The Dust Veil Environmental Disaster of AD 536

The Dust Veil Environmental Disaster of AD 536 According to written records and supported by dendrochronology (tree ring) and archaeological evidence, for 12-18 months in AD 536-537, a thick, persistent dust veil or dry fog darkened the skies between Europe and Asia Minor. The climatic interruption brought by the thick, bluish fog extended as far east as China, where summer frosts and snow are mentioned in historical records; tree ring data from Mongolia and Siberia to Argentina and Chile reflect decreased growing records from 536 and the subsequent decade. The climatic effects of the dust veil brought decreased temperatures, drought, and food shortages throughout the affected regions: in Europe, two years later came the Justinian plague. The combination killed perhaps as much as 1/3 of the population of Europe; in China, the famine killed perhaps 80% of people in some regions; and in Scandinavia, the losses may have been as much as 75-90% of the population, as evidenced by the numbers of deserted villages and cemeteries. Historical Documentation The rediscovery of the AD 536 event was made during the 1980s by American geoscientists Stothers and Rampino, who searched classical sources for evidence of volcanic eruptions. Among their other findings, they noted several references to environmental disasters around the world between AD 536-538. Contemporary reports identified by Stothers and Rampino included Michael the Syrian, who wrote: [T]he sun became dark and its darkness lasted for one and a half years [...] Each day it shone for about four hours and still this light was only a feeble shadow [...] the fruits did not ripen and the wine tasted like sour grapes. John of Ephesus related much the same events. Prokopios, who lived in both Africa and Italy at the time, said: For the sun gave forth its light without brightness, like the moon, during this whole year, and it seemed exceedingly like the sun in eclipse, for the beams it shed were not clear nor such as it is accustomed to shed. An anonymous Syrian chronicler wrote: [T]he sun began to be darkened by day and the moon by night, while the ocean was tumultuous with spray, from the 24th of March in this year till the 24th of June in the following year... The following winter in Mesopotamia was so bad that from the large and unwonted quantity of snow the birds perished. A Summer Without Heat Cassiodorus, praetorian prefect of Italy at the time, wrote: so we have had a winter without storms, spring without mildness, summer without heat. John Lydos, in On Portents, writing from Constantinople, said: If the sun becomes dim because the air is dense from rising moisture- as happened in [536/537] for nearly a whole year [...] so that produce was destroyed because of the bad time- it predicts heavy trouble in Europe. In China, reports indicate that the star of Canopus could not be seen in as usual in the spring and fall equinoxes of 536, and the years AD 536-538 were marked by summer snows and frosts, drought and severe famine. In some parts of China, the weather was so severe that 70-80% of the people starved to death. Physical Evidence Tree rings show that 536 and the following ten years was a period of slow growth for Scandinavian pines, European oaks and even several North American species including bristlecone pine and foxtail; similar patterns of ring size decrease are also seen in trees in Mongolia and northern Siberia. But there seems to be something of a regional variation in the worst of the effects. 536 was a bad growing season in many parts of the world, but more generally, it was a part of a decade-long downturn in climate for the northern hemisphere, separate from the worst seasons by 3-7 years. For most reports in Europe and Eurasia, there is a drop in 536, followed by a recovery in 537-539, followed by a more serious plunge lasting perhaps as late as 550. In most cases the worst year for tree ring growth is 540; in Siberia 543, southern Chile 540, Argentina 540-548. AD 536 and the Viking Diaspora Archaeological evidence described by Grslund and Price shows that Scandinavia might have experienced the worst troubles. Almost 75% of villages were abandoned in parts of Sweden, and areas of southern Norway show a decrease in formal burials- indicating that haste was required in interments- up to 90-95%. Scandinavian narratives recount possible events that might be referring to 536. Snorri Sturlusons Edda includes a reference to Fimbulwinter, the great or mighty winter that served as a forewarning of Ragnarà ¶k, the destruction of the world and all of its inhabitants. First of all that a winter will come called Fimbulwinter. Then snow will drift from all directions. There will then be great frosts and keen winds. The sun will do no good. There will be three of these winters together and no summer between. Grslund and Price speculate that the social unrest and sharp agrarian decline and demographic disaster in Scandinavia may have been a primary catalyst for the Viking diaspora- when in the 9th century AD, young men left Scandinavia in droves  and sought to conquer new worlds.   Possible Causes Scholars are divided concerning what caused the dust veil: a violent volcanic eruption- or several (see Churakova et al.), a cometary impact, even a near miss by a large comet could have created a dust cloud made up of dust particles, smoke from fires and (if a volcanic eruption) sulfuric acid droplets such as that described. Such a cloud would reflect and/or absorb light, increasing the earths albedo and measurably decreasing the temperature. Sources Arrhenius B. 2012. Helgà ¶ in the shadow of the dust veil 536-37. Journal of Archaeology and Ancient History 2013(5).Arjava A. 2005. The Mystery Cloud of 536 CE in the Mediterranean Sources. