Split (1)

train · 729k rows

text string	id string	dump string	url string	file_path string	language string	language_score float64	token_count int64	score float64	int_score int64	embedding list	count int64	Content string	Tokens int64	Top_Lang string	Top_Conf float64
Born to Mexican immigrant parents, Rodriguez felt a disconnect between Spanish, the language he used at home, and English, the language used in the public world. Eventually, with practice Rodriguez felt confident speaking English in public and gained a sense of identity among his peers. Starting at a young age, Richard started to learn Spanish. This was because his parents would only address him in Spanish, "During those years when I was first conscious of hearing, my mother and father addressed me only in Spanish; in Spanish I learned to reply. By contrast, English, was the language I came to associate with gringos. At a young age the barrier between Spanish speaking people, and "gringos" started to form. This barrier caused him to feel almost unsafe when he heard people speak in English. For a while, he was uncomfortable when he, or any of his family members, would speak in English. For instance, on page he describes an experience where his father was talking in English, and he describes how awkward and uncomfortable it was. The barrier began to grow through the bilingual education program in his school. He feels as if the program was not encouraging students to speak in English, and it made him feel like his family language was a private language. He needed to be taught that he had the obligation to learn the language of los gringos. Eventually, his two communities, private and public, clashed when the nun came to his house. From that point on he was then encouraged to speak English, and he eventually became more confident with the language. This clash helped him develop his personal identity. Obviously, there is no more struggle with the English language seeing that he is a successful essayist. The clash made him feel closer to anyone that spoke his language, because he felt that they had a connection that no one else had. This clash possibly lead him to where he is today, writing about his controversial positions dealing with bilingual education programs in schools.Compared with public schools, private schools required more coursework (in 4-year high school programs) in – in social studies, mathematics, science, foreign language, and computer science. For example private schools required on average years of mathematics, while public schools required years. Language is “a system of symbols that allows members of a society to communicate with one another”. Language Reflecting Our Culture And Reality Cultural Studies Essay. Print Reference These images are delivered to the public through a variety of mediums, such as television, radio, newspaper. Language is a basic medium in the. Richard Rodriguez (born July 31, ) is an American writer who became famous as the author of Hunger of Memory: The Education of Richard Rodriguez (), a . Dec 03, · “Aria”, an essay from the memoir Hunger of Memory: the Education of Richard Rodriguez, is a poignant account of author Richard Rodriguez’ childhood experience with learning English as a second language (ESL).He discusses themes of intimacy and language, drawing special attention to “private” (intimate) and “public” language. About 46 million students are currently enrolled in the Nation’s public schools in kindergarten through grade 12, and another 6 million are enrolled in private schools. 1 Because private schools are often perceived to be more successful in teaching students. May 24, · This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue.	<urn:uuid:fba7280e-5870-487e-9ed3-461c033af4b9>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://baberuganabomewej.lausannecongress2018.com/public-and-private-language-essay-26750xy.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251728207.68/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127205148-20200127235148-00522.warc.gz	en	0.983052	701	3.28125	3	[ 0.044874873012304306, 0.23092037439346313, 0.19887131452560425, -0.23747579753398895, -0.406541109085083, 0.07324577122926712, 0.17136624455451965, -0.09739647060632706, -0.05300818383693695, -0.6313248872756958, -0.07633572816848755, 0.14485962688922882, 0.15472710132598877, 0.35695585608...	1	Born to Mexican immigrant parents, Rodriguez felt a disconnect between Spanish, the language he used at home, and English, the language used in the public world. Eventually, with practice Rodriguez felt confident speaking English in public and gained a sense of identity among his peers. Starting at a young age, Richard started to learn Spanish. This was because his parents would only address him in Spanish, "During those years when I was first conscious of hearing, my mother and father addressed me only in Spanish; in Spanish I learned to reply. By contrast, English, was the language I came to associate with gringos. At a young age the barrier between Spanish speaking people, and "gringos" started to form. This barrier caused him to feel almost unsafe when he heard people speak in English. For a while, he was uncomfortable when he, or any of his family members, would speak in English. For instance, on page he describes an experience where his father was talking in English, and he describes how awkward and uncomfortable it was. The barrier began to grow through the bilingual education program in his school. He feels as if the program was not encouraging students to speak in English, and it made him feel like his family language was a private language. He needed to be taught that he had the obligation to learn the language of los gringos. Eventually, his two communities, private and public, clashed when the nun came to his house. From that point on he was then encouraged to speak English, and he eventually became more confident with the language. This clash helped him develop his personal identity. Obviously, there is no more struggle with the English language seeing that he is a successful essayist. The clash made him feel closer to anyone that spoke his language, because he felt that they had a connection that no one else had. This clash possibly lead him to where he is today, writing about his controversial positions dealing with bilingual education programs in schools.Compared with public schools, private schools required more coursework (in 4-year high school programs) in – in social studies, mathematics, science, foreign language, and computer science. For example private schools required on average years of mathematics, while public schools required years. Language is “a system of symbols that allows members of a society to communicate with one another”. Language Reflecting Our Culture And Reality Cultural Studies Essay. Print Reference These images are delivered to the public through a variety of mediums, such as television, radio, newspaper. Language is a basic medium in the. Richard Rodriguez (born July 31, ) is an American writer who became famous as the author of Hunger of Memory: The Education of Richard Rodriguez (), a . Dec 03, · “Aria”, an essay from the memoir Hunger of Memory: the Education of Richard Rodriguez, is a poignant account of author Richard Rodriguez’ childhood experience with learning English as a second language (ESL).He discusses themes of intimacy and language, drawing special attention to “private” (intimate) and “public” language. About 46 million students are currently enrolled in the Nation’s public schools in kindergarten through grade 12, and another 6 million are enrolled in private schools. 1 Because private schools are often perceived to be more successful in teaching students. May 24, · This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue.	679	ENGLISH	1
Among European colonists dance was a favourite recreation and entertainment, and a way of keeping warm on cold nights, socialising and meeting potential partners. Encouraged to dance while on board ship (as healthy exercise), the new arrivals continued to do so once they landed. Opportunities to dance ranged from formal balls among the elite to dancing in a woolshed at the end of shearing. In 1850s Wellington (population 5,000), for example, there were balls during the ‘season’ (June to September). Less formal dances, held wherever there was enough room for dancing, were probably more frequent but went unrecorded. The worst thing A Māori observer described Europeans dancing in the 1840s. ‘[T]hey were continually bobbing to each other, and rushing to and fro in the greatest confusion, and yet we could see no collision and no blood. Then they cease, and begin eating; then more rings would sound and away they would rush as if they were mad, and go on with the same jumpings’. It was, he said, ‘katahi he hanga kino’ (the worst thing we have seen).1 In the first few decades of European settlement, women were scarce and much sought-after as dancing partners. It was usual for younger women and teenage girls to be on the floor for every dance. Behaviour at balls followed set rules, but in colonial New Zealand some of these were relaxed – men were allowed to dance together if no women were available. Suppers, which ranged from sumptuous to simple, were an important part of a ball or dance. The chance to meet a future husband or wife attracted many people to dances, and asking a partner to supper was a declaration of interest. In the mid-19th century Māori attended balls (and no doubt also dances). The New Zealander reported on the attendance of chiefly Māori at a ball at Government House in Auckland, probably in the 1850s. The women, who wore the latest European fashions, were enthusiastic dancers, quickly mastering the steps of quadrilles and polkas, but the men were more reserved, preferring to watch. By the later 19th century the attendance of well-to-do Māori at balls was commonplace. - folk dances (jigs, reels and the like) - ballroom dances (polkas and waltzes) - sequence dances (quadrilles and lancers). How sedate or vigorous a dance was depended to some extent on those doing it, as well as the steps and movements of the dance itself. The galop, for example, was just what its name suggests, and when done by young people could easily become a romping, rollicking race across the floor. The polka, when done by the unskilled, could become immodest. Learning to dance With the colonists came teachers of dance, and by the 1850s they were advertising their classes. Mr Reid’s Select Dance Class was held on Tuesday nights in St George’s Hall in Dunedin. Men paid 10 shillings per month, women and juveniles 6 shillings. Classes were expensive, and many people were taught to dance by older relatives, or by joining in when family and friends danced. Dances like the quadrille (which was the basis of square dancing) were a series of set movements performed sequentially by groups of couples, and the simple forms were relatively easy to learn. When Auckland justices of the peace gathered for an annual licensing meeting in 1868, the city’s commissioner of police had stern words for them. Police attempts to suppress music and dancing in Auckland’s pubs were failing. With the permission of a justice of the peace, a ‘special occasion’ could be celebrated. Enterprising Queen Street publicans had found up to six nights a week’s worth of special occasions, and justices of the peace willing to sign the permits in daily and even weekly batches. Where and when At first, people danced in homes or any available space large enough. Hotels held regular dances until the 1860s, when many provinces limited or suppressed this. In 1881 Parliament made dancing in licensed premises illegal, unless run by a private society (rather than the publican) with the permission of the local licensing committee. There was growing concern over alcohol consumption and a belief that dancing and music were being used to draw people into hotels. There were plenty of alternatives. Dances and balls were put on by local groups, businesses, military regiments and individuals. They were held to celebrate New Year’s Eve; to accompany sporting events, meetings of friendly societies and the opening of woolsheds; or just for the fun of it. Until the later 19th century many areas had poor roads and no street lighting, and dances were often timed to take advantage of a full moon. There are also accounts of dancing till dawn (or close to it). The Taradale Mikado Quadrille club fancy dress ball, held in April 1887, began at 9 p.m. after a cooling shower of rain, and ended at 4 a.m., when another shower soaked those on their way home. Dancing from one day to the next, eating a post-ball breakfast with the host, and setting off home in daylight when travel was easier was a common country practice.	<urn:uuid:36133886-3a1d-4686-8d09-402fcdf513cd>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://teara.govt.nz/en/dancing/page-1	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700675.78/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127112805-20200127142805-00382.warc.gz	en	0.984365	1,117	3.46875	3	[ -0.09902189671993256, 0.056311916559934616, 0.2900581955909729, -0.21600979566574097, -0.33640700578689575, 0.007073970045894384, 0.0864257663488388, -0.16403573751449585, 0.12356101721525192, 0.39304956793785095, 0.3638165593147278, -0.2766145169734955, 0.01648017205297947, 0.293605118989...	