# data[].attributes.body
10,000 B.C.

Mesopotamia, between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers in what is now southern Iraq and The Middle East

The Neolithic Revolution was the critical transition that resulted in the birth of agriculture, taking Homo sapiens from scattered groups of hunter-gatherers to farming villages and from there to technologically sophisticated societies with great temples and towers.

https://www2.nau.edu/~gaud/bio301/content/neolth.htm#:~:text=The%20Neolithic%20Revolution%20was%20the,directed%20the%20labor%20of%20their

# data[].attributes.headline
The Battle of Thermopylae ends in defeat for the Greeks

# data[].attributes.subject
The Battle of Thermopylae ends in defeat for the Greeks

# data[].attributes.body
480 BCE

Southern Greece and Thermopylae

The battle itself had shown that even when heavily outnumbered, the Greeks could put up an effective fight against the Persians, and the defeat at Thermopylae had turned Leonidas and the men under his command into martyrs. That boosted the morale of all Greek soldiers in the second Persian invasion.

The Persian victory at Thermopylae allowed for Xerxes' passage into southern Greece, which expanded the Persian empire even more.

https://www.britannica.com/event/Battle-of-Thermopylae-Greek-history-480-BC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Battle of Thermopylae | Date, Location, and Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Battle of Thermopylae, (480 bce), battle in central Greece at the mountain pass of Thermopylae during the Persian Wars. The Greek forces, mostly Spartan, were led by Leonidas. After three days of holding their own against the Persian king Xerxes I and his vast southward-advancing army, the Greeks w…

# data[].attributes.body
The Year of 610

Asia, Africa, and Europe

Islam is the second-largest religion in the world after Christianity, with about 1.8 billion Muslims worldwide. As one of the three Abrahamic religions the others being Judaism and Christianity it too is a monotheistic faith that worships one god, called Allah.

https://www.history.com/topics/religion/islam

# data[].attributes.body
The Year of 718

Islam, Spain, Portugal

Spain gained its Catholic unity, but at a high price. More than 150,000 Muslims and Jews left Spain, and many of them were skilled, capable, and educated people who made significant contributions to the Spanish economy and culture. Of course, all of this would never have happened without the Reconquista.

Reconquista: How the Christian Kingdoms Took Spain from ...

TheCollector

https://www.thecollector.com › reconquista-christian-rec...

# data[].attributes.body
960

It Impacted China first the the entire World

The invention of gunpowder was and is a significant event in human history as it has shaped the styles of warfare at the time while resulting in massive political and cultural change in Europe and beyond such as the eventual collapse of feudalism and the Siege of Constantinople.

The long-term consequence of the gunpowder revolution was to increase both the incentive and the capacity for commanders to deploy larger forces on the battlefield.

http://www.highburygrove.cola.org.uk/filedownload/0ED55BF6-BEED-13C7-7E498D90322F0F65.pdf/yusuf-epc.pdf#:~:text=The%20invention%20of%20gunpowder%20was,and%20the%20Siege%20of%20Constantinople.

# data[].attributes.body
August 15, 1096

France, Denmark, and Sweden

The movement helped both to militarize the medieval western Church and to sustain criticism of that militarization. It arguably helped solidify the pope's control over the Church and made certain financial innovations central to Church operations. And it both reflected and influenced devotional trends. The capture of Jerusalem and the formation of various Crusader states

https://www.history.com/

# data[].attributes.body
1436

Renaissance Europe

The printing press revolutionized society by standardizing language, spreading ideas, increasing literacy, and growing the printing industry. The printing press was first developed in Europe by Johannes Gutenberg. It improved upon moveable type printing that had become available in Europe in the 15th century.

https://study.com/academy/lesson/the-printing-press-impact-on-the-english-language.html#:~:text=The%20printing%20press%20revolutionized%20society,Europe%20in%20the%2015th%20century.

# data[].attributes.body
November 1, 1478

Spain and Europe

Spain gained its Catholic unity, but at a high price. More than 150,000 Muslims and Jews left Spain, and many of them were skilled, capable, and educated people who made significant contributions to the Spanish economy and culture. Of course, all of this would never have happened without the Reconquista.

https://www.history.com/

# data[].attributes.body
1492

America/13 Colonies, Bahamas, Europe

Columbus thereby initiated an era of exploration, subjugation, and colonization that lasted for centuries. The explorer has been accused by many historians of initiating the genocide of Hispaniola's indigenous Arawak population, and he is also considered by some to be the originator of the transatlantic slave trade.

https://www.haiti.org/columbus-525-an-exploration-of-christopher-columbuss-impact-on-the-atlantic-world/#:~:text=Columbus%20thereby%20initiated%20an%20era,of%20the%20transatlantic%20slave%20trade.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Columbus 525: An Exploration of Christopher Columbus's Impact on the Atlantic World

Five hundred and twenty-five years ago, Christopher Columbus, under the patronage of the Spanish Crown, embarked on a journey to find a western route to Asia. On December 5, 1492, Columbus and his crew landed on an island that he named La Isla Española, "The Spanish Island," which was eventually anglicized to Hispaniola. Haiti now occupies the western third of the island, and the remaining eastern two-thirds of the island make up the Dominican Republic.

In Hispaniola, Columbus established Spain's first colony in the New World. As a result, he is the European explorer who is generally credited with originating and chronicling sea routes to the Western Hemisphere. During the early colonial period, Hispaniola's key location on the northern edge of the Caribbean Sea made the colony the logistical base for Spain's conquest of most of the Western Hemisphere. Columbus thereby initiated an era of exploration, subjugation, and colonization that lasted for centuries. The explorer has been accused by many historians of initiating the genocide of Hispaniola's indigenous Arawak population, and he is also considered by some to be the originator of the transatlantic slave trade.

On December 5, 2017, exactly 525 years after Columbus's arrival to Haiti, the Embassy of Haiti in Washington, DC hosted a panel discussion to explore how Columbus's actions significantly impacted the Atlantic world and contributed to the current configuration of the Western world. The panel featured the following distinguished scholars and authors: Mr. Hervé Fanini-Lemoine, Writer & Editor of Kiskeya Publishing Company; Dr. Jessica Krug, Assistant Professor of History at The George Washington University; Dr. Kay Wright Lewis, Assistant Professor of History at Howard University; Dr. Adam Rothman, Professor of History at Georgetown University; and Dr. Julia Young, Associate Professor of History at The Catholic University of America.

Mr. Hervé Fanini-Lemoine was the first panelist to speak, and he provided a general overview of Columbus's impact on the Atlantic World in terms of exploration, colonization, slavery, and revolution. According to Fanini-Lemoine, "Although 1492 was a bloodshed circa in human history, Western Europe largely profited for the next three centuries. It projected its trade, power, and influence across much of the globe. The endless wars of Europe were then fought in the Atlantic which became both a highway and a battlefield as western powers contested the space between the Old and New Worlds."

Afterwards, Dr. Young presented on the migration of Columbus and the Europeans that followed him to the Americas, and how it had enormous and devastating consequences that still shape our world today. In her presentation, Dr. Young examined the matter through two themes: environment and religion. In focusing on these two topics, Dr. Young highlighted the fact that not only did the arrival of Columbus cause significant changes to the New World, but also that the New World changed Europe/Europeans as well. With regard to the environment, Dr. Young shared that Columbus's arrival set off what is commonly known as the "Columbian Exchange": the exchange of plants, animals, and pathogens that occurred when mass migration from the Eastern to Western hemisphere began immediately after 1492. According to Dr. Young, "All of the Columbian exchange had devastating consequences for the New World; none more than disease. It is estimated that 75-95% of native populations died of disease." With regard to religion, Dr. Young explicated how Columbus and subsequent Spaniards imposed their religious beliefs on native peoples, as well as on enslaved Africans. She concluded her presentation by reflecting on how the so-called "Spiritual Conquest" ultimately created a Catholic population in the Americas, with a Latin American pope and 425 million Catholics in the region (approximately 40 percent of the total global Catholic population).

