Jump to content

Genocides in history (before 1490)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of a series on
Genocide
Issues
Related topics
Category
Part of a series on
Discrimination
Forms
Attributes
Social
Religious
Race or ethnicity
Manifestations
Policies
Countermeasures
Related topics

Genocide is the intentional destruction of a people[a] in whole or in part. The term was coined in 1944 by Raphael Lemkin. It is defined in Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) of 1948 as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group's conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."[1]

The preamble to the CPPCG states that "genocide is a crime under international law, contrary to the spirit and aims of the United Nations and condemned by the civilized world", and it also states that "at all periods of history genocide has inflicted great losses on humanity."[1] Genocide is widely considered to be the epitome of human evil,[2] and has been referred to as the "crime of crimes".[3][4][5] The Political Instability Task Force estimated that 43 genocides occurred between 1956 and 2016, resulting in 50 million deaths.[6] The UNHCR estimated that a further 50 million had been displaced by such episodes of violence.[6]

Definitions of genocide

[edit]
Main article: Genocide definitions

The debate continues over what legally constitutes genocide. One definition is any conflict that the International Criminal Court has so designated. Mohammed Hassan Kakar argues that the definition should include political groups or any group so defined by the perpetrator.[7] He prefers the definition from Frank Chalk and Kurt Jonassohn, which defines genocide as "a form of one-sided mass killing in which a state or other authority intends to destroy a group so defined by the perpetrator."[8]

In literature, some scholars have popularly emphasized the role that the Soviet Union played in excluding political groups from the international definition of genocide, which is contained in the Genocide Convention of 1948,[9] and in particular they have written that Joseph Stalin may have feared greater international scrutiny of the political killings that occurred in the country, such as the Great Purge;[10] however, this claim is not supported by evidence. The Soviet view was shared and supported by many diverse countries, and they were also in line with Raphael Lemkin's original conception,[b] and it was originally promoted by the World Jewish Congress.[12]

Historiography

[edit]
See also: Genocide of indigenous peoples § Pre–1948 examples

According to Canadian scholar Adam Jones, if a dominant group of people had little in common with a marginalised group of people, it was easy for the dominant group to define the other as subhuman. As a result, the marginalised group might be labeled as a threat that must be eliminated.[13] Jones continues: "The difficulty, as Frank Chalk and Kurt Jonassohn pointed out in their early study, is that such historical records as exist are ambiguous and undependable. While history today is generally written with some fealty to 'objective' facts, most previous accounts aimed rather to praise the writer's patron (normally the leader) and to emphasise the superiority of one's own gods and religious beliefs."[14]

Chalk and Jonassohn wrote that: "Historically and anthropologically peoples have always had a name for themselves. In a great many cases, that name meant 'the people' to set the owners of that name off against all other people who were considered of lesser quality in some way. If the differences between the people and some other society were particularly large in terms of religion, language, manners, customs, and so on, then such others were seen as less than fully human: pagans, savages, or even animals."[15]

Pre-history

[edit]

Neanderthal genocide

[edit]
Main article: Prehistoric warfare

Yarin Eski, a criminologist at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, argues that "genocidal violence and mass exploitation are perhaps the defining characteristics of being human," and he also describes how our talent for murder put an end to the Neanderthals, and it has also colored all subsequent human history.[16] Similarly, Kwang Hyun Ho stresses the fact that modern humans possess a mutated gene which is related to aggression and combined with fossil evidence, the possession of it by early modern humans proves that the Neanderthals were killed in acts of violence which were committed by early modern humans.[17] The first person to publish an analysis of a Neanderthal, French paleontologist Marcellin Boule, was also the first to suppose (in 1912) that early humans violently replaced Neanderthals.[18][page needed] In particular, larger tribal groupings and projectile weapons were supposed to give modern humans an edge in violent conflicts with Neanderthals and other indigenous populations of archaic humans that allowed early modern humans to wipe out other hominin species as they spread out of Africa.[19][page needed] This view is at odds with the more supported views that Neanderthal extinction occurred due to events such as interbreeding,[20] inbreeding,[21][22] disease,[23] and climate change.[24] Archaeologist Helle Vandkilde highlights how trauma that is indicative of interpersonal violence is only present in approximately 20 cases of Neanderthal and Homo sapiens skeletal remains in the Palaeolithic.[25]

Chiefdom genocides

[edit]
The percentages of male deaths caused by war in eight tribal societies. (Lawrence H. Keeley, War Before Civilization)[26]

Historian Max Ostrovsky concludes that chiefdoms performed the most genocidal warfare in human history and practiced this kind of warfare all over the world, wherever culture reached the level of chiefdom.[27] He based his conclusion on anthropological researches[28] and notes that Thomas Malthus collected many reports on genocidal wars by chiefdoms.

