Författare: Rss .

As a kid, it was tough for me to grasp the massive time scale of Earth’s history. Now, with nearly two decades of experience as a geologist, I think one of the best ways to understand our planet’s history and evolution is by condensing the entire timeline into a single calendar year.

It’s not a new concept, but it’s a powerful one.

So, how do we go about this? If we consider Earth’s age as 4.54 billion years and divide it by 365 days, each day of the Gregorian calendar represents about 12.438 million years.

Let’s say we want to calculate what “day” the Paleozoic started in our new Earth calendar. We just need to subtract 541 million years from the age of the planet and divide it by 12.438 million years. Simple, right?

As I ran these equations, I noticed something amusing. Some of the most significant events in Earth’s history coincide with major holidays in the Western world. By this reckoning, the dinosaurs went extinct on Christmas Day.

The Earth calendar

View the events in the infographic above, or scroll down to read about the entire year in order.

January 1

4.54 billion years ago: Formation of proto-Earth as part of the Solar System

Dust and gas in the early Solar System collide and combine under gravity. This process eventually leads to the formation of a molten planet, our proto-Earth.

January 3

4.5 billion years ago: Theia’s impact and the formation of the Moon

A Mars-sized planet, Theia, collides with the proto-Earth, changing the composition of our planet forever. This massive impact ejects a significant amount of material into orbit around Earth, which eventually coalesces to form the Moon.

February 4

4.1 billion years ago: Beginning of the Late Heavy Bombardment

Earth, the Moon and other inner bodies of our Solar System experience intense asteroid and comet impacts, which shape their surfaces. Unlike Earth, the Moon still retains these craters today because it lacks an atmosphere, water and tectonic activity. The bombardment continues until the very end of February – 3.8 billion years ago.

February 14

3.97 billion years ago: Beginning of the Archean Eon

By Valentine’s Day, the hottest period in Earth’s history – the Hadean Eon – has finally come to an end. With these hostile conditions in the past, the stage is lovingly set for life to emerge as the Archean Eon begins.

March 16

3.6 billion years ago: Formation of the first supercontinent, maybe

For a couple of weeks now, Earth has been cool enough to form stable continental crusts. Vaalbara is a theorised supercontinent consisting of two cratons (ancient, stable and thick blocks that form the cores of continents): Kaapvaal in eastern South Africa, and Pilbara in north-western Western Australia. While still under debate, this would make Vaalbara 3.6 to 2.7 billion years old, one of the oldest supercontinents we know of.

March 26

3.48 billion years ago: Earliest direct evidence of life

Right before the end of the first quarter of the year, simple prokaryotic organisms appear during the Paleoarchean. These are the earliest direct evidence of life recorded as microfossils (stromatolites).

May 27

2.7 billion years ago: Cyanobacteria become the first oxygen producers

Blue-green algae called cyanobacteria develop oxygenic photosynthesis. They use sunlight to convert carbon dioxide and water into organic compounds, releasing oxygen as a byproduct. It’s a milestone for the development of our current atmosphere.

June 16

2.46 billion years ago: The Great Oxygenation Event

A dramatic rise in oxygen levels occurs in shallow seas and in Earth’s atmosphere, driven by oxygenic photosynthesis from cyanobacteria. This event lasts approximately 400 million years, transforming Earth’s environment and paving the way for more complex life forms to thrive on a radically changed planet.

September 17

1.3 billion years ago: Formation of the supercontinent Rodinia

One of the first supercontinents to form on Earth, Rodinia brings together most of the planet’s landmasses. During its 550 million years of existence, Earth is predominantly inhabited by simple life forms, including prokaryotes and early eukaryotes.

October 31

750 million years ago: Breakdown of Rodinia and Snowball Earth events

By Halloween, Rodinia begins to crack apart just like candies in a kid’s trick-or-treat bag. The breakup of Rodinia dramatically influences the planet’s climate and ocean circulation, potentially triggering Snowball Earth events. These two major global glaciations, lasting approximately 70 million years, play a significant role in shaping Earth’s history.

November 9

635 million years ago: The Ediacaran Period begins

Right before the start of the Paleozoic, the first large, complex, multi-cellular marine life forms appear. The Ediacaran biota includes diverse, soft-bodied organisms – early animals, algae and other complex life. Today, curious visitors to the Flinders Ranges in South Australia might be lucky enough to spot some Ediacaran fossils.

November 17

538.8 million years ago: The Cambrian Explosion

The Cambrian Explosion lasts no more than two days (25 million years). During this time, sudden development of complex life occurs in the oceans. Almost all present-day animal phyla appear, and other groups diversify in major ways. Undoubtedly, this is a critical period for life on our planet.

November 23

470 million years ago: Plants first colonise Gondwanaland during the Ordovician Period

Early land plants are simple, non-vascular organisms that colonise moist environments – much like moss today. Over time, plants evolve more complex structures, including vascular tissue specialised for transporting water, nutrients and food, allowing them to thrive in a wider range of terrestrial habitats.

December 1

370 million years ago: First vertebrates move onto land

On the very first day of December, four-limbed animals called tetrapods are the first animals with backbones (vertebrates) to transition to a life on land during the Late Devonian period. These are the ancestors of all land-dwelling vertebrates, living and extinct.

December 10

252 million years ago: Permian-Triassic mass extinction

Life is almost entirely obliterated after a series of massive Siberian volcanic eruptions trigger global warming and a lack of oxygen in the oceans. The Great Dying is the largest extinction in Earth’s history, wiping out more than 90% of marine species and about 70% of terrestrial species.

December 12

230 million years ago: The rise of dinosaurs

The very first dinosaurs are small, bipedal reptiles that eventually evolve into the diverse group of animals that dominate Earth during the Mesozoic Era. Dinosaurs reign over our planet for 13 days, meaning their kingdom endures for an epic 165 million years.

December 25

66 million years ago: Cretaceous-Paleogene mass extinction

Christmas Day is not a joyful day for dinosaurs: they go extinct. The current leading hypothesis for their demise is an asteroid impact in the Yucatán Peninsula of Mexico. A massive space lump of coal from Santa, if you will.

December 26

56 million years ago: The rise of mammals

Boxing Day is a good day for mammals. During the Palaeocene, right after the extinction event, mammals begin to grow in size and diversity. By noon, when the Eocene starts 56 million years ago, they have evolved into the first large herbivores and carnivores.

December 31: midday

~7 to 6 million years ago: The planet of the apes

The very first hominids, either Sahelanthropus or Orrorin, appear by noon on December 31. These species represent some of the earliest common ancestors of humans and other great apes, such as gorillas, orangutans and chimpanzees.

December 31: 11:25pm

300,000 years ago: Modern humans finally arrive

The very first Homo sapiens emerge in Africa, marking the beginning of anatomically modern humans.

The final ten minutes

We’re almost at midnight, and nearly all of humanity’s history can be condensed into the last ten minutes of the year.

11:50pm

~86,377 years ago: Homo sapiens migrate out of Africa into Eurasia. Thus begins a significant global colonisation by early modern humans.