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 59:73-94.Baillie M. 2007. The case for significant numbers of extraterrestrial impacts through the late Holocene. Journal of Quaternary Science 22(2):101-109. doi: 10.1002/jqs.1099Baillie MGL, and McAneney J. 2015. Tree ring. Climate 11(1):105-114. effects and ice core acidities clarify the volcanic record of the first millennium of the PastChurakova OV, Bryukhanova MV, Saurer M, Boettger T, Naurzbaev MM, Myglan VS, Vaganov EA, Hughes MK, and Siegwolf RTW. 2014. A cluster of stratospheric volcanic eruptions in the AD 530s recorded in Siberian tree rings. Global and Planetary Change 122:140-150.Engvild KC. 2003. A review of the risks of sudden global cooling and its effects on agriculture. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 115(3–4):127-137. doi:10.1016/s0168-1923(02 )00253-8Grslund B, and Price N. 2012. Twilight of the gods? The ‘dust veil event’ of AD 536 in critical perspective. Antiquity 332:428-443. Larsen LB, Vinther BM, Briffa KR, Melvin TM, Clausen HB, Jones PD, Siggaard-Andersen M, Hammer CU, Eronen M, and Grudd H. 2008. New ice core evidence for a volcanic cause of the AD 536 dust veil. Geophysical Research Letters 35(4)Rigby E, Symonds M, and Ward-Thompson D. 2004. A comet impact in AD 536? Astronomy Geophysics 45(1):1.23-1.26

Understanding Parasocial Relationships with Celebs

Understanding Parasocial Relationships with Celebs Have you ever wondered what a movie character, a celebrity, or a TV personality would do, even when you’re not watching them on-screen? Have you felt close to a character or celebrity even though you’ve never met them in real life? If youve had one of these common experiences, youve experienced a parasocial relationship: an enduring relationship with a media figure. Key Terms Parasocial relationship: An ongoing, one-sided bond with a media figureParasocial interaction: An imagined interaction with a media figure during a discrete viewing situation Donald Horton and Richard Wohl first introduced the concept of parasocial relationships, along with the related idea of parasocial interaction, in the 1950s. Although the relationship is one-sided, it is psychologically similar to a real-life social relationship. Origins In their 1956 article, â€Å"Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction: Observations on Intimacy at a distance,† Horton and Wohl described both parasocial relationships and parasocial interaction for the first time. They used the terms somewhat interchangeably, but mostly focused their exploration on the illusion of conversational give-and-take a media consumer experiences with a media figure while watching a TV show or listening to a radio program. This led to some conceptual confusion. Although a great deal of research has been done on parasocial phenomena, especially since the 1970s and 1980s, the most widely utilized scale in that research, the Parasocial Interaction Scale, combines questions about parasocial interactions and parasocial relationships. However, today, scholars generally agree the two concepts are related but different. Defining Parasocial Interactions and Relationships When a media consumer feels like they are interacting with a media figure- a celebrity, fictional character, radio host, or even a puppet- during a discrete viewing or listening scenario, they are experiencing a parasocial interaction. For example, if a viewer feels like they are hanging out at the Dunder-Mifflin office while watching the TV comedy The Office, they are engaging in a parasocial interaction. On the other hand, if the media user imagines a long-term bond with a media figure that extends outside the viewing or listening situation, it is considered a parasocial relationship.  The bond can be either positive or negative. For instance, if an individual adores the host of their local morning program and often thinks about and discusses the host as if he is one of their friends, that individual has a parasocial relationship with the host. Scholars have observed that parasocial interactions can lead to parasocial relationships, and parasocial relationships can strengthen parasocial interactions. This process resembles the way that spending time with a person in real-life can result in a friendship that then gets deeper and more committed when the individuals spend additional time together. Parasocial vs. Interpersonal Relationships Although the idea of parasocial relationships may seem unusual at first, it’s important to remember that for most media consumers, this is a perfectly normal and psychologically healthy reaction to encounters with on-screen individuals. Humans are wired to make social connections. Media did not exist through a majority of human evolution, and so when consumers are presented with a person or person-like individual via video or audio media, their brains respond as if they were engaging in a real-life social situation. This response does not mean that the individuals believe the interaction is real. Despite media consumers’ knowledge that the interaction is an illusion, however, their perception will cause them to react to the situation as if it were real. In fact, research has shown that the development, maintenance, and dissolution of a parasocial relationship is similar in many ways to real-life interpersonal relationships. For example, one study found that when television viewers perceive a favorite television performer as having an attractive personality and as being competent in their abilities, a parasocial relationship will develop. Surprisingly, physical attraction was found to be less important to the development of parasocial relationships, leading the researchers to conclude that television viewers prefer to develop relationships with television personalities they find socially attractive and who are attractive for their capabilities.  