Dr. Lewis's presentation followed thereafter, and it dealt with violence in the Atlantic World, particularly in regard to the genocide of indigenous populations, the transatlantic slave trade, and the Haitian Revolution. In her presentation, Dr. Lewis provided a historical overview of the legacy and use of violence in the colonization of the Atlantic World. According to Dr. Lewis, "violence was an essential part of the history of those people perceived to be different, perceived to be enslaveable, or just in the way. Violence facilitated the colonization of the Atlantic World, not just in Columbus's time, but rather throughout the process of Empire building."

Afterwards, Dr. Jessica Krug delivered her presentation, which dealt with fugitive and maroon politics in the Atlantic World. She took the public on journey spanning five decades of transatlantic history, from the 16th century to the 21st century. Dr. Krug explored the relationship between seminal fugitive/resistance leaders and the gendered politics of authority and state in West Africa, the Dominican Republic, and Haiti from 1492 to the present.

Dr. Adam Rothman was the last panelist to speak, and he explored Columbus's pervasiveness in the landscape of memory. As a first example of this point, Dr. Rothman pointed out that "we are all gathered here in the District of Columbia, which is, after all, named after Christopher Columbus." He explained that "during the Age of Revolution in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, many newly independent countries took Columbus as a symbol of America and their new nations, which were represented by the figure of 'Columbia'." Dr. Rothman went on to share that he received his PhD in History from Columbia University, and that he lives in the Columbia Heights area of D.C. He also mentioned a painting by Constantino Brumidi from the 1870s called "Columbus and the Indian Maiden," which hangs in the Senate wing of the U.S. Capitol. To conclude, Dr. Rothman revealed the fact that the fountain that stands outside Washington, DC's Union Station is actually named the Christopher Columbus Memorial Fountain, much to the surprise of the guests.

Following these informative and edifying presentations, a Q&A session followed during which the public had the opportunity to ask the panelists several questions. One of the questions pertained to whether or not the multitude of monuments erected in honor of Columbus would eventually be subjected to removal. The guests proved to be keenly interested in the subject matter, and continued to debate among themselves regarding this question and others long after the panel's conclusion.

You may click here to view additional photos from the evening.

Acknowledgements:
Samira Rashid, Photography
Nellie Goen, Floral arrangements
Marie Michel Bakery, Catering

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Columbus 525: An Exploration of Christopher Columbus's Impact on the Atlantic World

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Columbus 525: An Exploration of Christopher Columbus's Impact on the Atlantic World Five hundred and twenty-five years ago, Christopher Columbus, under the patronage of the Spanish Crown, embarked on a...

# data[].attributes.body
1760

Europe and North America

The Industrial Revolution changed how people worked, the technologies available to them, and in turn where they lived. It made life comfortable for many though living conditions for workers remained abhorrent, which eventually fueled the rise of labor unions that led to improved working conditions and fair wages.

https://www.investopedia.com › terms › industrial-r

# data[].attributes.body
1907

U.S. and Everywhere around The World

Plastics help us protect the environment by reducing waste, lowering greenhouse gas emissions, and saving energy at home, at work, and on the road.

Every day, the equivalent of 2,000 garbage trucks full of plastic are dumped into the world's oceans, rivers, and lakes. Plastic pollution is a global problem. Every year 19-23 million tonnes of plastic waste leaks into aquatic ecosystems, polluting lakes, rivers and seas.

https://www.unep.org/plastic-pollution#:~:text=Every%20day%2C%20the%20equivalent%20of,polluting%20lakes%2C%20rivers%20and%20seas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Every day, the equivalent of 2,000 garbage trucks full of plastic are dumped into the world's oceans, rivers, and lakes.

Plastic pollution is a global problem. Every year 19-23 million tonnes of plastic waste leaks into aquatic ecosystems, polluting lakes, rivers and seas.

Plastic pollution can alter habitats and natural processes, reducing ecosystems' ability to adapt to climate change, directly affecting millions of people's livelihoods, food production capabilities and social well-being.

UNEP's body of work demonstrates that the problem of plastic pollution doesn't exist in a vacuum. The environmental, social, economic and health risks of plastics need to be assessed alongside other environmental stressors, like climate change, ecosystem degradation and resource use.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Every day, the equivalent of 2,000 garbage trucks full of plastic are dumped into the world's oceans, rivers, and lakes. Plastic pollution is a global problem. Every year 19-23 million tonnes of plastic waste leaks into aquatic ecosystems, polluting lakes, rivers and seas.

# data[].attributes.body
January 1916

Israel and Palestine, Jordan and southern Iraq

The agreement led to the division of Turkish-held Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine into various French- and British-administered areas. Negotiations were begun in November 1916, and the final agreement took its name from the chief negotiators from Britain and France, Sir Mark Sykes and François Georges-Picot.

Sykes-Picot Agreement | Map, History, & Facts | Britannica

# data[].attributes.body
1916

Germany and France

A more professional and effective army emerged from the battle. And the tactics developed there, including the use of tanks and creeping barrages, laid some of the foundations of the Allies' successes in 1918.

Although the British Army suffered heavy casualties for relatively little territorial gain on the Somme, the battle has increasingly been seen as important in providing experience that later contributed to victory on the Western Front.

https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/5-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-battle-of-the-somme#:~:text=The%20British%20Army%20gained%20valuable%20experience&text=Although%20the%20British%20Army%20suffered,victory%20on%20the%20Western%20Front.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At 7:30 a.m. on the 1st of July 1916, whistles rang out across Allied lines near the River Somme in Northern France. Thousands of men clambered out of their trenches and slowly began to advance towards German lines. Allied artillery had been pounding the German defences for a week hoping to cut their barbed wire, destroy their dugouts, and provide a long-awaited breakthrough on the western front. But there was a problem. The Germans were dug in deep and many of the British shells were either duds which failed to explode or shrapnel shells which did little to no damage. Allied soldiers anticipated limited resistance, but when the barrage lifted German machine gunners emerged from their intact shelters and mowed down the oncoming British infantry in their thousands.

That first day of the Battle of the Somme was the bloodiest day in British military history with over 57,000 casualties. For many people the story of the Somme ends there with unmitigated disaster, but the battle was by no means over. Britain would go on to take another 360,000 casualties the French over 200,000 and the Germans over 500,000 in a fight which would come to define First World War. If you truly want to understand the Battle of the Somme, you need to look at the fighting beyond the first day.

Before we do that though, a reminder to subscribe to the Imperial War Museums YouTube channel for more videos just like this every two weeks.

Of course, the Battle of the Somme is not just the first of July 1916. There's 142 days of action on the Somme and the rest of the battle is not like the first day. Had it been like the first day the British army would almost ceased to have existed.

To understand the rest of the battle, we first need to understand why the battle was being fought in the first place. 1916 was set to be a big year for the Allies with planned offensives on the Western, Eastern, Italian, and Balkan fronts.

Well, initially the Somme is supposed to be a French-led campaign, so the French army under Joffre have decided to fight on the Somme because at the Somme River the British and French armies meet. Haig however wants really to fight in Flanders, but that doesn't cut any ice with the French and the French are the senior partner here so the French drive allied strategy.

But when the Germans attacked at Verdun in February the French army was sucked in to defend it which changed the allied plans.

What happens is that switches the emphasis to the Battle of Somme to be primarily a British-led offensive. Haig, he wants to attack in the middle of August because by that time he'd have trained his army. Joffre says 'No way we cannot wait for this. We need to attack by the 1st of July at the latest'. So, Haig is now fighting a major battle on ground not of his own choosing and at a time not of his own choosing.

The Somme simply had to be fought. Mainly to take pressure off the French, but also to start wearing down the German army as part of grand allied strategy. This in part explains the disaster of the first day, but more importantly, it explains why fighting continued after that point despite British unpreparedness.

The British army is just not really ready for this battle. From Haig down people lack experience. It's almost like turning a corner shop into Sainsbury's overnight. Where have you got the experience at all levels to run that organization and to make that organization function properly? You haven't, you have to learn. You have to learn on a job and unfortunately learning on the job at war fighting a major battle means you are going to take casualties unfortunately.

Remember this is not the British army of old. It's primarily made up of Kitchener's volunteers who signed up in 1914 and alongside them are troops of the Empire Australians, Canadians, New Zealanders, South Africans, Indians and West Indians all played their part on the Somme.

