Search This Blog

Sunday 23 February 2020

Paleo Profiles: Tiktaalik

A reconstruction and skull, from National Geographic
It is rare in palaeontology that transitional fossils are found - these are the fossils which show how organisms evolve over time. Among some of the famous ones include the Archaeopteryx, which showed how dinosaurs evolved into birds, and Darwinius, which helped show where apes branched off from lemurs. For a long time scientists have known that there must be transitional animals between fish and amphibians, but the question was what would they look like? Then, in 2004, one transitional fossil was found: Tiktaalik

Discovery and Fossils
Tiktaalik was first discovered in 2004 way in the frozen north of Canada on Ellesmere Island. Modern day Ellesmere Island is not a place you would imagine to find a transitional fish fossil - the geomagnetic north pole can be found on the island. However, a group of palaeontologists discovered this important fossil and fully described it in 2006. This group, (comprising of Neil Shubin, Edward Daeschler, and Farish Jenkins), named it Tiktaalik roseae; Tiktaalik comes from an Inuktitut word roughly meaning 'large freshwater fish', and was actually suggested by elders from the local Inuit Council, and roseae was chosen to honour an anonymous donor. After the initial discovery this alerted palaeontologists to the importance of Ellesmere Island, and successive digs have found other Tiktaalik remains allowing this strange animal to be better understood.

Biology
This animal has been described as a mixture of a salamander and a fish. Although gills do not fossilise the bony structures which support them do, and on the crocodile-like head of the Tiktaalik they took the form of holes called 'spiracles'. This gives us the indication that it could live underwater, but the layout of the ribs, and a secondary use of the spiracles, gives an indication that it also had lungs. Fish have a swim bladder which is full of air to keep them buoyant, but these swim bladders can evolve to become larger becoming a lung over millions of years. Modern day lungfish have this adaptation - they can exist a long time out of water thanks to their swim bladders evolving to become more like a lung which land vertebrates (tetrapods) have. Tiktaalik could then go on land and the water, and its fins helped it do so. Unlike the fish we know today fish of the Devonian, when Tiktaalik lived, had bones in their fins which form a 'hand' you might see in modern whales or the mosasaurs. These were the lobe-finned fish, today there are only eight species of them - the two coelacanths and the eight lungfish species.
A West Indian coelacanth
These lobe-fins will help answer why the Tiktaalik could move onto land. Later fossil finds have managed to unveil the fish's pelvis and tail, unlike its other fish cousins Tiktaalik had a larger pelvis and tail allowing greater movement. This allowed it to move onto land, but the pelvis was not too strong, so it was largely confined to the water side. Shubin, Daeschler, and Jenkins have advocated for a 'front wheel drive hypothesis' - like modern mudskippers it would use its front fins as a way to prop itself up while on land. The ribs were strong for this reason as it required thicker ribs to support its organs outside of the water. Finally, we have the neck. The spiracles allowed Tiktaalik to lose the bony structure which normally protected the gills, so this gave the Tiktaalik a neck with the ability to look around without completely moving its entire body. Although primitive, Tiktaalik and similar animals, one similar fish can also be found in Poland, set the stage for the body plans of amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. This could be used as a way for it to search for prey, or possibly spot predators. At a metre long it was sizeable but was dwarfed by other fish as seen below.
A seize chart from Prehistoric-Wildlife.com
When and Where
Ellesmere Island today
As we've already mentioned, Tiktaalik has so far only been found on Ellesmere Island in the very north of Canada. The North East of North America is well known for Devonian lobe-finned fish and the first amphibians. In Quebec there is the closely related Eusthenapteron, which possibly was an ancestor to Tiktaalik, in Pennsylvania there was the giant lobe-finned fish Hyneria and the salamander-like Hynerpeton, and in Greenland there was a possible descendant of Tiktaalik, another salamander-like amphibian called Icthyostega. Tiktaalik has currently been found from fossil sites dating to 375 million years ago during the Devonian period. During this time the first large plants grew on the land, and invertebrates had already conquered the land. The Devonian has been known as 'The Age of the Fishes' for the explosion in the diversity of fish: sharks became common, there were the lobe-finned fish, and armoured fish called placoderms. Oxygen was also a lot less compared to present-day air - possibly around 75% less than today. This possibly explains why Tiktaalik moved onto land. The diversity of plants on the land would die, get washed into the ocean, and start decomposing which increasingly stripped the oceans of oxygen. As a result, any fish which could breathe on land and in water had an advantage. Eusthenopteron had spiracles on the top of its head instead of on the side of its head like other fish (even today), so it could go to the surface and breathe. Consequently, Tiktaalik evolved from lobe-finned fish like Eusthenopteron to take advantage of this.

Habitat
While it could go on land, the Tiktaalik was still very dependent on the water to survive. If you travelled back 375 million years to spot a Tiktaalik you would have to search riverbeds. Shubin and Daeschler have theorised that it would live in the first swamps, as well as streams and ponds, resting on edge of the water. Most of its time would be spent in the water - quite possibly it would be an ambush predator. Like crocodiles, it would lay on the water's surface, or the riverbed, waiting for prey, and then lunge with its powerful tail and pelvis after an unfortunate fish or bug. As other, larger fish were constrained to the water Tiktaalik would have gone to the shore as a way of effortlessly hiding from them. This fish's ancestors, such as Icthyostega, would start evolving to be more and more on land until the Carboniferous period when the first reptiles would permanently leave the water.

