandwide,takingonvariousnew forms and novel tasks. People began to write poetry, history books,romances,dramas,propheciesandcookbooks.Yetwriting’smostimportanttask

continued to be the storage of reams of mathematical data, and that taskremained the prerogative of partial script.TheHebrewBible, theGreek Iliad,theHinduMahabharataand theBuddhistTipitikaallbeganasoralworks.Formanygenerationstheyweretransmittedorallyandwouldhavelivedonevenhadwritingneverbeeninvented.Buttaxregistriesandcomplexbureaucracieswereborn togetherwith partial script, and the two remain inexorably linked to thisdaylikeSiamesetwins–thinkofthecrypticentriesincomputeriseddatabasesandspreadsheets.

As more and more things were written, and particularly as administrativearchivesgrewtohugeproportions,newproblemsappeared.Informationstoredinapersonsbrainiseasytoretrieve.Mybrainstoresbillionsofbitsofdata,yetIcan quickly, almost instantaneously, recall the name of Italy’s capital,immediately afterwards recollect what I did on 11 September 2001, and thenreconstruct the route leading from my house to the Hebrew University inJerusalem.Exactlyhowthebraindoesitremainsamystery,butweallknowthatthebrain’sretrievalsystemisamazinglyefficient,exceptwhenyouaretryingtorememberwhereyouputyourcarkeys.

How,though,doyoufindandretrieveinformationstoredonquipucordsorclaytablets?Ifyouhavejusttentabletsorahundredtablets,it’snotaproblem.But what if you have accumulated thousands of them, as did one ofHammurabi’scontemporaries,KingZimrilimofMari?

Imagineforamomentthatit’s1776BC.TwoMariansarequarrellingoverpossession of a wheat field. Jacob insists that he bought the field from Esauthirtyyearsago.EsauretortsthatheinfactrentedthefieldtoJacobforatermofthirtyyears,andthatnow,thetermbeingup,heintendstoreclaimit.Theyshoutand wrangle and start pushing one another before they realise that they canresolvetheirdisputebygoingtotheroyalarchive,wherearehousedthedeedsandbillsofsalethatapplytoallthekingdom’srealestate.Uponarrivingatthearchive they are shuttled from one official to the other. They wait throughseveral herbal tea breaks, are told to comeback tomorrow, and eventually aretakenbyagrumblingclerktolookfortherelevantclaytablet.Theclerkopensadoorandleadsthemintoahugeroomlined,floortoceiling,withthousandsofclaytablets.Nowondertheclerkissour-faced.Howishesupposedtolocatethedeedtothedisputedwheatfieldwrittenthirtyyearsago?Evenifhefindsit,howwillhebeabletocross-checktoensurethattheonefromthirtyyearsagoisthelatest document relating to the field in question? If he can’t find it, does thatprovethatEsauneversoldorrentedoutthefield?Orjustthatthedocumentgotlost,orturnedtomushwhensomerainleakedintothearchive?

Clearly, just imprinting a document in clay is not enough to guarantee

efficient, accurate and convenient data processing. That requires methods oforganisationlikecatalogues,methodsofreproductionlikephotocopymachines,methodsofrapidandaccurateretrieval likecomputeralgorithms,andpedantic(buthopefullycheerful)librarianswhoknowhowtousethesetools.

Inventing such methods proved to be far more difficult than inventingwriting.Many writing systems developed independently in cultures distant intime and place fromeach other.Every decade archaeologists discover anotherfew forgotten scripts. Some of them might prove to be even older than theSumerianscratches inclay.Butmostof themremaincuriositiesbecause thosewhoinventedthemfailedtoinventefficientwaysofcataloguingandretrievingdata.WhatsetapartSumer,aswellaspharaonicEgypt,ancientChinaand theInca Empire, is that these cultures developed good techniques of archiving,cataloguing and retrieving written records. They also invested in schools forscribes,clerks,librariansandaccountants.

A writing exercise from a school in ancient Mesopotamia discovered bymodernarchaeologistsgivesusaglimpseintothelivesofthesestudents,some4,000yearsago:

Iwent in and sat down, andmy teacher readmy tablet.He said, ‘There’ssomethingmissing!’

Andhecanedme.Oneofthepeopleinchargesaid,‘Whydidyouopenyourmouthwithoutmy

permission?’Andhecanedme.The one in charge of rules said, ‘Why did you get up without my

permission?’Andhecanedme.Thegatekeepersaid,‘Whyareyougoingoutwithoutmypermission?’And

hecanedme.The keeper of the beer jug said, ‘Why did you get some without my

permission?’Andhecanedme.TheSumerianteachersaid,‘WhydidyouspeakAkkadian?’*Andhecanedme.Myteachersaid,‘Yourhandwritingisnogood!’Andhecanedme.4

Ancient scribes learned not merely to read and write, but also to usecatalogues, dictionaries, calendars, forms and tables. They studied andinternalised techniques of cataloguing, retrieving and processing information

very different from those used by the brain. In the brain, all data is freelyassociated.WhenIgowithmyspousetosignonamortgageforournewhome,Iam reminded of the first place we lived together, which reminds me of ourhoneymooninNewOrleans,whichremindsmeofalligators,whichremindmeof dragons, which remind me of The Ring of the Nibelungen, and suddenly,beforeIknowit,thereIamhummingtheSiegfriedleitmotiftoapuzzledbankclerk.Inbureaucracy,thingsmustbekeptapart.Thereisonedrawerforhomemortgages,anotherformarriagecertificates,athirdfortaxregisters,andafourthforlawsuits.Otherwise,howcanyoufindanything?Thingsthatbelonginmorethan one drawer, likeWagnerianmusic dramas (do I file themunder ‘music’,‘theatre’,orperhapsinventanewcategoryaltogether?),areaterribleheadache.Sooneisforeveradding,deletingandrearrangingdrawers.

Inordertofunction,thepeoplewhooperatesuchasystemofdrawersmustbereprogrammedtostopthinkingashumansandtostartthinkingasclerksandaccountants. As everyone from ancient times till today knows, clerks andaccountantsthinkinanon-humanfashion.Theythinklikefilingcabinets.Thisisnot their fault. If theydon’t think thatway theirdrawerswillallgetmixedupand theywon’t be able to provide the services their government, company ororganisationrequires.Themost important impactofscriptonhumanhistoryisprecisely this: it has gradually changed the way humans think and view theworld. Free association and holistic thought have given way tocompartmentalisationandbureaucracy.

TheLanguageofNumbersAsthecenturiespassed,bureaucraticmethodsofdataprocessinggrewever

moredifferentfromthewayhumansnaturallythink–andevermoreimportant.A critical stepwasmade sometimebefore the ninth centuryAD,when a newpartialscriptwas invented,one thatcouldstoreandprocessmathematicaldatawith unprecedented efficiency. This partial script was composed of ten signs,representing the numbers from 0 to 9. Confusingly, these signs are known asArabicnumeralseventhoughtheywerefirstinventedbytheHindus(evenmoreconfusingly, modern Arabs use a set of digits that look quite different fromWestern ones).But theArabs get the credit becausewhen they invaded Indiatheyencounteredthesystem,understooditsusefulness,refinedit,andspreaditthroughtheMiddleEastandthentoEurope.Whenseveralothersignswerelateradded to the Arab numerals (such as the signs for addition, subtraction andmultiplication),thebasisofmodernmathematicalnotationcameintobeing.

Although this systemofwriting remains apartial script, it hasbecome the

world’s dominant language. Almost all states, companies, organisations andinstitutions – whether they speak Arabic, Hindi, English or Norwegian – usemathematicalscripttorecordandprocessdata.Everypieceofinformationthatcanbe translated intomathematical script is stored, spreadandprocessedwithmind-bogglingspeedandefficiency.

A person who wishes to influence the decisions of governments,organisationsandcompaniesmustthereforelearntospeakinnumbers.Expertsdotheirbesttotranslateevenideassuchas‘poverty’,‘happiness’and‘honesty’intonumbers(‘thepovertyline’,‘subjectivewell-beinglevels’,‘creditrating’).Entire fieldsofknowledge, suchasphysicsandengineering,havealready lostalmostalltouchwiththespokenhumanlanguage,andaremaintainedsolelybymathematicalscript.

An equation for calculating the acceleration of mass i under theinfluence of gravity, according to the Theory of Relativity. When mostlaypeople see such an equation, theyusuallypanic and freeze, like adeercaughtintheheadlightsofaspeedingvehicle.Thereactionisquitenatural,anddoesnotbetrayalackofintelligenceorcuriosity.Withrareexceptions,human brains are simply incapable of thinking through concepts likerelativityandquantummechanics.Physicistsneverthelessmanagetodoso,becausetheysetasidethetraditionalhumanwayofthinking,andlearntothinkanewwiththehelpofexternaldata-processingsystems.Crucialpartsoftheirthoughtprocesstakeplacenotinthehead,butinsidecomputersoronclassroomblackboards.

More recently, mathematical script has given rise to an even morerevolutionary writing system, a computerised binary script consisting of onlytwo signs: 0 and 1. Thewords I am now typing onmy keyboard arewrittenwithinmycomputerbydifferentcombinationsof0and1.

Writing was born as the maidservant of human consciousness, but isincreasingly becoming its master. Our computers have trouble understandinghowHomosapienstalks,feelsanddreams.SoweareteachingHomosapienstotalk, feel and dream in the language of numbers,which can be understood bycomputers.

And this is not the end of the story. The field of artificial intelligence isseekingtocreateanewkindofintelligencebasedsolelyonthebinaryscriptofcomputers.Science-fictionmoviessuchasTheMatrixandTheTerminator tellofadaywhenthebinaryscriptthrowsofftheyokeofhumanity.Whenhumanstry to regaincontrolof the rebellious script, it respondsbyattempting towipeoutthehumanrace.

*EvenafterAkkadianbecamethespokenlanguage,Sumerianremainedthelanguage of administration and thus the language recorded with writing.AspiringscribesthushadtospeakSumerian.

8

ThereisNoJusticeinHistory

UNDERSTANDINGHUMANHISTORYINTHEmillennia following theAgricultural Revolution boils down to a single question: how did humansorganise themselves in mass-cooperation networks, when they lacked thebiologicalinstinctsnecessarytosustainsuchnetworks?Theshortansweristhathumanscreatedimaginedordersanddevisedscripts.Thesetwoinventionsfilledthegapsleftbyourbiologicalinheritance.

However, the appearance of these networks was, for many, a dubiousblessing.Theimaginedorderssustainingthesenetworkswereneitherneutralnorfair.Theydividedpeopleintomake-believegroups,arrangedinahierarchy.Theupper levelsenjoyedprivilegesandpower,while the loweronessufferedfromdiscrimination and oppression.Hammurabi’sCode, for example, established apecking order of superiors, commoners and slaves. Superiors got all the goodthings in life. Commoners got what was left. Slaves got a beating if theycomplained.

Despite its proclamation of the equality of all men, the imagined orderestablishedby theAmericans in1776alsoestablishedahierarchy. Itcreatedahierarchy between men, who benefited from it, and women, whom it leftdisempowered.Itcreatedahierarchybetweenwhites,whoenjoyedliberty,andblacksandAmericanIndians,whowereconsideredhumansofalessertypeandthereforedidnotshareintheequalrightsofmen.ManyofthosewhosignedtheDeclarationofIndependencewereslaveholders.Theydidnotreleasetheirslavesupon signing theDeclaration, nor did they consider themselves hypocrites. Intheirview,therightsofmenhadlittletodowithNegroes.

TheAmericanorder alsoconsecrated thehierarchybetween richandpoor.MostAmericans at that time had little problemwith the inequality caused bywealthyparentspassingtheirmoneyandbusinessesontotheirchildren.Intheirview,equalitymeantsimplythatthesamelawsappliedtorichandpoor.Ithad

nothing to do with unemployment benefits, integrated education or healthinsurance.Liberty,too,carriedverydifferentconnotationsthanitdoestoday.In1776,itdidnotmeanthatthedisempowered(certainlynotblacksorIndiansor,God forbid, women) could gain and exercise power. It meant simply that thestate could not, except in unusual circumstances, confiscate a citizen’s privatepropertyortellhimwhattodowithit.TheAmericanordertherebyupheldthehierarchy of wealth, which some thought was mandated by God and othersviewed as representing the immutable laws of nature.Nature, it was claimed,rewardedmeritwithwealthwhilepenalisingindolence.

All the above-mentioned distinctions – between free persons and slaves,betweenwhitesandblacks,betweenrichandpoor–arerootedinfictions.(Thehierarchyofmenandwomenwillbediscussed later.)Yet it is an iron ruleofhistorythateveryimaginedhierarchydisavowsitsfictionaloriginsandclaimstobe natural and inevitable. For instance, many people who have viewed thehierarchy of free persons and slaves as natural and correct have argued thatslavery is not a human invention.Hammurabi saw it as ordainedby the gods.Aristotleargued thatslaveshavea ‘slavishnature’whereas freepeoplehavea‘freenature’.Theirstatusinsocietyismerelyareflectionoftheirinnatenature.

Ask white supremacists about the racial hierarchy, and you are in for apseudoscientificlectureconcerningthebiologicaldifferencesbetweentheraces.YouarelikelytobetoldthatthereissomethinginCaucasianbloodorgenesthatmakeswhitesnaturallymoreintelligent,moralandhardworking.Askadiehardcapitalistaboutthehierarchyofwealth,andyouarelikelytohearthat it is theinevitable outcome of objective differences in abilities. The rich have moremoney,inthisview,becausetheyaremorecapableanddiligent.Nooneshouldbe bothered, then, if the wealthy get better health care, better education andbetternutrition.Therichrichlydeserveeveryperktheyenjoy.

21. A sign on a South African beach from the period of apartheid,restricting its usage to whites’ only. People with lighter skin colour aretypicallymoreindangerofsunburnthanpeoplewithdarkerskin.Yettherewas no biological logic behind the division of South African beaches.Beaches reserved for people with lighter skin were not characterised bylowerlevelsofultravioletradiation.

Hinduswhoadheretothecastesystembelievethatcosmicforceshavemadeonecastesuperior toanother.AccordingtoafamousHinducreationmyth, thegodsfashionedtheworldoutof thebodyofaprimevalbeing, thePurusa.Thesunwascreated from thePurusa’s eye, themoon from thePurusa’sbrain, theBrahmins(priests) fromitsmouth, theKshatriyas (warriors) fromitsarms, theVaishyas (peasants andmerchants) from its thighs, and theShudras (servants)fromitslegs.AcceptthisexplanationandthesociopoliticaldifferencesbetweenBrahminsandShudrasareasnaturalandeternalasthedifferencesbetweenthesunandthemoon.1TheancientChinesebelievedthatwhenthegoddessNüWacreated humans from earth, she kneaded aristocrats from fine yellow soil,whereascommonerswereformedfrombrownmud.2

Yet,tothebestofourunderstanding,thesehierarchiesarealltheproductofhumanimagination.BrahminsandShudraswerenotreallycreatedbythegodsfromdifferentbodypartsofaprimevalbeing. Instead, thedistinctionbetweenthetwocasteswascreatedbylawsandnormsinventedbyhumansinnorthernIndiaabout3,000yearsago.ContrarytoAristotle,thereisnoknownbiological

differencebetweenslavesandfreepeople.Humanlawsandnormshaveturnedsome people into slaves and others into masters. Between blacks and whitesthere are some objective biological differences, such as skin colour and hairtype, but there is no evidence that the differences extend to intelligence ormorality.

Mostpeopleclaimthattheirsocialhierarchyisnaturalandjust,whilethoseofothersocietiesarebasedonfalseandridiculouscriteria.ModernWesternersare taught to scoff at the idea of racial hierarchy. They are shocked by lawsprohibitingblackstoliveinwhiteneighbourhoods,ortostudyinwhiteschools,or tobe treated inwhitehospitals.But thehierarchyof richandpoor–whichmandates that richpeople live inseparateandmore luxuriousneighbourhoods,studyinseparateandmoreprestigiousschools,andreceivemedicaltreatmentinseparate and better-equipped facilities – seems perfectly sensible to manyAmericansandEuropeans.Yetit’saprovenfactthatmostrichpeoplearerichfor the simple reason that theywere born into a rich family,whilemost poorpeoplewill remain poor throughout their lives simplybecause theywere bornintoapoorfamily.

Unfortunately, complex human societies seem to require imaginedhierarchiesandunjustdiscrimination.Ofcoursenotallhierarchiesaremorallyidentical,andsomesocietiessufferedfrommoreextremetypesofdiscriminationthanothers,yetscholarsknowofnolargesocietythathasbeenabletodispensewithdiscriminationaltogether.Timeandagainpeoplehavecreatedorderintheirsocieties by classifying the population into imagined categories, such assuperiors, commoners and slaves;whites and blacks; patricians and plebeians;Brahmins and Shudras; or rich and poor. These categories have regulatedrelationsbetweenmillionsofhumansbymakingsomepeoplelegally,politicallyorsociallysuperiortoothers.

Hierarchiesservean important function.Theyenablecompletestrangers toknowhowto treatoneanotherwithoutwasting the timeandenergyneeded tobecome personally acquainted. In George Bernard Shaw’s Pygmalion, HenryHigginsdoesn’tneedtoestablishanintimateacquaintancewithElizaDoolittleinordertounderstandhowheshouldrelatetoher.Justhearinghertalktellshimthatsheisamemberoftheunderclasswithwhomhecandoashewishes–forexample,usingherasapawninhisbettopassoffaflowergirlasaduchess.AmodernElizaworkingataflorist’sneedstoknowhowmucheffort toputintosellingrosesandgladiolitothedozensofpeoplewhoentertheshopeachday.Shecan’tmakeadetailedenquiryintothetastesandwalletsofeachindividual.Instead,sheusessocialcues–thewaythepersonisdressed,hisorherage,and

if she’s not politically correct his skin colour. That is how she immediatelydistinguishesbetweentheaccounting-firmpartnerwho’slikelytoplacealargeorderforexpensiveroses,andamessengerboywhocanonlyaffordabunchofdaisies.

Ofcourse,differencesinnaturalabilitiesalsoplayaroleintheformationofsocial distinctions. But such diversities of aptitudes and character are usuallymediated through imagined hierarchies. This happens in two important ways.First and foremost,most abilities have to be nurtured and developed. Even ifsomebodyisbornwithaparticulartalent,thattalentwillusuallyremainlatentifit is not fostered, honed and exercised.Not all people get the same chance tocultivateandrefinetheirabilities.Whetherornottheyhavesuchanopportunitywill usually depend on their place within their society’s imagined hierarchy.HarryPotterisagoodexample.Removedfromhisdistinguishedwizardfamilyand brought up by ignorant muggles, he arrives at Hogwarts without anyexperience inmagic. It takeshim sevenbooks togain a firmcommandofhispowersandknowledgeofhisuniqueabilities.

Second, even if people belonging to different classes develop exactly thesameabilities,theyareunlikelytoenjoyequalsuccessbecausetheywillhavetoplay the game by different rules. If, in British-ruled India, anUntouchable, aBrahmin, a Catholic Irishman and a Protestant Englishman had somehowdevelopedexactlythesamebusinessacumen,theystillwouldnothavehadthesame chance of becoming rich. The economic game was rigged by legalrestrictionsandunofficialglassceilings.

TheViciousCircleAll societies are based on imagined hierarchies, but not necessarily on the

samehierarchies.Whataccountsforthedifferences?WhydidtraditionalIndiansocietyclassifypeopleaccordingtocaste,Ottomansocietyaccordingtoreligion,andAmericansocietyaccordingtorace?Inmostcasesthehierarchyoriginatedas the result of a set of accidental historical circumstances and was thenperpetuated and refined over many generations as different groups developedvestedinterestsinit.

Forinstance,manyscholarssurmisethattheHinducastesystemtookshapewhenIndo-AryanpeopleinvadedtheIndiansubcontinentabout3,000yearsago,subjugatingthelocalpopulation.Theinvadersestablishedastratifiedsociety,inwhich they–ofcourse–occupied the leadingpositions(priestsandwarriors),leavingthenativestoliveasservantsandslaves.Theinvaders,whowerefewinnumber,fearedlosingtheirprivilegedstatusanduniqueidentity.Toforestallthis

danger, theydivided thepopulation intocastes, eachofwhichwas required topursue a specific occupation or perform a specific role in society. Each haddifferentlegalstatus,privilegesandduties.Mixingofcastes–socialinteraction,marriage,eventhesharingofmeals–wasprohibited.Andthedistinctionswerenotjustlegal–theybecameaninherentpartofreligiousmythologyandpractice.

The rulers argued that the caste system reflected an eternal cosmic realityrather than a chance historical development. Concepts of purity and impuritywereessentialelements inHindu religion,and theywereharnessed tobuttressthe social pyramid. PiousHinduswere taught that contactwithmembers of adifferent caste couldpollute not only thempersonally, but society as awhole,and should therefore be abhorred. Such ideas are hardly unique to Hindus.Throughouthistory,andinalmostallsocieties,conceptsofpollutionandpurityhaveplayeda leading role in enforcing social andpoliticaldivisionsandhavebeenexploitedbynumerousrulingclassestomaintaintheirprivileges.Thefearof pollution is not a complete fabrication of priests and princes, however. Itprobablyhasitsrootsinbiologicalsurvivalmechanismsthatmakehumansfeelan instinctiverevulsion towardspotentialdiseasecarriers,suchassickpersonsanddeadbodies.Ifyouwanttokeepanyhumangroupisolated–women,Jews,Roma, gays, blacks – the best way to do it is convince everyone that thesepeopleareasourceofpollution.

The Hindu caste system and its attendant laws of purity became deeplyembeddedinIndianculture.LongaftertheIndo-Aryaninvasionwasforgotten,Indians continued to believe in the caste system and to abhor the pollutioncausedbycastemixing.Casteswerenotimmunetochange.Infact,astimewentby,largecastesweredividedintosub-castes.Eventuallytheoriginalfourcastesturned into 3,000 different groupings called jati (literally ‘birth’). But thisproliferationofcastesdidnotchangethebasicprincipleofthesystem,accordingtowhicheverypersonisbornintoaparticularrank,andanyinfringementofitsrulespollutes thepersonandsocietyasawhole.Apersons jatideterminesherprofession,thefoodshecaneat,herplaceofresidenceandhereligiblemarriagepartners. Usually a person can marry only within his or her caste, and theresultingchildreninheritthatstatus.

Wheneveranewprofessiondevelopedoranewgroupofpeopleappearedonthescene, theyhad tobe recognisedasacaste inorder to receivea legitimateplace within Hindu society. Groups that failed to win recognition as a castewere,literally,outcasts–inthisstratifiedsociety,theydidnotevenoccupythelowestrung.TheybecameknownasUntouchables.Theyhadtoliveapartfromallotherpeopleandscrapetogetheralivinginhumiliatinganddisgustingways,suchassiftingthroughgarbagedumpsforscrapmaterial.Evenmembersofthe

lowestcasteavoidedminglingwiththem,eatingwiththem,touchingthemandcertainlymarryingthem.InmodernIndia,mattersofmarriageandworkarestillheavily influenced by the caste system, despite all attempts by the democraticgovernmentofIndiatobreakdownsuchdistinctionsandconvinceHindusthatthereisnothingpollutingincastemixing.3

PurityinAmericaAsimilarviciouscircleperpetuatedtheracialhierarchyinmodernAmerica.

Fromthesixteenthtotheeighteenthcentury,theEuropeanconquerorsimportedmillionsofAfricanslavestoworktheminesandplantationsofAmerica.TheychosetoimportslavesfromAfricaratherthanfromEuropeorEastAsiaduetothree circumstantial factors. Firstly, Africa was closer, so it was cheaper toimportslavesfromSenegalthanfromVietnam.

Secondly, in Africa there already existed a well-developed slave trade(exporting slavesmainly to theMiddle East), whereas in Europe slaverywasveryrare.Itwasobviouslyfareasiertobuyslavesinanexistingmarketthantocreateanewonefromscratch.

Thirdly, and most importantly, American plantations in places such asVirginia,HaitiandBrazilwereplaguedbymalariaandyellowfever,whichhadoriginatedinAfrica.Africanshadacquiredoverthegenerationsapartialgeneticimmunity to these diseases, whereas Europeans were totally defenceless anddied in droves. Itwas consequentlywiser for a plantation owner to invest hismoney in an African slave than in a European slave or indentured labourer.Paradoxically, genetic superiority (in termsof immunity) translated into socialinferiority: precisely because Africans were fitter in tropical climates thanEuropeans, they ended up as the slaves of European masters! Due to thesecircumstantial factors, the burgeoning new societies of America were to bedivided intoa rulingcasteofwhiteEuropeansandasubjugatedcasteofblackAfricans.

Butpeopledon’tliketosaythattheykeepslavesofacertainraceororiginsimplybecauseit’seconomicallyexpedient.LiketheAryanconquerorsofIndia,whiteEuropeans in theAmericaswanted to be seen not only as economicallysuccessfulbut also aspious, just andobjective.Religious and scientificmythswere pressed into service to justify this division. Theologians argued thatAfricansdescendfromHam,sonofNoah,saddledbyhisfatherwithacursethathisoffspringwouldbeslaves.Biologistsargued thatblacksare less intelligentthanwhites and theirmoral sense less developed.Doctors alleged that blacksliveinfilthandspreaddiseases–inotherwords,theyareasourceofpollution.

These myths struck a chord in American culture, and in Western culturegenerally.Theycontinuedtoexert their influencelongaftertheconditionsthatcreatedslaveryhaddisappeared.IntheearlynineteenthcenturyimperialBritainoutlawed slavery and stopped theAtlantic slave trade, and in thedecades thatfollowed slavery was gradually outlawed throughout the American continent.Notably, thiswas the first and only time in history that slaveholding societiesvoluntarilyabolishedslavery.But,eventhoughtheslaveswerefreed,theracistmythsthatjustifiedslaverypersisted.Separationoftheraceswasmaintainedbyracistlegislationandsocialcustom.

Theresultwasaself-reinforcingcycleofcauseandeffect,aviciouscircle.Consider, for example, the southernUnited States immediately after theCivilWar. In 1865 the Thirteenth Amendment to the US Constitution outlawedslaveryandtheFourteenthAmendmentmandatedthatcitizenshipandtheequalprotection of the law could not be denied on the basis of race.However, twocenturiesofslaverymeantthatmostblackfamilieswerefarpoorerandfarlesseducatedthanmostwhitefamilies.AblackpersonborninAlabamain1865thushadmuchlesschanceofgettingagoodeducationandawell-paidjobthandidhiswhiteneighbours.Hischildren,borninthe1880Sand1890s,startedlifewiththesamedisadvantage–they,too,wereborntoanuneducated,poorfamily.

But economic disadvantage was not the whole story. Alabama was alsohometomanypoorwhiteswholackedtheopportunitiesavailabletotheirbetter-off racial brothers and sisters. In addition, the Industrial Revolution and thewavesofimmigrationmadetheUnitedStatesanextremelyfluidsociety,whererags could quickly turn into riches. Ifmoneywas all thatmattered, the sharpdivide between the races should soon have blurred, not least throughintermarriage.

Butthatdidnothappen.By1865whites,aswellasmanyblacks,tookittobe a simple matter of fact that blacks were less intelligent, more violent andsexually dissolute, lazier and less concerned about personal cleanliness thanwhites.Theywerethustheagentsofviolence,theft,rapeanddisease–inotherwords, pollution. If a blackAlabaman in 1895miraculouslymanaged to get agoodeducationandthenappliedforarespectablejobsuchasabankteller,hisoddsofbeingacceptedwerefarworsethanthoseofanequallyqualifiedwhitecandidate.Thestigmathatlabelledblacksas,bynature,unreliable,lazyandlessintelligentconspiredagainsthim.

Youmight thinkthatpeoplewouldgraduallyunderstandthat thesestigmasweremyth rather than fact and that blackswouldbe able, over time, toprovethemselves just as competent, law-abiding and clean as whites. In fact, theoppositehappened–theseprejudicesbecamemoreandmoreentrenchedastime

wentby.Sinceallthebestjobswereheldbywhites,itbecameeasiertobelievethat blacks really are inferior. ‘Look,’ said the average white citizen, ‘blackshavebeenfreeforgenerations,yettherearealmostnoblackprofessors,lawyers,doctors or even bank tellers. Isn’t that proof that blacks are simply lessintelligent and hard-working?’ Trapped in this vicious circle, blacks were nothired for white-collar jobs because they were deemed unintelligent, and theproofoftheirinferioritywasthepaucityofblacksinwhite-collarjobs.

Thevicious circle did not stop there.As anti-black stigmasgrew stronger,they were translated into a system of ‘Jim Crow’ laws and norms that weremeanttosafeguardtheracialorder.Blackswereforbiddentovoteinelections,tostudyinwhiteschools, tobuyinwhitestores, toeat inwhiterestaurants, tosleepinwhitehotels.Thejustificationforallofthiswasthatblackswerefoul,slothful andvicious, sowhites had to be protected from them.Whites did notwanttosleepinthesamehotelasblacksortoeatinthesamerestaurant,forfearofdiseases.Theydidnotwanttheirchildrenlearninginthesameschoolasblackchildren, for fear of brutality and bad influences. They did not want blacksvoting in elections, sinceblackswere ignorant and immoral.These fearsweresubstantiated by scientific studies that ‘proved’ that blacks were indeed lesseducated,thatvariousdiseasesweremorecommonamongthem,andthattheircrimeratewasfarhigher(thestudiesignoredthefactthatthese‘facts’resultedfromdiscriminationagainstblacks).

By themid-twentiethcentury, segregation in the formerConfederate stateswasprobablyworse than in the latenineteenthcentury.ClennonKing,ablackstudent who applied to the University of Mississippi in 1958, was forcefullycommitted to amental asylum. The presiding judge ruled that a black personmust surely be insane to think that he could be admitted to theUniversity ofMississippi.

The vicious circle: a chance histotical situation is translated into a rigidsocialsystem.

NothingwasasrevoltingtoAmericansoutherners(andmanynortherners)assexual relations and marriage between black men and white women. Sexbetween the races became the greatest taboo and any violation, or suspectedviolation,wasviewedasdeservingimmediateandsummarypunishment in theform of lynching. The Ku Klux Klan, a white supremacist secret society,perpetratedmanysuchkillings.Theycouldhave taught theHinduBrahminsathingortwoaboutpuritylaws.

With time, the racism spread tomore andmore cultural arenas.Americanaesthetic culture was built around white standards of beauty. The physicalattributesofthewhiterace–forexamplelightskin,fairandstraighthair,asmallupturnednose–cametobeidentifiedasbeautiful.Typicalblackfeatures–darkskin, dark and bushy hair, a flattened nose – were deemed ugly. Thesepreconceptions ingrained the imagined hierarchy at an even deeper level ofhumanconsciousness.

Suchviciouscirclescangoonforcenturiesandevenmillennia,perpetuatingan imaginedhierarchy that sprang froma chancehistorical occurrence.Unjustdiscriminationoftengetsworse,notbetter,withtime.Moneycomestomoney,and poverty to poverty. Education comes to education, and ignorance toignorance.Thoseoncevictimisedbyhistoryarelikelytobevictimisedyetagain.Andthosewhomhistoryhasprivilegedaremorelikelytobeprivilegedagain.

Most sociopoliticalhierarchies lacka logicalorbiologicalbasis– theyarenothingbut theperpetuationofchanceeventssupportedbymyths.That isonegoodreasontostudyhistory.IfthedivisionintoblacksandwhitesorBrahminsandShudraswasgroundedinbiologicalrealities–thatis,ifBrahminsreallyhadbetter brains than Shudras – biology would be sufficient for understandinghuman society. Since the biological distinctions between different groups ofHomo sapiens are, in fact, negligible, biology can’t explain the intricacies ofIndian society or American racial dynamics. We can only understand thosephenomena by studying the events, circumstances, and power relations thattransformed figments of imagination into cruel – and very real – socialstructures.

HeandSheDifferent societies adopt different kinds of imagined hierarchies. Race is

veryimportanttomodernAmericansbutwasrelativelyinsignificanttomedieval

Muslims. Caste was amatter of life and death inmedieval India, whereas inmodernEuropeitispracticallynon-existent.Onehierarchy,however,hasbeenof supreme importance inallknownhumansocieties: thehierarchyofgender.Peopleeverywherehavedividedthemselves intomenandwomen.Andalmosteverywhere men have got the better deal, at least since the AgriculturalRevolution.

SomeoftheearliestChinesetextsareoraclebones,datingto1200BC,usedto divine the future. On one was engraved the question: ‘Will Lady Hao’schildbearingbelucky?’Towhichwaswrittenthereply:‘Ifthechildisbornonadingday,lucky;ifonagengday,vastlyauspicious.’However,LadyHaowastogive birth on a jiayin day.The text endswith themorose observation: ‘Threeweeksandonedaylater,onjiayinday,thechildwasborn.Notlucky.Itwasagirl.’4More than 3,000 years later, when Communist China enacted the ‘onechild’policy,manyChinesefamiliescontinuedtoregardthebirthofagirlasamisfortune.Parentswouldoccasionallyabandonormurdernewbornbabygirlsinordertohaveanothershotatgettingaboy.

Inmanysocietieswomenweresimplythepropertyofmen,mostoftentheirfathers,husbandsorbrothers.Rape,inmanylegalsystems,fallsunderpropertyviolation–inotherwords,thevictimisnotthewomanwhowasrapedbutthemalewhoownsher.Thisbeing the case, the legal remedywas the transferofownership–therapistwasrequiredtopayabridepricetothewoman’sfatherorbrother,uponwhichshebecametherapist’sproperty.TheBibledecreesthat‘Ifamanmeetsavirginwhoisnotbetrothed,andseizesherandlieswithher,andthey are found, then themanwho laywith her shall give to the father of theyoungwoman fifty shekelsof silver, and she shallbehiswife’ (Deuteronomy22:28–9).TheancientHebrewsconsideredthisareasonablearrangement.

Rapingawomanwhodidnotbelongtoanymanwasnotconsideredacrimeatall,justaspickingupalostcoinonabusystreetisnotconsideredtheft.Andifahusbandrapedhisownwife,hehadcommittednocrime. In fact, the ideathatahusbandcould rapehiswifewasanoxymoron.Tobeahusbandwas tohavefullcontrolofyourwife’ssexuality.Tosaythatahusband‘raped’hiswifewasasillogicalassayingthatamanstolehisownwallet.Suchthinkingwasnotconfined to the ancient Middle East. As of 2006, there were still fifty-threecountrieswhereahusbandcouldnotbeprosecutedfortherapeofhiswife.EveninGermany,rapelawswereamendedonlyin1997tocreatealegalcategoryofmaritalrape.5

Is thedivision intomenandwomenaproduct of the imagination, like thecastesysteminIndiaandtheracialsysteminAmerica,orisitanaturaldivision

withdeepbiologicalroots?Andifit isindeedanaturaldivision,aretherealsobiologicalexplanationsforthepreferencegiventomenoverwomen?

Someofthecultural,legalandpoliticaldisparitiesbetweenmenandwomenreflect the obvious biological differences between the sexes. Childbearing hasalwaysbeenwomen’sjob,becausemendon’thavewombs.Yetaroundthisharduniversal kernel, every society accumulated layer upon layer of cultural ideasand norms that have little to do with biology. Societies associate a host ofattributes withmasculinity and femininity that, for themost part, lack a firmbiologicalbasis.

For instance, in democratic Athens of the fifth century BC, an individualpossessing a womb had no independent legal status and was forbidden toparticipateinpopularassembliesortobeajudge.Withfewexceptions,suchanindividualcouldnotbenefitfromagoodeducation,norengageinbusinessorinphilosophical discourse. None of Athens’ political leaders, none of its greatphilosophers, orators, artists ormerchants had awomb.Does having awombmakeapersonunfit,biologically,fortheseprofessions?TheancientAtheniansthoughtso.ModernAtheniansdisagree.Inpresent-dayAthens,womenvote,areelected to public office, make speeches, design everything from jewellery tobuildingstosoftware,andgotouniversity.Theirwombsdonotkeepthemfromdoinganyofthesethingsassuccessfullyasmendo.True,theyarestillunder-representedinpoliticsandbusiness–onlyabout12percentofthemembersofGreece’s parliament are women. But there is no legal barrier to theirparticipationinpolitics,andmostmodernGreeks thinkit isquitenormalforawomantoserveinpublicoffice.

ManymodernGreeksalsothinkthatanintegralpartofbeingamanisbeingsexuallyattracted towomenonly,andhavingsexualrelationsexclusivelywiththeoppositesex.Theydon’tseethisasaculturalbias,butratherasabiologicalreality – relations between two people of the opposite sex are natural, andbetween twopeopleof thesamesexunnatural. In fact, though,MotherNaturedoes not mind if men are sexually attracted to one another. It’s only humanmotherssteepedinparticularcultureswhomakeasceneiftheirsonhasaflingwiththeboynextdoor.Themother’stantrumsarenotabiologicalimperative.Asignificantnumberofhumancultureshaveviewedhomosexualrelationsasnotonly legitimate but even socially constructive, ancient Greece being the mostnotableexample.TheIliaddoesnotmentionthatThetishadanyobjectiontohersonAchilles’relationswithPatroclus.QueenOlympiasofMacedonwasoneofthemosttemperamentalandforcefulwomenoftheancientworld,andevenhadherownhusband,KingPhilip,assassinated.Yetshedidn’thaveafitwhenherson,AlexandertheGreat,broughthisloverHephaestionhomefordinner.

Howcanwedistinguishwhat isbiologicallydetermined fromwhatpeoplemerelytrytojustifythroughbiologicalmyths?Agoodruleofthumbis‘Biologyenables,Cultureforbids.’Biologyiswillingtotolerateaverywidespectrumofpossibilities. It’s culture that obliges people to realise somepossibilitieswhileforbidding others. Biology enables women to have children – some culturesobligewomentorealisethispossibility.Biologyenablesmentoenjoysexwithoneanother–someculturesforbidthemtorealisethispossibility.

Culturetendstoarguethatitforbidsonlythatwhichisunnatural.Butfromabiologicalperspective,nothingisunnatural.Whateverispossibleisbydefinitionalso natural. A truly unnatural behaviour, one that goes against the laws ofnature,simplycannotexist,soitwouldneednoprohibition.Noculturehaseverbotheredtoforbidmentophotosynthesise,womentorunfasterthanthespeedoflight,ornegativelychargedelectronstobeattractedtoeachother.

Intruth,ourconcepts‘natural’andunnatural’aretakennotfrombiology,butfromChristiantheology.Thetheologicalmeaningof‘natural’is‘inaccordancewiththeintentionsoftheGodwhocreatednature’.Christiantheologiansarguedthat God created the human body, intending each limb and organ to serve aparticularpurpose.IfweuseourlimbsandorgansforthepurposeenvisionedbyGod, then it is a natural activity. To use them differently thanGod intends isunnatural. But evolution has no purpose. Organs have not evolved with apurpose, and the way they are used is in constant flux. There is not a singleorgan in thehumanbody thatonlydoes the job itsprototypedidwhen it firstappeared hundreds of millions of years ago. Organs evolve to perform aparticularfunction,butoncetheyexist,theycanbeadaptedforotherusagesaswell.Mouths,forexample,appearedbecausetheearliestmulticellularorganismsneededawaytotakenutrientsintotheirbodies.Westilluseourmouthsforthatpurpose,butwealsousethemtokiss,speakand, ifweareRambo, topull thepinsoutofhandgrenades.Areanyoftheseusesunnaturalsimplybecauseourworm-like ancestors 600 million years ago didn’t do those things with theirmouths?

Similarly,wingsdidn’tsuddenlyappearinalltheiraerodynamicglory.Theydeveloped from organs that served another purpose.According to one theory,insectwingsevolvedmillionsofyearsagofrombodyprotrusionsonflightlessbugs.Bugswithbumpshadalargersurfaceareathanthosewithoutbumps,andthis enabled them to absorb more sunlight and thus stay warmer. In a slowevolutionary process, these solar heaters grew larger. The same structure thatwasgoodformaximumsunlightabsorption–lotsofsurfacearea,littleweight–also, by coincidence, gave the insects a bit of a lift when they skipped andjumped. Those with bigger protrusions could skip and jump farther. Some

insects started using the things to glide, and from there itwas a small step towingsthatcouldactuallypropel thebugthroughtheair.Nexttimeamosquitobuzzesinyourear,accuseherofunnaturalbehaviour.IfshewerewellbehavedandcontentwithwhatGodgaveher,she’duseherwingsonlyassolarpanels.

The same sort ofmultitasking applies to our sexual organs and behaviour.Sexfirstevolvedforprocreationandcourtshipritualsasawayofsizingupthefitnessofapotentialmate.Butmanyanimalsnowputbothtouseforamultitudeofsocialpurposesthathavelittletodowithcreatinglittlecopiesofthemselves.Chimpanzees, for example, use sex to cement political alliances, establishintimacyanddefusetensions.Isthatunnatural?

SexandGenderThereislittlesense,then,inarguingthatthenaturalfunctionofwomenisto

givebirth, or that homosexuality is unnatural.Most of the laws, norms, rightsandobligationsthatdefinemanhoodandwomanhoodreflecthumanimaginationmorethanbiologicalreality.

Biologically, humans are divided into males and females. A maleHomosapiensisonewhohasoneXchromosomeandoneYchromosome;afemaleisonewithtwoXs.But‘man’andwoman’namesocial,notbiological,categories.Whileinthegreatmajorityofcasesinmosthumansocietiesmenaremalesandwomen are females, the social terms carry a lot of baggage that has only atenuous,ifany,relationshiptothebiologicalterms.AmanisnotaSapienswithparticular biological qualities such as XY chromosomes, testicles and lots oftestosterone.Rather,hefitsintoaparticularslotinhissociety’simaginedhumanorder.Hisculture’smythsassignhimparticularmasculineroles(likeengagingin politics), rights (like voting) and duties (like military service). Likewise, awoman is not a Sapiens with two X chromosomes, a womb and plenty ofoestrogen. Rather, she is a femalemember of an imagined human order. Themythsofhersocietyassignherunique feminine roles (raisingchildren), rights(protection against violence) and duties (obedience to her husband). Sincemyths, rather than biology, define the roles, rights and duties of men andwomen, themeaning of ‘manhood’ and ‘womanhood’ have varied immenselyfromonesocietytoanother.

22. Eighteenth-century masculinity: an official portrait of King LouisXIV of France. Note the long wig, stockings, high-heeled shoes, dancersposture – andhuge sword. In contemporaryEurope, all these (except forthesword)wouldbeconsideredmarksofeffeminacy.ButinhistimeLouiswasaEuropeanparagonofmanhoodandvirility.

23. Twenty-first-century masculinity: an official portrait of BarackObama. What happened to the wig, stockings, high heels – and sword?Dominant men have never looked so dull and dreary as they do today.Duringmostofhistory,dominantmenhavebeencolourfulandflamboyant,suchasAmericanIndianchiefswiththeirfeatheredheaddressesandHindumaharajas decked out in silks and diamonds. Throughout the animalkingdommales tend tobemorecolourfulandaccessorised than females–thinkofpeacocks’tailsandlions’manes.

Tomake things less confusing, scholars usually distinguish between ‘sex’,whichisabiologicalcategory,and‘gender’,aculturalcategory.Sexisdivided

betweenmalesandfemales,and thequalitiesof thisdivisionareobjectiveandhaveremainedconstantthroughouthistory.Genderisdividedbetweenmenandwomen (and some cultures recognise other categories). So-called ‘masculine’and‘feminine’qualitiesare inter-subjectiveandundergoconstantchanges.Forexample, thereare far-reachingdifferences in thebehaviour,desires,dressandeven body posture expected from women in classical Athens and women inmodernAthens.6

Sexischild’splay;butgenderisseriousbusiness.Togettobeamemberofthemalesexisthesimplestthingintheworld.YoujustneedtobebornwithanXandaYchromosome.Toget tobea female is equally simple.ApairofXchromosomes will do it. In contrast, becoming a man or a woman is a verycomplicated and demanding undertaking. Since most masculine and femininequalitiesareculturalratherthanbiological,nosocietyautomaticallycrownseachmaleaman,or every femaleawoman.Norare these titles laurels that canberestedononcetheyareacquired.Malesmustprovetheirmasculinityconstantly,throughout their lives, from cradle to grave, in an endless series of rites andperformances. And a woman’s work is never done – she must continuallyconvinceherselfandothersthatsheisfeminineenough.

Successisnotguaranteed.Malesinparticularliveinconstantdreadoflosingtheirclaimtomanhood.Throughouthistory,maleshavebeenwillingtoriskandevensacrificetheirlives,justsothatpeoplewillsay‘He’sarealman!’

What’sSoGoodAboutMen?AtleastsincetheAgriculturalRevolution,mosthumansocietieshavebeen

patriarchalsocietiesthatvaluedmenmorehighlythanwomen.Nomatterhowasocietydefined‘man’and‘woman’,tobeamanwasalwaysbetter.Patriarchalsocietieseducatementothinkandactinamasculinewayandwomentothinkandactinafeminineway,punishinganyonewhodarescrossthoseboundaries.Yet they do not equally reward those who conform. Qualities consideredmasculine aremore valued than those considered feminine, andmembers of asocietywhopersonifythefeminineidealgetlessthanthosewhoexemplifythemasculine ideal. Fewer resources are invested in the health and education ofwomen; theyhavefewereconomicopportunities, lesspoliticalpower,and lessfreedomofmovement.Genderisaraceinwhichsomeoftherunnerscompeteonlyforthebronzemedal.

True, a handful of women have made it to the alpha position, such asCleopatraofEgypt,EmpressWuZetianofChina(c.AD700)andElizabethIofEngland.Yettheyaretheexceptionsthatprovetherule.ThroughoutElizabeth’s

forty-five-year reign, allMembers of Parliamentweremen, all officers in theRoyalNavyandarmyweremen,all judgesandlawyersweremen,allbishopsandarchbishopsweremen,alltheologiansandpriestsweremen,alldoctorsandsurgeonsweremen, all students andprofessors in all universities and collegeswere men, all mayors and sheriffs were men, and almost all the writers,architects,poets,philosophers,painters,musiciansandscientistsweremen.

Patriarchy has been the norm in almost all agricultural and industrialsocieties.Ithastenaciouslyweatheredpoliticalupheavals,socialrevolutionsandeconomic transformations.Egypt, forexample,wasconquerednumerous timesover the centuries. Assyrians, Persians, Macedonians, Romans, Arabs,Mameluks, Turks and British occupied it – and its society always remainedpatriarchal. Egypt was governed by pharaonic law, Greek law, Roman law,Muslimlaw,Ottoman lawandBritish law–and theyalldiscriminatedagainstpeoplewhowerenot‘realmen’.

Since patriarchy is so universal, it cannot be the product of some viciouscirclethatwaskick-startedbyachanceoccurrence.Itisparticularlynoteworthythat even before 1492, most societies in both America and Afro-Asia werepatriarchal,eventhoughtheyhadbeenoutofcontactforthousandsofyears.Ifpatriarchy in Afro-Asia resulted from some chance occurrence, whywere theAztecsandIncaspatriarchal? It is farmore likely thateven though theprecisedefinitionof‘man’and‘woman’variesbetweencultures,thereissomeuniversalbiologicalreasonwhyalmostallculturesvaluedmanhoodoverwomanhood.Wedo not know what this reason is. There are plenty of theories, none of themconvincing.

MusclePowerThe most common theory points to the fact that men are stronger than

women, and that they have used their greater physical power to forcewomeninto submission.Amore subtleversionof this claimargues that their strengthallows men to monopolise tasks that demand hard manual labour, such asploughingandharvesting.Thisgivesthemcontroloffoodproduction,whichinturntranslatesintopoliticalclout.

There are two problems with this emphasis on muscle power. First, thestatementthatmenarestrongerthanwomen’istrueonlyonaverage,andonlywithregardtocertaintypesofstrength.Womenaregenerallymoreresistanttohunger,diseaseandfatiguethanmen.Therearealsomanywomenwhocanrunfaster and lift heavier weights than many men. Furthermore, and mostproblematicallyforthistheory,womenhave,throughouthistory,beenexcluded

mainly fromjobs that require littlephysicaleffort (suchas thepriesthood, lawandpolitics),whileengaginginhardmanuallabourinthefields,incraftsandinthehousehold.Ifsocialpowerweredividedindirectrelationtophysicalstrengthorstamina,womenshouldhavegotfarmoreofit.

Evenmore importantly, there simply isnodirect relationbetweenphysicalstrengthandsocialpoweramonghumans.Peopleintheirsixtiesusuallyexercisepower over people in their twenties, even though twentysomethings aremuchstrongerthantheirelders.ThetypicalplantationownerinAlabamainthemid-nineteenthcenturycouldhavebeenwrestledtothegroundinsecondsbyanyoftheslavescultivatinghiscottonfields.BoxingmatcheswerenotusedtoselectEgyptian pharaohs orCatholic popes. In forager societies, political dominancegenerallyresideswiththepersonpossessingthebestsocialskillsratherthanthemostdevelopedmusculature.Inorganisedcrime,thebigbossisnotnecessarilythestrongestman.Heisoftenanoldermanwhoveryrarelyuseshisownfists;hegetsyoungerandfittermen todo thedirty jobs forhim.Aguywho thinksthat thewayto takeover thesyndicate is tobeatupthedonisunlikely to livelongenoughtolearnfromhismistake.Evenamongchimpanzees,thealphamalewinshispositionbybuildingastablecoalitionwithothermalesandfemales,notthroughmindlessviolence.

Infact,humanhistoryshowsthatthereisoftenaninverserelationbetweenphysicalprowessandsocialpower.Inmostsocieties,it’sthelowerclasseswhodothemanuallabour.ThismayreflectHomosapienspositioninthefoodchain.If all that counted were raw physical abilities, Sapiens would have foundthemselves on amiddle rung of the ladder. But theirmental and social skillsplacedthematthetop.Itisthereforeonlynaturalthatthechainofpowerwithinthespecieswillalsobedeterminedbymentalandsocialabilitiesmorethanbybrute force. It is therefore hard to believe that the most influential and moststablesocialhierarchyinhistoryisfoundedonmen’sabilityphysicallytocoercewomen.

TheScumofSocietyAnothertheoryexplainsthatmasculinedominanceresultsnotfromstrength

but from aggression.Millions of years of evolution havemademen farmoreviolent thanwomen.Womencanmatchmenas farashatred,greedandabuseare concerned,butwhenpushcomes to shove, the theorygoes,menaremorewilling to engage in raw physical violence. This is why throughout historywarfarehasbeenamasculineprerogative.

In times of war, men’s control of the armed forces has made them the

mastersofciviliansociety,too.Theythenusedtheircontrolofciviliansocietytofightmoreandmorewars,andthegreaterthenumberofwars,thegreatermen’scontrolofsociety.Thisfeedbackloopexplainsboththeubiquityofwarandtheubiquityofpatriarchy.

Recent studies of the hormonal and cognitive systems ofmen andwomenstrengthen the assumption that men indeed have more aggressive and violenttendencies, and are therefore, on average, better suited to serve as commonsoldiers.Yetgranted that thecommonsoldiersareallmen,does it follow thattheonesmanagingthewarandenjoyingitsfruitsmustalsobemen?Thatmakesnosense. It’s likeassumingthatbecauseall theslavescultivatingcottonfieldsareblack,plantationownerswillbeblackaswell.Justasanall-blackworkforcemight be controlled by an all-white management, why couldn’t an all-malesoldierybecontrolledbyanall-femaleoratleastpartlyfemalegovernment?Infact,innumeroussocietiesthroughouthistory,thetopofficersdidnotworktheirwayupfromtherankofprivate.Aristocrats,thewealthyandtheeducatedwereautomaticallyassignedofficerrankandneverservedadayintheranks.

When theDukeofWellington,Napoleon’snemesis, enlisted in theBritisharmyattheageofeighteen,hewasimmediatelycommissionedasanofficer.Hedidn’tthinkmuchoftheplebeiansunderhiscommand.‘Wehaveintheservicethescumoftheearthascommonsoldiers,’hewrotetoafellowaristocratduringthe wars against France. These common soldiers were usually recruited fromamongtheverypoorest,orfromethnicminorities(suchastheIrishCatholics).Theirchancesofascendingthemilitaryrankswerenegligible.Theseniorrankswerereservedfordukes,princesandkings.Butwhyonlyfordukes,andnotforduchesses?

TheFrenchEmpireinAfricawasestablishedanddefendedbythesweatandbloodofSenegalese,Algeriansandworking-classFrenchmen.Thepercentageofwell-born Frenchmen within the ranks was negligible. Yet the percentage ofwell-bornFrenchmenwithin thesmallelite that led theFrencharmy,ruled theempire and enjoyed its fruits was very high. Why just Frenchmen, and notFrenchwomen?

InChina therewas a long traditionof subjugating the army to the civilianbureaucracy,somandarinswhohadneverheldaswordoftenranthewars.‘Youdonotwastegoodirontomakenails,’wentacommonChinesesaying,meaningthat really talentedpeople join thecivilbureaucracy,not thearmy.Why, then,wereallofthesemandarinsmen?

Onecan’treasonablyarguethattheirphysicalweaknessorlowtestosteronelevels prevented women from being successful mandarins, generals andpoliticians. In order tomanage awar, you surely need stamina, but notmuchphysical strength or aggressiveness.Wars are not a pub brawl. They are verycomplex projects that require an extraordinary degree of organisation,cooperation and appeasement. The ability tomaintain peace at home, acquireallies abroad, and understand what goes through the minds of other people

(particularly your enemies) is usually the key to victory.Hence an aggressivebruteisoftentheworstchoicetorunawar.Muchbetterisacooperativepersonwho knows how to appease, how to manipulate and how to see things fromdifferent perspectives. This is the stuff empire-builders are made of. Themilitarily incompetent Augustus succeeded in establishing a stable imperialregime,achievingsomething thateludedbothJuliusCaesarandAlexander theGreat,whoweremuch better generals. Both his admiring contemporaries andmodernhistoriansoftenattribute thisfeat tohisvirtueofclementia–mildnessandclemency.

Womenareoftenstereotypedasbettermanipulatorsandappeasersthanmen,and are famed for their superior ability to see things from the perspective ofothers.If there’sanytruthin thesestereotypes, thenwomenshouldhavemadeexcellent politicians and empire-builders, leaving the dirty work on thebattlefields to testosterone-charged but simple-mindedmachos. Popularmythsnotwithstanding,thisrarelyhappenedintherealworld.Itisnotatallclearwhynot.

PatriarchalGenesA third type of biological explanationgives less importance to brute force

andviolence,andsuggeststhatthroughmillionsofyearsofevolution,menandwomenevolveddifferentsurvivalandreproductionstrategies.Asmencompetedagainst each other for the opportunity to impregnate fertile women, anindividual’s chances of reproduction depended above all on his ability tooutperform and defeat othermen. As timewent by, themasculine genes thatmade it to the next generation were those belonging to the most ambitious,aggressiveandcompetitivemen.

A woman, on the other hand, had no problem finding a man willing toimpregnate her. However, if she wanted her children to provide her withgrandchildren,sheneededtocarrytheminherwombforninearduousmonths,andthennurturethemforyears.Duringthattimeshehadfeweropportunitiestoobtainfood,andrequiredalotofhelp.Sheneededaman.Inordertoensureherownsurvivalandthesurvivalofherchildren,thewomanhadlittlechoicebuttoagree towhatever conditions theman stipulated so thathewould stickaroundandsharesomeoftheburden.Astimewentby,thefemininegenesthatmadeitto the next generation belonged to women who were submissive caretakers.Womenwhospenttoomuchtimefightingforpowerdidnotleaveanyofthosepowerfulgenesforfuturegenerations.

Theresultofthesedifferentsurvivalstrategies–sothetheorygoes–isthat

men have been programmed to be ambitious and competitive, and to excel inpoliticsandbusiness,whereaswomenhavetendedtomoveoutofthewayanddedicatetheirlivestoraisingchildren.

But this approach also seems to be belied by the empirical evidence.Particularlyproblematicistheassumptionthatwomen’sdependenceonexternalhelpmadethemdependentonmen,ratherthanonotherwomen,andthatmalecompetitiveness made men socially dominant. There are many species ofanimals, such as elephants and bonobo chimpanzees, in which the dynamicsbetween dependent females and competitive males results in a matriarchalsociety. Since females need external help, they are obliged to develop theirsocialskillsandlearnhowtocooperateandappease.Theyconstructall-femalesocial networks that help eachmember raise her children.Males, meanwhile,spend their time fighting and competing. Their social skills and social bondsremainunderdeveloped.Bonoboandelephantsocietiesarecontrolledbystrongnetworksofcooperativefemales,whiletheself-centredanduncooperativemalesarepushedtothesidelines.Thoughbonobofemalesareweakeronaveragethanthemales,thefemalesoftenganguptobeatmaleswhooversteptheirlimits.

If this is possible among bonobos and elephants, why not among Homosapiens? Sapiens are relatively weak animals, whose advantage rests in theirability to cooperate in large numbers. If so, we should expect that dependentwomen,eveniftheyaredependentonmen,wouldusetheirsuperiorsocialskillstocooperatetooutmanoeuvreandmanipulateaggressive,autonomousandself-centredmen.

Howdidithappenthatintheonespecieswhosesuccessdependsabovealloncooperation, individualswhoare supposedly lesscooperative (men)controlindividualswhoaresupposedlymorecooperative(women)?Atpresent,wehavenogoodanswer.Maybethecommonassumptionsarejustwrong.Maybemalesof the species Homo sapiens are characterised not by physical strength,aggressiveness and competitiveness, but rather by superior social skills and agreatertendencytocooperate.Wejustdon’tknow.

Whatwedoknow,however,isthatduringthelastcenturygenderroleshaveundergone a tremendous revolution. More and more societies today not onlygive men and women equal legal status, political rights and economicopportunities,butalsocompletelyrethinktheirmostbasicconceptionsofgenderand sexuality. Though the gender gap is still significant, events have beenmoving at a breathtaking speed.At thebeginningof the twentieth century theidea of giving voting rights to women was generally seen in the USA asoutrageous;theprospectofafemalecabinetsecretaryorSupremeCourtjusticewassimplyridiculous;whereashomosexualitywassucha taboosubject that it

couldnotevenbeopenlydiscussed.Atthebeginningofthetwenty-firstcenturywomen’s voting rights are taken for granted; female cabinet secretaries arehardlyacauseforcomment;andin2013fiveUSSupremeCourtjustices,threeofthemwomen,decidedinfavouroflegalisingsame-sexmarriages(overrulingtheobjectionsoffourmalejustices).

Thesedramatic changes arepreciselywhatmakes thehistoryof gender sobewildering.If,asisbeingdemonstratedtodaysoclearly,thepatriarchalsystemhas been based on unfounded myths rather than on biological facts, whataccountsfortheuniversalityandstabilityofthissystem?

PartThreeTheUnificationofHumankind

24.PilgrimscirclingtheKa’abainMecca.

9

TheArrowofHistory

AFTER THE AGRICULTURAL REVOLUTION, human societies grewever larger and more complex, while the imagined constructs sustaining thesocialorderalsobecamemoreelaborate.Mythsandfictionsaccustomedpeople,nearly from the moment of birth, to think in certain ways, to behave inaccordancewithcertainstandards,towantcertainthings,andtoobservecertainrules.Theytherebycreatedartificialinstinctsthatenabledmillionsofstrangerstocooperateeffectively.Thisnetworkofartificialinstinctsiscalledculture’.

During the first half of the twentieth century, scholars taught that everyculturewas complete and harmonious, possessing an unchanging essence thatdefineditforalltime.Eachhumangrouphaditsownworldviewandsystemofsocial,legalandpoliticalarrangementsthatranassmoothlyastheplanetsgoingaround thesun. In thisview,cultures left to theirowndevicesdidnotchange.They justkeptgoingat thesamepaceand in thesamedirection.Onlya forceapplied from outside could change them. Anthropologists, historians andpoliticians thus referred to ‘SamoanCulture’ or ‘TasmanianCulture’ as if thesamebeliefs,normsandvalueshadcharacterisedSamoansandTasmaniansfromtimeimmemorial.

Today, most scholars of culture have concluded that the opposite is true.Everyculturehasitstypicalbeliefs,normsandvalues,buttheseareinconstantflux.Theculturemaytransformitselfinresponsetochangesinitsenvironmentor through interaction with neighbouring cultures. But cultures also undergotransitions due to their own internal dynamics. Even a completely isolatedculture existing in an ecologically stable environment cannot avoid change.Unlike the lawsofphysics,whichare freeof inconsistencies,everyman-madeorder is packed with internal contradictions. Cultures are constantly trying toreconcilethesecontradictions,andthisprocessfuelschange.

For instance, inmedievalEurope thenobility believed in bothChristianity

andchivalry.Atypicalnoblemanwenttochurchinthemorning,andlistenedasthepriestheldforthonthelivesofthesaints.‘Vanityofvanities,’saidthepriest,‘allisvanity.Riches,lustandhonouraredangeroustemptations.Youmustriseabovethem,andfollowinChrist’sfootsteps.BemeeklikeHim,avoidviolenceandextravagance,andifattacked–justturntheothercheek.’Returninghomeinameekandpensivemood,thenoblemanwouldchangeintohisbestsilksandgotoabanquetinhislord’scastle.Therethewineflowedlikewater,theminstrelsang of Lancelot and Guinevere, and the guests exchanged dirty jokes andbloody war tales. ‘It is better to die,’ declared the barons, ‘than to live withshame. If someonequestionsyourhonour,onlybloodcanwipeout the insult.Andwhat is better in life than to see your enemies flee before you, and theirprettydaughterstrembleatyourfeet?’

The contradiction was never fully resolved. But as the European nobility,clergy and commoners grappledwith it, their culture changed.One attempt tofigureitoutproducedtheCrusades.Oncrusade,knightscoulddemonstratetheirmilitary prowess and their religious devotion at one stroke. The samecontradiction producedmilitary orders such as the Templars andHospitallers,whotried tomeshChristianandchivalric idealsevenmore tightly. Itwasalsoresponsible for a large part ofmedieval art and literature, such as the tales ofKingArthurandtheHolyGrail.WhatwasCamelotbutanattempttoprovethatagoodknightcanandshouldbeagoodChristian,andthatgoodChristiansmakethebestknights?

Another example is the modern political order. Ever since the FrenchRevolution, people throughout the world have gradually come to see bothequality and individual freedom as fundamental values. Yet the two valuescontradicteachother.Equalitycanbeensuredonlybycurtailingthefreedomsofthosewhoarebetteroff.Guaranteeingthateveryindividualwillbefreetodoashewishes inevitably short-changes equality. The entire political history of theworld since 1789 can be seen as a series of attempts to reconcile thiscontradiction.

Anyone who has read a novel by Charles Dickens knows that the liberalregimesofnineteenth-centuryEuropegaveprioritytoindividualfreedomevenifit meant throwing insolvent poor families in prison and giving orphans littlechoice but to join schools for pickpockets. Anyone who has read a novel byAlexander Solzhenitsyn knows how Communisms egalitarian ideal producedbrutaltyranniesthattriedtocontroleveryaspectofdailylife.

Contemporary American politics also revolve around this contradiction.Democratswantamoreequitablesociety,evenifitmeansraisingtaxestofundprogrammes to help the poor, elderly and infirm. But that infringes on the

freedom of individuals to spend their money as they wish. Why should thegovernmentforcemetobuyhealthinsuranceifIpreferusingthemoneytoputmy kids through college? Republicans, on the other hand, want to maximiseindividualfreedom,evenifitmeansthattheincomegapbetweenrichandpoorwillgrowwiderandthatmanyAmericanswillnotbeabletoaffordhealthcare.

JustasmedievalculturedidnotmanagetosquarechivalrywithChristianity,sothemodernworldfails tosquarelibertywithequality.But this isnodefect.Suchcontradictionsareaninseparablepartofeveryhumanculture.Infact,theyareculture’sengines,responsibleforthecreativityanddynamismofourspecies.Justaswhentwoclashingmusicalnotesplayedtogetherforceapieceofmusicforward, so discord in our thoughts, ideas and values compel us to think,reevaluateandcriticise.Consistencyistheplaygroundofdullminds.

If tensions, conflicts and irresolvable dilemmas are the spice of everyculture, a human being who belongs to any particular culture must holdcontradictorybeliefsandberivenbyincompatiblevalues.It’ssuchanessentialfeatureofanyculture that itevenhasaname:cognitivedissonance.Cognitivedissonanceisoftenconsideredafailureofthehumanpsyche.Infact,itisavitalasset.Hadpeoplebeenunabletoholdcontradictorybeliefsandvalues,itwouldprobablyhavebeenimpossibletoestablishandmaintainanyhumanculture.

If, say,aChristianreallywants tounderstand theMuslimswhoattend thatmosquedownthestreet,heshouldn’tlookforapristinesetofvaluesthateveryMuslim holds dear. Rather, he should enquire into the catch-22s of Muslimculture,thoseplaceswhererulesareatwarandstandardsscuffle.It’sattheveryspotwhere theMuslims teeterbetween two imperatives thatyou’llunderstandthembest.

TheSpySatelliteHumanculturesareinconstantflux.Isthisfluxcompletelyrandom,ordoes

ithavesomeoverallpattern?Inotherwords,doeshistoryhaveadirection?The answer is yes. Over the millennia, small, simple cultures gradually

coalesceintobiggerandmorecomplexcivilisations,sothattheworldcontainsfewerandfewermega-cultures,eachofwhichisbiggerandmorecomplex.Thisis of course a very crude generalisation, true only at the macro level. At themicrolevel,itseemsthatforeverygroupofculturesthatcoalescesintoamega-culture, there’samega-culture thatbreaksup intopieces.TheMongolEmpireexpandedtodominateahugeswatheofAsiaandevenpartsofEurope,onlytoshatterintofragments.Christianityconvertedhundredsofmillionsofpeopleatthe same time that it splintered into innumerable sects. The Latin language

spread through western and central Europe, then split into local dialects thatthemselves eventually became national languages. But these break-ups aretemporaryreversalsinaninexorabletrendtowardsunity.

Perceiving the direction of history is really a question of vantage point.When we adopt the proverbial bird’s-eye view of history, which examinesdevelopments in termsofdecadesorcenturies, it’shardtosaywhetherhistorymovesinthedirectionofunityorofdiversity.However,tounderstandlong-termprocessesthebird’s-eyeviewistoomyopic.Wewoulddobettertoadoptinsteadthe viewpoint of a cosmic spy satellite, which scans millennia rather thancenturies. From such a vantage point it becomes crystal clear that history ismoving relentlessly towards unity. The sectioning of Christianity and thecollapseoftheMongolEmpirearejustspeedbumpsonhistory’shighway.

*

The bestway to appreciate the general direction of history is to count thenumberofseparatehumanworldsthatcoexistedatanygivenmomentonplanetEarth.Today,weareusedtothinkingaboutthewholeplanetasasingleunit,butformostofhistory,earthwasinfactanentiregalaxyofisolatedhumanworlds.

ConsiderTasmania,amedium-sizedislandsouthofAustralia.Itwascutofffrom the Australian mainland in about 10,000 BC as the end of the Ice Agecaused the sea level to rise.A few thousand hunter-gathererswere left on theisland, and had no contact with any other humans until the arrival of theEuropeans in the nineteenth century. For 12,000 years, nobody else knew theTasmanianswerethere,andtheydidn’tknowthattherewasanyoneelseintheworld. They had theirwars, political struggles, social oscillations and culturaldevelopments.YetasfarastheemperorsofChinaortherulersofMesopotamiawere concerned, Tasmania could just as well have been located on one ofJupiter’smoons.TheTasmanianslivedinaworldoftheirown.

AmericaandEurope,too,wereseparateworldsformostoftheirhistories.InAD378, theRomanemperorValencewasdefeatedandkilledby theGothsatthebattleofAdrianople.Inthesameyear,KingChakTokIch’aakofTikalwasdefeatedandkilledbythearmyofTeotihuacan.(TikalwasanimportantMayancitystate,whileTeotihuacanwas then the largestcity inAmerica,withalmost250,000 inhabitants – of the same order of magnitude as its contemporary,Rome.)TherewasabsolutelynoconnectionbetweenthedefeatofRomeandtherise ofTeotihuacan.Romemight just aswell havebeen locatedonMars, andTeotihuacanonVenus.

Howmanydifferenthumanworldscoexistedonearth?Around10.000BC

ourplanetcontainedmanythousandsofthem.By2000BC,theirnumbershaddwindled to the hundreds, or at most a few thousand. By AD 1450, theirnumbershaddeclinedevenmoredrastically.Atthattime,justpriortotheageofEuropeanexploration,earthstillcontainedasignificantnumberofdwarfworldssuchasTasmania.Butclose to90percentofhumans lived ina singlemega-world:theworldofAfro-Asia.MostofAsia,mostofEurope,andmostofAfrica(includingsubstantialchunksofsub-SaharanAfrica)werealreadyconnectedbysignificantcultural,politicalandeconomicties.

Most of the remaining tenth of theworld’s humanpopulationwas dividedbetweenfourworldsofconsiderablesizeandcomplexity:1.TheMesoamericanWorld,whichencompassedmostofCentralAmerica

andpartsofNorthAmerica.2.TheAndeanWorld,whichencompassedmostofwesternSouthAmerica.3.TheAustralianWorld,whichencompassedthecontinentofAustralia.4.TheOceanicWorld,whichencompassedmostoftheislandsofthesouth-

westernPacificOcean,fromHawaiitoNewZealand.Over the next 300 years, theAfro-Asian giant swallowed up all the other

worlds. It consumed the Mesoamerican World in 1521, when the SpanishconqueredtheAztecEmpire.IttookitsfirstbiteoutoftheOceanicWorldatthesame time, during Ferdinand Magellan’s circumnavigation of the globe, andsoon after that completed its conquest. TheAndeanWorld collapsed in 1532,whenSpanishconquistadorscrushedtheIncaEmpire.ThefirstEuropeanlandedontheAustraliancontinentin1606,andthatpristineworldcametoanendwhenBritish colonisation began in earnest in 1788. Fifteen years later the BritonsestablishedtheirfirstsettlementinTasmania,thusbringingthelastautonomoushumanworldintotheAfro-Asiansphereofinfluence.

It took the Afro-Asian giant several centuries to digest all that it hadswallowed,buttheprocesswasirreversible.Todayalmostallhumanssharethesame geopolitical system (the entire planet is divided into internationallyrecognised states); the same economic system (capitalist market forces shapeeventheremotestcornersoftheglobe);thesamelegalsystem(humanrightsandinternational law are valid everywhere, at least theoretically); and the samescientific system (experts in Iran, Israel,Australia andArgentina have exactlythesameviewsaboutthestructureofatomsorthetreatmentoftuberculosis).

Thesingleglobalcultureisnothomogeneous.Justasasingleorganicbodycontainsmanydifferentkindsoforgansandcells, soour singleglobal culturecontains many different types of lifestyles and people, from New Yorkstockbrokers toAfghanshepherds.Yet theyareallcloselyconnectedand theyinfluenceoneanotherinmyriadways.Theystillargueandfight,buttheyargue

using the same concepts and fight using the same weapons. A real ‘clash ofcivilisations’isliketheproverbialdialogueofthedeaf.Nobodycangraspwhattheotherissaying.TodaywhenIranandtheUnitedStatesrattleswordsatoneanother, they both speak the language of nation states, capitalist economies,internationalrightsandnuclearphysics.