14	Among European colonists dance was a favourite recreation and entertainment, and a way of keeping warm on cold nights, socialising and meeting potential partners. Encouraged to dance while on board ship (as healthy exercise), the new arrivals continued to do so once they landed. Opportunities to dance ranged from formal balls among the elite to dancing in a woolshed at the end of shearing. In 1850s Wellington (population 5,000), for example, there were balls during the ‘season’ (June to September). Less formal dances, held wherever there was enough room for dancing, were probably more frequent but went unrecorded. The worst thing A Māori observer described Europeans dancing in the 1840s. ‘[T]hey were continually bobbing to each other, and rushing to and fro in the greatest confusion, and yet we could see no collision and no blood. Then they cease, and begin eating; then more rings would sound and away they would rush as if they were mad, and go on with the same jumpings’. It was, he said, ‘katahi he hanga kino’ (the worst thing we have seen).1 In the first few decades of European settlement, women were scarce and much sought-after as dancing partners. It was usual for younger women and teenage girls to be on the floor for every dance. Behaviour at balls followed set rules, but in colonial New Zealand some of these were relaxed – men were allowed to dance together if no women were available. Suppers, which ranged from sumptuous to simple, were an important part of a ball or dance. The chance to meet a future husband or wife attracted many people to dances, and asking a partner to supper was a declaration of interest. In the mid-19th century Māori attended balls (and no doubt also dances). The New Zealander reported on the attendance of chiefly Māori at a ball at Government House in Auckland, probably in the 1850s. The women, who wore the latest European fashions, were enthusiastic dancers, quickly mastering the steps of quadrilles and polkas, but the men were more reserved, preferring to watch. By the later 19th century the attendance of well-to-do Māori at balls was commonplace. - folk dances (jigs, reels and the like) - ballroom dances (polkas and waltzes) - sequence dances (quadrilles and lancers). How sedate or vigorous a dance was depended to some extent on those doing it, as well as the steps and movements of the dance itself. The galop, for example, was just what its name suggests, and when done by young people could easily become a romping, rollicking race across the floor. The polka, when done by the unskilled, could become immodest. Learning to dance With the colonists came teachers of dance, and by the 1850s they were advertising their classes. Mr Reid’s Select Dance Class was held on Tuesday nights in St George’s Hall in Dunedin. Men paid 10 shillings per month, women and juveniles 6 shillings. Classes were expensive, and many people were taught to dance by older relatives, or by joining in when family and friends danced. Dances like the quadrille (which was the basis of square dancing) were a series of set movements performed sequentially by groups of couples, and the simple forms were relatively easy to learn. When Auckland justices of the peace gathered for an annual licensing meeting in 1868, the city’s commissioner of police had stern words for them. Police attempts to suppress music and dancing in Auckland’s pubs were failing. With the permission of a justice of the peace, a ‘special occasion’ could be celebrated. Enterprising Queen Street publicans had found up to six nights a week’s worth of special occasions, and justices of the peace willing to sign the permits in daily and even weekly batches. Where and when At first, people danced in homes or any available space large enough. Hotels held regular dances until the 1860s, when many provinces limited or suppressed this. In 1881 Parliament made dancing in licensed premises illegal, unless run by a private society (rather than the publican) with the permission of the local licensing committee. There was growing concern over alcohol consumption and a belief that dancing and music were being used to draw people into hotels. There were plenty of alternatives. Dances and balls were put on by local groups, businesses, military regiments and individuals. They were held to celebrate New Year’s Eve; to accompany sporting events, meetings of friendly societies and the opening of woolsheds; or just for the fun of it. Until the later 19th century many areas had poor roads and no street lighting, and dances were often timed to take advantage of a full moon. There are also accounts of dancing till dawn (or close to it). The Taradale Mikado Quadrille club fancy dress ball, held in April 1887, began at 9 p.m. after a cooling shower of rain, and ended at 4 a.m., when another shower soaked those on their way home. Dancing from one day to the next, eating a post-ball breakfast with the host, and setting off home in daylight when travel was easier was a common country practice.	1,116	ENGLISH	1
Mahatma Gandhi was born on October 2nd, 1869, in the city of Porbandar in then British controlled India. His mother was very religious, and he grew up as a Vaishnaiva Hindu (placing emphasis on the god Vishnu), with elements of Jainism as well. Jainism advocated non-violence (ahiṃsā) as a key doctrine that included vegetarianism, as well as such actions as meditation and fasting. He was married at the age of 13 to Kasturba Makanji, and they would go on to have 5 sons together, though his first son passed away as a baby. Gandhi's father died just before his first son, so this was a difficult time in the young Ghandi's life. After he turned 18, he left his family to go to London to study and become a lawyer. Ghandi was not suited to be a lawyer, and the first case he handled went very poorly. However, he found a job opportunity in what is now Natal, South Africa, in what was also then a British possession, and arrived there in 1893. This was a turning point in his life, as he was increasingly subjugated to numerous instances of racial discrimination there, which inspired him to fight against such attitudes. Gandhi started the Natal Indian Congress in 1894, and the group actively fought to end discrimination of Indians there. He returned to India in 1896 to bring his wife and children back to Natal. In 1906, Gandhi organized the "Satyagraha," which means truth and firmness, a massive campaign of protests against newly passed anti-Indian laws in South Africa. Gandhi returned to India in 1915, but was not very politically active until the Massacre of Amritsar, which occurred in 1919. In the event, British troops killed 400 people during a protest. The British created a series of acts in 1930 that prohibited Indians from selling salt, and imposed heavy taxation upon the country. Gandhi planned a protest, formally called "The Salt March", to fight back against these new laws. In 1942, he began the "Quit India" Movement, with the goal of removing the British from India and, in 1945, he became an active member in the negotiations regarding India's independence. In 1947, it was announced that rule of British India would be handed over from the British to the people there, and the state would be partiioned into the sovereign states of predominately Muslim Pakistan and predominately Hindu India. The colonial government was an ongoing challenge working against Gandhi, and he was imprisoned several times for civil disobedience. His first imprisonment was in Natal in 1913, during his Satyagraha campaign. In 1922, he was sentenced to six years in jail by the British authorities, but was released in 1924 after an appendicitis surgery. He still spent more time in prison, though, when he was jailed in 1930 for breaking the Salt Acts. Gandhi was also advocating for peace between the Hindus and Muslims in the Indian subcontinent, and this turned some Hindus against him because they were angry that he was being friendly towards Indian Muslims. Death and Legacy Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated on January 30th, 1948 by Nathuram Godse, a Hindu who was angry that Gandhi was promoting acceptance of, and compassion for, Muslims by Hindus. Gandhi's philosophy of Satyagraha, a peaceful form of rebellion, is still practiced worldwide. Many of his ideas, such as fasting and eating vegetarian for purification and as a form of protest, are still used as well. He inspired many other civil rights activists that would follow around the world, notably including Martin Luther King, Jr. in the U.S. and Nelson Mandela in South Africa. Gandhi was a man devoted to creating unity and harmony in the world and for his people, and his legacy has been passed on to the generations of pacificists and leaders that have followed in his footsteps. How Did Gandhi Die? Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated on January 30th, 1948 by Nathuram Godse, a Hindu who was angry that Gandhi was promoting acceptance of, and compassion for, Muslims by Hindus. Gandhi's philosophy of Satyagraha, a peaceful form of rebellion, is still practiced worldwide. Many of his ideas, such as fasting and eating vegetarian for purification and as a form of protest, are still used as well. Your MLA Citation Your APA Citation Your Chicago Citation Your Harvard CitationRemember to italicize the title of this article in your Harvard citation.	<urn:uuid:dfc12bd8-762f-4aaf-aac4-809f4d956b6b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/mahatma-gandhi-important-figures-in-world-history.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00539.warc.gz	en	0.989978	933	3.953125	4	[ -0.011408975347876549, 0.7055004835128784, -0.09546346962451935, -0.043670229613780975, -0.47855478525161743, -0.14101716876029968, 0.5058852434158325, -0.14982765913009644, 0.13939771056175232, 0.21344900131225586, 0.008793639950454235, -0.17560645937919617, 0.07108693569898605, 0.5804519...	2	Mahatma Gandhi was born on October 2nd, 1869, in the city of Porbandar in then British controlled India. His mother was very religious, and he grew up as a Vaishnaiva Hindu (placing emphasis on the god Vishnu), with elements of Jainism as well. Jainism advocated non-violence (ahiṃsā) as a key doctrine that included vegetarianism, as well as such actions as meditation and fasting. He was married at the age of 13 to Kasturba Makanji, and they would go on to have 5 sons together, though his first son passed away as a baby. Gandhi's father died just before his first son, so this was a difficult time in the young Ghandi's life. After he turned 18, he left his family to go to London to study and become a lawyer. Ghandi was not suited to be a lawyer, and the first case he handled went very poorly. However, he found a job opportunity in what is now Natal, South Africa, in what was also then a British possession, and arrived there in 1893. This was a turning point in his life, as he was increasingly subjugated to numerous instances of racial discrimination there, which inspired him to fight against such attitudes. Gandhi started the Natal Indian Congress in 1894, and the group actively fought to end discrimination of Indians there. He returned to India in 1896 to bring his wife and children back to Natal. In 1906, Gandhi organized the "Satyagraha," which means truth and firmness, a massive campaign of protests against newly passed anti-Indian laws in South Africa. Gandhi returned to India in 1915, but was not very politically active until the Massacre of Amritsar, which occurred in 1919. In the event, British troops killed 400 people during a protest. The British created a series of acts in 1930 that prohibited Indians from selling salt, and imposed heavy taxation upon the country. Gandhi planned a protest, formally called "The Salt March", to fight back against these new laws. In 1942, he began the "Quit India" Movement, with the goal of removing the British from India and, in 1945, he became an active member in the negotiations regarding India's independence. In 1947, it was announced that rule of British India would be handed over from the British to the people there, and the state would be partiioned into the sovereign states of predominately Muslim Pakistan and predominately Hindu India. The colonial government was an ongoing challenge working against Gandhi, and he was imprisoned several times for civil disobedience. His first imprisonment was in Natal in 1913, during his Satyagraha campaign. In 1922, he was sentenced to six years in jail by the British authorities, but was released in 1924 after an appendicitis surgery. He still spent more time in prison, though, when he was jailed in 1930 for breaking the Salt Acts. Gandhi was also advocating for peace between the Hindus and Muslims in the Indian subcontinent, and this turned some Hindus against him because they were angry that he was being friendly towards Indian Muslims. Death and Legacy Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated on January 30th, 1948 by Nathuram Godse, a Hindu who was angry that Gandhi was promoting acceptance of, and compassion for, Muslims by Hindus. Gandhi's philosophy of Satyagraha, a peaceful form of rebellion, is still practiced worldwide. Many of his ideas, such as fasting and eating vegetarian for purification and as a form of protest, are still used as well. He inspired many other civil rights activists that would follow around the world, notably including Martin Luther King, Jr. in the U.S. and Nelson Mandela in South Africa. Gandhi was a man devoted to creating unity and harmony in the world and for his people, and his legacy has been passed on to the generations of pacificists and leaders that have followed in his footsteps. How Did Gandhi Die? Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated on January 30th, 1948 by Nathuram Godse, a Hindu who was angry that Gandhi was promoting acceptance of, and compassion for, Muslims by Hindus. Gandhi's philosophy of Satyagraha, a peaceful form of rebellion, is still practiced worldwide. Many of his ideas, such as fasting and eating vegetarian for purification and as a form of protest, are still used as well. Your MLA Citation Your APA Citation Your Chicago Citation Your Harvard CitationRemember to italicize the title of this article in your Harvard citation.	993	ENGLISH	1