The sources I have used are as follows:
-'Tiktaalik', Prehistoric-Wildlife.com, [Accessed 20/02/2020]
-Dan Vergano, 'Our Fishy Ancestors Had Fins made for Walking', National Geographic, (14/01/2014), [Accessed 20/02/2020]
-Jason P. Downs, Edward B. Daeschler, Farish A. Jenkins, Jr. and Neil H. Shubin, 'The Cranial Endoskeleton of Tiktaalik roseae', Nature, 455/7215, (2008)
-Jennifer Clack, 'The Fish-Tetrapod Transition: New Fossils and Interpretations', Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2, (2009), 213-223
-Neil Shubin, Your Inner Fish: A Journey Into the 3.5-Billion-Year History of the Human Body, (New York: 2008)
-Neil H. Shubin, Edward B. Daeschler, and Farish A. Jenkins Jr, 'Pelvic girdle and fin of Tiktaalik roseae', PNAS, 111:3, (2014), 893-899
-PBS Eons, 'When Fish First Breathed Air', YouTube.com, (19/06/2018), [Accessed 20/02/2020]

Thank you for reading, for our other Paleo Profiles we have a list here. For other blog updates please see our Facebook or catch me on Twitter @LewisTwiby.

Sunday 16 February 2020

World History: Australia and New Zealand

Australian Gold Diggers
Throughout the nineteenth century, and last time when we looked at colonialism, new forms of states emerged, including the new settler colonies of Aotearoa/New Zealand and Australia. Coming after the older settler colonies in the Americas new settler colonies emerged in Oceania, and Kenya and Zimbabwe. Despite being colonised by Britain around the same time we will see the major differences which emerged in these colonies. This occurred through various reasons ranging from geography to the conditions of the pre-colonial regions. A hint at a possible World History 2 I aim to look at these pre-colonial societies, but that is another discussion for a long time in the future. Instead we'll go over a basic summary here.

Australia and Aotearoa before Europe

The landmass which we now call Australia has been inhabited by people for over 30,000 years, and possibly as far back as 65,000 years - we discussed this all the way back in my first year of university with our first World History post. The site of Lake Mungo, from around 40,000 years ago, exhibits burials and some of the oldest cremations indicating that prehistoric indigenous Australians had by then developed religious rituals. It is difficult to write a history of pre-colonial Aboriginal Australians in just this short section, as it is impossible to understand the complexity and diversity of life over such a large period of time, and over a geographic area. There are over 900 ethnic groups, and just before European colonisation they were organised in over 250 'nations', which were then divided into smaller and localised units, speaking over 250 languages. Unfortunately, through genocide only 50 of these languages remain. Through oral tradition, and outdated ethnographies, we can piece together life and culture just before European colonisation - Nancy Williams and Lesley Jolly have discussed how Arrernte men and women lived in 'separate but intersecting spheres' of activity.

Meanwhile, it is easier to understand the pre-colonial history of Aotearoa/New Zealand. For one, Aotearoa is the Maori name for New Zealand, and in this post I will refer to the islands as 'Aotearoa' until European colonisation became 'complete' which is when that I'll switch to 'New Zealand'. Despite theories that alleged that before the Maori there were Egyptian, Indo-Aryans, Celtic, or Phoenician colonisation of Aotearoa, it was Polynesians (the ancestors of the Maori) who first settled on the islands. Aotearoa is one of the most isolated regions in the world, so it would make sense that the Polynesian linguistic group - who are one of the most geographically diverse peoples - were the ones to settle there. Unlike Australia, having tens of thousands of years of inhabitation, the first people to permanently settle on Aotearoa only arrived in the thirteenth century. As a result, Maori and Moriori religion, language, and culture contains similarities with other Polynesian groups. Due to the recent nature of their settlement, and the smaller geographic area, the indigenous peoples of Aotearoa have a more homogenous set of beliefs and cultures compared to Australian Aboriginals. Society was organised into various competing networks of alliances or rivalries called iwi, and this was further divided into a smaller, intimate unit called hapu. Of course, these models were often changing and various events could change the structure of the iwi and hapu. There was a further hierarchical system among these units with the rangatira (often seen as aristocrats) and tutua (commoners). Rangatira based their prestige on mana - power and influence which derived from your genealogy and your physical resources.