Map3.Earth inAD1450.Thenamed locationswithin theAfro-AsianWorldwereplacesvisitedby the fourteenth-centuryMuslim traveller IbnBattuta. A native of Tangier, inMorocco, Ibn Battuta visited Timbuktu,Zanzibar, southernRussia,CentralAsia, India,Chinaand Indonesia.HistravelsillustratetheunityofAfro-Asiaontheeveofthemodernera.

We still talk a lot about ‘authentic’ cultures, but if by authentic’wemeansomething that developed independently, and that consists of ancient localtraditionsfreeofexternalinfluences,thentherearenoauthenticculturesleftonearth. Over the last few centuries, all cultures were changed almost beyondrecognitionbyafloodofglobalinfluences.

Oneofthemostinterestingexamplesofthisglobalisationis‘ethnic’cuisine.InanItalianrestaurantweexpecttofindspaghettiintomatosauce;inPolishandIrish restaurants lots of potatoes; in an Argentinian restaurant we can choosebetweendozensof kindsof beefsteaks; in an Indian restaurant hot chillies areincorporated into just about everything; and the highlight at anySwiss café isthickhotchocolateunderanalpofwhippedcream.Butnoneof thesefoodsisnative to thosenations.Tomatoes, chilli peppers andcocoaare allMexican inorigin; they reached Europe and Asia only after the Spaniards conqueredMexico. Julius Caesar and Dante Alighieri never twirled tomato-drenched

spaghetti on their forks (even forks hadn’t been invented yet), William Tellnevertastedchocolate,andBuddhaneverspiceduphisfoodwithchilli.Potatoesreached Poland and Ireland nomore than 400 years ago. The only steak youcouldobtaininArgentinain1492wasfromallama.

Hollywood filmshaveperpetuatedan imageof thePlains Indiansasbravehorsemen, courageously charging thewagons of European pioneers to protectthecustomsoftheirancestors.However,theseNativeAmericanhorsemenwerenot the defenders of some ancient, authentic culture. Instead, they were theproduct of a major military and political revolution that swept the plains ofwestern North America in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, aconsequenceofthearrivalofEuropeanhorses.In1492therewerenohorsesinAmerica. The culture of the nineteenth-century Sioux and Apache has manyappealingfeatures,butitwasamodernculture–aresultofglobalforces–muchmorethanauthentic’.

TheGlobalVisionFrom a practical perspective, the most important stage in the process of

global unification occurred in the last few centuries, when empires grew andtradeintensified.Ever-tighteninglinkswereformedbetweenthepeopleofAfro-Asia,America,AustraliaandOceania.ThusMexicanchillipeppersmadeitintoIndian food and Spanish cattle began grazing in Argentina. Yet from anideological perspective, an evenmore important development occurred duringthe first millennium BC, when the idea of a universal order took root. Forthousands of years previously, history was already moving slowly in thedirectionofglobalunity,but the ideaofauniversalordergoverning theentireworldwasstillalientomostpeople.

25. Sioux chiefs (1905). Neither the Sioux nor any otherGreat Plainstribehadhorsespriorto1492.

Homosapiensevolvedtothinkofpeopleasdividedintousandthem.‘Us’was the group immediately around you, whoever you were, and ‘them’ waseveryone else. In fact, no social animal is ever guided by the interests of theentirespeciestowhichitbelongs.Nochimpanzeecaresabouttheinterestsofthechimpanzeespecies,nosnailwillliftatentaclefortheglobalsnailcommunity,no lion alphamalemakes a bid for becoming thekingof all lions, and at theentrance of no beehive can one find the slogan: ‘Worker bees of theworld –unite!’

But beginningwith theCognitiveRevolution,Homosapiens becamemoreandmore exceptional in this respect. People began to cooperate on a regularbasiswith complete strangers,whom they imagined as ‘brothers’ or ‘friends’.Yetthisbrotherhoodwasnotuniversal.Somewhereinthenextvalley,orbeyondthemountainrange,onecouldstillsense‘them’.Whenthefirstpharaoh,Menes,unitedEgypt around 3000BC, itwas clear to theEgyptians thatEgypt had aborder, and beyond the border lurked ‘barbarians’. The barbarianswere alien,threatening, and interesting only to the extent that they had land or naturalresources that the Egyptians wanted. All the imagined orders people createdtendedtoignoreasubstantialpartofhumankind.

The first millennium BC witnessed the appearance of three potentially

universal orders, whose devotees could for the first time imagine the entireworldandtheentirehumanraceasasingleunitgovernedbyasinglesetoflaws.Everyonewas ‘us’, at least potentially. Therewas no longer ‘them’. The firstuniversal order to appear was economic: the monetary order. The seconduniversalorderwaspolitical: the imperialorder.The thirduniversalorderwasreligious: the order of universal religions such as Buddhism, Christianity andIslam.

Merchants, conquerors andprophetswere the firstpeoplewhomanaged totranscend the binary evolutionary division, ‘us vs them’, and to foresee thepotentialunityofhumankind.For themerchants, theentireworldwasasinglemarket and all humans were potential customers. They tried to establish aneconomic order that would apply to all, everywhere. For the conquerors, theentireworldwasasingleempireandallhumanswerepotentialsubjects,andfortheprophets,theentireworldheldasingletruthandallhumanswerepotentialbelievers. They too tried to establish an order that would be applicable foreveryoneeverywhere.

During the last three millennia, people made more and more ambitiousattempts to realise that global vision. The next three chapters discuss howmoney,empiresanduniversalreligionsspread,andhowtheylaidthefoundationoftheunitedworldoftoday.Webeginwiththestoryofthegreatestconquerorinhistory,aconquerorpossessedofextremetoleranceandadaptability,therebyturning people into ardent disciples.This conqueror ismoney. Peoplewhodonotbelieveinthesamegodorobeythesamekingaremorethanwillingtousethe same money. Osama Bin Laden, for all his hatred of American culture,American religion andAmerican politics,was very fond ofAmerican dollars.Howdidmoneysucceedwheregodsandkingsfailed?

10

TheScentofMoney

IN 1519 HERNÁN CORTÉS AND HIS CONQUISTADORS invadedMexico,hithertoanisolatedhumanworld.TheAztecs,asthepeoplewholivedtherecalledthemselves,quicklynoticedthatthealiensshowedanextraordinaryinterest in a certain yellow metal. In fact, they never seemed to stop talkingabout it.Thenativeswerenotunfamiliarwithgold– itwasprettyandeasy towork,sotheyusedittomakejewelleryandstatues,andtheyoccasionallyusedgold dust as a medium of exchange. But when an Aztec wanted to buysomething, he generally paid in cocoa beans or bolts of cloth. The Spanishobsessionwithgold thus seemed inexplicable.Whatwas so important about ametalthatcouldnotbeeaten,drunkorwoven,andwastoosofttousefortoolsorweapons?When thenativesquestionedCortés as towhy theSpaniardshadsuch a passion for gold, the conquistador answered, ‘Because I and mycompanions suffer from a disease of the heart which can be cured only withgold.’1

In theAfro-Asianworldfromwhich theSpaniardscame, theobsessionforgoldwasindeedanepidemic.Eventhebitterestofenemieslustedafterthesameuseless yellow metal. Three centuries before the conquest of Mexico, theancestors of Cortés and his armywaged a bloodywar of religion against theMuslimkingdoms in Iberia andNorthAfrica.The followersofChrist and thefollowers of Allah killed each other by the thousands, devastated fields andorchards,andturnedprosperouscitiesintosmoulderingruins–allforthegreatergloryofChristorAllah.

As the Christians gradually gained the upper hand, they marked theirvictories not only by destroying mosques and building churches,but also byissuingnewgoldandsilvercoinsbearingthesignofthecrossandthankingGodfor His help in combating the infidels. Yet alongside the new currency, thevictors minted another type of coin, called the millares, which carried a

somewhat different message. These square coins made by the ChristianconquerorswereemblazonedwithflowingArabicscriptthatdeclared:‘ThereisnogodexceptAllah,andMuhammadisAllah’smessenger.’EventheCatholicbishops ofMelgueil andAgde issued these faithful copies of popularMuslimcoins,andGod-fearingChristianshappilyusedthem.2

Toleranceflourishedon theothersideof thehill too.Muslimmerchants inNorth Africa conducted business using Christian coins such as the Florentineflorin,theVenetianducatandtheNeapolitangigliato.EvenMuslimrulerswhocalledforjihadagainsttheinfidelChristiansweregladtoreceivetaxesincoinsthatinvokedChristandHisVirginMother.3

HowMuchisIt?Hunter-gatherers had no money. Each band hunted, gathered and

manufactured almost everything it required, from meat to medicine, fromsandals to sorcery. Different bandmembersmay have specialised in differenttasks,but theyshared theirgoodsandservices throughaneconomyof favoursand obligations. A piece of meat given for free would carry with it theassumption of reciprocity – say, free medical assistance. The band waseconomicallyindependent;onlyafewrareitemsthatcouldnotbefoundlocally–seashells,pigments,obsidianandthelike–hadtobeobtainedfromstrangers.This couldusuallybedoneby simplebarter: ‘We’ll giveyoupretty seashells,andyou’llgiveushigh-qualityflint.’

Little of this changedwith the onset of theAgricultural Revolution.Mostpeople continued to live in small, intimate communities.Much like a hunter-gatherer band, each villagewas a self-sufficient economic unit,maintained bymutual favours and obligations plus a little barterwith outsiders.One villagermayhavebeenparticularlyadeptatmakingshoes,anotheratdispensingmedicalcare,sovillagersknewwhere to turnwhenbarefootorsick.Butvillagesweresmall and their economies limited, so there could be no full-time shoemakersanddoctors.

The rise of cities and kingdoms and the improvement in transportinfrastructure brought about new opportunities for specialisation. Denselypopulated cities provided full-time employment not just for professionalshoemakers and doctors, but also for carpenters, priests, soldiers and lawyers.Villages that gained a reputation for producing really goodwine, olive oil orceramicsdiscoveredthatitwasworththeirwhiletospecialisenearlyexclusivelyin that product and trade itwith other settlements for all the other goods theyneeded. This made a lot of sense. Climates and soils differ, so why drink

mediocrewine fromyour backyard if you can buy a smoother variety from aplacewhosesoilandclimateismuchbettersuitedtograpevines?Iftheclayinyourbackyardmakesstrongerandprettierpots,thenyoucanmakeanexchange.Furthermore,full-timespecialistvintnersandpotters,nottomentiondoctorsandlawyers,canhonetheirexpertisetothebenefitofall.Butspecialisationcreatedaproblem–howdoyoumanagetheexchangeofgoodsbetweenthespecialists?

Aneconomyoffavoursandobligationsdoesn’tworkwhenlargenumbersofstrangerstrytocooperate.It’sonethingtoprovidefreeassistancetoasisteroraneighbour, a very different thing to take care of foreigners who might neverreciprocatethefavour.Onecanfallbackonbarter.Butbarter iseffectiveonlywhen exchanging a limited range of products. It cannot form the basis for acomplexeconomy.4

In order to understand the limitations of barter, imagine that you own anappleorchardinthehillcountrythatproducesthecrispest,sweetestapplesintheentireprovince.Youworksohardinyourorchardthatyourshoeswearout.Soyouharnessupyourdonkeycartandheadtothemarkettowndownbytheriver.Yourneighbourtoldyouthatashoemakeronthesouthendofthemarketplacemadehima really sturdypair of boots that’s lastedhim through five seasons.You find the shoemaker’s shop and offer to barter some of your apples inexchangefortheshoesyouneed.

Theshoemakerhesitates.Howmanyapplesshouldheask for inpayment?Everydayheencountersdozensofcustomers,afewofwhombringalongsacksofapples,whileotherscarrywheat,goatsorcloth–allofvaryingquality.Stillothersoffertheirexpertiseinpetitioningthekingorcuringbackaches.Thelasttimetheshoemakerexchangedshoesforappleswasthreemonthsago,andbackthenheaskedforthreesacksofapples.Orwasitfour?Butcometothinkofit,thoseapplesweresourvalleyapples,ratherthanprimehillapples.Ontheotherhand, on that previous occasion, the appleswere given in exchange for smallwomen’s shoes. This fellow is asking for man-size boots. Besides, in recentweeksadiseasehasdecimatedtheflocksaroundtown,andskinsarebecomingscarce. The tanners are starting to demand twice as many finished shoes inexchange for the same quantity of leather. Shouldn’t that be taken intoconsideration?

In a barter economy, every day the shoemaker and the apple grower willhavetolearnanewtherelativepricesofdozensofcommodities.Ifonehundreddifferentcommoditiesaretradedinthemarket,thenbuyersandsellerswillhavetoknow4,950differentexchangerates.Andif1,000differentcommoditiesaretraded,buyersandsellersmust juggle499,500differentexchange rates!5How

doyoufigureitout?Itgetsworse.Evenifyoumanagetocalculatehowmanyapplesequalone

pairofshoes,barterisnotalwayspossible.Afterall,atraderequiresthateachsidewantwhat theother has tooffer.Whathappens if the shoemakerdoesn’tlikeapplesand,ifatthemomentinquestion,whathereallywantsisadivorce?True,thefarmercouldlookforalawyerwholikesapplesandsetupathree-waydeal.Butwhatifthelawyerisfulluponapplesbutreallyneedsahaircut?

Some societies tried to solve the problem by establishing a central bartersystem that collected products from specialist growers andmanufacturers anddistributed themto thosewhoneededthem.The largestandmostfamoussuchexperiment was conducted in the Soviet Union, and it failed miserably.‘Everyonewouldworkaccordingtotheirabilities,andreceiveaccordingtotheirneeds’turnedoutinpracticeinto‘everyonewouldworkaslittleastheycangetawaywith,andreceiveasmuchas theycouldgrab’.Moremoderateandmoresuccessfulexperimentsweremadeonotheroccasions, forexample in the IncaEmpire.Yetmostsocietiesfoundamoreeasywaytoconnectlargenumbersofexperts–theydevelopedmoney.

ShellsandCigarettesMoneywascreatedmanytimesinmanyplaces.Itsdevelopmentrequiredno

technologicalbreakthroughs–itwasapurelymentalrevolution.Itinvolvedthecreation of a new inter-subjective reality that exists solely in people’s sharedimagination.

Moneyisnotcoinsandbanknotes.Moneyisanythingthatpeoplearewillingto use in order to represent systematically the value of other things for thepurpose of exchanging goods and services.Money enables people to comparequicklyandeasilythevalueofdifferentcommodities(suchasapples,shoesanddivorces), to easily exchange one thing for another, and to store wealthconveniently.Therehavebeenmany typesofmoney.Themost familiar is thecoin,whichisastandardisedpieceofimprintedmetal.Yetmoneyexistedlongbeforetheinventionofcoinage,andcultureshaveprosperedusingotherthingsascurrency,suchasshells,cattle,skins,salt,grain,beads,clothandpromissorynotes.Cowryshellswereusedasmoneyforabout4,000yearsalloverAfrica,SouthAsia,EastAsiaandOceania.TaxescouldstillbepaidincowryshellsinBritishUgandaintheearlytwentiethcentury.

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

InmodernprisonsandPOWcamps,cigaretteshaveoftenservedasmoney.Evennon-smokingprisonershavebeenwillingtoacceptcigarettesinpayment,and to calculate the value of all other goods and services in cigarettes. OneAuschwitzsurvivordescribedthecigarettecurrencyusedinthecamp:‘Wehadour own currency,whose value no one questioned: the cigarette.The price ofevery article was stated in cigarettes… In “normal” times, that is, when thecandidatestothegaschamberswerecominginataregularpace,aloafofbreadcosttwelvecigarettes;a300-grampackageofmargarine,thirty;awatch,eightyto200;alitreofalcohol,400cigarettes!’6

Infact,eventodaycoinsandbanknotesarearareformofmoney.In2006,the sum totalofmoney in theworld is about$60 trillion,yet the sum totalofcoins and banknotes was less than $6 trillion.7 More than 90 per cent of all

money – more than $50 trillion appearing in our accounts – exists only oncomputer servers. Accordingly, most business transactions are executed bymovingelectronicdatafromonecomputerfiletoanother,withoutanyexchangeofphysicalcash.Onlyacriminalbuysahouse,forexample,byhandingoverasuitcase full of banknotes. As long as people are willing to trade goods andservices in exchange for electronic data, it’s even better than shiny coins andcrispbanknotes–lighter,lessbulky,andeasiertokeeptrackof.

For complex commercial systems to function, some kind of money isindispensable.Ashoemakerinamoneyeconomyneedstoknowonlythepriceschargedforvariouskindsofshoes–thereisnoneedtomemorisetheexchangeratesbetweenshoesandapplesorgoats.Moneyalsofreesappleexpertsfromtheneed to search out apple-craving shoemakers, because everyone alwayswantsmoney. This is perhaps itsmost basic quality. Everyone alwayswantsmoneybecauseeveryoneelsealsoalwayswantsmoney,whichmeansyoucanexchangemoneyforwhateveryouwantorneed.Theshoemakerwillalwaysbehappytotakeyourmoney,becausenomatterwhathe reallywants–apples,goatsor adivorce–hecangetitinexchangeformoney.

Money is thus a universal medium of exchange that enables people toconvert almost everything into almost anything else. Brawn gets converted tobrain when a discharged soldier finances his college tuition with his militarybenefits.Landgetsconvertedintoloyaltywhenabaronsellspropertytosupporthisretainers.Healthisconvertedtojusticewhenaphysicianusesherfeestohirealawyer–orbribeajudge.Itisevenpossibletoconvertsexintosalvation,asfifteenth-centuryprostitutesdidwhentheysleptwithmenformoney,whichtheyinturnusedtobuyindulgencesfromtheCatholicChurch.

Idealtypesofmoneyenablepeoplenotmerelytoturnonethingintoanother,but tostorewealthaswell.Manyvaluablescannotbestored–suchastimeorbeauty.Some things canbe storedonly for a short time, such as strawberries.Otherthingsaremoredurable,buttakeupalotofspaceandrequireexpensivefacilitiesandcare.Grain,forexample,canbestoredforyears,buttodosoyouneed to build huge storehouses and guard against rats,mould,water, fire andthieves. Money, whether paper, computer bits or cowry shells, solves theseproblems.Cowryshellsdon’t rot,areunpalatable to rats,cansurvivefiresandarecompactenoughtobelockedupinasafe.

Inorder tousewealth it isnot enough just to store it. Itoftenneeds tobetransported from place to place. Some forms of wealth, such as real estate,cannot be transported at all. Commodities such as wheat and rice can betransportedonlywithdifficulty.Imagineawealthyfarmerlivinginamoneylessland who emigrates to a distant province. His wealth consists mainly of his

house and rice paddies. The farmer cannot take with him the house or thepaddies. He might exchange them for tons of rice, but it would be veryburdensome and expensive to transport all that rice. Money solves theseproblems. The farmer can sell his property in exchange for a sack of cowryshells,whichhecaneasilycarrywhereverhegoes.

Becausemoneycanconvert,storeandtransportwealtheasilyandcheaply,itmade a vital contribution to the appearance of complex commercial networksanddynamicmarkets.Withoutmoney,commercialnetworksandmarketswouldhave been doomed to remain very limited in their size, complexity anddynamism.

HowDoesMoneyWork?Cowryshellsanddollarshavevalueonlyinourcommonimagination.Their

worth isnot inherent in thechemicalstructureof theshellsandpaper,or theircolour, or their shape. In otherwords,money isn’t amaterial reality – it is apsychologicalconstruct.Itworksbyconvertingmatterintomind.Butwhydoesitsucceed?Whyshouldanyonebewillingtoexchangeafertilericepaddyforahandful of useless cowry shells?Whyare youwilling to flip hamburgers, sellhealth insurance or babysit three obnoxious brats when all you get for yourexertionsisafewpiecesofcolouredpaper?

People arewilling to do such thingswhen they trust the figments of theircollectiveimagination.Trustistherawmaterialfromwhichalltypesofmoneyareminted.When a wealthy farmer sold his possessions for a sack of cowryshellsandtravelledwiththemtoanotherprovince,hetrustedthatuponreachinghisdestinationotherpeoplewouldbewillingtosellhimrice,housesandfieldsinexchangefor theshells.Moneyisaccordinglyasystemofmutual trust,andnot just any system of mutual trust: money is the most universal and mostefficientsystemofmutualtrusteverdevised.

What created this trust was a very complex and long-term network ofpolitical,socialandeconomicrelations.WhydoIbelieveinthecowryshellorgold coin or dollar bill? Because my neighbours believe in them. And myneighbours believe in them because I believe in them. Andwe all believe inthembecauseourkingbelievesinthemanddemandsthemintaxes,andbecauseourpriestbelieves in themanddemands them in tithes.Takeadollarbill andlookatitcarefully.YouwillseethatitissimplyacolourfulpieceofpaperwiththesignatureoftheUSsecretaryofthetreasuryononeside,andtheslogan‘InGodWeTrust’ontheother.Weacceptthedollarinpayment,becausewetrustinGodand theUS secretaryof the treasury.Thecrucial roleof trust explains

whyourfinancialsystemsaresotightlyboundupwithourpolitical,socialandideological systems, why financial crises are often triggered by politicaldevelopments,andwhythestockmarketcanriseorfalldependingonthewaytradersfeelonaparticularmorning.

Initially,whenthefirstversionsofmoneywerecreated,peopledidn’thavethis sortof trust, so itwasnecessary todefineas ‘money’ things thathad realintrinsicvalue.History’sfirstknownmoneySumerianbarleymoney–isagoodexample.ItappearedinSumeraround3000BC,atthesametimeandplace,andunder the same circumstances, in which writing appeared. Just as writingdevelopedtoanswertheneedsofintensifyingadministrativeactivities,sobarleymoneydevelopedtoanswertheneedsofintensifyingeconomicactivities.

Barleymoneywassimplybarley–fixedamountsofbarleygrainsusedasauniversalmeasure for evaluating and exchanging all other goods and services.Themost commonmeasurementwas the sila, equivalent to roughly one litre.Standardisedbowls,eachcapableofcontainingonesila,weremass-producedsothatwheneverpeopleneededtobuyorsellanything,itwaseasytomeasurethenecessaryamountsofbarley.Salaries,too,weresetandpaidinsilasofbarley.Amale labourer earned sixty silas a month, a female labourer thirty silas. Aforemancouldearnbetween1,200and5,000silas.Noteventhemostravenousforemancouldeat5,000litresofbarleyamonth,buthecoulduse thesilashedidn’t eat to buy all sorts of other commodities – oil, goats, slaves, andsomethingelsetoeatbesidesbarley.8

Eventhoughbarleyhasintrinsicvalue,itwasnoteasytoconvincepeopletouse it asmoney rather than as just another commodity. In order to understandwhy,justthinkwhatwouldhappenifyoutookasackfullofbarleytoyourlocalshoppingcentre,andtriedtobuyashirtorapizza.Thevendorswouldprobablycallsecurity.Still,itwassomewhateasiertobuildtrustinbarleyasthefirsttypeofmoney,becausebarleyhasan inherentbiologicalvalue.Humanscaneat it.On the other hand, it was difficult to store and transport barley. The realbreakthrough inmonetaryhistoryoccurredwhenpeoplegained trust inmoneythat lacked inherent value, butwas easier to store and transport. SuchmoneyappearedinancientMesopotamiainthemiddleofthethirdmillenniumBC.Thiswasthesilvershekel.

The silver shekel was not a coin, but rather 8.33 grams of silver. WhenHammurabi’sCodedeclaredthatasuperiormanwhokilledaslavewomanmustpayherowner twentysilvershekels, itmeant thathehad topay166gramsofsilver,nottwentycoins.MostmonetarytermsintheOldTestamentaregivenintermsofsilverratherthancoins.JosephsbrotherssoldhimtotheIshmaelitesfortwenty silver shekels, or rather 166gramsof silver (the sameprice as a slave

woman–hewasayouth,afterall).Unlike thebarley sila, the silver shekelhadno inherentvalue.Youcannot

eat,drinkorclotheyourselfinsilver,andit’stoosoftformakingusefultools–ploughsharesorswordsofsilverwouldcrumplealmostasfastasonesmadeoutof aluminium foil.When theyareused for anything, silver andgoldaremadeintojewellery,crownsandotherstatussymbols–luxurygoodsthatmembersofaparticularcultureidentifywithhighsocialstatus.Theirvalueispurelycultural.

Setweightsofpreciousmetalseventuallygavebirthtocoins.Thefirstcoinsin historywere struck around 640 BC byKingAlyattes of Lydia, in westernAnatolia. These coins had a standardised weight of gold or silver, and wereimprintedwithanidentificationmark.Themarktestifiedtotwothings.First,itindicatedhowmuchpreciousmetalthecoincontained.Second,itidentifiedtheauthoritythatissuedthecoinandthatguaranteeditscontents.AlmostallcoinsinusetodayaredescendantsoftheLydiancoins.

Coinshadtwoimportantadvantagesoverunmarkedmetal ingots.First, thelatterhadtobeweighedforeverytransaction.Second,weighingtheingotisnotenough.HowdoestheshoemakerknowthatthesilveringotIputdownformybootsisreallymadeofpuresilver,andnotofleadcoveredontheoutsidebyathin silver coating? Coins help solve these problems. The mark imprinted onthemtestifiestotheirexactvalue,sotheshoemakerdoesn’thavetokeepascaleonhiscashregister.Moreimportantly,themarkonthecoinisthesignatureofsomepoliticalauthoritythatguaranteesthecoin’svalue.

Theshapeandsizeofthemarkvariedtremendouslythroughouthistory,butthemessagewasalwaysthesame:‘I, theGreatKingSo-And-So,giveyoumypersonalwordthatthismetaldisccontainsexactlyfivegramsofgold.Ifanyonedarescounterfeit thiscoin, itmeanshe is fabricatingmyownsignature,whichwouldbe a blot onmy reputation. Iwill punish such a crimewith the utmostseverity.’That’swhycounterfeitingmoneyhasalwaysbeenconsideredamuchmore serious crime than other acts of deception. Counterfeiting is not justcheating–it’sabreachofsovereignty,anactofsubversionagainst thepower,privileges and person of the king. The legal term is lese-majesty (violatingmajesty), andwas typically punished by torture and death.As long as peopletrustedthepowerandintegrityoftheking,theytrustedhiscoins.TotalstrangerscouldeasilyagreeontheworthofaRomandenariuscoin,becausetheytrustedthepowerandintegrityoftheRomanemperor,whosenameandpictureadornedit.

27. One of the earliest coins in history, from Lydia of the seventhcenturyBC.

In turn, the power of the emperor rested on the denarius. Just think howdifficultitwouldhavebeentomaintaintheRomanEmpirewithoutcoins–iftheemperorhadtoraisetaxesandpaysalariesinbarleyandwheat.ItwouldhavebeenimpossibletocollectbarleytaxesinSyria,transportthefundstothecentraltreasuryinRome,andtransportthemagaintoBritaininordertopaythelegionsthere. It would have been equally difficult to maintain the empire if theinhabitants of the city of Rome believed in gold coins, but the subjectpopulationsrejectedthisbelief,puttingtheirtrustinsteadincowryshells,ivorybeadsorrollsofcloth.

TheGospelofGoldThe trust in Rome’s coins was so strong that even outside the empire’s

borders, peoplewere happy to receive payment in denarii. In the first centuryAD, Roman coins were an accepted medium of exchange in the markets ofIndia,eventhoughtheclosestRomanlegionwasthousandsofkilometresaway.TheIndianshadsuchastrongconfidence in thedenariusand the imageof theemperorthatwhenlocalrulersstruckcoinsoftheirowntheycloselyimitatedthedenarius, down to the portrait of the Roman emperor! The name ‘denarius’became a generic name for coins. Muslim caliphs Arabicised this name andissued ‘dinars’. The dinar is still the official name of the currency in Jordan,Iraq,Serbia,Macedonia,Tunisiaandseveralothercountries.

AsLydian-stylecoinagewasspreadingfromtheMediterraneantotheIndianOcean,Chinadevelopedaslightlydifferentmonetarysystem,basedonbronzecoinsandunmarkedsilverandgold ingots.Yet the twomonetarysystemshadenough in common (especially the reliance on gold and silver) that close

monetaryandcommercialrelationswereestablishedbetweentheChinesezoneandtheLydianzone.MuslimandEuropeanmerchantsandconquerorsgraduallyspreadtheLydiansystemandthegospelofgoldtothefarcornersoftheearth.Bythelatemoderneratheentireworldwasasinglemonetaryzone,relyingfirston gold and silver, and later on a few trusted currencies such as the BritishpoundandtheAmericandollar.

Theappearanceofasingletransnationalandtransculturalmonetaryzonelaidthe foundation for the unification of Afro-Asia, and eventually of the entireglobe, into a single economic and political sphere. People continued to speakmutuallyincomprehensiblelanguages,obeydifferentrulersandworshipdistinctgods,but all believed ingold and silver and ingold and silver coins.Withoutthissharedbelief,globaltradingnetworkswouldhavebeenvirtuallyimpossible.The gold and silver that sixteenth-century conquistadors found in Americaenabled European merchants to buy silk, porcelain and spices in East Asia,therebymoving thewheelsofeconomicgrowth inbothEuropeandEastAsia.Most of the gold and silver mined inMexico and the Andes slipped throughEuropean fingers to find a welcome home in the purses of Chinese silk andporcelainmanufacturers.Whatwouldhavehappened to theglobal economy iftheChinese hadn’t suffered from the same ‘disease of the heart’ that afflictedCortés and his companions – and had refused to accept payment in gold andsilver?

YetwhyshouldChinese,Indians,MuslimsandSpaniards–whobelongedtoverydifferentculturesthatfailedtoagreeaboutmuchofanything–neverthelessshare thebelief ingold?Whydidn’t ithappenthatSpaniardsbelievedingold,whileMuslimsbelievedinbarley,Indiansincowryshells,andChineseinrollsof silk? Economists have a ready answer. Once trade connects two areas, theforcesofsupplyanddemandtendtoequalisethepricesoftransportablegoods.In order to understand why, consider a hypothetical case. Assume that whenregular trade opened between India and the Mediterranean, Indians wereuninterestedingold,soitwasalmostworthless.ButintheMediterranean,goldwas a coveted status symbol, hence its value was high. What would happennext?

MerchantstravellingbetweenIndiaandtheMediterraneanwouldnoticethedifferenceinthevalueofgold.Inorder tomakeaprofit, theywouldbuygoldcheaply in India and sell it dearly in the Mediterranean. Consequently, thedemandforgoldinIndiawouldskyrocket,aswoulditsvalue.Atthesametimethe Mediterranean would experience an influx of gold, whose value wouldconsequently drop. Within a short time the value of gold in India and theMediterraneanwouldbequitesimilar.ThemerefactthatMediterraneanpeople

believed in gold would cause Indians to start believing in it as well. Even ifIndiansstillhadnorealuseforgold,thefactthatMediterraneanpeoplewanteditwouldbeenoughtomaketheIndiansvalueit.

Similarly,thefactthatanotherpersonbelievesincowryshells,ordollars,orelectronic data, is enough to strengthen our own belief in them, even if thatperson isotherwisehated,despisedor ridiculedbyus.ChristiansandMuslimswhocouldnotagreeonreligiousbeliefscouldneverthelessagreeonamonetarybelief,becausewhereasreligionasksustobelieveinsomething,moneyasksustobelievethatotherpeoplebelieveinsomething.

Forthousandsofyears,philosophers,thinkersandprophetshavebesmirchedmoney and called it the root of all evil. Be that as itmay,money is also theapogee of human tolerance.Money ismore open-minded than language, statelaws,culturalcodes,religiousbeliefsandsocialhabits.Moneyistheonlytrustsystemcreatedbyhumansthatcanbridgealmostanyculturalgap,andthatdoesnotdiscriminateonthebasisofreligion,gender,race,ageorsexualorientation.Thankstomoney,evenpeoplewhodon’tknoweachotheranddon’ttrusteachothercanneverthelesscooperateeffectively.

ThePriceofMoneyMoneyisbasedontwouniversalprinciples:a.Universal convertibility:withmoney as an alchemist, you can turn land

intoloyalty,justiceintohealth,andviolenceintoknowledge.b. Universal trust: with money as a go-between, any two people can

cooperateonanyproject.Theseprincipleshaveenabledmillionsofstrangerstocooperateeffectively

in trade and industry.But these seeminglybenignprinciples have a dark side.When everything is convertible, andwhen trust depends on anonymous coinsand cowry shells, it corrodes local traditions, intimate relations and humanvalues,replacingthemwiththecoldlawsofsupplyanddemand.

Human communities and families have always been based on belief in‘priceless’ things, such as honour, loyalty,morality and love.These things lieoutside the domain of the market, and they shouldn’t be bought or sold formoney.Even if themarketoffersagoodprice, certain things just aren’tdone.Parents mustn’t sell their children into slavery; a devout Christian must notcommit amortal sin; a loyal knightmust never betray his lord; and ancestraltriballandsshallneverbesoldtoforeigners.

Moneyhasalways tried tobreak through thesebarriers, likewater seepingthrough cracks in a dam. Parents have been reduced to selling some of their

childrenintoslaveryinordertobuyfoodfortheothers.DevoutChristianshavemurdered, stolen and cheated – and later used their spoils to buy forgivenessfrom the church. Ambitious knights auctioned their allegiance to the highestbidder, while securing the loyalty of their own followers by cash payments.Triballandsweresoldtoforeignersfromtheothersideoftheworldinordertopurchaseanentryticketintotheglobaleconomy.

Moneyhas anevendarker side.For althoughmoneybuildsuniversal trustbetween strangers, this trust is investednot inhumans, communities or sacredvalues,butinmoneyitselfandintheimpersonalsystemsthatbackit.Wedonottrust the stranger, or thenext-doorneighbour–we trust the coin theyhold. Iftheyrunoutofcoins,werunoutof trust.Asmoneybringsdownthedamsofcommunity,religionandstate, theworldis indangerofbecomingonebigandratherheartlessmarketplace.

Hencetheeconomichistoryofhumankindisadelicatedance.Peoplerelyonmoneytofacilitatecooperationwithstrangers,butthey’reafraiditwillcorrupthumanvaluesandintimaterelations.Withonehandpeoplewillinglydestroythecommunaldamsthatheldatbaythemovementofmoneyandcommerceforsolong.Yetwith theotherhand theybuildnewdams toprotect society, religionandtheenvironmentfromenslavementtomarketforces.

Itiscommonnowadaystobelievethatthemarketalwaysprevails,andthatthedamserectedbykings,priestsandcommunitiescannot longholdback thetidesofmoney.Thisisnaïve.Brutalwarriors,religiousfanaticsandconcernedcitizenshaverepeatedlymanagedtotrouncecalculatingmerchants,andeventoreshapetheeconomy.Itisthereforeimpossibletounderstandtheunificationofhumankindasapurelyeconomicprocess.Inordertounderstandhowthousandsofisolatedculturescoalescedovertimetoformtheglobalvillageoftoday,wemust take intoaccount theroleofgoldandsilver,butwecannotdisregard theequallycrucialroleofsteel.

II

ImperialVisions

THE ANCIENT ROMANS WERE USED TO being defeated. Like therulersofmostofhistory’sgreatempires, theycould losebattleafterbattlebutstillwin thewar.Anempire thatcannotsustainablowandremainstanding isnot reallyanempire.Yet even theRomans found ithard to stomach thenewsarrivingfromnorthernIberiainthemiddleofthesecondcenturyBC.Asmall,insignificant mountain town called Numantia, inhabited by the peninsula’snativeCelts,haddaredtothrowofftheRomanyoke.Romeatthetimewastheunquestionedmaster of the entireMediterranean basin, having vanquished theMacedonianandSeleucid empires, subjugated theproudcity statesofGreece,and turnedCarthage into a smouldering ruin.TheNumantians hadnothingontheirsidebuttheirfierceloveoffreedomandtheirinhospitableterrain.Yettheyforcedlegionafterlegiontosurrenderorretreatinshame.

Eventually,in134BC,Romanpatiencesnapped.TheSenatedecidedtosendScipio Aemilianus, Rome’s foremost general and the man who had levelledCarthage,totakecareoftheNumantians.Hewasgivenamassivearmyofmorethan30,000soldiers.Scipio,whorespectedthefightingspiritandmartialskillofthe Numantians, preferred not to waste his soldiers in unnecessary combat.Instead,heencircledNumantiawithalineoffortifications,blockingthetown’scontactwiththeoutsideworld.Hungerdidhisworkforhim.Aftermorethanayear, thefoodsupplyranout.WhentheNumantiansrealisedthatallhopewaslost,theyburneddowntheirtown;accordingtoRomanaccounts,mostofthemkilledthemselvessoasnottobecomeRomanslaves.

Numantia later became a symbol of Spanish independence and courage.Miguel de Cervantes, the author ofDonQuixote, wrote a tragedy called TheSiegeofNumantiawhichendswiththetown’sdestruction,butalsowithavisionofSpain’s futuregreatness.Poets composedpaeans to its fiercedefendersandpainterscommittedmajesticdepictionsofthesiegetocanvas.In1882,itsruins

weredeclaredanationalmonument’andbecameapilgrimagesite forSpanishpatriots.Inthe1950sand1960s,themostpopularcomicbooksinSpainweren’taboutSupermanandSpiderman– they toldof the adventuresofEl Jabato, animaginaryancient Iberianherowho foughtagainst theRomanoppressors.TheancientNumantiansaretothisdaySpain’sparagonsofheroismandpatriotism,castasrolemodelsforthecountry’syoungpeople.

YetSpanishpatriotsextoltheNumantiansinSpanish–aromancelanguagethatisaprogenyofScipio’sLatin.TheNumantiansspokeanowdeadandlostCelticlanguage.CervanteswroteTheSiegeofNumantiainLatinscript,andtheplayfollowsGraeco-Romanartisticmodels.Numantiahadnotheatres.SpanishpatriotswhoadmireNumantianheroism tendalso tobe loyal followersof theRomanCatholicChurch–don’tmissthatfirstword–achurchwhoseleaderstillsitsinRomeandwhoseGodpreferstobeaddressedinLatin.Similarly,modernSpanish law derives from Roman law; Spanish politics is built on Romanfoundations; and Spanish cuisine and architecture owe a far greater debt toRoman legacies than to those of the Celts of Iberia. Nothing is really left ofNumantiasaveruins.EvenitsstoryhasreachedusthanksonlytothewritingsofRoman historians. It was tailored to the tastes of Roman audiences whichrelishedtalesoffreedom-lovingbarbarians.ThevictoryofRomeoverNumantiawassocompletethatthevictorsco-optedtheverymemoryofthevanquished.

It’s not our kind of story.We like to see underdogs win. But there is nojustice in history. Most past cultures have sooner or later fallen prey to thearmies of some ruthless empire, which have consigned them to oblivion.Empires, too, ultimately fall, but they tend to leave behind rich and enduringlegacies.Almostallpeople in the twenty-first centuryare theoffspringofoneempireoranother.

WhatisanEmpire?An empire is a political order with two important characteristics. First, to

qualifyforthatdesignationyouhavetoruleoverasignificantnumberofdistinctpeoples, each possessing a different cultural identity and a separate territory.Howmanypeoplesexactly?Twoor three isnotsufficient.Twentyor thirty isplenty.Theimperialthresholdpassessomewhereinbetween.

Second, empires are characterised by flexible borders and a potentiallyunlimited appetite. They can swallow and digest more and more nations andterritorieswithout altering theirbasic structureor identity.TheBritish stateoftoday has fairly clear borders that cannot be exceeded without altering thefundamentalstructureandidentityofthestate.Acenturyagoalmostanyplace

onearthcouldhavebecomepartoftheBritishEmpire.Culturaldiversityandterritorialflexibilitygiveempiresnotonlytheirunique

character, but also their central role in history. It’s thanks to these twocharacteristics that empires have managed to unite diverse ethnic groups andecologicalzonesunderasinglepoliticalumbrella,therebyfusingtogetherlargerandlargersegmentsofthehumanspeciesandofplanetEarth.

Itshouldbestressedthatanempireisdefinedsolelybyitsculturaldiversityand flexible borders, rather than by its origins, its form of government, itsterritorialextent,orthesizeofitspopulation.Anempireneednotemergefrommilitaryconquest.TheAthenianEmpirebeganitslifeasavoluntaryleague,andthe Habsburg Empire was born in wedlock, cobbled together by a string ofshrewd marriage alliances. Nor must an empire be ruled by an autocraticemperor. The British Empire, the largest empire in history, was ruled by ademocracy.Otherdemocratic(oratleastrepublican)empireshaveincludedthemodernDutch,French,BelgianandAmericanempires,aswellasthepremodernempiresofNovgorod,Rome,CarthageandAthens.

Size,too,doesnotreallymatter.Empirescanbepuny.TheAthenianEmpireatitszenithwasmuchsmallerinsizeandpopulationthantoday’sGreece.TheAztecEmpirewassmallerthantoday’sMexico.Bothwereneverthelessempires,whereas modern Greece and modern Mexico are not, because the formergraduallysubdueddozensandevenhundredsofdifferentpolitieswhilethelatterhavenot.Athenslordeditovermorethanahundredformerlyindependentcitystates,whereastheAztecEmpire,ifwecantrustitstaxationrecords,ruled371differenttribesandpeoples.1

Howwasitpossibletosqueezesuchahumanpotpourriintotheterritoryofamodestmodernstate?Itwaspossiblebecauseinthepastthereweremanymoredistinct peoples in the world, each of which had a smaller population andoccupied less territory than today’s typical people. The land between theMediterranean and the Jordan River, which today struggles to satisfy theambitionsofjusttwopeoples,easilyaccommodatedinbiblicaltimesdozensofnations,tribes,pettykingdomsandcitystates.

Empires were one of themain reasons for the drastic reduction in humandiversity. The imperial steamroller gradually obliterated the uniquecharacteristics of numerous peoples (such as the Numantians), forging out ofthemnewandmuchlargergroups.

EvilEmpires?In our time, ‘imperialist’ ranks second only to ‘fascist’ in the lexicon of

political swear words. The contemporary critique of empires commonly takestwoforms:

1.Empiresdonotwork.Inthelongrun,itisnotpossibletoruleeffectivelyoveralargenumberofconqueredpeoples.

2. Even if it can be done, it should not be done, because empires are evilengines of destruction and exploitation. Every people has a right to self-determination,andshouldneverbesubjecttotheruleofanother.

Fromahistoricalperspective, the first statement isplainnonsense,and thesecondisdeeplyproblematic.

Thetruthisthatempirehasbeentheworld’smostcommonformofpoliticalorganisationforthelast2,500years.Mosthumansduringthesetwoandahalfmillennia have lived in empires. Empire is also a very stable form ofgovernment.Mostempireshavefounditalarminglyeasytoputdownrebellions.Ingeneral,theyhavebeentoppledonlybyexternalinvasionorbyasplitwithintherulingelite.Conversely,conqueredpeoplesdon’thaveaverygoodrecordoffreeing themselves from their imperial overlords. Most have remainedsubjugatedforhundredsofyears.Typically,theyhavebeenslowlydigestedbytheconqueringempire,untiltheirdistinctculturesfizzledout.

For example, when the Western Roman Empire finally fell to invadingGermanic tribes in 476 AD, the Numantians, Arverni, Helvetians, Samnites,Lusitanians,Umbrians,Etruscansandhundredsofotherforgottenpeopleswhomthe Romans conquered centuries earlier did not emerge from the empireseviscerated carcass like Jonah from the belly of the great fish. None of themwere left. The biological descendants of the people who had identifiedthemselves as members of those nations, who had spoken their languages,worshippedtheirgodsandtoldtheirmythsandlegends,nowthought,spokeandworshippedasRomans.

Inmanycases,thedestructionofoneempirehardlymeantindependenceforsubjectpeoples.Instead,anewempiresteppedintothevacuumcreatedwhentheoldonecollapsedorretreated.NowherehasthisbeenmoreobviousthanintheMiddle East. The current political constellation in that region – a balance ofpower between many independent political entities with more or less stableborders– isalmostwithoutparallelany time in the last severalmillennia.ThelasttimetheMiddleEastexperiencedsuchasituationwasintheeighthcenturyBC–almost3,000yearsago!FromtheriseoftheNeo-AssyrianEmpireintheeighth centuryBC until the collapse of theBritish and French empires in themid-twentiethcenturyAD,theMiddleEastpassedfromthehandsofoneempireintothehandsofanother,likeabatoninarelayrace.AndbythetimetheBritishand French finally dropped the baton, the Aramaeans, the Ammonites, the

Phoenicians, thePhilistines, theMoabites, theEdomites and the other peoplesconqueredbytheAssyrianshadlongdisappeared.

True, today’sJews,ArmeniansandGeorgiansclaimwithsomemeasureofjustice that theyare theoffspringofancientMiddleEasternpeoples.Yet theseare only exceptions that prove the rule, and even these claims are somewhatexaggerated. It goes without saying that the political, economic and socialpracticesofmodernJews,forexample,owefarmoretotheempiresunderwhichthey lived during the past two millennia than to the traditions of the ancientkingdom of Judaea. If King David were to show up in an ultra-Orthodoxsynagogue in present-day Jerusalem, he would be utterly bewildered to findpeopledressedinEastEuropeanclothes,speakinginaGermandialect(Yiddish)and having endless arguments about the meaning of a Babylonian text (theTalmud).Therewereneither synagogues,volumesofTalmud,norevenTorahscrollsinancientJudaea.

Buildingandmaintaininganempireusuallyrequiredtheviciousslaughteroflarge populations and the brutal oppression of everyone who was left. Thestandardimperialtoolkitincludedwars,enslavement,deportationandgenocide.When the Romans invaded Scotland in AD 83, they were met by fierceresistance from local Caledonian tribes, and reacted by laying waste to thecountry. In reply to Roman peace offers, the chieftain Calgacus called theRomans ‘the ruffians of the world’, and said that ‘to plunder, slaughter androbbery they give the lying name of empire; they make a desert and call itpeace’.2

This does notmean, however, that empires leave nothing of value in theirwake. To colour all empires black and to disavow all imperial legacies is toreject most of human culture. Imperial elites used the profits of conquest tofinancenotonlyarmiesandfortsbutalsophilosophy,art,justiceandcharity.Asignificant proportionof humanity’s cultural achievements owe their existencetotheexploitationofconqueredpopulations.Theprofitsandprosperitybroughtby Roman imperialism provided Cicero, Seneca and St Augustine with theleisureandwherewithal to thinkandwrite; theTajMahalcouldnothavebeenbuilt without the wealth accumulated by Mughal exploitation of their Indiansubjects; and the Habsburg Empire’s profits from its rule over its Slavic,Hungarian and Romanian-speaking provinces paid Haydn’s salaries andMozart’s commissions. No Caledonian writer preserved Calgacus’ speech forposterity.WeknowofitthankstotheRomanhistorianTacitus.Infact,Tacitusprobablymadeitup.MostscholarstodayagreethatTacitusnotonlyfabricatedthespeechbut invented thecharacterofCalgacus, theCaledonianchieftain, to

serveasamouthpieceforwhatheandotherupper-classRomansthoughtabouttheirowncountry.

Evenifwelookbeyondelitecultureandhighart,andfocusinsteadontheworldofcommonpeople,we find imperial legacies in themajorityofmoderncultures. Todaymost of us speak, think and dream in imperial languages thatwereforceduponourancestorsbythesword.MostEastAsiansspeakanddreaminthelanguageoftheHanEmpire.Nomatterwhattheirorigins,nearlyalltheinhabitantsofthetwoAmericancontinents,fromAlaska’sBarrowPeninsulatothe Straits of Magellan, communicate in one of four imperial languages:Spanish, Portuguese, French or English. Present-day Egyptians speak Arabic,thinkofthemselvesasArabs,andidentifywholeheartedlywiththeArabEmpirethat conqueredEgypt in the seventh century and crushedwith an iron fist therepeatedrevoltsthatbrokeoutagainstitsrule.About10millionZulusinSouthAfricaharkbacktotheZuluageofgloryinthenineteenthcentury,eventhoughmostofthemdescendfromtribeswhofoughtagainsttheZuluEmpire,andwereincorporatedintoitonlythroughbloodymilitarycampaigns.

It’sforYourOwnGoodThe first empire about which we have definitive information was the

AkkadianEmpireofSargontheGreat(c.2250BC).SargonbeganhiscareerasthekingofKish, a small city state inMesopotamia.Within a fewdecadeshemanagedtoconquernotonlyallotherMesopotamiancitystates,butalsolargeterritories outside the Mesopotamian heartland. Sargon boasted that he hadconquered theentireworld. In reality,hisdominionstretched fromthePersianGulf to theMediterranean, and includedmostof today’s IraqandSyria, alongwithafewslicesofmodernIranandTurkey.

TheAkkadianEmpiredidnotlastlongafteritsfounder’sdeath,butSargonleft behind an imperial mantle that seldom remained unclaimed. For the next1,700 years, Assyrian, Babylonian andHittite kings adopted Sargon as a rolemodel,boastingthatthey,too,hadconqueredtheentireworld.Then,around550BC,CyrustheGreatofPersiacamealongwithanevenmoreimpressiveboast.

Map4.TheAkkadianEmpireandthePersianEmpire.

ThekingsofAssyriaalwaysremainedthekingsofAssyria.Evenwhentheyclaimed to rule theentireworld, itwasobvious that theyweredoing it for thegreater glory ofAssyria, and theywere not apologetic about it.Cyrus, on theotherhand,claimednotmerelytorulethewholeworld,buttodosoforthesakeofallpeople.‘Weareconqueringyouforyourownbenefit,’saidthePersians.Cyrus wanted the peoples he subjected to love him and to count themselveslucky to be Persian vassals. The most famous example of Cyrus’ innovativeeffortstogaintheapprobationofanationlivingunderthethumbofhisempirewas his command that the Jewish exiles inBabylonia be allowed to return totheirJudaeanhomelandandrebuildtheirtemple.Heevenofferedthemfinancialassistance.CyrusdidnotseehimselfasaPersiankingrulingoverJews–hewasalsothekingoftheJews,andthusresponsiblefortheirwelfare.

Thepresumptiontoruletheentireworldforthebenefitofallitsinhabitantswasstartling.EvolutionhasmadeHomosapiens, likeothersocialmammals,axenophobiccreature.Sapiensinstinctivelydividehumanityintotwoparts,‘we’and‘they’.Wearepeoplelikeyouandme,whoshareourlanguage,religionandcustoms.Weareallresponsibleforeachother,butnotresponsibleforthem.Wewerealwaysdistinct from them,andowe themnothing.Wedon’twant to seeany of them in our territory, andwe don’t care an iotawhat happens in their

territory.Theyarebarelyevenhuman. In the languageof theDinkapeopleofthe Sudan, ‘Dinka’ simplymeans ‘people’. Peoplewho are notDinka are notpeople.TheDinka’sbitterenemiesaretheNuer.WhatdoesthewordNuermeaninNuerlanguage?Itmeans‘originalpeople’.ThousandsofkilometresfromtheSudandeserts, in the frozen ice-landsofAlaskaandnorth-easternSiberia, livetheYupiks.WhatdoesYupikmeaninYupiklanguage?Itmeans‘realpeople’.3

In contrast with this ethnic exclusiveness, imperial ideology from Cyrusonward has tended to be inclusive and all-encompassing. Even though it hasoftenemphasisedracialandculturaldifferencesbetweenrulersandruled,ithasstillrecognisedthebasicunityoftheentireworld,theexistenceofasinglesetofprinciplesgoverningallplacesandtimes,andthemutualresponsibilitiesofallhumanbeings.Humankindisseenasalargefamily:theprivilegesoftheparentsgohandinhandwithresponsibilityforthewelfareofthechildren.

ThisnewimperialvisionpassedfromCyrusand thePersians toAlexandertheGreat,andfromhimtoHellenistickings,Romanemperors,Muslimcaliphs,Indiandynasts,andeventuallyeventoSovietpremiersandAmericanpresidents.This benevolent imperial vision has justified the existence of empires, andnegated not only attempts by subject peoples to rebel, but also attempts byindependentpeoplestoresistimperialexpansion.

SimilarimperialvisionsweredevelopedindependentlyofthePersianmodelin other parts of the world, most notably in Central America, in the Andeanregion,andinChina.AccordingtotraditionalChinesepoliticaltheory,Heaven(Tian)isthesourceofalllegitimateauthorityonearth.HeavenchoosesthemostworthypersonorfamilyandgivesthemtheMandateofHeaven.Thispersonorfamily then rules over All Under Heaven (Tianxia) for the benefit of all itsinhabitants.Thus,alegitimateauthorityis–bydefinition–universal.IfarulerlackstheMandateofHeaven,thenhelackslegitimacytoruleevenasinglecity.Ifarulerenjoysthemandate,heisobligedtospreadjusticeandharmonytotheentireworld.TheMandateofHeavencouldnotbegiven toseveralcandidatessimultaneously,andconsequentlyonecouldnotlegitimisetheexistenceofmorethanoneindependentstate.

The first emperorof theunitedChinese empire,QínShǐHuángdì, boastedthat ‘throughout the six directions [of the universe] everything belongs to theemperor…wherever there is ahuman footprint, there is not onewhodidnotbecomeasubject[oftheemperor]…hiskindnessreachesevenoxenandhorses.Thereisnotonewhodidnotbenefit.Everymanissafeunderhisownroof.’4InChinese political thinking as well as Chinese historical memory, imperialperiods were henceforth seen as golden ages of order and justice. In

contradiction to the modern Western view that a just world is composed ofseparatenationstates, inChinaperiodsofpolitical fragmentationwereseenasdark ages of chaos and injustice. This perception has had far-reachingimplicationsforChinesehistory.Everytimeanempirecollapsed,thedominantpolitical theory goaded the powers that be not to settle for paltry independentprincipalities,buttoattemptreunification.Soonerorlatertheseattemptsalwayssucceeded.

WhenTheyBecomeUsEmpires have played a decisive part in amalgamatingmany small cultures

intofewerbigcultures.Ideas,people,goodsandtechnologyspreadmoreeasilywithin the borders of an empire than in a politically fragmented region.Oftenenough, it was the empires themselves which deliberately spread ideas,institutions, customs and norms. One reason was to make life easier forthemselves. It isdifficult to ruleanempire inwhichevery littledistricthas itsownsetoflaws,itsownformofwriting,itsownlanguageanditsownmoney.Standardisationwasaboontoemperors.

A second and equally important reason why empires actively spread acommonculturewastogainlegitimacy.AtleastsincethedaysofCyrusandQínShǐ Huángdì, empires have justified their actions – whether road-building orbloodshed–asnecessarytospreadasuperiorculturefromwhichtheconqueredbenefitevenmorethantheconquerors.

The benefits were sometimes salient – law enforcement, urban planning,standardisationofweightsandmeasures–andsometimesquestionable–taxes,conscription,emperorworship.Butmost imperialelitesearnestlybelieved thattheywereworkingforthegeneralwelfareofalltheempiresinhabitants.China’sruling class treated their country’s neighbours and its foreign subjects asmiserablebarbarianstowhomtheempiremustbringthebenefitsofculture.TheMandateofHeavenwasbestowedupontheemperornotinordertoexploittheworld, but in order to educate humanity. The Romans, too, justified theirdominionbyarguingthattheywereendowingthebarbarianswithpeace,justiceandrefinement.ThewildGermansandpaintedGaulshad lived insqualorandignorance until the Romans tamed themwith law, cleaned them up in publicbathhouses, and improved themwith philosophy. TheMauryanEmpire in thethirdcenturyBCtookasitsmissionthedisseminationofBuddha’steachingstoanignorantworld.TheMuslimcaliphsreceivedadivinemandatetospreadtheProphet’s revelation, peacefully if possiblebut by the sword if necessary.TheSpanishandPortugueseempiresproclaimedthatitwasnotrichestheysoughtin

theIndiesandAmerica,butconvertstothetruefaith.ThesunneversetontheBritish mission to spread the twin gospels of liberalism and free trade. TheSoviets felt duty-bound to facilitate the inexorable historical march fromcapitalism towards theutopiandictatorshipof theproletariat.ManyAmericansnowadaysmaintainthattheirgovernmenthasamoralimperativetobringThirdWorldcountriesthebenefitsofdemocracyandhumanrights,evenifthesegoodsaredeliveredbycruisemissilesandF-16s.

Thecultural ideas spreadbyempirewere seldom theexclusive creationoftherulingelite.Sincetheimperialvisiontendstobeuniversalandinclusive,itwasrelativelyeasyforimperialelitestoadoptideas,normsandtraditionsfromwherevertheyfoundthem,ratherthantostickfanaticallytoasinglehideboundtradition.Whilesomeemperorssoughttopurifytheirculturesandreturntowhatthey viewed as their roots, for the most part empires have begot hybridcivilisationsthatabsorbedmuchfromtheirsubjectpeoples.TheimperialcultureofRomewasGreek almost asmuch asRoman.The imperialAbbasid culturewaspartPersian,partGreek,partArab.ImperialMongolculturewasaChinesecopycat.IntheimperialUnitedStates,anAmericanpresidentofKenyanbloodcan munch on Italian pizza while watching his favourite film, Lawrence ofArabia,aBritishepicabouttheArabrebellionagainsttheTurks.

Not that this culturalmeltingpotmade theprocessof cultural assimilationanyeasierforthevanquished.Theimperialcivilisationmaywellhaveabsorbednumerous contributions from various conquered peoples, but the hybrid resultwasstillalientothevastmajority.Theprocessofassimilationwasoftenpainfulandtraumatic.Itisnoteasytogiveupafamiliarandlovedlocaltradition,justasit is difficult and stressful to understand and adopt a new culture.Worse still,evenwhen subject peopleswere successful in adopting the imperial culture, itcouldtakedecades,ifnotcenturies,untiltheimperialeliteacceptedthemaspartof ‘us’.Thegenerationsbetweenconquest andacceptancewere leftout in thecold.Theyhadalreadylosttheirbelovedlocalculture,buttheywerenotallowedtotakeanequalpartintheimperialworld.Onthecontrary,theiradoptedculturecontinuedtoviewthemasbarbarians.

ImagineanIberianofgoodstocklivingacenturyafterthefallofNumantia.HespeakshisnativeCelticdialectwithhisparents,buthasacquiredimpeccableLatin,withonlyaslightaccent,becauseheneedsittoconducthisbusinessanddealwiththeauthorities.Heindulgeshiswife’spenchantforelaboratelyornatebaubles, but is a bit embarrassed that she, likeother localwomen, retains thisrelic of Celtic taste – he’d rather have her adopt the clean simplicity of thejewellerywornbytheRomangovernor’swife.HehimselfwearsRomantunicsand, thanks to his success as a cattle merchant, due in no small part to his

expertiseintheintricaciesofRomancommerciallaw,hehasbeenabletobuildaRoman-stylevilla.Yet,eventhoughhecanreciteBookIIIofVirgil’sGeorgicsbyheart, theRomansstill treathimas thoughhe’ssemi-barbarian.Herealiseswith frustration that he’ll never get a government appointment, or one of thereallygoodseatsintheamphitheatre.

Inthelatenineteenthcentury,manyeducatedIndiansweretaughtthesamelessonbytheirBritishmasters.OnefamousanecdotetellsofanambitiousIndianwhomasteredtheintricaciesof theEnglishlanguage, tooklessonsinWestern-style dance, and even became accustomed to eating with a knife and fork.Equipped with his new manners, he travelled to England, studied law atUniversity College London, and became a qualified barrister. Yet this youngmanoflaw,bedeckedinsuitandtie,wasthrownoffatrainintheBritishcolonyofSouthAfricaforinsistingontravellingfirstclassinsteadofsettlingforthirdclass, where ‘coloured’ men like him were supposed to ride. His name wasMohandasKaramchandGandhi.

In some cases the processes of acculturation and assimilation eventuallybroke down the barriers between the newcomers and the old elite. Theconqueredno longersaw theempireasanaliensystemofoccupation,and theconquerorscametoviewtheirsubjectsasequaltothemselves.Rulersandruledalike came to see ‘them’ as ‘us’. All the subjects of Rome eventually, aftercenturiesofimperialrule,weregrantedRomancitizenship.Non-Romansrosetooccupy the top ranks in the officer corps of the Roman legions and wereappointedtotheSenate.InAD48theemperorClaudiusadmittedtotheSenateseveralGallic notables,who, he noted in a speech, through ‘customs, culture,and the ties of marriage have blended with ourselves’. Snobbish senatorsprotestedintroducingtheseformerenemiesintotheheartoftheRomanpoliticalsystem. Claudius reminded them of an inconvenient truth.Most of their ownsenatorialfamiliesdescendedfromItaliantribeswhooncefoughtagainstRome,andwerelatergrantedRomancitizenship.Indeed,theemperorremindedthem,hisownfamilywasofSabineancestry.5

DuringthesecondcenturyAD,Romewasruledbyalineofemperorsbornin Iberia, inwhoseveinsprobably flowedat leasta fewdropsof local Iberianblood.ThereignsofTrajan,Hadrian,AntoniniusPiusandMarcusAureliusaregenerallythoughttoconstitutetheempire’sgoldenage.Afterthat,alltheethnicdamswereletdown.EmperorSeptimiusSeverus(193–211)wasthescionofaPunic family from Libya. Elagabalus (218–22) was a Syrian. Emperor Philip(244–9)wasknowncolloquiallyas‘PhiliptheArab’.Theempire’snewcitizensadopted Roman imperial culture with such zest that, for centuries and evenmillenniaaftertheempireitselfcollapsed,theycontinuedtospeaktheempire’s

language,tobelieveintheChristianGodthattheempirehadadoptedfromoneofitsLevantineprovinces,andtolivebytheempire’slaws.

Asimilarprocessoccurredin theArabEmpire.Whenitwasestablishedinthemid-seventhcenturyAD,itwasbasedonasharpdivisionbetweentherulingArab–MuslimeliteandthesubjugatedEgyptians,Syrians,IraniansandBerbers,whowereneitherArabsnorMuslim.Manyof the empire’s subjects graduallyadopted theMuslim faith, the Arabic language and a hybrid imperial culture.The oldArab elite looked upon these parvenuswith deep hostility, fearing tolose its unique status and identity. The frustrated converts clamoured for anequal sharewithin the empire and in theworld of Islam. Eventually they gottheir way. Egyptians, Syrians and Mesopotamians were increasingly seen as‘Arabs’.Arabs, in their turn–whetherauthentic’Arabs fromArabiaornewlyminted Arabs from Egypt and Syria – came to be increasingly dominated bynon-Arab Muslims, in particular by Iranians, Turks and Berbers. The greatsuccessoftheArabimperialprojectwasthattheimperialcultureitcreatedwaswholeheartedlyadoptedbynumerousnon-Arabpeople,whocontinuedtoupholdit, develop it and spread it – even after the original empire collapsed and theArabsasanethnicgrouplosttheirdominion.

InChina the success of the imperial projectwas evenmore thorough. Formore than 2,000 years, a welter of ethnic and cultural groups first termedbarbarians were successfully integrated into imperial Chinese culture andbecameHanChinese(sonamedaftertheHanEmpirethatruledChinafrom206BCtoAD220).TheultimateachievementoftheChineseEmpireisthatitisstillaliveandkicking,yet it ishard tosee itasanempireexcept inoutlyingareassuchasTibetandXinjiang.Morethan90percentofthepopulationofChinaareseenbythemselvesandbyothersasHan.

Wecanunderstand thedecolonisationprocessof the last fewdecades in asimilar way. During the modern era Europeans conqueredmuch of the globeundertheguiseofspreadingasuperiorWesternculture.Theyweresosuccessfulthatbillionsofpeoplegraduallyadoptedsignificantpartsofthatculture.Indians,Africans,Arabs,ChineseandMaorislearnedFrench,EnglishandSpanish.Theybegan to believe in human rights and the principle of self-determination, andthey adoptedWestern ideologies such as liberalism, capitalism, Communism,feminismandnationalism.

TheImperialCycle

Duringthetwentiethcentury,localgroupsthathadadoptedWesternvaluesclaimed equality with their European conquerors in the name of these veryvalues. Many anti-colonial struggles were waged under the banners of self-determination, socialism and human rights, all ofwhich areWestern legacies.JustasEgyptians, IraniansandTurksadoptedandadapted the imperialculturethat they inherited from the original Arab conquerors, so today’s Indians,AfricansandChinesehaveacceptedmuchoftheimperialcultureoftheirformerWesternoverlords,whileseekingtomoulditinaccordancewiththeirneedsandtraditions.

GoodGuysandBadGuysinHistoryItistemptingtodividehistoryneatlyintogoodguysandbadguys,withall

empiresamongthebadguys.Forthevastmajorityofempireswerefoundedonblood, and maintained their power through oppression and war. Yet most oftoday’sculturesarebasedonimperiallegacies.Ifempiresarebydefinitionbad,whatdoesthatsayaboutus?

There are schools of thought and political movements that seek to purgehuman culture of imperialism, leaving behind what they claim is a pure,authentic civilisation, untainted by sin. These ideologies are at best naïve; atworst they serve as disingenuous window-dressing for crude nationalism andbigotry. Perhaps you couldmake a case that someof themyriad cultures that

emerged at the dawn of recorded history were pure, untouched by sin andunadulteratedbyothersocieties.Butnoculturesincethatdawncanreasonablymake that claim, certainly no culture that exists now on earth. All humanculturesareatleastinpartthelegacyofempiresandimperialcivilisations,andnoacademicorpoliticalsurgerycancutouttheimperiallegacieswithoutkillingthepatient.

Think, for example, about the love-hate relationship between theindependent Indianrepublicof todayand theBritishRaj.TheBritishconquestandoccupationofIndiacostthelivesofmillionsofIndians,andwasresponsiblefor the continuous humiliation and exploitation of hundreds ofmillionsmore.YetmanyIndiansadopted,withthezestofconverts,Westernideassuchasself-determinationandhumanrights,andweredismayedwhentheBritishrefusedtoliveuptotheirowndeclaredvaluesbygrantingnativeIndianseitherequalrightsasBritishsubjectsorindependence.

Nevertheless, themodern Indianstate isachildof theBritishEmpire.TheBritish killed, injured and persecuted the inhabitants of the subcontinent, butthey also united a bewilderingmosaic ofwarring kingdoms, principalities andtribes, creating a shared national consciousness and a country that functionedmoreor less as a single political unit.They laid the foundationsof the Indianjudicial system, created its administrative structure, and built the railroadnetwork thatwas critical for economic integration. Independent India adoptedWestern democracy, in its British incarnation, as its form of government.English is still the subcontinent’s lingua franca, a neutral tongue that nativespeakersofHindi,Tamil andMalayalamcanuse to communicate. Indians arepassionatecricketplayersandchai(tea)drinkers,andbothgameandbeverageareBritishlegacies.CommercialteafarmingdidnotexistinIndiauntilthemid-nineteenthcentury,whenitwasintroducedbytheBritishEastIndiaCompany.Itwas the snobbish British sahibs who spread the custom of tea drinkingthroughoutthesubcontinent.

28.TheChhatrapatiShivajitrainstationinMumbai.ItbeganitslifeasVictoriaStation,Bombay.TheBritishbuilt it in theNeo-Gothic style thatwas popular in late nineteenth-century Britain. A Hindu nationalistgovernment changed the names of both city and station, but showed noappetite for razing such a magnificent building, even if it was built byforeignoppressors.

HowmanyIndianstodaywouldwanttocallavotetodivest themselvesofdemocracy,English,therailwaynetwork,thelegalsystem,cricketandteaonthegroundsthattheyareimperiallegacies?Andiftheydid,wouldn’ttheveryactofcalling a vote to decide the issue demonstrate their debt to their formeroverlords?

29. The TajMahal. An example of ‘authentic’ Indian culture, or thealiencreationofMuslimimperialism?

Evenifweweretocompletelydisavowthelegacyofabrutalempireinthehopeofreconstructingandsafeguardingthe‘authentic’culturesthatprecededit,inallprobabilitywhatwewillbedefendingisnothingbutthelegacyofanolderandnolessbrutalempire.ThosewhoresentthemutilationofIndianculturebytheBritishRajinadvertentlysanctifythelegaciesoftheMughalEmpireandtheconqueringsultanateofDelhi.Andwhoeverattemptstorescue‘authenticIndianculture’fromthealieninfluencesoftheseMuslimempiressanctifiesthelegaciesoftheGuptaEmpire,theKushanEmpireandtheMauryaEmpire.IfanextremeHindunationalistweretodestroyallthebuildingsleftbytheBritishconquerors,such asMumbai’smain train station,what about the structures left by India’sMuslimconquerors,suchastheTajMahal?

Nobody really knows how to solve this thorny question of culturalinheritance. Whatever path we take, the first step is to acknowledge thecomplexityofthedilemmaandtoacceptthatsimplisticallydividingthepastintogood guys and bad guys leads nowhere. Unless, of course, we are willing toadmitthatweusuallyfollowtheleadofthebadguys.

TheNewGlobalEmpireSince around200BC,mosthumanshave lived in empires. It seems likely

thatinthefuture,too,mosthumanswillliveinone.Butthistimetheempirewillbetrulyglobal.Theimperialvisionofdominionovertheentireworldcouldbeimminent.

Asthetwenty-firstcenturyunfolds,nationalismisfastlosingground.Moreand more people believe that all of humankind is the legitimate source ofpoliticalauthority, rather than themembersofaparticularnationality,and thatsafeguarding human rights and protecting the interests of the entire humanspecies should be the guiding light of politics. If so, having close to 200independentstatesisahindranceratherthanahelp.SinceSwedes,IndonesiansandNigeriansdeservethesamehumanrights,wouldn’titbesimplerforasingleglobalgovernmenttosafeguardthem?

The appearance of essentially global problems, such as melting ice caps,nibbles away atwhatever legitimacy remains to the independent nation states.No sovereign statewill be able to overcome globalwarming on its own. TheChinese Mandate of Heaven was given by Heaven to solve the problems ofhumankind. The modernMandate of Heaven will be given by humankind tosolve the problems of heaven, such as the hole in the ozone layer and theaccumulationofgreenhousegases.Thecolouroftheglobalempiremaywellbegreen.

Asof2014,theworldisstillpoliticallyfragmented,butstatesarefastlosingtheir independence. Not one of them is really able to execute independenteconomicpolicies,todeclareandwagewarsasitpleases,oreventorunitsowninternalaffairsasitseesfit.Statesareincreasinglyopentothemachinationsofglobalmarkets, to the interferenceof global companies andNGOs, and to thesupervisionofglobalpublicopinionandtheinternationaljudicialsystem.Statesareobligedtoconformtoglobalstandardsoffinancialbehaviour,environmentalpolicy and justice. Immensely powerful currents of capital, labour andinformationturnandshapetheworld,withagrowingdisregardforthebordersandopinionsofstates.

The global empire being forged before our eyes is not governed by anyparticularstateorethnicgroup.MuchliketheLateRomanEmpire,itisruledbya multi-ethnic elite, and is held together by a common culture and commoninterests. Throughout the world, more and more entrepreneurs, engineers,experts,scholars,lawyersandmanagersarecalledtojointheempire.Theymustponderwhethertoanswertheimperialcallortoremainloyaltotheirstateandtheirpeople.Moreandmorechoosetheempire.