Malthus regards chiefdoms as an intermediate stage between independent tribes and states. By contrast to independent tribes, chiefdoms cumulated power after their decisive military victories but they did not learn to enslave their defeated enemies yet. Hence, according to Malthus, chiefdoms simply slaughtered them: "Their object of war is not conquest but destruction... Among the Iroquois, the phrase by which they express their resolution to make war against an enemy is 'let us go and eat that nation.'"[29] The verb "eat" has a literal meaning. The cannibalism of chiefdoms appears in the military genocidal context which is referred to as "post-battle rage" rather than hunger.[30] Immanuel Kant supposed that slavery and imperialism appeared at a later, albeit equally savage, stage, when peoples learned "how to make better use of their conquered enemies than to dine off them."[31] Jared Diamond offered a similar explanation, arguing that enslavement of defeated groups could only be introduced at an advanced stage because it required feeding, guarding, and organising slaves for work, and tribal societies could not do these things and hence opted to kill all of the defeated.[32]

Ostrovsky found that the hypothesis of chiefdom genocide applies to the Israelites of the Judges period (c. 1150–1025 BCE) when they formed a chiefdom (of twelve tribes): When Israel defeats the Canaanite nations, the tradition commands, "you must devote them to complete destruction. You shall make no covenant with them and show no mercy to them" (Deuteronomy 7:1–2). Similarly to the chiefdoms which are described in the Age of Discovery, the genocide of the Hebrew ban was total which means that it extended to women, children and domestic animals (1 Samuel 15:3). "[You] must not leave anything that breathes" (Deuteronomy 20:16). The Bible exaggerates when it claims that the genocide of the Canaanite peoples (Joshua 10:40–41, 11:21–23, 6:18–19) was total, but, according to Ostrovsky, "whenever the Israelite chiefdom won, the vanquished did not survive."[33] Given the vast data on chiefdom-level warfare, he finds the historicity of the Canaanite genocide credible.

Scholars devoted much of their attention to the Canaanite genocide and scholars of theology struggled to explain why Moses commanded the Israelites to wage a "genocidal" conquest of Canaan[34][35][36] and the secular scholar Richard Dawkins characterises Yahweh as a "genocidal" and "blood thirsty ethnic cleanser."[37] The genocides which were committed during the Judges period were partial genocides, such as the destruction of the Midianites by the Israelites (Numbers 31:7–18). Adam Jones notes that this massacre is an example of the partial destruction and the partial incorporation of an enemy ethnicity.[38]

Julius Caesar's army waged a genocidal war against the Germanic chiefdoms (Gallic Wars 1:17). The Annales Bertiniani recorded the impression of survivors from the onslaught of the chiefdom of the Vikings: "Wild beasts... killing babies, children, young men, old men, fathers, sons and mothers... They overthrow, they despoil, they destroy, they burn, they ravage; sinister cohort, fatal phalanx, cruel host."[33]

Gendercides

[edit]

Scholars of antiquity differentiate genocides from gendercides, in which groups of people were conquered and the males who belonged to the conquered groups were killed but the children (particularly the girls) and the women were incorporated into the conquering groups. Jones notes, "Chalk and Jonassohn provide a wide-ranging selection of historical events such as the Assyrian Empire's root-and branch depredations in the first half of the first millennium BCE, and the destruction of Melos by Athens during the Peloponnesian War (431–404 BCE), a gendercidal rampage described by Thucydides in his 'Melian Dialogue'".[38] Jones and Wendy Lower also detail how gendercides are a common feature through much classical literature in the western tradition.[39] Additionally, Jones highlights in an article published in the Journal of Genocide Research in 2000, that the gender specific targeting of men for extermination has persisted through many cases of conflict in the 20th century.[40]

Prehistoric Andes

[edit]

In the Cambridge World History of Genocide, anthropologist and archaeologist Danielle Kurin wrote that there is archaeological evidence of genocidal violence at various points in time in the prehistoric Andes in South America.[41][page needed]

Ancient history

[edit]

Destruction of Carthage

[edit]
Ruins of the Punic district of Carthage
Main article: Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War)
Further information: Punic Wars