Australians famously at Poziers, they actually lose as many men at Poziers as they did in the Gallipoli campaign. There are also Indian cavalry. Indian cavalry make an attack and charge German machine guns near High Wood relatively successfully but there's no breakthrough. Behind the lines are men of the British West Indies Regiment. Unfortunately, not allowed to fight on the Western Front but they were doing great logistical work moving that ammunition forward for the artillery to keep the guns in action, digging trenches dugouts, forming camps for the men coming out in and out of the line, really important contribution from them as well.

So what was the situation like after the first day? Well, these were the Allied objectives on that day and this is where they actually got to after two weeks. North of the Roman road from Albert to Bapaume it had been a disaster, south of the road there had been some progress made, but the only places of real success were where the British could make use of French heavy guns and in fact below the river Somme French troops had done brilliantly, exceeding their objectives and exposing the clear differences between themselves and the green British army.

The next phase of the operation was focused south of the Roman road in an attempt to capitalize on previous half-successes. Repeated attempts to break through the German lines were made as the British took Bazentin, Longeuval and eventually Delville Wood. When that sector started to get bogged down in late August, the focus moved north of the road to the high ground around Thiepval and the heavily fortified Schwaben Redoubt. The fighting was brutal in places and the Germans did not give any ground often staying in their positions for weeks unable to be relieved. But throughout their time the British army was learning how to fight a modern war.

I mean even on the first day, 18th division, their divisional commander actually gets them to go into no man's land at night lie down in no man's stand lightly equipped and as soon as the barrage lifts at zero-hour rush across no man's land and take those German trenches. That works, they get in there and capture those trenches. They also move troops up at night and start to launch attacks at night that happens in the middle of July into August/September.

These experimentations were not army-wide. It was often divisional or core level commanders trying new things and learning on the job. Likewise, artillery tactics were also developing.

Even if you've got a lot of artillery, if you spread it over a lot of targets it's not going to crush any of your targets. So the idea is you attack a smaller portion of the line so you can group your artillery together, hit fewer targets, but it means more shells per yard of battlefield so you're hitting those positions harder and harder.

One of the most famous instances of this experimentation came on the 15th of September when tanks were used for the first time at the Battle of Flers-Courcelette.

If you want to find out more about those tanks, I've linked our video on that in the description.

Because it's a new weapon a lot of the Germans absolutely freak out on the battlefield and abandon some of their positions. The big problem is only 36 tanks get to the start lines because mechanically they're very unreliable and by the end of that day there's really none left to use in subsequent days. All of these things are tried and the British army is on a learning curve through the Somme. There are going to be more big battles, more heavy casualties, but these are the seeds of battlefield success in 1918.

As the weather deteriorated into sleet and snow the final part of the battle in October and November was an attempt to bite off a few more German positions. The village of Beaumont Hamel, an objective on the first day of the battle, was finally taken in mid-November bringing the fight to a close. The British army had advanced a maximum of seven miles, but they'd learned a lot in that time and they had taken an important chunk out of the German army.

If you look at the German casualties alongside Verdun the Germans lose about 1,500,000 men in 1916. And in fact, if we look at what the Germans do in 1917, firstly they retreat to the Hindenburg Line because they just don't have the manpower left now really to hold the front line securely, the other thing they do of course is they go for unrestricted submarine warfare. The reason they risk doing that and potentially risk bringing America into the war is they cannot take another Somme battle and both Hindenburg and Ludendorff say we are doing this to prevent more Somme fighting, so the Somme is the key thing in the German army.

For the Allies though the heavy casualties did take their toll back home. Many towns and villages were forever changed as so-called 'Pals battalions', made up of people from the same area or profession, concentrated the losses in particular areas.

So, some of these towns are absolutely decimated by the Somme, almost everybody knows somebody if they haven't had a casualty themselves, they know somebody who has and it's normally somebody they personally know. They don't recruit Pals battalions after this it's just not worth it really.

Despite those casualties though, on the first day and beyond, the British soldiers and the British people remained entirely behind the war effort. This was in part thanks to propaganda films like the Battle of the Somme, a feature-length documentary shot within the trenches.

The Battle of Somme film was released really within weeks of the battle starting and it's seen by millions of people in Britain and people flock to this because it's their first chance to see something of what it is like to be a soldier on the Western Front. And of course that film the Battle of the Somme is one of the gems of the IWM collection.

Since then though the British public has started to have a different view of the events on the Somme. For many people it's an example of the so-called 'lions led by donkeys', generals who didn't care about the deaths of their own men. Although the horrendous losses on the first day of the Somme have never been surpassed, since the 1970s academics have started to form a different view of the battle.

Okay, we don't have a successful decisive breakthrough as Haig was hoping but unfortunately, if you want to defeat the main enemy in the main theatre of war you have to wear down his ability to fight. That means both sides are going to take heavy casualties. We've just got this fixation with that first day and those 57,000 casualties and we really need to look at the other 141 days of this battle which will lead, ultimately, to Allied victory in 1918.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Things You Need To Know About The Battle Of The Somme

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Battle of the Somme was one of the most bitterly contested and costly battles of the First World War, lasting nearly five months. Despite this, it is often the first day of the battle that is most remembered.

# data[].attributes.body
1919

Germany and France

The Treaty of Versailles is one of the most controversial armistice treaties in history. The treaty's so-called “war guilt” clause forced Germany and other Central Powers to take all the blame for World War I. This meant a loss of territories, reduction in military forces, and reparation payments to Allied powers.

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/treaty-versailles-ends-wwi/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On June 28, 1919, the Treaty of Versailles was signed at the Palace of Versailles outside Paris, France.

Subjects

Social Studies, U.S. History, World History

On June 28, 1919, the Treaty of Versailles was signed at the Palace of Versailles outside Paris, France. The treaty was one of several that officially ended five years of conflict known as the Great War-World War I. The Treaty of Versailles outlined the conditions of peace between Germany and the victorious Allies, led by the United States, France, and the United Kingdom. Other Central Powers (significantly, Austria-Hungary) signed different treaties with the Allies.

The Treaty of Versailles is one of the most controversial armistice treaties in history. The treaty's so-called "war guilt" clause forced Germany and other Central Powers to take all the blame for World War I. This meant a loss of territories, reduction in military forces, and reparation payments to Allied powers.

Some historians think the Treaty of Versailles was, in the words of British economist John Maynard Keynes, "one of the most serious acts of political unwisdom for which our statesmen have ever been responsible." They say it contributed to German economic and political instability that allowed for the formation of the National Socialists (Nazis) just a year later.

Other historians note that the Treaty of Versailles was actually very restrained-Germany and other Central Powers were not occupied by Allied forces after the war. However, it would take Germany several decades to pay off their reparations. The treaty was also much more lenient than the armistice treaty (the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk) Germany forced on Russia when that nation negotiated an exit from the war a year earlier.

Media Credits

The audio, illustrations, photos, and videos are credited beneath the media asset, except for promotional images, which generally link to another page that contains the media credit. The Rights Holder for media is the person or group credited.

Editor

National Geographic Society

Producer

Mary Crooks, National Geographic Society

other

Last Updated

October 19, 2023

For information on user permissions, please read our Terms of Service. If you have questions about how to cite anything on our website in your project or classroom presentation, please contact your teacher. They will best know the preferred format. When you reach out to them, you will need the page title, URL, and the date you accessed the resource.

Media

If a media asset is downloadable, a download button appears in the corner of the media viewer. If no button appears, you cannot download or save the media.

Text

Text on this page is printable and can be used according to our Terms of Service.

Interactives

Any interactives on this page can only be played while you are visiting our website. You cannot download interactives.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On June 28, 1919, the Treaty of Versailles was signed at the Palace of Versailles outside Paris, France.

# data[].attributes.body
1932

Germany and Europe

The year 1932 had seen Hitler’s meteoric rise to prominence in Germany, spurred largely by the German people’s frustration with dismal economic conditions and the still-festering wounds inflicted by defeat in the Great War and the harsh peace terms of the Versailles treaty. A charismatic speaker, Hitler channeled popular discontent with the post-war Weimar government into support for his fledgling Nazi party. In an election held in July 1932, the Nazis won 230 governmental seats; together with the Communists, the next largest party, they made up over half of the Reichstag.

www.history.com

# data[].attributes.body
1933

Germany and Europe

The Holocaust was the state-sponsored persecution and mass murder of millions of European Jews, Romani people, the intellectually disabled, political dissidents and homosexuals by the German Nazi regime between 1933 and 1945. The word “holocaust,” from the Greek words “holos” (whole) and “kaustos” (burned), was historically used to describe a sacrificial offering burned on an altar.