12

TheLawofReligion

IN THE MEDIEVAL MARKET IN SAMARKAND, a city built on aCentralAsianoasis, Syrianmerchants ran their hands over fineChinese silks,fierce tribesmen from the steppes displayed the latest batch of straw-hairedslavesfromthefarwest,andshopkeeperspocketedshinygoldcoinsimprintedwithexoticscriptsandtheprofilesofunfamiliarkings.Here,atoneofthatera’smajor crossroads between east and west, north and south, the unification ofhumankindwasaneverydayfact.Thesameprocesscouldbeobservedatworkwhen Kublai Khan’s army mustered to invade Japan in 1281. Mongolcavalrymen in skins and furs rubbed shoulders with Chinese foot soldiers inbamboohats,drunkenKoreanauxiliariespickedfightswithtattooedsailorsfromtheSouthChinaSea,engineersfromCentralAsialistenedwithdroppingjawstothetall talesofEuropeanadventurers,andallobeyedthecommandofasingleemperor.

Meanwhile, around the holy Ka’aba in Mecca, human unification wasproceedingbyothermeans.HadyoubeenapilgrimtoMecca,circlingIslam’sholiestshrineintheyear1300,youmighthavefoundyourselfinthecompanyofaparty fromMesopotamia, their robes floating in thewind, their eyesblazingwith ecstasy, and their mouths repeating one after the other the ninety-ninenames of God. Just ahead you might have seen a weather-beaten Turkishpatriarch from the Asian steppes, hobbling on a stick and stroking his beardthoughtfully.To one side, gold jewellery shining against jet-black skin,mighthavebeenagroupofMuslimsfromtheAfricankingdomofMali.Thearomaofclove, turmeric, cardamom and sea salt would have signalled the presence ofbrothersfromIndia,orperhapsfromthemysteriousspiceislandsfurthereast.

Todayreligionisoftenconsideredasourceofdiscrimination,disagreementanddisunion.Yet,infact,religionhasbeenthethirdgreatunifierofhumankind,alongside money and empires. Since all social orders and hierarchies are

imagined, theyareall fragile, and the larger the society, themore fragile it is.Thecrucialhistoricalroleofreligionhasbeentogivesuperhumanlegitimacytothesefragilestructures.Religionsassertthatourlawsarenottheresultofhumancaprice,butareordainedbyanabsoluteandsupremeauthority.Thishelpsplaceat least some fundamental laws beyond challenge, thereby ensuring socialstability.

Religioncanthusbedefinedasasystemofhumannormsandvaluesthatisfoundedonabeliefinasuperhumanorder.Thisinvolvestwodistinctcriteria:

1.Religionsholdthatthereisasuperhumanorder,whichisnottheproductofhumanwhimsoragreements.Professionalfootballisnotareligion,becausedespiteitsmanylaws,ritesandoftenbizarrerituals,everyoneknowsthathumanbeingsinventedfootball themselves,andFIFAmayatanymomentenlargethesizeofthegoalorcanceltheoffsiderule.

2. Based on this superhuman order, religion establishes norms and valuesthat itconsidersbinding.ManyWesterners todaybelieve inghosts, fairiesandreincarnation, but these beliefs are not a source of moral and behaviouralstandards.Assuch,theydonotconstituteareligion.

Despitetheirabilitytolegitimisewidespreadsocialandpoliticalorders,notallreligionshaveactuatedthispotential.Inordertouniteunderitsaegisalargeexpanseof territory inhabited bydisparate groups of humanbeings, a religionmustpossesstwofurtherqualities.First,itmustespouseauniversalsuperhumanorderthatistruealwaysandeverywhere.Second,itmustinsistonspreadingthisbelieftoeveryone.Inotherwords,itmustbeuniversalandmissionary.

The best-known religions of history, such as Islam and Buddhism, areuniversalandmissionary.Consequentlypeopletendtobelievethatallreligionsarelikethem.Infact,themajorityofancientreligionswerelocalandexclusive.Their followers believed in local deities and spirits, and had no interest inconvertingtheentirehumanrace.Asfarasweknow,universalandmissionaryreligionsbegantoappearonlyinthefirstmillenniumBC.Theiremergencewasoneofthemostimportantrevolutionsinhistory,andmadeavitalcontributiontotheunificationofhumankind,muchliketheemergenceofuniversalempiresanduniversalmoney.

SilencingtheLambsWhen animismwas the dominant belief system, human norms and values

had to take intoconsideration theoutlookand interestsofamultitudeofotherbeings,suchasanimals,plants,fairiesandghosts.Forexample,aforagerbandintheGangesValleymayhaveestablishedaruleforbiddingpeopletocutdown

a particularly large fig tree, lest the fig-tree spirit become angry and takerevenge.Another forager band living in the IndusValleymay have forbiddenpeoplefromhuntingwhite-tailedfoxes,becauseawhite-tailedfoxoncerevealedtoawiseoldwomanwherethebandmightfindpreciousobsidian.

Such religions tended to be very local in outlook, and to emphasise theunique features of specific locations, climates and phenomena.Most foragersspent their entire lives within an area of no more than a thousand squarekilometres. Inorder to survive, the inhabitantsofaparticularvalleyneeded tounderstandthesuper-humanorderthatregulatedtheirvalley,andtoadjusttheirbehaviour accordingly. It was pointless to try to convince the inhabitants ofsomedistant valley to follow the same rules.The people of the Indus did notbothertosendmissionariestotheGangestoconvincelocalsnottohuntwhite-tailedfoxes.

TheAgriculturalRevolutionseemstohavebeenaccompaniedbyareligiousrevolution.Hunter-gathererspickedandpursuedwildplantsandanimals,whichcouldbeseenasequalinstatustoHomosapiens.Thefactthatmanhuntedsheepdidnotmakesheepinferiortoman,justasthefactthattigershuntedmandidnotmakemaninferiortotigers.Beingscommunicatedwithoneanotherdirectlyandnegotiated the rulesgoverning their sharedhabitat. In contrast, farmersownedandmanipulated plants and animals, and could hardly degrade themselves bynegotiating with their possessions. Hence the first religious effect of theAgriculturalRevolutionwastoturnplantsandanimalsfromequalmembersofaspiritualroundtableintoproperty.

This, however, created a big problem. Farmersmay have desired absolutecontrol of their sheep, but they knew perfectly well that their control waslimited.Theycouldlockthesheepinpens,castrateramsandselectivelybreedewes, yet they could not ensure that the ewes conceived and gave birth tohealthy lambs, nor could they prevent the eruption of deadly epidemics.Howthentosafeguardthefecundityoftheflocks?

A leading theory about the origin of the gods argues that gods gainedimportance because they offered a solution to this problem.Gods such as thefertilitygoddess, the skygodand thegodofmedicine tookcentre stagewhenplants and animals lost their ability to speak, and the gods’main rolewas tomediate between humans and the mute plants and animals. Much of ancientmythology is in fact a legal contract in which humans promise everlastingdevotiontothegodsinexchangeformasteryoverplantsandanimals–thefirstchapters of the book ofGenesis are a prime example. For thousands of yearsafter theAgriculturalRevolution, religious liturgyconsistedmainlyofhumanssacrificinglambs,wineandcakestodivinepowers,whoinexchangepromised

abundantharvestsandfecundflocks.TheAgriculturalRevolutioninitiallyhadafarsmallerimpactonthestatusof

othermembersoftheanimistsystem,suchasrocks,springs,ghostsanddemons.However, thesetoograduallyloststatusinfavourof thenewgods.Aslongaspeoplelivedtheirentireliveswithinlimitedterritoriesofafewhundredsquarekilometres,mostoftheirneedscouldbemetbylocalspirits.Butoncekingdomsandtradenetworksexpanded,peopleneededtocontactentitieswhosepowerandauthorityencompassedawholekingdomoranentiretradebasin.

The attempt to answer these needs led to the appearance of polytheisticreligions (from the Greek: poly = many, theos = god). These religionsunderstoodtheworldtobecontrolledbyagroupofpowerfulgods,suchasthefertilitygoddess, the raingod and thewargod.Humans could appeal to thesegodsandthegodsmight,iftheyreceiveddevotionsandsacrifices,deigntobringrain,victoryandhealth.

Animism did not entirely disappear at the advent of polytheism. Demons,fairies,ghosts,holyrocks,holyspringsandholytreesremainedanintegralpartofalmostallpolytheistreligions.Thesespiritswerefar less important thanthegreatgods,butforthemundaneneedsofmanyordinarypeople,theyweregoodenough.While theking in his capital city sacrificeddozensof fat rams to thegreatwargod,prayingforvictoryoverthebarbarians,thepeasantinhishutlitacandletothefig-treefairy,prayingthatshehelpcurehissickson.

Yetthegreatestimpactoftheriseofgreatgodswasnotonsheepordemons,butupon the statusofHomosapiens.Animists thought that humanswere justone of many creatures inhabiting the world. Polytheists, on the other hand,increasinglysawtheworldasareflectionoftherelationshipbetweengodsandhumans.Ourprayers,oursacrifices,oursinsandourgooddeedsdeterminedthefate of the entire ecosystem.A terrible floodmightwipe out billions of ants,grasshoppers,turtles,antelopes,giraffesandelephants,justbecauseafewstupidSapiensmadethegodsangry.Polytheismtherebyexaltednotonlythestatusofthegods,butalsothatofhumankind.Lessfortunatemembersoftheoldanimistsystem lost their stature and became either extras or silent decor in the greatdramaofman’srelationshipwiththegods.

TheBenefitsofIdolatryTwo thousand years of monotheistic brainwashing have caused most

Westernerstoseepolytheismasignorantandchildishidolatry.Thisisanunjuststereotype.Inordertounderstandtheinnerlogicofpolytheism,itisnecessarytograspthecentralideabuttressingthebeliefinmanygods.

Polytheismdoesnot necessarilydispute the existenceof a singlepowerorlaw governing the entire universe. In fact, most polytheist and even animistreligions recognised such a supremepower that standsbehind all thedifferentgods,demonsandholyrocks.InclassicalGreekpolytheism,Zeus,Hera,Apolloandtheircolleaguesweresubjecttoanomnipotentandall-encompassingpower–Fate(Moira,Ananke).Nordicgods,too,wereinthralltofate,whichdoomedthemtoperishinthecataclysmofRagnarök(theTwilightof theGods).Inthepolytheistic religion of theYoruba ofWestAfrica, all godswere born of thesupremegodOlodumare,andremainedsubject tohim.InHindupolytheism,asingle principle,Atman, controls themyriad gods and spirits, humankind, andthe biological and physicalworld.Atman is the eternal essence or soul of theentireuniverse,aswellasofeveryindividualandeveryphenomenon.

The fundamental insight of polytheism, which distinguishes it frommonotheism, is that the supreme power governing the world is devoid ofinterestsandbiases,and therefore it isunconcernedwith themundanedesires,caresandworriesofhumans.It’spointlesstoaskthispowerforvictoryinwar,forhealthorforrain,becausefromitsall-encompassingvantagepoint,itmakesnodifferencewhetheraparticularkingdomwinsor loses,whetheraparticularcity prospers or withers, whether a particular person recuperates or dies. TheGreeks did not waste any sacrifices on Fate, and Hindus built no temples toAtman.

Theonlyreasontoapproachthesupremepoweroftheuniversewouldbetorenouncealldesiresandembracethebadalongwiththegood–toembraceevendefeat, poverty, sickness and death. Thus some Hindus, known as Sadhus orSannyasis, devote their lives to uniting with Atman, thereby achievingenlightenment. They strive to see the world from the viewpoint of thisfundamental principle, to realise that from its eternal perspective allmundanedesiresandfearsaremeaninglessandephemeralphenomena.

MostHindus,however,arenotSadhus.Theyaresunkdeepinthemorassofmundane concerns, where Atman is not much help. For assistance in suchmatters,Hindusapproach thegodswith theirpartialpowers.Preciselybecausetheir powers are partial rather than all-encompassing, gods such as Ganesha,Lakshmi andSaraswati have interests and biases.Humans can thereforemakedealswiththesepartialpowersandrelyontheirhelpinorder towinwarsandrecuperate from illness. There are necessarily many of these smaller powers,since once you start dividing up the all-encompassing power of a supremeprinciple,you’llinevitablyendupwithmorethanonedeity.Hencethepluralityofgods.

The insight of polytheism is conducive to far-reaching religious tolerance.

Since polytheists believe, on the one hand, in one supreme and completelydisinterestedpower, andon theotherhand inmanypartial andbiasedpowers,there is no difficulty for the devotees of one god to accept the existence andefficacy of other gods. Polytheism is inherently open-minded, and rarelypersecutes‘heretics’and‘infidels’.

Evenwhenpolytheistsconqueredhugeempires, theydidnot trytoconverttheir subjects. The Egyptians, the Romans and the Aztecs did not sendmissionaries to foreign lands to spread the worship of Osiris, Jupiter orHuitzilopochtli(thechiefAztecgod),andtheycertainlydidn’tdispatcharmiesforthatpurpose.Subjectpeoplesthroughouttheempirewereexpectedtorespectthe empire’s gods and rituals, since these gods and rituals protected andlegitimised the empire.Yet theywere not required to give up their local godsandrituals.IntheAztecEmpire,subjectpeopleswereobligedtobuildtemplesforHuitzilopochtli,but these templeswerebuilt alongside thoseof localgods,ratherthanintheirstead.Inmanycasestheimperialeliteitselfadoptedthegodsand rituals of subject people. The Romans happily added the Asian goddessCybeleandtheEgyptiangoddessIsistotheirpantheon.

TheonlygodthattheRomanslongrefusedtotoleratewasthemonotheisticandevangelisinggodof theChristians.TheRomanEmpiredidnotrequire theChristians to give up their beliefs and rituals, but it did expect them to payrespect to theempire’sprotectorgodsand to thedivinityof theemperor.Thiswasseenasadeclarationofpolitical loyalty.When theChristiansvehementlyrefusedtodoso,andwentontorejectallattemptsatcompromise,theRomansreacted by persecuting what they understood to be a politically subversivefaction. And even this was done half-heartedly. In the 300 years from thecrucifixion of Christ to the conversion of Emperor Constantine, polytheisticRomanemperorsinitiatednomorethanfourgeneralpersecutionsofChristians.Localadministratorsandgovernorsincitedsomeanti-Christianviolenceoftheirown.Still,ifwecombineallthevictimsofallthesepersecutions,itturnsoutthatin these three centuries, the polytheistic Romans killed no more than a fewthousand Christians.1 In contrast, over the course of the next 1,500 years,Christians slaughtered Christians by the millions to defend slightly differentinterpretationsofthereligionofloveandcompassion.

The religiouswarsbetweenCatholicsandProtestants that sweptEurope inthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries are particularly notorious. All thoseinvolved accepted Christ’s divinity and His gospel of compassion and love.However,theydisagreedaboutthenatureofthislove.ProtestantsbelievedthatthedivineloveissogreatthatGodwasincarnatedinfleshandallowedHimselftobetorturedandcrucified,therebyredeemingtheoriginalsinandopeningthe

gatesofheaven to all thosewhoprofessed faith inHim.Catholicsmaintainedthat faith, while essential, was not enough. To enter heaven, believers had toparticipate in church rituals and do good deeds. Protestants refused to acceptthis,arguingthatthisquidproquobelittlesGod’sgreatnessandlove.Whoeverthinksthatentrytoheavendependsuponhisorherowngooddeedsmagnifieshisownimportance,andimpliesthatChrist’ssufferingonthecrossandGod’sloveforhumankindarenotenough.

These theological disputes turned so violent that during the sixteenth andseventeenth centuries, Catholics and Protestants killed each other by thehundredsofthousands.On23August1572,FrenchCatholicswhostressedtheimportance of good deeds attacked communities of French Protestants whohighlightedGod’sloveforhumankind.Inthisattack,theStBartholomew’sDayMassacre, between5,000 and10,000Protestantswere slaughtered in less thantwenty-fourhours.WhenthepopeinRomeheardthenewsfromFrance,hewassoovercomeby joy thatheorganised festiveprayers tocelebrate theoccasionandcommissionedGiorgioVasaritodecorateoneoftheVatican’sroomswithafresco of the massacre (the room is currently off-limits to visitors).2 MoreChristianswerekilledby fellowChristians in those twenty-fourhours thanbythepolytheisticRomanEmpirethroughoutitsentireexistence.

GodisOneWith time some followers of polytheist gods became so fond of their

particularpatron that theydriftedawayfromthebasicpolytheist insight.Theybegan to believe that their godwas the only god, and thatHewas in fact thesupremepoweroftheuniverse.YetatthesametimetheycontinuedtoviewHimaspossessinginterestsandbiases,andbelievedthattheycouldstrikedealswithHim. Thus were born monotheist religions, whose followers beseech thesupremepoweroftheuniversetohelpthemrecoverfromillness,winthelotteryandgainvictoryinwar.

The first monotheist religion known to us appeared in Egypt, c.350 BC,whenPharaohAkhenatendeclaredthatoneoftheminordeitiesoftheEgyptianpantheon, the godAten, was, in fact, the supreme power ruling the universe.AkhenateninstitutionalisedtheworshipofAtenasthestatereligionandtriedtocheck the worship of all other gods. His religious revolution, however, wasunsuccessful.Afterhisdeath, theworshipofAtenwasabandonedinfavouroftheoldpantheon.

Polytheism continued to give birth here and there to other monotheistreligions, but they remained marginal, not least because they failed to digest

their own universal message. Judaism, for example, argued that the supremepoweroftheuniversehasinterestsandbiases,yetHischiefinterestisinthetinyJewishnationandintheobscurelandofIsrael.Judaismhadlittletoofferothernations, and throughout most of its existence it has not been a missionaryreligion.Thisstagecanbecalledthestageof‘localmonotheism’.

ThebigbreakthroughcamewithChristianity.ThisfaithbeganasanesotericJewishsectthatsoughttoconvinceJewsthatJesusofNazarethwastheirlong-awaited messiah. However, one of the sect’s first leaders, Paul of Tarsus,reasonedthatifthesupremepoweroftheuniversehasinterestsandbiases,andifHehadbotheredtoincarnateHimselfinthefleshandtodieonthecrossforthesalvationofhumankind,thenthisissomethingeveryoneshouldhearabout,notjustJews.Itwasthusnecessarytospreadthegoodword–thegospel–aboutJesusthroughouttheworld.

Paul’s arguments fell on fertile ground. Christians began organisingwidespread missionary activities aimed at all humans. In one of history’sstrangesttwists,thisesotericJewishsecttookoverthemightyRomanEmpire.

Christian success served as a model for another monotheist religion thatappeared in the Arabian peninsula in the seventh century – Islam. LikeChristianity, Islam, too,beganasasmall sect ina remotecornerof theworld,butinanevenstrangerandswifterhistoricalsurpriseitmanagedtobreakoutofthe deserts of Arabia and conquer an immense empire stretching from theAtlanticOceantoIndia.Henceforth,themonotheistideaplayedacentralroleinworldhistory.

Monotheists have tended to be far more fanatical and missionary thanpolytheists. A religion that recognises the legitimacy of other faiths implieseither that itsgod isnot thesupremepowerof theuniverse,or that it receivedfrom God just part of the universal truth. Since monotheists have usuallybelieved that theyare inpossessionof the entiremessageof theoneandonlyGod,theyhavebeencompelledtodiscreditallotherreligions.Overthelasttwomillennia, monotheists repeatedly tried to strengthen their hand by violentlyexterminatingallcompetition.

Itworked.At thebeginningof the firstcenturyAD, therewerehardlyanymonotheistsintheworld.AroundAD500,oneoftheworld’slargestempires–the Roman Empire – was a Christian polity, and missionaries were busyspreadingChristianitytootherpartsofEurope,AsiaandAfrica.Bytheendofthe firstmillenniumAD,most people inEurope,WestAsia andNorthAfricawere monotheists, and empires from the Atlantic Ocean to the HimalayasclaimedtobeordainedbythesinglegreatGod.Bytheearlysixteenthcentury,monotheismdominatedmostofAfro-Asia,withtheexceptionofEastAsiaand

thesouthernpartsofAfrica,anditbeganextendinglongtentaclestowardsSouthAfrica,America andOceania.Todaymost people outsideEastAsia adhere toone monotheist religion or another, and the global political order is built onmonotheisticfoundations.

Yet justasanimismcontinued tosurvivewithinpolytheism,sopolytheismcontinuedtosurvivewithinmonotheism.Intheory,onceapersonbelievesthatthesupremepoweroftheuniversehasinterestsandbiases,what’sthepoint inworshipping partial powers?Whowouldwant to approach a lowly bureaucratwhenthepresident’sofficeisopentoyou?Indeed,monotheisttheologytendstodenytheexistenceofallgodsexceptthesupremeGod,andtopourhellfireandbrimstoneoveranyonewhodaresworshipthem.

Map5.TheSpreadofChristianityandIslam.

Yet there has always been a chasm between theological theories andhistorical realities.Mostpeoplehavefounditdifficult todigest themonotheistideafully.Theyhavecontinuedtodividetheworldinto‘we’and‘they’,andtoseethesupremepoweroftheuniverseastoodistantandalienfortheirmundaneneeds.Themonotheistreligionsexpelledthegodsthroughthefrontdoorwithalotoffanfare,onlytotakethembackinthroughthesidewindow.Christianity,for example, developed its own pantheon of saints, whose cults differed little

fromthoseofthepolytheisticgods.Just as the god Jupiter defended Rome and Huitzilopochtli protected the

AztecEmpire,soeveryChristiankingdomhaditsownpatronsaintwhohelpedit overcome difficulties and win wars. England was protected by St George,Scotland by St Andrew, Hungary by St Stephen, and France had St Martin.Citiesandtowns,professions,andevendiseases–eachhadtheirownsaint.ThecityofMilanhadStAmbrose,whileStMarkwatchedoverVenice.StFlorianprotectedchimneycleaners,whereasStMathewlentahandtotaxcollectorsindistress. Ifyousufferedfromheadachesyouhad topray toStAgathius,but iffromtoothaches,thenStApolloniawasamuchbetteraudience.

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

TheBattleofGoodandEvilPolytheism gave birth not merely to monotheist religions, but also to

dualisticones.Dualisticreligionsespousetheexistenceoftwoopposingpowers:goodandevil.Unlikemonotheism,dualismbelievesthatevilisanindependentpower,neithercreatedbythegoodGod,norsubordinatetoit.Dualismexplainsthat the entire universe is a battleground between these two forces, and thateverythingthathappensintheworldispartofthestruggle.

Dualism is a very attractiveworld view because it has a short and simpleanswer to the famous Problem of Evil, one of the fundamental concerns ofhumanthought.‘Whyisthereevilintheworld?Whyistheresuffering?Whydobad things happen to good people?’ Monotheists have to practise intellectualgymnasticstoexplainhowanall-knowing,all-powerfulandperfectlygoodGodallowssomuchsufferingintheworld.Onewell-knownexplanationisthatthisisGod’swayofallowingforhumanfreewill.Weretherenoevil,humanscouldnotchoosebetweengoodandevil,andhencetherewouldbenofreewill.This,however, is a non-intuitive answer that immediately raises a host of newquestions.Freedomofwillallowshumanstochooseevil.Manyindeedchooseevil and, according to the standardmonotheist account, this choicemustbringdivinepunishmentinitswake.IfGodknewinadvancethataparticularpersonwoulduseherfreewilltochooseevil,andthatasaresultshewouldbepunishedfor this by eternal tortures in hell,whydidGod create her?Theologians havewritten countless books to answer such questions. Some find the answers

convincing.Somedon’t.What’sundeniableisthatmonotheistshaveahardtimedealingwiththeProblemofEvil.

Fordualists,it’seasytoexplainevil.Badthingshappeneventogoodpeoplebecausetheworldisnotgovernedsingle-handedlybyagoodGod.Thereisanindependentevilpowerlooseintheworld.Theevilpowerdoesbadthings.

Dualism has its own drawbacks.While solving the Problem of Evil, it isunnervedbytheProblemofOrder.IftheworldwascreatedbyasingleGod,it’sclearwhyitissuchanorderlyplace,whereeverythingobeysthesamelaws.Butif Good and Evil battle for control of the world, who enforces the lawsgoverningthiscosmicwar?Tworivalstatescanfightoneanotherbecausebothobeythesamelawsofphysics.AmissilelaunchedfromPakistancanhittargetsinIndiabecausegravityworksthesamewayinbothcountries.WhenGoodandEvilfight,whatcommonlawsdotheyobey,andwhodecreedtheselaws?

So,monotheism explains order, but ismystified by evil.Dualism explainsevil,but ispuzzledbyorder.Thereisonelogicalwayofsolvingtheriddle: toarguethatthereisasingleomnipotentGodwhocreatedtheentireuniverse–andHe’sevil.Butnobodyinhistoryhashadthestomachforsuchabelief.

Dualistic religions flourished for more than a thousand years. Sometimebetween 1500BC and 1000BC a prophet namedZoroaster (Zarathustra)wasactive somewhere in Central Asia. His creed passed from generation togeneration until it became the most important of dualistic religions –Zoroastrianism.ZoroastrianssawtheworldasacosmicbattlebetweenthegoodgodAhuraMazdaandtheevilgodAngraMainyu.Humanshadtohelpthegoodgod in this battle. Zoroastrianism was an important religion during theAchaemenidPersianEmpire(550–330BC)andlaterbecametheofficialreligionof theSassanidPersianEmpire(AD224–651). Itexertedamajor influenceonalmostallsubsequentMiddleEasternandCentralAsianreligions,anditinspiredanumberofotherdualistreligions,suchasGnosticismandManichaeanism.

DuringthethirdandfourthcenturiesAD,theManichaeancreedspreadfromChina to North Africa, and for a moment it appeared that it would beatChristianity toachievedominance in theRomanEmpire.Yet theManichaeanslost the soul of Rome to theChristians, the Zoroastrian Sassanid Empirewasoverrun by the monotheistic Muslims, and the dualist wave subsided. TodayonlyahandfulofdualistcommunitiessurviveinIndiaandtheMiddleEast.

Nevertheless,therisingtideofmonotheismdidnotreallywipeoutdualism.Jewish, Christian andMuslim monotheism absorbed numerous dualist beliefsandpractices,andsomeof themostbasic ideasofwhatwecall ‘monotheism’are,infact,dualistinoriginandspirit.CountlessChristians,MuslimsandJews

believeinapowerfulevilforce–liketheoneChristianscalltheDevilorSatan–whocanactindependently,fightagainstthegoodGod,andwreakhavocwithoutGod’spermission.

Howcanamonotheistadheretosuchadualisticbelief(which,bytheway,isnowhere tobefound in theOldTestament)?Logically, it is impossible.EitheryoubelieveinasingleomnipotentGodoryoubelieveintwoopposingpowers,neither of which is omnipotent. Still, humans have a wonderful capacity tobelieve in contradictions. So it should not come as a surprise thatmillions ofpiousChristians,MuslimsandJewsmanagetobelieveatoneandthesametimeinanomnipotentGodandanindependentDevil.CountlessChristians,MuslimsandJewshavegonesofarastoimaginethatthegoodGodevenneedsourhelpinitsstruggleagainsttheDevil,whichinspiredamongotherthingsthecallforjihadsandcrusades.

Another key dualistic concept, particularly in Gnosticism andManichaeanism, was the sharp distinction between body and soul, betweenmatter and spirit.Gnostics andManichaeans argued that the goodgod createdthespiritandthesoul,whereasmatterandbodiesarethecreationoftheevilgod.Man,accordingtothisview,servesasabattlegroundbetweenthegoodsoulandthe evil body. From a monotheistic perspective, this is nonsense – whydistinguish so sharply between body and soul, ormatter and spirit?Andwhyargue that body andmatter are evil? After all, everythingwas created by thesame goodGod. Butmonotheists could not help but be captivated by dualistdichotomies,preciselybecausetheyhelpedthemaddresstheproblemofevil.Sosuch oppositions eventually became cornerstones of Christian and Muslimthought.Beliefinheaven(therealmofthegoodgod)andhell(therealmoftheevil god)was alsodualist inorigin.There isno traceof thisbelief in theOldTestament,whichalsoneverclaimsthatthesoulsofpeoplecontinuetoliveafterthedeathofthebody.

In fact, monotheism, as it has played out in history, is a kaleidoscope ofmonotheist, dualist, polytheist and animist legacies, jumbling together under asingle divineumbrella.The averageChristianbelieves in themonotheistGod,butalsointhedualistDevil,inpolytheistsaints,andinanimistghosts.Scholarsof religion have a name for this simultaneous avowal of different and evencontradictory ideas and the combination of rituals and practices taken fromdifferentsources.It’scalledsyncretism.Syncretismmight,infact,bethesinglegreatworldreligion.

TheLawofNature

Allthereligionswehavediscussedsofarshareoneimportantcharacteristic:they all focus on a belief in gods and other supernatural entities. This seemsobvioustoWesterners,whoarefamiliarmainlywithmonotheisticandpolytheistcreeds.Infact,however,thereligioushistoryoftheworlddoesnotboildowntothehistoryofgods.During the firstmillenniumBC, religionsof analtogethernewkindbegantospreadthroughAfro-Asia.Thenewcomers,suchasJainismand Buddhism in India, Daoism and Confucianism in China, and Stoicism,CynicismandEpicureanism in theMediterraneanbasin,werecharacterisedbytheirdisregardofgods.

Thesecreedsmaintained that the superhumanordergoverning theworld istheproductofnaturallawsratherthanofdivinewillsandwhims.Someofthesenatural-lawreligionscontinuedtoespousetheexistenceofgods,buttheirgodsweresubjecttothelawsofnaturenolessthanhumans,animalsandplantswere.Gods had their niche in the ecosystem, just as elephants and porcupines hadtheirs,butcouldnomorechangethelawsofnaturethanelephantscan.Aprimeexample isBuddhism, themost important of the ancient natural law religions,whichremainsoneofthemajorfaiths.

ThecentralfigureofBuddhismisnotagodbutahumanbeing,SiddharthaGautama. According to Buddhist tradition, Gautama was heir to a smallHimalayankingdom, sometime around500BC.Theyoungprincewasdeeplyaffectedbythesufferingevidentallaroundhim.Hesawthatmenandwomen,children and old people, all suffer not just fromoccasional calamities such aswarandplague,butalso fromanxiety, frustrationanddiscontent, allofwhichseemtobeaninseparablepartofthehumancondition.Peoplepursuewealthandpower,acquireknowledgeandpossessions,begetsonsanddaughters,andbuildhouses and palaces.Yet nomatterwhat they achieve, they are never content.Thosewholiveinpovertydreamofriches.Thosewhohaveamillionwanttwomillion.Thosewhohavetwomillionwant10million.Eventherichandfamousare rarely satisfied.They tooarehauntedbyceaseless cares andworries,untilsickness, old age and death put a bitter end to them. Everything that one hasaccumulatedvanisheslikesmoke.Lifeisapointlessratrace.Buthowtoescapeit?

At the age of twenty-nine Gautama slipped away from his palace in themiddleofthenight,leavingbehindhisfamilyandpossessions.Hetravelledasahomeless vagabond throughout northern India, searching for a way out ofsuffering.Hevisitedashramsandsatat the feetofgurusbutnothing liberatedhim entirely – some dissatisfaction always remained. He did not despair. Heresolved to investigate suffering on his own until he found a method forcomplete liberation.He spent six yearsmeditating on the essence, causes and

curesforhumananguish.Intheendhecametotherealisationthatsufferingisnot caused by ill fortune, by social injustice, or by divine whims. Rather,sufferingiscausedbythebehaviourpatternsofone’sownmind.

Gautama’sinsightwasthatnomatterwhatthemindexperiences, itusuallyreactswithcraving,andcravingalwaysinvolvesdissatisfaction.Whenthemindexperiencessomethingdistasteful itcraves toberidof the irritation.Whenthemindexperiencessomethingpleasant,itcravesthatthepleasurewillremainandwill intensify. Therefore, the mind is always dissatisfied and restless. This isveryclearwhenweexperienceunpleasant things,suchaspain.As longas thepaincontinues,wearedissatisfiedanddoallwecantoavoidit.Yetevenwhenwe experience pleasant things we are never content. We either fear that thepleasure might disappear, or we hope that it will intensify. People dream foryearsaboutfindinglovebutarerarelysatisfiedwhentheyfindit.Somebecomeanxious that theirpartnerwill leave;others feel that theyhavesettledcheaply,andcouldhavefoundsomeonebetter.Andweallknowpeoplewhomanagetodoboth.

Map6.TheSpreadofBuddhism.

Greatgodscansendusrain,socialinstitutionscanprovidejusticeandgood

health care, and lucky coincidences can turn us intomillionaires, but none ofthem can change our basicmental patterns.Hence even the greatest kings aredoomed to live in angst, constantly fleeing grief and anguish, forever chasingaftergreaterpleasures.

Gautamafoundthattherewasawaytoexitthisviciouscircle.If,whenthemindexperiencessomethingpleasantorunpleasant,itsimplyunderstandsthingsastheyare,thenthereisnosuffering.Ifyouexperiencesadnesswithoutcravingthatthesadnessgoaway,youcontinuetofeelsadnessbutyoudonotsufferfromit.Therecanactuallyberichness in thesadness.Ifyouexperiencejoywithoutcravingthatthejoylingerandintensify,youcontinuetofeeljoywithoutlosingyourpeaceofmind.

Buthowdoyougetthemindtoacceptthingsastheyare,withoutcraving?Toacceptsadnessassadness,joyasjoy,painaspain?Gautamadevelopedasetofmeditationtechniquesthattrainthemindtoexperiencerealityasitis,withoutcraving.Thesepracticestrainthemindtofocusallitsattentiononthequestion,‘What am I experiencing now?’ rather than on ‘What would I rather beexperiencing?’Itisdifficulttoachievethisstateofmind,butnotimpossible.

Gautamagroundedthesemeditationtechniquesinasetofethicalrulesmeanttomake it easier forpeople to focusonactual experienceand toavoid fallinginto cravings and fantasies. He instructed his followers to avoid killing,promiscuoussexandtheft,sincesuchactsnecessarilystokethefireofcraving(forpower,forsensualpleasure,orforwealth).Whentheflamesarecompletelyextinguished,cravingisreplacedbyastateofperfectcontentmentandserenity,known as nirvana (the literal meaning of which is ‘extinguishing the fire’).Those who have attained nirvana are fully liberated from all suffering. Theyexperiencerealitywiththeutmostclarity,freeoffantasiesanddelusions.Whiletheywillmost likely still encounterunpleasantnessandpain, suchexperiencescausethemnomisery.Apersonwhodoesnotcravecannotsuffer.

AccordingtoBuddhisttradition,Gautamahimselfattainednirvanaandwasfully liberated from suffering. Henceforth he was known as ‘Buddha’, whichmeans ‘TheEnlightenedOne’.Buddha spent the restofhis lifeexplaininghisdiscoveries to others so that everyone could be freed from suffering. Heencapsulated his teachings in a single law: suffering arises from craving; theonly way to be fully liberated from suffering is to be fully liberated fromcraving; and theonlyway tobe liberated fromcraving is to train themind toexperiencerealityasitis.

Thislaw,knownasdharmaordhamma,isseenbyBuddhistsasauniversallaw of nature. That ‘suffering arises from craving’ is always and everywheretrue,justasinmodernphysicsEalwaysequalsmc2.Buddhistsarepeoplewho

believeinthislawandmakeitthefulcrumofalltheiractivities.Beliefingods,on the other hand, is of minor importance to them. The first principle ofmonotheist religions is ‘God exists.What does He want fromme?’ The firstprincipleofBuddhismis‘Sufferingexists.HowdoIescapeit?’

Buddhism does not deny the existence of gods – they are described aspowerfulbeingswhocanbringrainsandvictories–buttheyhavenoinfluenceonthelawthatsufferingarisesfromcraving.Ifthemindofapersonisfreeofallcraving,nogodcanmakehimmiserable.Conversely,oncecravingarises inaperson’smind,allthegodsintheuniversecannotsavehimfromsuffering.

Yet much like the monotheist religions, premodern natural-law religionssuchasBuddhismneverreallyridthemselvesoftheworshipofgods.Buddhismtold people that they should aim for the ultimate goal of complete liberationfromsuffering,ratherthanforstopsalongthewaysuchaseconomicprosperityandpoliticalpower.However,99percentofBuddhistsdidnotattainnirvana,andeven if theyhoped todoso in some future lifetime, theydevotedmostoftheirpresentlivestothepursuitofmundaneachievements.Sotheycontinuedtoworshipvariousgods,suchas theHindugods in India, theBongods inTibet,andtheShintogodsinJapan.

Moreover, as timewent by severalBuddhist sects developed pantheons ofBuddhas and bodhisattvas. These are human and non-human beings with thecapacitytoachievefullliberationfromsufferingbutwhoforegothisliberationoutofcompassion,inordertohelpthecountlessbeingsstilltrappedinthecycleof misery. Instead of worshipping gods, many Buddhists began worshippingtheseenlightenedbeings,askingthemforhelpnotonlyinattainingnirvana,butalso in dealing with mundane problems. Thus we find many Buddhas andbodhisattvasthroughoutEastAsiawhospendtheirtimebringingrain,stoppingplagues, and even winning bloody wars – in exchange for prayers, colourfulflowers,fragrantincenseandgiftsofriceandcandy.

TheWorshipofManThe last 300 years are often depicted as an age of growing secularism, in

whichreligionshaveincreasinglylost their importance.Ifwearetalkingabouttheistreligions,thisislargelycorrect.Butifwetakeintoconsiderationnatural-lawreligions,thenmodernityturnsouttobeanageofintensereligiousfervour,unparalleledmissionaryefforts,andthebloodiestwarsofreligioninhistory.Themodern age has witnessed the rise of a number of new natural-law religions,such as liberalism, Communism, capitalism, nationalism and Nazism. Thesecreedsdonot like tobecalledreligions,andrefer to themselvesas ideologies.

Butthisisjustasemanticexercise.Ifareligionisasystemofhumannormsandvaluesthatisfoundedonbeliefinasuperhumanorder,thenSovietCommunismwasnolessareligionthanIslam.

Islam is of course different from Communism, because Islam sees thesuperhumanordergoverningtheworldastheedictofanomnipotentcreatorgod,whereasSovietCommunismdid not believe in gods.ButBuddhism too givesshort shrift to gods, and yet we commonly classify it as a religion. LikeBuddhists, Communists believed in a superhuman order of natural andimmutable laws that should guide human actions.Whereas Buddhists believethat the law of nature was discovered by Siddhartha Gautama, Communistsbelievedthat the lawofnaturewasdiscoveredbyKarlMarx,FriedrichEngelsand Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. The similarity does not end there. Like otherreligions, Communism too has its holy scripts and prophetic books, such asMarx’s Das Kapital, which foretold that history would soon end with theinevitablevictoryoftheproletariat.Communismhaditsholidaysandfestivals,suchastheFirstofMayandtheanniversaryof theOctoberRevolution.IthadtheologiansadeptatMarxistdialectics,andeveryunitintheSovietarmyhadachaplain,calledacommissar,whomonitoredthepietyofsoldiersandofficers.Communism hadmartyrs, holywars and heresies, such as Trotskyism. SovietCommunism was a fanatical and missionary religion. A devout CommunistcouldnotbeaChristianoraBuddhist,andwasexpectedtospreadthegospelofMarxandLeninevenatthepriceofhisorherlife.

Religionisasystemofhumannormsandvaluesthatisfoundedonbeliefinasuperhumanorder.Thetheoryofrelativityisnotareligion,because(at

leastsofar)therearenohumannormsandvaluesthatarefoundedonit.Football is not a religion because nobody argues that its rules reflectsuperhuman edicts. Islam, Buddhism and Communism are all religions,because all are systems of human norms and values that are founded onbelief ina superhumanorder. (Note thedifferencebetween ‘superhuman’and ‘supernatural’. The Buddhist law of nature and theMarxist laws ofhistoryaresuperhuman,sincetheywerenotlegislatedbyhumans.Yettheyarenotsupernatural.)

Somereadersmayfeelveryuncomfortablewith this lineofreasoning.If itmakes you feel better, you are free to go on callingCommunism an ideologyrather than a religion. Itmakes no difference.We can divide creeds into god-centredreligionsandgodlessideologiesthatclaimtobebasedonnaturallaws.Butthen, tobeconsistent,wewouldneedtocatalogueat leastsomeBuddhist,DaoistandStoicsectsasideologiesratherthanreligions.Conversely,weshouldnotethatbeliefingodspersistswithinmanymodernideologies,andthatsomeofthem,mostnotablyliberalism,makelittlesensewithoutthisbelief.

*

It would be impossible to survey here the history of all the new moderncreeds,especiallybecausetherearenoclearboundariesbetweenthem.Theyareno less syncretic thanmonotheism and popular Buddhism. Just as a Buddhistcould worship Hindu deities, and just as a monotheist could believe in theexistence of Satan, so the typical American nowadays is simultaneously anationalist (shebelieves in the existenceof anAmericannationwith a specialrole to play in history), a free-market capitalist (she believes that opencompetition and the pursuit of self-interest are the best ways to create aprosperoussociety),andaliberalhumanist(shebelievesthathumanshavebeenendowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights). Nationalismwill bediscussed in Chapter 18. Capitalism – the most successful of the modernreligions – gets a whole chapter, Chapter 16, which expounds its principalbeliefs and rituals. In the remaining pages of this chapter I will address thehumanistreligions.

Theist religions focus on theworship of gods.Humanist religionsworshiphumanity, ormore correctly,Homo sapiens. Humanism is a belief thatHomosapienshasauniqueandsacrednature,which is fundamentallydifferent fromthenatureof allother animals andof all otherphenomena.HumanistsbelievethattheuniquenatureofHomosapiensisthemostimportantthingintheworld,and itdetermines themeaningofeverything thathappens in theuniverse.ThesupremegoodisthegoodofHomosapiens.Therestoftheworldandallotherbeingsexistsolelyforthebenefitofthisspecies.

All humanists worship humanity, but they do not agree on its definition.Humanismhassplit into threerivalsects that fightover theexactdefinitionof‘humanity’,justasrivalChristiansectsfoughtovertheexactdefinitionofGod.Today, themost important humanist sect is liberal humanism,which believesthat ‘humanity’ is a quality of individual humans, and that the liberty ofindividuals is therefore sacrosanct. According to liberals, the sacred nature ofhumanityresideswithineachandeveryindividualHomosapiens.Theinnercoreofindividualhumansgivesmeaningtotheworld,andisthesourceforallethicaland political authority. If we encounter an ethical or political dilemma, weshould look inside and listen to our inner voice – the voice of humanity. Thechiefcommandmentsofliberalhumanismaremeanttoprotectthelibertyofthisinner voice against intrusion or harm. These commandments are collectivelyknownas‘humanrights’.

This,forexample,iswhyliberalsobjecttotortureandthedeathpenalty.Inearly modern Europe, murderers were thought to violate and destabilise thecosmicorder.Tobringthecosmosbacktobalance, itwasnecessaryto tortureand publicly execute the criminal, so that everyone could see the order re-established. Attending gruesome executions was a favourite pastime forLondoners and Parisians in the era of Shakespeare and Molière. In today’sEurope,murderisseenasaviolationofthesacrednatureofhumanity.Inorderto restore order, present-day Europeans do not torture and execute criminals.Instead, they punish a murderer in what they see as the most ‘humane’ waypossible, thus safeguarding and even rebuilding his human sanctity. Byhonouring the human nature of the murderer, everyone is reminded of thesanctityofhumanity,andorderisrestored.Bydefendingthemurderer,werightwhatthemurdererhaswronged.

Even though liberal humanism sanctifies humans, it does not deny theexistence of God, and is, in fact, founded on monotheist beliefs. The liberalbelief in the freeandsacrednatureofeach individual isadirect legacyof thetraditionalChristianbeliefinfreeandeternalindividualsouls.Withoutrecourseto eternal souls and a Creator God, it becomes embarrassingly difficult for

liberalstoexplainwhatissospecialaboutindividualSapiens.Another important sect is socialist humanism. Socialists believe that

‘humanity’ iscollectiverather thanindividualistic.Theyholdassacrednot theinner voice of each individual, but the species Homo sapiens as a whole.Whereas liberal humanism seeks as much freedom as possible for individualhumans, socialist humanism seeks equality between all humans.According tosocialists, inequality is the worst blasphemy against the sanctity of humanity,becauseitprivilegesperipheralqualitiesofhumansovertheiruniversalessence.Forexample,whentherichareprivilegedoverthepoor,itmeansthatwevaluemoneymorethantheuniversalessenceofallhumans,whichisthesameforrichandpooralike.

Like liberal humanism, socialist humanism is built on monotheistfoundations. The idea that all humans are equal is a revamped version of themonotheist conviction that all souls are equal beforeGod. The only humanistsectthathasactuallybrokenloosefromtraditionalmonotheismisevolutionaryhumanism, whose most famous representatives are the Nazis. Whatdistinguished theNazis fromotherhumanist sectswasadifferentdefinitionof‘humanity’,onedeeplyinfluencedbythetheoryofevolution.Incontrasttootherhumanists, the Nazis believed that humankind is not something universal andeternal, but rather a mutable species that can evolve or degenerate. Man canevolveintosuperman,ordegenerateintoasubhuman.

ThemainambitionoftheNaziswastoprotecthumankindfromdegenerationand encourage its progressive evolution. This is why the Nazis said that theAryan race, the most advanced form of humanity, had to be protected andfostered, while degenerate kinds of Homo sapiens like Jews, Roma,homosexualsandthementallyillhadtobequarantinedandevenexterminated.The Nazis explained thatHomo sapiens itself appeared when one ‘superior’population of ancient humans evolved, whereas ‘inferior’ populations such asthe Neanderthals became extinct. These different populations were at first nomore than different races, but developed independently along their ownevolutionarypaths.Thismightwellhappenagain.AccordingtotheNazis,Homosapienshadalreadydividedintoseveraldistinctraces,eachwithitsownuniquequalities. One of these races, the Aryan race, had the finest qualities –rationalism, beauty, integrity, diligence. The Aryan race therefore had thepotentialtoturnmanintosuperman.Otherraces,suchasJewsandblacks,weretoday’sNeanderthals, possessing inferior qualities. If allowed to breed, and inparticular to intermarry with Aryans, they would adulterate all humanpopulationsanddoomHomosapienstoextinction.

Biologists have since debunked Nazi racial theory. In particular, genetic

researchconductedafter1945hasdemonstratedthatthedifferencesbetweenthevarious human lineages are far smaller than the Nazis postulated. But theseconclusionsarerelativelynew.Giventhestateofscientificknowledgein1933,Nazi beliefs were hardly outside the pale. The existence of different humanraces,thesuperiorityofthewhiterace,andtheneedtoprotectandcultivatethissuperior racewerewidelyheldbeliefsamongmostWesternelites.Scholars inthemostprestigiousWesternuniversities,usingtheorthodoxscientificmethodsof the day, published studies that allegedly proved thatmembers of thewhiterace were more intelligent, more ethical and more skilled than Africans orIndians.PoliticiansinWashington,LondonandCanberratookitforgrantedthatitwas their job toprevent theadulterationanddegenerationof thewhite race,by, for example, restricting immigration from China or even Italy to ‘Aryan’countriessuchastheUSAandAustralia.

HumanistReligions–ReligionsthatWorshipHumanityLiberalhumanismSocialisthumanismEvolutionaryhumanismHomosapienshas a unique and sacred nature that is fundamentally different from the

nature of all other beings and phenomena. The supreme good is the good ofhumanity.

‘Humanity’isindividualisticandresideswithineachindividualHomosapiens.‘Humanity’iscollectiveandresideswithinthespeciesHomosapiensasawhole.‘Humanity’isamutablespecies.Humansmightdegenerateintosubhumans

orevolveintosuperhumans.Thesupremecommandmentistoprotecttheinnercoreandfreedomofeach

individualHomosapiens.ThesupremecommandmentistoprotectequalitywithinthespeciesHomosapiens.Thesupremecommandmentistoprotecthumankindfromdegeneratinginto

subhumans,andtoencourageitsevolutionintosuperhumans.Thesepositionsdidnotchangesimplybecausenewscientific researchwas

published. Sociological and political developments were far more powerfulenginesof change. In this sense,Hitlerdugnot just hisowngravebut that ofracismingeneral.WhenhelaunchedWorldWarTwo,hecompelledhisenemiesto make clear distinctions between ‘us’ and ‘them’. Afterwards, preciselybecauseNaziideologywassoracist,racismbecamediscreditedintheWest.Butthe change took time. White supremacy remained a mainstream ideology inAmerican politics at least until the 1960s. TheWhite Australia policy whichrestricted immigrationofnon-whitepeople toAustraliaremainedinforceuntil1973. Aboriginal Australians did not receive equal political rights until the1960s, and most were prevented from voting in elections because they weredeemedunfittofunctionascitizens.

30. A Nazi propaganda poster showing on the right a ‘racially pureAryan’andonthelefta‘cross-breed’.Naziadmirationforthehumanbodyisevident,asistheirfearthatthelowerracesmightpollutehumanityandcauseitsdegeneration.

TheNazis didnot loathehumanity.They fought liberal humanism,humanrightsandCommunismpreciselybecause theyadmiredhumanityandbelievedinthegreatpotentialofthehumanspecies.ButfollowingthelogicofDarwinianevolution, theyarguedthatnaturalselectionmustbeallowedtoweedoutunfit

individualsandleaveonlythefittesttosurviveandreproduce.Bysuccouringtheweak,liberalismandCommunismnotonlyallowedunfitindividualstosurvive,they actually gave them the opportunity to reproduce, thereby underminingnaturalselection.Insuchaworld,thefittesthumanswouldinevitablydrowninaseaofunfitdegenerates.Humankindwouldbecome lessand less fitwitheachpassinggeneration–whichcouldleadtoitsextinction.

31.ANazicartoonof1933.Hitlerispresentedasasculptorwhocreatesthesuperman.Abespectacledliberalintellectualisappalledbytheviolenceneeded to create the superman. (Note also the erotic glorification of thehumanbody.)

A 1942 German biology textbook explains in the chapter ‘The Laws ofNatureandMankind’thatthesupremelawofnatureisthatallbeingsarelockedina remorselessstruggle forsurvival.Afterdescribinghowplantsstruggle forterritory,howbeetlesstruggletofindmatesandsoforth,thetextbookconcludesthat:

The battle for existence is hard and unforgiving, but is the only way tomaintainlife.Thisstruggleeliminateseverythingthatisunfitforlife,andselects

everything that is able to survive… These natural laws are incontrovertible;livingcreaturesdemonstratethembytheirverysurvival.Theyareunforgiving.Thosewhoresistthemwillbewipedout.Biologynotonlytellsusaboutanimalsandplants,butalsoshowsusthelawswemustfollowinourlives,andsteelsourwills toliveandfightaccordingtotheselaws.Themeaningoflife isstruggle.Woetohimwhosinsagainsttheselaws.

Then follows a quotation fromMeinKampf: ‘The personwho attempts tofighttheironlogicofnaturetherebyfightstheprincipleshemustthankforhislife as a human being. To fight against nature is to bring about one’s owndestruction.’3

Atthedawnofthethirdmillennium,thefutureofevolutionaryhumanismisunclear.For sixtyyears after the endof thewar againstHitler itwas taboo tolink humanism with evolution and to advocate using biological methods toupgrade’Homo sapiens. But today such projects are back in vogue. No onespeaksaboutexterminatinglowerracesorinferiorpeople,butmanycontemplateusingourincreasingknowledgeofhumanbiologytocreatesuperhumans.

At the same time, a huge gulf is opening between the tenets of liberalhumanismand the latest findingsof the life sciences, a gulfwe cannot ignoremuchlonger.Ourliberalpoliticalandjudicialsystemsarefoundedonthebeliefthateveryindividualhasasacredinnernature,indivisibleandimmutable,whichgivesmeaningtotheworld,andwhichis thesourceofallethicalandpoliticalauthority.ThisisareincarnationofthetraditionalChristianbeliefinafreeandeternalsoulthatresideswithineachindividual.Yetoverthelast200years,thelife sciences have thoroughly undermined this belief. Scientists studying theinner workings of the human organism have found no soul there. Theyincreasinglyarguethathumanbehaviourisdeterminedbyhormones,genesandsynapses,ratherthanbyfreewill–thesameforcesthatdeterminethebehaviourofchimpanzees,wolves,andants.Ourjudicialandpoliticalsystemslargelytryto sweep such inconvenient discoveries under the carpet.But in all frankness,how longcanwemaintain thewall separating thedepartmentofbiology fromthedepartmentsoflawandpoliticalscience?

13

TheSecretofSuccess

COMMERCE,EMPIRESANDUNIVERSAL religionseventuallybroughtvirtuallyeverySapiensoneverycontinentintotheglobalworldweliveintoday.Not that this process of expansion and unification was linear or withoutinterruptions. Looking at the bigger picture, though, the transition frommanysmallculturestoafewlargeculturesandfinallytoasingleglobalsocietywasprobablyaninevitableresultofthedynamicsofhumanhistory.

Butsaying thataglobalsociety is inevitable isnot thesameassaying thattheendresulthadtobetheparticularkindofglobalsocietywenowhave.Wecancertainlyimagineotheroutcomes.WhyisEnglishsowidespreadtoday,andnotDanish?Whyarethereabout2billionChristiansand1.25billionMuslims,butonly150,000ZoroastriansandnoManichaeans?Ifwecouldgobackintimeto10,000yearsagoandsettheprocessgoingagain,timeaftertime,wouldwealwaysseetheriseofmonotheismandthedeclineofdualism?

We can’t do such an experiment, so we don’t really know. But anexaminationof twocrucialcharacteristicsofhistorycanprovideuswith someclues.

1.TheHindsightFallacyEverypointinhistoryisacrossroads.Asingletravelledroadleadsfromthe

pasttothepresent,butmyriadpathsforkoffintothefuture.Someofthosepathsarewider,smootherandbettermarked,andarethusmorelikelytobetaken,butsometimeshistory–orthepeoplewhomakehistory–takesunexpectedturns.

AtthebeginningofthefourthcenturyAD,theRomanEmpirefacedawidehorizon of religious possibilities. It could have stuck to its traditional andvariegatedpolytheism.Butitsemperor,Constantine,lookingbackonafractiouscentury of civilwar, seems to have thought that a single religionwith a clear

doctrinecouldhelpunifyhisethnicallydiverserealm.Hecouldhavechosenanyof a number of contemporary cults to be his national faith – Manichaeism,Mithraism, the cults of Isis or Cybele, Zoroastrianism, Judaism and evenBuddhism were all available options. Why did he opt for Jesus? Was theresomething in Christian theology that attracted him personally, or perhaps anaspectofthefaiththatmadehimthinkitwouldbeeasiertouseforhispurposes?Didhehaveareligiousexperience,ordidsomeofhisadviserssuggestthattheChristianswerequicklygainingadherentsandthatitwouldbebesttojumponthat wagon? Historians can speculate, but not provide any definitive answer.They can describe how Christianity took over the Roman Empire, but theycannotexplainwhythisparticularpossibilitywasrealised.

Whatis thedifferencebetweendescribing‘how’andexplaining‘why’?Todescribe ‘how’means to reconstruct the seriesof specificevents that led fromone point to another. To explain ‘why means to find causal connections thataccountfortheoccurrenceofthisparticularseriesofeventstotheexclusionofallothers.

Somescholarsdo indeedprovidedeterministicexplanationsofevents suchastheriseofChristianity.Theyattempttoreducehumanhistorytotheworkingsof biological, ecological or economic forces. They argue that there wassomething about the geography, genetics or economy of the RomanMediterranean thatmade the riseofamonotheist religion inevitable.Yetmosthistorianstendtobescepticalofsuchdeterministictheories.Thisisoneofthedistinguishingmarksofhistoryasanacademicdiscipline–thebetteryouknowa particular historical period, the harder it becomes to explain why thingshappened one way and not another. Those who have only a superficialknowledge of a certain period tend to focus only on the possibility that waseventuallyrealised.Theyofferajust-sostorytoexplainwithhindsightwhythatoutcomewasinevitable.Thosemoredeeplyinformedabouttheperiodaremuchmorecognisantoftheroadsnottaken.

Infact,thepeoplewhoknewtheperiodbest–thosealiveatthetime–werethemostcluelessofall.FortheaverageRomaninConstantine’stime,thefuturewasafog.Itisanironruleofhistorythatwhatlooksinevitableinhindsightwasfar from obvious at the time. Today is no different.Arewe out of the globaleconomiccrisis,oristheworststilltocome?WillChinacontinuegrowinguntilitbecomestheleadingsuperpower?WilltheUnitedStatesloseitshegemony?Isthe upsurge ofmonotheistic fundamentalism thewave of the future or a localwhirlpool of little long-term significance?Arewe heading towards ecologicaldisasterortechnologicalparadise?Therearegoodargumentstobemadeforalloftheseoutcomes,butnowayofknowingforsure.Inafewdecades,peoplewill

lookbackandthinkthattheanswerstoallofthesequestionswereobvious.It is particularly important to stress that possibilities which seem very

unlikely to contemporaries often get realised.When Constantine assumed thethrone in306,Christianitywas littlemore thananesotericEasternsect. IfyouweretosuggestthenthatitwasabouttobecometheRomanstatereligion,you’dhavebeen laughedoutof the room just asyouwouldbe today ifyouwere tosuggest that by theyear 2050HareKrishnawouldbe the state religionof theUSA.InOctober1913,theBolshevikswereasmallradicalRussianfaction.Noreasonable person would have predicted that within a mere four years theywould take over the country. In AD 600, the notion that a band of desert-dwelling Arabs would soon conquer an expanse stretching from the AtlanticOcean to India was evenmore preposterous. Indeed, had the Byzantine armybeenabletorepeltheinitialonslaught,Islamwouldprobablyhaveremainedanobscurecultofwhichonlyahandfulofcognoscentiwereaware.Scholarswouldthen have a very easy job explaining why a faith based on a revelation to amiddle-agedMeccanmerchantcouldneverhavecaughton.

Not that everything is possible. Geographical, biological and economicforcescreateconstraints.Yet theseconstraints leaveampleroomforsurprisingdevelopments,whichdonotseemboundbyanydeterministiclaws.

This conclusion disappoints many people, who prefer history to bedeterministic.Determinism is appealing because it implies that ourworld andour beliefs are a natural and inevitable product of history. It is natural andinevitable thatwe live in nation states, organise our economy along capitalistprinciples,andferventlybelieveinhumanrights.Toacknowledgethathistoryisnotdeterministicistoacknowledgethatitisjustacoincidencethatmostpeopletodaybelieveinnationalism,capitalismandhumanrights.

History cannot be explained deterministically and it cannot be predictedbecause it is chaotic.Somany forces are atwork and their interactions are socomplexthatextremelysmallvariationsinthestrengthoftheforcesandthewaytheyinteractproducehugedifferencesinoutcomes.Notonlythat,buthistoryiswhatiscalleda‘leveltwo’chaoticsystem.Chaoticsystemscomeintwoshapes.Levelonechaosischaosthatdoesnotreacttopredictionsaboutit.Theweather,for example, is a level one chaotic system.Though it is influencedbymyriadfactors,we can build computermodels that takemore andmore of them intoconsideration,andproducebetterandbetterweatherforecasts.

Leveltwochaosischaosthatreactstopredictionsaboutit,andthereforecannever be predicted accurately. Markets, for example, are a level two chaoticsystem.Whatwillhappenifwedevelopacomputerprogramthatforecastswith100 per cent accuracy the price of oil tomorrow? The price of oil will

immediatelyreacttotheforecast,whichwouldconsequentlyfailtomaterialise.If the current price of oil is $90 a barrel, and the infallible computer programpredicts that tomorrowitwillbe$100, traderswill rushtobuyoilso that theycanprofit from thepredictedprice rise.As a result, thepricewill shootup to$100 a barrel today rather than tomorrow. Thenwhatwill happen tomorrow?Nobodyknows.

Politics, too, is a second-order chaotic system. Many people criticiseSovietologists for failing to predict the 1989 revolutions and castigateMiddleEast experts for not anticipating theArab Spring revolutions of 2011. This isunfair. Revolutions are, by definition, unpredictable. A predictable revolutionnevererupts.

Why not? Imagine that it’s 2010 and some genius political scientists incahoots with a computer wizard have developed an infallible algorithm that,incorporated into an attractive interface, can be marketed as a revolutionpredictor.TheyoffertheirservicestoPresidentHosniMubarakofEgyptand,inreturn for a generous down payment, tell Mubarak that according to theirforecasts a revolutionwould certainlybreakout inEgyptduring the courseofthe following year. How would Mubarak react? Most likely, he wouldimmediately lower taxes, distribute billions of dollars in handouts to thecitizenry–andalsobeefuphissecretpoliceforce,justincase.Thepre-emptivemeasureswork.Theyearcomesandgoesand,surprise, there isnorevolution.Mubarakdemandshismoneyback.‘Youralgorithmisworthless!’heshoutsatthescientists.‘IntheendIcouldhavebuiltanotherpalaceinsteadofgivingallthatmoneyaway!’ ‘But the reason the revolutiondidn’thappen isbecausewepredictedit,’thescientistssayintheirdefence.‘Prophetswhopredictthingsthatdon’thappen?’Mubarakremarksashemotionshisguardstograbthem.‘IcouldhavepickedupadozenofthosefornexttonothingintheCairomarketplace.’

Sowhystudyhistory?Unlikephysicsoreconomics,historyisnotameansformakingaccuratepredictions.Westudyhistorynottoknowthefuturebuttowidenourhorizons,tounderstandthatourpresentsituationisneithernaturalnorinevitable,andthatweconsequentlyhavemanymorepossibilitiesbeforeusthanweimagine.Forexample,studyinghowEuropeanscametodominateAfricansenablesus to realise that there isnothingnaturalor inevitable about the racialhierarchy,andthattheworldmightwellbearrangeddifferently.

2.BlindClioWecannotexplainthechoicesthathistorymakes,butwecansaysomething

very important about them: history’s choices are not made for the benefit of

humans.Thereisabsolutelynoproofthathumanwell-beinginevitablyimprovesas history rolls along. There is no proof that cultures that are beneficial tohumans must inexorably succeed and spread, while less beneficial culturesdisappear. There is no proof that Christianity was a better choice thanManichaeism, or that the Arab Empire was more beneficial than that of theSassanidPersians.

Thereisnoproofthathistoryisworkingforthebenefitofhumansbecausewelackanobjectivescaleonwhichtomeasuresuchbenefit.Differentculturesdefine the good differently, and we have no objective yardstick by which tojudgebetweenthem.Thevictors,ofcourse,alwaysbelievethattheirdefinitionis correct. Butwhy shouldwe believe the victors? Christians believe that thevictoryofChristianityoverManichaeismwasbeneficialtohumankind,butifwedo not accept the Christian world view then there is no reason to agree withthem.Muslimsbelieve that the fallof theSassanidEmpire intoMuslimhandswasbeneficialtohumankind.ButthesebenefitsareevidentonlyifweaccepttheMuslimworldview.Itmaywellbethatwe’dallbebetteroffifChristianityandIslamhadbeenforgottenordefeated.

Evermore scholars see cultures as a kind ofmental infection or parasite,withhumansasitsunwittinghost.Organicparasites,suchasviruses,liveinsidethe body of their hosts. Theymultiply and spread from one host to the other,feedingoff theirhosts,weakening them,and sometimesevenkilling them.Aslongasthehostslivelongenoughtopassalongtheparasite,itcareslittleabouttheconditionofitshost.Injustthisfashion,culturalideasliveinsidethemindsof humans. They multiply and spread from one host to another, occasionallyweakeningthehostsandsometimesevenkillingthem.Aculturalidea–suchasbeliefinChristianheavenabovethecloudsorCommunistparadisehereonearth–cancompelahumantodedicatehisorherlifetospreadingthatidea,evenatthe price of death. The human dies, but the idea spreads. According to thisapproach, cultures are not conspiracies concocted by some people in order totakeadvantageofothers(asMarxiststendtothink).Rather,culturesarementalparasites that emerge accidentally, and thereafter take advantage of all peopleinfectedbythem.

Thisapproachissometimescalledmemetics.Itassumesthat,justasorganicevolutionisbasedonthereplicationoforganicinformationunitscalled‘genes’,so cultural evolution is based on the replication of cultural information unitscalled ‘memes’.1 Successful cultures are those that excel in reproducing theirmemes,irrespectiveofthecostsandbenefitstotheirhumanhosts.

Mostscholarsinthehumanitiesdisdainmemetics,seeingitasanamateurishattempttoexplainculturalprocesseswithcrudebiologicalanalogies.Butmany

of these same scholars adhere to memetics’ twin sister – postmodernism.Postmodernistthinkersspeakaboutdiscoursesratherthanmemesasthebuildingblocksofculture.Yettheytooseeculturesaspropagatingthemselveswithlittleregard for the benefit of humankind. For example, postmodernist thinkersdescribenationalismasadeadlyplaguethatspreadthroughouttheworldinthenineteenthandtwentiethcenturies,causingwars,oppression,hateandgenocide.Themomentpeopleinonecountrywereinfectedwithit,thoseinneighbouringcountrieswerealsolikelytocatchthevirus.Thenationalistviruspresenteditselfasbeingbeneficialforhumans,yetithasbeenbeneficialmainlytoitself.

Similar arguments are common in the social sciences, under the aegis ofgame theory. Game theory explains how in multi-player systems, views andbehaviour patterns that harmall players neverthelessmanage to take root andspread.Armsracesareafamousexample.Manyarmsracesbankruptall thosewho takepart in them,without really changing themilitarybalanceof power.WhenPakistanbuysadvancedaeroplanes, India responds inkind.When Indiadevelopsnuclearbombs,Pakistanfollowssuit.WhenPakistanenlargesitsnavy,Indiacounters.Attheendoftheprocess,thebalanceofpowermayremainmuchas it was, but meanwhile billions of dollars that could have been invested ineducationorhealtharespentonweapons.Yetthearmsracedynamicishardtoresist.‘Armsracing’isapatternofbehaviourthatspreadsitselflikeavirusfromone country to another, harming everyone, but benefiting itself, under theevolutionary criteria of survival and reproduction. (Keep inmind that an armsrace,likeagene,hasnoawareness–itdoesnotconsciouslyseektosurviveandreproduce.Itsspreadistheunintendedresultofapowerfuldynamic.)

Nomatterwhatyoucallit–gametheory,postmodernismormemetics–thedynamics of history are not directed towards enhancing human well-being.There is no basis for thinking that themost successful cultures in history arenecessarily thebestones forHomosapiens. Like evolution, history disregardsthehappinessofindividualorganisms.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,history made its most momentous choice, changing not only the fate ofhumankind, but arguably the fate of all life on earth.We call it the ScientificRevolution.ItbeganinwesternEurope,alargepeninsulaonthewesterntipofAfro-Asia,whichup till thenplayedno important role inhistory.Whydid theScientificRevolutionbeginthereofallplaces,andnotinChinaorIndia?Why

did it begin at the midpoint of the second millennium AD rather than twocenturies before or three centuries later? We don’t know. Scholars haveproposeddozensoftheories,butnoneofthemisparticularlyconvincing.

Historyhasaverywidehorizonofpossibilities,andmanypossibilitiesareneverrealised.ItisconceivabletoimaginehistorygoingonforgenerationsupongenerationswhilebypassingtheScientificRevolution,justasitisconceivabletoimaginehistorywithoutChristianity,withoutaRomanEmpire,andwithoutgoldcoins.

PartFourTheScientificRevolution

32. Alamogordo, 16 July 1945, 05:29:53. Eight seconds after the firstatomic bombwas detonated. The nuclear physicist Robert Oppenheimer,upon seeing the explosion, quoted from the Bhagavadgita: ‘Now I ambecomeDeath,thedestroyerofworlds.’

14

TheDiscoveryofIgnorance

WERE,SAY,ASPANISHPEASANTTOHAVEfallenasleepinAD1000andwokenup500yearslater,tothedinofColumbus’sailorsboardingtheNiña,Pinta and SantaMaria, the world would have seemed to him quite familiar.Despite many changes in technology, manners and political boundaries, thismedievalRipVanWinklewouldhavefeltathome.ButhadoneofColumbus’sailorsfallen intoasimilarslumberandwokenup to theringtoneofa twenty-first-century iPhone, hewould have found himself in aworld strange beyondcomprehension.‘Isthisheaven?’hemightwellhaveaskedhimself.‘Orperhaps–hell?’

Thelast500yearshavewitnessedaphenomenalandunprecedentedgrowthinhumanpower.Intheyear1500,therewereabout500millionHomosapiensin the entire world. Today, there are 7 billion.1 The total value of goods andservicesproducedbyhumankindintheyear1500isestimatedat$250billion,intoday’sdollars.2Nowadaysthevalueofayearofhumanproductioniscloseto$60 trillion.3 In 1500, humanity consumed about 13 trillion calories of energyperday.Today,weconsume1,500trillioncaloriesaday.4(Takeasecondlookatthosefigures–humanpopulationhasincreasedfourteen-fold,production240-fold,andenergyconsumption115-fold.)

SupposeasinglemodernbattleshipgottransportedbacktoColumbus’time.InamatterofsecondsitcouldmakedriftwoodoutoftheNiña,PintaandSantaMariaandthensinkthenaviesofeverygreatworldpowerofthetimewithoutsustaining a scratch. Fivemodern freighters could have taken onboard all thecargoborneby thewholeworld’smerchant fleets.5Amodern computer couldeasilystoreeverywordandnumberinallthecodexbooksandscrollsineverysinglemedieval librarywith room to spare.Any large bank today holdsmoremoneythanalltheworld’spremodernkingdomsputtogether.6

In1500,fewcitieshadmorethan100,000inhabitants.Mostbuildingswereconstructedofmud,woodandstraw;a three-storeybuildingwasaskyscraper.Thestreetswererutteddirttracks,dustyinsummerandmuddyinwinter,pliedbypedestrians,horses,goats,chickensandafewcarts.Themostcommonurbannoiseswere human and animal voices, alongwith the occasional hammer andsaw.Atsunset,thecityscapewentblack,withonlyanoccasionalcandleortorchflickeringinthegloom.IfaninhabitantofsuchacitycouldseemodernTokyo,NewYorkorMumbai,whatwouldshethink?

Priortothesixteenthcentury,nohumanhadcircumnavigatedtheearth.Thischangedin1522,whenMagellan’sexpeditionreturnedtoSpainafterajourneyof72,000kilometres.Ittookthreeyearsandcostthelivesofalmostallthecrewmembers,Magellan included. In 1873, JulesVerne could imagine thatPhileasFogg, a wealthy British adventurer, might just be able to make it around theworldineightydays.Todayanyonewithamiddle-classincomecansafelyandeasilycircumnavigatetheglobeinjustforty-eighthours.

In 1500, humans were confined to the earth’s surface. They could buildtowers and climb mountains, but the sky was reserved for birds, angels anddeities.On 20 July 1969 humans landed on themoon.Thiswas notmerely ahistorical achievement, but an evolutionary and even cosmic feat. During theprevious 4 billion years of evolution, no organismmanaged even to leave theearth’satmosphere,andcertainlynoneleftafootortentacleprintonthemoon.