Contact and Invasion
A depiction of Captain Cook
It should be noted that Australian Aboriginals, Maori, and Moriori did not live in 'isolation' from the rest of the world - after initial settlement of Aotearoa there were other waves of settlement, and Aboriginals in the north traded for centuries with the Makassans in modern Indonesia. In fact, through this trade some Aboriginal groups had access to European goods before they even made 'contact' with Europeans! Oceania became known to Europe during the so-called 'Age of Discovery' - which you can read about here - but its existence had been theorised for centuries. Since the time of the ancient Greeks a Terra Australis Incognito (Unknown Land of the South) had been theorised, and in the 1540s 'Java La Grande' first appeared on French maps. While Portugal was likely the first European state to spot Australia, it was the Dutch who first landed in 1616 when Dirk Hartog arrived by accident. The Dutch would continue mapping the region, eventually calling it New Holland, and in 1642 Dutch East Indian Company governor-general Anthoine Van Diemen got Abel Tasman to map a route to the Spanish colonies in Latin America. During this time he mapped what is now Tasmania and eventually Aotearoa. These islands got their name from the explorations - Tasmania came from Tasman, but it was originally called Van Diemen's Land, and New Zealand is named after Zeeland in the Netherlands. No settlements were formed until the voyages of Captain James Cook in the late-1700s. Originally sent to help improve navigation, and using Venus as his guide to do so, his ship, the Endeavour, travelled across the Pacific - from Tahiti to Australia to Aotearoa to Hawai'i. Motivated by both capital accumulation and Enlightenment scientific inquiry Cook carefully documented and even met the inhabitants of the places he explored using Tahtian aid. His description of Aboriginals is loaded with the stereotypical 'Noble Savage' tropes, saying they were in 'a pure state of nature', but he does acknowledge that they had adapted to a land where European-style farming could not exist. This was in Botany Bay, an area which Cook would call initially Stingray Bay because of its stingrays. While some encounters were peaceful, others were not. At Botany Bay Aboriginals tried to scare them off, and Cook himself would later get into a fight with Hawaiians leading to his death on Valentine's Day in 1779.
A depiction of the First Fleet
Thanks to the cartographic mapping and diaries left by Cook and other explorers Britain started to have the Pacific in mind. Why Australia, then renamed New South Wales, was first chosen for colonisation is still up for debate. The first answer is obvious - penal colonies. Britain had been using the Americas as penal colonies, but the American Revolution had closed that off so they needed a new place for prisoners. However, only a third of the population of the 'First Fleet' which ended up founding Sydney were convicts. In 1952 Ken Dallas first challenged this idea and the debate continues to rage on. He, and later historians, argued that although Botany Bay was always intended as a penal colony, it was not the only, or possibly even primary, reason. The creation of Sydney could open a way to challenge the Spanish and French, as well as economic ventures. When the First Fleet was dropped off the ships made their way to Indonesia and China hoping to trade, and the Second Fleet were converted into whaling ships. Regardless, on 18 January 1788, now known as Australia Day or Invasion Day, the First Fleet arrived at Botany Bay with naval officer Arthur Phillip as the first governor of the new colony. There was an issue for the new settlers. Despite being rich in life the climate was not good for European style farming, and the fact that people already lived there, so other colonies were made to supply goods to the newly emerging Sydney. Timber was especially needed, something plentiful in Aotearoa, so Phillips ordered it to be collected from Aotearoa. This would pave the way for the colonisation of Aotearoa. The first settlers, called Pakeha by the Maori, were actually seamen and convicts escaping despotic captains and poor conditions on ships becoming the 'Pakeha Maori'. It would be sealing, not timber, which would create the first Pakeha settlement in 1792. Constructing European-houses at Dusky Sound in 1792 they returned to Sydney with 4500 seal skins. 

Trade and Conflict along the Frontier

In both Australia and Aotearoa initial contacts between settlers and indigenous peoples can be considered a mixture of cooperation and conflict. As was the case with all the other European empires, the settlers were initially reliant on the local peoples - for trade and so they wouldn't attack them. In 1828, for example, one entrepreneur called John Rodolphus Kent married Tiria, the daughter of the first 'Maori King' and chief Te Wherowhero, to secure access to resources and labour. Not mentioned till now was the devastating impact disease had on both Maori and Aboriginal populations - smallpox especially wiped out many communities. Christian missions were opened in both colonies to convert the local peoples, and also to make sure the settlers did not sin too much. This had a devastating impact on indigenous culture as Christianity was forced onto them. From religion to identity was changed by colonial evangelising - the Maori had a third gender concept called wakawahine which missionaries tried to cast as sinful and to be cast out. Most famously, however, guns and potatoes were traded to the Maori which revolutionised their society. Potato, being such an easy to grow crop, became a staple in their diet, but muskets radicalised warfare. The Musket Wars waged from 1807 to 1837 in something which Michael King describes as a time of 'Guns and God'. As muskets gave iwi an advantage over their opponents this caused a boom in trade as Pakeha exploited the growing need for iwi to defend themselves. A genocide also occurred. The Moriori on Chatham Island had long abandoned violence; when Europeans had shot one the community blamed themselves showing this aversion to violence. Due to displacement caused by the Musket Wars the Ngati Mutunga and Ngati Tama invaded in 1835 and commit a genocide. Many Moriori were killed, the rest were enslaved, their language forbidden, and holy sites destroyed. From around 2,000 individuals in 1835 by the time they were freed only around 101 remained. 

Meanwhile, similar actions were taking place in Australia. The initial years were hard due to the land - while it created allowed for a diversity of life it was not suited for European style farming. In a standard ironic twist in history Governor Phillips viewed the Aboriginals as being squatters on the land with no actual ties to it, but the land which proved to be most fertile happened to be the areas which had seen Aboriginal farming techniques being used. Instead, animal farming was more prosperous - within fifteen years the sheep population rose from 29 to 20,000. Experiments in selective breeding allowed sheep and cattle to become adapted to the Australian climate, and soon enough Australia became known for its lamb and beef. Landowners started emerging due to close connections with the governor, 'British democracy' did not exist in Australia for many decades to come. Close allies to governors allowed them to have large holdings, with over 80,000 acres, which opened the door for them to prosper through pastoralism. Not only did this push out smaller farmers it also created conflict with Aboriginal peoples. Not only around Sydney - other settlements started emerging across the eastern half of Australia including Newcastle, Adelaide, and Melbourne. The British government, not wanting to be drawn into costly colonial wars, called for the settlers to not disturb the Aboriginals, but this was easier said than done. For one, Aboriginal communities were not happy that their land was being taken from them - it is widely believed that John Batman's 1835 treaty with the Kulin, which founded Melbourne, was only a 'treaty' as the Kulin did not understand that they were permanently giving up their land. Different concepts of land ownership meant that they thought that they would be sharing the land. It was also not uncommon for settlers to initiate violence in order to move into Aboriginal land. In May 1804 panicking soldiers in Van Diemen's Land shot 40 people on a kangaroo hunt thinking they were a war party. This would be a standard throughout the 1800s.