At the beginning of the 20th century the Canadian government began exploiting film for educational and promotional purposes. For example, when the railway was built as a first step towards the political unification of the country, the Canadian Pacific Railway received government support for its series of films called Living Canada, intended to encourage American and British immigration to the Canadian northwest. In 1917, the Exhibits and Publicity Bureau, which came under the jurisdiction of the Department of Trade and Commerce, used film for the first time. Until 1921, the Bureau expanded considerably and produced films and photographs for several different government departments. To respond to increasing demand for a wider range of services, it was restructured and set up in new headquarters and renamed Canadian Government Motion Picture Bureau. For ten years the Bureau had a solid reputation, and Canada was the country in the British Empire that most successfully used film for information and promotional purposes. But the Depression led to severe budget cuts and Canada neglected its film industry. The Bureau fell far behind in terms of technology and even continued to produce silent films until 1934. In 1938, a year before the NFB was created, Vincent Massey, Canada’s High Commissioner in London, was already in discussion with his secretary, Ross McLean, about the value of the films made by the Canadian Government Motion Picture Bureau. They felt that if the films were to fulfill their role in promoting Canadian commerce and tourism overseas, they would have to be of higher quality. McLean, impressed by the work of the British documentary filmmaker John Grierson, persuaded Massey to send a report on the state of Canadian cinema to Mackenzie King’s government. He suggested that Grierson be invited to study the government’s filmmaking activities, at that point divided into four categories: educational, promotional, and ministerial and films designed to promote specific ideas, or a sense of belonging among the citizenry. After completing his study, Grierson found that there were two main problems with Canadian filmmaking: a lack of means and the absence of any governing direction. In fact, the Motion Picture Bureau served the interests of the Department of Commerce almost exclusively, to the extent that other sectors had gone as far as setting up their own film services. Grierson tabled a report in June pointing to the need for a coordinated film production unit. On May 2, 1939, an act of Parliament created the National Film Commission, soon known as the National Film Board. Its work was to complement that of the Motion Picture Bureau. The headquarters of the NFB were set up in Ottawa, and at the time of its creation its mandate was “….to make and distribute films across the country that were designed to help Canadians everywhere in Canada understand the problems and way of life of Canadians in other parts of the country.” The NFB was also responsible for coordinating all the filmmaking activities of the various federal departments. The law that was tabled set up a Governing Council of two members of the Privy Council, three people chosen from outside the civil service, and three people who were either members of the civil service or the Canadian military. The first meeting of the Governing Council took place on September 21, 1939. That same month, Canada went to war, so production switched to patriotic films. John Grierson was known as both a pioneer of documentary filmmaking and a specialist in the psychology of propaganda. He was a firm believer in the use of film as a tool for social change. He seemed naturally destined to head the NFB and in October he was appointed as the first Government Film Commissioner. He had a remarkable influence on the NFB, even after he retired in November 1945, and until his death in 1972. The NFB started producing films in 1939. The filmmaker Guy Glover made a…	<urn:uuid:84b295fa-5a6c-4e3e-84f2-80fb3143f337>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.majortests.com/essay/National-Film-Board-559569.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672440.80/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125101544-20200125130544-00342.warc.gz	en	0.981125	766	3.78125	4	[ 0.006762578152120113, 0.38733968138694763, 0.2462906688451767, -0.31470322608947754, 0.2157268226146698, 0.25480833649635315, -0.1780484914779663, 0.1606772541999817, -0.4394983649253845, 0.40330204367637634, 0.33540868759155273, -0.05338834971189499, 0.1932215392589569, 0.1708289086818695...	1	At the beginning of the 20th century the Canadian government began exploiting film for educational and promotional purposes. For example, when the railway was built as a first step towards the political unification of the country, the Canadian Pacific Railway received government support for its series of films called Living Canada, intended to encourage American and British immigration to the Canadian northwest. In 1917, the Exhibits and Publicity Bureau, which came under the jurisdiction of the Department of Trade and Commerce, used film for the first time. Until 1921, the Bureau expanded considerably and produced films and photographs for several different government departments. To respond to increasing demand for a wider range of services, it was restructured and set up in new headquarters and renamed Canadian Government Motion Picture Bureau. For ten years the Bureau had a solid reputation, and Canada was the country in the British Empire that most successfully used film for information and promotional purposes. But the Depression led to severe budget cuts and Canada neglected its film industry. The Bureau fell far behind in terms of technology and even continued to produce silent films until 1934. In 1938, a year before the NFB was created, Vincent Massey, Canada’s High Commissioner in London, was already in discussion with his secretary, Ross McLean, about the value of the films made by the Canadian Government Motion Picture Bureau. They felt that if the films were to fulfill their role in promoting Canadian commerce and tourism overseas, they would have to be of higher quality. McLean, impressed by the work of the British documentary filmmaker John Grierson, persuaded Massey to send a report on the state of Canadian cinema to Mackenzie King’s government. He suggested that Grierson be invited to study the government’s filmmaking activities, at that point divided into four categories: educational, promotional, and ministerial and films designed to promote specific ideas, or a sense of belonging among the citizenry. After completing his study, Grierson found that there were two main problems with Canadian filmmaking: a lack of means and the absence of any governing direction. In fact, the Motion Picture Bureau served the interests of the Department of Commerce almost exclusively, to the extent that other sectors had gone as far as setting up their own film services. Grierson tabled a report in June pointing to the need for a coordinated film production unit. On May 2, 1939, an act of Parliament created the National Film Commission, soon known as the National Film Board. Its work was to complement that of the Motion Picture Bureau. The headquarters of the NFB were set up in Ottawa, and at the time of its creation its mandate was “….to make and distribute films across the country that were designed to help Canadians everywhere in Canada understand the problems and way of life of Canadians in other parts of the country.” The NFB was also responsible for coordinating all the filmmaking activities of the various federal departments. The law that was tabled set up a Governing Council of two members of the Privy Council, three people chosen from outside the civil service, and three people who were either members of the civil service or the Canadian military. The first meeting of the Governing Council took place on September 21, 1939. That same month, Canada went to war, so production switched to patriotic films. John Grierson was known as both a pioneer of documentary filmmaking and a specialist in the psychology of propaganda. He was a firm believer in the use of film as a tool for social change. He seemed naturally destined to head the NFB and in October he was appointed as the first Government Film Commissioner. He had a remarkable influence on the NFB, even after he retired in November 1945, and until his death in 1972. The NFB started producing films in 1939. The filmmaker Guy Glover made a…	794	ENGLISH	1
The essay sample on Shylock Character dwells on its problems, providing a shortened but comprehensive overview of basic facts and arguments related to it. To read the essay, scroll down. The Merchant of Venice is a tragic comedy ,set in Venice in the late 15th century. Shylock, who is a Jewish moneylender, is trying to make a living in a country that despises him for being Jewish. Before the plot even starts, Shylock is condemned by the audience for being a Jew, and a moneylender. The Christians by religion were unable to lend money and the Jews could basically do nothing else, this made the Christians hate the Jews even more. In Venice there was a great opposition between Christians and Jews, for example the centre of the Venetian community was Christian and around the perimeter of Venice lived the Jews, who were not included in the rest of Venice. Because of their religion, They were portrayed as inferior. The play was a big risk for Shakespeare to take as it showed the prejudice towards the Jews. If his play portrayed Jews too well so that it offended the queen or if any of the audience took offence it may have cost him his life. But cleverly Shakespeare captured understanding and sympathy from the audience towards Shylock. What Is Shylock In act 1, scene 3 where Shylock first appears, his first line in the play is ‘Three thousand ducats’. We can look at this sentence in two ways; as a cold, greedy man only interested in his money, or as a man making a living at one of the only jobs available for him. Most of the time he fits the cold, greedy character more, because he makes such a big point about locking up the house and really gets annoyed with his daughter for failing to. But then occasionally we see a streak of a man who’s lost the person he loved the most, his wife, and who’s heart has hardened only by the hate shown towards him. From this manner of his, now Jessica, his only family member is ashamed of him; ‘To be ashamed to be my fathers child. ‘ He ends up by striking his daughter, reducing her to tears, making the point of how locking up his house and protecting his possessions are very important. These extreme actions portray him as a man so scared of the outside world and mistreated so much that he feels its necessary to hurt and disrespect the only family he has so as to emphasise the importance of protecting what is his. As Jessica, his daughter, elopes with Lorenzo, Shylock earns pity from the audience when Bassanio is told that, ‘My daughter is my flesh and blood’, meaning that by taking her, a part of him has been taken too. But still, in Jessica’s defence, her father needed to learn from his harsh actions towards her. When he discovers his daughters disappearance, he screams in rage, finally letting out a deep emotion which we thought Shylock never had, ‘My daughter! O my ducats! O my daughter! Fled with a Christian! Only Christian ducats! ‘. This speech of his could have earned a lot of sympathy from the audience if he didn’t mention the ducats. He had compared his own daughter to money, demonstrating that he thought of his money as important, if not more important than his daughter. Which once again outlines this stereotypical, greedy ‘Jewish’ figure. But the most distinguished sympathy cry in the play is Shylock’s famous plea for equality in Act three, Scene Five, which victimises him and lets us see him in a whole new light; ‘What’s his reason? I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons’. This equality speech is meant to soften the audience towards Shylock, even if it is only momentarily, since he proceeds to carry out his bond in which he’s able to legally commit murder to Antonio. The court scene is Shylock’s only chance for some justice, if only as a way of revenge for how he has been treated all his life. The court is very biased from the minute Shylock is ordered in by the judge; ‘Go on, and call the Jew into the court! .’ Thus, Shylock is having an unfair trail. He is being judged in a Christian court, not a court of law. Shylock had lent Bassanio three thousand ducats in order that Antonio would pay him back within a month. Antonio and Shylock made a bond together that meant that if Antonio could not pay back the money, Shylock could claim a pound of flesh nearest to Antonio’s heart. Due to Antonio’s bad luck, he could not pay back the money. Which gave Shylock the right to carry out his bond. Shylock is now on the very point of cutting into Antonio’s skin when Portia, dressed as a doctor of law, stops him and proclaims that the bond was for him to cut only a pound of flesh. The bond doth give thee here no jot of blood’. From this she reveals that there is a flaw in the bond and Shylock is to take a pound of flesh without spilling a drop of blood, which of course is impossible; ‘If thou doest shed one drop of Christian blood, thy lands and goods are, by the laws of Venice, confiscated unto the state of Venice’. His own bond has ruined his chances of revenge. He could still kill Antonio, but would then loose everything that is and ever was dear to him. This gave him no choice but to resign from the bond and loose his chance of revenge that he was so sure he would achieve. Shylock is, at this point, I think more humiliated than he had been at any other point in the play. Shylock has his possessions taken away because of the attempted murder of Antonio, who made two conditions of his life: he must, firstly, become a Christian and, secondly, leave all of his possessions to Jessica and Lorenzo in his will. So, besides him being converted to a Christian and humiliated in court, loosing his possessions and daughter, his friend Tubal left him. Shylock is iscolated not only from Christans but also from Jews. In a way it is quite ironic how the one thing that ruined him, is the one thing that he is left with; Christianity. I think Shylock had been sent right to the point of insanity, he had been victimised all his life. And maybe he only acts in such a horrible manner in a reflex to how he had been treated. So, if racism hadn’t victimised him then maybe his temperament would be gentler. I think that Shakespeare presented Shylock in many different aspects and it will depend on the eyes of the individual to which side is seen more clearly. I think Shylock is presented as a comical character to some and both victimised and a villian.	<urn:uuid:800602be-841a-4e62-9b77-76d2d76f37ec>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://paperap.com/paper-on-how-does-shakespeare-present-the-character-of-shylock/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00206.warc.gz	en	0.986327	1,500	3.59375	4	[ 0.03677598387002945, 0.015330921858549118, -0.11997941136360168, -0.2123490422964096, -0.34010589122772217, 0.023724837228655815, 0.5563600063323975, 0.07689326256513596, 0.40123260021209717, -0.33798715472221375, -0.2594350576400757, -0.09994778037071228, 0.13779208064079285, 0.4077101945...	2	The essay sample on Shylock Character dwells on its problems, providing a shortened but comprehensive overview of basic facts and arguments related to it. To read the essay, scroll down. The Merchant of Venice is a tragic comedy ,set in Venice in the late 15th century. Shylock, who is a Jewish moneylender, is trying to make a living in a country that despises him for being Jewish. Before the plot even starts, Shylock is condemned by the audience for being a Jew, and a moneylender. The Christians by religion were unable to lend money and the Jews could basically do nothing else, this made the Christians hate the Jews even more. In Venice there was a great opposition between Christians and Jews, for example the centre of the Venetian community was Christian and around the perimeter of Venice lived the Jews, who were not included in the rest of Venice. Because of their religion, They were portrayed as inferior. The play was a big risk for Shakespeare to take as it showed the prejudice towards the Jews. If his play portrayed Jews too well so that it offended the queen or if any of the audience took offence it may have cost him his life. But cleverly Shakespeare captured understanding and sympathy from the audience towards Shylock. What Is Shylock In act 1, scene 3 where Shylock first appears, his first line in the play is ‘Three thousand ducats’. We can look at this sentence in two ways; as a cold, greedy man only interested in his money, or as a man making a living at one of the only jobs available for him. Most of the time he fits the cold, greedy character more, because he makes such a big point about locking up the house and really gets annoyed with his daughter for failing to. But then occasionally we see a streak of a man who’s lost the person he loved the most, his wife, and who’s heart has hardened only by the hate shown towards him. From this manner of his, now Jessica, his only family member is ashamed of him; ‘To be ashamed to be my fathers child. ‘ He ends up by striking his daughter, reducing her to tears, making the point of how locking up his house and protecting his possessions are very important. These extreme actions portray him as a man so scared of the outside world and mistreated so much that he feels its necessary to hurt and disrespect the only family he has so as to emphasise the importance of protecting what is his. As Jessica, his daughter, elopes with Lorenzo, Shylock earns pity from the audience when Bassanio is told that, ‘My daughter is my flesh and blood’, meaning that by taking her, a part of him has been taken too. But still, in Jessica’s defence, her father needed to learn from his harsh actions towards her. When he discovers his daughters disappearance, he screams in rage, finally letting out a deep emotion which we thought Shylock never had, ‘My daughter! O my ducats! O my daughter! Fled with a Christian! Only Christian ducats! ‘. This speech of his could have earned a lot of sympathy from the audience if he didn’t mention the ducats. He had compared his own daughter to money, demonstrating that he thought of his money as important, if not more important than his daughter. Which once again outlines this stereotypical, greedy ‘Jewish’ figure. But the most distinguished sympathy cry in the play is Shylock’s famous plea for equality in Act three, Scene Five, which victimises him and lets us see him in a whole new light; ‘What’s his reason? I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons’. This equality speech is meant to soften the audience towards Shylock, even if it is only momentarily, since he proceeds to carry out his bond in which he’s able to legally commit murder to Antonio. The court scene is Shylock’s only chance for some justice, if only as a way of revenge for how he has been treated all his life. The court is very biased from the minute Shylock is ordered in by the judge; ‘Go on, and call the Jew into the court! .’ Thus, Shylock is having an unfair trail. He is being judged in a Christian court, not a court of law. Shylock had lent Bassanio three thousand ducats in order that Antonio would pay him back within a month. Antonio and Shylock made a bond together that meant that if Antonio could not pay back the money, Shylock could claim a pound of flesh nearest to Antonio’s heart. Due to Antonio’s bad luck, he could not pay back the money. Which gave Shylock the right to carry out his bond. Shylock is now on the very point of cutting into Antonio’s skin when Portia, dressed as a doctor of law, stops him and proclaims that the bond was for him to cut only a pound of flesh. The bond doth give thee here no jot of blood’. From this she reveals that there is a flaw in the bond and Shylock is to take a pound of flesh without spilling a drop of blood, which of course is impossible; ‘If thou doest shed one drop of Christian blood, thy lands and goods are, by the laws of Venice, confiscated unto the state of Venice’. His own bond has ruined his chances of revenge. He could still kill Antonio, but would then loose everything that is and ever was dear to him. This gave him no choice but to resign from the bond and loose his chance of revenge that he was so sure he would achieve. Shylock is, at this point, I think more humiliated than he had been at any other point in the play. Shylock has his possessions taken away because of the attempted murder of Antonio, who made two conditions of his life: he must, firstly, become a Christian and, secondly, leave all of his possessions to Jessica and Lorenzo in his will. So, besides him being converted to a Christian and humiliated in court, loosing his possessions and daughter, his friend Tubal left him. Shylock is iscolated not only from Christans but also from Jews. In a way it is quite ironic how the one thing that ruined him, is the one thing that he is left with; Christianity. I think Shylock had been sent right to the point of insanity, he had been victimised all his life. And maybe he only acts in such a horrible manner in a reflex to how he had been treated. So, if racism hadn’t victimised him then maybe his temperament would be gentler. I think that Shakespeare presented Shylock in many different aspects and it will depend on the eyes of the individual to which side is seen more clearly. I think Shylock is presented as a comical character to some and both victimised and a villian.	1,450	ENGLISH	1
Black leaders in the North later turned against Washington's gradual approach to breaking down racial barriers, but Washington was hailed by white leaders. He was invited to consult with the President at the White House and succeeded in creating numerous charitable funds that led to the creation of schools throughout the South. Washington was the first black person to be depicted on currency, and his image was also printed on stamps. Washington secured financial support from benefactors such as the Carnegie and Rockefeller families, as well as the vice president of Sears. In an age when Southern legislatures were reluctant to fund public schools for African Americans, these funds along with matching donations from black communities led to the creation of nearly one-third of the public schools in the South in the early decades of the 20th century. Booker T. Washington was raised in present-day West Virginia and a replica of his boyhood cabin may be seen at Malden, a few miles east of Charleston. Washington died on November 14, 1915, at the Tuskegee Institute campus. He nurtured his West Virginia ties throughout his life by occasionally returning to speak at the West Virginia Colored Institute, which is now West Virginia State University. Washington is also memorialized by the Booker T. Washington State Park in Institute, West Virginia. The bust displayed in the Booker T. Washington Memorial at the West Virginia State Capitol was sculpted by William D. Hopen. The bust is a replacement for the original bust that was moved to the capitol from Malden. The Booker T. Washington Memorial was re-dedicated in 1985. Washington's legacy is complicated. He turned a one-room school in Alabama into a university and spent his life campaigning for better conditions and educational opportunities for African Americans in the South. In his quest to secure funds for this school and others, however, he made many compromises with Southern whites such as the tacit acceptance of segregation and the assumption that African American schools would focus on job preparation rather than the liberal arts and other fields that might prepare African Americans for professional careers. Washington's tactics and his personal ambition led to conflicts with W.E.B. DuBois, William Monroe Trotter, and other black leaders in the North. From the perspective of these Northern leaders, Washington's tactics were tantamount to accommodating the agenda of segregationists. From Washington's perspective, however, his tactical negotiations with white Souther leaders were necessary both for survival and as a way to secure funding for black schools. While Washington raised funds that led to the construction of hundreds of schools, his legacy is marked by his personal ambition to speak for all African Americans rather than accept the perspectives of those who hoped to confront segregation more directly.	<urn:uuid:4c2a7c7e-f389-423f-a486-e637017c0dfc>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.theclio.com/entry/22826	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778168.77/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128091916-20200128121916-00412.warc.gz	en	0.982735	543	4	4	[ -0.277638703584671, 0.3610113859176636, -0.010180084966123104, 0.076097771525383, -0.1918332576751709, 0.4622322618961334, -0.1960713267326355, -0.2530304789543152, -0.033827535808086395, 0.15061666071414948, 0.41944652795791626, 0.1705748587846756, 0.008519243448972702, 0.3314627110958099...	