For most of history, humans knew nothing about 99.99 per cent of theorganisms on the planet – namely, themicroorganisms. Thiswas not becausetheywereofnoconcerntous.Eachofusbearsbillionsofone-celledcreatureswithin us, and not just as free-riders. They are our best friends, and deadliestenemies.Someof themdigestour foodandcleanourguts,whileotherscauseillnesses and epidemics.Yet itwasonly in1674 that a humaneye first sawamicroorganism,whenAntonvanLeeuwenhoek tookapeek throughhishome-mademicroscopeandwasstartledtoseeanentireworldoftinycreaturesmillingaboutinadropofwater.Duringthesubsequent300years,humanshavemadetheacquaintanceofahugenumberofmicroscopicspecies.We’vemanaged todefeatmostofthedeadliestcontagiousdiseasestheycause,andhaveharnessedmicroorganisms in the service of medicine and industry. Today we engineerbacteriatoproducemedications,manufacturebiofuelandkillparasites.

But thesinglemostremarkableanddefiningmomentof thepast500yearscameat05:29:45on16July1945.At thatprecisesecond,Americanscientistsdetonated thefirstatomicbombatAlamogordo,NewMexico.Fromthatpointonward,humankindhadthecapabilitynotonlytochangethecourseofhistory,buttoendit.

ThehistoricalprocessthatledtoAlamogordoandtothemoonisknownasthe Scientific Revolution. During this revolution humankind has obtainedenormous new powers by investing resources in scientific research. It is arevolutionbecause,untilaboutAD1500,humanstheworldoverdoubtedtheirabilitytoobtainnewmedical,militaryandeconomicpowers.Whilegovernmentandwealthypatronsallocatedfundstoeducationandscholarship,theaimwas,in general, to preserve existing capabilities rather than acquire new ones. Thetypical premodern ruler gave money to priests, philosophers and poets in thehopethattheywouldlegitimisehisruleandmaintainthesocialorder.Hedidnotexpect them to discover new medications, invent new weapons or stimulateeconomicgrowth.

Duringthelastfivecenturies,humansincreasinglycametobelievethattheycould increase theircapabilitiesby investing inscientificresearch.Thiswasn’tjust blind faith – itwas repeatedly proven empirically. Themore proofs therewere, themore resourceswealthypeopleandgovernmentswerewilling toputinto science.Wewould never have been able towalk on themoon, engineermicroorganisms and split the atom without such investments. The USgovernment, for example,has in recentdecadesallocatedbillionsofdollars tothestudyofnuclearphysics.Theknowledgeproducedbythisresearchhasmadepossible the construction of nuclear power stations, which provide cheapelectricity for American industries, which pay taxes to the US government,whichusessomeofthesetaxestofinancefurtherresearchinnuclearphysics.

TheScientificRevolution’sfeedbackloop.Scienceneedsmorethanjustresearch to make progress. It depends on the mutual reinforcement ofscience,politicsandeconomics.Politicalandeconomicinstitutionsprovidethe resources without which scientific research is almost impossible. Inreturn,scientificresearchprovidesnewpowersthatareused,amongother

things,toobtainnewresources,someofwhicharereinvestedinresearch.

Whydidmodernhumansdevelopagrowingbeliefintheirabilitytoobtainnewpowers through research?What forged thebondbetweenscience,politicsand economics?This chapter looks at the unique nature ofmodern science inorder to provide part of the answer. The next two chapters examine theformation of the alliance between science, the European empires and theeconomicsofcapitalism.

IgnoramusHumanshavesoughttounderstandtheuniverseatleastsincetheCognitive

Revolution. Our ancestors put a great deal of time and effort into trying todiscovertherulesthatgovernthenaturalworld.Butmodernsciencediffersfromallprevioustraditionsofknowledgeinthreecriticalways:a. The willingness to admit ignorance. Modern science is based on the

Latininjunctionignoramus–‘wedonotknow’.Itassumesthatwedon’tknoweverything.Evenmorecritically,itacceptsthatthethingsthatwethinkweknowcouldbeprovenwrongaswegainmoreknowledge.Noconcept,ideaortheoryissacredandbeyondchallenge.b. The centrality of observation and mathematics. Having admitted

ignorance, modern science aims to obtain new knowledge. It does so bygathering observations and then using mathematical tools to connect theseobservationsintocomprehensivetheories.c. The acquisition of new powers. Modern science is not content with

creating theories. Ituses these theories inorder toacquirenewpowers,and inparticulartodevelopnewtechnologies.

The Scientific Revolution has not been a revolution of knowledge. It hasbeenaboveallarevolutionofignorance.ThegreatdiscoverythatlaunchedtheScientificRevolutionwasthediscoverythathumansdonotknowtheanswerstotheirmostimportantquestions.

Premodern traditions of knowledge such as Islam, Christianity, BuddhismandConfucianismasserted thateverything that is important toknowabout theworldwasalreadyknown.Thegreatgods,ortheonealmightyGod,orthewisepeopleof thepastpossessedall-encompassingwisdom,whichtheyrevealed tous in scriptures and oral traditions. Ordinary mortals gained knowledge bydelvingintotheseancienttextsandtraditionsandunderstandingthemproperly.ItwasinconceivablethattheBible,theQur’anortheVedasweremissingouton

acrucialsecretoftheuniverse–asecretthatmightyetbediscoveredbyflesh-and-bloodcreatures.

Ancienttraditionsofknowledgeadmittedonlytwokindsofignorance.First,anindividualmightbeignorantofsomethingimportant.Toobtainthenecessaryknowledge,allheneededtodowasasksomebodywiser.Therewasnoneedtodiscover something that nobody yet knew. For example, if a peasant in somethirteenth-century Yorkshire village wanted to know how the human raceoriginated,heassumedthatChristiantraditionheldthedefinitiveanswer.Allhehadtodowasaskthelocalpriest.

Second, an entire tradition might be ignorant of unimportant things. Bydefinition,whateverthegreatgodsorthewisepeopleofthepastdidnotbotherto tell us was unimportant. For example, if our Yorkshire peasant wanted toknowhowspidersweavetheirwebs, itwaspointlesstoaskthepriest,becausetherewasnoanswertothisquestioninanyoftheChristianScriptures.Thatdidnot mean, however, that Christianity was deficient. Rather, it meant thatunderstanding how spidersweave their webswas unimportant. After all, Godknewperfectlywellhowspidersdoit.Ifthiswereavitalpieceofinformation,necessary for human prosperity and salvation, God would have included acomprehensiveexplanationintheBible.

Christianitydidnot forbidpeople to studyspiders.But spider scholars– ifthere were any in medieval Europe – had to accept their peripheral role insocietyandtheirrelevanceoftheirfindingstotheeternaltruthsofChristianity.No matter what a scholar might discover about spiders or butterflies orGalapagos finches, thatknowledgewas littlemore than trivia,withnobearingonthefundamentaltruthsofsociety,politicsandeconomics.

In fact, things were never quite that simple. In every age, even the mostpiousandconservative,therewerepeoplewhoarguedthattherewereimportantthingsofwhichtheirentiretraditionwasignorant.Yetsuchpeoplewereusuallymarginalised or persecuted – or else they founded a new tradition and beganarguing that they knew everything there is to know. For example, the prophetMuhammad began his religious career by condemning his fellow Arabs forliving in ignorance of the divine truth. YetMuhammad himself very quicklybegantoarguethatheknewthefull truth,andhisfollowersbegancallinghim‘TheSealoftheProphets’.Henceforth,therewasnoneedofrevelationsbeyondthosegiventoMuhammad.

Modern-day science is a unique tradition of knowledge, inasmuch as itopenly admits collective ignorance regarding the most important questions.Darwinneverargued thathewas‘TheSealof theBiologists’,and thathehadsolvedtheriddleoflifeonceandforall.Aftercenturiesofextensivescientific

research,biologistsadmitthattheystilldon’thaveanygoodexplanationforhowbrains produce consciousness. Physicists admit that they don’t know whatcausedtheBigBang,orhowtoreconcilequantummechanicswiththetheoryofgeneralrelativity.

Inothercases,competingscientifictheoriesarevociferouslydebatedonthebasis of constantly emerging new evidence. A prime example is the debatesabouthowbest to run the economy.Though individual economistsmayclaimthattheirmethodisthebest,orthodoxychangeswitheveryfinancialcrisisandstock-exchange bubble, and it is generally accepted that the final word oneconomicsisyettobesaid.

In still other cases, particular theories are supported so consistently by theavailable evidence, that all alternatives have long since fallen by thewayside.Suchtheoriesareacceptedastrue–yeteveryoneagreesthatwerenewevidencetoemergethatcontradicts thetheory, itwouldhavetoberevisedordiscarded.Good examples of these are the plate tectonics theory and the theory ofevolution.

Thewillingnesstoadmitignorancehasmademodernsciencemoredynamic,suppleandinquisitivethananyprevioustraditionofknowledge.Thishashugelyexpanded our capacity to understand how the world works and our ability toinventnewtechnologies.Butitpresentsuswithaseriousproblemthatmostofourancestorsdidnothavetocopewith.Ourcurrentassumptionthatwedonotknoweverything,andthateventheknowledgewepossessis tentative,extendstothesharedmythsthatenablemillionsofstrangerstocooperateeffectively.Ifthe evidence shows thatmany of thosemyths are doubtful, how canwe holdsocietytogether?Howcanourcommunities,countriesandinternationalsystemfunction?

Allmodernattemptstostabilisethesociopoliticalorderhavehadnochoicebuttorelyoneitheroftwounscientificmethods:a.Takeascientifictheory,andinoppositiontocommonscientificpractices,

declarethatitisafinalandabsolutetruth.ThiswasthemethodusedbyNazis(who claimed that their racial policieswere the corollaries of biological facts)and Communists (who claimed that Marx and Lenin had divined absoluteeconomictruthsthatcouldneverberefuted).b. Leave science out of it and live in accordance with a non-scientific

absolutetruth.Thishasbeenthestrategyofliberalhumanism,whichisbuiltonadogmaticbelief in theuniqueworthandrightsofhumanbeings–adoctrinewhich has embarrassingly little in commonwith the scientific study ofHomosapiens.

Butthatshouldn’tsurpriseus.Evenscienceitselfhastorelyonreligiousandideologicalbeliefstojustifyandfinanceitsresearch.

Modern culture has nevertheless been willing to embrace ignorance to amuchgreater degree thanhas anyprevious culture.Oneof the things that hasmade it possible formodern social orders to hold together is the spread of analmost religiousbelief in technologyand in themethodsofscientific research,whichhavereplacedtosomeextentthebeliefinabsolutetruths.

TheScientificDogmaModern science has no dogma. Yet it has a common core of research

methods,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 waste preciousresourcesobtainingnewobservationswhenwealreadyhavealltheanswersweneed?Butasmodernpeoplecametoadmitthattheydidnotknowtheanswerstosomevery important questions, they found it necessary to look forcompletelynewknowledge.Consequently,thedominantmodernresearchmethodtakesforgranted the insufficiency of old knowledge. Instead of studying old traditions,emphasis is now placed on new observations and experiments.When presentobservationcollideswithpast tradition,wegiveprecedencetotheobservation.Of course, physicists analysing the spectra of distant galaxies, archaeologistsanalysingthefindsfromaBronzeAgecity,andpoliticalscientistsstudyingtheemergenceofcapitalismdonotdisregardtradition.Theystartbystudyingwhatthewise people of the past have said andwritten.But from their first year incollege,aspiringphysicists,archaeologistsandpoliticalscientistsaretaughtthatit is theirmission to go beyondwhatEinstein,Heinrich Schliemann andMaxWebereverknew.

Mereobservations,however,arenotknowledge.Inorder tounderstandtheuniverse,weneedtoconnectobservations intocomprehensive theories.Earliertraditionsusually formulated their theories in termsof stories.Modern scienceusesmathematics.

There are very few equations, graphs and calculations in the Bible, theQur’an,theVedasortheConfucianclassics.Whentraditionalmythologiesandscriptureslaiddowngenerallaws,thesewerepresentedinnarrativeratherthanmathematical form. Thus a fundamental principle of Manichaean religion

asserted that theworld is abattlegroundbetweengoodandevil.Anevil forcecreatedmatter,while a good force created spirit.Humans are caught betweenthesetwoforces,andshouldchoosegoodoverevil.YettheprophetManimadenoattempttoofferamathematicalformulathatcouldbeusedtopredicthumanchoices by quantifying the respective strength of these two forces. He nevercalculatedthat‘theforceactingonamanisequaltotheaccelerationofhisspiritdividedbythemassofhisbody’.

This is exactlywhat scientists seek to accomplish. In 1687, IsaacNewtonpublished The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, arguably themost importantbook inmodernhistory.Newtonpresentedageneral theoryofmovement and change. The greatness of Newton’s theory was its ability toexplain and predict themovements of all bodies in the universe, from fallingapplestoshootingstars,usingthreeverysimplemathematicallaws:

Henceforth,anyonewhowishedtounderstandandpredictthemovementofacannonballoraplanetsimplyhadtomakemeasurementsoftheobject’smass,direction and acceleration, and the forces acting on it. By inserting thesenumbers into Newton’s equations, the future position of the object could bepredicted.Itworkedlikemagic.OnlyaroundtheendofthenineteenthcenturydidscientistscomeacrossafewobservationsthatdidnotfitwellwithNewton’slaws,and these led to thenext revolutions inphysics– the theoryof relativityandquantummechanics.

Newton showed that the book of nature is written in the language ofmathematics.Somechapters(forexample)boildowntoaclear-cutequation;butscholarswho attempted to reduce biology, economics and psychology to neatNewtonian equations have discovered that these fields have a level ofcomplexity thatmakes such an aspiration futile. This did notmean, however,thattheygaveuponmathematics.Anewbranchofmathematicswasdevelopedover the last 200 years to deal with the more complex aspects of reality:statistics.

In 1744, two Presbyterian clergymen in Scotland, AlexanderWebster andRobert Wallace, decided to set up a life-insurance fund that would providepensions for thewidows and orphans of dead clergymen. They proposed thateachoftheirchurch’sministerswouldpayasmallportionofhisincomeintothefund,whichwouldinvestthemoney.Ifaministerdied,hiswidowwouldreceivedividendsonthefund’sprofits.Thiswouldallowhertolivecomfortablyfortherestofherlife.Buttodeterminehowmuchtheministershadtopayinsothatthefund would have enough money to live up to its obligations, Webster andWallacehadtobeabletopredicthowmanyministerswoulddieeachyear,howmanywidowsandorphanstheywouldleavebehind,andbyhowmanyyearsthewidowswouldoutlivetheirhusbands.

Takenoteofwhatthetwochurchmendidnotdo.TheydidnotpraytoGodtorevealtheanswer.NordidtheysearchforananswerintheHolyScripturesoramong the works of ancient theologians. Nor did they enter into an abstractphilosophical disputation. Being Scots, they were practical types. So theycontacted aprofessorofmathematics from theUniversityofEdinburgh,ColinMaclaurin.The three of themcollecteddata on the ages atwhichpeople diedandusedthesetocalculatehowmanyministerswerelikelytopassawayinanygivenyear.

Their work was founded on several recent breakthroughs in the fields ofstatistics and probability. One of these was Jacob Bernoulli’s Law of LargeNumbers.Bernoullihadcodifiedtheprinciplethatwhileitmightbedifficulttopredictwithcertaintyasingleevent,suchasthedeathofaparticularperson,itwaspossibletopredictwithgreataccuracytheaverageoutcomeofmanysimilarevents.Thatis,whileMaclaurincouldnotusemathstopredictwhetherWebsterandWallacewoulddienextyear,hecould,givenenoughdata,tellWebsterandWallace howmany Presbyterianministers in Scotlandwould almost certainlydie next year. Fortunately, they had ready-made data that they could use.Actuary tables published fifty years previously by Edmond Halley provedparticularlyuseful.Halleyhadanalysedrecordsof1,238birthsand1,174deathsthat he obtained from the city of Breslau, Germany. Halley’s tables made itpossibletoseethat,forexample,atwenty-year-oldpersonhasa1:100chanceofdyinginagivenyear,butafifty-year-oldpersonhasa1:39chance.

Processingthesenumbers,WebsterandWallaceconcludedthat,onaverage,therewouldbe930livingScottishPresbyterianministersatanygivenmoment,and an average of twenty-seven ministers would die each year, eighteen ofwhomwouldbesurvivedbywidows.Fiveof thosewhodidnot leavewidowswouldleaveorphanedchildren,andtwoofthosesurvivedbywidowswouldalsobeoutlivedbychildrenfrompreviousmarriageswhohadnotyetreachedtheage

ofsixteen.Theyfurthercomputedhowmuchtimewaslikelytogobybeforethewidows’deathorremarriage(inboththeseeventualities,paymentofthepensionwould cease). These figures enabledWebster andWallace to determine howmuchmoneytheministerswhojoinedtheirfundhadtopayinordertoprovidefor their loved ones. By contributing £2 12s. 2d. a year, a minister couldguaranteethathiswidowedwifewouldreceiveatleast£10ayear–aheftysuminthosedays.Ifhethoughtthatwasnotenoughhecouldchoosetopayinmore,uptoalevelof£611s.3d.ayear–whichwouldguaranteehiswidowtheevenmorehandsomesumof£25ayear.

Accordingtotheircalculations,bytheyear1765theFundforaProvisionfortheWidowsandChildrenoftheMinistersoftheChurchofScotlandwouldhavecapital totalling £58,348. Their calculations proved amazingly accurate.Whenthat year arrived, the fund’s capital stood at £58,347 – just £1 less than theprediction!ThiswasevenbetterthanthepropheciesofHabakkuk,JeremiahorStJohn.Today,WebsterandWallace’sfund,knownsimplyasScottishWidows,isoneofthelargestpensionandinsurancecompaniesintheworld.Withassetsworth£100billion, it insures not onlyScottishwidows, but anyonewilling tobuyitspolicies.7

Probability calculations such as those used by the two Scottish ministersbecame the foundation notmerely of actuarial science,which is central to thepensionandinsurancebusiness,butalsoofthescienceofdemography(foundedby another clergyman, theAnglicanRobertMalthus).Demography in its turnwasthecornerstoneonwhichCharlesDarwin(whoalmostbecameanAnglicanpastor) built his theoryof evolution.While there are no equations that predictwhatkindoforganismwillevolveunderaspecificsetofconditions,geneticistsuseprobabilitycalculationstocomputethelikelihoodthataparticularmutationwill spread in a given population. Similar probabilistic models have becomecentral to economics, sociology, psychology, political science and the othersocial and natural sciences. Even physics eventually supplemented Newton’sclassicalequationswiththeprobabilitycloudsofquantummechanics.

We need merely look at the history of education to realise how far thisprocesshastakenus.Throughoutmostofhistory,mathematicswasanesotericfield that even educated people rarely studied seriously. In medieval Europe,logic,grammarandrhetoricformedtheeducationalcore,whiletheteachingofmathematics seldom went beyond simple arithmetic and geometry. Nobodystudiedstatistics.Theundisputedmonarchofallscienceswastheology.

Today few students study rhetoric; logic is restricted to philosophydepartments, and theology to seminaries. But more and more students are

motivated – or forced – to study mathematics. There is an irresistible drifttowards the exact sciences – defined as ‘exact’ by their use of mathematicaltools.Evenfieldsofstudythatweretraditionallypartofthehumanities,suchasthestudyofhumanlanguage(linguistics)andthehumanpsyche(psychology),rely increasingly on mathematics and seek to present themselves as exactsciences. Statistics courses are now part of the basic requirements not just inphysicsandbiology,butalsoinpsychology,sociology,economicsandpoliticalscience.

Inthecoursecatalogueofthepsychologydepartmentatmyownuniversity,the first required course in the curriculum is ‘Introduction to Statistics andMethodology in Psychological Research’. Second-year psychology studentsmust take‘StatisticalMethods inPsychologicalResearch’.Confucius,Buddha,JesusandMuhammadwouldhavebeenbewilderedifyoutoldthemthatinorderto understand the human mind and cure its illnesses you must first studystatistics.

KnowledgeisPowerMost people have a hard time digesting modern science because its

mathematicallanguageisdifficultforourmindstograsp,anditsfindingsoftencontradictcommonsense.Outof the7billionpeople in theworld,howmanyreallyunderstandquantummechanics,cellbiologyormacroeconomics?Sciencenevertheless enjoys immense prestige because of the new powers it gives us.Presidents and generals may not understand nuclear physics, but they have agoodgraspofwhatnuclearbombscando.

In 1620 Francis Bacon published a scientific manifesto tided The NewInstrument. In it he argued that ‘knowledge is power’. The real test of‘knowledge’ is not whether it is true, but whether it empowers us. Scientistsusuallyassume thatno theory is100percentcorrect.Consequently, truth is apoor test forknowledge.Thereal test isutility.A theory thatenablesus todonewthingsconstitutesknowledge.

Overthecenturies,sciencehasofferedusmanynewtools.Somearementaltools,suchasthoseusedtopredictdeathratesandeconomicgrowth.Evenmoreimportant are technological tools. The connection forged between science andtechnologyissostrongthattodaypeopletendtoconfusethetwo.Weoftenthinkthatitisimpossibletodevelopnewtechnologieswithoutscientificresearch,andthatthereislittlepointinresearchifitdoesnotresultinnewtechnologies.

In fact, the relationship between science and technology is a very recentphenomenon.Priorto1500,scienceandtechnologyweretotallyseparatefields.

When Bacon connected the two in the early seventeenth century, it was arevolutionary idea. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries thisrelationshiptightened,buttheknotwastiedonlyinthenineteenthcentury.Evenin 1800,most rulerswhowanted a strong army, andmost businessmagnateswhowantedasuccessfulbusiness,didnotbothertofinanceresearchinphysics,biologyoreconomics.

Idon’tmeantoclaimthatthereisnoexceptiontothisrule.Agoodhistoriancanfindprecedentforeverything.Butanevenbetterhistorianknowswhentheseprecedents are but curiosities that cloud the big picture. Generally speaking,most premodern rulers andbusiness people did not finance research about thenatureof theuniverse inorder todevelopnewtechnologies,andmost thinkersdidnottrytotranslatetheirfindingsintotechnologicalgadgets.Rulersfinancededucationalinstitutionswhosemandatewastospreadtraditionalknowledgeforthepurposeofbuttressingtheexistingorder.

Hereandtherepeoplediddevelopnewtechnologies,butthesewereusuallycreatedbyuneducatedcraftsmenusingtrialanderror,notbyscholarspursuingsystematicscientificresearch.Cartmanufacturersbuilt thesamecartsfromthesamematerials year in year out. They did not set aside a percentage of theirannual profits in order to research and develop new cart models. Cart designoccasionallyimproved,butitwasusuallythankstotheingenuityofsomelocalcarpenterwhoneversetfootinauniversityanddidnotevenknowhowtoread.

Thiswas true of the public aswell as the private sector.Whereasmodernstatescallintheirscientiststoprovidesolutionsinalmosteveryareaofnationalpolicy,fromenergytohealthtowastedisposal,ancientkingdomsseldomdidso.The contrast between then and now is most pronounced in weaponry. WhenoutgoingPresidentDwightEisenhowerwarnedin1961ofthegrowingpowerofthemilitary-industrialcomplex,heleftoutapartoftheequation.Heshouldhavealertedhiscountrytothemilitary-industrial-scientificcomplex,becausetoday’swars are scientific productions. The world’s military forces initiate, fund andsteer a large part of humanity’s scientific research and technologicaldevelopment.

WhenWorldWarOneboggeddownintointerminabletrenchwarfare,bothsidescalledinthescientiststobreakthedeadlockandsavethenation.Themeninwhiteansweredthecall,andoutofthelaboratoriesrolledaconstantstreamofnewwonder-weapons: combat aircraft, poisongas, tanks, submarines andevermoreefficientmachineguns,artillerypieces,riflesandbombs.

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

Science played an even larger role in World War Two. By late 1944Germany was losing the war and defeat was imminent. A year earlier, theGermans’ allies, the Italians, had toppled Mussolini and surrendered to theAllies.ButGermany kept fighting on, even though theBritish,American andSovietarmieswereclosingin.OnereasonGermansoldiersandciviliansthoughtnotallwaslostwasthattheybelievedGermanscientistswereabouttoturnthetide with so-called miracle weapons such as the V-2 rocket and jet-poweredaircraft.

While the Germans were working on rockets and jets, the AmericanManhattanProjectsuccessfullydevelopedatomicbombs.Bythetimethebombwas ready, inearlyAugust1945,Germanyhadalreadysurrendered,but Japanwas fightingon.American forceswerepoised to invade itshome islands.TheJapanesevowedtoresisttheinvasionandfighttothedeath,andtherewaseveryreason to believe that it was no idle threat. American generals told PresidentHarry S. Truman that an invasion of Japan would cost the lives of a millionAmericansoldiersandwouldextendthewarwellinto1946.Trumandecidedtouse the new bomb. Twoweeks and two atom bombs later, Japan surrenderedunconditionallyandthewarwasover.

Butscienceisnotjustaboutoffensiveweapons.Itplaysamajorroleinourdefencesaswell.TodaymanyAmericansbelievethatthesolutiontoterrorismistechnologicalratherthanpolitical.Justgivemillionsmoretothenanotechnologyindustry, they believe, and the United States could send bionic spy-flies intoevery Afghan cave, Yemenite redoubt and North African encampment. Oncethat’sdone,OsamaBinLaden’sheirswillnotbeabletomakeacupofcoffeewithout a CIA spy-fly passing this vital information back to headquarters inLangley.Allocatemillionsmore to brain research, and every airport could beequipped with ultra-sophisticated FMRI scanners that could immediatelyrecognise angry and hateful thoughts in people’s brains.Will it really work?Whoknows.Isitwisetodevelopbionicfliesandthought-readingscanners?Notnecessarily.Be that as itmay, as you read these lines, theUSDepartment ofDefense is transferring millions of dollars to nanotechnology and brainlaboratoriesforworkontheseandothersuchideas.

Thisobsessionwithmilitarytechnology–fromtankstoatombombstospy-flies–isasurprisinglyrecentphenomenon.Upuntilthenineteenthcentury,thevastmajority ofmilitary revolutionswere the product of organisational ratherthan technological changes. When alien civilisations met for the first time,technologicalgapssometimesplayedanimportantrole.Buteveninsuchcases,few thought of deliberately creatingor enlarging suchgaps.Most empires didnot rise thanks to technological wizardry, and their rulers did not give muchthought to technological improvement. TheArabs did not defeat the SassanidEmpire thanks to superior bows or swords, the Seljuks had no technologicaladvantageovertheByzantines,andtheMongolsdidnotconquerChinawiththehelpofsome ingeniousnewweapon. In fact, inall thesecases thevanquishedenjoyedsuperiormilitaryandciviliantechnology.

TheRomanarmyisaparticularlygoodexample.Itwasthebestarmyofitsday,yettechnologicallyspeaking,RomehadnoedgeoverCarthage,Macedoniaor the Seleucid Empire. Its advantage rested on efficient organisation, irondiscipline and huge manpower reserves. The Roman army never set up aresearch and development department, and itsweapons remainedmore or lessthesameforcenturiesonend.IfthelegionsofScipioAemilianus–thegeneralwholevelledCarthageanddefeatedtheNumantiansinthesecondcenturyBC–had suddenly popped up 500 years later in the age of Constantine the Great,ScipiowouldhavehadafairchanceofbeatingConstantine.Nowimaginewhatwouldhappentoageneralfromafewcenturiesback–sayNapoleon–ifheledhis troops against a modern armoured brigade. Napoleon was a brillianttactician,andhismenwerecrackprofessionals,buttheirskillswouldbeuselessinthefaceofmodernweaponry.

AsinRome,soalsoinancientChina:mostgeneralsandphilosophersdidnotthink it their duty to develop new weapons. The most important militaryinvention in the history of China was gunpowder. Yet to the best of ourknowledge, gunpowder was invented accidentally, by Daoist alchemistssearching for the elixir of life. Gunpowder’s subsequent career is even moretelling. One might have thought that the Daoist alchemists would have madeChinamasteroftheworld.Infact,theChineseusedthenewcompoundmainlyfor firecrackers. Even as the Song Empire collapsed in the face of aMongolinvasion,noemperorsetupamedievalManhattanProjecttosavetheempirebyinventingadoomsdayweapon.Onlyin thefifteenthcentury–about600yearsafter the invention of gunpowder – did cannons become a decisive factor onAfro-Asianbattlefields.Whydidittakesolongforthedeadlypotentialofthissubstancetobeputtomilitaryuse?Becauseitappearedatatimewhenneitherkings,scholars,normerchantsthoughtthatnewmilitarytechnologycouldsavethemormakethemrich.

The situation began to change in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, butanother200yearswentbybeforemostrulersevincedanyinterest infinancingtheresearchanddevelopmentofnewweapons.Logisticsandstrategycontinuedto have far greater impact on the outcome of wars than technology. TheNapoleonicmilitarymachinethatcrushedthearmiesoftheEuropeanpowersatAusterlitz(1805)wasarmedwithmoreorlessthesameweaponrythatthearmyof LouisXVI had used.Napoleon himself, despite being an artilleryman, hadlittle interest in new weapons, even though scientists and inventors tried topersuade him to fund the development of flying machines, submarines androckets.

Science, industryandmilitary technology intertwinedonlywith the adventofthecapitalistsystemandtheIndustrialRevolution.Oncethisrelationshipwasestablished,however,itquicklytransformedtheworld.

TheIdealofProgressUntil the Scientific Revolution most human cultures did not believe in

progress.They thought thegoldenagewas in thepast,and that theworldwasstagnant, ifnotdeteriorating.Strictadherenceto thewisdomof theagesmightperhapsbringbackthegoodoldtimes,andhumaningenuitymightconceivablyimprove thisor that facetofdaily life.However, itwasconsidered impossiblefor humanknow-how to overcome theworld’s fundamental problems. If evenMuhammad, Jesus,Buddha andConfucius –who knew everything there is toknow–wereunabletoabolishfamine,disease,povertyandwarfromtheworld,

howcouldweexpecttodoso?Many faiths believed that some day a messiah would appear and end all

wars,faminesandevendeathitself.Butthenotionthathumankindcoulddosoby discovering new knowledge and inventing new tools was worse thanludicrous–itwashubris.ThestoryoftheTowerofBabel,thestoryofIcarus,thestoryoftheGolemandcountlessothermythstaughtpeoplethatanyattemptto go beyond human limitations would inevitably lead to disappointment anddisaster.

Whenmoderncultureadmittedthatthereweremanyimportantthingsthatitstilldidnotknow,andwhenthatadmissionofignorancewasmarriedtotheideathat scientific discoveries could give us new powers, people began suspectingthat real progress might be possible after all. As science began to solve oneunsolvable problem after another, many became convinced that humankindcould overcome any and every problem by acquiring and applying newknowledge.Poverty,sickness,wars, famines,oldageanddeath itselfwerenottheinevitablefateofhumankind.Theyweresimplythefruitsofourignorance.

34.BenjaminFranklindisarmingthegods.

A famous example is lightning.Many cultures believed that lightningwasthe hammer of an angry god, used to punish sinners. In the middle of theeighteenth century, in one of the most celebrated experiments in scientifichistory, Benjamin Franklin flew a kite during a lightning storm to test the

hypothesis that lightning is simply an electric current. Franklins empiricalobservations, coupled with his knowledge about the qualities of electricalenergy,enabledhimtoinventthelightningrodanddisarmthegods.

Poverty isanothercase inpoint.Manycultureshaveviewedpovertyasaninescapable part of this imperfect world. According to the New Testament,shortlybeforethecrucifixionawomananointedChristwithpreciousoilworth300denarii.Jesus’disciplesscoldedthewomanforwastingsuchahugesumofmoneyinsteadofgivingittothepoor,butJesusdefendedher,sayingthat‘Thepooryouwillalwayshavewithyou,andyoucanhelpthemanytimeyouwant.Butyouwillnotalwayshaveme’(Mark14:7).Today,fewerandfewerpeople,includingfewerandfewerChristians,agreewithJesusonthismatter.Povertyisincreasinglyseenasatechnicalproblemamenabletointervention.It’scommonwisdom that policies based on the latest findings in agronomy, economics,medicineandsociologycaneliminatepoverty.

Andindeed,manypartsoftheworldhavealreadybeenfreedfromtheworstformsofdeprivation.Throughouthistory,societieshavesufferedfromtwokindsofpoverty:socialpoverty,whichwithholdsfromsomepeopletheopportunitiesavailable to others; and biological poverty, which puts the very lives ofindividuals at risk due to lack of food and shelter. Perhaps social poverty canneverbeeradicated,butinmanycountriesaroundtheworldbiologicalpovertyisathingofthepast.

Untilrecently,mostpeoplehoveredveryclosetothebiologicalpovertyline,belowwhichapersonlacksenoughcaloriestosustainlifeforlong.Evensmallmiscalculations or misfortunes could easily push people below that line, intostarvation. Natural disasters and man-made calamities often plunged entirepopulations over the abyss, causing the death of millions. Todaymost of theworld’speoplehaveasafetynetstretchedbelowthem.Individualsareprotectedfrom personal misfortune by insurance, state-sponsored social security and aplethora of local and international NGOs. When calamity strikes an entireregion,worldwide relief efforts areusually successful inpreventing theworst.Peoplestillsufferfromnumerousdegradations,humiliationsandpoverty-relatedillnesses, but in most countries nobody is starving to death. In fact, in manysocietiesmorepeopleareindangerofdyingfromobesitythanfromstarvation.

TheGilgameshProjectOfallmankind’sostensiblyinsolubleproblems,onehasremainedthemost

vexing, interesting and important: the problem of death itself. Before the latemodernera,mostreligionsandideologiestookitforgrantedthatdeathwasour

inevitable fate. Moreover, most faiths turned death into the main source ofmeaning in life. Try to imagine Islam, Christianity or the ancient Egyptianreligion in a world without death. These creeds taught people that they mustcometotermswithdeathandpintheirhopesontheafterlife,ratherthanseektoovercomedeathandliveforeverhereonearth.Thebestmindswerebusygivingmeaningtodeath,nottryingtoescapeit.

That is the theme of the most ancient myth to come down to us – theGilgameshmyth of ancient Sumer. Its hero is the strongest andmost capablemanintheworld,KingGilgameshofUruk,whocoulddefeatanyoneinbattle.Oneday,Gilgamesh’sbestfriend,Enkidu,died.Gilgameshsatbythebodyandobserved it formany days, until he saw a worm dropping out of his friend’snostril. At that moment Gilgamesh was gripped by a terrible horror, and heresolved that he himself would never die. He would somehow find a way todefeat death. Gilgamesh then undertook a journey to the end of the universe,killing lions, battling scorpion-men and finding his way into the underworld.ThereheshatteredthestonegiantsofUrshanabiandtheferrymanoftheriverofthedead,andfoundUtnapishtim, the lastsurvivorof theprimordial flood.YetGilgamesh failed in his quest. He returned home empty-handed, as mortal asever,butwithonenewpieceofwisdom.Whenthegodscreatedman,Gilgameshhad learned, theysetdeathasman’s inevitabledestiny,andmanmust learn tolivewithit.

Disciplesofprogressdonotsharethisdefeatistattitude.Formenofscience,deathisnotaninevitabledestiny,butmerelyatechnicalproblem.Peopledienotbecausethegodsdecreedit,butduetovarioustechnicalfailures–aheartattack,cancer,aninfection.Andeverytechnicalproblemhasatechnicalsolution.Iftheheartflutters,itcanbestimulatedbyapacemakerorreplacedbyanewheart.Ifcancerrampages,itcanbekilledwithdrugsorradiation.Ifbacteriaproliferate,they can be subdued with antibiotics. True, at present we cannot solve alltechnicalproblems.Butweareworkingonthem.Ourbestmindsarenotwastingtheir time trying togivemeaning todeath. Instead, theyarebusy investigatingthephysiological,hormonalandgeneticsystemsresponsiblefordiseaseandoldage.Theyaredevelopingnewmedicines,revolutionarytreatmentsandartificialorgansthatwilllengthenourlivesandmightonedayvanquishtheGrimReaperhimself.

Untilrecently,youwouldnothaveheardscientists,oranyoneelse,speaksobluntly. ‘Defeat death?! What nonsense! We are only trying to cure cancer,tuberculosisandAlzheimer’sdisease,’theyinsisted.Peopleavoidedtheissueofdeath because the goal seemed too elusive. Why create unreasonableexpectations?We’renowatapoint,however,wherewecanbe frankabout it.

The leading project of the Scientific Revolution is to give humankind eternallife.Evenifkillingdeathseemsadistantgoal,wehavealreadyachievedthingsthat were inconceivable a few centuries ago. In 1199, King Richard theLionheart was struck by an arrow in his left shoulder. Today we’d say heincurredaminorinjury.Butin1199,intheabsenceofantibioticsandeffectivesterilisationmethods, thisminor fleshwound turned infected andgangrene setin.Theonlywaytostopthespreadofgangreneintwelfth-centuryEuropewastocutofftheinfectedlimb,impossiblewhentheinfectionwasinashoulder.Thegangrenespread through theLionheart’sbodyandnoonecouldhelp theking.Hediedingreatagonytwoweekslater.

Asrecentlyasthenineteenthcentury,thebestdoctorsstilldidnotknowhowtopreventinfectionandstoptheputrefactionoftissues.Infieldhospitalsdoctorsroutinelycutoff thehandsand legsof soldierswho receivedevenminor limbinjuries, fearing gangrene. These amputations, as well as all other medicalprocedures(suchas toothextraction),weredonewithoutanyanaesthetics.Thefirst anaesthetics – ether, chloroform andmorphine – entered regular usage inWestern medicine only in the middle of the nineteenth century. Before theadventofchloroform,foursoldiershadtoholddownawoundedcomradewhilethe doctor sawed off the injured limb. On the morning after the battle ofWaterloo(1815),heapsofsawn-offhandsandlegscouldbeseenadjacenttothefieldhospitals.Inthosedays,carpentersandbutcherswhoenlistedtothearmywere often sent to serve in the medical corps, because surgery required littlemorethanknowingyourwaywithknivesandsaws.

In the two centuries since Waterloo, things have changed beyondrecognition.Pills,injectionsandsophisticatedoperationssaveusfromaspateofillnesses and injuries that once dealt an inescapable death sentence.They alsoprotectusagainstcountlessdailyachesandailments,whichpremodernpeoplesimplyacceptedaspartoflife.Theaveragelifeexpectancyjumpedfromaroundtwenty-five to forty years, to around sixty-seven in the entire world, and toaroundeightyyearsinthedevelopedworld.8

Death suffered itsworst setbacks in the arena of childmortality.Until thetwentiethcentury,betweenaquarter anda thirdof thechildrenofagriculturalsocietiesneverreachedadulthood.Mostsuccumbedtochildhooddiseasessuchasdiphtheria,measlesandsmallpox.Inseventeenth-centuryEngland,150outofevery1,000newbornsdiedduringtheirfirstyear,andathirdofallchildrenweredeadbeforetheyreachedfifteen.9Today,onlyfiveoutof1,000Englishbabiesdieduringtheirfirstyear,andonlysevenoutof1,000diebeforeagefifteen.10

Wecanbettergraspthefullimpactofthesefiguresbysettingasidestatisticsand telling some stories. A good example is the family of King Edward I ofEngland (1237–1307) and his wife, Queen Eleanor (1241–90). Their childrenenjoyed thebest conditions and themost nurturing surroundings that couldbeprovided inmedievalEurope.They lived inpalaces, ateasmuch foodas theyliked, hadplentyofwarmclothing,well-stocked fireplaces, the cleanestwateravailable,anarmyofservantsandthebestdoctors.ThesourcesmentionsixteenchildrenthatQueenEleanorborebetween1255and1284:1.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.

The youngest, Edward,was the first of the boys to survive the dangerousyearsof childhood, andat his fathersdeathhe ascended theEnglish throne asKingEdward II. In otherwords, it took Eleanor sixteen tries to carry out themostfundamentalmissionofanEnglishqueen–toprovideherhusbandwithamaleheir.EdwardII’smothermusthavebeenawomanofexceptionalpatienceandfortitude.NotsothewomanEdwardchoseforhiswife,IsabellaofFrance.Shehadhimmurderedwhenhewasforty-three.11

Tothebestofourknowledge,EleanorandEdwardIwereahealthycoupleandpassednofatalhereditaryillnessesontotheirchildren.Nevertheless,tenoutofthesixteen–62percent–diedduringchildhood.Onlysixmanagedtolivebeyondtheageofeleven,andonlythree–just18percent–livedbeyondtheage of forty. In addition to these births, Eleanormost likely had a number ofpregnancies that ended inmiscarriage.Onaverage,EdwardandEleanor lost achildeverythreeyears,tenchildrenoneafteranother.It’snearlyimpossibleforaparenttodaytoimaginesuchloss.

Howlongwill theGilgameshProject– thequest for immortality– take tocomplete?Ahundredyears?Fivehundredyears?Athousandyears?Whenwerecall how little we knew about the human body in 1900, and how muchknowledge we have gained in a single century, there is cause for optimism.GeneticengineershaverecentlymanagedtodoubletheaveragelifeexpectancyofCaenorhabditiselegansworms.12CouldtheydothesameforHomosapiens?Nanotechnology experts are developing a bionic immune system composed ofmillions of nano-robots, who would inhabit our bodies, open blocked bloodvessels, fight viruses and bacteria, eliminate cancerous cells and even reverseageingprocesses.13Afewseriousscholarssuggest thatby2050,somehumanswill become a-mortal (not immortal, because they could still die of someaccident, but a-mortal,meaning that in the absence of fatal trauma their livescouldbeextendedindefinitely).

WhetherornotProjectGilgameshsucceeds,fromahistoricalperspectiveitisfascinatingtoseethatmostlate-modernreligionsandideologieshavealreadytaken death and the afterlife out of the equation.Until the eighteenth century,religions considered death and its aftermath central to the meaning of life.Beginningintheeighteenthcentury,religionsandideologiessuchasliberalism,socialismandfeminismlostallinterestintheafterlife.What,exactly,happenstoaCommunistafterheorshedies?Whathappenstoacapitalist?Whathappensto a feminist? It is pointless to look for the answer in the writings ofMarx,AdamSmithorSimonedeBeauvoir.Theonlymodernideologythatstillawardsdeath a central role is nationalism. In itsmore poetic and desperatemoments,nationalism promises that whoever dies for the nation will forever live in itscollectivememory.Yet thispromise is so fuzzy thatevenmostnationalistsdonotreallyknowwhattomakeofit.

TheSugarDaddyofScienceWe are living in a technical age. Many are convinced that science and

technologyholdtheanswerstoallourproblems.Weshouldjustletthescientistsandtechniciansgoonwiththeirwork,andtheywillcreateheavenhereonearth.But science is not an enterprise that takes place on some superior moral orspiritual plane above the rest of human activity. Like all other parts of ourculture,itisshapedbyeconomic,politicalandreligiousinterests.

Science is a very expensive affair. A biologist seeking to understand thehumanimmunesystemrequires laboratories, test tubes,chemicalsandelectronmicroscopes,not tomention labassistants,electricians,plumbersandcleaners.Aneconomistseekingtomodelcreditmarketsmustbuycomputers,setupgiant

databanksanddevelopcomplicateddata-processingprograms.Anarchaeologistwhowishestounderstandthebehaviourofarchaichunter-gatherersmusttraveltodistant lands, excavateancient ruinsanddate fossilisedbonesandartefacts.Allofthiscostsmoney.

During the past 500 years modern science has achieved wonders thankslargely to thewillingness of governments, businesses, foundations and privatedonorstochannelbillionsofdollarsintoscientificresearch.Thesebillionshavedonemuchmoretocharttheuniverse,maptheplanetandcataloguetheanimalkingdomthandidGalileoGalilei,ChristopherColumbusandCharlesDarwin.Ifthese particular geniuses had never been born, their insights would probablyhave occurred to others. But if the proper funding were unavailable, nointellectualbrilliancecouldhavecompensatedforthat.IfDarwinhadneverbeenborn,forexample,we’dtodayattributethetheoryofevolutiontoAlfredRusselWallace, who came up with the idea of evolution via natural selectionindependentlyofDarwinandjustafewyearslater.ButiftheEuropeanpowershad not financed geographical, zoological and botanical research around theworld,neitherDarwinnorWallacewouldhavehadthenecessaryempiricaldatato develop the theory of evolution. It is likely that theywould not even havetried.

Whydidthebillionsstartflowingfromgovernmentandbusinesscoffersintolabsanduniversities?Inacademiccircles,manyarenaïveenoughtobelieveinpurescience.Theybelievethatgovernmentandbusinessaltruisticallygivethemmoney to pursuewhatever research projects strike their fancy.But this hardlydescribestherealitiesofsciencefunding.

Mostscientificstudiesarefundedbecausesomebodybelievestheycanhelpattainsomepolitical,economicorreligiousgoal.Forexample, in thesixteenthcentury, kings and bankers channelled enormous resources to financegeographical expeditions around theworld but not a penny for studying childpsychology.This is because kings and bankers surmised that the discovery ofnewgeographicalknowledgewouldenable themtoconquernewlandsandsetup trade empires,whereas they couldn’t see any profit in understanding childpsychology.

In the1940s thegovernmentsofAmericaand theSovietUnionchannelledenormous resources to the study of nuclear physics rather than underwaterarchaeology.Theysurmisedthatstudyingnuclearphysicswouldenablethemtodevelopnuclearweapons,whereasunderwaterarchaeologywasunlikelytohelpwinwars.Scientiststhemselvesarenotalwaysawareofthepolitical,economicandreligiousintereststhatcontroltheflowofmoney;manyscientistsdo,infact,actoutofpure intellectualcuriosity.However,only rarelydoscientistsdictate

thescientificagenda.Evenifwewantedtofinancepurescienceunaffectedbypolitical,economic

orreligiousinterests,itwouldprobablybeimpossible.Ourresourcesarelimited,after all. Ask a congressman to allocate an additional million dollars to theNationalScienceFoundationforbasicresearch,andhe’lljustifiablyaskwhetherthatmoneywouldn’tbebetterusedtofundteachertrainingortogiveaneededtaxbreak toa troubled factory inhisdistrict.Tochannel limited resourceswemustanswerquestionssuchas‘Whatismoreimportant?’and‘Whatisgood?’And these are not scientific questions. Science can explainwhat exists in theworld,howthingswork,andwhatmightbeinthefuture.Bydefinition,ithasnopretensions to knowing what should be in the future. Only religions andideologiesseektoanswersuchquestions.

Considerthefollowingquandary:twobiologistsfromthesamedepartment,possessing the same professional skills, have both applied for amillion-dollargrant to finance their current research projects. Professor Slughorn wants tostudyadiseasethatinfectstheuddersofcows,causinga10percentdecreaseintheir milk production. Professor Sprout wants to study whether cows suffermentallywhentheyareseparatedfromtheircalves.Assumingthat theamountofmoneyis limited,andthat it is impossible tofinancebothresearchprojects,whichoneshouldbefunded?

There is no scientific answer to this question. There are only political,economic and religious answers. In today’sworld, it is obvious that Slughornhas a better chance of getting the money. Not because udder diseases arescientifically more interesting than bovine mentality, but because the dairyindustry, which stands to benefit from the research, has more political andeconomiccloutthantheanimal-rightslobby.

Perhaps in a strict Hindu society, where cows are sacred, or in a societycommitted to animal rights,ProfessorSproutwouldhave abetter shot.But aslongasshelivesinasocietythatvaluesthecommercialpotentialofmilkandthehealthof itshumancitizensover the feelingsof cows, she’dbestwriteupherresearchproposalsoastoappealtothoseassumptions.Forexample,shemightwritethat‘Depressionleadstoadecreaseinmilkproduction.Ifweunderstandthementalworld of dairy cows,we could developpsychiatricmedication thatwill improve theirmood, thus raisingmilk production by up to 10 per cent. Iestimate that there is a global annual market of $250 million for bovinepsychiatricmedications.’

Scienceisunabletosetitsownpriorities.Itisalsoincapableofdeterminingwhattodowithitsdiscoveries.Forexample,fromapurelyscientificviewpointit isunclearwhatweshoulddowithour increasingunderstandingofgenetics.

Should we use this knowledge to cure cancer, to create a race of geneticallyengineered supermen, or to engineerdairy cowswith super-sizedudders? It isobviousthataliberalgovernment,aCommunistgovernment,aNazigovernmentand a capitalist business corporation would use the very same scientificdiscoveryforcompletelydifferentpurposes,andthereisnoscientific reason topreferoneusageoverothers.

Inshort,scientificresearchcanflourishonlyinalliancewithsomereligionor ideology. The ideology justifies the costs of the research. In exchange, theideology influences the scientific agenda and determines what to do with thediscoveries. Hence in order to comprehend how humankind has reachedAlamogordoandthemoon–ratherthananynumberofalternativedestinations–it is not enough to survey the achievements of physicists, biologists andsociologists. We have to take into account the ideological, political andeconomic forces that shaped physics, biology and sociology, pushing them incertaindirectionswhileneglectingothers.

Two forces inparticular deserveour attention: imperialismand capitalism.The feedback loop between science, empire and capital has arguably beenhistory’schiefengineforthepast500years.Thefollowingchaptersanalyseitsworkings.Firstwe’lllookathowthetwinturbinesofscienceandempirewerelatched tooneanother,and then learnhowbothwerehitchedup to themoneypumpofcapitalism.

15

TheMarriageofScienceandEmpire

HOWFARISTHESUNFROMTHEEARTH?It’saquestionthatintriguedmany earlymodern astronomers, particularly after Copernicus argued that thesun,rather thantheearth, is locatedat thecentreof theuniverse.Anumberofastronomers and mathematicians tried to calculate the distance, but theirmethods provided widely varying results. A reliable means of making themeasurement was finally proposed in the middle of the eighteenth century.Everyfewyears,theplanetVenuspassesdirectlybetweenthesunandtheearth.Thedurationof the transit differswhen seen fromdistant points on the earthssurfacebecauseofthetinydifferenceintheangleatwhichtheobserverseesit.Ifseveralobservationsofthesametransitweremadefromdifferentcontinents,simple trigonometrywasall itwould take tocalculateourexactdistance fromthesun.

AstronomerspredictedthatthenextVenustransitswouldoccurin1761and1769.SoexpeditionsweresentfromEuropetothefourcornersoftheworldinorder to observe the transits from asmany distant points as possible. In 1761scientists observed the transit from Siberia, North America, Madagascar andSouth Africa. As the 1769 transit approached, the European scientificcommunitymounteda supremeeffort, and scientistsweredispatchedas far asnorthern Canada and California (which was then a wilderness). The RoyalSocietyofLondon for the ImprovementofNaturalKnowledge concluded thatthiswas not enough. To obtain themost accurate results itwas imperative tosendanastronomerallthewaytothesouth-westernPacificOcean.

TheRoyalSocietyresolvedtosendaneminentastronomer,CharlesGreen,toTahiti,andsparedneithereffortnormoney.But,sinceitwasfundingsuchanexpensive expedition, it hardly made sense to use it to make just a singleastronomicalobservation.Greenwasthereforeaccompaniedbyateamofeightotherscientistsfromseveraldisciplines,headedbybotanistsJosephBanksand

DanielSolander.Theteamalsoincludedartistsassignedtoproducedrawingsofthe new lands, plants, animals and peoples that the scientistswould no doubtencounter.Equippedwith themost advanced scientific instruments thatBanksandtheRoyalSocietycouldbuy,theexpeditionwasplacedunderthecommandof Captain James Cook, an experienced seaman as well as an accomplishedgeographerandethnographer.

TheexpeditionleftEnglandin1768,observedtheVenustransitfromTahitiin1769,reconnoitredseveralPacificislands,visitedAustraliaandNewZealand,and returned to England in 1771. It brought back enormous quantities ofastronomical, geographical, meteorological, botanical, zoological andanthropological data. Its findings made major contributions to a number ofdisciplines, sparked the imaginationofEuropeanswithastonishing talesof theSouthPacific,andinspiredfuturegenerationsofnaturalistsandastronomers.

OneofthefieldsthatbenefitedfromtheCookexpeditionwasmedicine.Atthetime,shipsthatsetsailtodistantshoresknewthatmorethanhalftheircrewmemberswoulddieonthejourney.Thenemesiswasnotangrynatives,enemywarshipsorhomesickness.Itwasamysteriousailmentcalledscurvy.Menwhocamedownwith thediseasegrew lethargicanddepressed,and theirgumsandothersofttissuesbled.Asthediseaseprogressed,theirteethfellout,opensoresappeared and they grew feverish, jaundiced, and lost control of their limbs.Between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries, scurvy is estimated to haveclaimedthelivesofabout2millionsailors.Nooneknewwhatcausedit,andnomatterwhat remedywas tried, sailors continued to die in droves. The turningpoint came in 1747, when a British physician, James Lind, conducted acontrolled experiment on sailors who suffered from the disease. He separatedthemintoseveralgroupsandgaveeachgroupadifferenttreatment.Oneofthetestgroupswasinstructedtoeatcitrusfruits,acommonfolkremedyforscurvy.Thepatientsinthisgrouppromptlyrecovered.Linddidnotknowwhatthecitrusfruitshadthatthesailors’bodieslacked,butwenowknowthatitisvitaminC.Atypicalshipboarddietat that timewasnotablylackinginfoodsthatarerichinthis essential nutrient. On long-range voyages sailors usually subsisted onbiscuitsandbeefjerky,andatealmostnofruitsorvegetables.

TheRoyalNavywasnotconvincedbyLind’sexperiments,butJamesCookwas. He resolved to prove the doctor right. He loaded his boat with a largequantity of sauerkraut and ordered his sailors to eat lots of fresh fruits andvegetableswhenever the expeditionmade landfall. Cook did not lose a singlesailortoscurvy.Inthefollowingdecades,alltheworld’snaviesadoptedCook’snauticaldiet,andthelivesofcountlesssailorsandpassengersweresaved.1

However,theCookexpeditionhadanother,farlessbenignresult.Cookwas

not only an experienced seaman andgeographer, but also a naval officer.TheRoyal Society financed a large part of the expedition’s expenses, but the shipitselfwasprovidedbytheRoyalNavy.Thenavyalsosecondedeighty-fivewell-armed sailors and marines, and equipped the ship with artillery, muskets,gunpowder and other weaponry. Much of the information collected by theexpedition particularly the astronomical, geographical, meteorological andanthropologicaldata–wasofobviouspoliticalandmilitaryvalue.ThediscoveryofaneffectivetreatmentforscurvygreatlycontributedtoBritishcontroloftheworld’soceansanditsabilitytosendarmiestotheothersideoftheworld.CookclaimedforBritainmanyoftheislandsandlandshe‘discovered’,mostnotablyAustralia.TheCookexpeditionlaidthefoundationfortheBritishoccupationofthe south-western Pacific Ocean; for the conquest of Australia, Tasmania andNewZealand;for thesettlementofmillionsofEuropeans in thenewcolonies;and for the extermination of their native cultures and most of their nativepopulations.2

In the century following the Cook expedition, the most fertile lands ofAustralia and New Zealand were taken from their previous inhabitants byEuropeansettlers.Thenativepopulationdroppedbyup to90percentand thesurvivors were subjected to a harsh regime of racial oppression. For theAborigines ofAustralia and theMaoris ofNewZealand, theCook expeditionwasthebeginningofacatastrophefromwhichtheyhaveneverrecovered.

An even worse fate befell the natives of Tasmania. Having survived for10,000years in splendid isolation, theywerecompletelywipedout, to the lastman,womanandchild,withinacenturyofCook’sarrival.Europeansettlersfirstdrove them off the richest parts of the island, and then, coveting even theremainingwilderness, hunted them down and killed them systematically. Thefew survivors were hounded into an evangelical concentration camp, wherewell-meaningbutnotparticularlyopen-mindedmissionariestriedtoindoctrinatethem in the ways of the modern world. The Tasmanians were instructed inreadingandwriting,Christianityandvarious‘productiveskills’suchassewingclothes and farming. But they refused to learn. They became ever moremelancholic, stoppedhavingchildren, lostall interest in life,and finallychosetheonlyescaperoutefromthemodernworldofscienceandprogress–death.

Alas,scienceandprogresspursuedthemeventotheafterlife.ThecorpsesofthelastTasmanianswereseizedin thenameofsciencebyanthropologistsandcurators.Theyweredissected,weighedandmeasured,andanalysed in learnedarticles. The skulls and skeletons were then put on display in museums andanthropological collections.Only in 1976did theTasmanianMuseumgiveupforburial theskeletonofTruganini, thelastnativeTasmanian,whohaddieda

hundred years earlier. The English Royal College of Surgeons held on tosamplesofherskinandhairuntil2002.

WasCook’s ship a scientific expedition protected by amilitary force or amilitary expedition with a few scientists tagging along? That’s like askingwhetheryourpetrol tank ishalfemptyorhalf full. Itwasboth.TheScientificRevolution andmodern imperialismwere inseparable. People such asCaptainJamesCookandthebotanistJosephBankscouldhardlydistinguishsciencefromempire.NorcouldlucklessTruganini.

WhyEurope?ThefactthatpeoplefromalargeislandinthenorthernAtlanticconquereda

largeislandsouthofAustraliaisoneofhistory’smorebizarreoccurrences.NotlongbeforeCook’sexpedition, theBritishIslesandwesternEurope ingeneralwere but distant backwaters of theMediterranean world. Little of importanceeverhappened there.Even theRomanEmpire– theonly importantpremodernEuropean empire – derivedmost of itswealth from itsNorthAfrican,BalkanandMiddleEasternprovinces.Rome’swesternEuropeanprovinceswereapoorWildWest, which contributed little aside fromminerals and slaves. NorthernEuropewassodesolateandbarbarousthatitwasn’tevenworthconquering.

35.Truganini,thelastnativeTasmanian.

Only at the end of the fifteenth century didEurope become a hothouse ofimportant military, political, economic and cultural developments. Between1500 and 1750,western Europe gainedmomentum and becamemaster of the‘OuterWorld’,meaningthetwoAmericancontinentsandtheoceans.YeteventhenEuropewasnomatchforthegreatpowersofAsia.EuropeansmanagedtoconquerAmericaandgainsupremacyatseamainlybecausetheAsiaticpowersshowed little interest in them.The earlymodern erawas a golden age for theOttomanEmpireintheMediterranean,theSafavidEmpireinPersia,theMughalEmpireinIndia,andtheChineseMingandQingdynasties.Theyexpandedtheirterritories significantly and enjoyedunprecedenteddemographic and economicgrowth. In 1775 Asia accounted for 80 per cent of the world economy. ThecombinedeconomiesofIndiaandChinaalonerepresentedtwo-thirdsofglobalproduction.Incomparison,Europewasaneconomicdwarf.3

TheglobalcentreofpowershiftedtoEuropeonlybetween1750and1850,

whenEuropeanshumiliatedtheAsianpowersinaseriesofwarsandconqueredlargeparts ofAsia.By1900Europeans firmly controlled theworlds economyandmostofitsterritory.In1950westernEuropeandtheUnitedStatestogetheraccountedformorethanhalfofglobalproduction,whereasChinasportionhadbeenreducedto5percent.4Under theEuropeanaegisanewglobalorderandglobalcultureemerged.Todayallhumansare,toamuchgreaterextentthantheyusually want to admit, European in dress, thought and taste. They may befiercelyanti-Europeanintheirrhetoric,butalmosteveryoneontheplanetviewspolitics, medicine, war and economics through European eyes, and listens tomusic written in European modes with words in European languages. Eventoday’s burgeoning Chinese economy, which may soon regain its globalprimacy,isbuiltonaEuropeanmodelofproductionandfinance.

Howdid thepeopleof this frigid fingerofEurasiamanage tobreakoutoftheir remote corner of the globe and conquer the entire world? Europe’sscientistsareoftengivenmuchofthecredit.It’sunquestionablethatfrom1850onwardEuropeandominationrestedtoalargeextentonthemilitary–industrial–scientific complex and technological wizardry. All successful late modernempires cultivated scientific research in the hope of harvesting technologicalinnovations, and many scientists spent most of their time working on arms,medicines andmachines for their imperialmasters.A common saying amongEuropean soldiers facing African enemies was, ‘Come what may, we havemachine guns, and they don’t.’ Civilian technologies were no less important.Cannedfoodfedsoldiers,railroadsandsteamshipstransportedsoldiersandtheirprovisions, while a new arsenal of medicines cured soldiers, sailors andlocomotiveengineers.These logisticaladvancesplayedamore significant roleintheEuropeanconquestofAfricathandidthemachinegun.

But that wasn’t the case before 1850. The military-industrial-scientificcomplex was still in its infancy; the technological fruits of the ScientificRevolutionwere unripe; and the technological gap betweenEuropean,Asiaticand African powers was small. In 1770, James Cook certainly had far bettertechnology than the Australian Aborigines, but so did the Chinese and theOttomans.Why then was Australia explored and colonised by Captain JamesCook and not by Captain Wan Zhengse or Captain Hussein Pasha? Moreimportantly, if in 1770 Europeans had no significant technological advantageover Muslims, Indians and Chinese, how did they manage in the followingcenturytoopensuchagapbetweenthemselvesandtherestoftheworld?

Whydidthemilitary-industrial-scientificcomplexblossominEuroperatherthan India?WhenBritain leaped forward,whywereFrance,Germanyand theUnited States quick to follow, whereas China lagged behind? When the gap

betweenindustrialandnon-industrialnationsbecameanobviouseconomicandpoliticalfactor,whydidRussia,ItalyandAustriasucceedinclosingit,whereasPersia,Egypt and theOttomanEmpire failed?After all, the technologyof thefirst industrial wave was relatively simple. Was it so hard for Chinese orOttomans toengineer steamengines,manufacturemachinegunsand laydownrailroads?

The world’s first commercial railroad opened for business in 1830, inBritain. By 1850, Western nations were criss-crossed by almost 40,000kilometres of railroads – but in thewhole ofAsia, Africa and LatinAmericatherewereonly4,000kilometresoftracks.In1880,theWestboastedmorethan350,000kilometresofrailroads,whereasintherestoftheworldtherewerebut35,000kilometresof train lines (andmostof thesewere laidby theBritish inIndia).5 The first railroad in China opened only in 1876. It was twenty-fivekilometres longandbuiltbyEuropeans– theChinesegovernmentdestroyed itthefollowingyear.In1880theChineseEmpiredidnotoperateasinglerailroad.ThefirstrailroadinPersiawasbuiltonlyin1888,anditconnectedTehranwithaMuslimholysiteabouttenkilometressouthofthecapital.ItwasconstructedandoperatedbyaBelgiancompany.In1950,thetotalrailwaynetworkofPersiastillamountedtoameagre2,500kilometres,inacountryseventimesthesizeofBritain.6

The Chinese and Persians did not lack technological inventions such assteamengines(whichcouldbefreelycopiedorbought).Theylackedthevalues,myths,judicialapparatusandsociopoliticalstructuresthattookcenturiestoformandmatureintheWestandwhichcouldnotbecopiedandinternalisedrapidly.FranceandtheUnitedStatesquicklyfollowedinBritain’sfootstepsbecausetheFrench and Americans already shared the most important British myths andsocial structures. The Chinese and Persians could not catch up as quicklybecausetheythoughtandorganisedtheirsocietiesdifferently.

Thisexplanationshedsnew lighton theperiod from1500 to1850.Duringthis era Europe did not enjoy any obvious technological, political,military oreconomicadvantageovertheAsianpowers,yetthecontinentbuiltupauniquepotential, whose importance suddenly became obvious around 1850. TheapparentequalitybetweenEurope,ChinaandtheMuslimworldin1750wasamirage. Imagine two builders, each busy constructing very tall towers. Onebuilderuseswoodandmudbricks,whereastheotherusessteelandconcrete.Atfirst it seems that there is notmuchof adifferencebetween the twomethods,sinceboth towersgrowata similarpaceand reacha similarheight.However,oncea critical threshold is crossed, thewoodandmud tower cannot stand the

strain and collapses, whereas the steel and concrete tower grows storey bystorey,asfarastheeyecansee.

WhatpotentialdidEuropedevelopintheearlymodernperiodthatenableditto dominate the latemodernworld?There are two complementary answers tothisquestion:modernscienceandcapitalism.Europeanswereused to thinkingand behaving in a scientific and capitalist way even before they enjoyed anysignificant technological advantages. When the technological bonanza began,Europeans could harness it far better than anybody else. So it is hardlycoincidental that science and capitalism form the most important legacy thatEuropean imperialism has bequeathed the post-Europeanworld of the twenty-first century.Europe andEuropeansno longer rule theworld, but science andcapital are growing ever stronger.The victories of capitalism are examined inthe following chapter. This chapter is dedicated to the love story betweenEuropeanimperialismandmodernscience.

TheMentalityofConquestModernscienceflourishedinandthankstoEuropeanempires.Thediscipline

obviously owes a huge debt to ancient scientific traditions, such as those ofclassicalGreece,China,IndiaandIslam,yet itsuniquecharacterbegantotakeshapeonlyintheearlymodernperiod,handinhandwiththeimperialexpansionofSpain,Portugal,Britain,France,RussiaandtheNetherlands.Duringtheearlymodernperiod,Chinese, Indians,Muslims,NativeAmericans andPolynesianscontinued to make important contributions to the Scientific Revolution. Theinsights ofMuslim economists were studied by Adam Smith and KarlMarx,treatmentspioneeredbyNativeAmericandoctorsfoundtheirwayintoEnglishmedical texts and data extracted from Polynesian informants revolutionisedWestern anthropology. But until the mid-twentieth century, the people whocollatedthesemyriadscientificdiscoveries,creatingscientificdisciplinesintheprocess,were the rulingand intellectualelitesof theglobalEuropeanempires.TheFarEastandtheIslamicworldproducedmindsasintelligentandcuriousasthose of Europe. However, between 1500 and 1950 they did not produceanythingthatcomesevenclosetoNewtonianphysicsorDarwinianbiology.

Thisdoesnotmean thatEuropeanshaveauniquegene forscience,or thattheywillforeverdominatethestudyofphysicsandbiology.JustasIslambeganasanArabmonopolybutwassubsequentlytakenoverbyTurksandPersians,somodernsciencebeganasaEuropeanspeciality,butistodaybecomingamulti-ethnicenterprise.

What forged the historical bond between modern science and European

imperialism? Technology was an important factor in the nineteenth andtwentiethcenturies,butintheearlymoderneraitwasoflimitedimportance.Thekey factor was that the plant-seeking botanist and the colony-seeking navalofficer shared a similar mindset. Both scientist and conqueror began byadmittingignorance–theybothsaid,‘Idon’tknowwhat’soutthere.’Theybothfelt compelled to go out andmake newdiscoveries.And they both hoped thenewknowledgethusacquiredwouldmakethemmastersoftheworld.

European imperialism was entirely unlike all other imperial projects inhistory. Previous seekers of empire tended to assume that they alreadyunderstood the world. Conquest merely utilised and spread their view of theworld.TheArabs,tonameoneexample,didnotconquerEgypt,SpainorIndiainorder todiscover something theydidnotknow.TheRomans,Mongols andAztecsvoraciouslyconquerednewlandsinsearchofpowerandwealth–notofknowledge. In contrast, European imperialists set out to distant shores in thehopeofobtainingnewknowledgealongwithnewterritories.

JamesCookwasnotthefirstexplorertothinkthisway.ThePortugueseandSpanish voyagers of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries already did. PrinceHenry the Navigator and Vasco da Gama explored the coasts of Africa and,while doing so, seized control of islands and harbours.ChristopherColumbus‘discovered’AmericaandimmediatelyclaimedsovereigntyoverthenewlandsforthekingsofSpain.FerdinandMagellanfoundawayaroundtheworld,andsimultaneouslylaidthefoundationfortheSpanishconquestofthePhilippines.

As timewent by, the conquest of knowledge and the conquest of territorybecameevermoretightlyintertwined.Intheeighteenthandnineteenthcenturies,almosteveryimportantmilitaryexpeditionthatleftEuropefordistantlandshadonboard scientistswho set out not to fight but tomake scientific discoveries.WhenNapoleoninvadedEgyptin1798,hetook165scholarswithhim.Amongother things, they founded an entirely new discipline, Egyptology, and madeimportantcontributionstothestudyofreligion,linguisticsandbotany.

In 1831, the Royal Navy sent the shipHMSBeagle tomap the coasts ofSouth America, the Falklands Islands and the Galapagos Islands. The navyneeded thisknowledge inorder tobebetterprepared in the eventofwar.Theship’scaptain,whowasanamateurscientist,decided toaddageologist to theexpedition to study geological formations they might encounter on the way.After several professional geologists refusedhis invitation, the captain offeredthe job toa twenty-two-year-oldCambridgegraduate,CharlesDarwin.Darwinhad studied to become an Anglican parson but was far more interested ingeology andnatural sciences than in theBible.He jumped at the opportunity,

andtherestishistory.ThecaptainspenthistimeonthevoyagedrawingmilitarymapswhileDarwincollectedtheempiricaldataandformulatedtheinsightsthatwouldeventuallybecomethetheoryofevolution.

On20July1969,NeilArmstrongandBuzzAldrinlandedonthesurfaceofthemoon.Inthemonthsleadinguptotheirexpedition,theApollo11astronautstrained in a remotemoon-likedesert in thewesternUnitedStates.The area ishometoseveralNativeAmericancommunities,andthereisastory–orlegend–describinganencounterbetweentheastronautsandoneofthelocals.

One day as they were training, the astronauts came across an old NativeAmerican.Themanasked themwhat theyweredoing there.They replied thattheywerepartofaresearchexpeditionthatwouldshortlytravel toexplorethemoon.Whentheoldmanheardthat,hefellsilentforafewmoments,andthenaskedtheastronautsiftheycoulddohimafavour.

‘Whatdoyouwant?’theyasked.‘Well,’saidtheoldman,‘thepeopleofmytribebelievethatholyspiritslive

onthemoon.Iwaswonderingifyoucouldpassanimportantmessagetothemfrommypeople.’

‘What’sthemessage?’askedtheastronauts.The man uttered something in his tribal language, and then asked the

astronautstorepeatitagainandagainuntiltheyhadmemoriseditcorrectly.‘Whatdoesitmean?’askedtheastronauts.‘Oh,Icannottellyou.It’sasecretthatonlyourtribeandthemoonspiritsare

allowedtoknow.’Whentheyreturnedtotheirbase,theastronautssearchedandsearcheduntil

they found someone who could speak the tribal language, and asked him totranslatethesecretmessage.Whentheyrepeatedwhattheyhadmemorised,thetranslator started to laughuproariously.Whenhe calmeddown, the astronautsasked him what it meant. The man explained that the sentence they hadmemorised so carefully said, ‘Don’t believe a single word these people aretellingyou.Theyhavecometostealyourlands.’

EmptyMapsThe modern ‘explore and conquer’ mentality is nicely illustrated by the

development ofworldmaps.Many cultures drewworldmaps long before themodernage.Obviously,noneof themreallyknew thewholeof theworld.NoAfro-AsiancultureknewaboutAmerica,andnoAmericancultureknewaboutAfro-Asia.But unfamiliar areaswere simply left out, or filledwith imaginary

monsters and wonders. These maps had no empty spaces. They gave theimpressionofafamiliaritywiththeentireworld.

Duringthefifteenthandsixteenthcenturies,Europeansbegantodrawworldmaps with lots of empty spaces – one indication of the development of thescientificmindset, aswell asof theEuropean imperialdrive.Theemptymapswere a psychological and ideological breakthrough, a clear admission thatEuropeanswereignorantoflargepartsoftheworld.