Life and Culture in the 'Frontier'
An Australian bush hut used by settlers
A wide range of people came to Australia and Aotearoa for various reasons, ranging from convicts to farmers wanting a new life. The farms were ran by forced convict labour, and many of the newly emerging economies relied on convicts. A significant percentage of those on the whaling ships which arrived with the Second Fleet happened to be convicts. Economic pressures meant that many convicts were soon declared free, especially coming towards the 1850s, so they could fully partake in the new economies. As described by David Day, although the land of New South Wales was not fertile, 'the women certainly were'. Of the convicts which arrived with the First Fleet 188 were women, and as they were settler colonies there were no bars on women coming to the colonies. Australia and New Zealand gave women the vote a long time before they did in Europe, and this is a similar trend as seen in the US West. To 'tame' the land women were given a lot more agency compared to those in the metropole which allowed an easier fight for rights. However, there was an expectation to be a model of the virtuous housewife. As argued by Ann Stoler, there was colonial anxiety over white women and non-white men having sex and 'transgressing the colour line'. Transposing their own ideas of gender onto indigenous peoples white men argued that Aboriginal men exploited and made women their slaves. As argued by Mary Anne Jacobs and Anna Haebich, 'White men stole Aboriginal women's labour and sexuality much as they usurped their land and resources.' In rural areas white settlers fathered mixed-race children, whether they accepted their children was another matter. Syphilis became endemic thanks to Europeans introducing the disease. Cultural changes deeply impacted indigenous peoples, colonialism created a cultural genocide as missionary activity tried to enforce Christianity and European culture. Some were caught in the middle. Bennelong was captured by Arthur Philips, used as an interpreter, and even went to Britain. Due to him being indigenous meant that he was rejected by the settlers, while his adoption of European cultural practices made him a pariah among indigenous peoples.

Colonial Wars 
A depiction of the Flagstaff War
Land expropriation and clashes meant that wars broke out. In 1840 Pakeha hoped to avoid further conflict with the Maori, but this decision would prove contentious and problematic. The Treaty of Waitangi, written in both English and Maori, was forged between iwi and New South Wales Lieutenant-Governor William Hobson, Aotearoa was then still seen as being part of New South Wales. There were three articles: first, 'Chiefs of the Confederation of the United Tribes of New Zealand...cede to Her Majesty the Queen of England absolutely and without reservation all the rights and powers of Sovereignty...over their respective Territories'; second, guarantees that chiefs and tribes had access to land; and third, that all Maori would become British citizens. There were naturally issues - these words and concepts emerged through British thought which did not map onto Maori thought. For one, sovereignty was translated as kawanatanga which in Maori implied that they still had some form of governorship. Similarly, the translation over land had a wider meaning, this also included cultural resources, not just material. Furthermore, not all iwi accepted the Treaty, and it did not take long for Pakeha to directly ignore it themselves. A 1846 Native Land Purchase Act which tightened government hold over Maori land. From the 1840s to the 1870s was a period known as the 'Maori' or 'New Zealand Wars'. These were a series of wars between Pakeha and their allies, and iwi over the Treaty. One such one, the Flagstaff War, sparked when Maori in 1845 cut down a British flag seeing it as encroaching on their sovereignty. The Maori managed to fight so well, incidentally, because of the British selling them muskets decades earlier - the Musket Wars had changed Maori community structures to better resist attack. However, they could not resist entirely, and by the 1870s the Pakeha had broke the back of the Maori resistance.

Australia similarly saw a colonial war against Aboriginal peoples. Before we discuss this we need to quickly go over the 'History Wars'. From the 1960s historians started having a look again at colonial Australia, and began writing histories of colonial Australia and the genocidal wars. However, from the 1990s conservative historians, under the guise of objectivity, that 'leftists' were re-writing Australian history. In particular, the 'Black War' was singled out, largely as it has been seen as leading to the near-extinction of the Tasmanians. However, this debate was not about 'objectivity', but really about trying to make Australia's colonial history less drenched in blood. Evidence speaks otherwise. As argued by Lyndall Ryan, the Black War emerged as a way to solidify settler rule by massacring communities. The 'Black Line' was even formed as a way to systematically corner communities - Batman got into his position to form 'Batmania', later Melbourne, through his participation in the Black War. Estimations have put that for every settler killed, five Aboriginals were killed - due to a small population this seemingly drove them to extinction. The 'Frontier Wars' across Australia were not as genocidal as the Black War, but the mixture of violence and disease 'subdued the frontier'.