1	Black leaders in the North later turned against Washington's gradual approach to breaking down racial barriers, but Washington was hailed by white leaders. He was invited to consult with the President at the White House and succeeded in creating numerous charitable funds that led to the creation of schools throughout the South. Washington was the first black person to be depicted on currency, and his image was also printed on stamps. Washington secured financial support from benefactors such as the Carnegie and Rockefeller families, as well as the vice president of Sears. In an age when Southern legislatures were reluctant to fund public schools for African Americans, these funds along with matching donations from black communities led to the creation of nearly one-third of the public schools in the South in the early decades of the 20th century. Booker T. Washington was raised in present-day West Virginia and a replica of his boyhood cabin may be seen at Malden, a few miles east of Charleston. Washington died on November 14, 1915, at the Tuskegee Institute campus. He nurtured his West Virginia ties throughout his life by occasionally returning to speak at the West Virginia Colored Institute, which is now West Virginia State University. Washington is also memorialized by the Booker T. Washington State Park in Institute, West Virginia. The bust displayed in the Booker T. Washington Memorial at the West Virginia State Capitol was sculpted by William D. Hopen. The bust is a replacement for the original bust that was moved to the capitol from Malden. The Booker T. Washington Memorial was re-dedicated in 1985. Washington's legacy is complicated. He turned a one-room school in Alabama into a university and spent his life campaigning for better conditions and educational opportunities for African Americans in the South. In his quest to secure funds for this school and others, however, he made many compromises with Southern whites such as the tacit acceptance of segregation and the assumption that African American schools would focus on job preparation rather than the liberal arts and other fields that might prepare African Americans for professional careers. Washington's tactics and his personal ambition led to conflicts with W.E.B. DuBois, William Monroe Trotter, and other black leaders in the North. From the perspective of these Northern leaders, Washington's tactics were tantamount to accommodating the agenda of segregationists. From Washington's perspective, however, his tactical negotiations with white Souther leaders were necessary both for survival and as a way to secure funding for black schools. While Washington raised funds that led to the construction of hundreds of schools, his legacy is marked by his personal ambition to speak for all African Americans rather than accept the perspectives of those who hoped to confront segregation more directly.	547	ENGLISH	1
The black cat, also called the "wild cat" or "sabot-cat", usually with an arched back and with claws and teeth bared, is closely associated with anarchism, especially with anarcho-syndicalism. It was designed by Ralph Chaplin, who was a prominent figure in the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). As its aggressive stance suggests, the cat is meant to suggest such ideas as wildcat strikes, sabotage, and radical unionism. The origin of the black cat symbol is unclear, but according to one story it came from a IWW strike that was going badly. Several members had been beaten up and were put in a hospital. At that time a skinny, black cat walked into the striker's camp. The cat was fed by the striking workers and as the cat regained its health the strike took a turn for the better. Eventually the striking workers got some of their demands and they adopted the cat as their mascot. - 911 Views Category: Political Symbols. More symbols in Anarchism Symbols: Anarchism is often defined as a political philosophy which holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful. However, others argue that while anti-statism is central, it is inadequate to d… read more » More symbols in Political Symbols: Political symbolism is symbolism that is used to represent a political standpoint. The symbolism can occur in various media including banners, acronyms, pictures, flags, mottos, and countless more. F… read more »	<urn:uuid:0e967e87-3216-487f-82e1-10428e970401>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.symbols.com/symbol/black-cat	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778272.69/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128122813-20200128152813-00457.warc.gz	en	0.98111	316	3.28125	3	[ -0.13139210641384125, 0.2711557447910309, -0.3637663424015045, 0.4910310208797455, -0.3908497989177704, 0.08333073556423187, 0.6392608880996704, 0.24521242082118988, -0.04247525334358215, -0.2583271265029907, -0.2648252546787262, -0.2692708373069763, 0.29087626934051514, 0.0916583985090255...	1	The black cat, also called the "wild cat" or "sabot-cat", usually with an arched back and with claws and teeth bared, is closely associated with anarchism, especially with anarcho-syndicalism. It was designed by Ralph Chaplin, who was a prominent figure in the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). As its aggressive stance suggests, the cat is meant to suggest such ideas as wildcat strikes, sabotage, and radical unionism. The origin of the black cat symbol is unclear, but according to one story it came from a IWW strike that was going badly. Several members had been beaten up and were put in a hospital. At that time a skinny, black cat walked into the striker's camp. The cat was fed by the striking workers and as the cat regained its health the strike took a turn for the better. Eventually the striking workers got some of their demands and they adopted the cat as their mascot. - 911 Views Category: Political Symbols. More symbols in Anarchism Symbols: Anarchism is often defined as a political philosophy which holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful. However, others argue that while anti-statism is central, it is inadequate to d… read more » More symbols in Political Symbols: Political symbolism is symbolism that is used to represent a political standpoint. The symbolism can occur in various media including banners, acronyms, pictures, flags, mottos, and countless more. F… read more »	312	ENGLISH	1
July 4 1926 – the Hitler youth company is established The Hitler youth was a group of children between the ages of 10 to 14 and only 3600 people were in this youth group. These kids had to be very liberal and patriots to their country. They would go around in the streets cheering for their country and telling propaganda lies about Germany. The youths would always be carrying a Nazi flag where ever they go, some would be trained on how to shoot a rifle. (A large group of the Hitler youths waiting to meet Adolf Hitler) Within the introduction of the story “The Cage” Riva had a neighboring friend who was named Harry, Harry had German ancestry. Harry was attacked by other Jewish neighbors because people thought he was working with the Germans, Riva and her family helped Harry and they were trying to get an understanding on why the other people attacked Harry. Within the following day, Germany invaded Poland and everyone was panicking. A knock came from the door and it was Harry, dressed in uniform and supported his fatherland. This is proving that Harry didn’t want any relation with the Jews after the war started and he didn’t want to get in any trouble. Everyone that knew Harry felt betrayed. This shows that Harry is a dynamic character. September 21 1939: Heydrich issues directives to establish ghettos in German-occupied Poland. Germany need to force the Jewish and the Gypsies out of their homes into a city filled with poverty. The reason that the Germans needed to do this is because they need to keep the Gypsies and the Jews in one place so when they are in need to find more people to do their labour they can just look in the ghettos. The conditions in the ghettos aren’t the best, people living in the ghetto barley get any food, warmth, and health care. People living in the ghetto contract diseases and since the doctors around can’t help them they will just have to be left there to die. (The perimeter of Warsaw sealed off to separate the ghettos) During the evacuation in “The Cage” Riva and her family were being forced out of their homes and they are moving walking to a place that was meant to treat Jews poorly and terribly, while they were walking Riva saw her neighbors and friends being bashed and hit by German soldiers. People arrived at the ghettos with only the clothing they had on their backs and some clothing they brought back from their own house. November 23, 1939 – Yellow stars required to be worn by Polish Jews over age 10. Jewish people in Europe had to wear a yellow Star of David sewed on to their clothing, reason being is so the Nazis can find and track Jews much easier. Jewish people caught not wearing a Star of David were usually killed or sent to prison. The Star of David allows the Germans to quickly isolate the Jews from the non-Jews. (A Jewish couple wearing a sewed on yellow star of David in their coats) Riva and her family are forced to wear a yellow star sewed on to their clothing; this was to prove that she was a Jew. During the Jew line up, every Jew within the ghetto had to be lined up and a certain amount had to be sent to labor camp. Riva’s mother wasn’t wearing a Yellow star on her shirt so a German soldier quickly pulled her out of the crowd and Riva and her Mother were separated from each other, Riva tried to catch up to her mom but it was hopeless. Riva doesn’t know what is going to happen to her mother but she fears that she will be killed to where ever she is going. April 30, 1940 – The Lodz Ghetto in occupied Poland is sealed off from the outside world with 230,000 Jews locked inside. Poland had the largest population of Jews in Europe, 230,000 Jews were sent to Lodz and the Germans sealed off the city with barbed wire around the perimeter. To keep the Jews in their place, Jewish police officers were created to keep the Jews in their homes and to prevent them from escaping Lodz. German police officers and guards would stand by around the perimeter of Lodz while the Jewish Police officers patrol the city. The reason why Jewish were chosen to become police officers rather than the Germans is because the Jewish know the people around the city, if they need to find a specific person they will be easily tracked down by the Jewish police rather than the German police. (Jewish people entering the ghetto in Lodz) Riva and her family were sent to the ghetto in Lodz. Within months in Lodz, people around the ghetto have contracted diseases and are suffering without any medical attention and the weather is getting colder and colder. Laibele got tuberculosis and Riva got bladder stones. The family has given very little food from their work, and they don’t have any vitamins to help with their diseases. Riva’s brothers traded weeks worth of bread and traded it for a tangerine and hoping that the tangerine will help Riva and Laibele. Later on houses needed to be torn down to make firewood and Riva’s family had to move out because they are planning to use her house next for firewood. March 3 1940 Jews are put into concentration camps. The Germans needed labour work done, but most of the Germans are rather living back in the their own country or fighting in the war against the allies. So the Germans decided to get the Jews and Gypsies to work for them, the working condition in the concentration camp is more different than how people are treated within the ghetto. Food is still limited same with health, but if you don’t have the strength to work anymore you are rather shot by German shoulders or gassed and then cremated within the crematorium. (Jewish labor workers in a concentration camp) There was a vicious knocking on the door and Riva and her family hid in the next room, the door opened and it was a long forgotten friend, Shmulek. Shmulek told Riva that he just came back from a concentration camp. Shmulek explained how the concentration camp was like to Riva and it was a camp full of hard labor and terrible living conditions, the workers at the camp were mostly separated families filled with fear and anxiety, wondering what the Germans would do to them next and if you are too weak to work you will be killed and be sent to the chimneys. The German commander felt nice and sent 5 Jews back to the ghettos. The next day there was another vicious knocking on the door and it was the Jewish police. The Jewish police were looking for Shmulek, the police need to find the 5 people that were sent back to the ghetto and if they aren’t found the Nazis will pick out another 5 group of people and send them to the concentration camp. January 25, 1940 – Nazis choose the town of Oswiecim (Auschwitz) in Poland near Krakow as the site of a new concentration camp. Auschwitz is a concentration camp built in 1940 and it was one of the largest concentration camps used labor and for mass killings. The Germans would use the Jews for hard labor and if they can’t work anymore they would be killed. A German doctor within Auschwitz named Josef Mengele would use the Jews within the camp for testing medical purposes, some of the Jews would also be used for secret experiments. The Russians invaded Auschwitz which forced the Germans to abandon the camp and forced the Jews to locate another place to stay. (Auschwitz railroads covered with broken pottery) Riva and her family were the last few people within the ghettos, so they decided to take the next train to Auschwitz willingly. They were in the train for hours and hours making multiple stops to pick up more Jews. The train finally stopped at Auschwitz, Riva was separate from her family and she wasn’t able to regroup with them since the crowd continued to push everyone forward. The Nazis later put women and men on different sides of the road. They were forced in to the showers and were only given a hospital robe to cover up after they showered. The Jews were forced in to small bunkers in a barrack and it was 3 floors of bunkers with each row filling up 9 people. The bunker is super cramped since 3 people are squishes on to 1 floor. Each day the Jews are forced to wake up and line up in the hot sun while the Nazis do a counting check and The Jews are forced to stand there for hours.	