The Sinking of the Lusitania and the Start of WWI

The past hundred years has seen many examples of luxury liners that have met an unfortunate end. Some liners have been sunk by accident, such as the RMS Titanic, and some through an act of violence, such as RMS Britannic. RMS Britannic was the sister ship to the Titanic and was sunk by a mine in 1916. The Britannic though was not the only ship that was sunk through violence during the First World War, in fact a more famous sinking was that of the RMS Lusitania, which is sometimes considered one of the starting point of World War I.

First off though it should be said that the sinking of the British luxury liner RMS Lusitania, can in no way be said to have commenced the First World War, as is often argued, for one simple fact, the Lusitania was sunk on 7th May 1915, whereas the Great War started in the summer months of 1914.

Arguments as to the exact date can be made, though the 28th June 1914 is as good as any, this being the date that Gavrilo Princip, assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo.

RMS Lusitania 1907 - International Film Service - PD-old-100

There is in fact more to the arguments made that the sinking of the Lusitania helped bring about the end of the First World War, these arguments are based on the sinking ultimately bringing the United States of America into the war, but even so this argument is in no way conclusive.

The Lusitania was owned by the Cunard Steamship Line Shipping Company, and was constructed to be a rival to the Olympic ships of the White Star Line, and the German North German Line. The Cunard company set out to build the fastest liners afloat and in the building of the Lusitania (1904-1907) and her sister ship the Mauretania; they succeeded in building liners that crossed the Atlantic at speeds of 25 knots. Cunard were though subsidised by the British government under Prime Minister Balfour, to a tune of 2.6million, to stave off the threat of an American buyout. The British government also agreed to pay an annual fee of 150,000 to Cunard to ensure the Cunard liners were in a state of war readiness, with provisions for mounting deck guns as required.

At the onset of the War, whilst the Mauretania was converted to a troop transport, the Lusitania was considered inappropriate for such a conversion. The Lusitania was too large to be a troop transport and continued in its role as a luxury liner, conveying passengers between the United Kingdom and the United States. As a liner carrying non-military passengers many considered the Lusitania safe from attack but there was other factors that made it a legitimate target for enemy submarines. The Lusitania routinely carried British issued small arms ammunition, but of greater importance the British Admiralty had ordered all merchant ships to report sightings of any German naval craft, and were to attempt to ram any submarine that it saw surfaced. This order meant that the Lusitania was a legitimate military target and a German submarine would not have to guarantee the safety of any passengers.

The Lusitania travelled through a declared war zone around the British Isles. The German Embassy issued warnings to passengers not travel aboard the Lusitania prior to the liner’s 202nd crossing. There is no evidence that the embassy had any prior knowledge of the possibility of attack and was probably acting on the off chance of an attack. The embassy would realise the impact on German-American relations in the event of a loss of American lives in any such attack. The warning was to be issued in 50 East Coast newspapers, though in the end only one newspaper published the warning.

Passengers were not put off by any potential dangers and on the 1st May 1915, almost two thousand passenger and crew departed from Pier 54 in New York, on what proved to be the liners final voyage. As the Lusitania crossed the Atlantic, the British Admiralty was tracking a German submarine, the U-20, under the command of Captain Schwieger. On 5th and 6th May the U-20 sank three vessels of the southern tip of Ireland, in the direct path of the Lusitania, low on fuel though, the U-20 had started to head for home when the Lusitania suddenly crossed its path.

Schwieger launched a single torpedo with devastating results. Within 18 minutes of the torpedo striking the hull of the Lusitania, the liner had sunk having travelled two miles to a point just off the coast of Ireland at Kinsale. 1198 people died as a result of the single torpedo and the Allied press promptly condemned Captain Schweiger as a war criminal.

Avenge the Lusitania - PD-GovUK

Timing proves that the sinking of the Lusitania did not start the First World War, timing also disproves that the sinking immediately helped to end the War. The main argument goes that the sinking forced the American government commit to the war. There is no doubt that the actions of the U-20 turned public opinion in many countries against Germany, and the British government presumed that the death of 128 American citizens aboard the Lusitania would force an American declaration of war upon Germany. President Wilson though did not want to be involved in what was perceived as a European conflict, and instead of declaring war, he sent a formal protest to Germany.