Mining and Migration
Bushrangers
The economies of Australia and New Zealand stagnated until the discovery of gold and minerals in the 1850s. Thus started the Australian and Otago Gold Rush. A big reason why the Maori Wars took place was due to the discovery of gold in Maori lands. Suddenly, Australia, in particular, went from a farming colony to an industrial one. Emigration to Australia rose from 20,000 a year to 90,000 a year in just a year! People came from Britain, Germany, the US, and China looking to make a fortune in the new gold mines, and the mine owners replaced the landowners as the wealthiest in society. The gold mines, naturally, were far from the cities, and with colonial power weaker there it allowed crime to proliferate. Missionaries decried the 'depravity' of the mining settlements where prostitution, alcoholism, and violence seemed to rule. In reality, each community formed their own structures and cooperated with each other, but with it being excluded from traditional power structures, and what it looked like, it was demonised. That does not mean that crime did not exist. Weak crime enforcement allowed the rise of the 'bushrangers'. Why mine when you can just steal the profits others made? While demonised at the time, in later years they became a point of pride for Australian national identity. Ned Kelly became the most famous for his raids and wearing of metal, knight-like armour earned him fame, and his execution in 1880 led him to become a folk hero like Billy the Kid. The bushrangers eventually vanished when the periphery of the nation became closer to the metropole. Cities expanded and to create a congruent nation railways and telegraphs made Australia more connected. This allowed both Australia and New Zealand to start developing their own identities.

The Rise of Democracy and National Identity
A depiction of the Eureka Rebellion
Australia and New Zealand have become famous for more progressive politics, for years Australia has been known as 'the Working Man's Nation'. This was largely thanks to the industrialisation and migration. Britain was still sending convicts well into the late-nineteenth century, including many political radicals. Similarly, European and American migrants brought new ideas like socialism and liberalism to the colonies very quickly. A spark for Australian democracy emerged in the gold mines with the 1854 Eureka Rebellion. Wanting a more democratic nation with workers' rights miners took control of the fields of Eureka, and, despite it being crushed, it proved to be a radical alternative for Australians. Mark Twain in 1890 described it as one of the most important events in the history of the colony, and left-wing activists even suggested using the Eureka flag flown by the rebels as an alternate flag of Australia. It is unsurprising that feminist and trade union movements quickly emerged in this context, and at times they were the same movement. In the early-1900s women engaged in unions in order to pressure the government into bringing equal pay for women. In 1884 Henrietta Dugdale formed the first suffrage society, and in 1897 the 'Grandmother of Australia' Catherine Helen Spence became the first woman to run for parliament. 

This surge in political activity allowed the two colonies to move towards becoming quasi-independent from Britain. How they would look as dominions was an alternate question. Originally, it was decided that they would form one big state, Australia's constitution still claims New Zealand showing this. Although New Zealand is as close to Sydney as Sydney is to Western Australia to divide by sea made them appear as two very separate states - while Western Australia reluctantly became part of the Federation of Australia, New Zealand solidly held fast. Instead New Zealand tried to build on different aspects to differentiate itself from Australia - ironically using its indigenous populace. The Treaty of Waitangi and Maori resistance to complete cultural domination gave New Zealand a false sense that it treats its native populace well. It is true that Australia had certainly treated its indigenous peoples badly - the looting of Aboriginal art and boom in anthropological accounts about them in the 1890s occurred as there was a belief that Aboriginals would soon go extinct. Furthermore, shortly after independence Australia began the 'Lost Generation' where Aboriginal children were taken from their families and placed into schools to 'civilise' them, a destructive policy which lasted well into the 1900s and solidified a cultural genocide. This gave New Zealand an easy difference to exaggerate - becoming part of the Australian Federation would infringe the rights of Maori. A cartoon from 1900 in the New Zealand Graphic shows a personified New Zealand, hand-in-hand with a Maori, rejecting the Australian ogre with its arms in chains, a likely reference to the convict past which could 'stain' New Zealand. However, both states positioned themselves as being 'white'. With the exception of the IWW, which emerged from anarco-syndicalist politics, trade unions were horrifically racist, and shortly after independence Australia passed the 'White Australia Policy' barring emigration from Asia and Melanesia. 

Conclusion
New Zealand and Australian troops at Gallipoli
As we have seen New Zealand and Australia had very similar but also very different histories. Through the legacies of settler colonialism and working-class agitation the modern states which we now know emerged. However, upon independence in 1901 (Australia) and 1907 (New Zealand) there were still debates about what they would look like; merging the two colonies was still not an unlikely scenario. Although a radical movement wanted to bring about a republic there was still an urge to remain part of the British Empire - both states immediately jumped into the First World War. As we will soon see it was this war which firmly set out their own national identity. The baptism of fire at Gallipoli would firmly set out their own identities. These shifts we have discussed today would shape the two countries up until now, and likely will continue to do so.

The sources I have used are as follows:
-Michael King, The Penguin History of New Zealand, (London: 2003)
-David Day, Claiming a Continent: A New History of Australia, (Sydney: 1997)
-Denis McLean, The Prickly Pair: Making Nationalism in Australia and New Zealand, (Dunedin: 2003)
-Kay Saunders and Raymond Evans, (eds.), Gender Relations in Australia: Domination and Negotiation, (Sydney: 1992)
-Eric Hobsbawm, The Age of Capital, 1848-1875, (London: 1975)
-Vincent O'Malley, Bruce Stirling, and Wally Penetito, (eds.), The Treaty of Waitangi Companion: Maori and Pakeha from Tasman to Today, (Auckland: 2010)
-Lyndall Ryan, 'Massacre in the Black War in Tasmania 1823-34: A Case Study of the Meander River Region, June 1827', Journal of Genocide Research, 10:4, (2008), 479-499

Thank you for reading, and next time we will be looking at the First World War. For other World History posts please see our list. For other blog posts please see our Facebook or catch me on Twitter @LewisTwiby.