<urn:uuid:b5224032-a195-4d37-967c-26f6b04dcad7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://myriverside.sd43.bc.ca/damont2015/2016/11/05/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597230.18/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120023523-20200120051523-00281.warc.gz	en	0.985381	1,786	3.421875	3	[ -0.33503445982933044, 0.5819272994995117, -0.10393483936786652, 0.1554354429244995, -0.11166596412658691, 0.22075197100639343, -0.10240224748849869, 0.05212447792291641, -0.3263760209083557, -0.21669471263885498, 0.549597978591919, -0.14172044396400452, 0.12921148538589478, 0.1880315244197...	5	July 4 1926 – the Hitler youth company is established The Hitler youth was a group of children between the ages of 10 to 14 and only 3600 people were in this youth group. These kids had to be very liberal and patriots to their country. They would go around in the streets cheering for their country and telling propaganda lies about Germany. The youths would always be carrying a Nazi flag where ever they go, some would be trained on how to shoot a rifle. (A large group of the Hitler youths waiting to meet Adolf Hitler) Within the introduction of the story “The Cage” Riva had a neighboring friend who was named Harry, Harry had German ancestry. Harry was attacked by other Jewish neighbors because people thought he was working with the Germans, Riva and her family helped Harry and they were trying to get an understanding on why the other people attacked Harry. Within the following day, Germany invaded Poland and everyone was panicking. A knock came from the door and it was Harry, dressed in uniform and supported his fatherland. This is proving that Harry didn’t want any relation with the Jews after the war started and he didn’t want to get in any trouble. Everyone that knew Harry felt betrayed. This shows that Harry is a dynamic character. September 21 1939: Heydrich issues directives to establish ghettos in German-occupied Poland. Germany need to force the Jewish and the Gypsies out of their homes into a city filled with poverty. The reason that the Germans needed to do this is because they need to keep the Gypsies and the Jews in one place so when they are in need to find more people to do their labour they can just look in the ghettos. The conditions in the ghettos aren’t the best, people living in the ghetto barley get any food, warmth, and health care. People living in the ghetto contract diseases and since the doctors around can’t help them they will just have to be left there to die. (The perimeter of Warsaw sealed off to separate the ghettos) During the evacuation in “The Cage” Riva and her family were being forced out of their homes and they are moving walking to a place that was meant to treat Jews poorly and terribly, while they were walking Riva saw her neighbors and friends being bashed and hit by German soldiers. People arrived at the ghettos with only the clothing they had on their backs and some clothing they brought back from their own house. November 23, 1939 – Yellow stars required to be worn by Polish Jews over age 10. Jewish people in Europe had to wear a yellow Star of David sewed on to their clothing, reason being is so the Nazis can find and track Jews much easier. Jewish people caught not wearing a Star of David were usually killed or sent to prison. The Star of David allows the Germans to quickly isolate the Jews from the non-Jews. (A Jewish couple wearing a sewed on yellow star of David in their coats) Riva and her family are forced to wear a yellow star sewed on to their clothing; this was to prove that she was a Jew. During the Jew line up, every Jew within the ghetto had to be lined up and a certain amount had to be sent to labor camp. Riva’s mother wasn’t wearing a Yellow star on her shirt so a German soldier quickly pulled her out of the crowd and Riva and her Mother were separated from each other, Riva tried to catch up to her mom but it was hopeless. Riva doesn’t know what is going to happen to her mother but she fears that she will be killed to where ever she is going. April 30, 1940 – The Lodz Ghetto in occupied Poland is sealed off from the outside world with 230,000 Jews locked inside. Poland had the largest population of Jews in Europe, 230,000 Jews were sent to Lodz and the Germans sealed off the city with barbed wire around the perimeter. To keep the Jews in their place, Jewish police officers were created to keep the Jews in their homes and to prevent them from escaping Lodz. German police officers and guards would stand by around the perimeter of Lodz while the Jewish Police officers patrol the city. The reason why Jewish were chosen to become police officers rather than the Germans is because the Jewish know the people around the city, if they need to find a specific person they will be easily tracked down by the Jewish police rather than the German police. (Jewish people entering the ghetto in Lodz) Riva and her family were sent to the ghetto in Lodz. Within months in Lodz, people around the ghetto have contracted diseases and are suffering without any medical attention and the weather is getting colder and colder. Laibele got tuberculosis and Riva got bladder stones. The family has given very little food from their work, and they don’t have any vitamins to help with their diseases. Riva’s brothers traded weeks worth of bread and traded it for a tangerine and hoping that the tangerine will help Riva and Laibele. Later on houses needed to be torn down to make firewood and Riva’s family had to move out because they are planning to use her house next for firewood. March 3 1940 Jews are put into concentration camps. The Germans needed labour work done, but most of the Germans are rather living back in the their own country or fighting in the war against the allies. So the Germans decided to get the Jews and Gypsies to work for them, the working condition in the concentration camp is more different than how people are treated within the ghetto. Food is still limited same with health, but if you don’t have the strength to work anymore you are rather shot by German shoulders or gassed and then cremated within the crematorium. (Jewish labor workers in a concentration camp) There was a vicious knocking on the door and Riva and her family hid in the next room, the door opened and it was a long forgotten friend, Shmulek. Shmulek told Riva that he just came back from a concentration camp. Shmulek explained how the concentration camp was like to Riva and it was a camp full of hard labor and terrible living conditions, the workers at the camp were mostly separated families filled with fear and anxiety, wondering what the Germans would do to them next and if you are too weak to work you will be killed and be sent to the chimneys. The German commander felt nice and sent 5 Jews back to the ghettos. The next day there was another vicious knocking on the door and it was the Jewish police. The Jewish police were looking for Shmulek, the police need to find the 5 people that were sent back to the ghetto and if they aren’t found the Nazis will pick out another 5 group of people and send them to the concentration camp. January 25, 1940 – Nazis choose the town of Oswiecim (Auschwitz) in Poland near Krakow as the site of a new concentration camp. Auschwitz is a concentration camp built in 1940 and it was one of the largest concentration camps used labor and for mass killings. The Germans would use the Jews for hard labor and if they can’t work anymore they would be killed. A German doctor within Auschwitz named Josef Mengele would use the Jews within the camp for testing medical purposes, some of the Jews would also be used for secret experiments. The Russians invaded Auschwitz which forced the Germans to abandon the camp and forced the Jews to locate another place to stay. (Auschwitz railroads covered with broken pottery) Riva and her family were the last few people within the ghettos, so they decided to take the next train to Auschwitz willingly. They were in the train for hours and hours making multiple stops to pick up more Jews. The train finally stopped at Auschwitz, Riva was separate from her family and she wasn’t able to regroup with them since the crowd continued to push everyone forward. The Nazis later put women and men on different sides of the road. They were forced in to the showers and were only given a hospital robe to cover up after they showered. The Jews were forced in to small bunkers in a barrack and it was 3 floors of bunkers with each row filling up 9 people. The bunker is super cramped since 3 people are squishes on to 1 floor. Each day the Jews are forced to wake up and line up in the hot sun while the Nazis do a counting check and The Jews are forced to stand there for hours.	1,792	ENGLISH	1
1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Salina Cruz SALINA CRUZ, a seaport of Mexico, in the state of Oaxaca, at the southern terminus of the Tehuantepec National Railway. It is situated near the mouth of the Tehuantepec river, on the open coast of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, and has no natural harbour. There was only a small Indian village here before Salina Cruz was chosen as the Pacific terminus of the railway. Since then a modern town has been laid out and built on adjacent higher ground. The new port was opened to traffic in 1907 and in 1909 its population was largely composed of labourers. A costly artificial harbour has been built by the Mexican government to accommodate the traffic of the Tehuantepec railway. It is formed by the construction of two breakwaters, the western 3260 ft. and the eastern 1900 ft. long, which curve toward each other at their outer extremities and leave an entrance 635 ft. wide. The enclosed space is divided into an outer and inner harbour by a double line of quays wide enough to carry six great warehouses with electric cranes on both sides and a number of railway tracks. Connected with the new port works is one of the largest dry docks in the world—610 ft. long and 89 ft. wide, with a depth of 28 ft. on its sill at low water. The works were planned to handle an immense volume of transcontinental freight, and before they were finished four steamship lines had arranged regular calls at Salina Cruz; this number has since been largely increased.	<urn:uuid:743c95d5-6e72-4a10-b6eb-bc3e5ae81695>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Salina_Cruz	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608295.52/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123041345-20200123070345-00329.warc.gz	en	0.981872	335	3.453125	3	[ 0.3792472779750824, 0.06089368090033531, 0.11588351428508759, -0.3486673831939697, -0.1395292431116104, -0.09485107660293579, -0.08325614780187607, 0.3224746286869049, -0.3786970376968384, -0.48725247383117676, -0.08094264566898346, -0.9581358432769775, -0.19734758138656616, 0.155728459358...	1	1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Salina Cruz SALINA CRUZ, a seaport of Mexico, in the state of Oaxaca, at the southern terminus of the Tehuantepec National Railway. It is situated near the mouth of the Tehuantepec river, on the open coast of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, and has no natural harbour. There was only a small Indian village here before Salina Cruz was chosen as the Pacific terminus of the railway. Since then a modern town has been laid out and built on adjacent higher ground. The new port was opened to traffic in 1907 and in 1909 its population was largely composed of labourers. A costly artificial harbour has been built by the Mexican government to accommodate the traffic of the Tehuantepec railway. It is formed by the construction of two breakwaters, the western 3260 ft. and the eastern 1900 ft. long, which curve toward each other at their outer extremities and leave an entrance 635 ft. wide. The enclosed space is divided into an outer and inner harbour by a double line of quays wide enough to carry six great warehouses with electric cranes on both sides and a number of railway tracks. Connected with the new port works is one of the largest dry docks in the world—610 ft. long and 89 ft. wide, with a depth of 28 ft. on its sill at low water. The works were planned to handle an immense volume of transcontinental freight, and before they were finished four steamship lines had arranged regular calls at Salina Cruz; this number has since been largely increased.	358	ENGLISH	1