11:51pm

~77,740 years ago: The first symbolic art. Engraved ochre in South Africa’s Blombos Cave is considered one of the earliest symbolic artworks created by humans, indicating the development of cognitive and cultural sophistication.

11:52pm

~69,102 years ago: The Last Glacial Period. An ongoing global cooling event intensifies, forcing humans to adapt to harsher climates.

11:53pm

~60,464 years ago: Humans reach Australia. This marks the earliest known migration across sea, and settlement on a new isolated continent.

11:54pm

~51,826 years ago: Upper Paleolithic Revolution. Humans arrive at a capacity for well-developed language, more complex social structures, and highly specialised tools.

11:55pm

~43,119 years ago: The Neanderthals go extinct. Multiple factors cause their demise, including violence, diseases, natural catastrophes and being outcompeted by Homo sapiens, the only remaining hominid species on Earth.

11:56pm

~34,551 years ago: Symbolic art flourishes and culture emerges globally among modern humans. This time is characterised by significant advancements in creativity and social organisation.

11:57pm

~25,913 years ago: The Last Glacial Maximum. Ice sheets reach their greatest extent, covering large parts of North America, Europe and Asia. This is the peak of the most recent ice age, affecting both ecosystems and human migration.

11:58pm

~17,275 years ago: Warming begins after the Last Glacial Maximum. Ice sheets gradually retreat, leading towards the end of the last ice age.

11:59pm

~8,638 years ago: Significant events take place globally. The Agricultural Revolution has started, with humans cultivating crops and domesticating animals, leading to the first permanent settlements and village life.

Midnight

8,638 years ago to today: A great deal happens in the last few seconds of the year. From the Bronze and Iron Age, to the rise and fall of major empires, the Renaissance, the Industrial Revolution, world wars, space exploration, the internet and artificial intelligence. Läs mer…

The holiday season can be a time of joy, celebration, and indulgence in delicious foods and meals. However, for many, it can also be an emotional and stressful period.

This stress can manifest in our eating habits, leading to what is known as emotional or stress eating.

There are certain foods we tend to eat more of when we’re stressed, and these can affect our health. What’s more, our food choices can influence our stress levels and make us feel worse. Here’s how.

Why we might eat more when stressed

The human stress response is a complex signalling network across the body and brain. Our nervous system then responds to physical and psychological events to maintain our health. Our stress response – which can be subtle or trigger a fight-or-flight response – is essential and part of daily life.

The stress response increases production of the hormones cortisol and insulin and the release of glucose (blood sugars) and brain chemicals to meet demand. Eating when we experience stress is a normal behaviour to meet a spike in energy needs.

But sometimes our relationship with food becomes strained in response to different types of stress. We might attach shame or guilt to overeating. And anxiety or insecurity can mean some people under-eat in stressful times.

Over time, people can start to associate eating with negative emotions – such as anger, sadness, fear or worry. This link can create behavioural cycles of emotional eating. “Emotional eaters” may go on to develop altered brain responses to the sight or smell of food.

What stress eating can do to the body

Stress eating can include binge eating, grazing, eating late at night, eating quickly or eating past the feeling of fullness. It can also involve craving or eating foods we don’t normally choose.
For example, stressed people often reach for ultra-processed foods. While eating these foods is not necessarily a sign of stress, having them can activate the reward system in our brain to alleviate stress and create a pattern.

Short-term stress eating, such as across the holiday period, can lead to symptoms such as acid reflux and poor sleep – particularly when combined with drinking alcohol.

In the longer term, stress eating can lead to weight gain and obesity, increasing the risks of cancer, heart diseases and diabetes.

While stress eating may help reduce stress in the moment, long-term stress eating is linked with an increase in depressive symptoms and poor mental health.

If you do over eat at a big gathering, don’t try and compensate by eating very little the next day.
Peopleimage.com – Yuri A/Shutterstock

What we eat can make us more or less stressed

The foods we choose can also influence our stress levels.

Diets high in refined carbohydrates and sugar (such as sugary drinks, sweets, crackers, cakes and most chocolates) can make blood sugar levels spike and then crash.

Diets high in unhealthy saturated and trans fats (processed foods, animal fats and commercially fried foods) can increase inflammatory responses.

Rapid changes in blood sugar and inflammation can increase anxiety and can change our mood.

Meanwhile, certain foods can improve the balance of neurotransmitters in the brain that regulate stress and mood.

Omega-3 fatty acids, found in fish and flaxseeds, are known to reduce inflammation and support brain health. Magnesium, found in leafy greens and nuts, helps regulate cortisol levels and the body’s stress response.

Vitamin Bs, found in whole grains, nuts, seeds, beans and animal products (mostly B12), help maintain a healthy nervous system and energy metabolism, improving mood and cognitive performance.

5 tips for the holiday table and beyond

Food is a big part of the festive season, and treating yourself to delicious treats can be part of the fun. Here are some tips for enjoying festive foods, while avoiding stress eating:

1. slow down: be mindful about the speed of your eating. Slow down, chew food well and put down your utensils after each bite

2. watch the clock: even if you’re eating more food than you normally would, sticking to the same timing of eating can help maintain your body’s response to the food. If you normally have an eight-hour eating window (the time between your first meal and last meal of the day) then stick to this even if you’re eating more

3. continue other health behaviours: even if we are eating more food or different food during the festive season, try to keep up other healthy behaviours, such as sleep and exercise

4. stay hydrated: make sure to drink plenty of fluids, especially water. This helps our body function and can help with feelings of hunger. When our brain gets the message something has entered the stomach (what we drink) this can provide a temporary reduction in feelings of hunger

5. don’t restrict: if we have a big day of eating, it can be tempting to restrict eating in the days before or after. But it is never a good idea to overly constrain food intake. It can lead to more overeating and worsen stress.

Reaching for cookies late at night can be characteristic of stress eating.
Stokkete/Shutterstock

Plus 3 bonus tips to manage holiday stress

1. shift your thinking: try reframing festive stress. Instead of viewing it as “something bad”, see it as “providing the energy” to reach your goals, such as a family gathering or present shopping

2. be kind to yourself and others: practise an act of compassion for someone else or try talking to yourself as you would a friend. These actions can stimulate our brains and improve wellbeing

3. do something enjoyable: being absorbed in enjoyable activities – such as crafting, movement or even breathing exercises – can help our brains and bodies to return to a more relaxed state, feel steady and connected.

For support and more information about eating disorders, contact the Butterfly Foundation on 1800 33 4673 or Kids Helpline on 1800 551 800. If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14. In an emergency, call 000. Läs mer…

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) affects up to half of all women during their lifetime, and one in eight will have surgery to treat it by the age of 85. Yet, despite how common POP is, the public’s awareness and understanding of this condition remains limited.

Most people are unfamiliar with POP until they are personally affected, and even then, are often unaware of the different surgical options available to manage it. Our team of medical professionals and health researchers aims to change this.