During the Third Punic War, the city of Carthage was besieged by Roman forces for three years (149–146 BCE). Once the city was breached, the Romans spent seven days systematically destroying it and killing its inhabitants. Ben Kiernan has labelled the devastation of the city and the massacre of its population "the first genocide".[42][38] Kiernan highlights calls for the destruction of Carthage before the third Punic war, and escalating rhetoric during the siege, with Polybius stating in his report from the battle that the Carthaginians were "utterly exterminated".[43][44] Scholars Bridget Conley and Alex de Waal, as well as Lemkin considered the destruction of Carthage to have been genocidal.[45][46]

Asiatic Vespers

[edit]
Main article: Asiatic Vespers

In 88 BCE, king Mithridates VI of Pontus ordered the murder of all Italics in Asia Minor, resulting in the deaths of about 100,000, mainly civilians.[47][page needed][48][49] The death toll makes it one of the deadliest recorded genocides in classical antiquity. This action provoked the Romans, leading to the First Mithridatic War.[50]

Julius Caesar's campaigns

[edit]

Julius Caesar's campaign against the Tencteri and Usipetes has been characterised as a genocide.[51][52] During the Gallic Wars Caesar reported that he burnt every village and building that he could find in the territory of the Eburones, drove off all of the cattle, and his men and beasts consumed all of the grain that the weather of the autumnal season had not destroyed. He left those who had hid themselves, if there were any, alive in the hope that they would all die of hunger in the winter. Caesar said that he wanted to annihilate the Eburones as well as their name.[53][54][55][page needed] Their country was soon occupied by a Germanic tribe with a different name, the Tungri. However, the report by Tacitus which states that the Tungri were the original "Germani" who first crossed the Rhine, and the way this matches Caesar's description of the Eburones and their neighbours, leads to the possibility that they survived under a new name.[original research?]

However, historian Johannes Heinrichs [de] (2008) argues that the genocide of the Eburones in 53 BCE could not have happened as Caesar claimed.[56] If the systematic destruction of infrastructure by the Roman forces was intended to prevent the local people from regaining power, the physical extermination of them proved to be impractical. The available areas of refuge which were hardly accessible to the Roman legions were numerous: the low mountain range of the Ardennes, the swamps and wastelands which were located towards the Menapii, the coastal islands, etc. Moreover, Caesar's second attempt to annihilate the tribe two years later is proof that the community survived, and its apparent ability to regenerate itself lead Caesar to believe that he needed to launch more raids against them.[56] According to Nico Roymans,[57] their disappearance from the political map may have resulted from "a policy of damnatio memoriae on the part of the Roman authorities, in combination with the confiscation of Eburonean territory".[58] A great part of their gold fell into Roman hands during repeated Roman raids on the Eburones in 53–51 BCE, and then it was melted down and carried off.[59]

Bar Kokhba revolt

[edit]
Main articles: History of the Jews in Europe § Ancient period, History of the Jews in Italy § Pre-Christian Rome, History of the Jews in the Roman Empire, Jewish history § The Roman period (63 BCE – 135 CE), Jewish–Roman wars, and Persecution of Jews § Roman Empire
The ruins of Horvat 'Ethri display a destruction layer dating to the revolt, along with a mass grave containing the remains of 15 individuals, including one with signs of beheading[60]

The Bar Kokhba revolt (Hebrew: מֶרֶד בַּר כּוֹכְבָא; Mered Bar Kokhba) was a rebellion against the Roman Empire by the Jews of the Roman province of Judea, led by Simon bar Kokhba. Waged from circa 132–136 CE,[61][62] it was the last of three major Jewish–Roman wars. The revolt erupted as a result of religious and political tensions which existed in Judea since the end of the failed First Revolt in 66–73 CE. These tensions were exacerbated by the establishment of a large Roman military presence in Judea, changes in administrative life and the economy, together with the outbreak and suppression of Jewish revolts from Mesopotamia to Libya and Cyrenaica.[63] The proximate reasons seem to be the construction of a new city, Aelia Capitolina, over the ruins of Jerusalem and the erection of a temple to Jupiter on the Temple Mount. The Church Fathers and rabbinic literature emphasise the role of Rufus, governor of Judea, in provoking the revolt.[64] The Bar Kokhba revolt resulted in the extensive depopulation of Judean communities, more so than during the First Jewish–Roman War of 70 CE.[65] According to Cassius Dio, 580,000 Jews perished in the war and many more died of hunger and disease. In addition, many Judean war captives were sold into slavery.[66] The Jewish communities of Judea were devastated to an extent which some scholars describe as a genocide.[65][67] However, the Jewish population remained strong in other parts of Palestine, thriving in Galilee, Golan, Bet Shean Valley and the eastern, southern and western edges of Judea.[68][69] Roman casualties were also considered heavy—XXII Deiotariana was disbanded after serious losses.[70][71] In addition, some historians argue that Legio IX Hispana's disbandment in the mid-2nd century could have been a result of this war. In an attempt to erase any memory of Judea or Ancient Israel, Emperor Hadrian wiped the name off the map and replaced it with Syria Palaestina.[72][73][74]

