What were the enchanted islands?

 

What were the enchanted islands?

Las Islas Encantadas-the enchanted or be witched islands was the name that Spanish sailors gave the Galápagos Islands when they were first discovered in 1535. The Spaniards were mystified by the desolate, volcanic islands, with their strange forms of animal life. They thought that the islands were not real, but only "shadows" of is lands. Although the islands then were uninhabited, evidence later was found of earlier settlement by South American Indians.

The name Galápagos (from the Spanish for "tortoises") was adopted by mapmakers, based on descriptions of the many giant tortoises, or land turtles, found on the islands. The islands' other distinctive animals include rare flightless cormorants (fish-catching sea birds), penguins, land and marine iguanas (large lizards), and numerous species of finches and other birds.

The animals were of special interest to the British naturalist Charles Darwin, who visited the islands in 1835. The many varieties of finches, in particular, provided Darwin with a clue to his theory of evolution.

The true finches are small to medium-sized passerine birds.  Passerine birds relate to or denote birds of a large order distinguished by feet that are adapted for perching, including all songbirds. Finches have stout conical bills adapted for eating seeds and nuts and often have colorful plumage.

Since 1832 the islands have been administered by Ecuador, which first colonised them. They are a province of Ecuador, officially known as the Archipelago de Colón. The dwindling number of animals on the islands are protected by the Ecuadorian Government.

 

The "invisible hand

 What is the amazing "invisible hand"?

Sham Misri

The life in most important cities with millions of inhabitants require huge amounts of a variety of goods and services to meet their wants and needs. Do people lie awake at night worrying that the goods and services they need might be unavailable when they need or want them? In market economies, people take it for granted that the things they need or want will be available. But, the fact that most things are usually available when people want them is a remarkable achievement.

Suppose a person decides to have fish, cheese, and sliced tomatoes for dinner. Even though he may not have purchased these items for months, he can be almost certain that he will find them at the nearest supermarket. The fish may have come from a faraway ocean or lake and the cheese and tomatoes from a distant farm and shipped to the local supermarket at just the right time for eating. None of the many people involved in producing and marketing these products knew you were going to want them on a particular day, yet they were there at the very time you needed them.

As amazing as it may seem, there is no government agency, business, or individual responsible for ensuring that the economic needs and wants of people are met. It is the economic system-its market economy-that sees to it that products of the right type and in the right quantity are available when most people want them. Some economists say that the economy works like an "invisible hand" in meeting the needs of the people.

The principle of the invisible hand was first reported by the economist Adam Smith in 1776 in his book Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Smith said that in a market economy, if individuals were allowed to pursue their own self-interests without government interference, they would be led, as if by an invisible hand, to achieve what is best for the society. The idea of letting economic problems work themselves out with no government interference is known as laissez-faire, a French term meaning "let do" or "let things alone." Al though the  economies today are very different from the type of economy described by Adam Smith, the principle of the invisible hand still applies to some extent.

Businesses work to maximize their profits, workers seek higher wages, and consumers attempt to get the maximum value for their money. To maximize their profits, businesses must provide the goods and services that most consumers want at the right time and in the right places. In this, the economy operates as way, if it were regulated by an "invisible hand."

Adam Smith

Adam Smith (1723 90) is generally considered to be the founder of economics. Born in Scotland, Smith became a professor of logic and moral philosophy at the University of Glasgow at age 28. His studies led him to the conclusion that people always act in their own best interest. He argued that if individuals were allowed to pursue their interests free from government interference, they would promote what was best for society as a whole.

Adam Smith revolutionized economics with the publication of Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776). Because of the ideas in this book, Smith is given credit for promoting the economic freedom, the industrialization, and the prosperity that characterized the Western world during the 1800's.

 

 

Achilles' heel

Sham Misri

What was wrong with Achilles' heel?

Achilles was a mythical hero of ancient Greece, the perfect of youthful strength beauty and courage. He was the son of Peleus, a mortal, and Thetis, one of the lesser goddesses. Achilles was King of the Myrmidons and a powerful warrior.

According to the legend, while Achilles was still a babe his mother dipped him in the River Styx, which protected his body forever against any weapon-with one important exception. The river water did not touch the heel by which his mother held him.  That was his weak spot; and he died at Troy from an arrow wound in that heel. Nowadays, if we know that an otherwise strong person has a weakness, we call it his Achilles' heel.

Tavernier A French Traveller

 

Tavernier A French Traveller

Baron Jean Baptiste Tavernier

Baron Jean Baptiste Tavernier of Aubonne, was the famed 17th century French traveller and expert gem trader, and is located in what used to be his fiefdom. Tavernier was among the many merchant travelers who bridged the gap between the Orient and the Western hemisphere.

Undertaking extensive and often dangerous journeys to the great empires of the East, Tavernier navigated much of Safavid Iran and Mughal India, serving as an integral cog in early modern global trade. His sense of enterprise, combined with his keen eye for gemstones, brought him in close proximity to many pivotal personalities, events, and objects of the time including becoming the conveyor of one the most famous diamonds in history.