Sunday 9 February 2020

Comics Explained: Harley Quinn


Harley Quinn is by far one of DC's most popular characters despite only debuting in the 1990s. Within that short amount of time she's managed to evolve from a one-off henchmen of the Joker, that didn't actually originate in the comics, to one of the major antiheroes of DC. As she is the star of Birds of Prey movie, as played by the fantastic Margot Robbie, it is the perfect time to discuss her character. We can't go over each of her appearances, in just thirty years she's appeared in DC a lot, so we'll be doing an overview of her instead.

Creation

Harley Quinn did not actually debut in the comics, instead she debuted on TV. It is not uncommon for characters to emerge outside of comics to become big inside the comics. Mr Freeze, Agent Coulson, X-23, Batgirl, Krypton, and kryptonite all made their debuts outside the comics. Harley Quinn debuted in the critically acclaimed Batman: The Animated Series in the episode 'Joker's Favor' as originally a walk-on role, and she was created by the show-creators Paul Dini and Bruce Timm. After watching Arleen Sorkin in the soap opera Days of Our Lives, and because Dini was friends with Sorkin, they modelled Harley off of Sorkin - she would even voice Harley in the series. The animated series had a spin-off comic in 1994 called The Batman Adventures: Mad Love which more or less has remained her origin story, but it took until 1999 for her to fully debut in the mainstream DC universe. As part of the No Man's Land event - when an earthquake isolates Gotham and the villains carve up the city between them - a tie-in graphic novel was released called Batman: Harley Quinn. This graphic novel mostly kept her origins from the animated series. 

Origins
Her origin story has had some tweaks thanks to the rebooting of the timelines after the Flashpoint event. Born in Brooklyn she had a long interest in criminal psychology, and she was a genius in regards to psychology. In the new timeline, explained in Suicide Squad Vol. 4, her interest was sparked by her teenage boyfriend committing a murder - to signify her interest in criminal psychology she stole a taxidermied beaver from her boyfriend's father. In the original timeline, a jealous professor spiked her boyfriend's drink with diluted Joker Venom sending him insane - not knowing this Harley thought this was due to the same mental problem which the Joker suffered from. As her boyfriend eventually was cured, she was determined to cure the Joker. In both timelines she began studying the Joker, but she did not expect to find how charming he could be. His split personalities allowed him to put on a charming, friendlier facade just for her - she enjoyed the nickname he gave her. As her name was Harleen Quinzel, he called her 'Harly Quinn' from harlequin. However, through all this, the Joker was slowly chipping away at her sanity and through this she fell in love with him. Eventually, she had been broken and secretly started freeing the Joker from his cell. Depending on the timeline she was either committed and later freed by the Joker (the original), or was kidnapped by the Joker and thrown in a chemical vat to replicate how the Joker came into being (the new timeline). Thus, Harley Quinn was born.

The Joker and Harley

Calling the Joker 'Mister J' or 'Puddin'' Harley became one of the most closest people to the Joker. Just like in the Animated Series it was not a true relationship as Harley envisioned it. Joker's callous nature meant that he regularly toyed with her emotions, and regularly saw her as expendable. In Batman #663, for example, the duo set out to kill all of the Joker's former henchmen, but it turned out that this was a set up for the 'punchline' - killing Harley herself. It was one of the examples of Harley fighting back against the Joker where she shot him in the shoulder in rage for his betrayal. In 2001, she got her own title called Harley Quinn where, tired of the Joker's abuse, she leaves to go on her own. Part of the story, which ran for 38 issues, saw her forming her own gang called the Quintets, although they too would also betray her. Meanwhile, she adopted two spotted hyenas called Bud and Lou, named after Abbott and Costello, and moved in with Poison Ivy. This would spark a long relationship between the two, which also happened in the Animated Series, and recently has blossomed into a romantic relationship. At the end of her series she handed herself into Arkham Asylum realising that she needs help. 

Throughout the 2000s she would have various appearances, some big and some small. For example, in Detective Comics #831 she could have had the chance of parole from Arkham, but she was kidnapped by the new Ventriloquist, Peyton Riley. The Ventriloquist was a gangster who appeared to act under the orders of his puppet Scarface, but he died and Peyton took over the role. Harley didn't want to work for her, especially as she disliked Peyton taking on the Ventriloquist's identity as the original cheered her up in Arkham, and teamed up with Batman to take her down. Eventually, she teamed up with Poison Ivy and Catwoman to form the Gotham Sirens, in the series Gotham City Sirens, where the trio agreed to live and fight together. Among their adventures included fighting the criminal mastermind, and childhood friend of Bruce Wayne, Hush; fighting a Joker impersonator; and Harley opting to spend Christmas with the Sirens after a 'horrible' time with her family. The team almost break up thanks to the events over issues 20 to 25. Wanting revenge for years of torment Harley breaks into Arkham to kill the Joker, but ends up joining with him to take over the asylum. While Catwoman teams up with Batman to defeat them, Poison Ivy attempts to kill the re-incarcerated Harley. Then she has a change of heart, wanting revenge on Catwoman for abandoning them for Batman. In the end Catwoman chose to let them escape instead of getting them arrested.