Ã‚   Another investigation assessed the way psychological commitments to a media figure led to the maintenance of parasocial relationships. Two different studies showed that for both fictional television characters, like Homer Simpson, and non-fictional television personas, like Oprah Winfrey, people were more committed to their parasocial relationship when (1) they felt satisfied watching the figure, (2) felt committed to continue watching the figure, and (3) felt that they didnt have good alternatives to the media figure. The researchers used a scale originally developed to assess interpersonal relationships to measure commitment to parasocial relationships, demonstrating that theories and measures of interpersonal relationships can be successfully applied to parasocial relationships. Finally, research has demonstrated that media consumers can experience parasocial breakups when a parasocial relationship ends. This can happen for a number of reasons, such as a television or movie series coming to an end, a character leaving a show, or a media consumer deciding to no longer watch or listen to a show where a character or personality appears. For example, a 2006 study examined how viewers reacted when the popular TV sitcom Friends ended its broadcast run. The researchers found that the more intense the viewers’ parasocial relationships with the characters, the greater the viewers’ distress when the show ended. The pattern of loss Friends fans exhibited was similar to that displayed by those who have lost a real-life relationship, although the emotions were less intense overall. Of course, while this research demonstrates the similarities between parasocial and interpersonal relationships, there are also important distinctions. A parasocial relationship is always mediated and one-sided, with no opportunity for mutual give-and-take. People can engage in as many parasocial relationships as they want and and can break them off whenever they choose without consequence. In addition, parasocial relationships can be shared with family members and friends without jealousy. In fact, discussing a mutual parasocial relationship can actually strengthen the bond in a real-life social relationship. Parasocial Bonds in the Digital Age While much of work involving parasocial phenomena has centered on parasocial bonds with radio, movie, and especially television characters and personalities, digital technology has introduced a new medium through which parasocial relationships can be developed, maintained, and even strengthened. For example, a researcher examined the way fans of the boy band New Kids on the Block maintained their parasocial relationships with the band members by posting to the band’s website. The analysis was conducted following the announcement of the band’s reunion after a 14-year break. On the website, fans expressed their continued devotion to the band, their affection towards its members, and their desire to see the band again. They also shared stories about how the band had helped them in their own lives. Thus, computer-mediated communication assisted fans in their parasocial relationship maintenance. Before the dawn of the internet, people could write fan letters to achieve a similar experience, but the researcher observed that online communication appeared to make fans feel closer to media figures, and that this could make the disclosure of personal feelings and anecdotes more likely.  Ã‚   It stands to reason, then, that social networks like Facebook and Twitter would make an even more substantial contribution to the maintenance of parasocial relationships. Celebrities appear to write and share their own messages with fans on these sites, and fans can respond to their messages, creating the potential for fans to develop even greater feelings of intimacy with media figures. So far, minimal research has been conducted on the way these technological developments impact parasocial relationships, but the topic is ripe for future research. Sources Branch, Sara E., Kari M. Wilson, and Christopher R. Agnew. â€Å"Committed to Oprah, Homer, and House: Using the Investment Model to Understand Parasocial Relationships.† Psychology of Popular Media Culture, vol. 2, no. 2, 2013, pp. 96-109, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030938Dibble, Jayson L., Tilo Hartmann, and Sarah F. Rosaen. â€Å"Parasocial interaction and Parasocial Relationship: Conceptual Clarification and a Critical Assessment of Measures.† Human Communication Research, vol. 42, no. 1, 2016, pp. 21-44, https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12063  Eyal, Keren, and Jonathan Cohen. â€Å"When Good Friends Say Goodbye: A Parasocial Breakup Study.† Journal of Broadcasting Electronic Media, vol. 50, no. 3, 2006, pp. 502-523, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem5003_9Giles, David, C. â€Å"Parasocial Interaction: A Review of the Literature and a Model for Future Research.† Media Psychology, vol. 4, no. 3., 2002, pp. 279-305, https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XM EP0403_04Horton, Donald, and R. Richard Wohl. â€Å"Mass Communication and Parasocial Interaction: Observation of Intimacy at a Distance.† Psychiatry, vol. 19, no. 3, 1956, pp. 215-229, https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049 Hu, Mu. â€Å"The influence of a scandal on parasocial relationship, parasocial interaction, and parsocial breakup.† Psychology of Popular Media Culture, vol. 5, no. 3, 2016, pp. 217-231, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000068Rubin, Alan M., Elizabeth M. Perse, and Robert A. Powell. â€Å"Loneliness, parasocial interaction, and local television news viewing.† Human Communication Research, vol. 12, no. 2, 1985, pp. 155-180, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1985.tb00071.xRubin, Rebecca B., and Michael P. McHugh. â€Å"Development of Parasocial Interaction Relationships.† Journal of Broadcasting Electronic Media, vol. 31, no. 3, 1987, pp. 279-292, https://doi.org/10.1080/08838158709386664Sanderson, James. â€Å"’You Are All Loved So Much:’ Exploring Relational Maintenance Within the Context of Parasocial Relationships.† Journal of Media Psychology, vol. 21, no. 4, 2009, pp. 171-182, https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105.21.4.171