Ever Eastwards

Tavernier made his first journey to the East in 1631, at the age of 26, accompanying two French clergymen on their travels to the Levant and Persia. Making their way through Constantinople (now Istanbul), Tavernier got as far as Isfahan in Iran. He returned to Europe in 1633 -'34, having spent about three years travelling and trading in the Mediterranean and Middle East. Over the next 30 years, Tavernier would make five more such excursions via land and sea — going as far east as Vietnam.

Much of what we know about his journeys come from his own accounts, published in 1676 as two books, Six Voyages and Travels in India. Both sold widely and by the middle of the 18th century had already gone through 21 editions in French as well as other languages (they are still in print today).

Tavernier was a discerning writer who kept meticulous notes – but arranged them by theme rather than chronologically. It is believed he did this in order to minimize repetition, but for those of us looking back on his travels nearly 400 years on, it means we often don't know exactly when he was in the places he mentions. What we do know is that in 1640, on his second journey, he made his way to India.

Travelling overland to Persia, and then via ship across the Strait of Hormuz and the Arabian Sea, Tavernier arrived in Surat-a route he would repeat in all his successive journeys. Arriving in the middle of March 1640, Tavernier was at once infatuated by this new land.

Apparently, he did not think too highly of Surat itself, considering it to be a city of "indifferent bigness, defended by a pitiful fortress", but as he explored the great plains of Hindustan, he became fascinated. Over five visits to India, he would travel through most of the Mughal Empire, visiting Agra, Golconda, Patna, Goa, Dhaka and Machilipatnam, among other cities.

The sheer abundance he encountered of everyday and extraordinary fare deeply fascinated him, and is something he wrote of repeatedly in his travelogues. Tavernier noted how "even in the smallest villages, rice, flour, butter, milk, beans and other vegetables, sugar and sweetmeats, dry and liquid, can be procured in abundance". Most supreme for Tavernier, however, was the court of the Great Moghuls. He attended court in Agra during the reigns of Shah Jahan (r. 1628-58) as well as Aurangzeb.

Tavernier describes the many customs often very elaborate that were followed by the Mughal Emperors. The weighing of the Emperor against an equivalent amount of jewelery on his birthday; the 80-elephant processions in which Shah Jahan proceeded on every mosque visit; Aurangzeb's fortnightly hunts that featured thousands of men, even if you counted just the beaters. All this was otherworldly and intriguing for Tavernier.

What instilled the most awe in him, naturally, were the jeweled riches of the Mughals. In his travelogues, he takes great pains to describe each of the seven imperial thrones. Chief among them was the Peacock Throne, on which Tavernier said he counted nearly 108 rubies (none below 100 carats), 160 emeralds (none below 30 carats), and a great number of diamonds and pearls. Atop the canopy of the throne, sat the jeweled peacock, "consisting all of sapphires... the body is of beaten gold, encased with several jewels; and a great ruby upon its breast, at which hangs a pearl, that weighs fifty carats".

Tavernier was in India at the time of the disputed hiatus between Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb, and describes in great detail the fratricidal war of succession that was unfolding before him. Having come from Europe, where primogeniture or the rule of the first-born child was the norm, the idea that all male relatives could lay claim to a throne baffled him. Tavernier's graphic account of the nearly confused Shah Jahan yelling curses upon his son Aurangzeb, after being imprisoned by the latter, is just one of the many episodes he recounts, as these famed figures revealed their very human vulnerabilities.

Another was Aurangzeb's reaction to the death of Dara Shikoh, his elder brother and main rival for the Mughal throne. It was Aurangzeb who sentenced Dara Shikoh to death, after defeating him in battle. But when he was presented with his severed head as evidence of his command being carried out, Aurangzeb fell to his knees weeping. Grief-stricken, he ordered the remains of his brother to be buried in Humayun's Tomb.

When Aurangzeb finally ascended the throne, Tavernier describes the lavish coronation he staged, stretching over months. He makes special mention of the variety of ambassadors and other ambassadors and envoys who arrived to pay their respects and establish ties with the new emperor. These included representatives from Tartar kingdoms in Uzbekistan, the Ethiopian Empire and the Sharif of Mecca. More presciently, Tavernier noted the attendance of the factory chiefs of the Dutch and British East India Companies, who needed to ensure warm ties with the Mughal court in order to trade. Apart from the larger historical events Tavernier also took note of the Mughal Empire, and after the porticos of the subcontinent at large. In the coming decades, they would play an emergent role in the downfall of the Mughal Empire, and alter the politics of the subcontinent at large. For now though, Tavernier was witnessing one of the grandest empires of the time at its apotheosis.