Jie and Wu Hu

[edit]

The Later Zhao dynasty (319–351) was a Jie-led state that ruled most of northern China during the Sixteen Kingdoms period in the fourth century CE. At the time, northern China was home to many non-Han Chinese tribes collectively known in historiography as the Wu Hu or "Five Barbarians", of which the Jie were one of them. In its final years, the Later Zhao fell into civil war between members of the imperial family over the throne. One powerful member, Shi Min (later known as Ran Min), was an adopted Han Chinese, and in 350, he seized control of the emperor and capital, Ye through a coup.[75]

After surviving multiple assassination attempts, Shi Min concluded that he could no longer trust the Jie and other non-Han people under his command. In late 350, he issued an order to kill any Jie or central Asians found in the city of Ye, rewarding any Han Chinese for killing any Jie or "barbarian" person they find.[75] Shi Min personally led his army to massacre the tribes in the capital, while ordering his generals to purge their armies of tribespeople. The Jie were an ethnic group which possessed racial characteristics which included high-bridged noses and bushy beards,[76] and as a result, they were easily identified and killed. However, many of the people killed were also mistakenly-identified Han Chinese. In total, 200,000 of them were reportedly massacred.[75][77] The historians David Graff and Victoria Tin-Bor Hui both describe the actions of Shi Min as a "genocidal campaign",[75] alongside historian Steven L. Jacobs who also considers it as an example of genocide.[78]

Zandaqa

[edit]

Zindīq (Arabic: زنديق) or Zandik (Middle Persian: 𐭦𐭭𐭣𐭩𐭪) was initially used to negatively denote the followers of the Manichaeian religion in the Sasanian Empire.[79] By the time of the 8th-century Abbasid Caliphate however, the meaning of the word zindīq and the adjectival zandaqa had broadened and could loosely denote many things: Gnostic Dualists as well as followers of Manichaeism, agnostics, and atheists.[79][80] However, many of those who were persecuted for being zandaqa under the Abbasids claimed to be Muslims, and when it was applied to Muslims, the accusation was that the accused secretly harbored Manichaean beliefs.[80] "The proof for such an accusation was sought, if at all, in an indication of some kind of dualism, or if that individual openly flouted Islamic beliefs or practices."[80] As such, certain Muslim poets of early Abbasid times could also be accused of being zandaqa as much as an actual Manichaean might be.[80]

The charge of being a zandaqa was a serious one, and it could cost the accused his/her life.[80][81][page needed] A history of the time cites the "Spiller" caliph Abu al-'Abbas as having said "tolerance is laudable, except in matters which are dangerous to religious belief, or matters which are dangerous to the sovereign's dignity."[82] The third Abbasid caliph, Al-Mahdi, ordered the composition of polemical works that were to be used to refute the beliefs of freethinkers and other heretics, and for years, he attempted to completely exterminate them, hunting them down and exterminating freethinkers in large numbers, putting anyone who was merely suspected of being a zindiq to death.[82] Al-Mahdi's successors, the caliphs al-Hadi and Harun al-Rashid, continued the pogroms, although they occurred with diminished intensity during the reign of the latter and were later ended by him.[80][83] In turn this policy influenced the Mihna policy of al-Ma'mun which targeted those Muslim religious scholars and officials who refused to accept the doctrine of the created nature of the Quran.[80]

Middle Ages

[edit]

Ancestral Puebloans

[edit]

A 2010 study suggests that a group of Ancestral Puebloans in the American Southwest were killed in a genocide that took place circa 800 CE.[84][page needed][85]

Harrying of the North

[edit]
Main article: Harrying of the North

The Harrying of the North was a series of military campaigns waged by William the Conqueror in the winter of 1069–1070 to subjugate Northern England, where the presence of the last Wessex claimant, Edgar Ætheling, had encouraged Anglo-Saxon Northumbrian, Anglo-Scandinavian and Danish rebellions. William's strategy, implemented during the winter of 1069–70 (he spent Christmas 1069 in York), has been described by William E. Kapelle and some other modern scholars as an act of genocide.[86] Medieval historian C. P. Lewis details how the consensus view of the Harrying of the North is that it was a particularly harsh course of action and that "modern labelling commonly falls not far short of genocide."[87] Lewis also highlights how the limitations of the evidence available mean it is difficult to assess whether the Harrying of the North meets any of the frameworks of genocide.[88]