POP occurs when pelvic organs, like the uterus, vagina, bladder or bowel, shift downward and sag into, or even through, the vaginal canal. This condition can lead to a range of physical symptoms, with pelvic pressure, urinary incontinence and a vaginal bulge being some of the most common complaints.

POP can be physically uncomfortable and disruptive to a woman’s quality of life, and the emotional and social impact can be profound. Many affected women report lowered self-esteem, avoidance of intimacy, and heightened anxiety or depression due to the persistent, painful and often stigmatized nature of the condition.

Hysterectomy is the default

For decades, the standard surgical approach for treating POP has generally included a hysterectomy, or removal of the uterus. In many cases, the uterus itself is not part of the prolapse, but removing it allows surgeons to access pelvic ligaments and tissues for securing the vaginal walls. Almost one in three Canadian women aged 60 and older have had their uterus removed to treat a number of gynecologic conditions, including POP.

POP can be physically uncomfortable and disruptive to a woman’s quality of life, and the emotional and social impact can be profound.
(Shutterstock)

This surgery is deeply embedded in medical practice with the long-standing belief that removing the uterus is necessary to achieve durable repair of POP, and that the surgery has minimal impact on women’s overall health.

Newer evidence, including recent systematic reviews, questions whether hysterectomy is the only effective approach for treating POP in women. Studies have shown that uterine-preserving procedures carry lower surgical risks compared to hysterectomy surgeries, while providing similar effectiveness in reducing prolapse symptoms.

Adding to this body of evidence, our team of urogynecologists and health researchers developed the Hysterectomy vs. Uterine Preserving Prolapse Surgery (HUPPS) study to generate real-world evidence about outcomes after POP surgery.

Over three years, we enrolled 321 women with POP affecting the top of their vagina who lived in Calgary and surrounding areas of Alberta. Importantly, each woman was free to consider minimally invasive hysterectomy or uterine-preserving POP surgery, based on their own values, preferences and consideration of the evidence. Almost half (47 per cent) chose the uterine-preserving route, which demonstrated substantial interest among Canadian women to keep their uterus when given the option.

However, in many hospitals in Canada, hysterectomy remains the primary approach for surgical treatment of POP, partly due to historical and educational clinical practices.

Surgical outcomes

At one year post-surgery, we found that 17.2 per cent of women who received a hysterectomy surgery experienced recurrence of POP, compared to only 7.5 per cent of women who received a uterine-preserving (UP) surgery. We then statistically accounted for patient differences such as age, body weight and the initial severity of their POP, and found that women who had uterine-preserving surgery indeed experienced approximately half the risk of POP recurrence than the women who had a hysterectomy.

Our data also showed other benefits of uterine-preserving surgery, including shorter operating time, shorter hospital stay, less post-operative opioid pain relief and fewer complications overall.

Why preserve the uterus?

Some women want to avoid hysterectomy due to personal or cultural beliefs about removing their uterus, while others are concerned about the potential long-term effects on their health.
(Shutterstock)

Emerging research suggests there can be long-term effects of hysterectomy. For example, hysterectomy may be associated with elevated risk of chronic health issues such as cardiovascular disease and neurological disorders. These risks are higher for people who undergo hysterectomy at younger ages.

However, there can be instances where patients may want to consider hysterectomy as part of their POP repair. These include a history of repeated abnormal pap smears signalling a higher risk of developing cervical cancer in the future, or in cases where it is strongly recommended to them by a surgeon, such as when precancerous cells have been determined by a biopsy of the uterus.

For people without these conditions, there is no medical need to remove the uterus.

However, the historical hysterectomy-based approach to POP assumes that all women want the same approach to their POP treatment. However, during the past five years, our team has noticed growing inquiries from patients around keeping their uterus, and questions about the risks and benefits of a hysterectomy.

Some women want to avoid hysterectomy due to personal or cultural beliefs about removing their uterus, while others are concerned about the potential long-term effects on their health. The International Urogynecological Association has a helpful pamphlet with more information on this topic.

The importance of patient-centred care

Our research findings, combined with growing evidence on surgical treatment of POP, encourage an essential shift in the field of gynecological surgery towards an approach that offers all women a greater sense of autonomy.

The HUPPS study demonstrates that when people are presented with evidence-based information on the risks and benefits, they can choose the option that aligns with their personal values and long-term health goals and still achieve a good surgical outcome.

For women in Canada who are affected by POP, this means ensuring that two options are offered and accessible to them: both hysterectomy and uterine-preserving surgeries. If we can achieve a permanent shift in the medical landscape towards more informed, personalized and patient-centred care, it will change women’s lives for the better. Läs mer…

Indonesia’s decision to pursue membership in BRICS – an emerging economy bloc comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa – signals that President Prabowo Subianto is steering foreign policy in a direction contrasting with his predecessors.

During Joko “Jokowi” Widodo’s two-term administration, then-former Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi led efforts to integrate Indonesia’s economy with Western institutions by working to secure membership with the OECD.

Since BRICS is an alternative to Western-dominated organisations, many observers scrutinised and questioned Indonesia’s nonalignment commitment. However, Foreign Minister Sugiono argued that BRICS aligns with Indonesia’s ‘free and active’ foreign policy, allowing Indonesia to collaborate widely without aligning too closely with any single bloc.

For Sugiono, joining BRICS means paving the way to advance the new government’s goals of food security, energy independence, poverty alleviation, and human capital development. The bloc offers access to funding, technology, and trade opportunities to tackle key challenges in those sectors. BRICS, with its emphasis on fairness and cooperation, supports Indonesia’s vision for a more inclusive and sustainable future.

The shift from Retno’s OECD focus to Sugiono’s BRICS approach reflects at least two visions. First, Indonesia seeks to reassess its strategic position as the leading economy in Southeast Asia. Second, the country seeks to switch from its nonalignment stance to multi-alignment. The later will help navigate partnerships with both developed and emerging economies, balancing traditional alliances with new opportunities.

Joining BRICS can amplify Indonesia’s influence in its already strong ties with each of the member countries and unlock opportunities beyond one-on-one partnerships.

Fear of missing out

Indonesia’s pivot to BRICS reflects both its relationship with major powers, such as China and the US, and regional pressures.

Neighbouring countries Malaysia and Thailand have recently expressed interest in BRICS, creating a sense of competition within Southeast Asia. Both countries joining the bloc could erode Indonesia’s leadership and influence in the region, especially in affecting global affairs.

Through ASEAN, Indonesia has sought to act as a regional stabiliser and mediator amid rising polarisation between the West and China.

As its de facto leader, Indonesia has historically championed initiatives like the South China Sea Code of Conduct and Myanmar’s peace process. Its G20 presidency further underscored its role as a mediator between global powers.

This ‘fear of missing out’ has spurred Indonesia’s interest in BRICS.

Joining BRICS ahead of its regional peers ensures that Indonesia maintains its leadership position in ASEAN. For Prabowo’s administration, BRICS offers a platform to advance Indonesia’s interests in maritime security, economic growth, and global governance. It is a strategic move beyond an economic decision to amplify its voice on global issues and prevent fellow Southeast Asian countries from overtaking it in shaping the bloc’s agenda.