Apart from the larger historical events, Tavernier also took note of the more trivial but intriguing rumors and stories that emerged from the Mughal harem. Tales of poisonings by rival mistresses, the murder of illicit lovers, and the intense political conspiracies to gain imperial favor allowed the traveller to paint a rich caricature of the lives of the Mughals at the height of the Empire. He surveyed the Mughal court at its very finest from a point of view few others could ever access.

Tavernier, however, was ultimately a merchant and had to profit from these long trips. Over his many journey's to India, he became extremely well-versed with one commodity that would ensure handsome rewards: diamonds. Until the mid-18th century, the mines of Golconda in the Deccan were the sole source of diamonds in the world. Stones originating here were highly prized, and the word 'Golconda' was synonymous with extreme extravagance even in the great courts of Europe.

Tavernier visited the mines himself, in order to purchase gemstones of the finest quality. It was on one of his final visits to the famed Kollur Mine, right on the banks of River Krishna, that Tavernier acquired a diamond like no other. Though only 112 carats (Tavernier saw numerous diamonds above 500 carats, he records), it had perfect clarity, a rare pristine blue tint, and was "the size of a grown man's fist". The Tavernier Blue, as it came to be known, sealed the merchant traveler’s place in history.

Upon returning to France in 1668, he was received in court by Louis XIV. The king bought a number of diamonds from him, including the Tavernier Blue, paying a staggering total of 3 million French livres. In addition to this vast sum, a patent of nobility was granted to Tavernier, making him Baron of Aubonne (then part of the Kingdom of France) and vesting with him the lands that came with the baronetcy.

The Tavernier Blue turned out to be the finest gemstone in the French Treasury, and was cut and placed in the insignia set of the French Crown Jewels. It was not to remain for very long. During the French Revolution (1787-99), it was stolen, along with the rest of the crown jewels, and would reappear in London — recut and now known as the Hope Diamond.

After passing through numerous hands, famed American gem merchant Harry Winston finally donated it to the Natural History museum in Washington DC in 1958, where it resides today. Its rich origin and provenance is not without its own 'diamond curse' adage, and a number of its owners fell upon hard times after acquiring it.

As for Tavernier, after spending over 40 years travelling and trading in kingdoms so distant from his own roots, he retired to his peerage on the shores of Lake Geneva. He at once began working on his travelogues, and much to our benefit, spent considerable time recounting all that he had seen and experienced. Rather ironically, it has been his literary works, rather than the scores of gemstones he bartered and esteemed so highly, whose value has stood the test of time, becoming vital resources for scholars of Mughal India.

Tavernier's own story ends tragically, in dwindled prosperity and a violent death. Having lavished his riches on a number of questionable business ventures by 1689, Tavernier- now 84 — decided to once again set out towards Persia, via Moscow, on a trading expedition. He would never complete it. He died somewhere near Smolensk, allegedly torn apart by a pack of wolves. The curse, perhaps, of the rare blue diamond he was the first to trade.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parasitic plants

 

Parasitic plants

Some parasitic plants can be beneficial to the ecosystem they live in. The most well-known parasitic plant is the mistletoe, the plant that has been part of Christmas celebrations in western cultures for hundreds of years. A branch of mistletoe is hung at the top of a doorway or suspended from the ceiling. Couples who “happen” to cross each other’s paths under the mistletoe are permitted a kiss. For each kiss, a berry is plucked off the branch. When the berries run out, so do the kisses. You didn’t know mistletoe was a parasite? Most people don’t. The name “mistletoe” (originally “mistiltan”) most likely comes from the Anglo-Saxon words “mistel” meaning “dung,” and “tan” meaning “twig.” So that makes the real name for this plant “dung-on-a-twig.” The dung in question comes from birds. Birds eat the berries, and some of their dropping fall on tree branches. Mistletoe seeds happen to be very sticky, so they quickly adhere to the branch. When the seeds germinate, they can grow for a while in the bird dropping, as if it was dirt. As quickly as they can, though, the baby mistletoe plants start putting out special “roots” called haustoria (hoe-STORE-ee-ah). The haustoria somehow grow their way through the tree’s bark and get into the sapwood where the living xylem and phloem tubes are. They put their thin root-like tubes into the tree’s xylem and phloem, as if putting a drinking straw into someone else’s glass. The mistletoe slurps away, sucking water, minerals and sugars from the tree’s vascular system. Thus, the mistletoe is permanently attached to a tree, instead of growing in the ground. The mistletoe is what botanists called a hemiparasite (“hemi” meaning “halfway”). The leaves can still do photosynthesis, so it is not completely reliant on the host tree. At first, the tree hardly notices the mistletoe and isn’t especially bothered by it. If rainfall is adequate, there is enough water for both plants. However, as the mistletoe grows larger and larger, there is a greater possibility that the tree won’t be able to keep up with the increasing demands the mistletoe places on it. Some trees do eventually die from mistletoe invasion, and, in general, gardeners see mistletoe as a threat. They usually prune off any tree branches that show mistletoe infestation.