Medieval anti-Jewish massacres

[edit]
See also: Antisemitism in Europe, Expulsions and exoduses of Jews, History of the Jews in Europe § Middle Ages, Medieval antisemitism, Persecution of Jews, and Pogrom § History of anti-Jewish pogroms

From the 11th century to the 16th century, hundreds of massacres were committed against Jewish communities in Europe.[89][90] The historian Maya Soifer Irish details how these pogroms meet the criteria of "genocidal massacres" as developed by the genocide scholars Leo Kuper and Ben Kiernan.[91]

13th-century extermination of the Cathars

[edit]
Main article: Albigensian Crusade

The Albigensian Crusade or the Cathar Crusade (1209–1229) was a 20-year-long military campaign which Pope Innocent III initiated to eliminate Catharism in Languedoc, in Southern France.[92][93][94] The Crusade was primarily prosecuted by the French crown and it promptly took on a political flavour. It resulted in a significant reduction in the number of practising Cathars, and realigned the County of Toulouse in Languedoc, bringing it into the sphere of the French crown, and diminishing the distinct regional culture and high level of influence of the Counts of Barcelona.

Pope Innocent III excommunicating the Albigensians (left). The Albigensians being massacred by the crusaders (right).

Raphael Lemkin, who coined the word "genocide" in the 20th century,[95] referred to the Albigensian Crusade as "one of the most conclusive cases of genocide in religious history".[96] Mark Gregory Pegg wrote that "The Albigensian Crusade ushered genocide into the West by linking divine salvation to mass murder, by making slaughter as loving an act as His sacrifice on the cross."[97]

Robert E. Lerner argues that Pegg's classification of the Albigensian Crusade as a genocide is inappropriate, on the ground that it "was proclaimed against unbelievers ... not against a 'genus' or people; those who joined the crusade had no intention of annihilating the population of southern France ... If Pegg wishes to connect the Albigensian Crusade to modern ethnic slaughter, well—words fail me (as they do him)."[98]

Laurence Marvin is not as dismissive as Lerner regarding Pegg's contention that the Albigensian Crusade was a genocide. He does however take issue with Pegg's argument that the Albigensian Crusade formed an important historical precedent for later genocides, including the Holocaust.[99]

Kurt Jonassohn and Karin Solveig Björnson describe the Albigensian Crusade as "the first ideological genocide".[100] Kurt Jonassohn and Frank Chalk, who together founded the Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies, include a detailed case study of the Albigensian Crusade in their genocide studies textbook The History and Sociology of Genocide: Analyses and Case Studies, authored by Joseph R. Strayer and Malise Ruthven.[101]

In 2023, Pegg highlights in the Cambridge World History of Genocide, how since his 2008 work a variety of other scholars from different disciplinary backgrounds have concluded that the Albigensian crusade was genocidal in nature.[102]

Mongol Empire

[edit]
Main article: Destruction under the Mongol Empire
Siege of Ryazan during the Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus' in December 1237

Quoting Eric Margolis, Jones claims that in the 13th century, the Mongol armies under Genghis Khan were genocidal killers[103] who were known to eradicate whole nations.[104] He ordered the extermination of the Tata Mongols, and all Kankali males in Bukhara who were "taller than a wheel"[105] using a technique called measuring against the linchpin. In the end, half of the Mongol tribes were exterminated by Genghis Khan. Rosanne Klass referred to the Mongols' rule of Afghanistan as "genocide".[106] It has been estimated that approximately 11% of the world's population was killed either during or immediately after the Turco-Mongol invasions (around 37.75 – 60 million people were killed during the genocide which was committed in Eurasia, out of which at least 35 million people were killed in China).[107] If these calculations are accurate, these events would constitute the deadliest acts of mass killing in human history. The second campaign against the Western Xia, the final military action which was led by Genghis Khan, because he died during it, involved the intentional and systematic destruction of Western Xia cities and culture.[citation needed] According to John Man, because of this policy of total obliteration, Western Xia is little known to anyone other than experts in the field because very few records of the existence of that society still exist. He states that "There is a case to be made that this was the first ever recorded example of attempted genocide. It was certainly very successful ethnocide."[108]

Historian and specialist on the Mongol empire, Timothy May, details how genocide scholars have been divided as to whether the Mongol conquests should be considered a case of genocide.[109] He then argues that while the Mongols frequently employed massacres as a tool of war during their conquests, they could only be described as genocidal in some cases.[110] Two Mongol military campaigns which can be considered genocidal are the massacre of the Tanguts at Zhongxing and the massacre of the Nizari Ismailis.[111]