After years of Nazi rule in Germany, dictator Adolf Hitler’s “Final Solution”—now known as the Holocaust—came to fruition during World War II, with mass killing centers in concentration camps. About six million Jews and some five million others, targeted for racial, political, ideological and behavioral reasons, died in the Holocaust—more than one million of those who perished were children.

https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/the-holocaust

# data[].attributes.body
1944

Normandy

Despite their success, some 4,000 Allied troops were killed by German soldiers defending the beaches. At the time, the D-Day invasion was the largest naval, air and land operation in history, and within a few days about 326,000 troops, more than 50,000 vehicles and some 100,000 tons of equipment had landed. By August 1944, all of northern France had been liberated, and in spring of 1945 the Allies had defeated the Germans. Historians often refer to D-Day as the beginning of the end of World War II.

https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/d-day

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
D-Day - Normandy Invasion, Facts & Significance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Codenamed Operation Overlord, the invasion began on June 6, 1944, also known as D-Day, when some 156,000 American, British and Canadian forces landed on five beaches along the heavily fortified coast of France’s Normandy region during World War II. The operation was one of the largest amphibious mil…

# data[].attributes.body
1945

Japan (Nagasaki)

After the bombing of Hiroshima on August 6, workers on Tinian island labored intensely to put the finishing touches on the Fat Man bomb and prepare it for use. This was a plutonium implosion device of far greater complexity than the Little Boy bomb used at Hiroshima, which used uranium-235 in a fairly conventional explosive mechanism. The scientists and ordnance experts at Los Alamos had agonized for years over how to use plutonium in an atomic weapon, and Fat Man was the result.

Still, the impact was devastating, particularly because people had heard the all-clear after an earlier aircraft raid warning, and had left their shelters. Everything within a mile of ground zero was annihilated. Fourteen thousand homes burst into flames. People close to the blast were vaporized; those unlucky enough to be just outside that radius received horrific burns and, there and further out, radiation poisoning that would eventually kill them. Although estimates vary, perhaps 40,000 people were killed by the initial detonation. By the beginning of 1946, 30,000 more people were dead. And within the next five years, well over 100,000 deaths were directly attributable to the bombing of Nagasaki on August 9, 1945.

https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/bombing-nagasaki-august-9-1945

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Target Committee appointed by President Harry Truman to decide which Japanese cities would receive the Little Boy and Fat Man atomic bombings did not place Nagasaki among their top two choices. Instead they identified Kokura as the second target after Hiroshima. In Kokura, a city of 130,000 people on the island of Kyushu, the Japanese operated one of their biggest ordnance factories, manufacturing among other things chemical weapons. The Americans knew all this, but strangely had not targeted the city yet in their conventional bombing campaign. That was one of the reasons the Target Committee thought it would be a good option after Hiroshima.

The third choice, Nagasaki was a port city located about 100 miles from Kokura. It was larger, with an approximate population of 263,000 people, and some major military facilities, including two Mitsubishi military factories. Nagasaki also was an important port city. Like Kokura and Hiroshima, it had not suffered much thus far from American conventional bombing.

After the bombing of Hiroshima on August 6, workers on Tinian island labored intensely to put the finishing touches on the Fat Man bomb and prepare it for use. This was a plutonium implosion device of far greater complexity than the Little Boy bomb used at Hiroshima, which used uranium-235 in a fairly conventional explosive mechanism. The scientists and ordnance experts at Los Alamos had agonized for years over how to use plutonium in an atomic weapon, and Fat Man was the result.

The decision to use Fat Man just days after the explosion of Little Boy at Hiroshima was based on two calculations: the always-changeable Japanese weather-the appearance of a typhoon or other major weather event could force deployment to be postponed for weeks-and the belief that two bombings following in quick succession would convince the Japanese that the Americans had plenty of atomic devices and were ready to keep using them until Japan finally surrendered. Reports of approaching bad weather convinced the Americans to drop the next bomb on August 9.

A B-29 named Bock's Car took off from Tinian at 3:47 that morning. In its belly was Fat Man, and the atomic bomb was already armed. Major Charles W. Sweeney flew the plane while its namesake, Captain Fredrick C. Bock, piloted Sweeney's usual mount christened "The Great Artiste." The two men had switched aircraft as "The Great Artiste" held the sensitive measuring equipment used to monitor the atomic event. The Enola Gay took part in the mission, flying weather reconnaissance.

Over Kokura, clouds and smoke from nearby bombing raids obscured visibility. The Americans could see parts of the city, but they could not site directly on the city arsenal that was their target. Sweeney flew overhead until Japanese antiaircraft fire and fighters made things "a little hairy," and it was obvious that sighting would be impossible. He then headed for his secondary target: Nagasaki. In Kokura, meanwhile, civilians who had taken shelter after the air raid signal heard the all-clear, emerged, and breathed sighs of relief. None of them knew then, of course, how close they had come to dying.

Clouds also obscured visibility over Nagasaki, and Maj. Sweeney, running out of fuel, prepared to turn back toward Okinawa. At the last second a hole opened in the clouds, however, and Bombardier Capt. Kermit K. Beahan announced that he could see his target. And so Fat Man began its journey, detonating over Nagasaki at 11:02 a.m. local time.

Fat Man detonated at an altitude of 1,650 feet over Nagasaki with a yield of 21 kilotons, about 40 percent more powerful than Little Boy had been. It did so almost directly above the Mitsubishi factories that were the city's primary targets, rather than over the residential and business districts further south. Tens of thousands of civilians, especially children, had already been evacuated from the city. The series of hills bracing Nagasaki also somewhat confined the initial blast and restricted the damage.

Still, the impact was devastating, particularly because people had heard the all-clear after an earlier aircraft raid warning, and had left their shelters. Everything within a mile of ground zero was annihilated. Fourteen thousand homes burst into flames. People close to the blast were vaporized; those unlucky enough to be just outside that radius received horrific burns and, there and further out, radiation poisoning that would eventually kill them. Although estimates vary, perhaps 40,000 people were killed by the initial detonation. By the beginning of 1946, 30,000 more people were dead. And within the next five years, well over 100,000 deaths were directly attributable to the bombing of Nagasaki on August 9, 1945.

This article is part of an ongoing series commemorating the 75th anniversary of the end of World War II made possible by Bank of America.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Bombing of Nagasaki, August 9, 1945 | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Target Committee appointed by President Harry Truman to decide which Japanese cities would receive the Little Boy and Fat Man atomic bombings did not place Nagasaki among their top two choices. Instead they identified Kokura as the second target after Hiroshima.

# data[].attributes.body
1948

Egypt, Iraq and Syria

The Jews were to possess more than half of Palestine, although they made up less than half of Palestine’s population. The Palestinian Arabs, aided by volunteers from other countries, fought the Zionist forces, but by May 14, 1948, the Jews had secured full control of their U.N.-allocated share of Palestine and also some Arab territory. On May 14, Britain withdrew with the expiration of its mandate, and the State of Israel was proclaimed. The next day, forces from Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq invaded.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/state-of-israel-proclaimed

# data[].attributes.body
1966

Asia, Latin America, and Africa

The revolution facilitated the creation of high-yielding crop varieties to solve the food problem. The initiative sparked significant improvements in rice and wheat production. Farmers could further raise their yields by using biochemicals and synthetic fertilizers.After the green revolution, the production of cereal crops tripled with only a 30% increase in the land area cultivated. This came true all over the world, with a few exceptions. In addition, there were significant impacts on poverty reduction and lower food prices.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7611098/#:~:text=After%20the%20green%20revolution%2C%20the,reduction%20and%20lower%20food%20prices.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
After World War II, newly implemented agricultural technologies, including pesticides and fertilizers as well as new breeds of high yield crops, greatly increased food production in certain regions of the Global South.