Thecrucialturningpointcamein1492,whenChristopherColumbussailedwestwardfromSpain,seekinganewroutetoEastAsia.Columbusstillbelievedintheold‘complete’worldmaps.Usingthem,ColumbuscalculatedthatJapanshould have been located about 7,000 kilometreswest of Spain. In fact,morethan20,000kilometresandanentireunknowncontinentseparateEastAsiafromSpain.On12October1492,atabout2:00a.m.,Columbus’expeditioncollidedwiththeunknowncontinent.JuanRodriguezBermejo,watchingfromthemastof the ship Pinta, spotted an island in what we now call the Bahamas, andshouted‘Land!Land!’

Columbusbelievedhehad reachedasmall islandoff theEastAsiancoast.Hecalledthepeoplehefoundthere‘Indians’becausehethoughthehadlandedintheIndies–whatwenowcalltheEastIndiesortheIndonesianarchipelago.Columbus stuck to this error for the rest of his life. The idea that he haddiscoveredacompletelyunknowncontinentwasinconceivableforhimandformany of his generation. For thousands of years, not only the greatest thinkersand scholars but also the infallible Scriptures had known only Europe,AfricaandAsia.Couldtheyallhavebeenwrong?CouldtheBiblehavemissedhalftheworld?Itwouldbeasifin1969,onitswaytothemoon,Apollo11hadcrashedintoahithertounknownmooncirclingtheearth,whichallpreviousobservationshad somehow failed to spot. In his refusal to admit ignorance,Columbuswasstillamedievalman.Hewasconvincedheknewthewholeworld,andevenhismomentousdiscoveryfailedtoconvincehimotherwise.

36.AEuropeanworldmapfrom1459(Europeisinthetopleftcorner).The map is filled with details, even when depicting areas that werecompletelyunfamiliartoEuropeans,suchassouthernAfrica.

ThefirstmodernmanwasAmerigoVespucci,anItaliansailorwhotookpartin several expeditions toAmerica in the years 1499–1504.Between 1502 and1504, two texts describing these expeditions were published in Europe. TheywereattributedtoVespucci.ThesetextsarguedthatthenewlandsdiscoveredbyColumbus were not islands off the East Asian coast, but rather an entirecontinent unknown to the Scriptures, classical geographers and contemporaryEuropeans. In 1507, convinced by these arguments, a respected mapmakernamedMartinWaldseemüllerpublishedanupdatedworldmap,thefirsttoshowthe place where Europe’s westward-sailing fleets had landed as a separatecontinent.Havingdrawn it,Waldseemüllerhad togive it aname.Erroneouslybelieving that Amerigo Vespucci had been the person who discovered it,Waldseemüller named the continent in his honour – America. The

Waldseemüller map became very popular and was copied by many othercartographers, spreading the namehe had given the new land.There is poeticjusticeinthefactthataquarteroftheworld,andtwoofitssevencontinents,arenamedafter a little-known Italianwhose sole claim to fame is thathehad thecouragetosay,‘Wedon’tknow.’

The discovery of America was the foundational event of the ScientificRevolution. It not only taught Europeans to favour present observations overpast traditions, but the desire to conquer America also obliged Europeans tosearchfornewknowledgeatbreakneckspeed. If theyreallywanted tocontrolthevastnewterritories,theyhadtogatherenormousamountsofnewdataaboutthegeography,climate,flora,fauna,languages,culturesandhistoryofthenewcontinent.ChristianScriptures,oldgeographybooksandancientoraltraditionswereoflittlehelp.

HenceforthnotonlyEuropeangeographers,butEuropeanscholarsinalmostallotherfieldsofknowledgebegantodrawmapswithspaceslefttofillin.Theybegantoadmitthattheirtheorieswerenotperfectandthattherewereimportantthingsthattheydidnotknow.

TheEuropeanswere drawn to the blank spots on themap as if theyweremagnets,andpromptlystartedfillingthemin.Duringthefifteenthandsixteenthcenturies, European expeditions circumnavigated Africa, explored America,crossed the Pacific and Indian Oceans, and created a network of bases andcoloniesallover theworld.Theyestablished the first trulyglobalempiresandknitted together the first global trade network. The European imperialexpeditionstransformedthehistoryoftheworld:frombeingaseriesofhistoriesof isolated peoples and cultures, it became the history of a single integratedhumansociety.

37.TheSalviatiWorldMap,1525.Whilethe1459worldmapisfullofcontinents, islands and detailed explanations, the Salviati map is mostlyempty.TheeyewanderssouthalongtheAmericancoastline,untilitpetersinto emptiness. Anyone looking at the map and possessing even minimalcuriosity is temptedtoask, ‘What’sbeyondthispoint?’Themapgivesnoanswers.Itinvitestheobservertosetsailandfindout.

TheseEuropean explore-and-conquer expeditions are so familiar to us thatwe tend to overlook just how extraordinary theywere.Nothing like themhadever happened before. Long-distance campaigns of conquest are not a naturalundertaking.Throughouthistorymosthumansocietiesweresobusywithlocalconflictsandneighbourhoodquarrels that theyneverconsideredexploringandconquering distant lands.Most great empires extended their control only overtheir immediate neighbourhood – they reached far-flung lands simply becausetheir neighbourhood kept expanding. Thus the Romans conquered Etruria inorder todefendRome (c.350–300BC).They thenconquered thePoValley inorder todefendEtruria (c.200BC).They subsequently conqueredProvence todefend the Po Valley (c.120 BC), Gaul to defend Provence (c.50 BC), andBritaininordertodefendGaul(c.AD50).It tookthem400years togetfromRome to London. In 350 BC, no Roman would have conceived of sailingdirectlytoBritainandconqueringit.

Occasionallyanambitiousruleroradventurerwouldembarkonalong-rangecampaign of conquest, but such campaigns usually followed well-beatenimperial or commercial paths. The campaigns of Alexander the Great, forexample,didnot result in theestablishmentofanewempire,but rather in theusurpationofanexistingempire–thatofthePersians.Theclosestprecedentstothe modern European empires were the ancient naval empires of Athens andCarthage, and themedieval naval empire ofMajapahit,which held sway overmuch of Indonesia in the fourteenth century. Yet even these empires rarelyventuredintounknownseas–theirnavalexploitswerelocalundertakingswhencomparedtotheglobalventuresofthemodernEuropeans.

ManyscholarsarguethatthevoyagesofAdmiralZhengHeoftheChineseMing dynasty heralded and eclipsed the European voyages of discovery.Between1405and1433,ZhengledsevenhugearmadasfromChina to thefarreaches of the IndianOcean.The largest of these comprised almost 300 shipsandcarriedcloseto30,000people.7TheyvisitedIndonesia,SriLanka,India,thePersianGulf,theRedSeaandEastAfrica.ChineseshipsanchoredinJedda,themainharbouroftheHejaz,andinMalindi,ontheKenyancoast.Columbus’fleetof1492–whichconsistedofthreesmallshipsmannedby120sailors–waslike

atrioofmosquitoescomparedtoZhengHe’sdroveofdragons.8Yet there was a crucial difference. Zheng He explored the oceans, and

assisted pro-Chinese rulers, but he did not try to conquer or colonise thecountries he visited.Moreover, the expeditions of ZhengHewere not deeplyrooted in Chinese politics and culture. When the ruling faction in Beijingchangedduringthe1430s,thenewoverlordsabruptlyterminatedtheoperation.The great fleet was dismantled, crucial technical and geographical knowledgewas lost, andnoexplorerof such statureandmeansever setout again fromaChineseport.Chineserulersinthecomingcenturies,likemostChineserulersinprevious centuries, restricted their interests and ambitions to the MiddleKingdom’simmediateenvirons.

TheZhengHeexpeditionsprove thatEuropedidnot enjoyanoutstandingtechnological edge.What made Europeans exceptional was their unparalleledandinsatiableambition toexploreandconquer.Althoughtheymighthavehadthe ability, the Romans never attempted to conquer India or Scandinavia, thePersians never attempted to conquer Madagascar or Spain, and the Chineseneverattempted toconquer IndonesiaorAfrica.MostChinese rulers left evennearby Japan to its own devices. There was nothing peculiar about that. TheoddityisthatearlymodernEuropeanscaughtafeverthatdrovethemtosailtodistantandcompletelyunknownlandsfullofaliencultures,takeonestepontotheir beaches, and immediately declare, ‘I claim all these territories for myking!’

38.ZhengHe’sflagshipnexttothatofColumbus.

InvasionfromOuterSpaceAround1517,SpanishcolonistsintheCaribbeanislandsbegantohearvague

rumours about a powerful empire somewhere in the centre of the Mexicanmainland.Amerefouryearslater,theAzteccapitalwasasmoulderingruin,theAztecEmpirewasathingofthepast,andHernánCortéslordedoveravastnewSpanishEmpireinMexico.

TheSpaniardsdidnotstoptocongratulatethemselvesoreventocatchtheirbreath. They immediately commenced explore-and-conquer operations in alldirections.ThepreviousrulersofCentralAmerica–theAztecs,theToltecs,theMaya – barely knew South America existed, and never made any attempt tosubjugateit,overthecourseof2,000years.Yetwithinlittlemorethantenyearsof theSpanish conquest ofMexico,FranciscoPizarrohaddiscovered the IncaEmpireinSouthAmerica,vanquishingitin1532.

HadtheAztecsandIncasshownabitmoreinterestintheworldsurroundingthem–andhadtheyknownwhattheSpaniardshaddonetotheirneighbours–theymighthaveresistedtheSpanishconquestmorekeenlyandsuccessfully.IntheyearsseparatingColumbus’firstjourneytoAmerica(1492)fromthelandingof Cortés in Mexico (1519), the Spaniards conquered most of the Caribbeanislands, setting up a chain of new colonies. For the subjugated natives, thesecolonieswere hell on earth. Theywere ruledwith an iron fist by greedy andunscrupulouscolonistswhoenslaved themand set them towork inmines andplantations, killing anyone who offered the slightest resistance. Most of thenativepopulationsoondied,eitherbecauseof theharshworkingconditionsorthe virulence of the diseases that hitch-hiked to America on the conquerors’sailingships.Withintwentyyears,almosttheentirenativeCaribbeanpopulationwaswipedout.TheSpanishcolonistsbeganimportingAfricanslavestofillthevacuum.

ThisgenocidetookplaceontheverydoorstepoftheAztecEmpire,yetwhenCortés landedon theempire’seasterncoast, theAztecsknewnothingabout it.ThecomingoftheSpaniardswastheequivalentofanalieninvasionfromouterspace.TheAztecswereconvincedthattheyknewtheentireworldandthattheyruledmostof it.To them itwasunimaginable thatoutside theirdomaincouldexist anything like these Spaniards.When Cortés and his men landed on thesunnybeachesoftoday’sVeraCruz,itwasthefirsttimetheAztecsencounteredacompletelyunknownpeople.

TheAztecsdidnotknowhowtoreact.Theyhadtroubledecidingwhatthese

strangerswere.Unlikeallknownhumans,thealienshadwhiteskins.Theyalsohadlotsoffacialhair.Somehadhairthecolourofthesun.Theystankhorribly.(Nativehygienewas farbetter thanSpanishhygiene.When theSpaniards firstarrivedinMexico,nativesbearingincenseburnerswereassignedtoaccompanythemwherevertheywent.TheSpaniardsthoughtitwasamarkofdivinehonour.We know from native sources that they found the newcomers’ smellunbearable.)

Map7.TheAztecandIncaempiresatthetimeoftheSpanishconquest.

Thealiens’materialculturewasevenmorebewildering.Theycameingiantships,thelikeofwhichtheAztecshadneverimagined,letaloneseen.Theyrodeon the back of huge and terrifying animals, swift as the wind. They couldproducelightningandthunderoutofshinymetalsticks.Theyhadflashinglongswordsandimpenetrablearmour,againstwhichthenatives’woodenswordsandflintspearswereuseless.

Some Aztecs thought these must be gods. Others argued that they weredemons, or the ghosts of the dead, or powerful sorcerers. Instead ofconcentrating all available forces and wiping out the Spaniards, the Aztecsdeliberated, dawdled and negotiated. They saw no reason to rush. After all,

Cortéshadnomorethan550Spaniardswithhim.Whatcould550mendotoanempireofmillions?

Cortés was equally ignorant about the Aztecs, but he and his men heldsignificant advantages over their adversaries. While the Aztecs had noexperience to prepare them for the arrival of these strange-looking and foul-smellingaliens, theSpaniardsknewthat theearthwasfullofunknownhumanrealms,andnoonehadgreaterexpertiseininvadingalienlandsanddealingwithsituations about which they were utterly ignorant. For the modern Europeanconqueror, like themodernEuropeanscientist,plunginginto theunknownwasexhilarating.

So when Cortés anchored off that sunny beach in July 1519, he did nothesitate to act. Like a science-fiction alien emerging from his spaceship, hedeclared to theawestruck locals: ‘Wecome inpeace.Takeus toyour leader.’CortésexplainedthathewasapeacefulemissaryfromthegreatkingofSpain,andaskedforadiplomaticinterviewwiththeAztecruler,MontezumaII.(Thiswasashamelesslie.Cortésledanindependentexpeditionofgreedyadventurers.The king of Spain had never heard of Cortés, nor of theAztecs.) Cortéswasgivenguides,foodandsomemilitaryassistancebylocalenemiesoftheAztecs.HethenmarchedtowardstheAzteccapital,thegreatmetropolisofTenochtitlan.

The Aztecs allowed the aliens to march all the way to the capital, thenrespectfullyledthealiens’leadertomeetEmperorMontezuma.Inthemiddleofthe interview, Cortés gave a signal, and steel-armed Spaniards butcheredMontezuma’sbodyguards(whowerearmedonlywithwoodenclubs,andstoneblades).Thehonouredguesttookhishostprisoner.

Cortéswasnow in averydelicate situation.Hehadcaptured the emperor,butwassurroundedbytensofthousandsoffuriousenemywarriors,millionsofhostile civilians, and an entire continent about which he knew practicallynothing.Hehadat hisdisposalonly a fewhundredSpaniards, and the closestSpanishreinforcementswereinCuba,morethan1,500kilometresaway.

CortéskeptMontezumacaptiveinthepalace,makingit lookasif thekingremained freeand inchargeandas if the ‘Spanishambassador’werenomorethan a guest. TheAztec Empirewas an extremely centralised polity, and thisunprecedented situation paralysed it.Montezuma continued to behave as if heruledtheempire,andtheAztecelitecontinuedtoobeyhim,whichmeanttheyobeyed Cortés. This situation lasted for several months, during which timeCortés interrogated Montezuma and his attendants, trained translators in avarietyoflocallanguages,andsentsmallSpanishexpeditionsinalldirectionstobecomefamiliarwiththeAztecEmpireandthevarioustribes,peoplesandcitiesthatitruled.

TheAzteceliteeventuallyrevoltedagainstCortésandMontezuma,electedanew emperor, and drove the Spaniards from Tenochtitlan. However, by nownumerous cracks had appeared in the imperial edifice. Cortés used theknowledge he had gained to prise the cracks openwider and split the empirefromwithin. He convincedmany of the empire’s subject peoples to join himagainst the ruling Aztec elite. The subject peoples miscalculated badly. Theyhated theAztecs, butknewnothingofSpainor theCaribbeangenocide.TheyassumedthatwithSpanishhelp theycouldshakeoff theAztecyoke.The ideathattheSpanishwouldtakeoverneveroccurredtothem.TheyweresurethatifCortésandhisfewhundredhenchmencausedanytrouble,theycouldeasilybeoverwhelmed.The rebelliouspeoplesprovidedCortéswithanarmyof tensofthousands of local troops, andwith its help Cortés besieged Tenochtitlan andconqueredthecity.

AtthisstagemoreandmoreSpanishsoldiersandsettlersbeganarrivinginMexico,somefromCuba,othersallthewayfromSpain.Whenthelocalpeoplesrealisedwhatwashappening,itwastoolate.WithinacenturyofthelandingatVeraCruz, thenativepopulationof theAmericashad shrunkby about 90percent,duemainlytounfamiliardiseasesthatreachedAmericawiththeinvaders.ThesurvivorsfoundthemselvesunderthethumbofagreedyandracistregimethatwasfarworsethanthatoftheAztecs.

TenyearsafterCortéslandedinMexico,PizarroarrivedontheshoreoftheIncaEmpire.Hehad far fewersoldiers thanCortés–hisexpeditionnumberedjust 168 men! Yet Pizarro benefited from all the knowledge and experiencegainedinpreviousinvasions.TheInca,incontrast,knewnothingaboutthefateof the Aztecs. Pizarro plagiarised Cortés. He declared himself a peacefulemissary from the king of Spain, invited the Inca ruler, Atahualpa, to adiplomaticinterview,andthenkidnappedhim.Pizarroproceededtoconquertheparalysedempirewiththehelpoflocalallies.IfthesubjectpeoplesoftheIncaEmpirehadknown the fateof the inhabitantsofMexico, theywouldnothavethrownintheirlotwiththeinvaders.Buttheydidnotknow.

ThenativepeoplesofAmericawerenottheonlyonestopayaheavypricefor their parochial outlook. The great empires of Asia – the Ottoman, theSafavid, theMughal and theChinese–veryquicklyheard that theEuropeanshad discovered something big. Yet they displayed little interest in thesediscoveries.TheycontinuedtobelievethattheworldrevolvedaroundAsia,andmadenoattempttocompetewiththeEuropeansforcontrolofAmericaorofthenewoceanlanesintheAtlanticandthePacific.EvenpunyEuropeankingdomssuch as Scotland andDenmark sent a few explore-and-conquer expeditions to

America,butnotoneexpeditionofeitherexplorationorconquestwaseversentto America from the Islamic world, India or China. The first non-Europeanpower that tried to send a military expedition to America was Japan. ThathappenedinJune1942,whenaJapaneseexpeditionconqueredKiskaandAttu,twosmallislandsofftheAlaskancoast,capturingintheprocesstenUSsoldiersandadog.TheJapanesenevergotanyclosertothemainland.

It ishard toargue that theOttomansorChinesewere toofaraway,or thattheylackedthetechnological,economicormilitarywherewithal.Theresourcesthat sentZhengHe fromChina toEastAfrica in the1420S shouldhavebeenenoughtoreachAmerica.TheChinesejustweren’tinterested.ThefirstChineseworldmaptoshowAmericawasnotissueduntil1602–andthenbyaEuropeanmissionary!

For 300 years, Europeans enjoyed undisputed mastery in America andOceania,intheAtlanticandthePacific.Theonlysignificantstrugglesinthoseregions were between different European powers. The wealth and resourcesaccumulated by the Europeans eventually enabled them to invade Asia too,defeat its empires, and divide it among themselves. When the Ottomans,Persians, Indians andChinesewokeup andbeganpayingattention, itwas toolate.

Onlyinthetwentiethcenturydidnon-Europeanculturesadoptatrulyglobalvision.Thiswasoneof thecrucial factors that led to thecollapseofEuropeanhegemony. Thus in the Algerian War of Independence (1954–62), Algerianguerrillas defeated a French army with an overwhelming numerical,technological and economic advantage. The Algerians prevailed because theyweresupportedbyaglobalanti-colonialnetwork,andbecausetheyworkedouthowtoharness theworld’smedia to theircause–aswellaspublicopinion inFrance itself. The defeat that little North Vietnam inflicted on the Americancolossus was based on a similar strategy. These guerrilla forces showed thatevensuperpowerscouldbedefeatedifalocalstrugglebecameaglobalcause.Itis interesting to contemplatewhatmight have happened hadMontezuma beenable to manipulate public opinion in Spain and gain assistance from one ofSpain’srivals–Portugal,FranceortheOttomanEmpire.

RareSpidersandForgottenScripts

Modernscienceandmodernempiresweremotivatedbytherestlessfeelingthatperhapssomethingimportantawaitedbeyondthehorizon–somethingtheyhadbetterexploreandmaster.Yet theconnectionbetweenscienceandempirewent much deeper. Not just the motivation, but also the practices of empire-builderswereentangledwiththoseofscientists.FormodernEuropeans,buildinganempirewasascientificproject,whilesettingupascientificdisciplinewasanimperialproject.

WhentheMuslimsconqueredIndia,theydidnotbringalongarchaeologiststosystematicallystudyIndianhistory,anthropologists tostudyIndiancultures,geologists to study Indian soils, or zoologists to study Indian fauna.When theBritishconqueredIndia,theydidallofthesethings.On10April1802theGreatSurvey of India was launched. It lasted sixty years.With the help of tens ofthousandsofnativelabourers,scholarsandguides,theBritishcarefullymappedthewholeofIndia,markingborders,measuringdistances,andevencalculatingfor the first time the exact height ofMount Everest and the other Himalayanpeaks.TheBritish explored themilitary resourcesof Indianprovinces and thelocationoftheirgoldmines,buttheyalsotookthetroubletocollectinformationaboutrareIndianspiders,tocataloguecolourfulbutterflies,totracetheancientoriginsofextinctIndianlanguages,andtodigupforgottenruins.

Mohenjo-darowas one of the chief cities of the IndusValley civilisation,which flourished in the thirdmillenniumBC andwas destroyed around 1900BC.NoneofIndia’spre-Britishrulers–neithertheMauryas,northeGuptas,northeDelhisultans,northegreatMughals–hadgiventheruinsasecondglance.But a British archaeological survey took notice of the site in 1922.ABritishteamthenexcavatedit,anddiscoveredthefirstgreatcivilisationofIndia,whichnoIndianhadbeenawareof.

AnothertellingexampleofBritishscientificcuriositywasthedecipheringofcuneiformscript.ThiswasthemainscriptusedthroughouttheMiddleEastforcloseto3,000years,butthelastpersonabletoreaditprobablydiedsometimeinthe early firstmillenniumAD.Since then, inhabitantsof the region frequentlyencountered cuneiform inscriptions on monuments, steles, ancient ruins andbrokenpots.Buttheyhadnoideahowtoreadtheweird,angularscratchesand,as far as we know, they never tried. Cuneiform came to the attention ofEuropeansin1618,whentheSpanishambassadorinPersiawentsightseeinginthe ruins of ancient Persepolis, where he saw inscriptions that nobody couldexplaintohim.NewsoftheunknownscriptspreadamongEuropeansavantsandpiqued their curiosity. In 1657 European scholars published the firsttranscriptionofacuneiformtextfromPersepolis.Moreandmoretranscriptionsfollowed, and for close to twocenturies scholars in theWest tried todecipher

them.Nonesucceeded.Inthe1830s,aBritishofficernamedHenryRawlinsonwassenttoPersiato

helptheshahtrainhisarmyintheEuropeanstyle.InhissparetimeRawlinsontravelledaroundPersiaandonedayhewasledbylocalguidestoacliffintheZagros Mountains and shown the huge Behistun Inscription. About fifteenmetreshighandtwenty-fivemetreswide,ithadbeenetchedhighupontheclifffaceonthecommandofKingDariusIsometimearound500BC.Itwaswrittenin cuneiform script in three languages: Old Persian, Elamite and Babylonian.Theinscriptionwaswellknowntothelocalpopulation,butnobodycouldreadit.Rawlinsonbecameconvinced that ifhecoulddecipher thewriting itwouldenablehimandother scholars to read thenumerous inscriptionsand texts thatwereatthetimebeingdiscoveredallovertheMiddleEast,openingadoorintoanancientandforgottenworld.

The first step in deciphering the lettering was to produce an accuratetranscriptionthatcouldbesentbacktoEurope.Rawlinsondefieddeathtodoso,scalingthesteepclifftocopythestrangeletters.Hehiredseverallocalstohelphim,mostnotablyaKurdishboywhoclimbedtothemostinaccessiblepartsofthecliffinordertocopytheupperportionoftheinscription.In1847theprojectwascompleted,andafullandaccuratecopywassenttoEurope.

Rawlinsondidnotrestonhislaurels.Asanarmyofficer,hehadmilitaryandpoliticalmissionstocarryout,butwheneverhehadasparemomenthepuzzledoverthesecretscript.Hetriedonemethodafteranotherandfinallymanagedtodecipher the Old Persian part of the inscription. This was easiest, since OldPersian was not that different from modern Persian, which Rawlinson knewwell.AnunderstandingoftheOldPersiansectiongavehimthekeyheneededtounlockthesecretsoftheElamiteandBabyloniansections.Thegreatdoorswungopen,andoutcamearushofancientbutlivelyvoices–thebustleofSumerianbazaars, the proclamations of Assyrian kings, the arguments of Babylonianbureaucrats. Without the efforts of modern European imperialists such asRawlinson,wewouldnothaveknownmuchaboutthefateoftheancientMiddleEasternempires.

Another notable imperialist scholar was William Jones. Jones arrived inIndiainSeptember1783toserveasajudgeintheSupremeCourtofBengal.HewassocaptivatedbythewondersofIndiathatwithinlessthansixmonthsofhisarrival he had founded the Asiatic Society. This academic organisation wasdevotedtostudyingthecultures,historiesandsocietiesofAsia,andinparticularthoseofIndia.WithintwoyearsJonespublishedhisobservationsontheSanskritlanguage,whichpioneeredthescienceofcomparativelinguistics.

InhispublicationsJonespointedoutsurprisingsimilaritiesbetweenSanskrit,anancient Indian language thatbecame thesacred tongueofHindu ritual, andthe Greek and Latin languages, as well as similarities between all theselanguagesandGothic,Celtic,OldPersian,German,FrenchandEnglish.ThusinSanskrit, ‘mother’ is ‘matar’, in Latin it is ‘mater’, and in Old Celtic it is‘mathir’. Jonessurmised thatall these languagesmustshareacommonorigin,developing from a now-forgotten ancient ancestor. He was thus the first toidentifywhatlatercametobecalledtheIndo-Europeanfamilyoflanguages.

Jones’ study was an important milestone not merely due to his bold (andaccurate) hypotheses, but also because of the orderly methodology that hedeveloped to compare languages. It was adopted by other scholars, enablingthemsystematicallytostudythedevelopmentofalltheworld’slanguages.

Linguistics received enthusiastic imperial support. The European empiresbelieved that inorder togoverneffectively theymustknow the languagesandcultures of their subjects. British officers arriving in India were supposed tospend up to three years in a Calcutta college, where they studied Hindu andMuslimlawalongsideEnglishlaw;Sanskrit,UrduandPersianalongsideGreekand Latin; and Tamil, Bengali andHindustani culture alongsidemathematics,economicsandgeography.Thestudyof linguisticsprovidedinvaluablehelpinunderstandingthestructureandgrammaroflocallanguages.

ThankstotheworkofpeoplelikeWilliamJonesandHenryRawlinson,theEuropeanconquerorsknewtheirempiresverywell.Farbetter,indeed,thananyprevious conquerors, or even than the native population itself. Their superiorknowledge had obvious practical advantages. Without such knowledge, it isunlikely that a ridiculously small number of Britons could have succeeded ingoverning,oppressing andexploiting somanyhundredsofmillionsof Indiansfortwocenturies.Throughoutthenineteenthandearlytwentiethcenturies,fewerthan5,000British officials, about 40,000–70,000British soldiers, andperhapsanother 100,000British business people, hangers-on,wives and childrenweresufficienttoconquerandruleupto300millionIndians.9

Yet these practical advantages were not the only reason why empiresfinanced the study of linguistics, botany, geography and history. No lessimportant was the fact that science gave the empires ideological justification.ModernEuropeanscame tobelieve that acquiringnewknowledgewasalwaysgood.The fact that theempiresproducedaconstant streamofnewknowledgebranded them as progressive and positive enterprises. Even today, histories ofsciencessuchasgeography,archaeologyandbotanycannotavoidcreditingtheEuropeanempires,atleastindirectly.Historiesofbotanyhavelittletosayaboutthe suffering of the Aboriginal Australians, but they usually find some kind

wordsforJamesCookandJosephBanks.Furthermore, the new knowledge accumulated by the empires made it

possible,atleastintheory,tobenefittheconqueredpopulationsandbringthemthe benefits of ‘progress’ – to provide them with medicine and education, tobuildrailroadsandcanals,toensurejusticeandprosperity.Imperialistsclaimedthat their empireswerenot vast enterprisesof exploitationbut rather altruisticprojects conducted for the sake of the non-European races – in RudyardKipling’swords,‘theWhiteMan’sburden’:

TakeuptheWhiteMan’sburden–Sendforththebestyebreed–GobindyoursonstoexileToserveyourcaptives’need;Towaitinheavyharness,Onflutteredfolkandwild–Yournew-caught,sullenpeoples,Half-devilandhalf-child.Of course, the facts often belied thismyth.TheBritish conqueredBengal,

the richest province of India, in 1764.The new rulerswere interested in littleexceptenrichingthemselves.TheyadoptedadisastrouseconomicpolicythatafewyearslaterledtotheoutbreakoftheGreatBengalFamine.Itbeganin1769,reached catastrophic levels in 1770, and lasted until 1773. About 10 millionBengalis,athirdoftheprovince’spopulation,diedinthecalamity.10

Intruth,neitherthenarrativeofoppressionandexploitationnorthatof‘TheWhiteMan’sBurden’completelymatchesthefacts.TheEuropeanempiresdidso many different things on such a large scale, that you can find plenty ofexamplestosupportwhateveryouwanttosayaboutthem.Youthinkthattheseempires were evil monstrosities that spread death, oppression and injusticearoundtheworld?Youcouldeasilyfillanencyclopediawiththeircrimes.Youwanttoarguethattheyinfactimprovedtheconditionsoftheirsubjectswithnewmedicines, better economic conditions and greater security? You could fillanother encyclopedia with their achievements. Due to their close cooperationwith science, theseempireswielded somuchpowerandchanged theworld tosuchanextentthatperhapstheycannotbesimplylabelledasgoodorevil.Theycreated the world as we know it, including the ideologies we use in order tojudgethem.

Butsciencewasalsousedby imperialists tomoresinisterends.Biologists,anthropologistsandeven linguistsprovidedscientificproof thatEuropeansaresuperior to all other races, andconsequentlyhave the right (if notperhaps theduty) to rule over them. After William Jones argued that all Indo-European

languagesdescendfromasingleancientlanguagemanyscholarswereeagertodiscover who the speakers of that language had been. They noticed that theearliestSanskritspeakers,whohadinvadedIndiafromCentralAsiamorethan3,000yearsago,hadcalledthemselvesArya.ThespeakersoftheearliestPersianlanguage called themselves Airiia. European scholars consequently surmisedthat the people who spoke the primordial language that gave birth to bothSanskritandPersian(aswellas toGreek,Latin,GothicandCeltic)musthavecalledthemselvesAryans.CoulditbeacoincidencethatthosewhofoundedthemagnificentIndian,Persian,GreekandRomancivilisationswereallAryans?

Next, British, French and German scholars wedded the linguistic theoryabouttheindustriousAryanstoDarwin’stheoryofnaturalselectionandpositedthattheAryanswerenotjustalinguisticgroupbutabiologicalentity–arace.And not just any race, but amaster race of tall, light-haired, blue-eyed, hard-working,andsuper-rationalhumanswhoemergedfromthemistsofthenorthtolaythefoundationsofculturethroughouttheworld.Regrettably,theAryanswhoinvadedIndiaandPersiaintermarriedwiththelocalnativestheyfoundintheselands, losing their light complexions and blond hair, and with them theirrationality and diligence. The civilisations of India and Persia consequentlydeclined.InEurope,ontheotherhand,theAryanspreservedtheirracialpurity.ThisiswhyEuropeanshadmanagedtoconquertheworld,andwhytheywerefittoruleit–providedtheytookprecautionsnottomixwithinferiorraces.

Such racist theories, prominent and respectable for many decades, havebecome anathema among scientists and politicians alike. People continue toconductaheroicstruggleagainstracismwithoutnoticingthatthebattlefronthasshifted,andthattheplaceofracisminimperialideologyhasnowbeenreplacedby‘culturism’.Thereisnosuchword,butit’sabouttimewecoinedit.Amongtoday’s elites, assertions about the contrastingmerits ofdiversehumangroupsare almost always couched in terms of historical differences between culturesratherthanbiologicaldifferencesbetweenraces.Wenolongersay,‘It’sintheirblood.’Wesay,‘It’sintheirculture.’

ThusEuropeanright-wingpartieswhichopposeMuslimimmigrationusuallytakecaretoavoidracialterminology.MarinelePen’sspeechwriterswouldhavebeenshownthedooronthespothadtheysuggestedthattheleaderoftheFrontNationalgoontelevisiontodeclarethat,‘Wedon’twantthoseinferiorSemitestodiluteourAryanbloodandspoilourAryancivilisation.’Instead,theFrenchFront National, the Dutch Party for Freedom, the Alliance for the Future ofAustria and their like tend to argue thatWestern culture, as it has evolved inEurope, is characterised by democratic values, tolerance and gender equality,whereasMuslimculture,whichevolvedintheMiddleEast,ischaracterisedby

hierarchical politics, fanaticism and misogyny. Since the two cultures are sodifferent, and since many Muslim immigrants are unwilling (and perhapsunable) toadoptWesternvalues, theyshouldnotbeallowedtoenter, lest theyfomentinternalconflictsandcorrodeEuropeandemocracyandliberalism.

Suchculturistargumentsarefedbyscientificstudies in thehumanitiesandsocial sciences that highlight the so-called clash of civilisations and thefundamental differences between different cultures. Not all historians andanthropologists accept these theories or support their political usages. Butwhereas biologists today have an easy time disavowing racism, simplyexplaining that the biological differences between present-day humanpopulationsaretrivial,itisharderforhistoriansandanthropologiststodisavowculturism.After all, if thedifferencesbetweenhumancultures are trivial,whyshouldwepayhistoriansandanthropologiststostudythem?

Scientists have provided the imperial project with practical knowledge,ideologicaljustificationandtechnologicalgadgets.Withoutthiscontributionitishighly questionable whether Europeans could have conquered the world. Theconquerors returned the favour by providing scientists with information andprotection,supportingallkindsofstrangeandfascinatingprojectsandspreadingthe scientificwayof thinking to the far cornersof the earth.Without imperialsupport,itisdoubtfulwhethermodernsciencewouldhaveprogressedveryfar.Thereareveryfewscientificdisciplinesthatdidnotbegintheirlivesasservantsto imperialgrowthand thatdonotowea largeproportionof theirdiscoveries,collections, buildings and scholarships to the generous help of army officers,navycaptainsandimperialgovernors.

This is obviously not the whole story. Science was supported by otherinstitutions,notjustbyempires.AndtheEuropeanempiresroseandflourishedthanks also to factors other than science. Behind the meteoric rise of bothscience and empire lurks one particularly important force: capitalism.Were itnotforbusinessmenseekingtomakemoney,ColumbuswouldnothavereachedAmerica, JamesCookwould not have reachedAustralia, andNeilArmstrongwouldneverhavetakenthatsmallsteponthesurfaceofthemoon.

16

TheCapitalistCreed

MONEYHASBEENESSENTIALBOTHFOR building empires and forpromoting science. But is money the ultimate goal of these undertakings, orperhapsjustadangerousnecessity?

It isnoteasytograspthetrueroleofeconomicsinmodernhistory.Wholevolumeshavebeenwritten about howmoney founded states and ruined them,openednewhorizonsandenslavedmillions,movedthewheelsof industryanddrovehundredsofspecies intoextinction.Yet tounderstandmoderneconomichistory,you reallyneed tounderstand just a singleword.Theword isgrowth.For better orworse, in sickness and in health, themodern economy has beengrowing like a hormone-soused teenager. It eats up everything it can find andputsoninchesfasterthanyoucancount.

For most of history the economy stayedmuch the same size. Yes, globalproductionincreased,butthiswasduemostlytodemographicexpansionandthesettlement of new lands. Per capita production remained static. But all thatchanged in themodern age. In 1500, global production of goods and serviceswas equal to about $250 billion; today it hovers around $60 trillion. Moreimportantly, in1500,annualpercapitaproductionaveraged$550,while todayeveryman,woman and child produces, on the average, $8,800 a year.1Whataccountsforthisstupendousgrowth?

Economicsisanotoriouslycomplicatedsubject.Tomakethingseasier,let’simagineasimpleexample.

SamuelGreedy,ashrewdfinancier,foundsabankinElDorado,California.A.A.Stone,anup-and-comingcontractorinElDorado,finisheshisfirstbig

job,receivingpaymentincashtothetuneof$1million.HedepositsthissuminMrGreedy’sbank.Thebanknowhas$1millionincapital.

In the meantime, Jane McDoughnut, an experienced but impecunious ElDorado chef, thinks she sees a business opportunity – there’s no really good

bakery inherpartof town.Butshedoesn’thaveenoughmoneyofherowntobuyaproperfacilitycompletewithindustrialovens,sinks,knivesandpots.Shegoestothebank,presentsherbusinessplantoGreedy,andpersuadeshimthatit’saworthwhile investment.He issueshera$1million loan,bycreditingheraccountinthebankwiththatsum.

McDoughnut now hires Stone, the contractor, to build and furnish herbakery.Hispriceis$1,000,000.

Whenshepayshim,withachequedrawnonheraccount,StonedepositsitinhisaccountintheGreedybank.

So how much money does Stone have in his bank account? Right, $2million.

How much money, cash, is actually located in the bank’s safe? Yes, $1million.

Itdoesn’tstopthere.Ascontractorsarewonttodo,twomonthsintothejobStoneinformsMcDoughnutthat,duetounforeseenproblemsandexpenses,thebillforconstructingthebakerywillactuallybe$2million.MrsMcDoughnutisnotpleased,butshecanhardlystopthejobinthemiddle.Soshepaysanothervisit to the bank, convincesMrGreedy to give her an additional loan, and heputs another $1 million in her account. She transfers the money to thecontractor’saccount.

HowmuchmoneydoesStonehaveinhisaccountnow?He’sgot$3million.Buthowmuchmoneyisactuallysittinginthebank?Stilljust$1million.In

fact,thesame$1millionthat’sbeeninthebankallalong.CurrentUSbankinglawpermitsthebanktorepeatthisexercisesevenmore

times. The contractorwould eventually have $10million in his account, eventhoughthebankstillhasbut$1millioninitsvaults.Banksareallowedtoloan$10foreverydollar theyactuallypossess,whichmeans that90percentofallthemoneyinourbankaccountsisnotcoveredbyactualcoinsandnotes.2IfalloftheaccountholdersatBarclaysBanksuddenlydemandtheirmoney,Barclayswillpromptlycollapse(unlessthegovernmentstepsintosaveit).ThesameistrueofLloyds,DeutscheBank,Citibank,andallotherbanksintheworld.

ItsoundslikeagiantPonzischeme,doesn’t it?But if it’safraud, thentheentiremoderneconomyisafraud.Thefactis,it’snotadeception,butratheratributetotheamazingabilitiesofthehumanimagination.Whatenablesbanks–andtheentireeconomy–tosurviveandflourishisourtrustinthefuture.Thistrustisthesolebackingformostofthemoneyintheworld.

In the bakery example, the discrepancy between the contractor’s accountstatementandtheamountofmoneyactuallyinthebankisMrsMcDoughnut’sbakery.MrGreedyhasputthebank’smoneyintotheasset,trustingthatoneday

it would be profitable. The bakery hasn’t baked a loaf of bread yet, butMcDoughnutandGreedyanticipatethatayearhenceitwillbesellingthousandsof loaves, rolls, cakes and cookies each day, at a handsome profit. MrsMcDoughnutwillthenbeabletorepayherloan,withinterest.IfatthatpointMrStonedecidestowithdrawhissavings,Greedywillbeabletocomeupwiththecash.Theentireenterpriseisthusfoundedontrustinanimaginaryfuture–thetrust that the entrepreneur and the banker have in the bakery of their dreams,alongwiththecontractor’strustinthefuturesolvencyofthebank.

We’ve already seen that money is an astounding thing because it canrepresent myriad different objects and convert anything into almost anythingelse. However, before themodern era this ability was limited. Inmost cases,money could represent and convert only things that actually existed in thepresent.Thisimposedaseverelimitationongrowth,sinceitmadeitveryhardtofinancenewenterprises.

Considerourbakeryagain.CouldMcDoughnutget itbuilt ifmoneycouldrepresentonlytangibleobjects?No.Inthepresent,shehasalotofdreams,butnotangibleresources.Theonlywayshecouldgetherbakerybuiltwouldbetofindacontractorwillingtoworktodayandreceivepaymentinafewyears’time,if and when the bakery starts making money. Alas, such contractors are rarebreeds.Soourentrepreneurisinabind.Withoutabakery,shecan’tbakecakes.Without cakes, she can’t make money. Without money, she can’t hire acontractor.Withoutacontractor,shehasnobakery.

Humankind was trapped in this predicament for thousands of years. As aresult,economiesremainedfrozen.Thewayoutofthetrapwasdiscoveredonlyin themodern era,with the appearance of a new systembased on trust in thefuture. In it, people agreed to represent imaginary goods – goods that do notexist in thepresent–witha specialkindofmoney theycalled ‘credit’.Creditenablesustobuildthepresentattheexpenseofthefuture.It’sfoundedontheassumptionthatourfutureresourcesaresure tobefarmoreabundant thanourpresentresources.Ahostofnewandwonderfulopportunitiesopenupifwecanbuildthingsinthepresentusingfutureincome.

If credit is such awonderful thing,whydidnobody thinkof it earlier?Ofcoursetheydid.Creditarrangementsofonekindoranotherhaveexistedinallknown human cultures, going back at least to ancient Sumer. The problem inpreviouseraswasnotthatnoonehadtheideaorknewhowtouseit.Itwasthatpeople seldomwanted toextendmuchcreditbecause theydidn’t trust that thefuturewouldbebetterthanthepresent.Theygenerallybelievedthattimespasthadbeenbetter than theirowntimesand that thefuturewouldbeworse,orat

bestmuchthesame.Toputthatineconomicterms,theybelievedthatthetotalamountofwealthwaslimited,ifnotdwindling.Peoplethereforeconsidereditabad bet to assume that they personally, or their kingdom, or the entireworld,wouldbeproducingmorewealthtenyearsdowntheline.Businesslookedlikeazero-sumgame.Of course, theprofits ofoneparticularbakerymight rise, butonlyattheexpenseofthebakerynextdoor.Venicemightflourish,butonlybyimpoverishingGenoa.The king ofEnglandmight enrich himself, but only byrobbingthekingofFrance.Youcouldcutthepieinmanydifferentways,butitnevergotanybigger.

That’s why many cultures concluded that making bundles of money wassinful.AsJesussaid,‘ItiseasierforacameltopassthroughtheeyeofaneedlethanforarichmantoenterintothekingdomofGod’(Matthew19:24).Ifthepieisstatic,andIhaveabigpartofit,thenImusthavetakensomebodyelse’sslice.Therichwereobligedtodopenancefortheirevildeedsbygivingsomeoftheirsurpluswealthtocharity.

TheEntrepreneur’sDilemma

Iftheglobalpiestayedthesamesize,therewasnomarginforcredit.Creditis the difference between today’s pie and tomorrows pie. If the pie stays thesame,whyextendcredit?Itwouldbeanunacceptableriskunlessyoubelievedthatthebakerorkingaskingforyourmoneymightbeabletostealaslicefromacompetitor.Soitwashardtogetaloaninthepremodernworld,andwhenyougot one it was usually small, short-term, and subject to high interest rates.Upstartentrepreneursthusfounditdifficulttoopennewbakeriesandgreatkingswho wanted to build palaces or wage wars had no choice but to raise thenecessaryfundsthroughhightaxesandtariffs.

TheMagicCircleoftheModernEconomy

That was fine for kings (as long as their subjects remained docile), but ascullerymaidwhohadagreat ideaforabakeryandwantedtomoveupintheworld generally could only dream of wealth while scrubbing down the royalkitchensfloors.

It was lose-lose. Because credit was limited, people had trouble financingnewbusinesses.Because therewere fewnewbusinesses, theeconomydidnotgrow.Because itdidnotgrow,peopleassumeditneverwould,and thosewhohadcapitalwerewaryofextendingcredit.Theexpectationofstagnationfulfilleditself.

AGrowingPieThencame theScientificRevolution and the ideaofprogress.The ideaof

progress is built on the notion that if we admit our ignorance and investresources in research, things can improve. This idea was soon translated intoeconomic terms. Whoever believes in progress believes that geographicaldiscoveries, technological inventions and organisational developments canincreasethesumtotalofhumanproduction,tradeandwealth.Newtraderoutesin theAtlantic could flourishwithout ruining old routes in the IndianOcean.Newgoodscouldbeproducedwithoutreducingtheproductionofoldones.Forinstance, one could open a new bakery specialising in chocolate cakes andcroissantswithoutcausingbakeriesspecialisinginbreadtogobust.Everybodywouldsimplydevelopnew tastesandeatmore. Icanbewealthywithoutyourbecomingpoor;Icanbeobesewithoutyourdyingofhunger.Theentireglobalpiecangrow.

Over the last500years the ideaofprogress convincedpeople toputmoreand more trust in the future. This trust created credit; credit brought realeconomicgrowth;andgrowthstrengthenedthetrustinthefutureandopenedtheway for evenmore credit. It didn’t happen overnight – the economy behavedmorelikearollercoasterthanaballoon.Butoverthelongrun,withthebumpsevened out, the general direction was unmistakable. Today, there is so muchcredit in the world that governments, business corporations and privateindividualseasilyobtainlarge,long-termandlow-interestloansthatfarexceedcurrentincome.

TheEconomicHistoryoftheWorldinaNutshell

Thebeliefinthegrowingglobalpieeventuallyturnedrevolutionary.In1776theScottisheconomistAdamSmithpublishedTheWealthofNations,probablythemostimportanteconomicsmanifestoofalltime.Intheeighthchapterofitsfirst volume, Smith made the following novel argument: when a landlord, aweaver, or a shoemaker has greater profits thanhe needs tomaintain his ownfamily,heusesthesurplustoemploymoreassistants,inordertofurtherincreasehis profits. The more profits he has, the more assistants he can employ. Itfollowsthatanincreaseintheprofitsofprivateentrepreneursisthebasisfortheincreaseincollectivewealthandprosperity.

Thismaynotstrikeyouasveryoriginal,becauseweall live inacapitalistworldthattakesSmith’sargumentforgranted.Wehearvariationsonthisthemeeverydayinthenews.YetSmith’sclaimthattheselfishhumanurgetoincreaseprivateprofitsisthebasisforcollectivewealthisoneofthemostrevolutionaryideas inhumanhistory– revolutionarynot just fromaneconomicperspective,butevenmoresofromamoralandpoliticalperspective.WhatSmithsaysis,in

fact,thatgreedisgood,andthatbybecomingricherIbenefiteverybody,notjustmyself.Egoismisaltruism.

Smithtaughtpeopletothinkabouttheeconomyasa‘win-winsituation’,inwhichmyprofitsarealsoyourprofits.Notonlycanwebothenjoyabiggersliceofpieatthesametime,buttheincreaseinyourslicedependsupontheincreaseinmyslice.IfIampoor,youtoowillbepoorsinceIcannotbuyyourproductsor services. If I am rich, you toowill be enriched since you can now sellmesomething. Smith denied the traditional contradiction between wealth andmorality, and threw open the gates of heaven for the rich. Being rich meantbeing moral. In Smiths story, people become rich not by despoiling theirneighbours, but by increasing the overall size of the pie. And when the piegrows, everyone benefits. The rich are accordingly the most useful andbenevolent people in society, because they turn the wheels of growth foreveryone’sadvantage.

All this depends, however, on the rich using their profits to open newfactoriesandhirenewemployees, rather thanwasting themonnon-productiveactivities.Smiththereforerepeatedlikeamantrathemaximthat‘Whenprofitsincrease, the landlord or weaver will employmore assistants’ and not ‘Whenprofitsincrease,Scroogewillhoardhismoneyinachestandtakeitoutonlytocount his coins.’ A crucial part of the modern capitalist economy was theemergenceofanewethic,accordingtowhichprofitsoughttobereinvestedinproduction. This brings about more profits, which are again reinvested inproduction,whichbringsmoreprofits,etceteraadinfinitum.Investmentscanbemade in many ways: enlarging the factory, conducting scientific research,developing new products. Yet all these investments must somehow increaseproductionandtranslateintolargerprofits.Inthenewcapitalistcreed,thefirstandmostsacredcommandmentis:‘Theprofitsofproductionmustbereinvestedinincreasingproduction.’

That’s why capitalism is called ‘capitalism’. Capitalism distinguishes‘capital’ frommere ‘wealth’. Capital consists of money, goods and resourcesthat are invested in production. Wealth, on the other hand, is buried in theground or wasted on unproductive activities. A pharaoh who pours resourcesintoanon-productivepyramid isnotacapitalist.ApiratewholootsaSpanishtreasure fleet and buries a chest full of glittering coins on the beach of someCaribbean island is not a capitalist. But a hard-working factory hand whoreinvestspartofhisincomeinthestockmarketis.

The idea that ‘The profits of production must be reinvested in increasingproduction’soundstrivial.Yetitwasalientomostpeoplethroughouthistory.Inpremoderntimes,peoplebelievedthatproductionwasmoreorlessconstant.So

whyreinvestyourprofitsifproductionwon’tincreasebymuch,nomatterwhatyou do? Thus medieval noblemen espoused an ethic of generosity andconspicuousconsumption.Theyspenttheirrevenuesontournaments,banquets,palaces and wars, and on charity and monumental cathedrals. Few tried toreinvest profits in increasing their manors’ output, developing better kinds ofwheat,orlookingfornewmarkets.

In the modern era, the nobility has been overtaken by a new elite whosemembers are true believers in the capitalist creed. The new capitalist elite ismadeupnotofdukesandmarquises,butofboardchairmen,stock tradersandindustrialists.Thesemagnatesarefarricherthanthemedievalnobility,buttheyare far less interested in extravagant consumption, and they spend a muchsmallerpartoftheirprofitsonnon-productiveactivities.

Medievalnoblemenworecolourfulrobesofgoldandsilk,anddevotedmuchof their time to attending banquets, carnivals and glamorous tournaments. Incomparison,modernCEOsdondrearyuniformscalledsuitsthataffordthemallthe panache of a flock of crows, and they have little time for festivities. Thetypicalventurecapitalistrushesfromonebusinessmeetingtoanother,tryingtofigure outwhere to invest his capital and following the ups and downs of thestocksandbondsheowns.True,hissuitsmightbeVersaceandhemightgettotravel in a private jet, but these expenses are nothing compared to what heinvestsinincreasinghumanproduction.

It’s not just Versace-clad business moguls who invest to increaseproductivity.Ordinary folkandgovernmentagencies thinkalongsimilar lines.Howmanydinnerconversationsinmodestneighbourhoodssooneror laterbogdownininterminabledebateaboutwhetheritisbettertoinvestone’ssavingsinthestockmarket,bondsorproperty?Governmentstoostrivetoinvesttheirtax

revenues in productive enterprises that will increase future income – forexample,buildinganewport couldmake it easier for factories to export theirproducts, enabling them tomakemore taxable income, thereby increasing thegovernment’s future revenues. Another government might prefer to invest ineducation,on thegrounds thateducatedpeopleformthebasisfor the lucrativehigh-tech industries, which pay lots of taxes without needing extensive portfacilities.

Capitalismbeganasatheoryabouthowtheeconomyfunctions.Itwasbothdescriptiveandprescriptive– itofferedanaccountofhowmoneyworkedandpromoted the idea that reinvestingprofits inproduction leads to fasteconomicgrowth. But capitalism gradually became far more than just an economicdoctrine. It now encompasses an ethic – a set of teachings about how peopleshouldbehave,educate theirchildrenandeven think. Itsprincipal tenet is thateconomicgrowthisthesupremegood,oratleastaproxyforthesupremegood,because justice, freedom and even happiness all depend on economic growth.Ask a capitalist how to bring justice and political freedom to a place likeZimbabweorAfghanistan,andyouarelikelytogetalectureonhoweconomicaffluence and a thriving middle class are essential for stable democraticinstitutions, and about theneed therefore to inculcateAfghan tribesmen in thevaluesoffreeenterprise,thriftandself-reliance.

This new religion has had a decisive influence on the development ofmodernscience,too.Scientificresearchisusuallyfundedbyeithergovernmentsor private businesses. When capitalist governments and businesses considerinvesting inaparticular scientificproject, the firstquestionsareusually, ‘Willthis project enable us to increase production and profits? Will it produceeconomicgrowth?’Aproject thatcan’tclear thesehurdleshas littlechanceoffindingasponsor.Nohistoryofmodernsciencecanleavecapitalismoutofthepicture.

Conversely,thehistoryofcapitalismisunintelligiblewithouttakingscienceintoaccount.Capitalismsbeliefinperpetualeconomicgrowthfliesinthefaceofalmost everythingweknowabout theuniverse.A societyofwolveswouldbeextremely foolish to believe that the supply of sheepwould keep on growingindefinitely. The human economy has nevertheless managed to growexponentially throughout themodernera, thanksonly to thefact thatscientistscome up with another discovery or gadget every few years – such as thecontinentofAmerica,theinternalcombustionengine,orgeneticallyengineeredsheep.Banks and governments printmoney, but ultimately, it is the scientistswhofootthebill.

Over the last few years, banks and governments have been frenziedlyprintingmoney.Everybodyisterrifiedthatthecurrenteconomiccrisismaystopthegrowthof theeconomy.So theyarecreating trillionsofdollars, eurosandyenoutof thin air, pumpingcheapcredit into the system, andhoping that thescientists, technicians and engineers will manage to come up with somethingreally big, before the bubble bursts. Everything depends on the people in thelabs.Newdiscoveriesinfieldssuchasbiotechnologyandnanotechnologycouldcreate entire new industries, whose profits could back the trillions of make-believemoney that thebanksandgovernmentshavecreatedsince2008. If thelabs do not fulfil these expectations before the bubble bursts, we are headingtowardsveryroughtimes.

ColumbusSearchesforanInvestorCapitalismplayedadecisiverolenotonlyintheriseofmodernscience,but

also in the emergence of European imperialism. And it was Europeanimperialismthatcreatedthecapitalistcreditsysteminthefirstplace.Ofcourse,creditwasnot invented inmodernEurope. It existed in almost all agriculturalsocieties,andintheearlymodernperiodtheemergenceofEuropeancapitalismwascloselylinkedtoeconomicdevelopmentsinAsia.Remember,too,thatuntilthe late eighteenth century, Asia was the world’s economic powerhouse,meaning thatEuropeanshad far lesscapital at theirdisposal than theChinese,MuslimsorIndians.

However, in the sociopolitical systems of China, India and the Muslimworld, credit played only a secondary role. Merchants and bankers in themarkets of Istanbul, Isfahan, Delhi and Beijing may have thought alongcapitalist lines, but the kings and generals in the palaces and forts tended todespisemerchantsandmercantile thinking.Mostnon-Europeanempiresof theearly modern era were established by great conquerors such as Nurhaci andNaderShah,orbybureaucraticandmilitaryelitesas in theQingandOttomanempires. Financing wars through taxes and plunder (without making finedistinctionsbetweenthetwo),theyowedlittletocreditsystems,andtheycaredevenlessabouttheinterestsofbankersandinvestors.

In Europe, on the other hand, kings and generals gradually adopted themercantilewayofthinking,untilmerchantsandbankersbecametherulingelite.TheEuropean conquest of theworldwas increasingly financed through creditrather than taxes, and was increasingly directed by capitalists whose mainambition was to receive maximum returns on their investments. The empiresbuiltbybankersandmerchantsinfrockcoatsandtophatsdefeatedtheempires

builtbykingsandnoblemeningoldclothesandshiningarmour.Themercantileempiresweresimplymuchshrewderinfinancingtheirconquests.Nobodywantstopaytaxes,buteveryoneishappytoinvest.

In 1484 Christopher Columbus approached the king of Portugal with theproposal that he finance a fleet that would sail westward to find a new traderoutetoEastAsia.Suchexplorationswereaveryriskyandcostlybusiness.Alotofmoneywasneededinordertobuildships,buysupplies,andpaysailorsandsoldiers–andtherewasnoguaranteethattheinvestmentwouldyieldareturn.ThekingofPortugaldeclined.

Like a present-day start-up entrepreneur, Columbus did not give up. HepitchedhisideatootherpotentialinvestorsinItaly,France,England,andagaininPortugal.Eachtimehewasrejected.HethentriedhisluckwithFerdinandandIsabella, rulersofnewlyunitedSpain.Hetookonsomeexperienced lobbyists,andwiththeirhelphemanagedtoconvinceQueenIsabellatoinvest.Aseveryschool-childknows,Isabellahitthejackpot.Columbus’discoveriesenabledtheSpaniardstoconquerAmerica,wheretheyestablishedgoldandsilverminesaswellas sugarand tobaccoplantations thatenriched theSpanishkings,bankersandmerchantsbeyondtheirwildestdreams.

Ahundredyearslater,princesandbankerswerewillingtoextendfarmorecredit to Columbus’ successors, and they had more capital at their disposal,thanks to the treasures reaped from America. Equally important, princes andbankershadfarmoretrustinthepotentialofexploration,andweremorewillingtopartwiththeirmoney.Thiswasthemagiccircleofimperialcapitalism:creditfinancednewdiscoveries;discoveriesledtocolonies;coloniesprovidedprofits;profitsbuilttrust;andtrusttranslatedintomorecredit.NurhaciandNaderShahran out of fuel after a few thousand kilometres. Capitalist entrepreneurs onlyincreasedtheirfinancialmomentumfromconquesttoconquest.

Buttheseexpeditionsremainedchancyaffairs,socreditmarketsneverthelessremained quite cautious.Many expeditions returned to Europe empty-handed,havingdiscoverednothingofvalue.TheEnglish, for instance,wasted a lot ofcapitalinfruitlessattemptstodiscoveranorth-westernpassagetoAsiathroughthe Arctic. Many other expeditions didn’t return at all. Ships hit icebergs,foundered in tropical storms, or fell victim to pirates. In order to increase thenumber of potential investors and reduce the risk they incurred, Europeansturned to limited liability joint-stock companies. Instead of a single investorbettingallhismoneyonasinglericketyship,thejoint-stockcompanycollectedmoneyfromalargenumberofinvestors,eachriskingonlyasmallportionofhiscapital.Theriskswere therebycurtailed,butnocapwasplacedon theprofits.Evenasmallinvestmentintherightshipcouldturnyouintoamillionaire.

Decade by decade, western Europe witnessed the development of asophisticated financial system thatcould raise largeamountsofcreditonshortnoticeandputitatthedisposalofprivateentrepreneursandgovernments.Thissystemcould finance explorations and conquests farmore efficiently than anykingdom or empire. The new-found power of credit can be seen in the bitterstrugglebetweenSpainandtheNetherlands.Inthesixteenthcentury,Spainwasthemost powerful state inEurope, holding swayover a vast global empire. ItruledmuchofEurope,hugechunksofNorthandSouthAmerica,thePhilippineIslands, anda stringofbasesalong thecoastsofAfricaandAsia.Everyyear,fleetsheavywithAmericanandAsiantreasuresreturnedtotheportsofSevilleandCadiz.TheNetherlandswas a small andwindy swamp, devoid of naturalresources,asmallcornerofthekingofSpain’sdominions.

In 1568 the Dutch, who were mainly Protestant, revolted against theirCatholic Spanish overlord. At first the rebels seemed to play the role ofDonQuixote,courageouslytiltingatinvinciblewindmills.YetwithineightyyearstheDutchhadnotonlysecuredtheirindependencefromSpain,buthadmanagedtoreplace the Spaniards and their Portuguese allies as masters of the oceanhighways,buildaglobalDutchempire,andbecomethericheststateinEurope.

ThesecretofDutchsuccesswascredit.TheDutchburghers,whohadlittletasteforcombatonland,hiredmercenaryarmiestofighttheSpanishforthem.The Dutch themselves meanwhile took to the sea in ever-larger fleets.Mercenary armies and cannon-brandishing fleets cost a fortune, but theDutchwere able to finance their military expeditions more easily than the mightySpanish Empire because they secured the trust of the burgeoning EuropeanfinancialsystematatimewhentheSpanishkingwascarelesslyerodingitstrustinhim.FinanciersextendedtheDutchenoughcredittosetuparmiesandfleets,andthesearmiesandfleetsgavetheDutchcontrolofworldtraderoutes,whichin turn yielded handsome profits. The profits allowed the Dutch to repay theloans, which strengthened the trust of the financiers. Amsterdam was fastbecoming not only one of the most important ports of Europe, but also thecontinent’sfinancialMecca.

HowexactlydidtheDutchwinthetrustofthefinancialsystem?Firstly,theywere sticklers about repaying their loans on time and in full, making theextension of credit less risky for lenders. Secondly, their country’s judicialsystemenjoyedindependenceandprotectedprivaterights–inparticularprivateproperty rights.Capital trickles away fromdictatorial states that fail to defendprivateindividualsandtheirproperty.Instead,itflowsintostatesupholdingtheruleoflawandprivateproperty.

Imagine thatyouare the sonof a solid familyofGerman financiers.YourfatherseesanopportunitytoexpandthebusinessbyopeningbranchesinmajorEuropean cities. He sends you to Amsterdam and your younger brother toMadrid, giving you each 10,000 gold coins to invest. Your brother lends hisstart-upcapitalatinteresttothekingofSpain,whoneedsittoraiseanarmytofight the king of France.You decide to lend yours to aDutchmerchant,whowants to invest in scrubland on the southern end of a desolate island calledManhattan,certainthatpropertyvaluestherewillskyrocketastheHudsonRiverturnsintoamajortradeartery.Bothloansaretoberepaidwithinayear.

The year passes. The Dutch merchant sells the land he’s bought at ahandsomemarkupandrepaysyourmoneywith the interesthepromised.Yourfather ispleased.Butyour littlebrother inMadrid isgettingnervous.ThewarwithFranceendedwellforthekingofSpain,buthehasnowembroiledhimselfinaconflictwiththeTurks.Heneedseverypennytofinancethenewwar,andthinks this is farmore important than repaying old debts. Your brother sendsletterstothepalaceandasksfriendswithconnectionsatcourttointercede,buttonoavail.Notonlyhasyourbrothernotearnedthepromisedinterest–he’slosttheprincipal.Yourfatherisnotpleased.

Now, to make matters worse, the king sends a treasury official to yourbrothertotellhim,innouncertainterms,thatheexpectstoreceiveanotherloanofthesamesize,forthwith.Yourbrotherhasnomoneytolend.HewriteshometoDad, trying topersuadehim that this time thekingwill come through.Thepaterfamilias has a soft spot for his youngest, and agreeswith a heavy heart.Another10,000goldcoinsdisappearintotheSpanishtreasury,nevertobeseenagain.MeanwhileinAmsterdam,thingsarelookingbright.Youmakemoreandmore loans to enterprisingDutchmerchants,who repay thempromptly and infull.But your luckdoesnot hold indefinitely.Oneof your usual clients has ahunchthatwoodenclogsaregoingtobethenextfashioncrazeinParis,andasksyou for a loan to setupa footwear emporium in theFrenchcapital.You lendhim the money, but unfortunately the clogs don’t catch on with the Frenchladies,andthedisgruntledmerchantrefusestorepaytheloan.

Yourfatherisfurious,andtellsbothofyouitistimetounleashthelawyers.Your brother files suit inMadrid against the Spanishmonarch,while you filesuitinAmsterdamagainsttheerstwhilewooden-shoewizard.InSpain,thelawcourts are subservient to the king – the judges serve at his pleasure and fearpunishment if they do not do his will. In the Netherlands, the courts are aseparate branch of government, not dependent on the country’s burghers andprinces.Thecourt inMadrid throwsoutyourbrother’ssuit,while thecourt inAmsterdamfindsinyourfavourandputsalienontheclog-merchant’sassetsto

forcehim topayup.Your fatherhas learnedhis lesson.Better todobusinesswithmerchantsthanwithkings,andbettertodoitinHollandthaninMadrid.

Andyourbrother’stravailsarenotover.ThekingofSpaindesperatelyneedsmoremoneytopayhisarmy.He’ssurethatyourfatherhascashtospare.Sohebrings trumped-up treasonchargesagainstyourbrother. Ifhedoesn’tcomeupwith20,000goldcoinsforthwith,he’llgetcastintoadungeonandrotthereuntilhedies.

Your father has had enough.He pays the ransom for his beloved son, butswears never to do business in Spain again.He closes hisMadrid branch andrelocatesyourbrother toRotterdam.Twobranches inHollandnowlooklikeareally good idea. He hears that even Spanish capitalists are smuggling theirfortunesout of their country.They, too, realise that if theywant to keep theirmoneyanduseittogainmorewealth,theyarebetteroffinvestingitwheretheruleoflawprevailsandwhereprivatepropertyisrespected–intheNetherlands,forexample.

InsuchwaysdidthekingofSpainsquanderthetrustofinvestorsatthesametime that Dutch merchants gained their confidence. And it was the Dutchmerchants–nottheDutchstate–whobuilttheDutchEmpire.ThekingofSpainkeptontryingtofinanceandmaintainhisconquestsbyraisingunpopulartaxesfromadisgruntledpopulace.TheDutchmerchantsfinancedconquestbygettingloans, and increasingly also by selling shares in their companies that entitledtheir holders to receive a portion of the company’s profits.Cautious investorswhowouldneverhavegiventheirmoneytothekingofSpain,andwhowouldhave thought twice before extending credit to the Dutch government, happilyinvestedfortunesin theDutchjoint-stockcompaniesthatwerethemainstayofthenewempire.

Ifyouthoughtacompanywasgoingtomakeabigprofitbutithadalreadysoldallitsshares,youcouldbuysomefrompeoplewhoownedthem,probablyfor a higher price than they originally paid. If you bought shares and laterdiscovered that the companywas in dire straits, you could try to unload yourstock for a lower price. The resulting trade in company shares led to theestablishment inmostmajorEuropeancitiesof stockexchanges, placeswherethesharesofcompaniesweretraded.

Themost famousDutch joint-stockcompany, theVereenigdeOostindischeCompagnie, orVOC for short,was chartered in 1602, just as theDutchwerethrowingoffSpanishruleandtheboomofSpanishartillerycouldstillbeheardnotfarfromAmsterdam’sramparts.VOCusedthemoneyitraisedfromsellingshares to build ships, send them toAsia, and bring backChinese, Indian andIndonesian goods. It also financed military actions taken by company ships

againstcompetitorsandpirates.EventuallyVOCmoneyfinanced theconquestofIndonesia.

Indonesiaistheworld’sbiggestarchipelago.Itsthousandsuponthousandsofislandswere ruled in the early seventeenth century by hundreds of kingdoms,principalities, sultanates and tribes. When VOC merchants first arrived inIndonesia in 1603, their aims were strictly commercial. However, in order tosecure theircommercial interestsandmaximise theprofitsof theshareholders,VOC merchants began to fight against local potentates who charged inflatedtariffs,aswellasagainstEuropeancompetitors.VOCarmeditsmerchantshipswith cannons; it recruited European, Japanese, Indian and Indonesianmercenaries;and itbuilt fortsandconducted full-scalebattlesandsieges.Thisenterprisemay sounda little strange tous,but in theearlymodernage itwascommon forprivatecompanies tohirenotonly soldiers,but alsogeneralsandadmirals, cannons and ships, and even entire off-the-shelf armies. Theinternationalcommunitytookthisforgrantedanddidn’traiseaneyebrowwhenaprivatecompanyestablishedanempire.

Island after island fell to VOCmercenaries and a large part of Indonesiabecame aVOC colony.VOC ruled Indonesia for close to 200 years.Only in1800didtheDutchstateassumecontrolofIndonesia,makingitaDutchnationalcolonyfor thefollowing150years.Todaysomepeoplewarn that twenty-first-century corporations are accumulating toomuch power. Earlymodern historyshows just how far that can go if businesses are allowed to pursue their self-interestunchecked.

WhileVOCoperatedintheIndianOcean,theDutchWestIndiesCompany,orWIC, plied theAtlantic. In order to control trade on the importantHudsonRiver,WICbuiltasettlementcalledNewAmsterdamonanislandattheriver’smouth. The colony was threatened by Indians and repeatedly attacked by theBritish, who eventually captured it in 1664. The British changed its name toNewYork.The remainsof thewallbuiltbyWIC todefend itscolonyagainstIndians andBritish are today paved over by theworld’smost famous street –WallStreet.

As the seventeenth century wound to an end, complacency and costlycontinental wars caused the Dutch to lose not only NewYork, but also theirplace as Europe’s financial and imperial engine. The vacancy was hotlycontestedbyFranceandBritain.AtfirstFranceseemedtobe inafarstrongerposition. Itwas bigger thanBritain, richer,more populous, and it possessed alargerandmoreexperiencedarmy.YetBritainmanagedtowinthetrustofthefinancial systemwhereasFranceproved itself unworthy.Thebehaviour of the

FrenchcrownwasparticularlynotoriousduringwhatwascalledtheMississippiBubble,thelargestfinancialcrisisofeighteenth-centuryEurope.Thatstoryalsobeginswithanempire-buildingjoint-stockcompany.

In1717theMississippiCompany,charteredinFrance,setouttocolonisethelowerMississippivalley,establishingthecityofNewOrleansintheprocess.Tofinance its ambitious plans, the company, which had good connections at thecourtofKingLouisXV,soldsharesontheParisstockexchange.JohnLaw,thecompany’s director, was also the governor of the central bank of France.Furthermore, the king had appointed him controller-general of finances, anofficeroughlyequivalenttothatofamodernfinanceminister.In1717thelowerMississippivalleyofferedfewattractionsbesidesswampsandalligators,yettheMississippi Company spread tales of fabulous riches and boundlessopportunities. French aristocrats, businessmen and the stolid members of theurban bourgeoisie fell for these fantasies, and Mississippi share pricesskyrocketed. Initially, shares were offered at 500 livres apiece. On 1 August1719,sharestradedat2,750livres.By30August,theywereworth4,100livres,andon4September, they reached5,000 livres.On2December thepriceof aMississippi share crossed the threshold of 10,000 livres. Euphoria swept thestreetsofParis.PeoplesoldalltheirpossessionsandtookhugeloansinordertobuyMississippi shares.Everybodybelieved they’ddiscovered theeasyway toriches.

39. New Amsterdam in 1660, at the tip of Manhattan Island. Thesettlement’sprotectivewallistodaypavedoverbyWallStreet.

Afewdays later, thepanicbegan.Somespeculatorsrealised that theshareprices were totally unrealistic and unsustainable. They figured that they hadbettersellwhilestockpriceswereattheirpeak.Asthesupplyofsharesavailablerose,theirpricedeclined.Whenotherinvestorssawthepricegoingdown,theyalsowantedtogetoutquick.Thestockpriceplummetedfurther,settingoffanavalanche. In order to stabilise prices, the central bank of France – at thedirectionofitsgovernor,JohnLaw–boughtupMississippishares,butitcouldnot do so for ever. Eventually it ran out of money.When this happened, thecontroller-general of finances, the same John Law, authorised the printing ofmore money in order to buy additional shares. This placed the entire Frenchfinancial system inside thebubble.Andnot even this financialwizardrycouldsavetheday.ThepriceofMississippisharesdroppedfrom10,000livresbackto1,000livres,andthencollapsedcompletely,andtheshareslosteverysouoftheirworth.Bynow,thecentralbankandtheroyaltreasuryownedahugeamountofworthless stock and had no money. The big speculators emerged largelyunscathed – they had sold in time. Small investors lost everything, andmanycommittedsuicide.