Bold (but not one) direction

Indonesia’s BRICS membership announcement highlights the new administration’s foreign policy ambitions, centred on two key shifts: adopting a multi-alignment strategy and strengthening its ‘good neighbour’ policy.

Prabowo envisions engaging with all nations, fostering friendly relations while opposing oppression. This approach resonates with Indonesia’s historical commitment to sovereignty and equality in international relations.

Indonesia has traditionally adhered to a nonalignment principle. This virtue has aided the country navigating major power blocs without binding itself to any single alliance. However, the current geopolitical climate – marked by intensifying tensions between global powers, regional conflicts, and intricate challenges – demands a more flexible and strategic approach.

By joining BRICS, Indonesia avoids taking sides and instead diversifies its partnerships to maximise benefits. This multi-aligned approach enables active participation in BRICS discussions on multilateral reform.

Prabowo’s ‘good neighbour policy’ further underscores the importance of maintaining positive relations with all countries. It empowers developing nations and advocates for a more equitable global order and economic system. This strategy also facilitates Indonesia’s resilience by fostering partnerships in food and energy security, poverty alleviation, and human capital development.

Such collaborations reduce reliance on Western financial systems and enhance Indonesia’s autonomy. Ultimately, these strategic directions position Indonesia as a sovereign and dynamic player capable of balancing global relationships while advancing its own priorities.

What about the OECD?

This move does not mean the OECD is off the table for Indonesia. Instead, Prabowo’s approach reflects a dual-track strategy that values both alliances for their respective benefits.

The OECD remains a long-term objective to enhance Indonesia’s economic governance and regulatory standards. It serves the goal of providing the country with stable relationships within the Western economic framework. Meanwhile, BRICS offers an immediate avenue for Indonesia to deepen ties with equivalent economies and actively shape policies that impact the Global South.

Sugiono’s statement in Kazan emphasised Indonesia’s commitment to engaging in other forums, including the G20 and OECD discussions. It highlighted the country’s flexibility in international alliances.

This dual-track strategy reinforces Indonesia’s role as a bridge between developed and developing nations, maximising the benefits of both alliances without sacrificing its autonomy.

What’s next for Indonesia?

Indonesia’s decision to join BRICS marks a significant evolution in its foreign policy. By participating in BRICS, Indonesia positions itself as a critical player in global discussions on economic reform and development, asserting its voice within a multi-polar world order.

Indonesia is charting a path that balances traditional alliances with emerging opportunities, reinforcing its role as a dynamic, independent player on the world stage. Läs mer…

A ruling by the UK’s Special Immigration Appeals Commission has revealed that a Chinese businessman with links to King Charles’ younger brother, Prince Andrew, has been banned from Britain. The commission was upholding a decision originally taken in 2023 by the then home secretary, Suella Braverman, to exclude a man subsequently named as Yang Tengbo.

Britain’s Security Service, MI5, had advised the commission that Yang posed “a risk to UK national security”. Reports have noted Yang’s visits to royal events at the request of the prince and his communications with one of Andrew’s senior advisers, Dominic Hampshire.

That Andrew might have been cultivated by an agent of the Chinese government will come as no surprise to anyone who has studied the work of intelligence agencies. Their ideal target will not necessarily be someone who sympathises with the regime they serve. Indeed with the collapse of the ideological certainties of the cold war, this has become increasingly unlikely.

Rather, a target will probably be someone who has particular weaknesses that can be exploited, often revolving around money or sex. They are seldom at the very pinnacle of power. But that, in itself, can leave them resentful and hungry for affirmation.

An exaggerated sense of self-importance can render them even more pliable. This can make for a complex relationship between intelligence predator and their prey.

In Andrew’s case, there are indications that members of his circle actually talked up the prince’s importance as a political contact. The commission’s ruling quoted a message from Hampshire to Yang in March 2020 after the latter had been invited to attend the Prince’s 60th birthday party.

Hampshire told Yang: “I also hope that it is clear to you where you sit with my principal and indeed his family. You should never underestimate the strength of that relationship. …outside of his closest internal confidants, you sit at the very top of a tree that many, many people would like to be on.”

Those more familiar with the workings of the British government might be sceptical about the height of the branches Yang had reached. King Charles is, after all, a constitutional monarch with few formal powers. And Andrew has become an increasingly marginalised figure within the royal family.

A steady stream of revelations about his relationship with sex-trafficker and paedophile Jeffrey Epstein has left him increasingly out in the cold. He was stripped of his role as UK trade envoy in 2011 and was then forced to step down from public duties in 2019. So why bother trying to court him?

Clues are provided in an important survey of the links between the royal family and the intelligence community published by international history specialists Richard Aldrich and Rory Cormac in 2021. As they note, before 2011, Andrew had enjoyed a long career in the royal navy and then as a British trade envoy, becoming closely involved in the sensitive and secretive world of UK arms sales.

In 2010, the Wikileaks revelations suggested Andrew had been fiercely critical of the Serious Fraud Office for almost derailing a deal with Saudi Arabia and that his inside knowledge might have extended to some dark corners of the arms trade and its methods. There were also reports that the UK’s foreign intelligence service, MI6, was concerned that a former US deputy police chief close to the investigation into the Epstein affair might have leaked details to Russia, leaving Andrew open to blackmail.

So Andrew probably was a tempting target, combining personal vulnerability with knowledge that could, at the very least, be embarrassing to the UK. But then, to borrow former US defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s vivid phrase about Iraq, the British establishment has long provided foreign intelligence agencies with “a target-rich environment”. And the waters tend to be muddied by the ease with which legitimate contacts based on cultural and trade diplomacy can morph into something more sinister.

Broader concerns

The ruling of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission quoted from a statement by the director-general of MI5 from July 2022 which distinguished between legitimate diplomacy and “what we call interference activity – influencing that is clandestine, coercive or corruptive”. Yet, in practice, the distinction is often opaque.

When darker forces are at work, it often only becomes apparent as a result of prolonged surveillance of those involved. And that, in turn, assumes Britain’s spies are actually doing their job. Various bodies have questioned whether they are.

In a July 2020 report, the parliamentary intelligence and security committee criticised the intelligence community for not being more curious about certain aspects of Russian activity. The possibility of Kremlin interference in the 2016 Brexit referendum was a significant concern.

The implication – that intelligence officials had been nervous about getting involved in such a sensitive political issue – was rather borne out by the fate of the committee’s report itself. It was delivered to then prime minister Boris Johnson in October 2019 but was not released to the public until well after his pro-Brexit government had won the general election of December that year.

Nor is the Labour party without questions to answer. At the same time as the Prince Andrew scandal was unfolding, Christine Lee, who donated £584,177 to the office of the Labour MP Barry Gardiner, lost a claim against MI5 which had accused her of engaging in political interference on behalf of China. Gardiner has said in response that none of the donations “according to MI5, came from an illegal source” and that he has “ceased all contact” with Lee following the MI5 warning.