The Green Revolution, or the Third Agricultural Revolution, was a period of technology transfer initiatives that saw greatly increased crop yields. These changes in agriculture began in developed countries in the early 20th century and spread globally until the late 1980s. In the late 1960s, farmers began incorporating new technologies such as high-yielding varieties of cereals, particularly dwarf wheat and rice, and the widespread use of chemical fertilizers (to produce their high yields, the new seeds require far more fertilizer than traditional varieties), pesticides, and controlled irrigation.

At the same time, newer methods of cultivation, including mechanization, were adopted, often as a package of practices to replace traditional agricultural technology. This was often in conjunction with loans conditional on policy changes being made by the developing nations adopting them, such as privatizing fertilizer manufacture and distribution.

Both the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation were heavily involved in its initial development in Mexico. A key leader was agricultural scientist Norman Borlaug, the "Father of the Green Revolution", who received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970. He is credited with saving over a billion people from starvation. Another important scientific figure was Yuan Longping, whose work on hybrid rice varieties is credited with saving at least as many lives. Similarly, MS Swaminathan is known as the Father of Green Revolution in India. The basic approach was the development of high-yielding varieties of cereal grains, expansion of irrigation infrastructure, modernization of management techniques, distribution of hybridized seeds, synthetic fertilizers, and pesticides to farmers. As crops began to reach the maximum improvement possible through selective breeding, genetic modification technologies were developed to allow for continued efforts.

Studies show that the Green Revolution contributed to widespread eradication of poverty, averted hunger for millions, raised incomes, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, reduced land use for agriculture, and contributed to declines in infant mortality.

The term "Green Revolution" was first used by William S. Gaud, the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), in a speech on 8 March 1968. He noted the spread of the new technologies as:

These and other developments in the field of agriculture contain the makings of a new revolution. It is not a violent Red Revolution like that of the Soviets, nor is it a White Revolution like that of the Shah of Iran. I call it the Green Revolution.

Mexico has been called the 'birthplace' and 'burial ground' of the Green Revolution. It began with great promise and it has been argued that "during the twentieth century two 'revolutions' transformed rural Mexico: the Mexican Revolution (1910-1920) and the Green Revolution (1940-1970)."

The genesis of the Green Revolution was a lengthy visit in 1940 by U.S. Vice President-elect Henry A. Wallace, who had served as U.S. Secretary of Agriculture during President Franklin Roosevelt's first two terms, and before government service, had founded a company, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, that had revolutionized the hybridization of seed corn to greatly increase crop yields. He became appalled at the meager corn yields in Mexico, where 80 percent of the people lived off the land, and a Mexican farmer had to work as much as 500 hours to produce a single bushel of corn, about 50 times longer than the typical Iowa farmer planting hybrid seed. Wallace persuaded the Rockefeller Foundation to fund an agricultural station in Mexico to hybridize corn and wheat for arid climates, and to lead it, he hired a young Iowa agronomist named Norman Borlaug.

The project was supported by the Mexican government under new President Manuel Ávila Camacho, and the U.S. government, the United Nations, and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). For the U.S. government, its neighbor Mexico was an important experimental case in the use of technology and scientific expertise in agriculture that became the model for international agricultural development. Mexico sought to transform agricultural productivity, particularly with irrigated rather than dry-land cultivation in its northwest, to solve its problem of lack of food self-sufficiency. In the center and south of Mexico, where large-scale production faced challenges, agricultural production languished. Increased production promised food self-sufficiency in Mexico to feed its growing and urbanizing population with the increase in a number of calories consumed per Mexican. The science of hybridization was seen as a valuable way to feed the poor and would relieve some pressure of the land redistribution process. In general, the success of "Green Revolution" depended on the use of machinery for cultivation and harvest, on large-scale agricultural enterprises with access to credit (often from foreign investors), government-supported infrastructure projects, and access to low-wage agricultural workers.

Within eight years of Wallace's visit, Mexico had no need to import food, for the first time since 1910; within 20 years, corn production had tripled, and wheat production had increased five-fold. In 1943, Mexico imported half of its wheat requirements, however by 1956 it had become self-sufficient and it was exporting half a million tons of wheat by 1964. Within 30 years, Borlaug was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for ultimately saving two billion people from starvation.

Mexico was the recipient of knowledge and technology of the Green Revolution, and it was an active participant with financial supports from the government for agriculture and Mexican agronomists. In the aftermath of the Mexican Revolution, the government had redistributed land to ejidatarios in some parts of the country which had broken the back of the hacienda system. During the presidency of Lázaro Cárdenas (1934-1940), land reform in Mexico reached its apex in the center and south of Mexico. Agricultural productivity had fallen significantly by the 1940s.

After Borlaug's agricultural station was established, in 1941, a team of U.S. scientists, Richard Bradfield (Cornell University), Paul C. Mangelsdorf (Harvard University), and Elvin Charles Stakman (under whom Borlaug had studied at the University of Minnesota) surveyed Mexican agriculture to recommend policies and practices. In 1943, the Mexican government founded the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), which became a base for international agricultural research.

Locations of Norman Borlaug's research stations in the Yaqui Valley and Chapingo.

Agriculture in Mexico had been a sociopolitical issue, a key factor in some regions' participation in the Mexican Revolution. It was also a technical issue enabled by a cohort of trained agronomists who advised ejidatarios on how to increase productivity. In the post-World War II era, the government sought development in agriculture that bettered technological aspects of agriculture in regions not dominated by small-scale ejido cultivators. This drive for agricultural transformation brought Mexico self-sufficiency in food, and in the political sphere during the Cold War, helped stem unrest and the appeal of Communism.

The Mexican government created the Mexican Agricultural Program (MAP) to be the lead organization in raising productivity. Mexico became the showcase for extending the Green Revolution to other areas of Latin America and beyond, into Africa and Asia. New breeds of maize, beans, and wheat produced bumper crops with additional inputs (such as fertilizer and pesticides) and careful cultivation. Many Mexican farmers who had been dubious about the scientists or hostile to them (often a mutual relationship of discord) came to see the scientific approach to agriculture as worth adopting.

The requirements for the full package of inputs of new strains of seeds, fertilizer, synthetic pesticides, and water were often not within the reach of small-scale farmers. The application of pesticides could be hazardous for farmers. Their use often damaged the local ecology, contaminating waterways and endangering the health of workers and newborns.

One of the participants in the Mexican experiment, Edwin J. Wellhausen, summarized the factors leading to its initial success. These include: high yield plants without disease resistivity, adaptability, and ability to use fertilizers; improved use of soils, adequate fertilizers, and control of weeds and pests; and "a favorable ratio between the cost of fertilizers (and other investments) to the price of the produce."

In 1960 during the administration of President Carlos P. Garcia the Government of the Republic of the Philippines with the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation established the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI). A rice crossing between Dee-Geo-woo-gen and Peta was done at IRRI in 1962. In 1966, one of the breeding lines became a new cultivar: IR8 rice. The administration of President Ferdinand Marcos made the promotion of IR8 the lynchpin of the Masagana 99 program, along with a credit program. The new variety required the use of fertilizers and pesticides but produced substantially higher yields than the traditional cultivars. Annual rice production in the Philippines increased from 3.7 to 7.7 million tons in two decades. The switch to IR8 rice made the Philippines a rice exporter for the first time in the 20th century, though imports still exceeded exports, according to data from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. From 1966 to 1986, the Philippines imported around 2,679,000 metric tons and exported only 632,000 metric tons of milled rice. By 1980, however, problems with the credit scheme rendered the loans accessible only to rich landowners while leaving poor farmers in debt. The program was also noted to have become a vehicle of political patronage.

In 1961, Norman Borlaug was invited to India by the adviser to the Indian Minister of Agriculture Dr. M. S. Swaminathan. Despite bureaucratic hurdles imposed by India's grain monopolies, the Ford Foundation and Indian government collaborated to import wheat seed from the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT). The state of Punjab was selected by the Indian government to be the first site to try the new crops because of its reliable water supply, the presence of Indus plains which make it one of the most fertile plains on earth, and a history of agricultural success. India began its own Green Revolution program of plant breeding, irrigation development, and financing of agrochemicals.

India soon adopted IR8 rice. In 1968, Indian agronomist S.K. De Datta published his findings that IR8 rice yielded about 5 tons per hectare with no fertilizer, and almost 10 tons per hectare under optimal conditions. This was 10 times the yield of traditional rice. IR8 was a success throughout Asia and dubbed the "Miracle Rice". IR8 was also developed into Semi-dwarf IR36.