The Mississippi Bubble was one of history’s most spectacular financialcrashes. The royal French financial system never recuperated fully from theblow. The way in which the Mississippi Company used its political clout tomanipulatesharepricesandfuelthebuyingfrenzycausedthepublictolosefaithin theFrenchbanking systemand in the financialwisdomof theFrenchking.LouisXVfounditmoreandmoredifficult toraisecredit.ThisbecameoneofthechiefreasonsthattheoverseasFrenchEmpirefellintoBritishhands.Whilethe British could borrow money easily and at low interest rates, France haddifficulties securing loans, and had to pay high interest on them. In order tofinancehisgrowingdebts,thekingofFranceborrowedmoreandmoremoneyathigherandhigher interest rates.Eventually, in the1780s,LouisXVI,whohadascended to the throneonhisgrandfather’sdeath, realised thathalfhisannualbudgetwas tied toservicing the interestonhis loans,and thathewasheadingtowards bankruptcy. Reluctantly, in 1789, Louis XVI convened the EstatesGeneral,theFrenchparliamentthathadnotmetforacenturyandahalf,inordertofindasolutiontothecrisis.ThusbegantheFrenchRevolution.

While the French overseas empirewas crumbling, theBritish Empirewasexpanding rapidly. Like the Dutch Empire before it, the British Empire wasestablishedandrunlargelybyprivatejoint-stockcompaniesbasedintheLondon

stockexchange.ThefirstEnglishsettlementsinNorthAmericawereestablishedin the early seventeenth century by joint-stock companies such as theLondonCompany, the Plymouth Company, the Dorchester Company and theMassachusettsCompany.

TheIndiansubcontinent toowasconquerednotby theBritishstate,butbythe mercenary army of the British East India Company. This companyoutperformed even the VOC. From its headquarters in Leadenhall Street,London,itruledamightyIndianempireforaboutacentury,maintainingahugemilitary forceofup to350,000soldiers, considerablyoutnumbering thearmedforcesof theBritishmonarchy.Only in1858did theBritishcrownnationaliseIndiaalongwiththecompany’sprivatearmy.NapoleonmadefunoftheBritish,callingthemanationofshopkeepers.YettheseshopkeepersdefeatedNapoleonhimself,andtheirempirewasthelargesttheworldhaseverseen.

IntheNameofCapitalThenationalisationofIndonesiabytheDutchcrown(1800)andofIndiaby

theBritishcrown(1858)hardlyendedtheembraceofcapitalismandempire.Onthe contrary, the connectiononlygrew stronger during thenineteenth century.Joint-stockcompaniesnolongerneededtoestablishandgovernprivatecolonies– their managers and large shareholders now pulled the strings of power inLondon,AmsterdamandParis, and theycouldcounton the state to lookaftertheir interests.AsMarxandothersocialcriticsquipped,Westerngovernmentswerebecomingacapitalisttradeunion.

The most notorious example of how governments did the bidding of bigmoneywastheFirstOpiumWar,foughtbetweenBritainandChina(1840–42).In the firsthalfof thenineteenthcentury, theBritishEast IndiaCompanyandsundry British business peoplemade fortunes by exporting drugs, particularlyopium, toChina.Millions ofChinese became addicts, debilitating the countrybotheconomicallyandsocially.Inthelate1830stheChinesegovernmentissueda ban on drug trafficking, butBritish drugmerchants simply ignored the law.Chineseauthoritiesbegantoconfiscateanddestroydrugcargos.Thedrugcartelshad close connections in Westminster and Downing Street – many MPs andCabinetministers in factheldstock in thedrugcompanies–so theypressuredthegovernmenttotakeaction.

In1840Britain dulydeclaredwar onChina in thenameof ‘free trade’. Itwas awalkover. The overconfident Chinesewere nomatch for Britain’s newwonder weapons – steamboats, heavy artillery, rockets and rapid-fire rifles.Underthesubsequentpeacetreaty,Chinaagreednottoconstraintheactivitiesof

British drug merchants and to compensate them for damages inflicted by theChinesepolice.Furthermore,theBritishdemandedandreceivedcontrolofHongKong,whichtheyproceededtouseasasecurebasefordrugtrafficking(HongKongremainedinBritishhandsuntil1997).Inthelatenineteenthcentury,about40millionChinese,atenthofthecountry’spopulation,wereopiumaddicts.3

Egypt,too,learnedtorespectthelongarmofBritishcapitalism.Duringthenineteenthcentury,FrenchandBritishinvestorslenthugesumstotherulersofEgypt,firstinordertofinancetheSuezCanalproject,andlatertofundfarlesssuccessful enterprises. Egyptian debt swelled, and European creditorsincreasinglymeddledinEgyptianaffairs.In1881Egyptiannationalistshadhadenoughand rebelled.Theydeclaredaunilateral abrogationof all foreigndebt.QueenVictoriawasnotamused.AyearlatershedispatchedherarmyandnavytotheNileandEgyptremainedaBritishprotectorateuntilafterWorldWarTwo.

Thesewerehardlytheonlywarsfoughtintheinterestsofinvestors.Infact,war itself could become a commodity, just like opium. In 1821 the Greeksrebelled against theOttomanEmpire. The uprising aroused great sympathy inliberal and romantic circles in Britain – Lord Byron, the poet, even went toGreece to fight alongside the insurgents. But London financiers saw anopportunity as well. They proposed to the rebel leaders the issue of tradableGreek Rebellion Bonds on the London stock exchange. The Greeks wouldpromise to repay the bonds, plus interest, if and when they won theirindependence. Private investors bought bonds to make a profit, or out ofsympathyfortheGreekcause,orboth.ThevalueofGreekRebellionBondsroseand fell on the London stock exchange in tempo withmilitary successes andfailuresonthebattlefieldsofHellas.TheTurksgraduallygainedtheupperhand.Witharebeldefeatimminent,thebondholdersfacedtheprospectoflosingtheirtrousers. The bondholders’ interest was the national interest, so the Britishorganisedaninternationalfleet that, in1827,sankthemainOttomanflotillaintheBattleofNavarino.Aftercenturiesofsubjugation,Greecewasfinallyfree.But freedom came with a huge debt that the new country had no way ofrepaying.TheGreekeconomywasmortgagedtoBritishcreditorsfordecadestocome.

Thebearhugbetweencapitalandpoliticshashadfar-reachingimplicationsforthecreditmarket.Theamountofcreditinaneconomyisdeterminednotonlyby purely economic factors such as the discovery of a new oil field or theinventionofanewmachine,butalsobypoliticaleventssuchasregimechangesor more ambitious foreign policies. After the Battle of Navarino, Britishcapitalistsweremorewillingtoinvesttheirmoneyinriskyoverseasdeals.Theyhad seen that if a foreign debtor refused to repay loans, HerMajesty’s armywouldgettheirmoneyback.

This is why today a country’s credit rating is far more important to itseconomicwell-being than are its natural resources. Credit ratings indicate theprobabilitythatacountrywillpayitsdebts.Inadditiontopurelyeconomicdata,they take into account political, social and even cultural factors. An oil-richcountry cursed with a despotic government, endemic warfare and a corruptjudicialsystemwillusuallyreceivealowcreditrating.Asaresult,itislikelytoremainrelativelypoorsince itwillnotbeable toraise thenecessarycapital tomake the most of its oil bounty. A country devoid of natural resources, butwhich enjoys peace, a fair judicial system and a free government is likely toreceiveahighcreditrating.Assuch,itmaybeabletoraiseenoughcheapcapitaltosupportagoodeducationsystemandfosteraflourishinghigh-techindustry.

TheCultoftheFreeMarketCapitalandpoliticsinfluenceeachothertosuchanextentthattheirrelations

arehotlydebatedbyeconomists,politiciansandthegeneralpublicalike.Ardentcapitalists tend to argue that capital should be free to influence politics, butpolitics should not be allowed to influence capital. They argue that whengovernments interfere in the markets, political interests cause them to makeunwise investments that result in slower growth. For example, a governmentmay impose heavy taxation on industrialists and use themoney to give lavishunemployment benefits, which are popular with voters. In the view of manybusiness people, itwould be far better if the government left themoneywiththem. They would use it, they claim, to open new factories and hire theunemployed.

In this view, the wisest economic policy is to keep politics out of theeconomy,reducetaxationandgovernmentregulationtoaminimum,andallowmarketforcesfreereintotaketheircourse.Privateinvestors,unencumberedbypolitical considerations, will invest their money where they can get the mostprofit, so the way to ensure the most economic growth – which will benefiteveryone, industrialists andworkers – is for the government to do as little aspossible. This free-market doctrine is today themost common and influentialvariantofthecapitalistcreed.Themostenthusiasticadvocatesofthefreemarketcriticisemilitaryadventuresabroadwithasmuchzealaswelfareprogrammesathome.TheyoffergovernmentsthesameadvicethatZenmastersofferinitiates:justdonothing.

Butinitsextremeform,beliefinthefreemarketisasnaïveasbeliefinSantaClaus.Theresimply isnosuch thingasamarket freeofallpoliticalbias.Themost important economic resource is trust in the future, and this resource isconstantlythreatenedbythievesandcharlatans.Marketsbythemselvesoffernoprotectionagainst fraud, theftandviolence. It is the jobofpoliticalsystemstoensuretrustbylegislatingsanctionsagainstcheatsandtoestablishandsupportpoliceforces,courtsandjailswhichwillenforcethelaw.Whenkingsfailtodotheir jobsandregulate themarketsproperly, it leads to lossof trust,dwindlingcreditandeconomicdepression.Thatwas the lesson taughtby theMississippiBubble of 1719, and anyone who forgot it was reminded by the US housingbubbleof2007,andtheensuingcreditcrunchandrecession.

TheCapitalistHellThere is an even more fundamental reason why it’s dangerous to give

markets a completely free rein.AdamSmith taught that the shoemakerwoulduse his surplus to employmore assistants. This implies that egoistic greed isbeneficial forall, sinceprofitsareutilised toexpandproductionandhiremoreemployees.

Yetwhat happens if the greedy shoemaker increases his profits by payingemployeeslessandincreasingtheirworkhours?Thestandardansweristhatthefreemarketwouldprotect theemployees. Ifour shoemakerpays too little anddemandstoomuch,thebestemployeeswouldnaturallyabandonhimandgotoworkforhiscompetitors.Thetyrantshoemakerwouldfindhimselfleftwiththeworstlabourers,orwithnolabourersatall.Hewouldhavetomendhiswaysorgo out of business. His own greed would compel him to treat his employeeswell.

Thissoundsbulletproofintheory,butinpracticethebulletsgetthroughalltoo easily. In a completely free market, unsupervised by kings and priests,avaricious capitalists can establish monopolies or collude against theirworkforces. If there is a single corporation controlling all shoe factories in acountry,orifallfactoryownersconspiretoreducewagessimultaneously,thenthelabourersarenolongerabletoprotectthemselvesbyswitchingjobs.

Evenworse,greedybossesmightcurtailtheworkers’freedomofmovementthrough debt peonage or slavery.At the end of theMiddleAges, slaverywasalmostunknowninChristianEurope.Duringtheearlymodernperiod,theriseofEuropeancapitalismwenthandinhandwiththeriseoftheAtlanticslavetrade.Unrestrained market forces, rather than tyrannical kings or racist ideologues,wereresponsibleforthiscalamity.

WhentheEuropeansconqueredAmerica,theyopenedgoldandsilverminesand established sugar, tobacco and cotton plantations. These mines andplantationsbecamethemainstayofAmericanproductionandexport.Thesugarplantationswere particularly important. In theMiddleAges, sugarwas a rareluxuryinEurope.ItwasimportedfromtheMiddleEastatprohibitivepricesandusedsparinglyasasecretingredientindelicaciesandsnake-oilmedicines.AfterlargesugarplantationswereestablishedinAmerica,ever-increasingamountsofsugarbegantoreachEurope.ThepriceofsugardroppedandEuropedevelopedan insatiable sweet tooth. Entrepreneurs met this need by producing hugequantitiesofsweets:cakes,cookies,chocolate,candy,andsweetenedbeveragessuch as cocoa, coffee and tea. The annual sugar intake of the averageEnglishmanrosefromnearzerointheearlyseventeenthcenturytoaroundeightkilogramsintheearlynineteenthcentury.

However, growing cane and extracting its sugar was a labour-intensivebusiness.Fewpeoplewantedtoworklonghoursinmalaria-infestedsugarfields

underatropicalsun.Contractlabourerswouldhaveproducedacommoditytooexpensive for mass consumption. Sensitive to market forces, and greedy forprofitsandeconomicgrowth,Europeanplantationownersswitchedtoslaves.

From the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries, about 10 million Africanslaves were imported to America. About 70 per cent of them worked on thesugarplantations.Labourconditionswereabominable.Mostslaveslivedashortandmiserablelife,andmillionsmorediedduringwarswagedtocaptureslavesorduringthelongvoyagefrominnerAfricatotheshoresofAmerica.AllthissothatEuropeanscouldenjoytheirsweetteaandcandy–andsugarbaronscouldenjoyhugeprofits.

The slave trade was not controlled by any state or government. It was apurelyeconomicenterprise,organisedandfinancedbythefreemarketaccordingto the lawsofsupplyanddemand.Privateslave-tradingcompaniessoldsharesontheAmsterdam,LondonandParisstockexchanges.Middle-classEuropeanslookingforagoodinvestmentboughttheseshares.Relyingonthismoney,thecompaniesbought ships,hiredsailorsandsoldiers,purchasedslaves inAfrica,and transported them toAmerica. There they sold the slaves to the plantationowners,usingtheproceedstopurchaseplantationproductssuchassugar,cocoa,coffee, tobacco, cotton and rum. They returned to Europe, sold the sugar andcotton for agoodprice, and then sailed toAfrica tobeginanother round.Theshareholders were very pleased with this arrangement. Throughout theeighteenthcentury theyieldonslave-trade investmentswasabout6percentayear–theywereextremelyprofitable,asanymodernconsultantwouldbequicktoadmit.

Thisistheflyintheointmentoffree-marketcapitalism.Itcannotensurethatprofitsaregainedinafairway,ordistributedinafairmanner.Onthecontrary,the craving to increase profits and production blinds people to anything thatmightstandintheway.Whengrowthbecomesasupremegood,unrestrictedbyanyotherethicalconsiderations,itcaneasilyleadtocatastrophe.Somereligions,such as Christianity and Nazism, have killed millions out of burning hatred.Capitalismhaskilledmillionsoutofcoldindifferencecoupledwithgreed.TheAtlantic slave trade did not stem from racist hatred towards Africans. Theindividualswhoboughttheshares,thebrokerswhosoldthem,andthemanagersof the slave-trade companies rarely thought about the Africans. Nor did theownersof the sugarplantations.Manyowners lived far from theirplantations,andtheonlyinformationtheydemandedwereneatledgersofprofitsandlosses.

It is important to remember that the Atlantic slave trade was not a singleaberrationinanotherwisespotlessrecord.TheGreatBengalFamine,discussedinthepreviouschapter,wascausedbyasimilardynamic–theBritishEastIndia

Company cared more about its profits than about the lives of 10 millionBengalis.VOC’smilitarycampaignsinIndonesiawerefinancedbyupstandingDutch burghers who loved their children, gave to charity, and enjoyed goodmusicandfineart,buthadnoregardforthesufferingoftheinhabitantsofJava,SumatraandMalacca.Countlessothercrimesandmisdemeanoursaccompaniedthegrowthofthemoderneconomyinotherpartsoftheplanet.

Thenineteenthcenturybroughtnoimprovementintheethicsofcapitalism.The IndustrialRevolution that swept throughEuropeenriched thebankersandcapital-owners,butcondemnedmillionsofworkerstoalifeofabjectpoverty.Inthe European colonies things were even worse. In 1876, King Leopold II ofBelgiumsetupanongovernmentalhumanitarianorganisationwiththedeclaredaim of exploring Central Africa and fighting the slave trade along the CongoRiver. Itwasalsochargedwith improvingconditionsfor the inhabitantsof theregionbybuilding roads, schools andhospitals. In 1885 theEuropeanpowersagreed togive thisorganisationcontrolof2.3millionsquarekilometres in theCongo basin. This territory, seventy-five times the size of Belgium, washenceforth known as the Congo Free State. Nobody asked the opinion of theterritory’s20–30millioninhabitants.

Within a short time the humanitarian organisation became a businessenterprisewhoserealaimwasgrowthandprofit.Theschoolsandhospitalswereforgotten,andtheCongobasinwasinsteadfilledwithminesandplantations,runbymostlyBelgian officialswho ruthlessly exploited the local population.Therubber industry was particularly notorious. Rubber was fast becoming anindustrial staple, and rubber exportwas theCongo’smost important sourceofincome.TheAfricanvillagerswhocollectedtherubberwererequiredtoprovidehigherandhigherquotas.Thosewhofailedtodelivertheirquotawerepunishedbrutallyfortheir‘laziness’.Theirarmswerechoppedoffandoccasionallyentirevillages were massacred. According to the most moderate estimates, between1885 and 1908 the pursuit of growth and profits cost the lives of 6 millionindividuals (at least 20 per cent of the Congo’s population). Some estimatesreachupto10milliondeaths.4

After1908,andespeciallyafter1945,capitalistgreedwassomewhatreinedin,notleastduetothefearofCommunism.Yetinequitiesarestillrampant.Theeconomicpieof2014isfar larger thanthepieof1500,but it isdistributedsounevenlythatmanyAfricanpeasantsandIndonesianlabourersreturnhomeafterahardday’sworkwithlessfoodthandidtheirancestors500yearsago.Muchlike the Agricultural Revolution, so too the growth of the modern economymightturnouttobeacolossalfraud.Thehumanspeciesandtheglobaleconomy

may well keep growing, but many more individuals may live in hunger andwant.

Capitalismhas twoanswers to thiscriticism.First,capitalismhascreatedaworldthatnobodybutacapitalistiscapableofrunning.Theonlyseriousattempttomanagetheworlddifferently–Communism–wassomuchworseinalmosteveryconceivablewaythatnobodyhasthestomachtotryagain.In8500BConecouldcrybittertearsovertheAgriculturalRevolution,butitwastoolatetogiveupagriculture.Similarly,wemaynotlikecapitalism,butwecannotlivewithoutit.

The second answer is that we just need more patience – paradise, thecapitalistspromise, is rightaround thecorner.True,mistakeshavebeenmade,such as theAtlantic slave trade and the exploitation of theEuropeanworkingclass. But we have learned our lesson, and if we just wait a little longer andallow thepie togrowa littlebigger, everybodywill receivea fatter slice.Thedivision of spoils will never be equitable, but there will be enough to satisfyeveryman,womanandchild–evenintheCongo.

Thereare,indeed,somepositivesigns.Atleastwhenweusepurelymaterialcriteria – such as life expectancy, child mortality and calorie intake – thestandardof livingof theaveragehuman in2014 is significantlyhigher than itwasin1914,despitetheexponentialgrowthinthenumberofhumans.

Yet can the economic pie grow indefinitely? Every pie requires rawmaterialsandenergy.ProphetsofdoomwarnthatsoonerorlaterHomosapienswillexhausttherawmaterialsandenergyofplanetEarth.Andwhatwillhappenthen?

17

TheWheelsofIndustry

THEMODERNECONOMYGROWSTHANKS toour trust in the futureand to thewillingnessof capitalists to reinvest their profits inproduction.Yetthatdoesnotsuffice.Economicgrowthalsorequiresenergyandrawmaterials,andthesearefinite.Whenandiftheyrunout,theentiresystemwillcollapse.

But theevidenceprovidedbythepast is that theyarefiniteonly in theory.Counter-intuitively, while humankind’s use of energy and raw materials hasmushroomedinthelastfewcenturies,theamountsavailableforourexploitationhaveactually increased.Whenever a shortage of either has threatened to sloweconomic growth, investments have flowed into scientific and technologicalresearch. These have invariably produced not only more efficient ways ofexploiting existing resources, but also completely new types of energy andmaterials.

Consider the vehicle industry. Over the last 300 years, humankind hasmanufacturedbillionsofvehicles–fromcartsandwheelbarrows,totrains,cars,supersonic jets and space shuttles. One might have expected that such aprodigious effort would have exhausted the energy sources and rawmaterialsavailableforvehicleproduction,andthattodaywewouldbescrapingthebottomof thebarrel.Yet theopposite is thecase.Whereas in1700 theglobalvehicleindustryreliedoverwhelminglyonwoodandiron,todayithasatitsdisposalacornucopia of new-found materials such as plastic, rubber, aluminium andtitanium,noneofwhichourancestorsevenknewabout.Whereasin1700cartswere built mainly by the muscle power of carpenters and smiths, today themachinesinToyotaandBoeingfactoriesarepoweredbypetroleumcombustionengines and nuclear power stations.A similar revolution has swept almost allotherfieldsofindustry.WecallittheIndustrialRevolution.

Formillenniaprior totheIndustrialRevolution,humansalreadyknewhow

tomakeuseofalargevarietyofenergysources.Theyburnedwoodinordertosmelt iron,heathousesandbakecakes.Sailingshipsharnessedwindpower tomovearound,andwatermillscapturedtheflowofriverstogrindgrain.Yetallthese had clear limits andproblems.Treeswere not available everywhere, thewinddidn’talwaysblowwhenyouneededit,andwaterpowerwasonlyusefulifyoulivednearariver.

An even bigger problemwas that people didn’t know how to convert onetype of energy into another. They could harness the movement of wind andwater to sail ships and push millstones, but not to heat water or smelt iron.Conversely, they could not use the heat energy produced by burningwood tomakeamillstonemove.Humanshadonlyonemachinecapableofperformingsuchenergyconversion tricks: thebody. In thenaturalprocessofmetabolism,thebodiesofhumansandotheranimalsburnorganicfuelsknownasfoodandconvert the released energy into themovement ofmuscles.Men, women andbeastscouldconsumegrainandmeat,burnuptheircarbohydratesandfats,andusetheenergytohaularickshaworpullaplough.

Since human and animal bodies were the only energy conversion deviceavailable, muscle power was the key to almost all human activities. Humanmusclesbuiltcartsandhouses,oxmusclesploughedfields,andhorsemusclestransportedgoods.Theenergythatfuelledtheseorganicmuscle-machinescameultimatelyfromasinglesource–plants.Plantsintheirturnobtainedtheirenergyfromthesun.Bytheprocessofphotosynthesis,theycapturedsolarenergyandpacked it into organic compounds. Almost everything people did throughouthistorywas fuelledby solar energy thatwas capturedbyplants and convertedintomusclepower.

Humanhistorywasconsequentlydominatedbytwomaincycles:thegrowthcyclesofplantsandthechangingcyclesofsolarenergy(dayandnight,summerandwinter).Whensunlightwasscarceandwhenwheatfieldswerestillgreen,humans had little energy. Granaries were empty, tax collectors were idle,soldiersfounditdifficulttomoveandfight,andkingstendedtokeepthepeace.Whenthesunshonebrightlyandthewheatripened,peasantsharvestedthecropsandfilledthegranaries.Taxcollectorshurriedtotaketheirshare.Soldiersflexedtheirmusclesandsharpenedtheirswords.Kingsconvenedcouncilsandplannedtheir next campaigns. Everyone was fuelled by solar energy – captured andpackagedinwheat,riceandpotatoes.

TheSecretintheKitchenThroughout these longmillennia, day in anddayout, people stood face to

facewiththemostimportantinventioninthehistoryofenergyproduction–andfailedtonoticeit.Itstaredthemintheeyeeverytimeahousewifeorservantputupakettle toboilwater for teaorputapot fullofpotatoeson thestove.Theminutethewaterboiled,thelidofthekettleorthepotjumped.Heatwasbeingconvertedtomovement.But jumpingpot lidswereanannoyance,especiallyifyouforgotthepotonthestoveandthewaterboiledover.Nobodysawtheirrealpotential.

A partial breakthrough in converting heat into movement followed theinvention of gunpowder in ninth-century China. At first, the idea of usinggunpowder to propel projectiles was so counter-intuitive that for centuriesgunpowderwasusedprimarilytoproducefirebombs.Buteventually–perhapsaftersomebombexpertgroundgunpowder inamortaronly tohave thepestleshoot out with force – guns made their appearance. About 600 years passedbetweentheinventionofgunpowderandthedevelopmentofeffectiveartillery.

Even then, the idea of converting heat into motion remained so counter-intuitive that another three centuries went by before people invented the nextmachinethatusedheattomovethingsaround.ThenewtechnologywasborninBritishcoalmines.AstheBritishpopulationswelled,forestswerecutdowntofuelthegrowingeconomyandmakewayforhousesandfields.Britainsufferedfroman increasingshortageof firewood. Itbeganburningcoalasasubstitute.Many coal seams were located in waterlogged areas, and flooding preventedminers fromaccessing the lowerstrataof themines. Itwasaproblem lookingforasolution.Around1700,astrangenoisebeganreverberatingaroundBritishmineshafts.Thatnoise–harbingerof theIndustrialRevolution–wassubtleatfirst,butitgrewlouderandlouderwitheachpassingdecadeuntil itenvelopedtheentireworldinadeafeningcacophony.Itemanatedfromasteamengine.

There are many types of steam engines, but they all share one commonprinciple.Youburnsomekindoffuel,suchascoal,andusetheresultingheattoboilwater,producingsteam.Asthesteamexpandsitpushesapiston.Thepistonmoves, and anything that is connected to the pistonmoveswith it. You haveconverted heat into movement! In eighteenth-century British coal mines, thepiston was connected to a pump that extracted water from the bottom of themineshafts.Theearliestengineswereincrediblyinefficient.Youneededtoburnahugeloadofcoalinordertopumpoutevenatinyamountofwater.Butintheminescoalwasplentifulandcloseathand,sonobodycared.

In thedecades that followed,Britishentrepreneurs improved theefficiencyofthesteamengine,broughtitoutofthemineshafts,andconnectedittoloomsandgins.This revolutionised textileproduction,making it possible toproduceever-largerquantitiesofcheaptextiles.Intheblinkofaneye,Britainbecamethe

workshopoftheworld.Butevenmoreimportantly,gettingthesteamengineoutoftheminesbrokeanimportantpsychologicalbarrier.Ifyoucouldburncoalinordertomovetextilelooms,whynotusethesamemethodtomoveotherthings,suchasvehicles?

In 1825, a British engineer connected a steam engine to a train of minewagonsfullofcoal.Theenginedrewthewagonsalonganironrailsometwentykilometreslongfromtheminetothenearestharbour.Thiswasthefirststeam-poweredlocomotiveinhistory.Clearly,ifsteamcouldbeusedtotransportcoal,whynot other goods?Andwhynot evenpeople?On15September 1830, thefirst commercial railway line was opened, connecting Liverpool withManchester.Thetrainsmovedunderthesamesteampowerthathadpreviouslypumpedwaterandmovedtextilelooms.Ameretwentyyearslater,Britainhadtensofthousandsofkilometresofrailwaytracks.1

Henceforth,peoplebecameobsessedwiththeideathatmachinesandenginescouldbeused toconvertone typeofenergy intoanother.Any typeofenergy,anywhereintheworld,mightbeharnessedtowhateverneedwehad,ifwecouldjust invent the right machine. For example, when physicists realised that animmense amount of energy is stored within atoms, they immediately startedthinkingabouthowthisenergycouldbereleasedandused tomakeelectricity,power submarines and annihilate cities.Sixhundredyears passedbetween themoment Chinese alchemists discovered gunpowder and the moment TurkishcannonpulverisedthewallsofConstantinople.OnlyfortyyearspassedbetweenthemomentEinsteindeterminedthatanykindofmasscouldbeconvertedintoenergy–that’swhatE=mc2means–andthemomentatombombsobliteratedHiroshima andNagasaki and nuclear power stationsmushroomed all over theglobe.

Another crucial discoverywas the internal combustion engine,which tooklittle more than a generation to revolutionise human transportation and turnpetroleumintoliquidpoliticalpower.Petroleumhadbeenknownforthousandsofyears,andwasused towaterproofroofsand lubricateaxles.Yetuntil justacenturyagonobodythoughtitwasusefulformuchmorethanthat.Theideaofspillingbloodforthesakeofoilwouldhaveseemedludicrous.Youmightfightawaroverland,gold,pepperorslaves,butnotoil.

Thecareerofelectricitywasmorestartlingyet.Twocenturiesagoelectricityplayed no role in the economy, and was used at most for arcane scientificexperiments and cheapmagic tricks. A series of inventions turned it into ouruniversal genie in a lamp.We flick our fingers and it prints books and sewsclothes,keepsourvegetablesfreshandouricecreamfrozen,cooksourdinners

andexecutesourcriminals,registersourthoughtsandrecordsoursmiles,lightsup our nights and entertains us with countless television shows. Few of usunderstandhowelectricitydoesallthesethings,butevenfewercanimaginelifewithoutit.

AnOceanofEnergyAt heart, the Industrial Revolution has been a revolution in energy

conversion. It has demonstrated again and again that there is no limit to theamountofenergyatourdisposal.Or,moreprecisely,thattheonlylimitissetbyourignorance.Everyfewdecadeswediscoveranewenergysource,sothatthesumtotalofenergyatourdisposaljustkeepsgrowing.

Whyaresomanypeopleafraidthatwearerunningoutofenergy?Whydotheywarnofdisaster ifweexhaustallavailablefossilfuels?Clearlytheworlddoes not lack energy.All we lack is the knowledge necessary to harness andconvertittoourneeds.Theamountofenergystoredinallthefossilfuelonearthisnegligiblecompared to theamount that thesundispenseseveryday, freeofcharge.Onlyatinyproportionofthesun’senergyreachesus,yetitamountsto3,766,800exajoulesofenergyeachyear(ajouleisaunitofenergyinthemetricsystem,abouttheamountyouexpendtoliftasmallappleoneyardstraightup;anexajoule isabillionbillion joules– that’sa lotofapples).2All theworld’splantscaptureonlyabout3,000ofthosesolarexajoulesthroughtheprocessofphotosynthesis.3Allhumanactivitiesandindustriesputtogetherconsumeabout500exajoulesannually,equivalenttotheamountofenergyearthreceivesfromthesuninjustninetyminutes.4Andthat’sonlysolarenergy.Inaddition,wearesurrounded by other enormous sources of energy, such as nuclear energy andgravitational energy, the latter most evident in the power of the ocean tidescausedbythemoon’spullontheearth.

Prior to the Industrial Revolution, the human energy market was almostcompletelydependentonplants.Peoplelivedalongsideagreenenergyreservoircarrying3,000exajoulesayear,andtriedtopumpasmuchofitsenergyastheycould.Yet therewasaclear limit tohowmuch theycouldextract.During theIndustrialRevolution,wecametorealisethatweareactuallylivingalongsideanenormous ocean of energy, one holding billions upon billions of exajoules ofpotentialpower.Allweneedtodoisinventbetterpumps.

*

Learning how to harness and convert energy effectively solved the other

problemthatslowseconomicgrowth–thescarcityofrawmaterials.Ashumansworkedout how toharness largequantities of cheap energy, they couldbeginexploiting previously inaccessible deposits of raw materials (for example,miningironintheSiberianwastelands),ortransportingrawmaterialsfromevermore distant locations (for example, supplying a British textile mill withAustralianwool).Simultaneously, scientific breakthroughs enabledhumankindtoinventcompletelynewrawmaterials,suchasplastic,anddiscoverpreviouslyunknownnaturalmaterials,suchassiliconandaluminium.

Chemistsdiscoveredaluminiumonlyinthe1820s,butseparatingthemetalfrom its ore was extremely difficult and costly. For decades, aluminium wasmuchmoreexpensivethangold.Inthe1860S,EmperorNapoleonIIIofFrancecommissionedaluminiumcutlerytobelaidoutforhismostdistinguishedguests.Lessimportantvisitorshadtomakedowiththegoldknivesandforks.5Butattheendofthenineteenthcenturychemistsdiscoveredawaytoextractimmenseamountsofcheapaluminium,andcurrentglobalproductionstandsat30milliontons per year. Napoleon III would be surprised to hear that his subjects’descendantsusecheapdisposablealuminiumfoil towraptheirsandwichesandputawaytheirleftovers.

Two thousandyears ago,whenpeople in theMediterraneanbasin sufferedfromdryskintheysmearedoliveoilontheirhands.Today,theyopenatubeofhandcream.BelowisthelistofingredientsofasimplemodernhandcreamthatIboughtatalocalstore:

deionisedwater, stearicacid,glycerin,caprylic/caprictiglyceride,propyleneglycol,isopropylmyristate,panaxginsengrootextract,fragrance,cetylalcohol,triethanolamine, dimeticone, arctostaphylos uva-ursi leaf extract, magnesiumascorbyl phosphate, imidazolidinyl urea, methyl paraben, camphor, propylparaben, hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde, hydroxyl-citronellal,linalool,butylphenylmethylproplonal,citronnellol,limonene,geraniol.

Almostallof these ingredientswere inventedordiscovered in the last twocenturies.

DuringWorldWarOne,Germanywasplacedunderblockadeandsufferedsevereshortagesofrawmaterials,inparticularsaltpetre,anessentialingredientingunpowderandotherexplosives.ThemostimportantsaltpetredepositswereinChileandIndia;therewerenoneatall inGermany.True,saltpetrecouldbereplacedbyammonia,butthatwasexpensivetoproduceaswell.LuckilyfortheGermans,oneoftheirfellowcitizens,aJewishchemistnamedFritzHaber,haddiscovered in 1908 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 rawmaterial. Some scholars

believethatifithadn’tbeenforHaber’sdiscovery,Germanywouldhavebeenforced to surrender long before November 1918.6 The discovery won Haber(whoduringthewaralsopioneeredtheuseofpoisongasinbattle)aNobelPrizein1918.Inchemistry,notinpeace.

LifeontheConveyorBeltThe Industrial Revolution yielded an unprecedented combination of cheap

andabundantenergyandcheapandabundantrawmaterials.Theresultwasanexplosion in human productivity. The explosionwas felt first and foremost inagriculture.Usually,whenwethinkoftheIndustrialRevolution,wethinkofanurban landscape of smoking chimneys, or the plight of exploited coal minerssweatinginthebowelsoftheearth.YettheIndustrialRevolutionwasaboveallelsetheSecondAgriculturalRevolution.

During the last 200 years, industrial production methods became themainstayofagriculture.Machinessuchastractorsbegantoundertaketasksthatwerepreviouslyperformedbymusclepower,ornotperformedatall.Fieldsandanimalsbecamevastlymoreproductivethankstoartificialfertilisers, industrialinsecticides and an entire arsenal of hormones andmedications.Refrigerators,ships and aeroplanes have made it possible to store produce for months, andtransportitquicklyandcheaplytotheothersideoftheworld.EuropeansbegantodineonfreshArgentinianbeefandJapanesesushi.

Even plants and animals were mechanised. Around the time that Homosapiens was elevated to divine status by humanist religions, farm animalsstoppedbeingviewedas livingcreatures that could feelpainanddistress, andinstead came to be treated asmachines. Today these animals are oftenmass-produced in factory-like facilities, their bodies shaped in accordance withindustrialneeds.Theypass theirentire livesascogsinagiantproductionline,and the length and quality of their existence is determined by the profits andlossesofbusinesscorporations.Evenwhentheindustrytakescaretokeepthemalive,reasonablyhealthyandwellfed,ithasnointrinsicinterestintheanimals’social and psychological needs (except when these have a direct impact onproduction).

Egg-layinghens, for example, have a complexworldofbehavioural needsanddrives.Theyfeelstrongurges toscout theirenvironment, forageandpeckaround,determinesocialhierarchies,buildnestsandgroomthemselves.Buttheeggindustryoftenlocksthehensinsidetinycoops,anditisnotuncommonforittosqueezefourhenstoacage,eachgivenafloorspaceofabouttwenty-fivebytwenty-twocentimetres.Thehensreceivesufficientfood,buttheyareunableto

claima territory, build anest or engage inother natural activities. Indeed, thecageissosmallthathensareoftenunableeventoflaptheirwingsorstandfullyerect.

Pigs are among the most intelligent and inquisitive of mammals, secondperhaps only to the great apes. Yet industrialised pig farms routinely confinenursingsowsinsidesuchsmallcratesthattheyareliterallyunabletoturnaround(nottomentionwalkorforage).Thesowsarekeptinthesecratesdayandnightfor four weeks after giving birth. Their offspring are then taken away to befattenedupandthesowsareimpregnatedwiththenextlitterofpiglets.

Manydairycowslivealmostalltheirallottedyearsinsideasmallenclosure;standing, sitting and sleeping in their own urine and excrement. They receivetheirmeasureoffood,hormonesandmedicationsfromonesetofmachines,andgetmilkedeveryfewhoursbyanothersetofmachines.Thecowinthemiddleistreatedaslittlemorethanamouththattakesinrawmaterialsandanudderthatproducesacommodity.Treatinglivingcreaturespossessingcomplexemotionalworlds as if they were machines is likely to cause them not only physicaldiscomfort,butalsomuchsocialstressandpsychologicalfrustration.7

40. Chicks on a conveyor belt in a commercial hatchery.Male chicksandimperfectfemalechicksarepickedofftheconveyorbeltandarethenasphyxiatedingaschambers,droppedintoautomaticshredders,orsimplythrown into the rubbish, where they are crushed to death. Hundreds ofmillionsofchicksdieeachyearinsuchhatcheries.

JustastheAtlanticslavetradedidnotstemfromhatredtowardsAfricans,sothemodernanimalindustryisnotmotivatedbyanimosity.Again,itisfuelledbyindifference.Mostpeoplewhoproduceandconsumeeggs,milkandmeatrarelystop to think about the fate of the chickens, cows or pigs whose flesh andemissionstheyareeating.Thosewhodothinkoftenarguethatsuchanimalsarereally little different from machines, devoid of sensations and emotions,incapableofsuffering.Ironically,thesamescientificdisciplineswhichshapeourmilkmachines and eggmachines have lately demonstrated beyond reasonabledoubtthatmammalsandbirdshaveacomplexsensoryandemotionalmake-up.Theynotonlyfeelphysicalpain,butcanalsosufferfromemotionaldistress.

Evolutionary psychologymaintains that the emotional and social needs offarm animals evolved in the wild, when they were essential for survival andreproduction.Forexample,awildcowhadtoknowhowtoformcloserelationswithothercowsandbulls,orelseshecouldnotsurviveandreproduce.Inordertolearnthenecessaryskills,evolutionimplantedincalves–asintheyoungofall other socialmammals – a strong desire to play (playing is themammalianway of learning social behaviour).And it implanted in them an even strongerdesire to bond with their mothers, whose milk and care were essential forsurvival.

What happens if farmers now take a young calf, separate her from hermother,puther inaclosedcage,giveherfood,waterand inoculationsagainstdiseases, and then, when she is old enough, inseminate her with bull sperm?Fromanobjectiveperspective,thiscalfnolongerneedseithermaternalbondingor playmates in order to survive and reproduce. But from a subjectiveperspective,thecalfstillfeelsaverystrongurgetobondwithhermotherandtoplaywithother calves. If theseurges arenot fulfilled, the calf suffers greatly.This is thebasic lessonofevolutionarypsychology:aneedshaped in thewildcontinues to be felt subjectively even if it is no longer really necessary forsurvival and reproduction.The tragedy of industrial agriculture is that it takesgreat care of the objective needs of animals,while neglecting their subjectiveneeds.

The truthof this theoryhasbeenknownat leastsince the1950s,when theAmerican psychologist Harry Harlow studied the development of monkeys.Harlow separated infantmonkeys from theirmothers several hours after birth.Themonkeyswereisolatedinsidecages,andthenraisedbydummymothers.Ineachcage,Harlowplacedtwodummymothers.Onewasmadeofmetalwires,andwasfittedwithamilkbottlefromwhichtheinfantmonkeycouldsuck.Theother was made of wood covered with cloth, which made it resemble a real

monkeymother,butitprovidedtheinfantmonkeywithnomaterialsustenancewhatsoever.Itwasassumedthattheinfantswouldclingtothenourishingmetalmotherratherthantothebarrenclothone.

ToHarlow’s surprise, the infantmonkeys showedamarkedpreference fortheclothmother,spendingmostof their timewithher.When the twomotherswere placed in close proximity, the infants held on to the cloth mother evenwhiletheyreachedovertosuckmilkfromthemetalmother.Harlowsuspectedthatperhaps the infantsdidsobecause theywerecold.Sohe fittedanelectricbulb inside the wiremother, which now radiated heat.Most of themonkeys,exceptfortheveryyoungones,continuedtoprefertheclothmother.

41.OneofHarlow’sorphanedmonkeysclingstotheclothmotherevenwhilesuckingmilkfromthemetalmother.

Follow-upresearchshowedthatHarlow’sorphanedmonkeysgrewuptobe

emotionally disturbed even though they had received all the nourishment theyrequired.Theyneverfittedintomonkeysociety,haddifficultiescommunicatingwith othermonkeys, and suffered fromhigh levels of anxiety and aggression.The conclusionwas inescapable:monkeysmust havepsychological needs anddesiresthatgobeyondtheirmaterialrequirements,andifthesearenotfulfilled,theywillsuffergreatly.Harlow’sinfantmonkeyspreferredtospendtheirtimeinthehandsofthebarrenclothmotherbecausetheywerelookingforanemotionalbondandnotonlyformilk.Inthefollowingdecades,numerousstudiesshowedthatthisconclusionappliesnotonlytomonkeys,buttoothermammals,aswellas birds. At present, millions of farm animals are subjected to the sameconditionsasHarlow’smonkeys,asfarmersroutinelyseparatecalves,kidsandotheryoungstersfromtheirmothers,toberaisedinisolation.8

Altogether, tens of billions of farm animals live today as part of amechanised assembly line, and about 50 billion of them are slaughteredannually. These industrial livestock methods have led to a sharp increase inagricultural production and in human food reserves. Together with themechanisationofplant cultivation, industrial animalhusbandry is thebasis forthe entire modern socio-economic order. Before the industrialisation ofagriculture,mostofthefoodproducedinfieldsandfarmswas‘wasted’feedingpeasants and farmyardanimals.Onlya smallpercentagewasavailable to feedartisans, teachers,priestsandbureaucrats.Consequently, inalmostallsocietiespeasants comprised more than 90 per cent of the population. Following theindustrialisation of agriculture, a shrinking number of farmers was enough tofeedagrowingnumberofclerksandfactoryhands.TodayintheUnitedStates,only2percentofthepopulationmakesalivingfromagriculture,yetthis2percent produces enough not only to feed the entire US population, but also toexport surpluses to the rest of the world.9 Without the industrialisation ofagriculturetheurbanIndustrialRevolutioncouldneverhavetakenplace–therewouldnothavebeenenoughhandsandbrainstostafffactoriesandoffices.

Asthosefactoriesandofficesabsorbedthebillionsofhandsandbrainsthatwere released from fieldwork, they began pouring out an unprecedentedavalancheofproducts.Humansnowproducefarmoresteel,manufacturemuchmore clothing, and build manymore structures than ever before. In addition,theyproduceamind-bogglingarrayofpreviouslyunimaginablegoods,suchaslightbulbs,mobilephones,camerasanddishwashers.Forthefirsttimeinhumanhistory, supply began to outstrip demand. And an entirely new problem wasborn:whoisgoingtobuyallthisstuff?

TheAgeofShoppingThemoderncapitalisteconomymustconstantlyincreaseproductionifitisto

survive, like a shark thatmust swim or suffocate. Yet it’s not enough just toproduce.Somebodymust alsobuy theproducts, or industrialists and investorsalikewillgobust.Topreventthiscatastropheandtomakesurethatpeoplewillalwaysbuywhatevernewstuffindustryproduces,anewkindofethicappeared:consumerism.

Mostpeoplethroughouthistorylivedunderconditionsofscarcity.Frugalitywasthustheirwatchword.TheaustereethicsofthePuritansandSpartansarebuttwofamousexamples.Agoodpersonavoidedluxuries,neverthrewfoodaway,andpatcheduptorntrousersinsteadofbuyinganewpair.Onlykingsandnoblesallowed themselves to renouncesuchvaluespubliclyandconspicuously flaunttheirriches.

Consumerismseestheconsumptionofevermoreproductsandservicesasapositive thing. It encourages people to treat themselves, spoil themselves, andeven kill themselves slowly by overconsumption. Frugality is a disease to becured.Youdon’thavetolookfartoseetheconsumerethicinaction–justreadthe back of a cereal box. Here’s a quote from a box of one of my favouritebreakfastcereals,producedbyanIsraelifirm,Telma:

Sometimesyouneedatreat.Sometimesyouneedalittleextraenergy.Thereare times to watch your weight and times when you’ve just got to havesomething…rightnow!Telmaoffers avarietyof tasty cereals just foryou–treatswithoutremorse.

The same package sports an ad for another brand of cereal called HealthTreats:

Health Treats offers lots of grains, fruits and nuts for an experience thatcombinestaste,pleasureandhealth.Foranenjoyabletreatinthemiddleoftheday,suitableforahealthylifestyle.Arealtreatwiththewonderfultasteofmore[emphasisintheoriginal].

Throughout most of history, people were likely to be have been repelledrather than attracted by such a text. They would have branded it as selfish,decadentandmorallycorrupt.Consumerismhasworkedveryhard,withthehelpofpopularpsychology(‘Justdoit!’)toconvincepeoplethatindulgenceisgoodforyou,whereasfrugalityisself-oppression.

Ithassucceeded.Weareallgoodconsumers.Webuycountlessproductsthatwe don’t really need, and that until yesterday we didn’t know existed.Manufacturers deliberately design short-term goods and invent new andunnecessarymodelsofperfectlysatisfactoryproductsthatwemustpurchaseinorder to stay ‘in’. Shopping has become a favourite pastime, and consumer

goods have become essential mediators in relationships between familymembers, spouses and friends. Religious holidays such as Christmas havebecomeshoppingfestivals.IntheUnitedStates,evenMemorialDay–originallyasolemndayfor rememberingfallensoldiers– isnowanoccasionforspecialsales.Mostpeoplemark thisdaybygoingshopping,perhaps toprove that thedefendersoffreedomdidnotdieinvain.

Thefloweringoftheconsumeristethicismanifestedmostclearlyinthefoodmarket.Traditionalagriculturalsocieties livedintheawfulshadeofstarvation.In the affluent world of today one of the leading health problems is obesity,whichstrikesthepoor(whostuffthemselveswithhamburgersandpizzas)evenmoreseverely than therich(whoeatorganicsaladsandfruitsmoothies).EachyeartheUSpopulationspendsmoremoneyondietsthantheamountneededtofeedallthehungrypeopleintherestoftheworld.Obesityisadoublevictoryforconsumerism. Insteadofeating little,whichwill lead toeconomiccontraction,people eat too much and then buy diet products – contributing to economicgrowthtwiceover.

How can we square the consumerist ethic with the capitalist ethic of thebusiness person, according towhich profits should not bewasted, and shouldinstead be reinvested in production? It’s simple. As in previous eras, there istodayadivisionoflabourbetweentheeliteandthemasses.InmedievalEurope,aristocrats spent their money carelessly on extravagant luxuries, whereaspeasantslivedfrugally,mindingeverypenny.Today,thetableshaveturned.Therich takegreat caremanaging their assetsand investments,while the lesswellheeledgointodebtbuyingcarsandtelevisionstheydon’treallyneed.

The capitalist and consumerist ethics are two sides of the same coin, amerger of two commandments. The supreme commandment of the rich is‘Invest!’Thesupremecommandmentoftherestofusis‘Buy!’

The capitalist-consumerist ethic is revolutionary in another respect. Mostpreviousethical systemspresentedpeoplewithapretty toughdeal.Theywerepromised paradise, but only if they cultivated compassion and tolerance,overcamecravingandanger,andrestrainedtheirselfishinterests.Thiswastootough for most. The history of ethics is a sad tale of wonderful ideals thatnobody can liveup to.MostChristians didnot imitateChrist,mostBuddhistsfailed to followBuddha,andmostConfucianswouldhavecausedConfuciusatempertantrum.

In contrast, most people today successfully live up to the capitalist-consumerist ideal. The new ethic promises paradise on condition that the richremain greedy and spend their timemakingmoremoney, and that themasses

givefreerein to theircravingsandpassions–andbuymoreandmore.This isthefirst religion inhistorywhosefollowersactuallydowhat theyareasked todo.How, though, doweknow thatwe’ll really get paradise in return?We’veseenitontelevision.

18

APermanentRevolution

THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION OPENED up new ways to convertenergyandtoproducegoods,largelyliberatinghumankindfromitsdependenceon the surrounding ecosystem. Humans cut down forests, drained swamps,dammed rivers, flooded plains, laid down tens of thousands of kilometres ofrailroadtracks,andbuiltskyscrapingmetropolises.AstheworldwasmouldedtofittheneedsofHomosapiens,habitatsweredestroyedandspecieswentextinct.Our once green and blue planet is becoming a concrete and plastic shoppingcentre.

Today, the earths continents are home to almost 7 billion Sapiens. If youtookallthesepeopleandputthemonalargesetofscales,theircombinedmasswouldbeabout300milliontons.Ifyouthentookallourdomesticatedfarmyardanimals–cows,pigs,sheepandchickens–andplacedthemonanevenlargersetofscales,theirmasswouldamounttoabout700milliontons.Incontrast,thecombined mass of all surviving large wild animals – from porcupines andpenguinstoelephantsandwhales–islessthan100milliontons.Ourchildren’sbooks,ouriconographyandourTVscreensarestillfullofgiraffes,wolvesandchimpanzees, but the real world has very few of them left. There are about80,000 giraffes in the world, compared to 1.5 billion cattle; only 200,000wolves,comparedto400milliondomesticateddogs;only250,000chimpanzees–incontrasttobillionsofhumans.Humankindreallyhastakenovertheworld.1

Ecologicaldegradationisnotthesameasresourcescarcity.Aswesawinthepreviouschapter,theresourcesavailabletohumankindareconstantlyincreasing,andarelikelytocontinuetodoso.That’swhydoomsdayprophesiesofresourcescarcityareprobablymisplaced.Incontrast,thefearofecologicaldegradationisonly too well founded. The future may see Sapiens gaining control of acornucopia of new materials and energy sources, while simultaneouslydestroyingwhatremainsofthenaturalhabitatanddrivingmostotherspeciesto

extinction.In fact, ecological turmoil might endanger the survival ofHomo sapiens

itself.Globalwarming, risingoceansandwidespreadpollutioncouldmake theearth less hospitable to our kind, and the future might consequently see aspiralling racebetweenhumanpowerandhuman-inducednaturaldisasters.Ashumans use their power to counter the forces of nature and subjugate theecosystem to their needs and whims, they might cause more and moreunanticipatedanddangeroussideeffects.Thesearelikelytobecontrollableonlyby even more drastic manipulations of the ecosystem, which would result inevenworsechaos.

Many call this process ‘the destruction of nature’. But it’s not reallydestruction, it’s change. Nature cannot be destroyed. Sixty-five million yearsago,anasteroidwipedoutthedinosaurs,butinsodoingopenedthewayforwardfor mammals. Today, humankind is drivingmany species into extinction andmightevenannihilateitself.Butotherorganismsaredoingquitewell.Ratsandcockroaches,forexample,areintheirheyday.ThesetenaciouscreatureswouldprobablycreepoutfrombeneaththesmokingrubbleofanuclearArmageddon,ready and able to spread their DNA. Perhaps 65 million years from now,intelligent rats will look back gratefully on the decimation wrought byhumankind,justaswetodaycanthankthatdinosaur-bustingasteroid.

Still, the rumoursofourownextinctionarepremature.Since theIndustrialRevolution, the world’s human population has burgeoned as never before. In1700theworldwashometosome700millionhumans.In1800therewere950millionofus.By1900wealmostdoubledournumbers to1.6billion.Andby2000thatquadrupledto6billion.Todaytherearejustshyof7billionSapiens.

ModernTimeWhilealltheseSapienshavegrownincreasinglyimpervioustothewhimsof

nature, theyhavebecomeevermoresubject to thedictatesofmodern industryand government. The Industrial Revolution opened the way to a long line ofexperiments in socialengineeringandaneven longer seriesofunpremeditatedchanges in daily life and human mentality. One example among many is thereplacement of the rhythms of traditional agriculture with the uniform andprecisescheduleofindustry.

Traditional agriculture depended on cycles of natural time and organicgrowth. Most societies were unable to make precise time measurements, norwere they terribly interested in doing so. The world went about its businesswithoutclocksandtimetables,subjectonlytothemovementsofthesunandthe

growth cycles of plants. There was no uniformworking day, and all routineschangeddrasticallyfromseasontoseason.Peopleknewwherethesunwas,andwatchedanxiouslyforportentsoftherainyseasonandharvesttime,buttheydidnotknowthehourandhardlycaredabouttheyear.Ifalosttimetravellerpoppedupinamedievalvillageandaskedapasserby,‘Whatyearisthis?’thevillagerwouldbeasbewilderedbythequestionasbythestrangersridiculousclothing.

Incontrasttomedievalpeasantsandshoemakers,modernindustrycareslittleaboutthesunortheseason.Itsanctifiesprecisionanduniformity.Forexample,in a medieval workshop each shoemaker made an entire shoe, from sole tobuckle.Ifoneshoemakerwaslateforwork,itdidnotstalltheothers.However,inamodernfootwear-factoryassemblyline,everyworkermansamachinethatproducesjustasmallpartofashoe,whichisthenpassedontothenextmachine.If theworkerwho operatesmachine no. 5 has overslept, it stalls all the othermachines. In order to prevent such calamities, everybody must adhere to aprecise timetable. Each worker arrives at work at exactly the same time.Everybody takes their lunch break together, whether they are hungry or not.Everybody goes home when a whistle announces that the shift is over – notwhentheyhavefinishedtheirproject.

42. Charlie Chaplin as a simple worker caught in the wheels of theindustrialassemblyline,fromthefilmModernTimes(1936).

TheIndustrialRevolutionturnedthetimetableandtheassemblylineintoa

template for almost all human activities. Shortly after factories imposed theirtime frames on human behaviour, schools too adopted precise timetables,followed by hospitals, government offices and grocery stores. Even in placesdevoidofassemblylinesandmachines,thetimetablebecameking.Iftheshiftatthefactoryendsat5p.m.,thelocalpubhadbetterbeopenforbusinessby5:02.

Acruciallinkinthespreadingtimetablesystemwaspublictransportation.Ifworkers needed to start their shift by 08:00, the train or bus had to reach thefactory gate by 07:55. A few minutes’ delay would lower production andperhaps even lead to the lay-offs of the unfortunate latecomers. In 1784 acarriage service with a published schedule began operating in Britain. Itstimetable specified only the hour of departure, not arrival. Back then, eachBritish city and townhad itsown local time,whichcoulddiffer fromLondontimebyuptohalfanhour.Whenitwas12:00inLondon,itwasperhaps12:20inLiverpooland11:50inCanterbury.Sincetherewerenotelephones,noradioortelevision,andnofasttrains–whocouldknow,andwhocared?2

The first commercial train service began operating betweenLiverpool andManchester in 1830. Ten years later, the first train timetablewas issued. Thetrainsweremuchfasterthantheoldcarriages,sothequirkydifferencesinlocalhoursbecameaseverenuisance.In1847,Britishtraincompaniesputtheirheadstogether and agreed that henceforth all train timetableswould be calibrated toGreenwich Observatory time, rather than the local times of Liverpool,Manchester or Glasgow.More andmore institutions followed the lead of thetrain companies. Finally, in 1880, the British government took theunprecedented step of legislating that all timetables in Britain must followGreenwich.For thefirst timeinhistory,acountryadoptedanational timeandobliged its population to live according to an artificial clock rather than localonesorsunrise-to-sunsetcycles.

This modest beginning spawned a global network of timetables,synchronised down to the tiniest fractions of a second. When the broadcastmedia–firstradio, thentelevision–madetheirdebut, theyenteredaworldoftimetablesandbecameitsmainenforcersandevangelists.Amongthefirstthingsradio stations broadcast were time signals, beeps that enabled far-flungsettlementsandshipsatseatosettheirclocks.Later,radiostationsadoptedthecustomofbroadcastingthenewseveryhour.Nowadays,thefirstitemofeverynewsbroadcast–more important even than theoutbreakofwar– is the time.DuringWorldWarTwo,BBCNewswas broadcast toNazi-occupiedEurope.EachnewsprogrammeopenedwithalivebroadcastofBigBentollingthehour– themagical soundof freedom. IngeniousGermanphysicists foundaway todeterminetheweatherconditionsinLondonbasedontinydifferencesinthetone

of the broadcast ding-dongs. This information offered invaluable help to theLuftwaffe.When the British Secret Service discovered this, they replaced thelivebroadcastwithasetrecordingofthefamousclock.

In order to run the timetable network, cheap but precise portable clocksbecameubiquitous.InAssyrian,SassanidorIncacitiestheremighthavebeenatmost a few sundials. In European medieval cities there was usually a singleclock – a giantmachinemounted on top of a high tower in the town square.These tower clockswerenotoriously inaccurate, but since therewerenootherclocksintowntocontradictthem,ithardlymadeanydifference.Today,asingleaffluent familygenerallyhasmore timepiecesathomethananentiremedievalcountry.Youcan tell the timeby lookingatyourwristwatch,glancingatyourAndroid, peering at the alarm clock by your bed, gazing at the clock on thekitchenwall,staringatthemicrowave,catchingaglimpseoftheTVorDVD,ortakinginthetaskbaronyourcomputeroutofthecornerofyoureye.Youneedtomakeaconsciouseffortnottoknowwhattimeitis.

Thetypicalpersonconsultstheseclocksseveraldozentimesaday,becausealmosteverythingwedohastobedoneontime.Analarmclockwakesusupat7 a.m., we heat our frozen bagel for exactly fifty seconds in the microwave,brushour teeth for threeminutes until the electric toothbrushbeeps, catch the07:40traintowork,runonthetreadmillatthegymuntilthebeeperannouncesthat half an hour is over, sit down in front of the TV at 7 p.m. towatch ourfavouriteshow,getinterruptedatpreordainedmomentsbycommercialsthatcost$1,000 per second, and eventually unload all our angst on a therapist whorestrictsourprattletothenowstandardfifty-minutetherapyhour.

The Industrial Revolution brought about dozens of major upheavals inhuman society.Adapting to industrial time is just one of them.Other notableexamplesincludeurbanisation,thedisappearanceofthepeasantry,theriseoftheindustrialproletariat,theempowermentofthecommonperson,democratisation,youthcultureandthedisintegrationofpatriarchy.

Yet all of these upheavals are dwarfed by the most momentous socialrevolution that everbefellhumankind: thecollapseof the familyand the localcommunityand their replacementby the state and themarket.Asbestwecantell, from the earliest times, more than a million years ago, humans lived insmall, intimatecommunities,mostofwhosememberswerekin.TheCognitiveRevolution and the Agricultural Revolution did not change that. They gluedtogetherfamiliesandcommunitiestocreatetribes,cities,kingdomsandempires,but familiesandcommunities remained thebasicbuildingblocksofallhumansocieties. The Industrial Revolution, on the other hand, managed within little

morethantwocenturiestobreakthesebuildingblocksintoatoms.Mostofthetraditionalfunctionsoffamiliesandcommunitieswerehandedovertostatesandmarkets.

TheCollapseoftheFamilyandtheCommunityPrior to the Industrial Revolution, the daily life of most humans ran its

coursewithinthreeancientframes:thenuclearfamily,theextendedfamilyandthelocalintimatecommunity.*Mostpeopleworkedinthefamilybusiness–thefamily farm or the family workshop, for example – or they worked in theirneighbours’ family businesses. The family was also the welfare system, thehealthsystem, theeducationsystem, theconstruction industry, the tradeunion,the pension fund, the insurance company, the radio, the television, thenewspapers,thebankandeventhepolice.

Whenaperson fell sick, the family tookcareofher.Whenapersongrewold, thefamilysupportedher,andherchildrenwereherpensionfund.Whenapersondied, thefamily tookcareof theorphans.Ifapersonwantedtobuildahut, the family lent a hand. If a personwanted to open a business, the familyraisedthenecessarymoney.Ifapersonwantedtomarry,thefamilychose,oratleast vetted, the prospective spouse. If conflict arose with a neighbour, thefamily muscled in. But if a person’s illness was too grave for the family tomanage, or a new business demanded too large an investment, or theneighbourhoodquarrel escalated to thepointofviolence, the local communitycametotherescue.

Thecommunityofferedhelponthebasisoflocaltraditionsandaneconomyoffavours,whichoftendifferedgreatlyfromthesupplyanddemandlawsofthefreemarket.Inanold-fashionedmedievalcommunity,whenmyneighbourwasin need, I helped build his hut and guard his sheep, without expecting anypayment in return.When Iwas inneed,myneighbour returned the favour.Atthe same time, the local potentate might have drafted all of us villagers toconstructhiscastlewithoutpayingusapenny.Inexchange,wecountedonhimto defend us against brigands and barbarians. Village life involved manytransactions but few payments. Therewere somemarkets, of course, but theirroles were limited. You could buy rare spices, cloth and tools, and hire theservices of lawyers and doctors.Yet less than 10 per cent of commonly usedproductsandserviceswereboughtinthemarket.Mosthumanneedsweretakencareofbythefamilyandthecommunity.

Therewerealsokingdomsandempiresthatperformedimportanttaskssuchas waging wars, building roads and constructing palaces. For these purposes

kingsraisedtaxesandoccasionallyenlistedsoldiersandlabourers.Yet,withfewexceptions, they tended to stay out of the daily affairs of families andcommunities.Eveniftheywantedtointervene,mostkingscoulddosoonlywithdifficulty. Traditional agricultural economies had few surpluseswithwhich tofeed crowds of government officials, policemen, social workers, teachers anddoctors. Consequently, most rulers did not develop mass welfare systems,health-caresystemsoreducationalsystems.Theyleftsuchmattersinthehandsof families and communities. Even on rare occasions when rulers tried tointervenemore intensively in thedaily livesof thepeasantry(ashappened,forexample, in theQinEmpire inChina), theydidsobyconverting familyheadsandcommunityeldersintogovernmentagents.

Often enough, transportation and communication difficulties made it sodifficult to intervene in theaffairsofremotecommunities thatmanykingdomspreferredtocedeeventhemostbasicroyalprerogatives–suchastaxationandviolence– to communities.TheOttomanEmpire, for instance, allowed familyvendettastometeoutjustice,ratherthansupportingalargeimperialpoliceforce.Ifmycousinkilledsomebody,thevictim’sbrothermightkillmeinsanctionedrevenge.ThesultaninIstanbuloreventheprovincialpashadidnotinterveneinsuchclashes,aslongasviolenceremainedwithinacceptablelimits.

IntheChineseMingEmpire(1368–1644),thepopulationwasorganisedintothe baojia system. Ten families were grouped to form a jia, and ten jiaconstituted a bao. When a member of a bao commited a crime, other baomemberscouldbepunishedfor it, inparticular thebaoelders.Taxes toowereleviedonthebao,anditwastheresponsibilityofthebaoeldersratherthanofthestateofficialstoassessthesituationofeachfamilyanddeterminetheamountof tax it should pay. From the empire’s perspective, this system had a hugeadvantage. Instead of maintaining thousands of revenue officials and taxcollectors, who would have to monitor the earnings and expenses of everyfamily, these tasks were left to the community elders. The elders knew howmuch each villager was worth and they could usually enforce tax paymentswithoutinvolvingtheimperialarmy.

Manykingdomsandempireswere in truth littlemore than largeprotectionrackets.Thekingwasthecapoditutticapiwhocollectedprotectionmoney,andinreturnmadesure thatneighbouringcrimesyndicatesand localsmall frydidnotharmthoseunderhisprotection.Hedidlittleelse.

Lifeinthebosomoffamilyandcommunitywasfarfromideal.Familiesandcommunitiescouldoppresstheirmembersnolessbrutallythandomodernstatesandmarkets, and their internal dynamicswere often fraughtwith tension andviolence – yet people had little choice. A person who lost her family and

communityaround1750wasasgoodasdead.Shehadnojob,noeducationandnosupport intimesofsicknessanddistress.Nobodywouldloanhermoneyordefendherifshegot intotrouble.Therewerenopolicemen,nosocialworkersandnocompulsoryeducation.Inordertosurvive,suchapersonquicklyhadtofind an alternative family or community. Boys and girls who ran away fromhomecouldexpect,atbest, tobecomeservants insomenewfamily.Atworst,therewasthearmyorthebrothel.

All this changed dramatically over the last two centuries. The IndustrialRevolutiongavethemarketimmensenewpowers,providedthestatewithnewmeans of communication and transportation, and placed at the government’sdisposalanarmyofclerks,teachers,policemenandsocialworkers.Atfirstthemarket and the state discovered their path blocked by traditional families andcommunitieswhohadlittleloveforoutsideintervention.Parentsandcommunityelderswerereluctanttolettheyoungergenerationbeindoctrinatedbynationalisteducation systems, conscripted into armies or turned into a rootless urbanproletariat.

Over time, states and markets used their growing power to weaken thetraditionalbondsoffamilyandcommunity.Thestatesentitspolicementostopfamily vendettas and replace them with court decisions. The market sent itshawkers towipeout longstanding local traditions and replace themwith ever-changingcommercialfashions.Yetthiswasnotenough.Inorderreallytobreakthepoweroffamilyandcommunity,theyneededthehelpofafifthcolumn.

Thestateandthemarketapproachedpeoplewithanofferthatcouldnotberefused.‘Becomeindividuals,’theysaid.‘Marrywhomeveryoudesire,withoutasking permission fromyour parents.Take upwhatever job suits you, even ifcommunityelders frown.Livewhereveryouwish, even ifyoucannotmake iteveryweektothefamilydinner.Youarenolongerdependentonyourfamilyoryourcommunity.We,thestateandthemarket,willtakecareofyouinstead.Wewillprovidefood,shelter,education,health,welfareandemployment.Wewillprovidepensions,insuranceandprotection.’

Romantic literature often presents the individual as somebody caught in astruggle against the state and the market. Nothing could be further from thetruth.Thestateandthemarketarethemotherandfatheroftheindividual,andthe individual can survive only thanks to them. Themarket provides us withwork, insurance and a pension. If we want to study a profession, thegovernment’sschoolsare there to teachus. Ifwewant toopenabusiness, thebank loans us money. If we want to build a house, a construction companybuildsitandthebankgivesusamortgage,insomecasessubsidisedorinsured

bythestate.Ifviolenceflaresup,thepoliceprotectus.Ifwearesickforafewdays, our health insurance takes care of us. If we are debilitated for months,socialsecuritystepsin.Ifweneedaround-the-clockassistance,wecangotothemarketandhireanurse–usuallysomestrangerfromtheothersideoftheworldwhotakescareofuswiththekindofdevotionthatwenolongerexpectfromourownchildren.Ifwehavethemeans,wecanspendourgoldenyearsataseniorcitizens’home.Thetaxauthoritiestreatusasindividuals,anddonotexpectustopay theneighbours’ taxes.Thecourts, too, seeus as individuals, andneverpunishusforthecrimesofourcousins.

Not only adult men, but also women and children, are recognised asindividuals.Throughoutmostofhistory,womenwereoftenseenasthepropertyof family or community. Modern states, on the other hand, see women asindividuals, enjoying economic and legal rights independently of their familyand community. They may hold their own bank accounts, decide whom tomarry,andevenchoosetodivorceorliveontheirown.

Buttheliberationoftheindividualcomesatacost.Manyofusnowbewailthelossofstrongfamiliesandcommunitiesandfeelalienatedandthreatenedbythe power the impersonal state and market wield over our lives. States andmarkets composed of alienated individuals can intervene in the lives of theirmembersmuchmoreeasilythanstatesandmarketscomposedofstrongfamiliesand communities. When neighbours in a high-rise apartment building cannotevenagreeonhowmuchtopaytheirjanitor,howcanweexpectthemtoresistthestate?

Thedealbetweenstates,marketsandindividualsisanuneasyone.Thestateand the market disagree about their mutual rights and obligations, andindividualscomplainthatbothdemandtoomuchandprovidetoolittle.Inmanycases individuals are exploited by markets, and states employ their armies,police forces and bureaucracies to persecute individuals instead of defendingthem.Yetitisamazingthatthisdealworksatall–howeverimperfectly.Foritbreachescountlessgenerationsofhumansocialarrangements.Millionsofyearsofevolutionhavedesignedustoliveandthinkascommunitymembers.Withinamere two centuries we have become alienated individuals. Nothing testifiesbettertotheawesomepowerofculture.

Thenuclearfamilydidnotdisappearcompletelyfromthemodernlandscape.Whenstatesandmarketstookfromthefamilymostofitseconomicandpoliticalroles,theyleftitsomeimportantemotionalfunctions.Themodernfamilyisstillsupposed to provide for intimate needs, which state and market are (so far)incapable of providing. Yet even here the family is subject to increasing

interventions. The market shapes to an ever-greater degree the way peopleconducttheirromanticandsexuallives.Whereastraditionallythefamilywasthemain matchmaker, today it’s the market that tailors our romantic and sexualpreferences, and then lends a hand in providing for them – for a fat fee.Previouslybride andgroommet in the family living room, andmoneypassedfrom the hands of one father to another. Today courting is done at bars andcafés, and money passes from the hands of lovers to waitresses. Even moremoneyistransferredtothebankaccountsoffashiondesigners,gymmanagers,dieticians, cosmeticians and plastic surgeons, who help us arrive at the cafélookingassimilaraspossibletothemarketsidealofbeauty.

Familyandcommunityvs.stateandmarket

The state, too, keeps a sharper eye on family relations, especially betweenparentsandchildren.Parentsareobligedtosendtheirchildrentobeeducatedbythestate.Parentswhoareespeciallyabusiveorviolentwiththeirchildrenmayberestrainedbythestate.Ifneedbe,thestatemayevenimprisontheparentsortransfertheirchildrentofosterfamilies.Untilnotlongago,thesuggestionthatthe state ought to prevent parents from beating or humiliating their childrenwould have been rejected out of hand as ludicrous and unworkable. In mostsocieties parental authority was sacred. Respect of and obedience to one’sparents were among the most hallowed values, and parents could do almostanything they wanted, including killing newborn babies, selling children intoslavery andmarrying off daughters tomenmore than twice their age. Today,parental authority is in full retreat. Youngsters are increasingly excused fromobeyingtheirelders,whereasparentsareblamedforanythingthatgoeswronginthelifeoftheirchild.MumandDadareaboutaslikelytogetoffintheFreudian

courtroomasweredefendantsinaStalinistshowtrial.

ImaginedCommunitiesLikethenuclearfamily,thecommunitycouldnotcompletelydisappearfrom

ourworldwithoutanyemotionalreplacement.Marketsandstatestodayprovidemost of thematerial needsonceprovidedby communities, but theymust alsosupplytribalbonds.

Marketsandstatesdosoby fostering ‘imaginedcommunities’ thatcontainmillionsofstrangers,andwhicharetailoredtonationalandcommercialneeds.Animaginedcommunityisacommunityofpeoplewhodon’treallyknoweachother, but imagine that they do. Such communities are not a novel invention.Kingdoms, empires and churches functioned for millennia as imaginedcommunities. In ancient China, tens of millions of people saw themselves asmembersofasinglefamily,withtheemperorasitsfather.IntheMiddleAges,millionsofdevoutMuslims imagined that theywereallbrothersandsisters inthe great community of Islam. Yet throughout history, such imaginedcommunities played second fiddle to intimate communities of several dozenpeople who knew each other well. The intimate communities fulfilled theemotionalneedsoftheirmembersandwereessentialforeveryone’ssurvivalandwelfare. In the last two centuries, the intimate communities have withered,leavingimaginedcommunitiestofillintheemotionalvacuum.