Prince Andrew’s behaviour is part of a wider picture and speaks to the general need for higher standards in British public life. Stricter rules on political donations to prevent foreign interference in British politics are long overdue. And people of political influence, including members of both houses of parliament, should be far more closely scrutinised over their relationships with foreign officials and business people. National security, as the term implies, very much begins at home. Läs mer…

The Bob Dylan biopic “A Complete Unknown,” starring Timothée Chalamet, focuses on Dylan’s early 1960s transition from idiosyncratic singer of folk songs to internationally renowned singer-songwriter.

As a music historian, I’ve always respected one decision of Dylan’s in particular – one that kicked off the young artist’s most turbulent and significant period of creative activity.

Sixty years ago, on Halloween Night 1964, a 23-year-old Dylan took the stage at New York City’s Philharmonic Hall. He had become a star within the niche genre of revivalist folk music. But by 1964 Dylan was building a much larger fanbase through performing and recording his own songs.

Columbia Records was on hand to turn Dylan’s Oct. 31, 1964, performance into a live album.
GAB Archive/Redferns via Getty Images

Dylan presented a solo set, mixing material he had previously recorded with some new songs. Representatives from his label, Columbia Records, were on hand to record the concert, with the intent to release the live show as his fifth official album.

It would have been a logical successor to Dylan’s four other Columbia albums. With the exception of one track, “Corrina, Corrina,” those albums, taken together, featured exclusively solo acoustic performances.

But at the end of 1964, Columbia shelved the recording of the Philharmonic Hall concert. Dylan had decided that he wanted to make a different kind of music.

From Minnesota to Manhattan

Two-and-a-half years earlier, Dylan, then just 20 years old, started earning acclaim within New York City’s folk music community. At the time, the folk music revival was taking place in cities across the country, but Manhattan’s Greenwich Village was the movement’s beating heart.

Mingling with and drawing inspiration from other folk musicians, Dylan, who had recently moved to Manhattan from Minnesota, secured his first gig at Gerde’s Folk City on April 11, 1961. Dylan appeared in various other Greenwich Village music clubs, performing folk songs, ballads and blues. He aspired to become, like his hero Woody Guthrie, a self-contained artist who could employ vocals, guitar and harmonica to interpret the musical heritage of “the old, weird America,” an adage coined by critic Greil Marcus to describe Dylan’s early repertoire, which was composed of material learned from prewar songbooks, records and musicians.

While Dylan’s versions of older songs were undeniably captivating, he later acknowledged that some of his peers in the early 1960s folk music scene – specifically, Mike Seeger – were better at replicating traditional instrumental and vocal styles.

Dylan, however, realized he had an unrivaled facility for writing and performing new songs.

In October 1961, veteran talent scout John Hammond signed Dylan to record for Columbia. His eponymous debut, released in March 1962, featured interpretations of traditional ballads and blues, with just two original compositions. That album sold only 5,000 copies, leading some Columbia officials to refer to the Dylan contract as “Hammond’s Folly.”

Full steam ahead

Flipping the formula of its predecessor, Dylan’s 1963 follow-up album, “The Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan,” offered 11 originals by Dylan and just two traditional songs. The powerful collection combined songs about relationships with original protest songs, including his breakthrough “Blowin’ in the Wind.”

“The Times They Are A-Changin’,” his third release, exclusively showcased Dylan’s own compositions.

Dylan’s creative output continued. As he testified in “Restless Farewell,” the closing track for “The Times They Are A-Changin’,” “My feet are now fast / and point away from the past.”

Released just six months after “The Times,” Dylan’s fourth Columbia album, “Another Side of Bob Dylan,” featured solo acoustic recordings of original songs that were lyrically adventurous and less focused on current events. As suggested in his song “My Back Pages,” he was now rejecting the notion that he could – or should – speak for his generation.

Bringing it all together

By the end of 1964, Dylan yearned to break away permanently from the constraints of the folk genre – and from the notion of “genre” altogether. He wanted to subvert the expectations of audiences and to rebel against music industry forces intent on pigeonholing him and his work.

The Philharmonic Hall concert went off without a hitch, but Dylan refused to let Columbia turn it into an album. The recording wouldn’t generate an official release for another four decades.

Instead, in January 1965, Dylan entered Columbia’s Studio A to record his fifth album, “Bringing It All Back Home.” But this time, he embraced the electric rock sound that had energized America in the wake of Beatlemania. That album introduced songs with stream-of-consciousness lyrics featuring surreal imagery, and on many of the songs Dylan performed with the accompaniment of a rock band.

Dylan plays a Fender Jazz bass while recording ‘Bringing It All Back Home’ in Columbia’s Studio A in New York City in January 1965.
Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

“Bringing It All Back Home,” released in March 1965, set the tone for Dylan’s next two albums: “Highway 61 Revisited,” in August 1965, and “Blonde and Blonde,” in June 1966. Critics and fans have long considered these latter three albums – pulsing with what the singer-songwriter himself called “that thin, that wild mercury sound” – as among the greatest albums of the rock era.

On July 25, 1965, at the Newport Folk Festival, Dylan invited members of the Paul Butterfield Blues Band on stage to accompany three songs. Since the genre expectations for folk music during that era involved acoustic instrumentation, the audience was unprepared for Dylan’s loud performances. Some critics deemed the set an act of heresy, an affront to folk music propriety. The next year, Dylan embarked on a tour of the U.K., and an audience member at the Manchester stop infamously heckled him for abandoning folk music, crying out, “Judas!”

Yet the creative risks undertaken by Dylan during this period inspired countless other musicians: rock acts such as the Beatles, the Animals and the Byrds; pop acts such as Stevie Wonder, Johnny Rivers and Sonny and Cher; and country singers such as Johnny Cash.

Acknowledging the bar that Dylan’s songwriting set, Cash, in his liner notes to Dylan’s 1969 album “Nashville Skyline,” wrote, “Here-in is a hell of a poet.”

Enlivened by Dylan’s example, many musicians went on to experiment with their own sound and style, while artists across a range of genres would pay homage to Dylan through performing and recording his songs.

In 2016, Dylan received the Nobel Prize in literature “for having created new poetic expressions within the great American song tradition.” His early exploration of this tradition can be heard on his first four Columbia albums – records that laid the groundwork for Dylan’s august career.

Back in 1964, Dylan was the talk of Greenwich Village.

But now, because he never rested on his laurels, he’s the toast of the world. Läs mer…

Threats and harassment are pushing some politicians out of office, scaring off some would-be candidates and even compelling some elected officials to change their vote.

Those are some of the conclusions of a new study I led on political violence in Southern California.

Rising threats against public officials is a national problem.

Between 2013 and 2016, there were, on average, 38 federal charges involving threats to public officials per year, according to the National Counterterrorism Innovation, Technology and Education Center, a research center. That average sharply increased between 2017 and 2022, when an average of 62 federal charges were brought annually for threats to public officials.

When elected officials worry for their safety, it has implications for all Americans. Democracy suffers when people are governed by fear.