In the 1960s, rice yields in India were about two tons per hectare; by the mid-1990s, they had risen to 6 tons per hectare. In the 1970s, rice cost about $550 a ton; in 2001, it cost under $200 a ton. India became one of the world's most successful rice producers, and is now a major rice exporter, shipping nearly 4.5 million tons in 2006.

China's large and increasing population meant that increasing food production, principally rice, was a top priority for the Chinese government. When the People's Republic of China was established in 1949, the Chinese Communist Party made it a priority to pursue agricultural development. They sought to solve China's food security issues by focusing on traditional crop production, biological pest control, the implementation of modern technology and science, creating food reserves for the population, high-yield seed varieties, multi-cropping, controlled irrigation, and protecting food security. This began with the Agrarian Reform Law of 1950, which ended private land ownership and gave land back to the peasants. Unlike with Mexico, the Philippines, India, or Brazil, the beginning of China's unique Green Revolution were unrelated to the American "Green Revolution." Rather, it was characterized by the government's sponsorship of agricultural research in concert with peasant knowledge and feedback, earlier international research, nature-based pest control and many other non-industrial agricultural practices, in order to feed the rapidly growing population.

Prominent in the development of productive hybrid rice was Yuan Longping, whose research hybridized wild strains of rice with existing strains. He has been dubbed "the father of hybrid rice", and was considered a national hero in China. Chinese rice production met the nation's food security needs, and today they are a leading exporter of rice. In recent years, however, extensive use of ground water for irrigation has drawn down aquifers and extensive use of fertilizers has increased greenhouse gas emissions. China has not expanded the area of cultivable land, China's unique high yields per hectare gave China the food security it sought. In 1979, there were 490 million Chinese people living in poverty. In 2014, there were only 82 million. Half of China's population had once been hungry and in poverty, but by 2014, only 6% remained so.

Brazil's agricultural revolution

Brazil's vast inland cerrado region was regarded as unfit for farming before the 1960s because the soil was too acidic and poor in nutrients, according to Norman Borlaug. However, from the 1960s, vast quantities of lime (pulverized chalk or limestone) were poured on the soil to reduce acidity. The effort went on for decades; by the late 1990s, between 14 million and 16 million tons of lime were being spread on Brazilian fields each year. The quantity rose to 25 million tons in 2003 and 2004, equaling around five tons of lime per hectare. As a result, Brazil has become the world's second biggest soybean exporter. Soybeans are also widely used in animal feed, and the large volume of soy produced in Brazil has contributed to Brazil's rise to become the biggest exporter of beef and poultry in the world. Several parallels can also be found in Argentina's boom in soybean production as well.

There have been numerous attempts to introduce the successful concepts from the Mexican and Indian projects into Africa. These programs have generally been less successful. Reasons cited include widespread corruption, insecurity, a lack of infrastructure, and a general lack of will on the part of the governments. Yet environmental factors, such as the availability of water for irrigation, the high diversity in slope and soil types in one given area are also reasons why the Green Revolution is not so successful in Africa.

A recent program in western Africa is attempting to introduce a new high yielding 'family' of rice varieties known as " New Rice for Africa" (NERICA). NERICA varieties yield about 30% more rice under normal conditions and can double yields with small amounts of fertilizer and very basic irrigation. However, the program has been beset by problems getting the rice into the hands of farmers, and to date the only success has been in Guinea, where it currently accounts for 16% of rice cultivation.

After a famine in 2001 and years of chronic hunger and poverty, in 2005 the small African country of Malawi launched the "Agricultural Input Subsidy Program" by which vouchers are given to smallholder farmers to buy subsidized nitrogen fertilizer and corn seeds. Within its first year, the program was reported to have had extreme success, producing the largest corn harvest of the country's history, enough to feed the country with tons left over. The program has advanced yearly ever since. Various sources claim that the program has been an unusual success, hailing it as a "miracle". Malawi experienced a 40% drop in corn production in 2015 and 2016.

A 2021, a randomized control trial on temporary subsidies for corn farmers in Mozambique found that adoption of Green Revolution technology led to increased yields in both the short- and long-term.

In 1970, the year that Borlaug won the Nobel Peace Prize, foundation officials proposed a worldwide network of agricultural research centers under a permanent secretariat. This was further supported and developed by the World Bank; on 19 May 1971, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) was established, co-sponsored by the FAO, IFAD, and UNDP. CGIAR has added many research centers throughout the world. CGIAR has responded, at least in part, to criticisms of Green Revolution methodologies. This began in the 1980s, and mainly was a result of pressure from donor organizations. Methods like agroecosystem analysis and farming system research have been adopted to gain a more holistic view of agriculture.

According to a 2012 review in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the existing academic literature, the Green Revolution "contributed to widespread poverty reduction, averted hunger for millions of people, and avoided the conversion of thousands of hectares of land into agricultural cultivation."

The Green Revolution spread technologies that already existed but had not been widely implemented outside industrialized nations. Two kinds of technologies were used in the Green Revolution, on the issues of cultivation and breeding. The technologies in cultivation are targeted at providing excellent growing conditions, which include modern irrigation projects, pesticides, and synthetic nitrogen fertilizer. The breeding technologies aimed at improving crop varieties developed through science-based methods including hybrids, combining modern genetics with plant-breeding trait selections.

The novel technological development of the Green Revolution was the production of novel wheat cultivars. Agronomists bred high-yielding varieties of corn, wheat, and rice. HYVs have higher nitrogen-absorbing potential than other varieties. Since cereals that absorbed extra nitrogen would typically lodge, or fall over before harvest, semi-dwarfing genes were bred into their genomes. A Japanese dwarf wheat cultivar Norin 10 developed by Japanese agronomist Gonjiro Inazuka, which was sent to Orville Vogel at Washington State University by Cecil Salmon, was instrumental in developing Green Revolution wheat cultivars. In the 1960s, with a food crisis in Asia, the spread of high-yielding variety rice greatly increased.

Dr. Norman Borlaug, the "Father of the Green Revolution", bred rust-resistant cultivars which have strong and firm stems, preventing them from falling over under extreme weather at high levels of fertilization. CIMMYT (Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo - International Center for Maize and Wheat Improvements) conducted these breeding programs and helped spread high-yielding varieties in Mexico and countries in Asia like India and Pakistan. These programs led to the doubling of harvests in these countries.

Plant scientists figured out several parameters related to the high yield and identified the related genes which control the plant height and tiller number. With advances in molecular genetics, the mutant genes responsible for Arabidopsis thaliana genes (GA 20-oxidase, ga1, ga1-3), wheat reduced-height genes ( Rht) and a rice semidwarf gene ( sd1) were cloned. These were identified as gibberellin biosynthesis genes or cellular signaling component genes. Stem growth in the mutant background is significantly reduced leading to the dwarf phenotype. Photosynthetic investment in the stem is reduced dramatically as the shorter plants are inherently more stable mechanically. Assimilates become redirected to grain production, amplifying in particular the effect of chemical fertilizers on commercial yield.

High-yielding varieties significantly outperform traditional varieties in the presence of adequate irrigation, pesticides, and fertilizers. In the absence of these inputs, traditional varieties may outperform high-yielding varieties. Therefore, several authors have challenged the apparent superiority of high-yielding varieties not only compared to the traditional varieties alone, but by contrasting the monocultural system associated with high-yielding varieties with the polycultural system associated with traditional ones.

Wheat yields in least developed countries since 1961, in kilograms per hectare.

By one 2021 estimate, the Green Revolution increased yields by 44% between 1965 and 2010. Cereal production more than doubled in developing nations between the years 1961-1985. Yields of rice, corn, and wheat increased steadily during that period. The production increases can be attributed equal to irrigation, fertilizer, and seed development, at least in the case of Asian rice.

While agricultural output increased as a result of the Green Revolution, the energy input to produce a crop has increased faster, so that the ratio of crops produced to energy input has decreased over time. Green Revolution techniques also heavily rely on agricultural machinery and chemical fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and defoliants; which, as of 2014, are derived from crude oil, making agriculture increasingly reliant on crude oil extraction.