New 52 and Rebirth

The post-Flashpoint universe is referred to as the 'New 52', and was generally seen as a new start for DC. In this Harley's origins were slightly altered, but, due to Batman's popularity, most of the pre-Flashpoint timeline was kept intact. Harley was brought into the Suicide Squad - this was basically a supervillain team used by the government to go on suicide missions. It was part of her new run with Suicide Squad that her best known design comes from. However, the Joker still had an influence of her. When it was rumoured that the Joker was dead, and that his face had been cut off, she broke into the Gotham City Police Department to get the mask - in a particularly dark scene she straps the face onto a tied up Deadshot to have one last 'conversation'. It turned out the Joker was alive, and in Death of the Family he managed to coax her into pretending to be his original moniker of the Red Hood - it was then that she realised that she could never go back to him. In 2013 she get her own comic title again, called Harley Quinn, by Jimmy Palmiotti and Amanda Conner where she developed into an anti-hero, and started formally dating Poison Ivy. This was a well-received series - except for when DC ran the really stupid design competition where they asked fans to draw Harley in suicide scenarios. Naturally many artists and writers, especially Palmiotti and Conner, were infuriated by this. Regardless, the actual stories were well-received, something helped by their eccentric stories. In one, it turns out Harley has a crush on Bruce Wayne and wins a competition to go on a date with him - it quickly turns into a story where she teams up with Batman to fight supervillains. 

In 2016 DC released Rebirth to fix many of the problems caused by the recent rebooting of the universe. In the new Suicide Squad series she has gone to be more of a darker character and refuses to take the title of 'hero', but still has a carefree attitude. She even managed to lead a team of the Suicide Squad which also comprises of Enchantress, Killer Croc, Captain Boomerang, Katana, and Deadshot - it is not coincidence that this was also the roster of the Suicide Squad movie. Despite rejecting the title of a hero, she is still seen as a hero. In 2018 the Heroes in Crisis story revealed that the Justice League has the 'Sanctuary', basically a place where heroes and former villains can undergo therapy. Harley was invited, and one day all the patients were found murdered - only Harley Quinn and Booster Gold, with no memory of the event, were found alive. In a murder mystery, which ended up spanning time itself, Harley helped clear of name of the murders.

Thank you for reading and I hope you found it interesting. For future blog updates please see our Facebook or catch me on Twitter @LewisTwiby.

Sunday 2 February 2020

Paleo Profiles: Elasmotherium

Reconstruction by W.S. van der Merwe
The Ice Age has become synonymous with larger than life woolly animals ranging from the Megaloceros, a deer with antlers the same length as a human is high, the woolly rhino Coelodonta, and the famous woolly mammoth. However, another woolly rhino roamed the plains of Ice Age Eurasia - the Elasmotherium. Often called the 'Siberian Unicorn' for its long horn the Elasmotherium is one of the many unique animals to roam the Ice Age world.

Discovery and Fossils
A skeleton at Azov History, Archaeology and Paleontology Museum-Reserve
The Elasmotherium was first described at the start of the 1800s by a Russian/German palaeontologist called Gotthelf Fischer von Waldheim. The fossil had been owned by a close friend of Catherine the Great, Yekaterina Dashkova, who donated it to the Moscow University in 1807, so Waldheim described it the following year. He named the fossil Elasmotherium sibericum - Thin Plate Beast from Siberia. Since then, many more fossils of this extinct rhino have been found across Eurasia, ranging from Siberia and China in east Asia all the way up to Ukraine in eastern Europe. A second species of Elasmotherium was discovered in 1914 by another Russian palaeontologist Aleksei Borissiak in the Caucasus region along the Black Sea - this new species was far older and was named Elasmotherium caucasicum. Research in the early-2000s found that some of the fossils assigned to the Caucasus species was in fact that of a different species of Elasmotherium - this new species was named Elasmotherium chaprovicum. As the Elasmotherium went extinct relatively recently in the history of the planet palaeontologists have recently managed to take DNA samples from fossils, something which allows us to know that Elasmotherium was on the rhino evolutionary tree, and we may even have cave art. Art by our ancestors can give palaeontologists good insights into how prehistoric animals looked and acted. Rouffignac Cave in France depicts a wide range of now extinct animals, mostly mammoths, but one has puzzled archaeologists. One seemed to be a one-horned rhino, but the Coelodonta, known to live in the area and alongside humans, had two horns. Although it can easily be a Coelodonta with artistic licensing, it could also be an Elasmotherium possibly showing that people in France somewhat knew about the Elasmotherium.

When and Where
The distribution of fossils by Schvyreva
The genus of Elasmotherium first appeared in the Pliocene about 2.5 million years ago - these fossils were from the caucasicum and chaprovicum species. Eventually these two species would go extinct, and they evolved into the better known Elasmotherium sibericum. Recent research has revealed an interesting aspect of when the Elasmotherium went extinct. Traditionally, it has been believed that the Elasmotherium went extinct sometime between 200,000 and 100,000 years ago during an epoch known as the Pleistocene. As this was many thousands of years before the large-scale Pleistocene Extinction, caused through a mixture of climate change and human activity, for sometime it was believed that it was a victim of 'natural extinction'. This is when a species naturally goes extinct, and a new species evolves to fill the vacant ecological role left behind. However, research done on 23 fossils in 2018 found that Elasmotherium managed to survive until a long time after this date. Through radiocarbon dating it has been found that they managed to survive in what is now Kazakhstan until as recent as 39,000 years ago. Elasmotherium was found from eastern Europe all the way up to Siberia at their height, so this Central Asian population represented the last of the rhinos. 