Tamerlane

[edit]
Main article: Timurid conquests and invasions

Similarly, the extreme brutality of the Turco-Mongol conqueror Tamerlane was well-documented and his conquests were accompanied by genocidal massacres.[112] William Rubinstein wrote: "In Assyria (1393–4)—Tamerlane got around—he killed all the Christians he could find, including everyone in the, then, Christian city of Tikrit, thus virtually destroying Assyrian Church of the East. Impartially, however, Tamerlane also slaughtered Shi'ite Muslims, Jews and heathens."[113]

Mongols in the Delhi Sultanate

[edit]
Main article: 1311 massacre of Mongols in the Delhi Sultanate

In 1311, the Delhi Sultanate's ruler Alauddin Khalji ordered a massacre of the "New Muslims" (Mongols who had recently converted to Islam), after some Mongol amirs of Delhi conspired to kill him.[114] According to chronicler Ziauddin Barani, 20,000 or 30,000 Mongols were killed as a result of this order.[115][116]

Guanches

[edit]
Main article: Conquest of the Canary Islands

The conquest of the Canary Islands by the Crown of Castille took place between 1402 and 1496.[117] Initially carried out by Norman aristocrats on behalf of the Castilian nobility in exchange for a covenant of allegiance to the crown, the process was later carried out by the Spanish crown itself during the reign of the Catholic Monarchs.[118] Some historians have labelled the conquest genocidal in nature[119][120][page needed] due to the brutal treatment of the Islands' indigenous Guanches which contributed to their extinction as a distinct group. Historian Francisco Morales Padrón [es] wrote in 1978 that the conquest of the islands constituted a genocide.[121] Historian Daniele Conversi locates the conquest of the Canary Islands within the history of colonial and imperial genocides.[120][page needed] Genocide scholar Mark Levene has stated that while there was not the intent by the Castilian crown to commit genocide, the result of their conquest was the same as if they had intended to commit genocide.[121] Historian and specialist in genocide studies Mohamed Adhikari published an article in 2017 analysing the settler colonial history of the Canary Islands as a case of genocide,[122] saying that the Canary Islands were the scene of "Europe's first overseas settler colonial genocide," and that the mass killing and enslavement of natives, along with forced deportation, sexual violence and confiscation of land and children constituted an attempt to "destroy in whole" the Guanche people.[123][121] The tactics used in the Canary Islands in the 15th century served as a model for the Iberian colonisation of the Americas.[124][120][page needed][125][page needed]