‘Respectful discourse has been lost’

I am the founder and director of the Violence, Inequality and Power Lab, or VIP Lab, housed at the University of San Diego’s Kroc Institute for Peace and Justice. Over the past two years, the VIP Lab has been collecting data to understand the frequency and severity of threats against local elected officials in Southern California.

Our research focused on California’s three southernmost counties – San Diego, Riverside and Imperial. Together, these counties have just under 6 million residents, or roughly 15% of California’s population.

To capture as complete a picture as possible, we did a survey and interviews, reviewed news coverage and social media accounts, and scoured literature nationwide.

The first year, we focused only on San Diego County, surveying 330 mayors, city councilors, county board of supervisor members and school board and community college board members. Over 25% of survey recipients responded. Of them, 75% reported being threatened or harassed at least once in the past five years. Roughly half said the abuse occurred at least monthly.

Respondents had found their name shared on the dark web and seen cars drive past their homes in an intimidating manner. They’d been followed after public meetings and blocked from leaving. In some cases, their families were harassed.

“As a parent, [I] feel vulnerable,” one city council member said, adding that he’s become “very guarded with [my] kid in public.”

Topics that were most likely to prompt threats and harassment included COVID-19, gun control, school curricula and LGBTQ+ rights.

“Since the pandemic, people have been mobilized into different silos or groups of people,” said a school board member interviewed in 2023. “[R]espectful discourse has been lost in all of this.”

A resident and elected official in a heated debate after a city council meeting, South Gate, Calif., 2003.
Richard Hartog/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

In year two, we sent surveys to 785 elected officials in all three counties. Two-thirds of respondents reported having been threatened or harassed at least once in the previous five years. Roughly the same number said verbal attacks had become a routine part of public service.

These attacks come from the public, they told us, and from other elected officials. Officials have been accused of corruption, called idiots and told they should die. School board members face allegations that they “don’t care about kids.”

The threats “are verbal, at council meetings, outside of meetings, during breaks,” said one interviewee serving on a city council. “I’ve been harassed by city council members, staff members, the city manager and the city attorney.”

A troubling trend

In simple terms, our research suggests that at least two of every three people who serve in public office in Southern California will be threatened, intimidated or harassed during their tenure.

Survey results suggest the average female elected official who experiences abuse is threatened or harassed at least six times as often as her male peers. Men reported being on the receiving end of abuse about once a year, while women suffer abuse almost monthly.

The attacks against women are more likely to be personalized – referring to their looks or their family members – and have a sexual nature.

It was “slanderous stuff,” one school board member told us of abusive text messages that started in 2022 after many years of service. “Language of being evil … of not being a Christian woman.”

Her husband was also followed by a car, and her home was circled by the same vehicle. No one else on her board reported similar abuse.

We heard many accounts like this from female elected officials in Southern California. One city councilwoman filed two police reports against men who threatened, harassed and stalked her. A second was threatened throughout her campaign and time in office, including by a man who used a racial slur and threatened to “take care of” her with his AK-47.

Even so, our most recent survey revealed that male elected officials are most concerned about political violence. Sixty-four percent reported that things had become worse during their time in office, compared with 50% of women.

Counterintuitively, white, male, rural and conservative respondents all reported that threats and harassment had gotten worse more often than their nonwhite, female, urban and liberal counterparts – even though nonwhite, female, urban and liberal respondents reported more threats and harassment overall.

This finding may reflect a meaningful shift in how threats are used in politics. We believe that those responsible for abuse previously targeted the most vulnerable elected officials – namely women and other underrepresented groups.

But as it becomes more common to use threats and harassment as a means to influence decision-making, everyone is a target.

Most of the abuse we documented is, thankfully, not physical. But “hostile, aggressive or violent acts motivated by political objectives or a desire to directly or indirectly affect political change or change in governance” is, by definition, political violence.

And our research shows that this constant, low-level abuse is taking its toll on people and communities.

Fear-based governing

Our study results mirror findings from other research on growing political violence in the U.S.

The number of threats targeting members of Congress went up 88% between 2018 and 2021, from 5,206 in 2018 to 9,625 in 2021.

Meanwhile, a 2023 study on state legislators by the nonprofit Brennan Center for Justice found that 89% had been threatened, harassed or insulted at some point over the previous three years. That means roughly 6,000 of the approximately 7,000 state legislators in the U.S. have been abused or intimidated since 2020.

The Capitol insurrection of Jan. 6, 2021, demonstrated for many Americans the threat of political violence.
Brent Stirton/Getty Images

Most Americans don’t need these data points: Three-quarters of Americans already believe political violence is a problem, according to the States United Democracy Center.

Constituents have a right, even an imperative, to make their opinions known to the individuals they elect. Accountability and representation are essential to democracy. But there is a line between expressing disagreement and using intimidation or violence to influence policy decisions. And the latter can have some distinctly undemocratic outcomes.

Six percent of the elected officials we interviewed said they had actually changed their vote on a specific issue due to the climate of fear. And 43% of our survey respondents said that threats and harassment have caused them to consider leaving their post.

“I don’t think it’s fair to have to fight so hard,” said one relatively new school board member. “I’m mad at myself for letting the bullies win.”

The climate of fear is also keeping people from serving. Nationwide, 69% of mayors surveyed by the Mayors Innovation Project said they knew someone who had decided not to run for office due to threats or fear of violence.

When fear – rather than the needs of community – becomes a driving force in politics, democracy loses. That’s rule by the powerful, not rule by the people. Läs mer…

Two influential tech CEOs have sparked a debate about AI’s effect on jobs. Klarna CEO Sebastian Siemiatkowski announced the buy-now, pay-later firm stopped hiring a year ago, claiming that AI can do most of the jobs that humans do. And the chief executive of AI firm Nvidia, Jensen Huang, has argued that workers are not going to lose their jobs to AI – but they could lose it to somebody who uses AI.

These opposing views capture a crucial tension as generative AI rapidly transforms workplaces. But research suggests the reality is more complex than either complete job displacement or simple augmentation.

As of spring 2024, 66% of employment in the US was exposed to a high or moderate level of generative AI impact, with the remaining 34% of jobs still affected in secondary tasks. Unlike previous technological revolutions, generative AI is being adopted at an unprecedented pace, outstripping the adoption rates of personal computers and the internet.

What makes this transformation particularly significant is that generative AI is disrupting a different array of “cognitive” and “non-routine” tasks, especially in middle- to higher-paid professions. This marks a departure from previous waves of automation that primarily affected routine manual labour. With the constantly evolving generative AI landscape, this trend is likely to continue and strengthen.

Research provides insights into how AI is actually affecting worker productivity and job security. One of the first comprehensive studies examined the effect of AI-powered conversational assistants on customer support agents. The findings challenge both the utopian and dystopian visions of AI’s impact.

The study found that access to AI tools increased worker productivity by an average of 14%. However, the benefits weren’t distributed equally. Novice and low-skilled workers saw the most dramatic improvements, with productivity gains of up to 35%. The AI effectively helped newer workers quickly adopt the techniques of high-performing agents.