Whilst noted, it was not until a further three American were killed on board the White Star liner Arabic, and a further protest from President Wilson, that submarine attacks on liners ceased. Both these attacks occurred in 1915, and America did not declare war on Germany until 6th April 1917, almost two years later. The declaration itself has been attributed more to do with the sinking of seven American merchant ships and publication of the Zimmerman telegram, a telegram inciting Mexico to war, than the sinking of the liners.

The sinking of the Lusitania was an act of war, resulting in a huge loss of life, an act described as a war crime, which resulted in worldwide sympathy for the allied powers. It is though only one act in a four year war, and dates dictate that it can not be described as the action that started the Great War. Nor can any great credence be given to arguments that the sinking caused the end of the war, due to the gap in time until the American declaration of war.

Copyright - First Published 8th February 2008

Howard Carter Discover of Tutankhamen's Tomb

The fame of Howard Carter has now gone beyond the boundaries of his archaeological profession. The discovery of the intact tomb of the pharaoh Tutankhamen, catapulted Carter into the public eye, and even now, a hundred years after the tomb’s discovery, the hard work that Carter had put in still enthrals, as does the treasure found. The life and works of Howard Carter have been an inspiration to many of the modern day archaelogoists, who each in their own way are waiting for their time to discover “wonderful things”.

Howard Carter - Library of Congress - PD-life-70

Carter did not come from a privileged household, and as the youngest son of an animal portrait painter, Samuel John Carter, his upbringing could best be described as middle class. Howard Carter was born on the 9th May 1874, at 10 Rich Terrace, in the small town of Kensington, which has subsequently been swallowed up by the sprawling city of London. Much of his early life though was spent with his maiden aunts in the market town of Swaffham in Norfolk; they helped provide him with a modest private education. Carter though had inherited his father’s talent for drawing and painting, a talent that was developed alongside his father as they drew and painted horses and livestock for local landowners.

Whilst obviously highly skilled in drawing, the young Carter was far more interested in the stories of ancient Egypt, and he craved the opportunity to leave Norfolk and travel to Egypt. His opportunity came earlier than he could have hoped for, and with the assistance of a family friend, Lady Amherst, at the age of 17 he set sail for Alexandria. He had though not travelled without an aim, and had already been hired by the Egypt Exploration Fund in London to assist PE Newberry as a tracer. Tracers undertook epigraphic recordings, drawings of tombs and artefacts to allow for future study. Carter’s first assignment commenced in the last months of 1891, at the excavation of Beni Hassan ad El-Bersha, the burial site of the sovereign Princes of Middle Egypt from c2000BC. Though a hard worker, Carter’s role in the excavation was in the recording of the tomb wall scenes, rather than in any true archaeologist activity.

His chance to become an archaeologist though soon came as he was asked to join to renowned archaeologist, William Flinders Petrie, at El-Amarna in January 1892. Petrie was not convinced that Carter had the makings of a good archaeologist. Petrie pushed Carter, who responded to the pressure in making a number of important discoveries and therefore proved Petrie wrong. Carter continued his training into 1893 as he was appointed to the position of Principle Artist for the Egypt Exploration Fund’s excavation of Deir el Bahbri, with the burial and temple of Queen Hatshepsut. Whilst in the main an artistic role, Carter, did manage to develop his excavation and restoration skills under the direction of Edouard Naville. Carter had ample time to develop these skills, as his position as Principle Artist continued through until 1899.

Carter’s hard work and diligence though had not gone unnoticed and his efforts brought about his appointment as First Inspector General of Monuments for Upper Egypt. In 1900 Carter was still only 25 but had responsibility for supervising and controlling the archaeological activity in the Upper Nile Valley, including the ancient area of Thebes. Staying in the role for four year, Carter transferred to the equivalent position responsible for Lower Egypt.