World population 1950-2010

The energy for the Green Revolution was provided by fossil fuels in the form of fertilizers (natural gas), pesticides (oil), and hydrocarbon fueled irrigation. The development of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer has significantly supported global population growth - it has been estimated that almost half the people on the Earth are currently fed as a result of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer use. According to ICIS Fertilizers managing editor Julia Meehan, "People don't realise that 50% of the world's food relies on fertilisers."

The world population has grown by about five billion since the beginning of the Green Revolution. India saw annual wheat production rise from 10 million tons in the 1960s to 73 million in 2006. The average person in the developing world consumes roughly 25% more calories per day now than before the Green Revolution. Between 1950 and 1984, as the Green Revolution transformed agriculture around the globe, world grain production increased by 160%.

The production increases fostered by the Green Revolution are often credited with having helped to avoid widespread famine, and for feeding billions of people.

World population supported with and without synthetic nitrogen fertilizers.[92]

Some criticisms generally involve some variation of the Malthusian principle of population. Such concerns often revolve around the idea that the Green Revolution is unsustainable, and argue that humanity is now in a state of overpopulation or overshoot with regards to the sustainable carrying capacity and ecological demands on the Earth. A 2021 study found, contrary to the expectations of the Malthusian hypothesis, that the Green Revolution led to reduced population growth, rather than an increase in population growth.

Although many people die each year as a direct or indirect result of hunger and poor nutrition, Malthus's more extreme predictions have failed to materialize. In 1798 Thomas Malthus made his prediction of impending famine. The world's population had doubled by 1923 and doubled again by 1973 without fulfilling Malthus's prediction. Malthusian Paul R. Ehrlich, in his 1968 book The Population Bomb, said that "India couldn't possibly feed two hundred million more people by 1980" and "Hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs." Ehrlich's warnings failed to materialize when India became self-sustaining in cereal production in 1974 (six years later) as a result of the introduction of Norman Borlaug's dwarf wheat varieties.

However, Borlaug was well aware of the implications of population growth. In his Nobel lecture he repeatedly presented improvements in food production within a sober understanding of the context of population. "The green revolution has won a temporary success in man's war against hunger and deprivation; it has given man a breathing space. If fully implemented, the revolution can provide sufficient food for sustenance during the next three decades. But the frightening power of human reproduction must also be curbed; otherwise the success of the green revolution will be ephemeral only. Most people still fail to comprehend the magnitude and menace of the "Population Monster"...Since man is potentially a rational being, however, I am confident that within the next two decades he will recognize the self-destructive course he steers along the road of irresponsible population growth..."

M. King Hubbert's prediction of world petroleum production rates (1968 peak of USA, 2005 World conventional oil peak, 2018 all liquides including corn to oil peak). Modern agriculture is largely reliant on petroleum energy.[95]

To some modern Western sociologists and writers, increasing food production is not synonymous with increasing food security, and is only part of a larger equation. For example, Harvard professor Amartya Sen wrote that large historic famines were not caused by decreases in food supply, but by socioeconomic dynamics and a failure of public action. Economist Peter Bowbrick disputes Sen's theory, arguing that Sen relies on inconsistent arguments and contradicts available information, including sources that Sen himself cited. Bowbrick further argues that Sen's views coincide with that of the Bengal government at the time of the Bengal famine of 1943, and the policies Sen advocates failed to relieve the famine.

Some have challenged the value of the increased food production of Green Revolution agriculture. These monoculture crops are often used for export, feed for animals, or conversion into biofuel. According to Emile Frison of Bioversity International, the Green Revolution has also led to a change in dietary habits, as fewer people are affected by hunger and die from starvation, but many are affected by malnutrition such as iron or vitamin-A deficiencies. Frison further asserts that almost 60% of yearly deaths of children under age five in developing countries are related to malnutrition.

The strategies developed by the Green Revolution focused on fending off starvation and were very successful in raising overall yields of cereal grains, but did not give sufficient relevance to nutritional quality. High yield cereal crops have low quality proteins, with essential amino acid deficiencies, are high in carbohydrates, and lack balanced essential fatty acids, vitamins, minerals and other quality factors.

High-yield rice, introduced since 1964 to poverty-ridden Asian countries, such as the Philippines, was found to have inferior flavor and be more glutinous and less savory than their native varieties, causing its price to be lower than the average market value.

In the Philippines the heavy use of pesticides in rice production, in the early part of the Green Revolution, poisoned and killed off fish and weedy green vegetables that traditionally coexisted in rice paddies. These were nutritious food sources for many poor Filipino farmers prior to the introduction of pesticides, further impacting the diets of locals.

A critic of the Green Revolution, American journalist Mark Dowie argues that "the primary objective of the program was geopolitical: to provide food for the populace in undeveloped countries and so bring social stability and weaken the fomenting of communist insurgency." Citing internal Foundation documents, Dowie states that the Ford Foundation had a greater concern than Rockefeller in this area.

According to a 2021 study, the Green Revolution substantially increased income. A delay in the Green Revolution by ten years would have cost 17% of GDP per capita, whereas if the Green Revolution had never happened, it could have reduced GDP per capita in the developing world by half.

Increased use of irrigation played a major role in the green revolution.

There are varying opinions about the effect of the Green Revolution on wild biodiversity. One hypothesis speculates that by increasing production per unit of land area, agriculture will not need to expand into new, uncultivated areas to feed a growing human population. However, land degradation and soil nutrients depletion have forced farmers to clear forested areas in order to maintain production. A counter-hypothesis speculates that biodiversity was sacrificed because traditional systems of agriculture that were displaced sometimes incorporated practices to preserve wild biodiversity, and because the Green Revolution expanded agricultural development into new areas where it was once unprofitable or too arid. For example, the development of wheat varieties tolerant to acid soil conditions with high aluminium content permitted the introduction of agriculture in sensitive Brazilian ecosystems such as Cerrado semi-humid tropical savanna and Amazon rainforest in the geoeconomic macroregions of Centro-Sul and Amazônia.

The world community has clearly acknowledged the negative aspects of agricultural expansion as the 1992 Rio Treaty, signed by 189 nations, has generated numerous national Biodiversity Action Plans which assign significant biodiversity loss to agriculture's expansion into new domains.

The Green Revolution has been criticized for an agricultural model which relied on a few staple and market profitable crops, and pursuing a model which limited the biodiversity of Mexico. One of the critics against these techniques and the Green Revolution as a whole was Carl O. Sauer, a geography professor at the University of California, Berkeley. According to Sauer these techniques of plant breeding would result in negative effects on the country's resources, and the culture:

A good aggressive bunch of American agronomists and plant breeders could ruin the native resources for good and all by pushing their American commercial stocks... And Mexican agriculture cannot be pointed toward standardization on a few commercial types without upsetting native economy and culture hopelessly... Unless the Americans understand that, they'd better keep out of this country entirely. That must be approached from an appreciation of native economies as being basically sound.

Studies indicate that the Green Revolution has substantially increased emissions of the greenhouse gas CO ₂. High yield agriculture has dramatic effects on the amount of carbon cycling in the atmosphere. The way in which farms are grown, in tandem with the seasonal carbon cycling of various crops, could alter the impact carbon in the atmosphere has on global warming. Wheat, rice, and soybean crops account for a significant amount of the increase in carbon in the atmosphere over the last 50 years.

Poorly regulated applications of nitrogen fertilizer that exceed the amount used by plants, such as broadcast applications of urea, result in emissions of nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas, and in water pollution. As the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Michael Fakhri summarized in 2022, "food systems emit approximately one third of the world's greenhouse gases and contribute to the alarming decline in the number of animal and plant species. Intensive industrial agriculture and export-oriented food policies have driven much of this damage. Ever since governments started adopting the Green Revolution in the 1950s, the world's food systems have been increasingly designed along industrial models, the idea being that, if people are able to purchase industrial inputs, then they can produce a large amount of food. Productivity was not measured in terms of human and environmental health, but exclusively in terms of commodity output and economic growth. This same system disrupted carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus cycles because it requires farmers to depend on fossil fuel- based machines and chemical inputs, displacing long-standing regenerative and integrated farming practices." The IPCC's synthesis of recent findings states similarly "intensive agriculture during the second half of the 20th century led to soil degradation and loss of natural resources and contributed to climate change." They further specify, "while the Green Revolution technologies substantially increased the yield of few crops and allowed countries to reduce hunger, they also resulted in inappropriate and excessive use of agrochemicals, inefficient water use, loss of beneficial biodiversity, water and soil pollution and significantly reduced crop and varietal diversity."