Surprisingly, highly skilled workers saw minimal productivity gains from the AI tools. This suggests that rather than replacing human expertise, AI might help to make things more equal by elevating the capabilities of less-experienced workers.

Klarna’s experiment

Against this backdrop, Klarna’s approach of ceasing hiring and allowing natural workforce attrition represents a bold experiment. Siemiatkowski’s claim that AI can replace most human jobs aligns with concerns about widespread job displacement.

However, the company’s strategy of increasing salaries for remaining workers suggests a more nuanced reality: even as AI automates certain tasks, human expertise becomes more valuable, not less. This aligns with research showing that organisations need workers who can use AI tools effectively.

The boss of Klarna has said the fintech giant hasn’t had to recruit in more than a year thanks to AI.
rarrarorro/Shutterstock

The perspective of Nvidia CEO Huang – that people will lose jobs to AI users rather than AI itself – finds support in emerging workplace trends. A KPMG survey of US executives found that while administrative jobs face significant risk from AI, the effects vary widely across sectors. In manufacturing, for instance, 20% of respondents expect benefits from AI, while 24% anticipate negative effects.

This suggests that rather than wholesale replacement of workers, it’s likely to be a transformation of roles. The key factor in job security may not be whether a role can be automated, but whether workers and organisations can effectively integrate AI tools into their workflows.

Crucially, researchers studying ChatGPT adoption in Denmark found that half of the workers surveyed have used the generative AI tool. Younger, less-experienced, higher-achieving, and especially male workers were leading adoption. The study suggests that while workers see substantial productivity potential in ChatGPT, employer restrictions and a need for training are hindering its full adoption; it does not appear that workers fear job redundancy as a reason for avoiding the technology.

The evidence points to several strategies for workers and organisations navigating this transition.

1. The importance of lifelong learning

Workers need to continuously update their skills, focusing particularly on capabilities that complement AI, such as critical thinking and complex problem-solving.

2. The value of AI literacy

Understanding how to use AI tools effectively is becoming as crucial as traditional job skills.

3. The need for organisations to adapt

Companies must invest in employee training and development while implementing clear guidelines for AI use.

The rapid adoption of generative AI means these changes are happening faster than previous technological transformations. Workers and organisations that adapt quickly will probably have significant advantages over those that delay.
x
The contrasting views of Siemiatkowski and Huang represent different possibilities in our AI-augmented future. The evidence suggests neither complete displacement of human workers nor business-as-usual is likely. Instead, we’re entering a period where the ability to work alongside AI will increasingly determine career success.

Early evidence suggesting that AI can help level the playing field for less experienced workers is encouraging. But perhaps the most important lesson from both CEOs’ predictions is this: while we can’t control how AI will transform industries, we can control how well we adapt to it.

In this new landscape, the key to job security isn’t fighting AI or passively accepting it – it’s actively choosing to become the person using AI rather than the person being replaced by someone who does. Läs mer…

When Elon Musk took over Twitter and changed its name to X, many users vowed to move to another platform. First was talk of a shift to Mastodon that never seemed to catch on. Then Meta tried to make Threads appealing by linking the app to Instagram – but this hasn’t had much cut-through either.

Now it’s Bluesky’s turn. In the weeks since the US election, the platform has grown rapidly as users flee X.

This is partly because Musk’s involvement in Donald Trump’s election campaign clearly showed where his political allegiances lay. But he has also fundamentally changed how people see X as a platform, particularly as a place to get good-quality journalism.

Many of those flocking to Bluesky have been publishers, news organisations and journalists, sending a message that they no longer see X as a valuable space to post their reporting. A group of UK journalists signed an open letter calling X “no longer a useful tool for objective reporting”.

Right now, Bluesky still remains very small compared to X. Getting official and widely agreed-upon user numbers is difficult, but estimates put X’s worldwide userbase at around 600 million, with small declines in recent months.

In comparison, Bluesky reported 13 million users in October, with increases following the US election. Estimates vary wildly, however, if you choose different metrics like daily active or monthly active users.

Our 2024 Digital News Report data at the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (from surveys fielded in January) puts the proportion of adults using X for any purpose at 25% in both the US and UK. Meanwhile, 15% of people in the US and 14% of people in the UK report using X for news. Our figures are similar to those of Pew Research Center and Ofcom.

As for Bluesky, usage barely registered in our 2024 data. Usage for any purpose was 2% in the US and 1% in the UK.

Facebook and YouTube are still the most widely used platforms in the UK and US, followed by Instagram.

But what is perhaps more important right now is looking at the specific organisations and individuals that are leaving X. NPR was one of the first news brands to stop posting, and the Guardian followed. The European Federation of Journalists, which represents nearly 300,000 journalists, has said it will stop posting on X from January, when Trump takes office. And some celebrities are also leaving.

Journalism on Twitter

Relative to its size, Twitter/X has always had an outsized impact on public discourse. This is largely due to the types of people who were attracted to the platform and became heavy users: journalists, politicians, and other public figures. “Power users” on the platform drove public narratives in many ways. Twitter was where cultural and political debates happened. News broke on Twitter.

Our research at the Reuters Institute from 2021 and 2023 showed this. People saw the platform as a good place to see breaking news, follow news publishers, and generally keep up with goings on. While Facebook was seen as a place to connect with friends and family, and YouTube a place to find entertainment, Twitter’s brand was as a destination for up-to-date information.

Musk’s changes to X, from complicating the “blue tick” verification system, to removing news headlines from links, to deprioritising news and links, have negatively affected the news industry, making the platform less appealing to publishers.

Elon Musk has made several changes to X that have made it more difficult for journalists to share information.
Frederic Legrand/Shutterstock

As news brands and journalists leave, in their place Musk has appeared to boost the voices of right-leaning users, while abandoning many of Twitter’s content moderation policies and reframing X as a right-wing social media platform.

Bluesky, on the other hand, has demonstrated appeal to the news industry, with reports of better referral traffic, a chronological timeline that suits breaking news, the ability to customise feeds and a general creative spark that some say reminds them of early Twitter.

For those remaining on X, the experience for many has been a steady increase in misinformation, hate speech and general toxicity, fuelled by Musk’s changes to the platform. With many reliable news publishers leaving, there is the risk that less reliable sources are further amplified.

The new ‘it’ place

It is possible, because of the migration of certain types of users, that the popularity of Bluesky is overstated. If journalists, academics and other professionals see all their friends and colleagues popping up on Bluesky, it may give the impression that a wider movement is underway – but this could be a mistake.

On the other hand, it may be precisely who is moving to Bluesky that matters. What the shift among social media power users (journalists, politicians, public figures) may do is encourage others to join.

If the buzz maintains its current level, more people may sign up to be part of it. Once there, they may see Bluesky’s “anti-toxic” features, including the ability to hide replies and filter notifications, and come to like the user experience, as many journalists have.

The key to whether it can really “replace” Twitter as a driver of news will be in how many people ultimately move. What’s always required to make a platform successful is a critical mass – enough people being there to make it feel useful and interesting, making you want to come back.