The Tomb is Opened - Harry Burton (1879 – 1940) - PD-life-70

This move brought about the end of his meteoric career progression. With responsibility for the Egyptian staff of the Antiquities Service, Carter sided with his men when a brawl broke out between them and a group of French tourists at Saqqara. Unfortunately the French tourists were not without influence, and upon complaint to the Egyptian Consul General Lord Cromer, Carter was told to apologise to the tourists. Believing that he was in the right, Carter refused, and was promptly demoted and transferred to an archaeological backwater at Tanta in the Nile Delta. Within a year Carter had resigned and 1905 saw him jobless.

From the peak of his profession Carter now found himself on hard times, and he was forced to scratch a living for three years. Acting as a guide to tourists, as well as a dealer in antiquities and painter of water colours, Carter survived in Egypt. His hard times were soon to be a distant memory though as his old boss from the Antiquities Service, Gaston Maspero, made an introduction that changed his fortunes.

The 5th Lord of Carnarvon, George Herbert, who had visited Egypt to improve his health, was seeking to invest some of his personal wealth in archaeological excavations. The Antiquities Service though insisted that all work be under the supervision of an experienced archaeologist. Maspero, put forward Carter as the preferred option. The joining of Carter and Lord Carnarvon commenced in 1909, and the partnership hit off immediately. As Supervisor of Excavations, Carter brought immediate success to Lord Carnarvon, and by 1914, Lord Carnarvon owned one of the premier collections of Egyptian antiquities in private hands. Lord Carnarvon used his contacts to gain a concession to dig within the Valley of the Kings. Finds were made including six tombs within the Valley, the war years though meant only limited work was undertaken, though both Carter and Carnarvon worked on the tomb of Amenophis III in 1915.

Carter though was no longer satisfied with the finds that were being uncovered. His own research had lead him to believe that the tomb of a little known Pharaoh, Tutankhamen, was waiting to be uncovered in the Valley of the Kings. With Carnarvon’s financial backing, work commenced once again in 1917, Carter tore through the Valley in his quest for the lost tomb. Five relatively fruitless seasons of excavation followed, and even the enthusiastic Carnarvon, became frustrated, and 1922 was to be the final season of searching.

If Carter’s career had finished there, he would have been recognised in archaeological circles as a success, but his name would have meant nothing to the wider public of that and subsequent generations. Carter’s career though did not finish there, and in November 1922 Carter’s career reached its pinnacle. Searching continued in the Valley of the Kings, at the site of Ramesses VI tomb. Steps to the tomb of Tutankhamen were uncovered amongst the debris rubble, and undisturbed seals to the tombs were found as the steps were cleared. 26th November 1922 was the historic date that saw Carter and Lord Carnarvon break through the plaster block into the undisturbed tomb, for the pair then looked upon the "Wonderful things".

Howard Carter - New York Times - PD-old

The discovery of the century took a decade just to catalogue the contents of the tomb, and at the peak of his career Carter effectively retired from archaeology. Carter stopped his active participation in the excavation of the tomb in 1923, and instead undertook a series of lucrative lectures in the United States in 1924. It would have been presumed that Carter would have written a scholarly account of the discovery but the only work published was “The Tomb of Tut.ankh.Amen” written by Howard Carter and Arthur C. Mace.

Carter though never lost his love of ancient Egypt, and following his retirement became a successful collector of antiquities. Whether all of his collection came from legal sources has been questioned as artefacts and jewellery from Tutankhamen’s tomb were found in Carter’s home following his death, this being suggestive that he had violated the excavation permit he had been working under. Many of his friends from his time in the Valley of the Kings had died, and the latter years of his life he would be found happy by himself in the grounds and building of the Winter Palace Hotel in Luxor. Away from public limelight Carter lived to the age of 64, though diagnosed with lymphoma, a type of cancer, Carter had returned to the place of his birth. On the 2nd March 1939, Carter passed away in Albert Court, Kensington.

History has seen fit to criticise Carter for the poor archaeological knowledge of the time, which saw the mummy from the tomb left in direct sunlight for a number of hours. Carter though was acting within the knowledge boundaries of the time. Carter has been the most famous Egyptologist and archaeologist for a century, and has inspired countless generations to be interested in ancient Egypt, and numerous others to enter the professional field of archaeology. One find made him famous, though even without the finding of Tutankhamen’s tomb his reputation would have been secure within the circles of archaeologists.