Thetwomostimportantexamplesfortheriseofsuchimaginedcommunitiesarethenationandtheconsumertribe.Thenationistheimaginedcommunityofthestate.Theconsumertribeistheimaginedcommunityofthemarket.Bothareimaginedcommunitiesbecauseitisimpossibleforallcustomersinamarketorforallmembersofanationreallytoknowoneanotherthewayvillagersknewone another in the past.NoGerman can intimately know the other 80millionmembers of theGermannation, or the other 500million customers inhabitingthe European Common Market (which evolved first into the EuropeanCommunityandfinallybecametheEuropeanUnion).

Consumerism and nationalism work extra hours to make us imagine thatmillions of strangers belong to the same community as ourselves, that we allhaveacommonpast, common interestsandacommon future.This isn’t a lie.It’s imagination. Like money, limited liability companies and human rights,nationsandconsumertribesareinter-subjectiverealities.Theyexistonlyinourcollective imagination, yet their power is immense. As long as millions ofGermansbelieveintheexistenceofaGermannation,getexcitedatthesightofGerman national symbols, retell German national myths, and are willing to

sacrificemoney, time and limbs for theGerman nation,Germanywill remainoneofthestrongestpowersintheworld.

Thenationdoes itsbest tohide its imaginedcharacter.Mostnationsarguethat theyareanatural andeternal entity, created in someprimordial epochbymixingthesoilofthemotherlandwiththebloodofthepeople.Yetsuchclaimsareusuallyexaggerated.Nationsexistedinthedistantpast,buttheirimportancewas much smaller than today because the importance of the state was muchsmaller.AresidentofmedievalNurembergmighthavefeltsomeloyaltytowardstheGermannation, but she felt farmore loyalty towards her family and localcommunity, which took care of most of her needs. Moreover, whateverimportanceancientnationsmayhavehad,fewofthemsurvived.MostexistingnationsevolvedonlyaftertheIndustrialRevolution.

TheMiddleEastprovidesampleexamples.TheSyrian,Lebanese,Jordanianand Iraqi nations are the product of haphazard borders drawn in the sand byFrench and British diplomats who ignored local history, geography andeconomy. These diplomats determined in 1918 that the people of Kurdistan,Baghdad andBasrawould henceforth be ‘Iraqis’. It was primarily the Frenchwho decided who would be Syrian and who Lebanese. Saddam Hussein andHafez el-Asad tried their best to promote and reinforce their Anglo-French-manufacturednationalconsciousnesses,but theirbombasticspeechesabout theallegedlyeternalIraqiandSyriannationshadahollowring.

It goeswithout saying that nations cannot be created from thin air. Thosewho worked hard to construct Iraq or Syria made use of real historical,geographical and cultural raw materials – some of which are centuries andmillennia old. SaddamHussein co-opted the heritage of theAbbasid caliphateand theBabylonian Empire, even calling one of his crack armoured units theHammurabi Division. Yet that does not turn the Iraqi nation into an anciententity.IfIbakeacakefromflour,oilandsugar,allofwhichhavebeensittinginmypantryforthepast twomonths, itdoesnotmeanthat thecakeitself is twomonthsold.

Inrecentdecades,nationalcommunitieshavebeenincreasinglyeclipsedbytribesofcustomerswhodonotknowoneanotherintimatelybutsharethesameconsumptionhabitsandinterests,andthereforefeelpartof thesameconsumertribe – and define themselves as such. This sounds very strange, but we aresurrounded by examples. Madonna fans, for example, constitute a consumertribe.Theydefine themselves largelybyshopping.TheybuyMadonnaconcerttickets, CDs, posters, shirts and ring tones, and thereby define who they are.ManchesterUnitedfans,vegetariansandenvironmentalistsareotherexamples.They,too,aredefinedaboveallbywhattheyconsume.Itisthekeystoneoftheir

identity.AGermanvegetarianmightwell prefer tomarry aFrenchvegetarianthanaGermancarnivore.

PerpetuumMobileTherevolutionsofthelasttwocenturieshavebeensoswiftandradicalthat

they have changed the most fundamental characteristic of the social order.Traditionally, thesocialorderwashardandrigid.‘Order’impliedstabilityandcontinuity. Swift social revolutions were exceptional, and most socialtransformations resulted from the accumulation of numerous small steps.Humans tended to assume that the social structurewas inflexible and eternal.Familiesandcommunitiesmightstruggletochangetheirplacewithintheorder,but the idea that you could change the fundamental structureof theorderwasalien.Peopletendedtoreconcilethemselvestothestatusquo,declaringthat‘thisishowitalwayswas,andthisishowitalwayswillbe’.

Over the last two centuries, the pace of change became so quick that thesocialorderacquiredadynamicandmalleablenature.Itnowexistsinastateofpermanentflux.Whenwespeakofmodernrevolutionswetendtothinkof1789(the French Revolution), 1848 (the liberal revolutions) or 1917 (the RussianRevolution).Butthefactisthat,thesedays,everyyearisrevolutionary.Today,even a thirty-year-old can honestly tell disbelieving teenagers, ‘When I wasyoung,theworldwascompletelydifferent.’TheInternet,forexample,cameintowideusageonlyintheearly1990s,hardlytwentyyearsago.Todaywecannotimaginetheworldwithoutit.

Henceanyattempttodefinethecharacteristicsofmodernsocietyisakintodefiningthecolourofachameleon.Theonlycharacteristicofwhichwecanbecertainistheincessantchange.Peoplehavebecomeusedtothis,andmostofusthinkabout the socialorderas something flexible,whichwecanengineerandimprove at will. Themain promise of premodern rulers was to safeguard thetraditional order or even to go back to some lost golden age. In the last twocenturies,thecurrencyofpoliticsisthatitpromisestodestroytheoldworldandbuildabetteroneinitsplace.Noteventhemostconservativeofpoliticalpartiesvows merely to keep things as they are. Everybody promises social reform,educationalreform,economicreform–andtheyoftenfulfilthosepromises.

Justasgeologistsexpectthattectonicmovementswillresult inearthquakesandvolcaniceruptions, somightweexpect thatdrastic socialmovementswillresultinbloodyoutburstsofviolence.Thepoliticalhistoryofthenineteenthandtwentieth centuries is often told as a series of deadly wars, holocausts and

revolutions.Likeachildinnewbootsleapingfrompuddletopuddle,thisviewseeshistory as leapfrogging fromonebloodbath to thenext, fromWorldWarOne toWorldWarTwo to theColdWar, from theArmeniangenocide to theJewishgenocidetotheRwandangenocide,fromRobespierretoLenintoHitler.

There is truth here, but this all too familiar list of calamities is somewhatmisleading.We focus toomuch on the puddles and forget about the dry landseparatingthem.Thelatemodernerahasseenunprecedentedlevelsnotonlyofviolenceandhorror,butalsoofpeaceandtranquillity.CharlesDickenswroteoftheFrenchRevolutionthat‘Itwasthebestoftimes,itwastheworstoftimes.’This may be true not only of the French Revolution, but of the entire era itheralded.

It isespeciallytrueofthesevendecadesthathaveelapsedsincetheendofWorldWarTwo.Duringthisperiodhumankindhasforthefirsttimefacedthepossibility of complete self-annihilation and has experienced a fair number ofactualwarsandgenocides.Yetthesedecadeswerealsothemostpeacefulerainhuman history – and by awidemargin. This is surprising because these verysamedecadesexperiencedmoreeconomic,socialandpoliticalchangethananypreviousera.Thetectonicplatesofhistoryaremovingatafranticpace,butthevolcanoesaremostly silent.Thenewelasticorder seems tobeable tocontainand even initiate radical structural changes without collapsing into violentconflict.3

PeaceinOurTimeMostpeopledon’tappreciatejusthowpeacefulanerawelivein.Noneofus

wasaliveathousandyearsago,soweeasilyforgethowmuchmoreviolenttheworld used to be.And aswars becomemore rare they attractmore attention.Manymore people think about thewars raging today inAfghanistan and IraqthanaboutthepeaceinwhichmostBraziliansandIndianslive.

Evenmore importantly, it’s easier to relate to the suffering of individualsthan of entire populations. However, in order to understand macro-historicalprocesses,weneed toexaminemass statistics rather than individual stories. Intheyear2000,warscausedthedeathsof310,000individuals,andviolentcrimekilled another 520,000. Each and every victim is aworld destroyed, a familyruined,friendsandrelativesscarredforlife.Yetfromamacroperspectivethese830,000victimscomprisedonly1.5percentofthe56millionpeoplewhodiedin 2000.That year 1.26million people died in car accidents (2.25 per cent oftotalmortality)and815,000peoplecommittedsuicide(1.45percent).4

Thefiguresfor2002areevenmoresurprising.Outof57milliondead,only

172,000peoplediedinwarand569,000diedofviolentcrime(atotalof741,000victimsofhumanviolence). Incontrast,873,000peoplecommittedsuicide.5 Itturns out that in the year following the 9/11 attacks, despite all the talk ofterrorismandwar,theaveragepersonwasmorelikelytokillhimselfthantobekilledbyaterrorist,asoldieroradrugdealer.

Inmost parts of the world, people go to sleepwithout fearing that in themiddle of the night a neighbouring tribe might surround their village andslaughter everyone.Well-off British subjects travel daily fromNottingham toLondonthroughSherwoodForestwithoutfear thatagangofmerrygreen-cladbrigandswillambush themand take theirmoney togive to thepoor (or,morelikely, murder them and take the money for themselves). Students brook nocanings from their teachers, children need not fear that theywill be sold intoslaverywhen theirparentscan’tpay theirbills, andwomenknow that the lawforbids their husbands 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. Throughouthistory, most violence resulted from local feuds between families andcommunities. (Even today, as the above figures indicate, local crime is a fardeadlier threat than international wars.) As we have seen, early farmers, whoknew no political organisations larger than the local community, sufferedrampantviolence.6 As kingdoms and empires became stronger, they reined incommunitiesandthelevelofviolencedecreased.InthedecentralisedkingdomsofmedievalEurope,abouttwentytofortypeopleweremurderedeachyearforevery 100,000 inhabitants. In recent decades, when states and markets havebecome all-powerful and communities have vanished, violence rates havedroppedevenfurther.Todaytheglobalaverageisonlyninemurdersayearper100,000 people, andmost of thesemurders take place inweak states such asSomalia andColombia. In the centralised states ofEurope, the average is onemurderayearper100,000people.7

There are certainly cases where states use their power to kill their owncitizens, and these often loom large in our memories and fears. During thetwentieth century, tens ofmillions if not hundreds ofmillions of peoplewerekilledbythesecurityforcesoftheirownstates.Still,fromamacroperspective,state-runcourtsandpolice forceshaveprobably increased the levelofsecurityworldwide.Even inoppressivedictatorships, theaveragemodernperson is farlesslikelytodieatthehandsofanotherpersonthaninpremodernsocieties.In1964amilitarydictatorshipwasestablishedinBrazil.Itruledthecountryuntil1985.Duringthesetwentyyears,severalthousandBraziliansweremurderedby

theregime.Thousandsmorewereimprisonedandtortured.Yetevenintheworstyears,theaverageBrazilianinRiodeJaneirowasfarlesslikelytodieathumanhandsthantheaverageWaorani,AraweteorYanomamo.TheWaorani,AraweteandYanomamo are indigenous peoplewho live in the depths of theAmazonforest,without army,policeorprisons.Anthropological studieshave indicatedthatbetweenaquarterandahalfoftheirmenfolkdiesoonerorlaterinviolentconflictsoverproperty,womenorprestige.8

ImperialRetirementIt is perhaps debatable whether violence within states has decreased or

increasedsince1945.Whatnobodycandeny is that internationalviolencehasdroppedtoanall-timelow.PerhapsthemostobviousexampleisthecollapseoftheEuropeanempires.Throughouthistoryempireshavecrushedrebellionswithanironfist,andwhenitsdaycame,asinkingempireusedallitsmighttosaveitself, usually collapsing into a bloodbath. Its final demise generally led toanarchy and wars of succession. Since 1945 most empires have opted forpeaceful early retirement. Their process of collapse became relatively swift,calmandorderly.

In1945Britainruledaquarteroftheglobe.Thirtyyearslateritruledjustafew small islands. In the intervening decades it retreated from most of itscolonies in a peaceful and orderly manner. Though in some places such asMalayaandKenyatheBritishtriedtohangonbyforceofarms,inmostplacestheyacceptedtheendofempirewithasighratherthanwithatempertantrum.They focused their efforts not on retaining power, but on transferring it assmoothly as possible.At least someof thepraise usually heapedonMahatmaGandhiforhisnon-violentcreedisactuallyowedtotheBritishEmpire.Despitemanyyearsofbitterandoftenviolentstruggle,whentheendof theRajcame,theIndiansdidnothavetofighttheBritishinthestreetsofDelhiandCalcutta.The empire’s placewas takenby a slewof independent states,most ofwhichhave since enjoyed stable borders and have for themost part lived peacefullyalongside their neighbours. True, tens of thousands of people perished at thehandsofthethreatenedBritishEmpire,andinseveralhotspotsitsretreatledtothe eruption of ethnic conflicts that claimed hundreds of thousands of lives(particularly in India).Yetwhencompared to the long-termhistoricalaverage,theBritishwithdrawalwasanexemplarofpeaceandorder.TheFrenchEmpirewasmore stubborn. Its collapse involvedbloody rearguard actions inVietnamand Algeria that cost hundreds of thousands of lives. Yet the French, too,retreatedfromtherestoftheirdominionsquicklyandpeacefully,leavingbehind

orderlystatesratherthanachaoticfree-for-all.TheSovietcollapsein1989wasevenmorepeaceful,despitetheeruptionof

ethnicconflictintheBalkans,theCaucasusandCentralAsia.Neverbeforehassuchamightyempiredisappearedsoswiftlyandsoquietly.TheSovietEmpireof 1989 had suffered no military defeat except in Afghanistan, no externalinvasions, no rebellions, nor even large-scale Martin Luther King-stylecampaignsofcivildisobedience.TheSovietsstillhadmillionsofsoldiers,tensofthousandsoftanksandaeroplanes,andenoughnuclearweaponstowipeoutthe whole of humankind several times over. The Red Army and the otherWarsaw Pact armies remained loyal. Had the last Soviet ruler, MikhailGorbachev, given the order, the Red Army would have opened fire on thesubjugatedmasses.

Yet the Soviet elite, and the Communist regimes throughmost of easternEurope(RomaniaandSerbiaweretheexceptions),chosenottouseevenatinyfractionofthismilitarypower.WhenitsmembersrealisedthatCommunismwasbankrupt,theyrenouncedforce,admittedtheirfailure,packedtheirsuitcasesandwenthome.Gorbachevandhiscolleaguesgaveupwithoutastrugglenotonlythe Soviet conquests of World War Two, but also the much older tsaristconquestsintheBaltic,theUkraine,theCaucasusandCentralAsia.Itischillingto contemplatewhatmight have happened ifGorbachev had behaved like theSerbianleadership–orliketheFrenchinAlgeria.

PaxAtomicaThe independent states that came after these empires were remarkably

uninterested in war. With very few exceptions, since 1945 states no longerinvadeotherstatesinordertoconquerandswallowthemup.Suchconquestshadbeenthebreadandbutterofpoliticalhistorysincetimeimmemorial.Itwashowmost great empires were established, and how most rulers and populationsexpected things to stay.But campaigns of conquest like those of theRomans,Mongols andOttomans cannot take place today anywhere in theworld. Since1945, no independent country recognised by theUN has been conquered andwipedoffthemap.Limitedinternationalwarsstilloccurfromtimetotime,andmillionsstilldieinwars,butwarsarenolongerthenorm.

Manypeoplebelievethatthedisappearanceofinternationalwarisuniquetothe richdemocraciesofwesternEurope. In fact, peace reachedEuropeafter itprevailed in other parts of the world. Thus the last serious international warsbetweenSouthAmericancountrieswerethePeru-EcuadorWarof1941andtheBolivia-ParaguayWar of 1932–5.And before that there hadn’t been a serious

warbetweenSouthAmericancountriessince1879–84,withChileononesideandBoliviaandPeruontheother.

Weseldomthinkof theArabworldasparticularlypeaceful.Yetonlyoncesince the Arab countries won their independence has one of themmounted afull-scaleinvasionofanother(theIraqiinvasionofKuwaitin1990).Therehavebeen quite a few border clashes (e.g. Syria vs Jordan in 1970), many armedinterventionsofoneintheaffairsofanother(e.g.SyriainLebanon),numerouscivilwars(Algeria,Yemen,Libya)andanabundanceofcoupsandrevolts.Yettherehavebeennofull-scaleinternationalwarsamongtheArabstatesexcepttheGulfWar. Evenwidening the scope to include the entireMuslimworld addsonly onemore example, the Iran-IraqWar. Therewas no Turkey—IranWar,Pakistan-AfghanistanWar,orIndonesia-MalaysiaWar.

InAfricathingsarefarlessrosy.Buteventhere,mostconflictsarecivilwarsandcoups.SinceAfricanstateswontheirindependenceinthe1960sand1970s,veryfewcountrieshaveinvadedoneanotherinthehopeofconquest.

Therehavebeenperiodsofrelativecalmbefore,as,forexample,inEuropebetween 1871 and 1914, and they always ended badly. But this time it isdifferent. For real peace is not the mere absence of war. Real peace is theimplausibility ofwar. There has never been real peace in theworld.Between1871 and 1914, a European war remained a plausible eventuality, and theexpectation ofwar dominated the thinking of armies, politicians and ordinarycitizensalike.Thisforebodingwastrueforallotherpeacefulperiodsinhistory.An iron law of international politics decreed, ‘For every two nearby polities,thereisaplausiblescenariothatwillcausethemtogotowaragainstoneanotherwithinoneyear.’Thislawofthejunglewasinforceinlatenineteenth-centuryEurope,inmedievalEurope,inancientChinaandinclassicalGreece.IfSpartaandAthenswere at peace in 450BC, therewas a plausible scenario that theywouldbeatwarby449BC.

Today humankind has broken the law of the jungle. There is at last realpeace, and not just absence of war. For most polities, there is no plausiblescenario leading to full-scaleconflictwithinoneyear.Whatcould lead towarbetween Germany and France next year? Or between China and Japan? OrbetweenBrazilandArgentina?Someminorborderclashmightoccur,butonlyatruly apocalyptic scenario could result in an old-fashioned full-scale warbetween Brazil and Argentina in 2014, with Argentinian armoured divisionssweeping to the gates of Rio, and Brazilian carpet-bombers pulverising theneighbourhoods ofBuenosAires. Suchwarsmight still erupt between severalpairsofstates,e.g.betweenIsraelandSyria,EthiopiaandEritrea,or theUSAandIran,buttheseareonlytheexceptionsthatprovetherule.

Thissituationmightofcoursechangein thefutureand,withhindsight, theworldof todaymightseemincrediblynaïve.Yet fromahistoricalperspective,our very naïvety is fascinating.Never before has peace been so prevalent thatpeoplecouldnotevenimaginewar.

Scholarshavesoughttoexplainthishappydevelopmentinmorebooksandarticles than you would ever want to read yourself, and they have identifiedseveral contributing factors. First and foremost, the price of war has gone updramatically.TheNobelPeacePrize to end all peace prizes should have beengiven to Robert Oppenheimer and his fellow architects of the atomic bomb.Nuclearweaponshaveturnedwarbetweensuperpowersintocollectivesuicide,andmadeitimpossibletoseekworlddominationbyforceofarms.

Secondly, while the price of war soared, its profits declined. For most ofhistory, polities could enrich themselves by looting or annexing enemyterritories.Mostwealthconsistedoffields,cattle,slavesandgold,soitwaseasytolootitoroccupyit.Today,wealthconsistsmainlyofhumancapital,technicalknow-howandcomplexsocio-economicstructuressuchasbanks.Consequentlyitisdifficulttocarryitofforincorporateitintoone’sterritory.

ConsiderCalifornia.Itswealthwasinitiallybuiltongoldmines.Buttodayitis built on silicon and celluloid – Silicon Valley and the celluloid hills ofHollywood.WhatwouldhappeniftheChineseweretomountanarmedinvasionofCalifornia,landamillionsoldiersonthebeachesofSanFranciscoandstorminland?Theywouldgainlittle.TherearenosiliconminesinSiliconValley.ThewealthresidesinthemindsofGoogleengineersandHollywoodscriptdoctors,directors and special-effects wizards, who would be on the first plane toBangalore or Mumbai long before the Chinese tanks rolled into SunsetBoulevard. It is not coincidental that the few full-scale internationalwars thatstilltakeplaceintheworld,suchastheIraqiinvasionofKuwait,occurinplaceswerewealth is old-fashionedmaterial wealth. TheKuwaiti sheikhs could flee

abroad,buttheoilfieldsstayedputandwereoccupied.

43. and 44. Gold miners in California during the Gold Rush, andFacebook’s headquarters near San Francisco. In 1849California built itsfortunes on gold. Today, California builds its fortunes on silicon. Butwhereasin1849thegoldactuallylaythereintheCaliforniansoil,therealtreasures of Silicon Valley are locked inside the heads of high-techemployees.

Whilewarbecamelessprofitable,peacebecamemorelucrativethanever.Intraditional agricultural economies long-distance trade and foreign investmentwere sideshows.Consequently,peacebrought littleprofit, aside fromavoidingthecostsofwar.If,say,in1400EnglandandFrancewereatpeace,theFrenchdidnothavetopayheavywartaxesandtosufferdestructiveEnglishinvasions,but otherwise it did not benefit their wallets. Inmodern capitalist economies,foreigntradeandinvestmentshavebecomeall-important.Peacethereforebringsuniquedividends.AslongasChinaandtheUSAareatpeace,theChinesecanprosperbysellingproductstotheUSA,tradinginWallStreetandreceivingUSinvestments.

Lastbutnotleast,atectonicshifthastakenplaceinglobalpoliticalculture.Manyelitesinhistory–Hunchieftains,VikingnoblemenandAztecpriests,forexample – viewed war as a positive good. Others viewed it as evil, but aninevitableone,whichwehadbetterturntoourownadvantage.Oursisthefirsttimeinhistorythattheworldisdominatedbyapeace-lovingelite–politicians,businesspeople,intellectualsandartistswhogenuinelyseewarasbothevilandavoidable.(Therewerepacifistsinthepast,suchastheearlyChristians,butin

the rare cases that they gained power, they tended to forget about theirrequirementto‘turntheothercheek’.)

Thereisapositivefeedbackloopbetweenallthesefourfactors.Thethreatofnuclearholocaustfosterspacifism;whenpacifismspreads,warrecedesandtradeflourishes; and trade increases both the profits of peace and the costs ofwar.Over time, this feedback loop creates another obstacle to war, which mayultimatelyprove themost importantofall.The tighteningwebof internationalconnections erodes the independence of most countries, lessening the chancethat any one of them might single-handedly let slip the dogs of war. Mostcountriesnolongerengageinfull-scalewarforthesimplereasonthattheyarenolongerindependent.ThoughcitizensinIsrael,Italy,MexicoorThailandmayharbour illusions of independence, the fact is that their governments cannotconduct independent economic or foreign policies, and they are certainlyincapableofinitiatingandconductingfull-scalewarontheirown.AsexplainedinChapter11,wearewitnessingtheformationofaglobalempire.Likepreviousempires, thisone, too,enforcespeacewithin itsborders.Andsince itsborderscovertheentireglobe,theWorldEmpireeffectivelyenforcesworldpeace.

So,isthemoderneraoneofmindlessslaughter,warandoppression,typifiedbythetrenchesofWorldWarOne,thenuclearmushroomcloudoverHiroshimaandthegorymaniasofHitlerandStalin?Orisitaneraofpeace,epitomisedbythe trenches never dug in South America, the mushroom clouds that neverappeared over Moscow and New York, and the serene visages of MahatmaGandhiandMartinLutherKing?

Theanswerisamatteroftiming.Itissoberingtorealisehowoftenourviewofthepast isdistortedbyeventsofthelastfewyears.If thischapterhadbeenwrittenin1945or1962,itwouldprobablyhavebeenmuchmoreglum.Sinceitwaswrittenin2014,ittakesarelativelybuoyantapproachtomodernhistory.

Tosatisfybothoptimistsandpessimists,wemayconcludebysayingthatweare on the threshold of both heaven and hell, moving nervously between thegatewayoftheoneandtheanteroomoftheother.Historyhasstillnotdecidedwherewewillendup,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 and historicalsphere.Theeconomyhasgrownexponentially,andhumankindtodayenjoysthekindofwealththatusedtobethestuffoffairytales.ScienceandtheIndustrialRevolutionhavegivenhumankindsuperhumanpowersandpracticallylimitlessenergy.Thesocialorderhasbeencompletelytransformed,ashavepolitics,dailylifeandhumanpsychology.

But arewe happier?Did thewealth humankind accumulated over the lastfive centuries translate into a new-found contentment? Did the discovery ofinexhaustible energy resources open before us inexhaustible stores of bliss?Going further back, have the seventy or so turbulent millennia since theCognitiveRevolutionmade theworldabetterplace to live?Was the lateNeilArmstrong,whosefootprint remains intacton thewindlessmoon,happier thanthenamelesshunter-gathererwho30,000yearsagoleftherhandprintonawallinChauvetCave? If not,whatwas the point of developing agriculture, cities,writing,coinage,empires,scienceandindustry?

Historiansseldomasksuchquestions.TheydonotaskwhetherthecitizensofUrukandBabylonwerehappierthantheirforagingancestors,whethertheriseof IslammadeEgyptiansmorepleasedwith their lives,orhowthecollapseofthe European empires in Africa have influenced the happiness of countlessmillions.Yetthesearethemostimportantquestionsonecanaskofhistory.Mostcurrent ideologies and political programmes are based on rather flimsy ideasconcerningtherealsourceofhumanhappiness.Nationalistsbelievethatpoliticalself-determination is essential for our happiness. Communists postulate thateveryonewouldbeblissfulunder thedictatorshipof theproletariat.Capitalistsmaintain that only the free market can ensure the greatest happiness of thegreatest number, by creating economicgrowth andmaterial abundance andby

teachingpeopletobeself-reliantandenterprising.Whatwouldhappenifseriousresearchweretodisprovethesehypotheses?If

economic growth and self-reliance do not make people happier, what’s thebenefitofCapitalism?Whatifitturnsoutthatthesubjectsoflargeempiresaregenerallyhappier than thecitizensof independentstatesand that, forexample,Algerianswere happier under French rule than under their own?Whatwouldthat say about the process of decolonisation and the value of national self-determination?

These are all hypothetical possibilities, because so far historians haveavoided raising these questions – not to mention answering them. They haveresearched the history of just about everything politics, society, economics,gender,diseases,sexuality,food,clothing–yettheyhaveseldomstoppedtoaskhowtheseinfluencehumanhappiness.

Though fewhave studied the long-termhistoryof happiness, almost everyscholarand laypersonhas somevaguepreconceptionabout it. Inonecommonview, human capabilities have increased throughout history. Since humansgenerally use their capabilities to alleviate miseries and fulfil aspirations, itfollowsthatwemustbehappierthanourmedievalancestors,andtheymusthavebeenhappierthanStoneAgehunter-gatherers.

But this progressive account is unconvincing. As we have seen, newaptitudes,behavioursandskillsdonotnecessarilymakeforabetterlife.WhenhumanslearnedtofarmintheAgriculturalRevolution,theircollectivepowertoshapetheirenvironmentincreased,butthelotofmanyindividualhumansgrewharsher. Peasants had towork harder than foragers to eke out less varied andnutritious food, and they were far more exposed to disease and exploitation.Similarly,thespreadofEuropeanempiresgreatlyincreasedthecollectivepowerof humankind, by circulating ideas, technologies and crops, and opening newavenuesofcommerce.YetthiswashardlygoodnewsformillionsofAfricans,Native Americans and Aboriginal Australians. Given the proven humanpropensity for misusing power, it seems naïve to believe that the more cloutpeoplehave,thehappiertheywillbe.

Somechallengersof thisview take adiametricallyopposedposition.Theyargueforareversecorrelationbetweenhumancapabilitiesandhappiness.Powercorrupts,theysay,andashumankindgainedmoreandmorepower,itcreatedacoldmechanisticworldill-suitedtoourrealneeds.Evolutionmouldedourmindsandbodiestothelifeofhunter-gatherers.Thetransitionfirsttoagricultureandthentoindustryhascondemnedustolivingunnaturallivesthatcannotgivefullexpressiontoourinherentinclinationsandinstincts,andthereforecannotsatisfyour deepest yearnings. Nothing in the comfortable lives of the urban middle

classcanapproachthewildexcitementandsheer joyexperiencedbyaforagerbandonasuccessfulmammothhunt.EverynewinventionjustputsanothermilebetweenusandtheGardenofEden.

Yetthisromanticinsistenceonseeingadarkshadowbehindeachinventionisasdogmaticasthebeliefintheinevitabilityofprogress.Perhapsweareoutoftouchwithourinnerhunter-gatherer,butit’snotallbad.Forinstance,overthelast twocenturiesmodernmedicinehasdecreased childmortality from33percenttolessthan5percent.Cananyonedoubtthatthismadeahugecontributiontothehappinessnotonlyofthosechildrenwhowouldotherwisehavedied,butalsooftheirfamiliesandfriends?

A more nuanced position takes the middle road. Until the ScientificRevolution there was no clear correlation between power and happiness.Medieval peasants may indeed have been more miserable than their hunter-gathererforebears.Butinthelastfewcenturieshumanshavelearnedtousetheircapacitiesmorewisely.Thetriumphsofmodernmedicinearejustoneexample.Otherunprecedentedachievementsincludethesteepdropinviolence,thevirtualdisappearance of international wars, and the near elimination of large-scalefamines.

Yet this, too, is an oversimplification. Firstly, it bases its optimisticassessmentonaverysmall sampleofyears.Themajorityofhumansbegan toenjoythefruitsofmodernmedicinenoearlierthan1850,andthedrasticdropinchildmortality isa twentieth-centuryphenomenon.Mass faminescontinued toblight much of humanity up to the middle of the twentieth century. DuringCommunistChinasGreatLeapForwardof1958–61,somewherebetween10and50millionhumanbeingsstarvedtodeath. Internationalwarsbecamerareonlyafter 1945, largely thanks to the new threat of nuclear annihilation. Hence,though the last few decades have been an unprecedented golden age forhumanity,itistooearlytoknowwhetherthisrepresentsafundamentalshiftinthe currents of history or an ephemeral eddy of good fortune.When judgingmodernity, it isall too tempting to take theviewpointofa twenty-first-centurymiddle-class Westerner. We must not forget the viewpoints of a nineteenth-century Welsh coal miner, Chinese opium addict or Tasmanian Aborigine.TruganiniisnolessimportantthanHomerSimpson.

Secondly,eventhebriefgoldenageofthelasthalf-centurymayturnouttohavesowntheseedsoffuturecatastrophe.Over the last fewdecades,wehavebeen disturbing the ecological equilibrium of our planet inmyriad newways,withwhatseemlikelytobedireconsequences.Alotofevidenceindicatesthatwe are destroying the foundations of human prosperity in an orgy of recklessconsumption.

Finally, we can congratulate ourselves on the unprecedentedaccomplishmentsofmodernSapiensonlyifwecompletelyignorethefateofallotheranimals.Muchofthevauntedmaterialwealththatshieldsusfromdiseaseandfaminewasaccumulatedattheexpenseoflaboratorymonkeys,dairycowsandconveyor-beltchickens.Overthelasttwocenturiestensofbillionsofthemhavebeensubjectedtoaregimeofindustrialexploitationwhosecrueltyhasnoprecedent in the annals of planet Earth. If we accept a mere tenth of whatanimal-rights activists are claiming, then modern industrial agriculture mightwell be the greatest crime in history.When evaluating global happiness, it iswrongtocountthehappinessonlyoftheupperclasses,ofEuropeansorofmen.Perhapsitisalsowrongtoconsideronlythehappinessofhumans.

CountingHappinessSofarwehavediscussedhappinessasifitwerelargelyaproductofmaterial

factors,suchashealth,dietandwealth. Ifpeoplearericherandhealthier, thentheymust also be happier.But is that really so obvious?Philosophers, priestsand poets have brooded over the nature of happiness formillennia, andmanyhaveconcludedthatsocial,ethicalandspiritualfactorshaveasgreatanimpacton our happiness as material conditions. Perhaps people in modern affluentsocieties suffer greatly from alienation and meaninglessness despite theirprosperity.Andperhapsour lesswell-to-doancestors foundmuchcontentmentincommunity,religionandabondwithnature.

Inrecentdecades,psychologistsandbiologistshavetakenupthechallengeofstudyingscientificallywhatreallymakespeoplehappy.Is itmoney,family,geneticsorperhapsvirtue?Thefirststepistodefinewhatistobemeasured.Thegenerallyaccepteddefinitionofhappinessis‘subjectivewell-being’.Happiness,according to this view, is something I feel inside myself, a sense of eitherimmediatepleasureor long-termcontentmentwith thewaymylife isgoing.Ifit’ssomethingfeltinside,howcanitbemeasuredfromoutside?Presumably,wecan do so by asking people to tell us how they feel. So psychologists orbiologistswhowanttoassesshowhappypeoplefeelgivethemquestionnairestofilloutandtallytheresults.

Atypicalsubjectivewell-beingquestionnaireasksintervieweestogradeonascaleofzerototentheiragreementwithstatementssuchas‘Ifeelpleasedwiththeway I am’, ‘I feel that life is very rewarding’, ‘I am optimistic about thefuture’ and ‘Life is good’. The researcher then adds up all the answers andcalculatestheinterviewee’sgenerallevelofsubjectivewell-being.

Such questionnaires are used in order to correlate happiness with various

objective factors. One study might compare a thousand people who earn$100,000ayearwithathousandpeoplewhoearn$50,000.Ifthestudydiscoversthat thefirstgrouphasanaveragesubjectivewell-beinglevelof8.7,whilethelatterhas an averageofonly7.3, the researchermay reasonably conclude thatthereisapositivecorrelationbetweenwealthandsubjectivewell-being.ToputitinsimpleEnglish,moneybringshappiness.Thesamemethodcanbeusedtoexaminewhetherpeoplelivingindemocraciesarehappierthanpeoplelivingindictatorships,andwhethermarriedpeoplearehappierthansingles,divorceesorwidowers.

Thisprovidesagroundingforhistorians,whocanexaminewealth,politicalfreedomanddivorceratesinthepast.Ifpeoplearehappierindemocraciesandmarriedpeoplearehappierthandivorcees,ahistorianhasabasisforarguingthatthedemocratisationprocessofthelastfewdecadescontributedtothehappinessofhumankind,whereasthegrowingratesofdivorceindicateanoppositetrend.

This way of thinking is not flawless, but before pointing out some of theholes,itisworthconsideringthefindings.

One interestingconclusion is thatmoneydoes indeedbringhappiness.Butonly up to a point, and beyond that point it has little significance. For peoplestuck at the bottom of the economic ladder, more money means greaterhappiness.IfyouareanAmericansinglemotherearning$12,000ayearcleaninghouses and you suddenly win $500,000 in the lottery, you will probablyexperience a significant and long-term surge in your subjective well-being.You’llbeabletofeedandclotheyourchildrenwithoutsinkingfurtherintodebt.However, if you’re a top executive earning $250,000 a year and you win $1million in the lottery,oryourcompanyboardsuddenlydecides todoubleyoursalary,yoursurgeislikelytolastonlyafewweeks.Accordingtotheempiricalfindings,it’salmostcertainlynotgoingtomakeabigdifferencetothewayyoufeeloverthelongrun.You’llbuyasnazziercar,moveintoapalatialhome,getusedtodrinkingChateauPétrusinsteadofCaliforniaCabernet,butit’llsoonallseemroutineandunexceptional.

Another interesting finding is that illness decreases happiness in the shortterm, but is a source of long-term distress only if a person’s condition isconstantlydeterioratingorifthediseaseinvolvesongoinganddebilitatingpain.People who are diagnosed with chronic illness such as diabetes are usuallydepressed forawhile,but if the illnessdoesnotgetworse theyadjust to theirnewconditionandratetheirhappinessashighlyashealthypeopledo.ImaginethatLucyandLukearemiddle-classtwins,whoagreetotakepartinasubjectivewell-beingstudy.Onthewaybackfromthepsychologylaboratory,Lucy’scarishit by a bus, leavingLucywith a numberof brokenbones and a permanently

lameleg.Justas therescuecrewiscuttingheroutof thewreckage, thephoneringsandLuke shouts thathehaswon the lottery’s$10,000,000 jackpot.Twoyearslatershe’llbelimpingandhe’llbealotricher,butwhenthepsychologistcomes around for a follow-up study, they are both likely to give the sameanswerstheydidonthemorningofthatfatefulday.

Family and community seem to have more impact on our happiness thanmoney and health. People with strong families who live in tight-knit andsupportivecommunitiesaresignificantlyhappierthanpeoplewhosefamiliesaredysfunctionalandwhohavenever found (ornever sought)acommunity tobepart of. Marriage is particularly important. Repeated studies have found thatthere is a very close correlation between good marriages and high subjectivewell-being,andbetweenbadmarriagesandmisery.Thisholdstrueirrespectiveofeconomicorevenphysicalconditions.Animpecuniousinvalidsurroundedbyalovingspouse,adevotedfamilyandawarmcommunitymaywellfeelbetterthananalienatedbillionaire,providedthattheinvalid’spovertyisnottoosevereandthathisillnessisnotdegenerativeorpainful.

This raises the possibility that the immense improvement in materialconditionsover the last twocenturieswasoffset by the collapseof the familyand the community. If so, the average personmightwell be no happier todaythanin1800.Eventhefreedomwevaluesohighlymaybeworkingagainstus.Wecanchooseourspouses,friendsandneighbours,buttheycanchoosetoleaveus.Withtheindividualwieldingunprecedentedpowertodecideherownpathinlife,wefinditeverhardertomakecommitments.Wethusliveinanincreasinglylonelyworldofunravellingcommunitiesandfamilies.

Butthemostimportantfindingofallisthathappinessdoesnotreallydependon objective conditions of eitherwealth, health or even community.Rather, itdepends on the correlation between objective conditions and subjectiveexpectations.Ifyouwantabullock-cartandgetabullock-cart,youarecontent.If you want a brand-new Ferrari and get only a second-hand Fiat you feeldeprived. This iswhywinning the lottery has, over time, the same impact onpeople’s happiness as a debilitating car accident. When things improve,expectations balloon, and consequently even dramatic improvements inobjective conditions can leave us dissatisfied. When things deteriorate,expectations shrink, and consequently even a severe illness might leave youprettymuchashappyasyouwerebefore.

You might say that we didn’t need a bunch of psychologists and theirquestionnaires to discover this. Prophets, poets and philosophers realisedthousands of years ago that being satisfiedwithwhat you already have is farmoreimportantthangettingmoreofwhatyouwant.Still,it’snicewhenmodern

research – bolstered by lots of numbers and charts – reaches the sameconclusionstheancientsdid.

Thecrucialimportanceofhumanexpectationshasfar-reachingimplicationsfor understanding the history of happiness. If happiness depended only onobjective conditions such aswealth, health and social relations, itwould havebeen relatively easy to investigate its history. The finding that it depends onsubjective expectations makes the task of historians far harder. We modernshave an arsenal of tranquillisers and painkillers at our disposal, but ourexpectations of ease and pleasure, and our intolerance of inconvenience anddiscomfort,haveincreasedtosuchanextentthatwemaywellsufferfrompainmorethanourancestorseverdid.

It’shardtoacceptthislineofthinking.Theproblemisafallacyofreasoningembedded deep in our psyches.Whenwe try to guess or imagine how happyother people are now, or how people in the pastwere,we inevitably imagineourselvesintheirshoes.Butthatwon’tworkbecauseitpastesourexpectationson to the material conditions of others. In modern affluent societies it iscustomary to take a shower and change your clothes every day. Medievalpeasantswentwithoutwashingformonthsonend,andhardlyeverchangedtheirclothes.Thevery thoughtof living like that, filthyand reeking to thebone, isabhorrent to us. Yet medieval peasants seem not to haveminded. They wereusedtothefeelandsmellofalong-unlaunderedshirt.It’snotthattheywantedachangeofclothesbutcouldn’tgetit–theyhadwhattheywanted.So,atleastasfarasclothinggoes,theywerecontent.

That’s not so surprising, when you think of it. After all, our chimpanzeecousins seldomwashandnever change their clothes.Nor arewedisgustedbythefactthatourpetdogsandcatsdon’tshowerorchangetheircoatsdaily.Wepat, hug and kiss them all the same. Small children in affluent societies oftendislikeshowering,andittakesthemyearsofeducationandparentaldisciplinetoadoptthissupposedlyattractivecustom.Itisallamatterofexpectations.

Ifhappinessisdeterminedbyexpectations,thentwopillarsofoursociety–mass media and the advertising industry – may unwittingly be depleting theglobe’s reservoirsofcontentment. Ifyouwereaneighteen-year-oldyouth inasmall village 5,000 years ago you’d probably think you were good-lookingbecausetherewereonlyfiftyothermeninyourvillageandmostofthemwereeither old, scarred and wrinkled, or still little kids. But if you are a teenagertoday you are a lot more likely to feel inadequate. Even if the other guys atschoolareanuglylot,youdon’tmeasureyourselfagainstthembutagainstthemovie stars, athletes and supermodels you see all dayon television,Facebook

andgiantbillboards.So maybe Third World discontent is fomented not merely by poverty,

disease, corruptionandpoliticaloppressionbut alsobymereexposure toFirstWorldstandards.TheaverageEgyptianwasfarlesslikelytodiefromstarvation,plague or violence under HosniMubarak than under Ramses II or Cleopatra.NeverhadthematerialconditionofmostEgyptiansbeensogood.You’dthinktheywould have been dancing in the streets in 2011, thankingAllah for theirgood fortune. Instead they rose up furiously to overthrow Mubarak. Theyweren’tcomparingthemselvestotheirancestorsunderthepharaohs,butrathertotheircontemporariesinObama’sAmerica.

Ifthat’sthecase,evenimmortalitymightleadtodiscontent.Supposesciencecomes up with cures for all diseases, effective anti-ageing therapies andregenerativetreatmentsthatkeeppeopleindefinitelyyoung.Inalllikelihood,theimmediateresultwillbeanunprecedentedepidemicofangerandanxiety.

Those unable to afford the newmiracle treatments – the vast majority ofpeople–willbebesidethemselveswithrage.Throughouthistory,thepoorandoppressed comforted themselves with the thought that at least death is even-handed – that the rich and powerful will also die. The poor will not becomfortablewith the thought that theyhave to die,while the richwill remainyoungandbeautifulforever.

45. In previous eras the standard of beautywas set by the handful ofpeople who lived next door to you. Today the media and the fashion

industryexposeustoatotallyunrealisticstandardofbeauty.Theysearchout the most gorgeous people on the planet, and then parade themconstantlybeforeoureyes.Nowonderwearefarlesshappywiththewaywelook.

Butthetinyminorityabletoaffordthenewtreatmentswillnotbeeuphoriceither. Theywill havemuch to be anxious about.Although the new therapiescouldextendlifeandyouth, theycannotrevivecorpses.HowdreadfultothinkthatIandmylovedonescanliveforever,butonlyifwedon’tgethitbyatruckorblowntosmithereensbyaterrorist!Potentiallya-mortalpeoplearelikelytogrowaversetotakingeventheslightestrisk,andtheagonyoflosingaspouse,childorclosefriendwillbeunbearable.

ChemicalHappinessSocialscientistsdistributesubjectivewell-beingquestionnairesandcorrelate

the results with socio-economic factors such as wealth and political freedom.Biologists use the same questionnaires, but correlate the answers people givethemwithbiochemicalandgeneticfactors.Theirfindingsareshocking.

Biologists hold that our mental and emotional world is governed bybiochemicalmechanismsshapedbymillionsofyearsofevolution.Likeallothermentalstates,oursubjectivewell-beingisnotdeterminedbyexternalparameterssuchas salary, social relationsorpolitical rights.Rather, it isdeterminedbyacomplex system of nerves, neurons, synapses and various biochemicalsubstancessuchasserotonin,dopamineandoxytocin.

Nobodyisevermadehappybywinningthelottery,buyingahouse,gettingapromotionoreven finding true love.Peoplearemadehappybyone thingandonethingonly–pleasantsensationsintheirbodies.Apersonwhojustwonthelotteryorfoundnewloveandjumpsfromjoyisnotreallyreactingtothemoneyor the lover. She is reacting to various hormones coursing through herbloodstream,andtothestormofelectricsignalsflashingbetweendifferentpartsofherbrain.

Unfortunately for all hopes of creating heaven on earth, our internalbiochemicalsystemseemstobeprogrammedtokeephappinesslevelsrelativelyconstant.There’snonaturalselectionforhappinessassuch–ahappyhermit’sgeneticlinewillgoextinctasthegenesofapairofanxiousparentsgetcarriedontothenextgeneration.Happinessandmiseryplayaroleinevolutiononlytotheextentthattheyencourageordiscouragesurvivalandreproduction.Perhapsit’s not surprising, then, that evolution has moulded us to be neither too

miserable nor too happy. It enables us to enjoy amomentary rush of pleasantsensations,but thesenever last forever.Sooneror later they subsideandgiveplacetounpleasantsensations.

Forexample,evolutionprovidedpleasantfeelingsasrewardstomaleswhospread their genes by having sex with fertile females. If sex were notaccompanied by such pleasure, few males would bother. At the same time,evolutionmade sure that these pleasant feelings quickly subsided. If orgasmswere to last for ever, the very happy males would die of hunger for lack ofinterest in food, and would not take the trouble to look for additional fertilefemales.

Some scholars compare human biochemistry to an air-conditioning systemthatkeepsthetemperatureconstant,comeheatwaveorsnowstorm.Eventsmightmomentarily change the temperature, but the air-conditioning system alwaysreturnsthetemperaturetothesamesetpoint.

Someair-conditioningsystemsaresetattwenty-fivedegreesCelsius.Othersare set at twenty degrees. Human happiness conditioning systems also differfrompersontoperson.Onascalefromonetoten,somepeoplearebornwithacheerfulbiochemicalsystemthatallowstheirmoodtoswingbetweenlevelssixandten,stabilisingwithtimeateight.Suchapersonisquitehappyevenifshelivesinanalienatingbigcity,losesallhermoneyinastock-exchangecrashandisdiagnosedwithdiabetes.Otherpeoplearecursedwithagloomybiochemistrythat swings between three and seven and stabilises at five. Such an unhappyperson remains depressed even if she enjoys the support of a tight-knitcommunity,winsmillionsinthelotteryandisashealthyasanOlympicathlete.Indeed,even ifourgloomyfriendwins$50,000,000 in themorning,discoversthecureforbothAIDSandcancerbynoon,makespeacebetweenIsraelisandPalestinians that afternoon, and then in theevening reuniteswithher long-lostchildwhodisappearedyearsago–shewouldstillbeincapableofexperiencinganything beyond level seven happiness. Her brain is simply not built forexhilaration,comewhatmay.

Thinkforamomentofyourfamilyandfriends.Youknowsomepeoplewhoremainrelativelyjoyful,nomatterwhatbefalls them.Andthenthereare thosewhoarealwaysdisgruntled,nomatterwhatgiftstheworldlaysattheirfeet.Wetend tobelieve that ifwecould just changeourworkplace,getmarried, finishwritingthatnovel,buyanewcarorrepaythemortgage,wewouldbeontopoftheworld.Yetwhenwegetwhatwedesirewedon’t seem tobeanyhappier.Buyingcarsandwritingnovelsdonotchangeourbiochemistry.Theycanstartleitforafleetingmoment,butitissoonbacktoitssetpoint.

How can this be squared with the above-mentioned psychological andsociological findings that, for example,marriedpeople arehappieron averagethan singles? First, these findings are correlations – the direction of causationmay be the opposite of what some researchers have assumed. It is true thatmarried people are happier than singles and divorcees, but that does notnecessarilymean thatmarriage produces happiness. It could be that happinesscausesmarriage.Ormorecorrectly,thatserotonin,dopamineandoxytocinbringabout and maintain a marriage. People who are born with a cheerfulbiochemistryaregenerallyhappyandcontent.Suchpeoplearemoreattractivespouses,andconsequentlytheyhaveagreaterchanceofgettingmarried.Theyarealso less likely todivorce,because it is fareasier to livewithahappyandcontent spouse than with a depressed and dissatisfied one. Consequently, it’struethatmarriedpeoplearehappieronaveragethansingles,butasinglewomanprone to gloom because of her biochemistry would not necessarily becomehappierifsheweretohookupwithahusband.

Inaddition,mostbiologistsarenotfanatics.Theymaintainthathappinessisdetermined mainly by biochemistry, but they agree that psychological andsociological factors also have their place. Ourmental air-conditioning systemhas some freedom of movement within predetermined borders. It is almostimpossible to exceed the upper and lower emotional boundaries, butmarriageand divorce can have an impact in the area between the two. Somebody bornwithanaverageoflevelfivehappinesswouldneverdancewildlyinthestreets.Butagoodmarriageshouldenableher toenjoylevelsevenfromtimetotime,andtoavoidthedespondencyoflevelthree.

Ifweacceptthebiologicalapproachtohappiness,thenhistoryturnsouttobeofminor importance, sincemost historical events have had no impact on ourbiochemistry.Historycanchangetheexternalstimulithatcauseserotonintobesecreted, yet it does not change the resulting serotonin levels, and hence itcannotmakepeoplehappier.

Compare a medieval French peasant to a modern Parisian banker. Thepeasant lived in an unheatedmud hut overlooking the local pigsty, while thebanker goes home to a splendid penthouse with all the latest technologicalgadgets and a view to the Champs-Elysées. Intuitively, we would expect thebankertobemuchhappierthanthepeasant.However,mudhuts,penthousesandtheChamps-Elyséesdon’treallydetermineourmood.Serotonindoes.Whenthemedievalpeasantcompleted theconstructionofhismudhut,hisbrainneuronssecretedserotonin,bringingituptolevelX.Whenin2014thebankermadethelast payment on his wonderful penthouse, brain neurons secreted a similaramountofserotonin,bringingituptoasimilarlevelX.Itmakesnodifferenceto

thebrainthatthepenthouseisfarmorecomfortablethanthemudhut.TheonlythingthatmattersisthatatpresentthelevelofserotoninisX.Consequentlythebankerwouldnotbeoneiotahappierthanhisgreat-great-great-grandfather,thepoormedievalpeasant.

Thisistruenotonlyofprivatelives,butalsoofgreatcollectiveevents.Take,for example, the French Revolution. The revolutionaries were busy: theyexecuted the king, gave lands to the peasants, declared the rights of man,abolishednobleprivilegesandwagedwaragainstthewholeofEurope.Yetnoneof that changed French biochemistry. Consequently, despite all the political,social,ideologicalandeconomicupheavalsbroughtaboutbytherevolution,itsimpactonFrenchhappinesswassmall.Thosewhowonacheerfulbiochemistryin the genetic lotterywere just as happy before the revolution as after. ThosewithagloomybiochemistrycomplainedaboutRobespierreandNapoleonwiththe same bitterness with which they earlier complained about Louis XVI andMarieAntoinette.

Ifso,whatgoodwastheFrenchRevolution?Ifpeopledidnotbecomeanyhappier, then what was the point of all that chaos, fear, blood and war?BiologistswouldneverhavestormedtheBastille.Peoplethinkthatthispoliticalrevolution or that social reformwillmake themhappy, but their biochemistrytricksthemtimeandagain.

There isonlyonehistoricaldevelopment thathas real significance.Today,when we finally realise that the keys to happiness are in the hands of ourbiochemicalsystem,wecanstopwastingourtimeonpoliticsandsocialreforms,putsches and ideologies, and focus insteadon theonly thing that canmakeustruly happy: manipulating our biochemistry. If we invest billions inunderstanding our brain chemistry and developing appropriate treatments, wecanmakepeoplefarhappierthaneverbefore,withoutanyneedofrevolutions.Prozac,forexample,doesnotchangeregimes,butbyraisingserotoninlevelsitliftspeopleoutoftheirdepression.

Nothingcaptures thebiological argumentbetter than the famousNewAgeslogan: ‘Happiness Begins Within.’ Money, social status, plastic surgery,beautifulhouses,powerfulpositions–noneof thesewill bringyouhappiness.Lastinghappinesscomesonlyfromserotonin,dopamineandoxytocin.1

InAldousHuxley’sdystopiannovelBraveNewWorld,publishedin1932atthe height of the Great Depression, happiness is the supreme value andpsychiatricdrugsreplacethepoliceandtheballotasthefoundationofpolitics.Each day, each person takes a dose of ‘soma’, a synthetic drugwhichmakespeople happy without harming their productivity and efficiency. The WorldState that governs the entire globe is never threatened by wars, revolutions,

strikes or demonstrations, because all people are supremely contentwith theircurrent conditions,whatever theymay be.Huxley’s vision of the future is farmore troubling than George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. Huxley’s worldseemsmonstrous tomost readers, but it is hard to explainwhy.Everybody ishappyallthetime–whatcouldbewrongwiththat?

TheMeaningofLifeHuxley’s disconcerting world is based on the biological assumption that

happinessequalspleasure.Tobehappyisnomoreandnolessthanexperiencingpleasant bodily sensations. Since our biochemistry limits the volume andduration of these sensations, the only way to make people experience a highlevel of happiness over an extended period of time is to manipulate theirbiochemicalsystem.

Butthatdefinitionofhappinessiscontestedbysomescholars.Inafamousstudy,DanielKahneman,winneroftheNobelPrizeineconomics,askedpeopleto recount a typical work day, going through it episode by episode andevaluating how much they enjoyed or disliked each moment. He discoveredwhatseemstobeaparadoxinmostpeople’sviewoftheirlives.Taketheworkinvolvedinraisingachild.Kahnemanfoundthatwhencountingmomentsofjoyandmomentsofdrudgery,bringingupachildturnsouttobearatherunpleasantaffair.Itconsistslargelyofchangingnappies,washingdishesanddealingwithtempertantrums,whichnobodylikes todo.Yetmostparentsdeclare that theirchildren are their chief source of happiness. Does it mean that people don’treallyknowwhat’sgoodforthem?

That’soneoption.Anotheristhatthefindingsdemonstratethathappinessisnotthesurplusofpleasantoverunpleasantmoments.Rather,happinessconsistsin seeing one’s life in its entirety asmeaningful andworthwhile. There is animportantcognitiveandethicalcomponenttohappiness.Ourvaluesmakeallthedifferencetowhetherweseeourselvesas‘miserableslavestoababydictator’oras‘lovinglynurturinganewlife’.2AsNietzscheputit,ifyouhaveawhytolive,you can bear almost any how. Ameaningful life can be extremely satisfyingeveninthemidstofhardship,whereasameaninglesslifeisaterribleordealnomatterhowcomfortableitis.

Thoughpeople inallculturesanderashavefelt thesametypeofpleasuresand pains, the meaning they have ascribed to their experiences has probablyvariedwidely.Ifso,thehistoryofhappinessmighthavebeenfarmoreturbulentthan biologists imagine. It’s a conclusion that does not necessarily favourmodernity. Assessing life minute byminute, medieval people certainly had it

rough.However,iftheybelievedthepromiseofeverlastingblissintheafterlife,theymaywellhaveviewed their livesas farmoremeaningfulandworthwhilethan modern secular people, who in the long term can expect nothing butcompleteandmeaninglessoblivion.Asked‘Areyousatisfiedwithyourlifeasawhole?’, people in the Middle Ages might have scored quite highly in asubjectivewell-beingquestionnaire.

Soourmedievalancestorswerehappybecausetheyfoundmeaningtolifeincollectivedelusionsabouttheafterlife?Yes.Aslongasnobodypuncturedtheirfantasies, why shouldn’t they? As far as we can tell, from a purely scientificviewpoint,human lifehasabsolutelynomeaning.Humansare theoutcomeofblind evolutionaryprocesses that operatewithoutgoalorpurpose.Our actionsare not part of some divine cosmic plan, and if planetEarthwere to blow uptomorrowmorning, theuniversewouldprobablykeepgoingabout itsbusinessas usual.As far aswe can tell at this point, human subjectivitywould not bemissed.Henceanymeaningthatpeopleascribetotheirlivesisjustadelusion.Theother-worldlymeaningsmedievalpeoplefoundintheirliveswerenomoredeluded than themodernhumanist, nationalist andcapitalistmeaningsmodernpeoplefind.Thescientistwhosaysherlifeismeaningfulbecausesheincreasesthe store of human knowledge, the soldier who declares that his life ismeaningfulbecausehefightstodefendhishomeland,andtheentrepreneurwhofinds meaning in building a new company are no less delusional than theirmedieval counterparts who found meaning in reading scriptures, going on acrusadeorbuildinganewcathedral.

Soperhapshappinessissynchronisingone’spersonaldelusionsofmeaningwith theprevailingcollectivedelusions.As longasmypersonalnarrative is inlinewiththenarrativesofthepeoplearoundme,Icanconvincemyselfthatmylifeismeaningful,andfindhappinessinthatconviction.

Thisisquiteadepressingconclusion.Doeshappinessreallydependonself-delusion?

KnowThyselfIf happiness is based on feeling pleasant sensations, then in order to be

happierweneedtore-engineerourbiochemicalsystem.Ifhappinessisbasedonfeeling that life ismeaningful, then in order to be happierwe need to deludeourselvesmoreeffectively.Isthereathirdalternative?

Both the above views share the assumption that happiness is some sort ofsubjective feeling (of either pleasure or meaning), and that in order to judgepeople’shappiness,allweneedtodoisaskthemhowtheyfeel.Tomanyofus,

that seems logical because the dominant religion of our age is liberalism.Liberalism sanctifies the subjective feelings of individuals. It views thesefeelingsasthesupremesourceofauthority.Whatisgoodandwhatisbad,whatisbeautifulandwhatisugly,whatoughttobeandwhatoughtnottobe,arealldeterminedbywhateachoneofusfeels.

Liberalpoliticsisbasedontheideathatthevotersknowbest,andthereisnoneedforBigBrothertotelluswhatisgoodforus.Liberaleconomicsisbasedontheideathatthecustomerisalwaysright.Liberalartdeclaresthatbeautyisintheeyeofthebeholder.Studentsinliberalschoolsanduniversitiesaretaughttothink for themselves.Commercials urge us to ‘Just do it!’Action films, stagedramas, soap operas, novels and catchy pop songs indoctrinate us constantly:‘Be true to yourself’, ‘Listen to yourself’, ‘Follow your heart’. Jean-JacquesRousseau stated thisviewmost classically: ‘What I feel tobegood– isgood.WhatIfeeltobebad–isbad.’

People who have been raised from infancy on a diet of such slogans areprone tobelieve thathappiness is a subjective feelingand that each individualbest knows whether she is happy or miserable. Yet this view is unique toliberalism.Mostreligionsandideologiesthroughouthistorystatedthatthereareobjectiveyardsticks for goodness andbeauty, and for how thingsought to be.Theyweresuspiciousofthefeelingsandpreferencesoftheordinaryperson.Atthe entrance of the temple of Apollo at Delphi, pilgrimswere greeted by theinscription: ‘Know thyself!’ The implication was that the average person isignorantofhistrueself,andisthereforelikelytobeignorantoftruehappiness.Freudwouldprobablyconcur.*

And so would Christian theologians. St Paul and St Augustine knewperfectlywell that if you askedpeople about it,most of themwouldprefer tohave sex than pray to God. Does that prove that having sex is the key tohappiness?NotaccordingtoPaulandAugustine.Itprovesonlythathumankindissinfulbynature,andthatpeopleareeasilyseducedbySatan.FromaChristianviewpoint,thevastmajorityofpeopleareinmoreorlessthesamesituationasheroin addicts. Imagine that a psychologist embarks on a study of happinessamongdrugusers.Hepollsthemandfindsthattheydeclare,everysingleoneofthem, that they are only happy when they shoot up. Would the psychologistpublishapaperdeclaringthatheroinisthekeytohappiness?

TheideathatfeelingsarenottobetrustedisnotrestrictedtoChristianity.Atleastwhen it comes to thevalueof feelings, evenDarwinandDawkinsmightfind common groundwith St Paul and StAugustine.According to the selfishgenetheory,naturalselectionmakespeople,likeotherorganisms,choosewhatis good for the reproduction of their genes, even if it is bad for them as

individuals. Most males spend their lives toiling, worrying, competing andfighting, instead of enjoying peaceful bliss, because their DNA manipulatesthemforitsownselfishaims.LikeSatan,DNAusesfleetingpleasurestotemptpeopleandplacetheminitspower.

Most religions and philosophies have consequently taken a very differentapproach to happiness than liberalism does.3 The Buddhist position isparticularly interesting.Buddhismhasassignedthequestionofhappinessmoreimportance than perhaps any other human creed. For 2,500 years, Buddhistshavesystematicallystudied theessenceandcausesofhappiness,which iswhythere is a growing interest among the scientific community both in theirphilosophyandtheirmeditationpractices.

Buddhismshares thebasic insightof thebiological approach tohappiness,namely thathappinessresults fromprocessesoccurringwithinone’sbody,andnotfromevents in theoutsideworld.However,startingfromthesameinsight,Buddhismreachesverydifferentconclusions.

According to Buddhism, most people identify happiness with pleasantfeelings, while identifying suffering with unpleasant feelings. Peopleconsequently ascribe immense importance to what they feel, craving toexperience more and more pleasures, while avoiding pain. Whatever we dothroughoutourlives,whetherscratchingourleg,fidgetingslightlyinthechair,orfightingworldwars,wearejusttryingtogetpleasantfeelings.

Theproblem,accordingtoBuddhism,is thatourfeelingsarenomorethanfleeting vibrations, changing every moment, like the ocean waves. If fiveminutes ago I felt joyful and purposeful, now these feelings are gone, and Imightwellfeelsadanddejected.SoifIwanttoexperiencepleasantfeelings,Ihavetoconstantlychasethem,whiledrivingawaytheunpleasantfeelings.EvenifIsucceed,Iimmediatelyhavetostartalloveragain,withoutevergettinganylastingrewardformytroubles.

What issoimportantaboutobtainingsuchephemeralprizes?Whystruggleso hard to achieve something that disappears almost as soon as it arises?AccordingtoBuddhism,therootofsufferingisneitherthefeelingofpainnorofsadness nor even ofmeaninglessness.Rather, the real root of suffering is thisnever-endingandpointlesspursuitofephemeralfeelings,whichcausesustobeinaconstantstateoftension,restlessnessanddissatisfaction.Duetothispursuit,themindisneversatisfied.Evenwhenexperiencingpleasure, it isnotcontent,because it fears this feelingmight soon disappear, and craves that this feelingshouldstayandintensify.

People are liberated from suffering not when they experience this or thatfleetingpleasure,butratherwhentheyunderstandtheimpermanentnatureofall

their feelings, and stop craving them. This is the aim of Buddhist meditationpractices. In meditation, you are supposed to closely observe your mind andbody,witnesstheceaselessarisingandpassingofallyourfeelings,andrealisehowpointless it is topursue them.When thepursuit stops, themindbecomesveryrelaxed,clearandsatisfied.Allkindsoffeelingsgoonarisingandpassing–joy,anger,boredom,lust–butonceyoustopcravingparticularfeelings,youcanjustacceptthemforwhattheyare.Youliveinthepresentmomentinsteadoffantasisingaboutwhatmighthavebeen.

Theresultingserenityissoprofoundthatthosewhospendtheirlivesinthefrenzied pursuit of pleasant feelings can hardly imagine it. It is like a manstandingfordecadesontheseashore,embracingcertain‘good’wavesandtryingto prevent them from disintegrating,while simultaneously pushing back ‘bad’wavestopreventthemfromgettingnearhim.Dayin,dayout,themanstandsonthebeach,drivinghimselfcrazywith thisfruitlessexercise.Eventually,hesitsdownonthesandandjustallowsthewavestocomeandgoastheyplease.Howpeaceful!

ThisideaissoalientomodernliberalculturethatwhenWesternNewAgemovements encountered Buddhist insights, they translated them into liberalterms, thereby turning them on their head. New Age cults frequently argue:‘Happinessdoesnotdependonexternalconditions.Itdependsonlyonwhatwefeel inside. People should stop pursuing external achievements such aswealthand status, and connect insteadwith their inner feelings.’Ormore succinctly,‘HappinessBeginsWithin.’This is exactlywhatbiologists argue,butmoreorlesstheoppositeofwhatBuddhasaid.

Buddha agreed with modern biology and New Age movements thathappinessisindependentofexternalconditions.Yethismoreimportantandfarmoreprofoundinsightwasthat truehappiness isalsoindependentofour innerfeelings.Indeed,themoresignificancewegiveourfeelings,themorewecravethem,and themorewesuffer.Buddha’srecommendationwas tostopnotonlythepursuitofexternalachievements,butalsothepursuitofinnerfeelings.

Tosumup,subjectivewell-beingquestionnairesidentifyourwell-beingwithoursubjectivefeelings,andidentifythepursuitofhappinesswiththepursuitofparticular emotional states. In contrast, for many traditional philosophies andreligions, such as Buddhism, the key to happiness is to know the truth aboutyourself – to understand who, or what, you really are. Most people wronglyidentify themselveswith their feelings, thoughts, likesanddislikes.Whentheyfeelanger,theythink,‘Iamangry.Thisismyanger.’Theyconsequentlyspendtheirlifeavoidingsomekindsoffeelingsandpursuingothers.Theyneverrealisethat they are not their feelings, and that the relentless pursuit of particularfeelingsjusttrapstheminmisery.

Ifthisisso,thenourentireunderstandingofthehistoryofhappinessmightbe misguided. Maybe it isn’t so important whether people’s expectations arefulfilledandwhethertheyenjoypleasantfeelings.Themainquestioniswhetherpeopleknowthetruthaboutthemselves.Whatevidencedowehavethatpeopletoday understand this truth any better than ancient foragers or medievalpeasants?

Scholarsbegantostudythehistoryofhappinessonlyafewyearsago,andwearestillformulatinginitialhypothesesandsearchingforappropriateresearchmethods.It’smuchtooearlytoadoptrigidconclusionsandendadebatethat’shardly yet begun. What is important is to get to know as many differentapproachesaspossibleandtoasktherightquestions.

Most history books focus on the ideas of great thinkers, the bravery ofwarriors,thecharityofsaintsandthecreativityofartists.Theyhavemuchtotellabouttheweavingandunravellingofsocialstructures,abouttheriseandfallofempires, about thediscoveryand spreadof technologies.Yet they saynothingabouthowallthisinfluencedthehappinessandsufferingofindividuals.Thisisthebiggestlacunainourunderstandingofhistory.Wehadbetterstartfillingit.

*Paradoxically,whilepsychologicalstudiesofsubjectivewell-beingrelyonpeople’sabilitytodiagnosetheirhappinesscorrectly,thebasicraisond’êtreofpsychotherapy is that people don’t really know themselves and that theysometimes need professional help to free themselves of self-destructivebehaviours.

20

TheEndofHomoSapiens

THISBOOKBEGANBYPRESENTINGHISTORYasthenextstageinthecontinuumofphysics tochemistry tobiology.Sapiensare subject to the samephysical forces, chemical reactions and natural-selection processes that governall living beings. Natural selection may have providedHomo sapiens with amuchlargerplayingfieldthanithasgiventoanyotherorganism,butthefieldhasstillhaditsboundaries.Theimplicationhasbeenthat,nomatterwhattheirefforts and achievements, Sapiens are incapable of breaking free of theirbiologicallydeterminedlimits.

But at the dawn of the twenty-first century, this is no longer true:Homosapiens is transcending those limits. It is now beginning to break the laws ofnaturalselection,replacingthemwiththelawsofintelligentdesign.

For close to 4 billion years, every single organism on the planet evolvedsubjecttonaturalselection.Notevenonewasdesignedbyanintelligentcreator.The giraffe, for example, got its long neck thanks to competition betweenarchaic giraffes rather than to the whims of a super-intelligent being. Proto-giraffes who had longer necks had access to more food and consequentlyproducedmore offspring than did thosewith shorter necks.Nobody, certainlynotthegiraffes,said,‘Alongneckwouldenablegiraffestomunchleavesoffthetreetops.Let’sextendit.’ThebeautyofDarwin’stheoryisthatitdoesnotneedto assume an intelligent designer to explain how giraffes ended up with longnecks.

Forbillionsofyears,intelligentdesignwasnotevenanoption,becausetherewas no intelligence which could design things. Microorganisms, which untilquiterecentlyweretheonlylivingthingsaround,arecapableofamazingfeats.Amicroorganismbelongingtoonespeciescanincorporategeneticcodesfromacompletelydifferentspeciesintoitscellandtherebygainnewcapabilities,suchas resistance to antibiotics. Yet, as best we know, microorganisms have no

consciousness,noaimsinlife,andnoabilitytoplanahead.At some stage organisms such as giraffes, dolphins, chimpanzees and

Neanderthalsevolvedconsciousnessandtheabilitytoplanahead.ButevenifaNeanderthal fantasised about fowls so fat and slow-moving that he could justscoopthemupwheneverhewashungry,hehadnowayofturningthatfantasyintoreality.Hehadtohuntthebirdsthathadbeennaturallyselected.

Thefirstcrackintheoldregimeappearedabout10,000yearsago,duringtheAgricultural Revolution. Sapiens who dreamed of fat, slow-moving chickensdiscoveredthatiftheymatedthefattesthenwiththeslowestcock,someoftheiroffspringwould be both fat and slow. If youmated those offspringwith eachother, you could produce a line of fat, slow birds. It was a race of chickensunknown to nature, produced by the intelligent design not of a god but of ahuman.

Still, compared to an all-powerful deity,Homo sapiens had limited designskills.Sapienscoulduseselectivebreedingtodetouraroundandacceleratethenatural-selectionprocesses that normally affected chickens, but they could notintroducecompletelynewcharacteristicsthatwereabsentfromthegeneticpoolofwildchickens.Inaway,therelationshipbetweenHomosapiensandchickenswas similar tomanyother symbiotic relationships thathave sooftenarisenontheirowninnature.Sapiensexertedpeculiarselectivepressuresonchickensthatcaused the fat and slow ones to proliferate, just as pollinating bees selectflowers,causingthebrightcolourfulonestoproliferate.

Today, the 4-billion-year-old regime of natural selection is facing acompletely different challenge. In laboratories throughout theworld, scientistsare engineering living beings. They break the laws of natural selection withimpunity,unbridledevenbyanorganismsoriginalcharacteristics.EduardoKac,aBrazilianbio-artist,decidedin2000tocreateanewworkofart:afluorescentgreenrabbit.KaccontactedaFrenchlaboratoryandoffereditafeetoengineeraradiantbunnyaccordingtohisspecifications.TheFrenchscientiststookarun-of-the-millwhiterabbitembryo,implantedinitsDNAagenetakenfromagreenfluorescent jellyfish, and voilà! One green fluorescent rabbit for lemonsieur.KacnamedtherabbitAlba.