Biology
A possible depiction in Rouffignac Cave
Unlike the better known woolly rhino, there has been many debates about the biology of the Elasmotherium. The big issue is its horn. You will often see this rhino recreated with one big horn, earning it the nickname of 'the Siberian unicorn'. However, there is an issue with this - we don't actually know if it had a horn. Rhino horn is made of keratin, the same material which our nails and hair is made of, which does not preserve as easily as bone, so few Elasmotherium horn has been preserved. It is more than likely that it did have a horn, especially as other Pleistocene rhinos had horns. Now that DNA analysis has found that Elasmotherium is indeed in the same family as modern rhinos, it is certain that they had a horn. Another question then arises, what did the horn look like? Rhino horns can look very different species to species, and one hypothesis is that each Elasmotherium species had a horn looking different to others. This is especially the case as the early species lived alongside one another; the shape of the horns could be a quick way to differentiate between the two species. All of them likely would have thick muscles around the shoulders so they could lift up their heads.

Another debate is whether Elasmotherium had thick fur. A paper from 1878 has claimed that they did comparing them to 'contemporary rhinoceros and mammoth'. However, this is based on an idea that the Ice Age was a continuous period of icy coldness - instead there were glacial periods which moved between periods of warmth and bitter cold. It is quite likely that during the warmer periods they would have had thinner layers of fur, which gave way to thick shaggy fur during the cold periods. The Siberian cold was also dry, so a thick layer of fur could better trap in the heat. Unlike other rhinos, the Elasmotherium had quite long legs, so it is quite possible that they stood more upright, similar to horses, than other rhinos. This has led to some off reconstructions like the one below:
The reconstruction by Heinrich Harder, c.1920
It is likely that Elasmotherium moved like a modern bison. Its head close to the earth grazing, with long legs allowing it to run fast. For this reason, it is possible that it could gallop at quite fast speeds.

Diet and Habitat
Isotope analysis has allowed us to know what the Elasmotherium ate. High levels of certain compounds indicate that they would have eaten tough grasses, and this is further shown by their teeth. Their teeth have deep roots, and fossilised teeth show indication of continuous wear. If you see how a modern white rhino eats this is how the Elasmotherium would also eat. They were perfectly adapted to their particular environment. Just like today, large areas of Ukraine, Siberia, and Central Asia are grasslands with nothing to see for miles, something which gets covered in snow during the winter. Elasmotherium had wide feet which would allow them to wade through snow, and their big horn would also be useful to move snow so they could access the grass beneath. Due to the low nutrition in tough grasses, and based on how rhinos claim wide areas as their territory, an Elasmotherium would actually be a fairly rare sight. A solitary life to monopolise access to grass, only meeting up to mate. Other animals would have lived alongside this rhino. Looking at fossils from eastern Europe dating from around 200,000 years ago, A.K. Schyreva has shown that they would have lived alongside now extinct camel and bison species, early mammoths, saiga antelope, and the giant antlered Megaloceros. The later ones would have also lived alongside the famous woolly mammoth, and most likely humans. Some fossils have been found in Italy, and possible presence in cave art meant that humans could have also lived alongside them.

Extinction
Skeleton Reconstruction, photo can be found here
Now that we know that Elasmotherium went extinct around 39,000 years ago we can put them as one of the casualties of the Quaternary extinction event. Beginning around 130,000 years ago the peak of the extinctions occurred between 12-8,000 years ago, but it is important to remember that the Elasmotherium was limited to a smaller area by 39,000 years ago. At this time cooler temperatures started chaging the environment, and the grasses which the rhinos grazed on gave way to lichens and mosses. Especially as more herbivores could eat these plants, it meant that the rhinos suddenly had far more competition, on top of their primary food source becoming depleted. As expected, humanity sealed the deal. As humans started moving into areas inhabited by Elasmotherium they would start hunting them. Consequently, the struggling pockets of rhinos would be pushed into extinction - a tale unfortunately all too common.

The sources I have used are as follows:
-A.K. Schyreva, 'On the importance of the representatives of the genus Elasmotherium (Rhinocerotidae, Mammalia) in the biochronology of the Pleistocene of Eastern Europe', Quaternary International, 379, (2015), 128-134
-'The Elasmotherium', Nature, 18:458, (1878), 387-389
-Pavel Kosintsev, Kieren J. Mitchell, Thibaut Devièse, Johannes van der Plicht, Margot Kuitems, Ekaterina Petrova, Alexei Tikhonov, Thomas Higham, Daniel Comeskey, Chris Turney, Alan Cooper, Thijs van Kolfschoten, Anthony J. Stuart, and Adrian M. Lister, 'Evolution and Extinction of the giant rhinoceros Elasmotherium sibiricum sheds light on the late Quaternary megafaunal extinctions', Nature, 3, (2019), 31-38
-'Elasmotherium', Prehistoric-Wildlife.com, [Accessed 31/01/2020]
-Josh Davis, 'The Siberian unicorn lived at the same time as modern humans', Natural History Museum, (26/11/2018), [Accessed 31/01/2020]

Thank you for reading. For other Paleo Profiles we have a list here. For other blog posts please see our Facebook or catch me on Twitter @LewisTwiby.