Copyright - First Published 9th February 2008

Keywords - Howard Carter, Howard Carter Tutankhamen, Howard Carter Egyptologist

The Destruction of the Royal Library of Alexandria

The ancient world was home to many wonders, a number of which were constructed with design and technology that astounds people even today. Seven of these wonders were named as such, and include the likes of the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, the Colossus of Rhodes and Pharos of Alexandria, and the surviving Giza Pyramids. Most of these wonders, and many others though have been lost, destroyed in antiquity. Alexandria in particular has lost much of its ancient buildings, and although the famed lighthouse lives on in legend, the Royal Library of Alexandria though deserves an equal level of fame.

The Royal Library of Alexandria was famed in its day as the largest library anywhere to be found in the world, the library of Alexandria is considered to have been the seat of all of the world’s knowledge. The fame still survives and even in modern movies, such as National Treasure, makes reference to the wonders that the library held.There is no exact known number of scrolls held within the Library of Alexandria, although it was given a target for five hundred thousand scrolls. What is known though is that the most learned individuals of the time all made use of its resources.

"The Great Library of Alexandria"- O. Von Corven - PD-old-100

The Library of Alexandria though did not survive into modernity but no one year can be given as to the date of its destruction. The library was originally started in the third century BC, after the founding of the city by Alexander. The construction of the library is credited to the Ptolemy and his family. Ptolemy being one of Alexander’s generals.

How long the library survived for is a matter of debate, and is dependant on when you consider the library to have been destroyed. Julius Caesar is often blamed for the destruction of the library during his conquest of Alexander in 48BC. Caesar was fighting Ptolemy XIII when the docks of Alexandria were set alight, a fire that spread to the library. It is though generally agreed though that it wasn’t the library that was destroyed in this fire but rather a store room of accounts and ledgers. This is based on the fact that the library is not thought to have been near the docks, but additionally the Roman writer, Strabo, made use of the library some twenty five years after this event.

Confusion continues as it is not known how many libraries existed in the city and what each building was used for. The library is still thought to exist in the third century AD as the remaining contents of the library were said to have been moved to Constantinople after the attack of the Roman Emperor Aurelian, against the revolt of Queen Zenobia of Palmyra. In this attack the library building were said to have been destroyed with the loss of much of its contents.

Even after this date there is the possibility that the Library of Alexandria still existed. The Emperor Theodosius I made a decree that all non-Christian temples should be destroyed in 391 AD. The Library of Alexandria was thought to be at least partially housed in the Serapeum, a temple, and so would have been destroyed by the Patriarch Theophilus of Alexandria. There is though no evidence to suggest that the Searpeum still acted as a library at this time, indicative that there was no scrolls left to be destroyed with the destruction of the building.

Burning of the Library of Alexandria - Ambrose Dudley - PD-old-100

One final finger of blame is pointed to the Muslim conquest of Alexandria in 642 AD when the city was sacked. This though is often seen as propaganda to blame the Muslims for burning books to heat bathwater.

Another theory is that the library was destroyed by a natural disaster just as the city’s Pharos was destroyed. There is though no evidence for this, the fact is that the site of the library is not known for certain. I for one prefer to think that an earthquake or tidal wave destroyed the library rather than being a deliberate act of destruction by one man.

Today searches continue for the site of the Library of Alexandria, and are a search made difficult by the fact that the city has been rebuilt so many times. In fact most searches now focus in on the harbour area where there is no new building to obstruct the search. Statues and monuments are regularly discovered, but there is no certain site even today. It is difficult to imagine that there was a deliberate destruction of a library, but it is not so long a go that people burnt books because they disagreed with their contents. Whether it was a natural disaster or whether it was a deliberate attack, it is known that much ancient knowledge was lost through the destruction of the Royal Library of Alexandria.

Copyright - First Published 12th October 2008

Keywords - Library of Alexandria, Library of Alexandria burning,