If people initially joined Twitter because that’s where the up-to-date conversations were happening, then Bluesky may benefit from becoming the new “it” place, supplanting X/Twitter’s former status as the place to be.

However, Bluesky could still go the way of other X competitors if it doesn’t maintain momentum and reach that critical mass. We’ve seen plenty of hype cycles before. Läs mer…

One of the most significant African museum openings of 2024 was the Musée des Rois Bamoun, or Museum of the Bamoun Kings, in Foumban, Cameroon.

Housing over 10,000 objects, it offers more than 600 years of history in its display of the treasures of the Bamoun kingdom, one of the oldest in sub-Saharan Africa. The museum’s striking architecture is dominated by a two-headed snake at its entrance and a spider perched on top of it.

Cameroonian archaeologist and heritage scholar Rachel Mariembe visited the museum and wrote a research paper on it. We asked her about it.

Who are the Bamoun kings?

The Bamoun (or Bamum) kingdom in western Cameroon was established in 1394 by the Tikar prince Nshare Yèn. Settling in the region from neighbouring territory, he established the palace at Foumban. The monarchy has survived through 20 reigns.

Nshare Yèn’s daughter became notable as the first female ruler of the kingdom. Her name means “skin of the sky”, a reference to her light complexion at birth. King Mônjù (1461–1498) introduced an eight-day week, advancing the idea of chronological organisation. After a period of some stagnation, Mo’Nguh (1568–1590) reconstructed the palace, preserving royal heritage. Kuotu (1672–1757) suppressed internal uprisings and ruled for an unprecedented 85 years.

King Nji Mforifum Mbombo Njoya Mohammad Nabil (centre) attending the museum opening.
Daniel Beloumou Olomo/AFP/Getty Images

The 11th king, Mbuombuo Mandù (1757–1814), expanded the kingdom through military campaigns but this was followed by a period of internal strife and massacres under Gbètnkom (1814–1817). When he died, power was left in the hands of his son, still a child.

Nguwuo (1818–1863) was a minister in the Bamum royal army who unexpectedly ascended to power. Despite not being from royal lineage, he restored the kingdom. He governed wisely for four decades until he was unseated in a coup by Nsangu, who was noted for his military skill and cruelty, but also his generosity. He met his demise in battle against the Nso people.

One of Bamum’s most illustrious leaders was Njoya Ibrahima (1889–1933), an innovator and cultural icon. He invented the A Ka U Ku script around 1896 and the Shümom language in 1912, promoting education and literacy. Njoya also established a hybrid religion, Nwet-Nkwete, blending Islam and Christianity with animist beliefs. His reign saw the construction of a magnificent palace in Foumban. Resistance to French colonial authority led to his exile in 1931.

A view of the palace near the museum.
Rachel Mariembe

His son, Njimoluh, restored stability to the Bamum kingdom. He reintroduced the Nguon festival and served in Cameroon’s parliament, but faced challenges during Cameroon’s transition to pluralist democracy. Mbombo Njoya Ibrahim (1992–2021) held various high-ranking positions and modernised the kingdom’s administration. He built a royal museum housing over 3,000 artifacts.

Nji Mforifoum Mbombo Njoya Mohammad Nabil (2021–) is the reigning monarch. His leadership represents the continuity of the heritage of the Bamum people into the modern era.

It’s this rich story that the museum tells.

Can you walk us through a visit?

A museum mediator accompanies visitors through almost a dozen key exhibition spaces, starting with the portrait gallery showing images of the 20 kings. This leads to vast murals, including one that illustrates the establishment of the kingdom. Artefacts include royal headdresses, a statue and parts of an ancient pirogue (canoe) and tree.

The new museum’s astonishing architecture.
Rachel Mariembe

This leads to exhibits from the 2nd to the 10th kings. Items on show include Bamoun cloth. The first fabric was created from beaten tree bark and dyed with indigo.

King Mbuombuo’s space displays a large statue of the 11th king in traditional attire. The kingdom’s coat of arms, featuring a mygale spider, a two-headed snake, and a double-gong bell, decorates the wall. In the centre of the room, a human skull and calabash are displayed. War trophy costumes, Tu’molah crest masks, royal pipes and weapons are also exhibited.

Highlights of the 12th and 13th kings’ space include royal headdresses, umbrellas and handbags. One then arrives at a room with audiovisual projections that offer insights into the secret societies of Bamoun culture. There are then artefacts from these societies (the Nguri, Mut-Ngu, and Mbansié) including dance costumes and masks. Next one encounters a showcase of Bamoun craftsmanship and artistry.

The space of the 15th, 16th and 17th kings includes a beaded royal stool, weapons, a human skull, royal bed, King Njoya’s manuscripts, costumes, private chambers, Quranic artefacts, musical instruments, masks and portraits.

The space of the 18th, 19th and 20th kings features photographs, the 18th king’s prayer room and private rooms, a Quran translated into Bamoun, a throne, ceremonial stones, costumes, a sceptre and the like.

Why is it so effective as a place of memory?

The museum embodies both a tangible and symbolic place of memory. Its location and its treasures reflect the historical, cultural and artistic heritage of the Bamoun people. As French historian Pierre Nora suggested, such spaces become “places of memory” by intertwining material objects with symbolic meanings.

A pivotal moment in Bamum history was King Njoya’s decision to open royal treasures to the wider community, breaking with the tradition of exclusivity tied to specific cultural ceremonies. He also reformed Bamoun craftsmanship.

Traditional masked dancers perform during the inauguration of the museum.
Daniel Beloumou Olomo/AFP/Getty Images

Originally located in the royal palace, itself an architectural marvel, the museum was relocated to a new building under King Ibrahim Mbombo Njoya, the 19th monarch. This shift allowed for a more modern exhibition. Each ruler has contributed to preserving and expanding this collective heritage.

Under the current monarch the museum has undergone further modernisation to align with contemporary practices.

Why does your study raise issues of looted heritage and restitution?

The restitution of cultural objects taken from places like the Bamoun kingdom during colonial rule is a multifaceted issue. It involves emotional, cultural, political, legal and economic dimensions. Beyond physical objects, restitution addresses the memory and stories of these items, their decolonisation, and their new context when returned.

A Bamoun warrior responsible for the security of the king shoots into the air during the inauguration.
Daniel Beloumou Olomo/AFP/Getty Images

The removal of Bamoun artefacts from their designated environments disrupted their cultural significance and function. In their new settings, they lost much of their meaning, becoming incomplete. This loss underscores the need for restitution and raises questions about the museum’s role both internally (in maintaining identity) and externally (in addressing colonial legacies).

Read more:
Five exciting African museums to add to your travel wish list

In Bamoun society, cultural objects gain legitimacy through their use in socio-cultural practices under the authority of the palace, the pinnacle of the social structure. These objects serve dynamic roles, activated or deactivated depending on their context – be it rites, initiation ceremonies or public exhibitions. When these items are removed, the intricate universe that gives them meaning is shattered.

Restoring these artefacts to their rightful contexts is essential so that they continue to serve as markers of identity and history. Läs mer…