See also

[edit]
Main article: Outline of genocide studies
This section is an excerpt from Genocides in history § See also.[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ Defined under the Genocide Convention as a "national, ethnical, racial, or religious group."
  2. ^ By 1951, Lemkin was saying that the Soviet Union was the only state that could be indicted for genocide; his concept of genocide, as it was outlined in Axis Rule in Occupied Europe, covered Stalinist deportations as genocide by default, and differed from the adopted Genocide Convention in many ways. From a 21st-century perspective, its coverage was very broad, and as a result, it would classify any gross human rights violation as a genocide, and many events that were deemed genocidal by Lemkin did not amount to genocide. As the Cold War began, this change was the result of Lemkin's turn to anti-communism in an attempt to convince the United States to ratify the Genocide Convention.[11]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide". Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. 12 January 1951. Archived from the original on 11 December 2005. Note: "ethnical", although unusual, is found in several dictionaries.
  2. ^ Towner 2011, pp. 625–638; Lang 2005, pp. 5–17: "On any ranking of crimes or atrocities, it would be difficult to name an act or event regarded as more heinous. Genocide arguably appears now as the most serious offense in humanity's lengthy—and, we recognize, still growing—list of moral or legal violations."; Gerlach 2010, p. 6: "Genocide is an action-oriented model designed for moral condemnation, prevention, intervention or punishment. In other words, genocide is a normative, action-oriented concept made for the political struggle, but in order to be operational it leads to simplification, with a focus on government policies."; Hollander 2012, pp. 149–189: "... genocide has become the yardstick, the gold standard for identifying and measuring political evil in our times. The label 'genocide' confers moral distinction on its victims and indisputable condemnation on its perpetrators."
  3. ^ Schabas 2000, pp. 9, 92, 227.
  4. ^ Straus 2022, pp. 223, 240.
  5. ^ Rugira 2022.
  6. ^ a b Gangopadhyay 2016, p. 510.
  7. ^ Kakar 1995, pp. 213–214.
  8. ^ Chalk & Jonassohn 1990.
  9. ^ Staub 1989, p. 8.
  10. ^ Gellately & Kiernan 2003, p. 267.
  11. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2005.
  12. ^ Schabas 2009, p. 160: "Rigorous examination of the travaux fails to confirm a popular impression in the literature that the opposition to the inclusion of political genocide was some Soviet machination. The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: Lebanon, Sweden, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Egypt, Belgium, and Uruguay. The exclusion of political groups was originally promoted by a non-governmental organization, the World Jewish Congress, and it corresponded to Raphael Lemkin's vision of the nature of the crime of genocide."
  13. ^ Jones 2006, p. 3 footnote 5 cites Fein 1993, p. 26
  14. ^ Jones 2006, p. 3.
  15. ^ Chalk & Jonassohn 1990, p. 28.
  16. ^ Eski 2023, Born of violence: the Neanderthal extinction, genocide and colonization.
  17. ^ Ko 2016, pp. 3–4.
  18. ^ Boule 1920.
  19. ^ Churchill et al. 2009.
  20. ^
  21. ^ Ríos, Kivell & Lalueza-Fox 2019.
  22. ^ Vaesen 2019, p. e0225117.
  23. ^ Sullivan et al. 2017, pp. 63, 68–69.
  24. ^ Timmermann 2020, p. 106331.
  25. ^ Vankilde 2023, pp. 66–67.
  26. ^ Keeley 1996 cited in Pinker 2002, p. 74
  27. ^ Ostrovsky 2006, p. 299.
  28. ^
  29. ^ Cited in Malthus 1963, p. 24
  30. ^ Masters 2007.
  31. ^ Kant 1795.
  32. ^ Diamond 2012, pp. 145–146.
  33. ^ a b Ostrovsky 2006, p. 300.
  34. ^ Cowles et al. 2003, pp. 7–9.
  35. ^ Trimm 2022, Chapter Two "Genocide".
  36. ^ Earl 2011, pp. 23–28.
  37. ^ Dawkins 2007, p. 51.
  38. ^ a b c Jones 2006, p. 5.
  39. ^ Jones & Lower 2023, p. 112.
  40. ^ Jones 2000, pp. 189, 192.
  41. ^ Kurin 2023.
  42. ^ Kiernan 2004, p. 27.
  43. ^ Kiernan 2007, pp. 49–50.
  44. ^ Quesada-Sanz 2015, p. 10.
  45. ^ Conley & de Waal 2023, pp. 127–128.
  46. ^ Taylor 2023, pp. 278–280.
  47. ^ Courtieu 2019.
  48. ^ Jonassohn & Björnson 1998, p. 191.
  49. ^ Stubbersfield 2022, p. 8.
  50. ^ Hind 1992, pp. 147–148.
  51. ^ Kiernan 2007, p. 58.
  52. ^ Taylor 2023, pp. 315–317.
  53. ^ Taylor 2023, p. 318.
  54. ^ Quesada-Sanz 2015, p. 11.
  55. ^ Raaflaub 2021.
  56. ^ a b Heinrichs 2008, p. 208.
  57. ^ Roymans 2004.
  58. ^ Roymans 2004, p. 23.
  59. ^ Roymans 2004, p. 45.