Here, Professor Neil Wynn presents a guide to the causes, crime and considerable impact of this policy on American society during the prohibition era… What was prohibition? Prohibition was the attempt to outlaw the production and consumption of alcohol in the United States. The call for prohibition began primarily as a religious movement in the early 19th century – the state of Maine passed the first state prohibition law in 1846, and the Prohibition Party was established in 1869. The movement gained support in the 1880s and 1890s from social reformers who saw alcohol as the cause of poverty, industrial accidents, and the break-up of families; others associated alcohol with urban immigrant ghettos, criminality, and political corruption. Groups such as the Women’s Christian Temperance Union (WCTU), formed in 1874, and the Anti-Saloon League (ASL), founded in 1893, became powerful crusading forces and by 1916, 26 of the then 48 states had already passed prohibition laws. With America’s entry into the First World War in 1917, prohibition was linked to grain conservation. It was also aimed at brewers, many of whom were of German descent. Limits on alcohol production were enacted first as a war measure in 1918, and prohibition became fully established with the ratification of the 18th Amendment in 1919 and its enforcement from January 1920 onward. Described by Herbert Hoover, US president from 1929-1933, as “a great social and economic experiment”, prohibition had a considerable impact on American society before its repeal in 1933. When did prohibition come into force? The 18th Amendment to the constitution prohibiting the manufacture, sale or transportation of alcohol was adopted by both houses of Congress in December 1917 and ratified by the necessary two-thirds of the states on 16 January 1919. The amendment was implemented by the National Prohibition Act (known as the Volstead Act after Andrew Volstead, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee and a leading prohibitionist) in October 1919. Under the terms of the act, prohibition began on 17 January 1920. The act defined ‘intoxicating liquor’ as anything that contained one half of one per cent alcohol by volume, but allowed the sale of alcohol for medicinal, sacramental, or industrial purposes. Two men pour alcohol down a drain during prohibition in the United States, c1920. (Hulton Archive/Getty Images) How was prohibition enforced, and how successful was its enforcement? The 18th Amendment and Volstead Act were more easily passed than enforced. Doctors were allowed to prescribe alcohol for ‘medicinal’ purposes and to purchase it themselves for ‘laboratory’ use, and many interpreted these terms loosely. The sale of ‘sacramental wine’ also rose significantly in the early years of prohibition. The private possession or consumption of alcohol itself was not itself illegal and, as many Americans continued to demand alcoholic beverages, criminals stepped in to meet the demand by illegitimate means. Where previously there had been bars and saloons, there were now illegal drinking dens known as ‘speakeasies’ or ‘blind pigs’, which by the end of the decade were numbered at an estimated 200,000. People also took to producing their own illicit booze or ‘moonshine’, ‘bath-tub gin’ or home-brewed beer. Enforcement of the legislation thus proved enormously difficult for local police forces and the federal Bureau of Prohibition, or Prohibition Unit. The bureau numbered at around 3,000 agents, who had to police the coastal frontier and land borders with Canada and Mexico to prevent smuggling, as well as investigate the illegal internal production and transportation of alcohol in the country as a whole. Often poorly paid federal agents and police were susceptible to corruption, as were some judges and politicians. In Chicago, it was claimed that half the police force was in the pay of gangsters and, in New York, 7,000 arrests under the prohibition laws produced only 17 convictions. A number of states and cities simply forbade local police forces from investigating breaches of the Volstead Act, and enforcers of the law were often unpopular with the public. Some agents did, however, become famous for their pursuit of bootleggers and other criminals: Izzy Einstein and Moe Smith in New York made almost 5,000 arrests between 1920 and 1925, and were known for their use of disguises. Most famous of all was Eliot Ness who, with his hand-picked group of ‘untouchables’, pursued and eventually helped arrest leading gangster Al Capone. Prohibition-era policemen Moe Smith (on the left in top picture, on the right on the bottom picture) and Izzy Einstein (on the right in the top picture, on the left in the bottom picture). The pair would use disguises to infiltrate speakeasies. (Underwood and Underwood/The LIFE Picture Collection/Getty Images) Who were the gangsters who profited from illegal bootleg alcohol businesses? Crime offered a gangsters quick route to success, wealth, and status, and prohibition presented them with a golden opportunity. Rather than being a fairly small-scale, localised affair, crime became increasingly national and organised, incorporating business people and politicians in new criminal syndicates and combinations that manufactured, imported and transported illegal bootleg alcohol sold in speakeasies. Competition and rivalry between rival gangs led to widespread violence: between 1927 and 1930 alone there were reported to be more than 500 gangland murders across the US. The Chicago Crime Commission claimed that there were 729 gangland killings in the Chicago area between 1919 and 1933, but historians have suggested this was exaggerated. The leading gangster of the prohibition era was undoubtedly Al Capone, who in 1930 was described by the head of the Chicago Crime Commission as “public enemy number one”. Capone was born in 1899 to Italian immigrant parents in Brooklyn, New York, but moved to Chicago around 1920 to work with John Torrio, the leader of organised crime in the city. In 1925, Capone took control of the Torrio operation and quickly rose to fame because of his ostentatious lifestyle and the acts of violence carried out under his name. Capone helped to build up a business worth $60m based on the manufacture and transportation of alcohol, as well as gambling and prostitution. Claiming all he was doing was meeting a demand, he talked of business efficiency and the elimination of competition to justify violence. A war between Capone’s gang and that of mobster Dion O’Bannion resulted in several deaths, including that of O’Bannion himself in 1924. O’Bannion was succeeded by Hymie Weiss and George ‘Bugs’ Moran, who continued the rivalry with Capone. Weiss was shot and killed in 1926. In 1927 Capone moved to Florida from where he continued to run his Chicago operation. Police mug shot of Chicago mobster Al Capone, one of the leading gangsters of the prohibition era. (Bettman via Getty Images) There were hundreds of gangland killings in Chicago in the 1920s. The most notorious incident occurred in February 1929 when seven of Capone’s rivals were machine-gunned to death in the St Valentine’s Day Massacre. Although not directly involved, it was assumed that Capone was responsible. He also personally carried out a number of killings, and used violence to shape local politics. In 1924 his gunmen determined the election in Cicero, just west of Chicago; an assistant state attorney was assassinated in 1926, and bombings influenced the election of Mayor William Thompson’s candidates in 1928. Capone was finally found guilty of income tax fraud in 1931 and sentenced to 11 years in prison. He was released in 1939 and retired to his home in Florida where he died in 1947. Who were the other leading gangsters? Dutch Schultz, born Arthur Flegenheimer, became one of the most powerful gangsters in New York and was often compared to Capone. Schultz’s power was based on bootlegging, gambling and a protection racket as well as a reputation for violence. Attempts to convict him of tax evasion failed in 1935, but he responded by planning to assassinate the district attorney for New York, Thomas Dewey. When Schultz’s alarmed gangland associates heard of this plot, they had him murdered. Another major New York gangster was Arnold Rothstein, a professional gambler who ran gambling houses in New York City, Saratoga Springs, and Long Beach – as well as operating a racing stable, a real estate business and a bail bond firm. Rothstein was alleged to have been behind the fixing of the 1919 World Series, when the Chicago White Sox lost to the Cincinnati Reds. Rothstein used his wealth to finance other criminal activities and was at the centre of growing organised crime, but in 1928 he was shot dead while playing cards, probably over a gambling debt. One of Rothstein’s associates was Salvatore Luciana, ‘Lucky Luciano’, who was born in Sicily. His family settled in New York’s Lower East Side where Luciano rose to become a leading figure in bootlegging, narcotics and prostitution. He was arrested 25 times between 1916 and 1936, but never convicted. Luciano eventually became a target of Thomas Dewey, and in 1936 was convicted of multiple charges of involvement in prostitution and sentenced to 30 to 50 years in prison. His sentence was commuted in 1946, possibly as a result of deal with the federal government to provide Mafia links in Sicily during the war, and he was deported to his home country. Other New York gangsters included Frank Costello and Vito Genovese, and Irish gangsters such as Bill Dwyer and Owney Madden. Crime covered many nationalities and many cities. Detroit became the ‘liquor capital’ of the US because of its proximity to Canada, which made it a centre for illegal imports. The city was said to have 15,000 speakeasies and was dominated by the ‘Purple Gang’ run by the four Bernstein brothers: Abe, Joseph, Ray and Isadore. They were responsible for the Milaflores Apartment Massacre in 1927, in which three rival gangsters were shot and killed. In 1931 an internal conflict that resulted in three further murders led to the conviction and jailing of Ray Bernstein and the gang gradually declined in influence. A potential customer examines an advertisement for an illegal drinking den or speakeasy during US prohibition in the 1920s. (Hulton-Deutsch Collection/Corbis via Getty Images) The German-born George Remus was a successful lawyer before he became the so-called ‘king of the bootleggers’, responsible for much of the whisky production in the Cincinnati, Ohio, region. His fabulous wealth (about $40 million) and lavish lifestyle may have been the basis for F Scott Fitzgerald’s main character in his novel The Great Gatsby. In 1925 Remus was jailed for two years for violations of the Volstead Act. In 1927 he shot and killed his wife who had squandered his wealth during his absence, but he was acquitted on the grounds of temporary insanity and lived until 1952, when he died of natural causes. What were the overall effects of prohibition and why did it fail? During prohibition, the consumption of hard liquor (spirits) probably dropped by as much as 50 per cent and other alcoholic beverages by about one third. As a result, it did have some positive effects: the number of deaths due to cirrhosis of the liver fell considerably, but was offset to some extent by deaths caused by drinking adulterated alcohol. However, in 1929 Mabel Walker Willebrandt, the former Assistant US Attorney General who had headed prohibition prosecutions, conceded that alcohol could be purchased “at almost any hour of the day or night, either in rural districts, the smaller towns, or the cities.” At the same time prohibition almost completely destroyed the brewing industry, causing a huge loss in jobs. It also resulted in a loss of $11bn in tax revenues, and cost $300m to enforce. The reasons for the failure of prohibition seemed clear. The report of the Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement in 1931 pointed to the widespread police and political corruption, combined with a lack of public will as primary causes. While the number of arrests for drunkenness had initially fallen, they soon rose again and the increase in crime associated with prohibition only strengthened the demands for repeal. Yet the issue left the nation divided. Expressing his opposition to prohibition was one of the factors that prevented Al Smith, democratic governor of New York, from being elected to the presidency in 1928. Opposition to prohibition was strongest in the urban areas and north, weakest in rural areas and the south and west. However, the onset of the Great Depression following the Wall Street Crash in 1929 further weakened the case for prohibition – as newly-elected President Franklin D Roosevelt said in 1932: “What America needs now is a drink.” When did prohibition end? Passed in February 1933 and ratified on 5 December 1933, the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th and so ended prohibition in the United States. Control of alcohol after 1933 became a state rather than a federal issue. A small number of states remained ‘dry’ for some years – Mississippi was the last until 1966, but there are still local areas where the ban on alcohol remains. Neil Wynn is a professor emeritus of 20th-century American history at the University of Gloucester, and the author of several books, including The African American Experience during World War II (2010), Historical Dictionary of the Roosevelt Truman Era (2008) and Historical Dictionary From Great War to Great Depression (2003). This article was first published by History Extra in December 2017	<urn:uuid:7c596dad-63f1-4be1-b9d3-6abb08503b23>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/prohibition-history-facts-what-when-start-why-passed-america-ban-alcohol/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594101.10/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119010920-20200119034920-00205.warc.gz	en	0.982336	2,872	3.890625	4	[ 0.04768015444278717, 0.1210147961974144, 0.2857811450958252, -0.14729997515678406, -0.07111820578575134, 0.2025240659713745, 0.06320278346538544, 0.32703039050102234, -0.41787850856781006, 0.09615582227706909, -0.035854652523994446, 0.6201586127281189, -0.2906244695186615, 0.01313662528991...	