A 2021 study found that the Green Revolution led to a reduction in land used for agriculture.

Studies have found that the Green Revolution substantially reduced infant mortality in the developing world. A 2020 study of 37 developing countries found that the diffusion of modern crop varieties "reduced infant mortality by 2.4-5.3 percentage points (from a baseline of 18%), with stronger effects for male infants and among poor households." Another 2020 study found that high yield crop varieties reduced infant mortality in India, with particularly large effects for rural children, boys and low-caste children.

Consumption of pesticides and fertilizer agrochemicals associated with the Green Revolution may have adverse health impacts. For example, pesticides may increase the likelihood of cancer. Poor farming practices including non-compliance to usage of masks and over-usage of the chemicals compound this situation. In 1989, WHO and UNEP estimated that there were around 1 million human pesticide poisonings annually. Some 20,000 (mostly in developing countries) ended in death, as a result of poor labeling, loose safety standards etc. A 2014 study found that Indian children who were exposed to higher quantities of fertilizer agrochemicals experienced more adverse health impacts.

Although the Green Revolution has been able to improve agricultural output briefly in some regions in the world, its yield rates have been declining, while its social and environmental costs become more clearly apparent. As a result, many organizations continue to invent new ways to rectify, significantly augment or replace the techniques already used in the Green Revolution. Frequently quoted inventions are the System of Rice Intensification, marker-assisted selection, agroecology, and applying existing technologies to agricultural problems of the developing world. It is projected that global populations by 2050 will increase by one-third and as such will require a 70% increase in the production of food, which can be achieved with the right policies and investments.

The term 'Evergreen Revolution' was coined by Indian agricultural scientist M. S. Swaminathan in 1990, though he has stated that the concept dates back to as early as 1968. It aims to represent an added dimension to the original concepts and practices of the green revolution, the ecological dimension. Swaminathan has described it as "productivity in perpetuity without associated ecological harm". The concept has evolved into a combination of science, economics, and sociology. In 2002, American biologist E.O. Wilson observed that: [emphasis added]

The problem before us is how to feed billions of new mouths over the next several decades and save the rest of life at the same time, without being trapped in a Faustian bargain that threatens freedom and security. No one knows the exact solution to this dilemma. The benefit must come from an Evergreen Revolution. The aim of this new thrust is to lift food production well above the level obtained by the Green Revolution of the 1960s, using technology and regulatory policy more advanced and even safer than those now in existence.

However, despite Swaminathan's prominent role in India's adoption of Green Revolution agriculture, the 'Evergreen' concept largely reflects the failures of the original project. Although a relatively lesser known term, its substance largely reflects the consensus positions outlined in recent IPCC and other synthetic reports.

Cotter, Joseph (2003). Troubled Harvest: Agronomy and Revolution in Mexico, 1880-2002. Westport, CT: Prager [ISBN missing ]

Deb, Debal, "Restoring Rice Biodiversity", Scientific American, vol. 321, no. 4 (October 2019), pp. 54-61.

Harwood, Andrew (14 June 2013). "Development policy and history: lessons from the Green Revolution".

Hurt, R. Douglas. The Green Revolution in the Global South: Science, Politics, and Unintended Consequences. Nexus Series. Tuscaloosa: University Alabama Press, 2020. ISBN 978-0-8173-2051-5.

Jain, H.K. (2010). Green revolution: history, impact and future. Houston: Studium Press. ISBN 978-1441674487. A brief history, for general readers.

Lewis-Nang'ea, Amanda. Review of Hurt, R. Douglas, The Green Revolution in the Global South: Science, Politics, and Unintended Consequences. H-Environment, H-Net Reviews. February, 2021. http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=55547

Perkins, John H. "The Rockefeller Foundation and the green revolution, 1941-1956." Agriculture and Human Values 7.3 (1990): 6-18. online

Randhawa, M.S. 1974. Green Revolution. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Singh, Pratibha (2017). "India's Evergreen Revolution". Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture and Society. 5 (2): 70-79.

Yadav, O. P.; Singh, D. V.; Dhillon, B. S.; Mohapatra, Trilochan (2019). "India's evergreen revolution in cereals". Current Science. 116 (11): 1805-1808. doi:10.18520/cs/v116/i11/1805-1808. S2CID 189922600.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Green Revolution, or the Third Agricultural Revolution, was a period of technology transfer initiatives that saw greatly increased crop yields. These changes in agriculture began in developed countries in the early 20th century and spread globally until the late 1980s.

# data[].attributes.headline
Neil Armstrong steps onto The Surface of The Moon

# data[].attributes.subject
Neil Armstrong steps onto The Surface of The Moon

# data[].attributes.body
1969

Effected the world and even made history

The moon landing taught us about the composition of the moon. It gave us the first perspective of the Earth from Space. Overall, there are many technologies that we now use in our daily lives that we would not have if scientists did not continue to explore space.

Armstrong changed the course of history as the commander of the Apollo 11 mission, landing humanity on another celestial body for the very first time and fulfilling President John F. Kennedy's goal of landing humans on the Moon by the end of the decade and returning them safely to Earth.

https://laurelsprings.com/blogs/moon-landing-history

# data[].attributes.body
1990s

South Africa

The formal end of the apartheid government in South Africa was hard-won. It took decades of activism from both inside and outside the country, as well as international economic pressure, to end the regime that allowed the country’s white minority to subjugate its Black majority. This work culminated in the dismantling of apartheid between 1990 and 1994. On April 27, 1994, the country elected Nelson Mandela, an activist who had spent 27 years in prison for his opposition to apartheid, in its first free presidential election.

This Day in History: 11/06/1962 - U.N. Condemns Apartheid

https://www.history.com/news/end-apartheid-steps

# data[].attributes.body
1992

Bosnia and Herzegovina

The Bosnian War resulted in the death of around 100,000 people, and the displacement of over two million men, women and children. A campaign of war crimes, 'ethnic cleansing' and genocide was perpetrated by Bosnian Serb troops under the orders of Slobodan Milošević.

A referendum on independence was held during February 29 – March 1, 1992, although Karadžić’s party obstructed voting in most Serb-populated areas and almost no Bosnian Serbs voted. Of the nearly two-thirds of the electorate that did cast a vote, almost all voted for independence, which President Izetbegović officially proclaimed on March 3, 1992.

https://www.britannica.com/event/Bosnian-War

# data[].attributes.body
1995

The World

The overall purpose of the World Trade Organization is to help its members use trade as a means to raise living standards, create jobs and improve people's lives. The World Trade Organization operates the global system of trade rules and helps developing economies build their trade capacity. Global rules of trade provide assurance and stability.

www.wto.org

# data[].attributes.body
2004

Facebook impacted the whole world

Facebook is a way to find and connect with friends and remain updated on their activities. Creating communities. Facebook is used to create and organize communities of interest on just about any topic. It's a platform that can enable like-minded individuals to come together, share ideas, discuss and organize.

It impacted 4.5m jobs globally in 2014. Facebook enables global economic activity by helping to unlock new opportunities through connecting people and businesses, lowering barriers to marketing, and stimulating innovation.

https://www2.deloitte.com/tr/en/pages/technology-media-and-telecommunications/articles/the-global-economic-impact-of-facebook.html

# data[].attributes.body
2011

Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan

Since its start in 2011, the Syrian Civil War has created the largest refugee population in the world, constituting over a third of the global refugee population. The conflict in Syria has caused immense suffering for the Syrian people, with hundreds of thousands dead and millions displaced, both within the war-torn country and as refugees since the fighting started in 2011

https://www.worldvision.org/refugees-news-stories/syrian-refugee-crisis-facts#:~:text=The%20conflict%20in%20Syria%20has,the%20fighting%20started%20in%202011.

# data[].attributes.body
2018

United States (California was Most affected)

There has also been a slew of litigation, most recently, Facebook settled a lawsuit on the matter for $725 million. The Cambridge Analytica controversy profoundly impacted the world of data privacy, political campaign and social media.