ItisimpossibletoexplaintheexistenceofAlbathroughthelawsofnaturalselection. She is the product of intelligent design. She is also a harbinger ofthings to come. If the potential Alba signifies is realised in full – and ifhumankinddoesn’tannihilateitselfmeanwhile–theScientificRevolutionmightproveitselffargreaterthanamerehistoricalrevolution.Itmayturnouttobethemostimportantbiologicalrevolutionsincetheappearanceoflifeonearth.After4billionyearsofnaturalselection,Albastandsatthedawnofanewcosmicera,

inwhich lifewill be ruled by intelligent design. If this happens, thewhole ofhuman history up to that point might, with hindsight, be reinterpreted as aprocess of experimentation and apprenticeship that revolutionised the game oflife.Suchaprocessshouldbeunderstoodfromacosmicperspectiveofbillionsofyears,ratherthanfromahumanperspectiveofmillennia.

Biologists the world over are locked in battle with the intelligent-designmovement,whichopposes the teachingofDarwinian evolution in schools andclaimsthatbiologicalcomplexityprovestheremustbeacreatorwhothoughtoutallbiologicaldetailsinadvance.Thebiologistsarerightaboutthepast,buttheproponentsofintelligentdesignmight,ironically,berightaboutthefuture.

At the time of writing, the replacement of natural selection by intelligentdesign could happen in any of three ways: through biological engineering,cyborgengineering(cyborgsarebeings thatcombineorganicwithnon-organicparts)ortheengineeringofinorganiclife.

OfMiceandMenBiological engineering is deliberate human intervention on the biological

level (e.g. implanting a gene) aimed at modifying an organisms shape,capabilities,needsordesires,inordertorealizesomepreconceivedculturalidea,suchastheartisticpredilectionsofEduardoKac.

Thereisnothingnewaboutbiologicalengineering,perse.Peoplehavebeenusing it for millennia in order to reshape themselves and other organisms. Asimple example is castration. Humans have been castrating bulls for perhaps10,000 years in order to create oxen. Oxen are less aggressive, and are thuseasiertotraintopullploughs.Humansalsocastratedtheirownyoungmalestocreatesopranosingerswithenchantingvoicesandeunuchswhocouldsafelybeentrustedwithoverseeingthesultansharem.

Butrecentadvancesinourunderstandingofhoworganismswork,downtothe cellular and nuclear levels, have opened up previously unimaginablepossibilities. For instance, we can today not merely castrate a man, but alsochange his sex through surgical and hormonal treatments. But that’s not all.Considerthesurprise,disgustandconsternationthatensuedwhen,in1996,thefollowingphotographappearedinnewspapersandontelevision:

46. A mouse on whose back scientists grew an ‘ear’ made of cattlecartilage cells. It is an eerie echo of the lion-man statue from the StadelCave. Thirty thousand years ago, humanswere already fantasising aboutcombining different species. Today, they can actually produce suchchimeras.

No,Photoshopwasnotinvolved.It’sanuntouchedphotoofarealmouseonwhosebackscientistsimplantedcattlecartilagecells.Thescientistswereabletocontrolthegrowthofthenewtissue,shapingitinthiscaseintosomethingthatlookslikeahumanear.Theprocessmaysoonenablescientiststomanufactureartificialears,whichcouldthenbeimplantedinhumans.1

Evenmoreremarkablewonderscanbeperformedwithgeneticengineering,whichiswhyitraisesahostofethical,politicalandideologicalissues.Andit’snot just piousmonotheists who object that man should not usurp God’s role.Many confirmed atheists are no less shocked by the idea that scientists arestepping intonature’sshoes.Animal-rightsactivistsdecry thesufferingcausedtolabanimalsingeneticengineeringexperiments,andtothefarmyardanimalsthat are engineered in complete disregard of their needs and desires. Human-rights activists are afraid that genetic engineering might be used to createsupermen who will make serfs of the rest of us. Jeremiahs offer apocalypticvisions of bio-dictatorships that will clone fearless soldiers and obedientworkers.Theprevailing feeling is that toomanyopportunitiesareopening tooquicklyandthatourabilitytomodifygenesisoutpacingourcapacityformaking

wiseandfar-sighteduseoftheskill.The result is thatwe’re at present usingonly a fractionof thepotential of

geneticengineering.Mostoftheorganismsnowbeingengineeredarethosewiththeweakestpolitical lobbies–plants,fungi,bacteriaandinsects.Forexample,linesofE.coli,abacteriumthatlivessymbioticallyinthehumangut(andwhichmakesheadlineswhenitgetsoutofthegutandcausesdeadlyinfections),havebeengeneticallyengineered toproducebiofuel.2E. coli and several speciesoffungihavealsobeenengineeredtoproduceinsulin,therebyloweringthecostofdiabetestreatment.3AgeneextractedfromanArcticfishhasbeeninsertedintopotatoes,makingtheplantsmorefrost-resistant.4

Afewmammalshavealsobeensubject togeneticengineering.Everyyearthedairyindustrysuffersbillionsofdollarsindamagesduetomastitis,adiseasethat strikes dairy-cow udders. Scientists are currently experimenting withgeneticallyengineeredcowswhosemilkcontainslysostaphin,abiochemicalthatattacks thebacteria responsible for thedisease.5 The pork industry,which hassufferedfromfallingsalesbecauseconsumersarewaryoftheunhealthyfatsinham and bacon, has hopes for a still-experimental line of pigs implantedwithgeneticmaterialfromaworm.Thenewgenescausethepigstoturnbadomega6fattyacidintoitshealthycousin,omega3.6

Thenextgenerationofgeneticengineeringwillmakepigswithgoodfatlooklike child’s play. Geneticists have managed not merely to extend sixfold theaveragelifeexpectancyofworms,butalsotoengineergeniusmicethatdisplaymuch-improved memory and learning skills.7 Voles are small, stout rodentsresemblingmice,andmostvarietiesofvolesarepromiscuous.Butthereisonespeciesinwhichboyandgirlvolesformlastingandmonogamousrelationships.Geneticistsclaimtohaveisolatedthegenesresponsibleforvolemonogamy.IftheadditionofagenecanturnavoleDonJuanintoaloyalandlovinghusband,arewe far off from being able to genetically engineer not only the individualabilitiesofrodents(andhumans),butalsotheirsocialstructures?8

TheReturnoftheNeanderthalsButgeneticists donotonlywant to transform living lineages.Theyaim to

reviveextinctcreaturesaswell.Andnot justdinosaurs,as inJurassicPark.Ateam of Russian, Japanese and Korean scientists has recently mapped thegenomeofancientmammoths,foundfrozenintheSiberianice.Theynowplanto take a fertilised egg-cell of a present-day elephant, replace the elephantineDNAwithareconstructedmammothDNA,andimplanttheegginthewombof

anelephant.Afterabout twenty-twomonths, theyexpect thefirstmammoth in5,000yearstobeborn.9

Butwhystopatmammoths?ProfessorGeorgeChurchofHarvardUniversityrecentlysuggestedthat,withthecompletionoftheNeanderthalGenomeProject,wecannowimplantreconstructedNeanderthalDNAintoaSapiensovum,thusproducing the firstNeanderthal child in 30,000 years.Church claimed that hecould do the job for a paltry $30 million. Several women have alreadyvolunteeredtoserveassurrogatemothers.10

WhatdoweneedNeanderthalsfor?SomearguethatifwecouldstudyliveNeanderthals,we could answer someof themost nagging questions about theorigins and uniqueness of Homo sapiens. By comparing a Neanderthal to aHomosapiensbrain,andmappingoutwheretheirstructuresdiffer,perhapswecouldidentifywhatbiologicalchangeproducedconsciousnessasweexperienceit.There’sanethicalreason,too–somehavearguedthatifHomosapienswasresponsiblefortheextinctionoftheNeanderthals,ithasamoraldutytoresurrectthem. And having some Neanderthals around might be useful. Lots ofindustrialistswouldbegladtopayoneNeanderthaltodothemenialworkoftwoSapiens.

But why stop even at Neanderthals?Why not go back to God’s drawingboard and design a better Sapiens? The abilities, needs and desires ofHomosapienshaveageneticbasis,andtheSapiensgenomeisnomorecomplexthanthat of voles and mice. (The mouse genome contains about 2.5 billionnucleobases,theSapiensgenomeabout2.9billionbases–meaningthelatterisonly14percent larger.)11 In themedium range–perhaps in a fewdecades–geneticengineeringandotherformsofbiologicalengineeringmightenableustomake far-reaching alterations not only to our physiology, immune system andlifeexpectancy,butalso toour intellectualandemotionalcapacities. Ifgeneticengineering can create genius mice, why not genius humans? If it can createmonogamous voles, why not humans hard-wired to remain faithful to theirpartners?

TheCognitiveRevolution that turnedHomo sapiens from an insignificantape into the master of the world did not require any noticeable change inphysiology or even in the size and external shape of the Sapiens brain. Itapparentlyinvolvednomorethanafewsmallchangestointernalbrainstructure.Perhaps another small change would be enough to ignite a Second CognitiveRevolution,createacompletelynewtypeofconsciousness,andtransformHomosapiensintosomethingaltogetherdifferent.

True,westilldon’thavetheacumentoachievethis,butthereseemstobeno

insurmountable technical barrier preventing us from producing superhumans.The main obstacles are the ethical and political objections that have sloweddownresearchonhumans.Andnomatterhowconvincingtheethicalargumentsmaybe,itishardtoseehowtheycanholdbackthenextstepforlong,especiallyif what is at stake is the possibility of prolonging human life indefinitely,conquering incurable diseases, and upgrading our cognitive and emotionalabilities.

Whatwould happen, for example, ifwe developed a cure forAlzheimer’sdisease that, as a side benefit, could dramatically improve the memories ofhealthypeople?Wouldanyonebeabletohalttherelevantresearch?Andwhenthecureisdeveloped,couldanylawenforcementagencylimitittoAlzheimer’spatientsandpreventhealthypeoplefromusingittoacquiresuper-memories?

It’sunclearwhetherbioengineeringcouldreallyresurrect theNeanderthals,butitwouldverylikelybringdownthecurtainonHomosapiens.Tinkeringwithourgeneswon’tnecessarilykillus.ButwemightfiddlewithHomosapiens tosuchanextentthatwewouldnolongerbeHomosapiens.

BionicLifeThereisanothernewtechnologywhichcouldchangethelawsoflife:cyborg

engineering. Cyborgs are beings which combine organic and inorganic parts,suchasahumanwithbionichands.Inasense,nearlyallofusarebionicthesedays,sinceournaturalsensesandfunctionsaresupplementedbydevicessuchaseyeglasses, pacemakers, orthotics, and even computers and mobile phones(whichrelieveourbrainsofsomeoftheirdatastorageandprocessingburdens).We stand poised on the brink of becoming true cyborgs, of having inorganicfeaturesthatareinseparablefromourbodies,featuresthatmodifyourabilities,desires,personalitiesandidentities.

TheDefenseAdvancedResearchProjectsAgency(DARPA),aUSmilitaryresearch agency, is developing cyborgs out of insects. The idea is to implantelectronic chips, detectors and processors in the body of a fly or cockroach,whichwillenableeitherahumanoranautomaticoperatortocontroltheinsect’smovementsremotelyandtoabsorbandtransmitinformation.Suchaflycouldbesitting on the wall at enemy headquarters, eavesdrop on the most secretconversations, and if it isn’t caught first by a spider, could inform us exactlywhattheenemyisplanning.12 In2006theUSNavalUnderseaWarfareCenterreporteditsintentiontodevelopcyborgsharks,declaring,‘NUWCisdevelopingafishtagwhosegoalisbehaviourcontrolofhostanimalsvianeuralimplants.’The developers hope to identify underwater electromagnetic fields made by

submarinesandmines,byexploitingthenaturalmagneticdetectingcapabilitiesofsharks,whicharesuperiortothoseofanyman-madedetectors.13

Sapiens,too,arebeingturnedintocyborgs.Thenewestgenerationofhearingaidsaresometimesreferredtoas‘bionicears’.Thedeviceconsistsofanimplantthatabsorbssoundthroughamicrophonelocatedintheouterpartoftheear.Theimplant filters the sounds, identifies human voices, and translates them intoelectricsignalsthataresentdirectlytothecentralauditorynerveandfromtheretothebrain.14

RetinaImplant,agovernment-sponsoredGermancompany,isdevelopingaretinalprosthesisthatmayallowblindpeopletogainpartialvision.It involvesimplanting a small microchip inside the patient’s eye. Photocells absorb lightfallingon the eye and transform it into electrical energy,which stimulates theintactnervecellsintheretina.Thenervousimpulsesfromthesecellsstimulatethebrain,wheretheyaretranslatedintosight.Atpresentthetechnologyallowspatients to orientate themselves in space, identify letters, and even recognisefaces.15

JesseSullivan,anAmericanelectrician,lostbotharmsuptotheshoulderina2001accident.Todayheusestwobionicarms,courtesyoftheRehabilitationInstitute of Chicago. The special feature of Jesse’s new arms is that they areoperated by thought alone. Neural signals arriving from Jesse’s brain aretranslated by micro-computers into electrical commands, and the arms move.When Jesse wants to raise his arm, he does what any normal personunconsciouslydoes–andthearmrises.Thesearmscanperformamuchmorelimitedrangeofmovementsthanorganicarms,buttheyenableJessetocarryoutsimple daily functions. A similar bionic arm has recently been outfitted forClaudia Mitchell, an American soldier who lost her arm in a motorcycleaccident.Scientistsbelievethatwewillsoonhavebionicarmsthatwillnotonlymovewhenwilledtomove,butwillalsobeabletotransmitsignalsbacktothebrain,therebyenablingamputeestoregaineventhesensationoftouch!16

47. Jesse Sullivan and Claudia Mitchell holding hands. The amazingthingabouttheirbionicarmsisthattheyareoperatedbythought.

At present these bionic arms are a poor replacement for our organicoriginals, but they have the potential for unlimited development.Bionic arms,forexample,canbemadefarmorepowerfulthantheirorganickin,makingevena boxing champion feel like a weakling. Moreover, bionic arms have theadvantagethattheycanbereplacedeveryfewyears,ordetachedfromthebodyandoperatedatadistance.

ScientistsatDukeUniversityinNorthCarolinahaverecentlydemonstratedthis with rhesus monkeys whose brains have been implanted with electrodes.The electrodes gather signals from the brain and transmit them to externaldevices. Themonkeys have been trained to control detached bionic arms andlegs through thought alone. One monkey, named Aurora, learned to thought-control a detached bionic arm while simultaneously moving her two organicarms.LikesomeHindugoddess,Auroranowhasthreearms,andherarmscanbelocatedindifferentrooms–orevencities.ShecansitinherNorthCarolinalab,scratchherbackwithonehand,scratchherheadwithasecondhand,andsimultaneously steal a banana in New York (although the ability to eat apurloined fruit atadistance remainsadream).Another rhesusmonkey, Idoya,wonworld fame in 2008when she thought-controlled a pair of bionic legs inKyoto, Japan, from her North Carolina chair. The legs were twenty timesIdoya’sweight.17

Locked-insyndromeisaconditioninwhichapersonlosesallornearlyall

her ability tomove any part of her body,while her cognitive abilities remainintact. Patients suffering from the syndrome have up till now been able tocommunicate with the outside world only through small eye movements.However,afewpatientshavehadbrain-signal-gatheringelectrodesimplantedintheir brains. Efforts are being made to translate such signals not merely intomovementsbut also intowords. If theexperiments succeed, locked-inpatientscouldfinallyspeakdirectlywiththeoutsideworld,andwemighteventuallybeabletousethetechnologytoreadotherpeoplesminds.18

Yetofalltheprojectscurrentlyunderdevelopment,themostrevolutionaryistheattempt todeviseadirect two-waybrain-computer interface thatwillallowcomputers to read the electrical signals of a human brain, simultaneouslytransmittingsignals that thebraincan read in turn.What if such interfacesareusedtodirectly linkabrain to theInternet,or todirectly linkseveralbrains toeach other, thereby creating a sort of Inter-brain-net? What might happen tohumanmemory,humanconsciousnessandhumanidentityifthebrainhasdirectaccess toacollectivememorybank?Insuchasituation,onecyborgcould,forexample,retrievethememoriesofanother–nothearaboutthem,notreadabouttheminanautobiography,not imagine them,butdirectlyremember themas iftheywerehisown.Orherown.Whathappenstoconceptssuchastheselfandgenderidentitywhenmindsbecomecollective?Howcouldyouknowthyselforfollow your dream if the dream is not in your mind but in some collectivereservoirofaspirations?

Such a cyborg would no longer be human, or even organic. It would besomething completely different. Itwould be so fundamentally another kind ofbeing that we cannot even grasp the philosophical, psychological or politicalimplications.

AnotherLifeThethirdwaytochangethelawsoflifeistoengineercompletelyinorganic

beings. The most obvious examples are computer programs and computervirusesthatcanundergoindependentevolution.

Thefieldofgeneticprogrammingistodayoneofthemostinterestingspotsin the computer science world. It tries to emulate the methods of geneticevolution.Manyprogrammersdreamofcreatingaprogramthatcouldlearnandevolve completely independently of its creator. In this case, the programmerwould be a primummobile, a first mover, but his creation would be free toevolve in directions neither its maker nor any other human could ever haveenvisaged.

Aprototypeforsuchaprogramalreadyexists–it’scalledacomputervirus.As it spreads through the Internet, the virus replicates itself millions uponmillionsoftimes,allthewhilebeingchasedbypredatoryantivirusprogramsandcompetingwithothervirusesforaplaceincyberspace.Onedaywhenthevirusreplicates itself a mistake occurs – a computerised mutation. Perhaps themutation occurs because the human engineer programmed the virus to makeoccasional random replication mistakes. Perhaps the mutation was due to arandom error. If, by chance, the modified virus is better at evading antivirusprograms without losing its ability to invade other computers, it will spreadthroughcyberspace.Ifso,themutantswillsurviveandreproduce.Astimegoesby, cyberspacewould be full of newviruses that nobody engineered, and thatundergonon-organicevolution.

Are these living creatures? It depends on what you mean by ‘livingcreatures’. They have certainly been produced by a new evolutionary process,completelyindependentofthelawsandlimitationsoforganicevolution.

Imagine another possibility – suppose you could back up your brain to aportableharddriveandthenrunitonyourlaptop.WouldyourlaptopbeabletothinkandfeeljustlikeaSapiens?Ifso,woulditbeyouorsomeoneelse?Whatif computer programmers could create an entirely new but digital mind,composedofcomputer code, completewitha senseof self, consciousnessandmemory?Ifyourantheprogramonyourcomputer,woulditbeaperson?Ifyoudeleteditcouldyoubechargedwithmurder?

Wemightsoonhavetheanswertosuchquestions.TheHumanBrainProject,foundedin2005,hopes torecreateacompletehumanbrain insideacomputer,withelectroniccircuitsinthecomputeremulatingneuralnetworksinthebrain.Theprojectsdirectorhasclaimedthat,iffundedproperly,withinadecadeortwowecouldhave an artificial humanbrain inside a computer that could talk andbehaveverymuchasahumandoes.Ifsuccessful,thatwouldmeanthatafter4billionyearsofmillingaroundinsidethesmallworldoforganiccompounds,lifewillsuddenlybreakoutintothevastnessoftheinorganicrealm,readytotakeupshapesbeyondourwildestdreams.Notallscholarsagreethatthemindworksinamanneranalogoustotoday’sdigitalcomputers–andifitdoesn’t,present-daycomputers would not be able to simulate it. Yet it would be foolish tocategorically dismiss the possibility before giving it a try. In 2013 the projectreceivedagrantof€1billionfromtheEuropeanUnion.19

TheSingularityPresently,onlyatinyfractionofthesenewopportunitieshavebeenrealised.

Yettheworldof2014isalreadyaworldinwhichcultureisreleasingitselffromtheshacklesofbiology.Ourabilitytoengineernotmerelytheworldaroundus,butabovealltheworldinsideourbodiesandminds,isdevelopingatbreakneckspeed. More and more spheres of activity are being shaken out of theircomplacent ways. Lawyers need to rethink issues of privacy and identity;governmentsarefacedwithrethinkingmattersofhealthcareandequality;sportsassociations and educational institutions need to redefine fair play andachievement; pension funds and labourmarkets should readjust to a world inwhichsixtymightbethenewthirty.Theymustalldealwiththeconundrumsofbioengineering,cyborgsandinorganiclife.

Mappingthefirsthumangenomerequiredfifteenyearsand$3billion.Todayyou can map a person’s DNA within a few weeks and at the cost of a fewhundred dollars.20 The era of personalized medicine – medicine that matchestreatment to DNA – has begun. The family doctor could soon tell you withgreater certainty that you face high risks of liver cancer,whereas you needn’tworry too much about heart attacks. She could determine that a popularmedication that helps 92 per cent of people is useless to you, and you shouldinsteadtakeanotherpill,fataltomanypeoplebutjustrightforyou.Theroadtonear-perfectmedicinestandsbeforeus.

However,with improvements inmedicalknowledgewillcomenewethicalconundrums. Ethicists and legal experts are alreadywrestlingwith the thornyissueofprivacyasitrelatestoDNA.WouldinsurancecompaniesbeentitledtoaskforourDNAscansandtoraisepremiumsiftheydiscoveragenetictendencyto recklessbehaviour?Wouldwebe required to faxourDNA, rather thanourCV,topotentialemployers?CouldanemployerfavouracandidatebecausehisDNAlooksbetter?Orcouldwesueinsuchcasesfor‘geneticdiscrimination’?CouldacompanythatdevelopsanewcreatureoraneworganregisterapatentonitsDNAsequences?Itisobviousthatonecanownaparticularchicken,butcanoneownanentirespecies?

Suchdilemmasaredwarfedby theethical,socialandpolitical implicationsof the Gilgamesh Project and of our potential new abilities to createsuperhumans.TheUniversalDeclarationofHumanRights,governmentmedicalprogrammes throughout the world, national health insurance programmes andnationalconstitutionsworldwiderecognisethatahumanesocietyoughttogiveallitsmembersfairmedicaltreatmentandkeeptheminrelativelygoodhealth.That was all well and good as long as medicine was chiefly concerned withpreventing illness and healing the sick. What might happen once medicinebecomes preoccupied with enhancing human abilities? Would all humans beentitledtosuchenhancedabilities,orwouldtherebeanewsuperhumanelite?

Our late modern world prides itself on recognising, for the first time inhistory,thebasicequalityofallhumans,yetitmightbepoisedtocreatethemostunequalofallsocieties.Throughouthistory,theupperclassesalwaysclaimedtobesmarter,strongerandgenerallybetterthantheunderclass.Theywereusuallydeludingthemselves.Ababyborntoapoorpeasantfamilywaslikelytobeasintelligent as the crownprince.With thehelpof newmedical capabilities, thepretensionsoftheupperclassesmightsoonbecomeanobjectivereality.

This is not science fiction.Most science-fiction plots describe a world inwhichSapiens–identicaltous–enjoysuperiortechnologysuchaslight-speedspaceships and laser guns. The ethical and political dilemmas central to theseplotsaretakenfromourownworld,andtheymerelyrecreateouremotionalandsocial tensions against a futuristic backdrop. Yet the real potential of futuretechnologies is to change Homo sapiens itself, including our emotions anddesires,andnotmerelyourvehiclesandweapons.Whatisaspaceshipcomparedtoaneternallyyoungcyborgwhodoesnotbreedandhasnosexuality,whocansharethoughtsdirectlywithotherbeings,whoseabilitiestofocusandrememberarea thousand timesgreater thanourown,andwhoisneverangryorsad,buthasemotionsanddesiresthatwecannotbegintoimagine?

Science fiction rarely describes such a future, because an accuratedescriptionisbydefinitionincomprehensible.Producingafilmaboutthelifeofsomesuper-cyborgisakintoproducingHamletforanaudienceofNeanderthals.Indeed,thefuturemastersoftheworldwillprobablybemoredifferentfromusthanwe are fromNeanderthals.Whereaswe and theNeanderthals are at leasthuman,ourinheritorswillbegodlike.

PhysicistsdefinetheBigBangasasingularity.Itisapointatwhichalltheknownlawsofnaturedidnotexist.Timetoodidnotexist.Itisthusmeaninglesstosaythatanythingexisted‘before’theBigBang.Wemaybefastapproachinganewsingularity,whenall theconcepts thatgivemeaning toourworld–me,you,men,women,loveandhate–willbecomeirrelevant.Anythinghappeningbeyondthatpointismeaninglesstous.

TheFrankensteinProphecyIn1818MaryShelleypublishedFrankenstein, the storyof a scientistwho

createsanartificialbeingthatgoesoutofcontrolandwreakshavoc.Inthelasttwo centuries, the same story has been told over and over again in countlessversions.Ithasbecomeacentralpillarofournewscientificmythology.Atfirstsight, theFrankensteinstoryappears towarnus that ifwetry toplayGodandengineerlifewewillbepunishedseverely.Yetthestoryhasadeepermeaning.

The Frankensteinmyth confrontsHomo sapiens with the fact that the lastdays are fast approaching. Unless some nuclear or ecological catastropheintervenes, sogoes the story, thepaceof technologicaldevelopmentwill soonlead to the replacement ofHomo sapiens by completely different beings whopossess not only different physiques, but also very different cognitive andemotionalworlds.ThisissomethingmostSapiensfindextremelydisconcerting.Weliketobelievethatinthefuturepeoplejustlikeuswilltravelfromplanettoplanetinfastspaceships.Wedon’tliketocontemplatethepossibilitythatinthefuture,beingswithemotionsandidentitieslikeourswillnolongerexist,andourplacewillbetakenbyalienlifeformswhoseabilitiesdwarfourown.

WesomehowfindcomfortintheideathatDrFrankensteincreatedaterriblemonster,whomwehadtodestroyinordertosaveourselves.Weliketotellthestory thatway because it implies thatwe are the best of all beings, that thereneverwasandneverwillbesomethingbetterthanus.Anyattempttoimproveuswill inevitablyfail,becauseeven ifourbodiesmightbe improved,youcannottouchthehumanspirit.

Wewouldhaveahardtimeswallowingthefactthatscientistscouldengineerspiritsaswellasbodies,andthatfutureDrFrankensteinscouldthereforecreatesomethingtrulysuperiortous,somethingthatwilllookatusascondescendinglyaswelookattheNeanderthals.

We cannot be certainwhether today’s Frankensteinswill indeed fulfil thisprophecy.Thefutureisunknown,anditwouldbesurprisingiftheforecastsofthelastfewpageswererealisedinfull.Historyteachesusthatwhatseemstobejustaroundthecornermaynevermaterialiseduetounforeseenbarriers,andthatother unimagined scenarios will in fact come to pass. When the nuclear ageeruptedinthe1940S,manyforecastsweremadeaboutthefuturenuclearworldoftheyear2000.WhensputnikandApollo11firedtheimaginationoftheworld,everyonebeganpredictingthatbytheendofthecentury,peoplewouldbelivinginspacecoloniesonMarsandPluto.Fewoftheseforecastscametrue.Ontheotherhand,nobodyforesawtheInternet.

Sodon’tgoout justyet tobuyliability insuranceto indemnifyyouagainstlawsuits filedbydigitalbeings.Theabove fantasies–ornightmares–are juststimulantsforyourimagination.Whatweshouldtakeseriouslyistheideathatthenextstageofhistorywill includenotonly technologicalandorganisationaltransformations, but also fundamental transformations in human consciousnessand identity.And thesecouldbe transformationssofundamental that theywillcalltheveryterm‘human’intoquestion.Howlongdowehave?Noonereallyknows.Asalreadymentioned,somesaythatby2050afewhumanswillalready

be a-mortal. Less radical forecasts speak of the next century, or the nextmillennium.Yet fromtheperspectiveof70,000yearsofSapienshistory,whatareafewmillennia?

IfthecurtainisindeedabouttodroponSapienshistory,wemembersofoneofitsfinalgenerationsshoulddevotesometimetoansweringonelastquestion:what dowewant to become?This question, sometimes known as theHumanEnhancementquestion,dwarfs thedebates thatcurrentlypreoccupypoliticians,philosophers, scholars and ordinary people. After all, today’s debate betweentoday’sreligions,ideologies,nationsandclasseswillinalllikelihooddisappearalongwithHomosapiens.Ifoursuccessorsindeedfunctiononadifferentlevelofconsciousness (orperhapspossess somethingbeyondconsciousness thatwecannot even conceive), it seems doubtful that Christianity or Islamwill be ofinteresttothem,thattheirsocialorganisationcouldbeCommunistorcapitalist,orthattheirgenderscouldbemaleorfemale.

Andyet thegreatdebatesofhistoryare importantbecauseat least thefirstgenerationof thesegodswouldbeshapedby thecultural ideasof theirhumandesigners.Would they be created in the image of capitalism, of Islam, or offeminism? The answer to this questionmight send them careening in entirelydifferentdirections.

Mostpeopleprefernottothinkaboutit.Eventhefieldofbioethicspreferstoaddressanotherquestion,‘Whatisitforbiddentodo?’Isitacceptabletocarryoutgeneticexperimentsonlivinghumanbeings?Onabortedfetuses?Onstemcells?Isitethicaltoclonesheep?Andchimpanzees?Andwhatabouthumans?All of these are important questions, but it is naïve to imagine thatwemightsimplyhit thebrakes and stop the scientific projects that are upgradingHomosapiensintoadifferentkindofbeing.FortheseprojectsareinextricablymeshedtogetherwiththeGilgameshProject.Askscientistswhytheystudythegenome,ortrytoconnectabraintoacomputer,ortrytocreateamindinsideacomputer.Nineout of ten timesyou’ll get the same standard answer:we are doing it tocurediseasesandsavehumanlives.Eventhoughtheimplicationsofcreatingamindinsideacomputerarefarmoredramaticthancuringpsychiatricillnesses,thisisthestandardjustificationgiven,becausenobodycanarguewithit.Thisiswhy the Gilgamesh Project is the flagship of science. It serves to justifyeverything science does. Dr Frankenstein piggybacks on the shoulders ofGilgamesh.SinceitisimpossibletostopGilgamesh,itisalsoimpossibletostopDrFrankenstein.

The only thingwe can try to do is to influence the direction scientists aretaking.Sincewemightsoonbeabletoengineerourdesirestoo,perhapstherealquestionfacingusisnot‘Whatdowewanttobecome?’,but‘Whatdowewant

towant?’Thosewhoarenotspookedbythisquestionprobablyhaven’tgivenitenoughthought.

Afterword:

TheAnimalthatBecameaGod

SEVENTY THOUSAND YEARS AGO, HOMO sapiens was still aninsignificant animal minding its own business in a corner of Africa. In thefollowingmillenniaittransformeditselfintothemasteroftheentireplanetandthe terror of the ecosystem. Today it stands on the verge of becoming a god,poisedtoacquirenotonlyeternalyouth,butalsothedivineabilitiesofcreationanddestruction.

Unfortunately,theSapiensregimeonearthhassofarproducedlittlethatwecanbeproudof.Wehavemasteredoursurroundings,increasedfoodproduction,builtcities,establishedempiresandcreatedfar-flungtradenetworks.Butdidwedecrease the amount of suffering in the world? Time and again, massiveincreases in human power did not necessarily improve the well-being ofindividualSapiens,andusuallycausedimmensemiserytootheranimals.

Inthelastfewdecadeswehaveatlastmadesomerealprogressasfarasthehumanconditionisconcerned,withthereductionoffamine,plagueandwar.Yetthesituationofotheranimalsisdeterioratingmorerapidlythaneverbefore,andtheimprovementinthelotofhumanityistoorecentandfragiletobecertainof.

Moreover,despite theastonishing things thathumansarecapableofdoing,weremainunsureofourgoalsandweseemtobeasdiscontentedasever.Wehave advanced from canoes to galleys to steamships to space shuttles – butnobodyknowswherewe’regoing.Wearemorepowerfulthaneverbefore,buthaveverylittleideawhattodowithallthatpower.Worsestill,humansseemtobemoreirresponsiblethanever.Self-madegodswithonlythelawsofphysicstokeepuscompany,weareaccountabletonoone.Weareconsequentlywreakinghavoc on our fellow animals and on the surrounding ecosystem, seeking littlemorethanourowncomfortandamusement,yetneverfindingsatisfaction.

Is there anything more dangerous than dissatisfied and irresponsible godswhodon’tknowwhattheywant?

Notes

1AnAnimalofNoSignificance1AnnGibbons,‘FoodforThought:DidtheFirstCookedMealsHelpFuel

theDramaticEvolutionaryExpansionoftheHumanBrain?’,Science316:5831(2007),1,558–60.

2TheTreeofKnowledge1 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: JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress, 2000);FransdeWaal,OurInnerApe:ALeadingPrimatologistExplainsWhyWeAreWhoWeAre (NewYork:Riverhead Books, 2005); Michael L. Wilson and Richard W. Wrangham,‘Intergroup Relations in Chimpanzees’, Annual Review of Anthropology 32(2003),363–92;M.McFarlandSymington,‘Fission-FusionSocialOrganizationinAtelesandPan,InternationalJournalofPrimatology11:1(1990),49;ColinA.ChapmanandLaurenJ.Chapman,‘DeterminantsofGroupsSizeinPrimates:TheImportanceofTravelCosts’,inOntheMove:HowandWhyAnimalsTravelinGroups,ed.SueBoinskyandPaulA.Garber(Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,2000),26.3Dunbar,Grooming,GossipandtheEvolutionofLanguage,69–79;Leslie

C.AielloandR.I.M.Dunbar,‘NeocortexSize,GroupSize,andtheEvolutionof Language’, Current Anthropology 34:2 (1993), 189. For criticism of thisapproach see: Christopher McCarthy et al., ‘Comparing Two Methods forEstimatingNetworkSize’,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

BeforeLascaux:TheCompleteRecordoftheEarlyUpperPaleolithic,ed.HeidiKnecht, Anne Pike-Tay and Randall White (Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1993),211–28.5 G. R. Summerhayes, ‘Application of PIXE-PIGME to Archaeological

Analysis of Changing Patterns of Obsidian Use inWest New Britain, PapuaNew Guinea’, in Archaeological Obsidian Studies: Method and Theory, ed.StevenM.Shackley(NewYork:PlenumPress,1998),129–58.

3ADayintheLifeofAdamandEve1ChristopherRyanandCacildaJethá,SexatDawn:ThePrehistoricOrigins

ofModernSexuality(NewYork:Harper,2010);S.BeckermanandP.Valentine(eds.), Cultures of Multiple Fathers. The Theory and Practice of PartiblePaternity inLowlandSouthAmerica (Gainesville:UniversityPressofFlorida,2002).2 Noel G. Butlin,Economics and theDreamtime: AHypothetical History

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 98–101; Richard Broome,Aboriginal Australians (Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 2002), 15;William HowellEdwards, An Introduction to Aboriginal Societies (Wentworth Falls, NSW:SocialSciencePress,1988),52.3FekriA.Hassan,DemographicArchaeology(NewYork:AcademicPress,

1981), 196–9; Lewis Robert Binford,Constructing Frames of Reference: AnAnalyticalMethod forArchaeologicalTheoryBuildingUsingHunter-GathererandEnvironmentalDataSets (Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2001),143.4BrianHare,TheGeniusofDogs:HowDogsAreSmarterThanYouThink

(Dutton:PenguinGroup,2013).5ChristopherB.Ruff,ErikTrinkausandTrentonW.Holliday,‘BodyMass

and Encephalization in Pleistocene Homo’, Nature 387 (1997), 173–6; M.Henneberg and M. Steyn, ‘Trends in Cranial Capacity and Cranial Index inSubsaharanAfricaDuringtheHolocene’,AmericanJournalofHumanBiology5:4 (1993): 473–9; Drew H. Bailey and David C. Geary, ‘Hominid BrainEvolution: Testing Climatic, Ecological and Social Competition Models’,Human Nature 20 (2009): 67–79; Daniel J. Wescott and Richard L. Jantz,‘AssessingCraniofacialSecularChangeinAmericanBlacksandWhitesUsingGeometricMorphometry’,inModernMorphometricsinPhysicalAnthropology:Developments in Primatology: Progress and Prospects, ed. Dennis E. Slice(NewYork:PlenumPublishers,2005),231–45.6NicholasG.BlurtonJonesetal.,‘AntiquityofPostreproductiveLife:Are

There Modern Impacts on Hunter-Gatherer Postreproductive Life Spans?’,AmericanJournalofHumanBiology14(2002),184–205.7KimHillandA.MagdalenaHurtado,AchéLifeHistory:TheEcologyand

DemographyofaForagingPeople(NewYork:AldinedeGruyter,1996),164,

236.8Ibid.,78.9 Vincenzo Formicola and Alexandra P. Buzhilova, ‘Double Child Burial

fromSunghir(Russia):PathologyandInferencesforUpperPaleolithicFuneraryPractices’,American Journal of PhysicalAnthropology 124:3 (2004), 189–98;Giacomo Giacobini, ‘Richness and Diversity of Burial Rituals in the UpperPaleolithic’,Diogenes54:2(2007),19–39.10I.J.N.Thorpe,‘Anthropology,ArchaeologyandtheOriginofWarfare’,

WorldArchaeology35:1(2003),145–65;RaymondC.Kelly,WarlessSocietiesandtheOriginofWar (AnnArbor:UniversityofMichiganPress,2000);AzarGat, War in Human Civilization (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006);LawrenceH.Keeley,WarbeforeCivilization:TheMythofthePeacefulSavage(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1996);SlavomilVend,‘StoneAgeWarfare’,inAncientWarfare:ArchaeologicalPerspectives,ed.JohnCarmanandAnthonyHarding(Stroud:SuttonPublishing,1999),57–73.

4TheFlood1JamesF.O’ConnelandJimAllen,‘Pre-LGMSahul(PleistoceneAustralia

–NewGuinea)and theArchaeologyofEarlyModernHumans’, inRethinkingthe Human Revolution: New Behavioural and Biological Perspectives on theOrigin and Dispersal of Modern Humans, ed. Paul Mellars, Ofer Bar-Yosef,Katie Boyle (Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research,2007), 395–410; JamesF.O’Connel and JimAllen, ‘WhenDidHumansFirstArrive inGreaterAustralia andWhy is it Important toKnow?’,EvolutionaryAnthropology 6:4 (1998), 132–46; James F.O’Connel and JimAllen, ‘DatingtheColonizationofSahul (PleistoceneAustralia–NewGuinea):AReviewofRecentResearch’,JournalofRadiologicalScience31:6(2004),835–53;JonM.Erlandson, ‘Anatomically Modern Humans, Maritime Voyaging and thePleistocene Colonization of the Americas’, in The First Americans: ThePleistocene Colonization of the New World, ed. Nina G. Jablonski (SanFrancisco:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2002),59–60,63–4;JonM.Erlandsonand Torben C. Rick, ‘Archaeology Meets Marine Ecology: The Antiquity ofMaritimeCultures andHuman Impacts onMarine Fisheries and Ecosystems’,Annual Review ofMarine Science 2 (2010), 231–51; Atholl Anderson, ‘SlowBoats fromChina: Issues in the Prehistory of Indo-China Seafaring’,ModernQuaternaryResearchinSoutheastAsia16(2000),13–50;RobertG.Bednarik,‘Maritime Navigation in the Lower and Middle Paleolithic’, Earth andPlanetarySciences 328 (1999),559–60;RobertG.Bednarik, ‘Seafaring in the

Pleistocene’,CambridgeArchaeologicalJournal13:1(2003),41–66.2 Timothy F. Flannery, The Future Eaters: An Ecological History of the

AustralasianLandsandPeoples(PortMelbourne:ReedBooksAustralia,1994);Anthony D. Barnosky et al., ‘Assessing the Causes of Late PleistoceneExtinctionsontheContinents’,Science306:5693(2004):70–5;BarryW.Brookand David M. J. S. Bowman, ‘The Uncertain Blitzkrieg of PleistoceneMegafauna’,JournalofBiogeography31:4(2004),517–23;GiffordH.Milleretal., ‘Ecosystem Collapse in Pleistocene Australia and a Human Role inMegafaunalExtinction’,Science309:5732(2005),287–90;RichardG.Robertsetal.,‘NewAgesfortheLastAustralianMegafauna:ContinentWideExtinctionabout46,000YearsAgo’,Science292:5523(2001),1,888–92.3StephenWroeandJudithField,‘AReviewofEvidenceforaHumanRole

in the Extinction of Australian Megafauna and an Alternative Explanation’,QuaternaryScienceReviews25:21–2(2006),2,692–703;BarryW.Brooketal.,‘WouldtheAustralianMegafaunaHaveBecomeExtinctifHumansHadNeverColonised the Continent? Comments on “A Review of the Evidence for aHuman Role in the Extinction of Australian Megafauna and an AlternativeExplanation” by S. Wroe and J. Field’,Quaternary Science Reviews 26:3–4(2007), 560–4; Chris S. M. Turney et al., ‘Late-Surviving Megafauna inTasmania, Australia, Implicate Human Involvement in their Extinction’,ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences105:34(2008),12,150–3.4 JohnAlroy, ‘AMultispeciesOverkill Simulation of the End-Pleistocene

MegafaunalMassExtinction,Science,292:5523(2001),1,893–6;O’ConnelandAllen,‘Pre-LGMSahul’,400–1.5 L. H. Keeley, ‘Proto-Agricultural PracticesAmongHunter-Gatherers: A

Cross-Cultural Survey’, inLast Hunters, First Farmers: New Perspectives onthePrehistoricTransitiontoAgriculture,ed.T.DouglasPriceandAnneBirgitteGebauer (Santa Fe: School of American Research Press, 1995), 243–72; R.Jones,‘FirestickFarming’,AustralianNaturalHistory16(1969),224–8.6 David J. Meitzer, First Peoples in a New World: Colonizing Ice Age

America(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2009).7 Paul L. Koch and Anthony D. Barnosky, ‘Late Quaternary Extinctions:

StateoftheDebate’,AnnualReviewofEcology,Evolution,andSystematics37(2006), 215–50; Anthony D. Barnosky et al., ‘Assessing the Causes of LatePleistoceneExtinctionsontheContinents’,70–5.

5History’sBiggestFraud1Themapisbasedmainlyon:PeterBellwood,FirstFarmers:TheOrigins

ofAgriculturalSocieties(Malden:BlackwellPublishing,2005).2 JaredDiamond,Guns,Germs, and Steel: The Fates ofHuman Societies

(NewYork:W.W.Norton,1997).3Gat,War inHumanCivilization, 130–1;Robert S.Walker andDrewH.

Bailey, ‘Body Counts in Lowland South American Violence’, Evolution andHumanBehavior34(2013),29–34.4 Katherine A. Spielmann, ‘A Review: Dietary Restriction on Hunter-

GathererWomenandtheImplicationsforFertilityandInfantMortality’,HumanEcology 17:3 (1989), 321–45. See also: Bruce Winterhalder and Eric AlderSmith,‘AnalyzingAdaptiveStrategies:HumanBehavioralEcologyatTwenty-Five’,EvolutionaryAnthropology9:2(2000),51–72.5AlainBideau,BertrandDesjardinsandHectorPerez-Brignoli(eds.),Infant

and Child Mortality in the Past (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997); EdwardAnthonyWrigleyetal.,EnglishPopulationHistoryfromFamilyReconstitution,1580–1837(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1997),295–6,303.6ManfredHeunetal.,‘SiteofEinkornWheatDomesticationIdentifiedby

DNAFingerprints’,Science278:5341(1997),1,312–14.7CharlesPatterson,EternalTreblinka:OurTreatment ofAnimals and the

Holocaust (NewYork:LanternBooks, 2002), 9–10;Peter J.Ucko andG.W.Dimbleby (eds.), The Domestication and Exploitation of Plants and Animals(London:Duckworth,1969),259.8AviPinkas(ed.),FarmyardAnimalsinIsrael–Research,Humanismand

Activity (Rishon Le-Ziyyon: The Association for Farmyard Animals, 2009[Hebrew]),169–99;“MilkProduction–theCow’[Hebrew],TheDairyCouncil,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 theModesof

Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People (Oxford: OxfordUniversityPress,1969);E.C.AmorosoandP.A.Jewell, ‘TheExploitationoftheMilk-EjectionReflexbyPrimitivePeople’,inManandCattle:ProceedingsoftheSymposiumonDomesticationattheRoyalAnthropologicalInstitute,24–26 May 1960, ed. A. E. Mourant and F. E. Zeuner (London: The RoyalAnthropologicalInstitute,1963),129–34.10 Johannes Nicolaisen, Ecology and Culture of the Pastoral Tuareg

(Copenhagen:NationalMuseum,1963),63.

6BuildingPyramids1AngusMaddison,TheWorldEconomy,vol.2(Paris:DevelopmentCentre

of theOrganization of EconomicCo-operation andDevelopment, 2006), 636;‘Historical Estimates ofWorld Population’, U.S. Census Bureau, accessed 10December2010,http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldhis.html.2 Robert B. Mark, The Origins of the Modern World: A Global and

EcologicalNarrative (Lanham,MD:Rowman&Littlefield Publishers, 2002),24.3 RaymondWestbrook, ‘Old Babylonian Period’, inAHistory of Ancient

NearEasternLaw,vol.1,ed.RaymondWestbrook(Leiden:Brill,2003),361–430;MarthaT.Roth,LawCollectionsfromMesopotamiaandAsiaMinor,2ndedn(Atlanta:ScholarsPress,1997),71–142;M.E.J.Richardson,Hammurabi’sLaws: Text, Translation and Glossary (London: T & T Clark International,2000).4Roth,LawCollectionsfromMesopotamia,76.5Ibid.,121.6Ibid.,122–3.7Ibid.,133–3.8ConstanceBrittaineBouchard,StrongofBody,BraveandNoble:Chivalry

and Society inMedieval France (NewYork: CornellUniversity Press, 1998),99;MaryMartinMcLaughlin,‘SurvivorsandSurrogates:ChildrenandParentsfromtheNinthtoThirteenthCenturies’,inMedievalFamilies:PerspectivesonMarriage, Household and Children, ed. Carol Neel (Toronto: University ofTorontoPress,2004),81n.;LiseE.Hull,Britain’sMedievalCastles(Westport:Praeger,2006),144.

7MemoryOverload1AndrewRobinson,TheStoryofWriting(NewYork:ThamesandHudson,

1995), 63; Hans J. Nissen, Peter Damerow and Robert K. Englung, ArchaicBookkeeping: Writing and Techniques of Economic Administration in theAncientNearEast (Chicago,London:TheUniversityofChicagoPress,1993),36.2MarciaandRobertAscher,MathematicsoftheIncas–CodeoftheQuipu

(NewYork:DoverPublications,1981).3GaryUrton,Signsof the InkaKhipu (Austin:University ofTexasPress,

2003); Galen Brokaw, A History of the Khipu (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress,2010).4StephenD.Houston(ed.),TheFirstWriting:Script InventionasHistory

andProcess(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2004),222.

8ThereisNoJusticeinHistory1SheldonPollock,‘AxialismandEmpire’,inAxialCivilizationsandWorld

History, ed. JohannP.Arnason, S.N.Eisenstadt andBjörnWittrock (Leiden:Brill,2005),397–451.2 Harold M. Tanner, China: A History (Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co.,

2009),34.3RameshChandra, Identity andGenesis of Caste System in India (Delhi:

KalpazPublications,2005);MichaelBamshadetal., ‘GeneticEvidenceon theOrigins of IndianCastePopulation’,GenomeResearch 11 (2001): 904–1,004;SusanBayly,Caste,SocietyandPoliticsinIndiafromtheEighteenthCenturytotheModernAge(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1999).4Houston,FirstWriting,196.5Thesecretarygeneral,UnitedNations,ReportoftheSecretaryGeneralon

the In-depth Study onAllForms ofViolenceAgainstWomen, delivered to theGeneralAssembly,UNDoc.A/16/122/Add.1(6July2006),89.6 Sue Blundell, Women in Ancient Greece (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard

UniversityPress,1995).113–2.9.131–3.

10TheScentofMoney1FranciscoLópezdeGómara,HistoriadelaConquistadeMexico,vol.1,

ed.D.JoaquinRamirezCabanes(MexicoCity:EditorialPedroRobredo,1943),106.2 Andrew M. Watson, ‘Back to Gold – and Silver’, Economic History

Review20:1 (1967),11–12; JasimAlubudi,RepertorioBibliográficodel Islam(Madrid:VisionLibros,2003),194.3Watson,‘BacktoGold–andSilver’,17–18.4 David Graeber, Debt: The First 5,000 Years (Brooklyn, NY: Melville

House,2011).5GlynDavies,AHistoryofMoney:FromAncientTimestothePresentDay

(Cardiff:UniversityofWalesPress,1994),15.6SzymonLaks,MusicofAnotherWorld,trans.ChesterA.Kisiel(Evanston,

Ill.:North-westernUniversityPress,1989),88–9.TheAuschwitz‘market’wasrestricted to certain classes of prisoners and conditions changed dramaticallyacrosstime.7 Niall Ferguson, The Ascent of Money (New York: The Penguin Press,

2008),4.8 For information on barley money I have relied on an unpublished PhD

thesis:RefaelBenvenisti, ‘Economic InstitutionsofAncientAssyrianTrade in

the Twentieth to Eighteenth Centuries BC’ (Hebrew University of Jerusalem,unpublished PhD thesis, 2011). See also Norman Yoffee, ‘The Economy ofAncientWesternAsia’, inCivilizationsof theAncientNearEast,vol.1,ed.J.M. Sasson (New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1995), 1,387–99; R. K. Englund,‘Proto-CuneiformAccount-Books and Journals’, inCreatingEconomicOrder:Record-keeping, Standardization and the Development of Accounting in theAncientNearEast,ed.MichaelHudsonandCorneliaWunsch(Bethesda,Md.:CDLPress,2004),21–46;MarvinA.Powell,‘AContributiontotheHistoryofMoneyinMesopotamiaPriortotheInventionofCoinage’,inFestschriftLuborMatouš, ed. B. Hruška and G. Komoróczy (Budapest: Eötvös LorándTudományegyetem, 1978), 211–43; Marvin A. Powell, ‘Money inMesopotamia’,Journalof theEconomicandSocialHistoryof theOrient39:3(1996),224–42;JohnF.Robertson,‘TheSocialandEconomicOrganizationofAncientMesopotamianTemples’,inCivilizationsoftheAncientNearEast,vol.1, ed. Sasson, 443–500; M. Silver, ‘Modern Ancients’, in Commerce andMonetary Systems in theAncientWorld:Means of Transmission andCulturalInteraction,ed.R.RollingerandU.Christoph(Stuttgart:Steiner,2004),65–87;DanielC.Snell,‘MethodsofExchangeandCoinageinAncientWesternAsia’,inCivilizationsoftheAncientNearEast,vol.1,ed.Sasson,1,487–97.

11ImperialVisions1NahumMegged,TheAztecs(TelAviv:Dvir,1999[Hebrew]),103.2 Tacitus,Agricola, ch. 30 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press,

1958),220–1.3A.Fienup-Riordan,TheNelsonIslandEskimo:SocialStructureandRitual

Distribution(Anchorage:AlaskaPacificUniversityPress,1983),10.4 Yuri Pines, ‘Nation States, Globalization and a United Empire – the

Chinese Experience (third to fifth centuries BC)’, Historia 15 (1995), 54[Hebrew].5 Alexander Yakobson, ‘Us and Them: Empire, Memory and Identity in

Claudius’SpeechonBringingGaulsintotheRomanSenate’,inOnMemory:AnInterdisciplinaryApproach,ed.DoronMendels(Oxford:PeterLand,2007),23–4.

12TheLawofReligion1 W. H. C. Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church

(Cambridge:JamesClarke&Co.,2008),536–7.

2RobertJeanKnecht,TheRiseandFallofRenaissanceFrance,1483–1610(London:FontanaPress,1996),424.3 Marie Harm and Hermann Wiehle, Lebenskunde fuer Mittelschulen –

FuenfterTeil.Klasse5 fuerJungen (Halle:HermannSchroedelVerlag,1942),152–7.

13TheSecretofSuccess1SusanBlackmore,TheMemeMachine (Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,

1999).

14TheDiscoveryofIgnorance1DavidChristian,MapsofTime:AnIntroductiontoBigHistory(Berkeley:

University of California Press, 2004), 344–5; Angus Maddison, The WorldEconomy, vol.2 (Paris:DevelopmentCentreof theOrganizationofEconomicCo-operation and Development, 2001), 636; ‘Historical Estimates of WorldPopulation’, 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’, the World Bank, Data and Statistics,

accessed 10 December 2010,http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GDP.pdf.4Christian,MapsofTime,141.5Thelargestcontemporarycargoshipcancarryabout100,000tons.In1470

all theworld’sfleetscouldtogethercarrynomorethan320,000tons.By1570total global tonnagewas up to 730,000 tons (Maddison,TheWorld Economy,vol.1,97).6Theworld’slargestbank–theRoyalBankofScotland–hasreportedin

2007depositsworth$1.3trillion.That’sfivetimestheannualglobalproductionin1500.See‘AnnualReportandAccounts2008’,theRoyalBankofScotland,35, accessed 10 December 2010,http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/RBS/626570033}0}278481/eb7a003a-5c9b-41ef-bad3–81fb98a6c823/RBS_GRA_2008_09_03_09.pdf.7Ferguson,AscentofMoney,185–98.8Maddison,TheWorldEconomy, vol. 1, 31;Wrigley,English Population

History,295;Christian,MapsofTime,450,452;‘WorldHealthStatisticReport2009’, 35–45, World Health Organization, accessed 10 December 2010http://www.who.int/whosis/whostat/EN_WHS09_Full.pdf.

9Wrigley,EnglishPopulationHistory,296.10‘England,InterimLifeTables,1980–82to2007–09’,OfficeforNational

Statistics, accessed 22March 2012 http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77–61850.11MichaelPrestwich,EdwardI (Berkeley:University ofCaliforniaPress,

1988),125–6.12 Jennie B. Dorman et al., ‘The age-1 and daf-2 Genes Function in a

CommonPathwaytoControltheLifespanofCaenorhabditiselegans’,Genetics141:4 (1995), 1,399–406; KoenHouthoofd et al., ‘Life Extension via DietaryRestriction is Independent of the Ins/IGF-1 Signalling Pathway inCaenorhabditiselegans’,ExperimentalGerontology38:9(2003),947–54.13ShawnM.Douglas,IdoBacheletandGeorgeM.Church,‘ALogic-Gated

Nanorobot for Targeted Transport of Molecular Payloads’, Science 335:6070(2012): 831–4; Dan Peer et al., ‘Nanocarriers As An Emerging Platform forCancer Therapy’,NatureNanotechnology 2 (2007): 751–60; Dan Peer et al.,‘SystemicLeukocyte-DirectedsiRNADeliveryRevealingCyclinDiasanAnti-InflammatoryTarget’,Science319:5863(2008):627–30.

15TheMarriageofScienceandEmpire1StephenR.Bown,Scurvy:HowaSurgeon, aMariner andaGentleman

Solved the GreatestMedicalMystery of the Age of Sail (NewYork: ThomasDunneBooks,St.Martin’sPress,2004);KennethJohnCarpenter,TheHistoryofScurvyandVitaminC(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1986).2 JamesCook,TheExplorationsofCaptainJamesCook in thePacific, as

ToldbySelectionsofhisOwnJournals1768–1779,ed.ArchibaldGrenfellPrice(New York: Dover Publications, 1971), 16–17; Gananath Obeyesekere, TheApotheosis ofCaptainCook:EuropeanMythmaking in thePacific (Princeton:Princeton University Press, 1992), 5; J. C. Beaglehole, ed., The Journals ofCaptain James Cook on His Voyages of Discovery, vol. 1 (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1968),588.3Mark,OriginsoftheModernWorld,81.4Christian,MapsofTime,436.5JohnDarwin,AfterTamerlane:TheGlobalHistoryofEmpireSince1405

(London:AllenLane,2007),239.6 Soli Shahvar, ‘Railroads i. The First Railroad Built and Operated in

Persia’, in theOnlineEdition ofEncyclopaediaIranica, lastmodified 7April2008, http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/railroads-i; Charles Issawi, ‘TheIranianEconomy1925–1975:FiftyYears ofEconomicDevelopment’, in Iran

underthePahlavis,ed.GeorgeLenczowski(Stanford:HooverInstitutionPress,1978),156.7Mark,OriginsoftheModernWorld,46.8 Kirkpatrick Sale,Christopher Columbus and the Conquest of Paradise

(London:TaurisParkePaperbacks,2006),7–13.9EdwardM.Spiers,TheArmyandSociety:1819–1914(London:Longman,

1980),121;RobinMoore,‘ImperialIndia,1858–1914’,inTheOxfordHistoryofthe British Empire: The Nineteenth Century, vol. 3, ed. Andrew Porter (NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1999),442.10 Vinita Damodaran, ‘Famine in Bengal: A Comparison of the 1770

FamineinBengalandthe1897FamineinChotanagpur’,TheMedievalHistoryJournal10:1–2(2007),151.

16TheCapitalistCreed1Maddison,WorldEconomy,vol.1,261,264;‘GrossNationalIncomePer

Capita2009,AtlasMethodandPPP’, theWorldBank,accessed10December2010,http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GNIPC.pdf.2Themathematicsofmybakeryexamplearenotasaccurateastheycould

be. Since banks are allowed to loan $10 for every dollar they keep in theirpossession,ofeverymilliondollarsdepositedinthebank,thebankcanloanouttoentrepreneursonlyabout$909,000whilekeeping$91,000initsvaults.ButtomakelifeeasierforthereadersIpreferredtoworkwithroundnumbers.Besides,banksdonotalwaysfollowtherules.3 Carl Trocki, Opium, Empire and the Global Political Economy (New

York:Routledge,1999),91.4GeorgesNzongola-Ntalaja,TheCongofromLeopoldtoKabila:APeople’s

History(London:ZedBooks,2002),22.

17TheWheelsofIndustry1Mark,OriginsoftheModernWorld,109.2NathanS.Lewis andDanielG.Nocera, ‘Powering thePlanet:Chemical

Challenges inSolarEnergyUtilization’,Proceedingsof theNationalAcademyofSciences103:43(2006),15,731.3KazuhisaMiyamoto(ed.),‘RenewableBiologicalSystemsforAlternative

SustainableEnergyProduction,FAOAgriculturalServicesBulletin128(Osaka:Osaka University, 1997), Chapter 2.1.1, accessed 10 December 2010,

http://www.fao.org/docrep/W7241E/w7241eo6.htm#2.1.1percent20solarpercent20energy;James Barber, ‘Biological Solar Energy’, Philosophical Transactions of theRoyalSocietyA365:1853(2007),1007.4 ‘International Energy Outlook 2010’, US Energy Information

Administration, 9, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/pdf/0484(2010).pdf.5 S.Venetsky, ‘ “Silver” fromClay’,Metallurgist 13:7 (1969), 451; Fred

Aftalion, A History of the International Chemical Industry (Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991), 64; A. J. Downs, Chemistry ofAluminium, Gallium, Indium and Thallium (Glasgow: Blackie Academic &Professional,1993),15.6 Jan Willem Erisman et al., ‘How a Century of Ammonia Synthesis

ChangedtheWorld’,NatureGeoscience1(2008),637.7G. J. Benson andB. E.Rollin (eds.),TheWell-being of FarmAnimals:

ChallengesandSolutions (Ames, IA:Blackwell, 2004);M.C.Appleby, J.A.MenchandB.O.Hughes,PoultryBehaviourandWelfare (Wallingford:CABIPublishing,2004);J.Webster,AnimalWelfare:LimpingTowardsEden(Oxford:Blackwell Publishing, 2005);C.Druce andP.Lymbery,Outlawed in Europe:HowAmerica isFallingBehindEurope inFarmAnimalWelfare (NewYork:ArchimedeanPress,2002).8 Harry Harlow and Robert Zimmermann, ‘Affectional Responses in the

InfantMonkey’,Science130:3373(1959),421–32;HarryHarlow,‘TheNatureofLove’,AmericanPsychologist 13 (1958),673–85;LaurensD.Younget al.,‘Early stress and later response to separation in rhesus monkeys’, AmericanJournalofPsychiatry130:4(1973),400–5;K.D.Broad,J.P.CurleyandE.B.Keverne, ‘Mother-infant bonding and the evolution of mammalian socialrelationships’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 361:1476(2006), 2,199–214; Florent Pittet et al., ‘Effects of maternal experience onfearfulness and maternal behaviour in a precocial bird’, Animal Behaviour(March 2013), In Press – available online at:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347213000547).9‘NationalInstituteofFoodandAgriculture’,UnitedStatesDepartmentof

Agriculture, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.csrees.usda.gov/qlinks/extension.html.

18APermanentRevolution1 Vaclav Smil, The Earth’s Biosphere: Evolution,Dynamics and Change

(Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2002); Sarah Catherine Walpole et al., ‘The

Weight of Nations: An Estimation of Adult Human Biomass’, BMC PublicHealth12:439(2012),http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471–2458/12/439.2 William T. Jackman, The Development of Transportation in Modern

England (London: Frank Cass & Co., 1966), 324–7; H. J. Dyos and D. H.Aldcroft,BritishTransport-AnEconomicSurveyFromtheSeventeenthCenturyto the Twentieth (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1969), 124–31;Wolfgang Schivelbusch, The Railway Journey: The Industrialization of TimeandSpaceinthe19thCentury(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1986).3Foradetaileddiscussionoftheunprecedentedpeacefulnessofthelastfew

decades,seeinparticularStevenPinker,TheBetterAngelsofOurNature:WhyViolenceHasDeclined(NewYork:Viking,2011);JoshuaS.Goldstein,WinningtheWaronWar:TheDeclineofArmedConflictWorldwide(NewYork:Dutton,2011);Gat,WarinHumanCivilization.4 ‘WorldReportonViolenceandHealth:Summary,Geneva2002’,World

Health Organization, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.who.int/whr/2001/en/whr01_annex_en.pdf. For mortality rates inpreviouserassee:LawrenceH.Keeley,WarbeforeCivilization:TheMythofthePeacefulSavage(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1996).5 ‘WorldHealthReport, 2004’,WorldHealthOrganization, 124, accessed

10December2010,http://www.who.int/whr/2004/en/reporto4_en.pdf.6RaymondC.Kelly,WarlessSocietiesandtheOriginofWar(AnnArbor:

University of Michigan Press, 2000), 21. See also Gat, War in HumanCivilization,129–31;Keeley,WarbeforeCivilization.7ManuelEisner,‘Modernization,Self-ControlandLethalViolence’,British

Journal of Criminology 41:4 (2001), 618–638; Manuel Eisner, ‘Long-TermHistoricalTrendsinViolentCrime’,CrimeandJustice:AReviewofResearch30(2003),83–142; ‘WorldReportonViolenceandHealth:Summary,Geneva2002’, World Health Organization, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.who.int/whr/2001/en/whr01_annex_en.pdf; ‘World Health Report,2004’, World Health Organization, 124, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.who.int/whr/2004/en/reporto4_en.pdf.8WalkerandBailey,‘BodyCountsinLowlandSouthAmericanViolence’,

30.

19AndTheyLivedHappilyEverAfter1Forboththepsychologyandbiochemistryofhappiness,thefollowingare

good starting points: Jonathan Haidt, The Happiness Hypothesis: FindingModernTruth inAncientWisdom (NewYork:BasicBooks,2006);R.Wright,

The Moral Animal: Evolutionary Psychology and Everyday Life (New York:VintageBooks,1994);M.Csikszentmihalyi, ‘IfWeAreSoRich,WhyAren’tWeHappy?’,American Psychologist 54:10 (1999): 821–7; F. A. Huppert, N.Baylis and B. Keverne (eds.), The Science of Well-Being (Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 2005); Michael Argyle, The Psychology of Happiness, 2ndedition (NewYork:Routledge, 2001); EdDiener (ed.),AssessingWell-Being:TheCollectedWorks of EdDiener (NewYork: Springer, 2009);Michael EidandRandy J.Larsen (eds.),TheScienceof SubjectiveWell-Being (NewYork:Guilford Press, 2008); Richard A. Easterlin (ed.), Happiness in Economics(Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2002); Richard Layard, Happiness:LessonsfromaNewScience(NewYork:Penguin,2005).2DanielKahneman,Thinking,FastandSlow(NewYork:Farrar,Strausand

Giroux,2011);Inglehartetal.,‘Development,FreedomandRisingHappiness’,278–81.3D.M.McMahon,ThePursuitofHappiness:AHistoryfromtheGreeksto

thePresent(London:AllenLane,2006).

20TheEndofHomoSapiens1 Keith T. Paige et al., ‘De Novo Cartilage Generation Using Calcium

Alginate-Chondrocyte Constructs’, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 97:1(1996),168–78.2DavidBiello, ‘Bacteria Transformed intoBiofuelsRefineries’,Scientific

American, 27 January 2010, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=bacteria-transformed-into-biofuel-refineries.3 GaryWalsh, ‘Therapeutic Insulins and Their Large-ScaleManufacture’,

AppliedMicrobiologyandBiotechnology67:2(2005),151–9.4 JamesG.Wallis et al., ‘Expression of a SyntheticAntifreeze Protein in

PotatoReducesElectrolyteReleaseatFreezingTemperatures’,PlantMolecularBiology35:3(1997),323–30.5Robert J.Wall et al., ‘GeneticallyEnhancedCowsResist Intramammary

StaphylococcusAureusInfection’,NatureBiotechnology23:4(2005),445–51.6 Liangxue Lai et al., ‘Generation of Cloned Transgenic Pigs Rich in

Omega-3FattyAcids’,NatureBiotechnology24:4(2006),435–6.7Ya-PingTang et al., ‘GeneticEnhancement ofLearning andMemory in

Mice’,Nature401(1999),63–9.8 Zoe R. Donaldson and Larry J. Young, ‘Oxytocin, Vasopressin and the

Neurogenetics of Sociality’, Science 322:5903 (2008), 900–904; Zoe R.

Donaldson, ‘Production of Germline Transgenic Prairie Voles (MicrotusOchrogaster)Using LentiviralVectors’,Biology of Reproduction 81:6 (2009),1,189–95.9TerriPous,‘SiberianDiscoveryCouldBringScientistsClosertoCloning

Woolly Mammoth’, Time, 17 September 2012, accessed 19 February 2013;PasqualinoLoietal,‘Biologicaltimemachines:arealisticapproachforcloningan extinct mammal’, Endangered Species Research 14 (2011), 227–33; LeonHuynen,CraigD.Millar andDavidM.Lambert, ‘Resurrectingancient animalgenomes:Theextinctmoaandmore’,Bioessays34(2012),661–9.10NicholasWade,‘ScientistsinGermanyDraftNeanderthalGenome’,New

York Times, 12 February 2009, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/science/13neanderthal.html?_r=2&ref=science; Zack Zorich, ‘Should We Clone Neanderthals?’,Archaeology 63:2 (2009), accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.archaeology.org/1003/etc/neanderthals.html.11RobertH.Waterstonetal.,‘InitialSequencingandComparativeAnalysis

oftheMouseGenome’,Nature420:6915(2002),520.12 ‘Hybrid Insect Micro Electromechanical Systems (HI-MEMS)’,

Microsystems Technology Office, DARPA, accessed 22 March 2012,http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/MTO/Programs/Hybrid_Insect_Micro_Electromechanical_Systems_percent28HI-MEMSpercent29.aspx.Seealso:SallyAdee,‘Nuclear-PoweredTransponderforCyborgInsect’,IEEESpectrum,December2009,accessed10December2010,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’,NewScientist 197:2646 (2008),40–3;EmilySinger,‘SendintheRescueRats’,NewScientist183:2466(2004),21–2; Susan Brown, ‘Stealth Sharks to Patrol the High Seas’, New Scientist189:2541(2006),30–1.13BillChristensen,‘MilitaryPlansCyborgSharks’,LiveScience,7March

2006, accessed 10 December 2010,http://www.livescience.com/technology/060307_shark_implant.html.14 ‘Cochlear Implants’, National Institute on Deafness and Other

Communication Disorders, accessed 22 March 2012,http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/pages/coch.aspx.15 Retina Implant, http://www.retina-

implant.de/en/doctors/technology/default.aspx.16DavidBrown,‘For1stWomanWithBionicArm,aNewLifeisWithin

Reach’,Washington Post, 14 September 2006, accessed 10 December 2010,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/o9/13/AR2006091302271.html?nav=E8.17 Miguel Nicolelis, Beyond Boundaries: The New Neuroscience of

ConnectingBrains andMachines – andHow itWillChangeOur Lives (NewYork:TimesBooks,2011).18 Chris Berdik, ‘Turning Thought into Words’, BU Today, 15 October

2008,accessed22March2012,http://www.bu.edu/today/2008/turning-thoughts-into-words/.19JonathanFildes,‘ArtificialBrain“10yearsaway”’,BBCNews,22July

2009,accessed19September2012,http://news.bbc.c0.uk/2/hi/8164060.stm.20 RadojeDrmanac et al., ‘HumanGenomeSequencingUsingUnchained

Base Reads on Self-AssemblingDNANanoarrays’, Science 327:5961 (2010),78–81;‘CompleteGenomics’website:http://www.completegenomics.com/;RobWaters, ‘CompleteGenomicsGetsGeneSequencingunder$5000(Update1)’,Bloomberg, 5 November 2009, accessed 10 December 2010;http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aWutnyE4S0Ww; Fergus Walsh, ‘Era of PersonalizedMedicineAwaits’,BBCNews, last updated 8April 2009, accessed 22March2012, http://news.bbc.co.Uk/2/hi/health/7954968.stm; Leena Rao, ‘PayPal Co-Founder and Founders Fund Partner Joins DNA Sequencing Firm HalcyonMolecular’, TechCrunch, 24 September 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

For their advice and assistance, thanks to: SaraiAharoni,DoritAharonov,AmosAvisar,TzafrirBarzilai,NoahBeninga,SuzanneDean,CaspianDennis,TirzaEisenberg,AmirFink,SaraHolloway,BenjaminZ.Kedar,YossiMaurey,EyalMiller,DavidMilner,JohnPurcell,SimonRhodes,ShmuelRosner,RamiRotholz,MichalShavit,MichaelShenkar,IdanSherer,EllieSteel,OferSteinitz,HaimWatzman,GuyZaslavskyandall the teachersandstudents in theWorldHistoryprogrammeoftheHebrewUniversityofJerusalem.

Special thanks to JaredDiamond,who taughtme to see thebigpicture; toDiegoOlstein,whoinspiredmetowriteastory;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: Waterhouse Hawkins, c.1862 © The Trustees of the Natural

HistoryMuseum.11.©Visual/Corbis.12. Photo: Karl G. Heider © President and Fellows of Harvard College,

PeabodyMuseumofArchaeologyandEthnology,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/NationalArchives

WashingtonDC(ref:AA399024).18.©AdamJones/Corbis.19. © The Schøyen Collection, Oslo and London, MS 1717.

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 ArtArchive/ArchaeologicalMuseumLima/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 toCredit Cards (London: Published for the Trustees of the British Museum byBritishMuseumPublications,1986),27.27.©akg/BibleLandPictures.28.©StuartBlack/RobertHardingWorldImagery/GettyImages.29.©TheArtArchive/GianniDagliOrti(ref:AA423796).30.LibraryofCongress,BildarchivPreussischerKulturbesitz,UnitedStates

HolocaustMemorialMuseum©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, National Library of Australia (ref:

an23378504).36.©BritishLibraryBoard(shelfmarkadd.11267).37.©Firenze,BibliotecaMediceaLaurenziana,Ms.Laur.Med.Palat.249

(mappaSalviati).38.Illustration©NeilGower.39.RedraftoftheCastelloPlan,JohnWolcottAdams,1916©Collectionof

theNew-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.