  60. ^ Zissu & Ganor 2002.
  61. ^ Eck 1999, pp. 87–88.
  62. ^ Gambash 2023, p. 348.
  63. ^ Davies & Finkelstein 1984, p. 106.
  64. ^ Davies & Finkelstein 1984, p. 35.
  65. ^ a b Taylor 2012, p. 243: "Up until this date the Bar Kokhba documents indicate that towns, villages and ports where Jews lived were busy with industry and activity. Afterwards there is an eerie silence, and the archaeological record testifies to little Jewish presence until the Byzantine era, in En Gedi. This picture coheres with what we have already determined in Part I of this study, that the crucial date for what can only be described as genocide, and the devastation of Jews and Judaism within central Judea, was 135 CE and not, as is usually assumed, 70 CE, despite the siege of Jerusalem and the Temple's destruction"
  66. ^ Mor 2016, p. 471.
  67. ^ Totten 2004, p. 24.
  68. ^ Goodblatt 2006, p. 406.
  69. ^ Gambash 2023, p. 349.
  70. ^ Keppie 2000, pp. 228–229.
  71. ^ Lendering 2002.
  72. ^ Ben-Sasson 1976, p. 334: "In an effort to wipe out all memory of the bond between the Jews and the land, Hadrian changed the name of the province from Judaea to Syria-Palestina, a name that became common in non-Jewish literature."
  73. ^ Lewin 2005, p. 33: "It seems clear that by choosing a seemingly neutral name—one juxtaposing that of a neighboring province with the revived name of an ancient geographical entity (Palestine), already known from the writings of Herodotus—Hadrian was intending to suppress any connection between the Jewish people and that land."
  74. ^ Schäfer 2003, p. 33.
  75. ^ a b c d Hui 2023, p. 380.
  76. ^ Hui 2023, p. 379.
  77. ^ Fang et al. 648, Chapter 7: "閔躬率趙人誅諸胡羯，無貴賤男女少長皆斬之，死者二十余萬，屍諸城外，悉為野犬豺狼所食。屯據四方者，所在承閔書誅之，于時高鼻多須至有濫死者半。" ["Min Gong led the Zhao people to kill all the Hu and Jie, regardless of their status, men and women, young and old, all were beheaded, and more than 200,000 people died. Their bodies were left outside the city and were eaten by wild dogs and wolves. Those who were stationed in the four directions were executed wherever they received Min's order. At that time, there were many people with high noses and beards, and half of them were killed indiscriminately."]
  78. ^ Jacobs 2023, p. 97.
  79. ^ a b Taheri-Iraqi 1982, p. 3: "Although the word zindīq/zandik was initially, in the Sassanid Empire, applied to Manichaeans as a pejorative epithet, by the time of the Islamic Epoch its usage had broadened and was loosely applied to Gnostic Dualists, agnostics, atheists, and even to free thinkers and libertines. Eventually in the later period, even up to the present time, 'zindīq' came to be synonymous with 'irreligious'."
  80. ^ a b c d e f g Zaman 1997, pp. 63–65
  81. ^ Bowker 1997.
  82. ^ a b Glassé 2013, p. 491.
  83. ^ Caldwell Ames 2015, p. 88.
  84. ^ Potter & Chuipka 2010.
  85. ^ Viegas 2010.
  86. ^
    • Lewis 2023, p. 406: "The Harrying is called genocide in a single scholarly work, W. E. Kapelle's The Norman Conquest of the North (1979), but only in the opening salvo of an attention-grabbing first paragraph"
    • Kapelle 1979, p. 3
    • Rex 2004, p. 108
    • Moses 2008, pp. 5, 28
  87. ^ Lewis 2023, p. 406.
  88. ^ Lewis 2023, p. 422.
  89. ^ Irish 2023, pp. 425–426.
  90. ^ Durant 1953, pp. 730–731.
  91. ^ Irish 2023, pp. 445–446.
  92. ^ Falk 2010, p. 169.
  93. ^ Lock 2006, p. 165.
  94. ^ Strayer 1971, p. 136.
  95. ^ UNHCR 2001.
  96. ^ Lemkin 2012, p. 71.
  97. ^ Pegg 2008, p. 188.
  98. ^ Lerner 2010, p. 92.
  99. ^ Marvin 2009, pp. 801–802.
  100. ^ Jonassohn & Björnson 1998, p. 50.
  101. ^ Chalk & Jonassohn 1990, pp. 114–138.
  102. ^ Pegg 2023, pp. 474–477.
  103. ^ Jones 2006, p. 3, footnote 4.
  104. ^ Jones 2006, p. 4 note 12.
  105. ^ Kahn 1998, pp. 65–66.
  106. ^ Charny 1999, p. 48.
  107. ^ Necrometrics 2012.
  108. ^ Man 2007, pp. 116–117.
  109. ^ May 2023, p. 517.
  110. ^ May 2023, p. 518.
  111. ^ May 2023, p. 521.
  112. ^ Bartrop & Totten 2007, p. 422.
  113. ^ Rubinstein 2004, p. 28.
  114. ^ Saksena 1992, p. 418.
  115. ^ Jackson 2003, p. 174.
  116. ^ Aquil 2023, pp. 560–561.
  117. ^ Adhikari 2017, pp. 2–7.
  118. ^ Adhikari 2019, pp. 31–60.
  119. ^ Adhikari 2022, pp. 1–32.
  120. ^ a b c Conversi 2010.
  121. ^ a b c Tostado 2023, p. 600.
  122. ^ Adhikari 2017, pp. 20–23.
  123. ^ Adhikari 2017, p. 1.
  124. ^ Adhikari 2017, pp. 2–3.
  125. ^ Blench 2021.

Sources

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
See also: Bibliography of genocide studies
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Genocides_in_history_(before_1490)&oldid=1300128814"