3	Here, Professor Neil Wynn presents a guide to the causes, crime and considerable impact of this policy on American society during the prohibition era… What was prohibition? Prohibition was the attempt to outlaw the production and consumption of alcohol in the United States. The call for prohibition began primarily as a religious movement in the early 19th century – the state of Maine passed the first state prohibition law in 1846, and the Prohibition Party was established in 1869. The movement gained support in the 1880s and 1890s from social reformers who saw alcohol as the cause of poverty, industrial accidents, and the break-up of families; others associated alcohol with urban immigrant ghettos, criminality, and political corruption. Groups such as the Women’s Christian Temperance Union (WCTU), formed in 1874, and the Anti-Saloon League (ASL), founded in 1893, became powerful crusading forces and by 1916, 26 of the then 48 states had already passed prohibition laws. With America’s entry into the First World War in 1917, prohibition was linked to grain conservation. It was also aimed at brewers, many of whom were of German descent. Limits on alcohol production were enacted first as a war measure in 1918, and prohibition became fully established with the ratification of the 18th Amendment in 1919 and its enforcement from January 1920 onward. Described by Herbert Hoover, US president from 1929-1933, as “a great social and economic experiment”, prohibition had a considerable impact on American society before its repeal in 1933. When did prohibition come into force? The 18th Amendment to the constitution prohibiting the manufacture, sale or transportation of alcohol was adopted by both houses of Congress in December 1917 and ratified by the necessary two-thirds of the states on 16 January 1919. The amendment was implemented by the National Prohibition Act (known as the Volstead Act after Andrew Volstead, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee and a leading prohibitionist) in October 1919. Under the terms of the act, prohibition began on 17 January 1920. The act defined ‘intoxicating liquor’ as anything that contained one half of one per cent alcohol by volume, but allowed the sale of alcohol for medicinal, sacramental, or industrial purposes. Two men pour alcohol down a drain during prohibition in the United States, c1920. (Hulton Archive/Getty Images) How was prohibition enforced, and how successful was its enforcement? The 18th Amendment and Volstead Act were more easily passed than enforced. Doctors were allowed to prescribe alcohol for ‘medicinal’ purposes and to purchase it themselves for ‘laboratory’ use, and many interpreted these terms loosely. The sale of ‘sacramental wine’ also rose significantly in the early years of prohibition. The private possession or consumption of alcohol itself was not itself illegal and, as many Americans continued to demand alcoholic beverages, criminals stepped in to meet the demand by illegitimate means. Where previously there had been bars and saloons, there were now illegal drinking dens known as ‘speakeasies’ or ‘blind pigs’, which by the end of the decade were numbered at an estimated 200,000. People also took to producing their own illicit booze or ‘moonshine’, ‘bath-tub gin’ or home-brewed beer. Enforcement of the legislation thus proved enormously difficult for local police forces and the federal Bureau of Prohibition, or Prohibition Unit. The bureau numbered at around 3,000 agents, who had to police the coastal frontier and land borders with Canada and Mexico to prevent smuggling, as well as investigate the illegal internal production and transportation of alcohol in the country as a whole. Often poorly paid federal agents and police were susceptible to corruption, as were some judges and politicians. In Chicago, it was claimed that half the police force was in the pay of gangsters and, in New York, 7,000 arrests under the prohibition laws produced only 17 convictions. A number of states and cities simply forbade local police forces from investigating breaches of the Volstead Act, and enforcers of the law were often unpopular with the public. Some agents did, however, become famous for their pursuit of bootleggers and other criminals: Izzy Einstein and Moe Smith in New York made almost 5,000 arrests between 1920 and 1925, and were known for their use of disguises. Most famous of all was Eliot Ness who, with his hand-picked group of ‘untouchables’, pursued and eventually helped arrest leading gangster Al Capone. Prohibition-era policemen Moe Smith (on the left in top picture, on the right on the bottom picture) and Izzy Einstein (on the right in the top picture, on the left in the bottom picture). The pair would use disguises to infiltrate speakeasies. (Underwood and Underwood/The LIFE Picture Collection/Getty Images) Who were the gangsters who profited from illegal bootleg alcohol businesses? Crime offered a gangsters quick route to success, wealth, and status, and prohibition presented them with a golden opportunity. Rather than being a fairly small-scale, localised affair, crime became increasingly national and organised, incorporating business people and politicians in new criminal syndicates and combinations that manufactured, imported and transported illegal bootleg alcohol sold in speakeasies. Competition and rivalry between rival gangs led to widespread violence: between 1927 and 1930 alone there were reported to be more than 500 gangland murders across the US. The Chicago Crime Commission claimed that there were 729 gangland killings in the Chicago area between 1919 and 1933, but historians have suggested this was exaggerated. The leading gangster of the prohibition era was undoubtedly Al Capone, who in 1930 was described by the head of the Chicago Crime Commission as “public enemy number one”. Capone was born in 1899 to Italian immigrant parents in Brooklyn, New York, but moved to Chicago around 1920 to work with John Torrio, the leader of organised crime in the city. In 1925, Capone took control of the Torrio operation and quickly rose to fame because of his ostentatious lifestyle and the acts of violence carried out under his name. Capone helped to build up a business worth $60m based on the manufacture and transportation of alcohol, as well as gambling and prostitution. Claiming all he was doing was meeting a demand, he talked of business efficiency and the elimination of competition to justify violence. A war between Capone’s gang and that of mobster Dion O’Bannion resulted in several deaths, including that of O’Bannion himself in 1924. O’Bannion was succeeded by Hymie Weiss and George ‘Bugs’ Moran, who continued the rivalry with Capone. Weiss was shot and killed in 1926. In 1927 Capone moved to Florida from where he continued to run his Chicago operation. Police mug shot of Chicago mobster Al Capone, one of the leading gangsters of the prohibition era. (Bettman via Getty Images) There were hundreds of gangland killings in Chicago in the 1920s. The most notorious incident occurred in February 1929 when seven of Capone’s rivals were machine-gunned to death in the St Valentine’s Day Massacre. Although not directly involved, it was assumed that Capone was responsible. He also personally carried out a number of killings, and used violence to shape local politics. In 1924 his gunmen determined the election in Cicero, just west of Chicago; an assistant state attorney was assassinated in 1926, and bombings influenced the election of Mayor William Thompson’s candidates in 1928. Capone was finally found guilty of income tax fraud in 1931 and sentenced to 11 years in prison. He was released in 1939 and retired to his home in Florida where he died in 1947. Who were the other leading gangsters? Dutch Schultz, born Arthur Flegenheimer, became one of the most powerful gangsters in New York and was often compared to Capone. Schultz’s power was based on bootlegging, gambling and a protection racket as well as a reputation for violence. Attempts to convict him of tax evasion failed in 1935, but he responded by planning to assassinate the district attorney for New York, Thomas Dewey. When Schultz’s alarmed gangland associates heard of this plot, they had him murdered. Another major New York gangster was Arnold Rothstein, a professional gambler who ran gambling houses in New York City, Saratoga Springs, and Long Beach – as well as operating a racing stable, a real estate business and a bail bond firm. Rothstein was alleged to have been behind the fixing of the 1919 World Series, when the Chicago White Sox lost to the Cincinnati Reds. Rothstein used his wealth to finance other criminal activities and was at the centre of growing organised crime, but in 1928 he was shot dead while playing cards, probably over a gambling debt. One of Rothstein’s associates was Salvatore Luciana, ‘Lucky Luciano’, who was born in Sicily. His family settled in New York’s Lower East Side where Luciano rose to become a leading figure in bootlegging, narcotics and prostitution. He was arrested 25 times between 1916 and 1936, but never convicted. Luciano eventually became a target of Thomas Dewey, and in 1936 was convicted of multiple charges of involvement in prostitution and sentenced to 30 to 50 years in prison. His sentence was commuted in 1946, possibly as a result of deal with the federal government to provide Mafia links in Sicily during the war, and he was deported to his home country. Other New York gangsters included Frank Costello and Vito Genovese, and Irish gangsters such as Bill Dwyer and Owney Madden. Crime covered many nationalities and many cities. Detroit became the ‘liquor capital’ of the US because of its proximity to Canada, which made it a centre for illegal imports. The city was said to have 15,000 speakeasies and was dominated by the ‘Purple Gang’ run by the four Bernstein brothers: Abe, Joseph, Ray and Isadore. They were responsible for the Milaflores Apartment Massacre in 1927, in which three rival gangsters were shot and killed. In 1931 an internal conflict that resulted in three further murders led to the conviction and jailing of Ray Bernstein and the gang gradually declined in influence. A potential customer examines an advertisement for an illegal drinking den or speakeasy during US prohibition in the 1920s. (Hulton-Deutsch Collection/Corbis via Getty Images) The German-born George Remus was a successful lawyer before he became the so-called ‘king of the bootleggers’, responsible for much of the whisky production in the Cincinnati, Ohio, region. His fabulous wealth (about $40 million) and lavish lifestyle may have been the basis for F Scott Fitzgerald’s main character in his novel The Great Gatsby. In 1925 Remus was jailed for two years for violations of the Volstead Act. In 1927 he shot and killed his wife who had squandered his wealth during his absence, but he was acquitted on the grounds of temporary insanity and lived until 1952, when he died of natural causes. What were the overall effects of prohibition and why did it fail? During prohibition, the consumption of hard liquor (spirits) probably dropped by as much as 50 per cent and other alcoholic beverages by about one third. As a result, it did have some positive effects: the number of deaths due to cirrhosis of the liver fell considerably, but was offset to some extent by deaths caused by drinking adulterated alcohol. However, in 1929 Mabel Walker Willebrandt, the former Assistant US Attorney General who had headed prohibition prosecutions, conceded that alcohol could be purchased “at almost any hour of the day or night, either in rural districts, the smaller towns, or the cities.” At the same time prohibition almost completely destroyed the brewing industry, causing a huge loss in jobs. It also resulted in a loss of $11bn in tax revenues, and cost $300m to enforce. The reasons for the failure of prohibition seemed clear. The report of the Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement in 1931 pointed to the widespread police and political corruption, combined with a lack of public will as primary causes. While the number of arrests for drunkenness had initially fallen, they soon rose again and the increase in crime associated with prohibition only strengthened the demands for repeal. Yet the issue left the nation divided. Expressing his opposition to prohibition was one of the factors that prevented Al Smith, democratic governor of New York, from being elected to the presidency in 1928. Opposition to prohibition was strongest in the urban areas and north, weakest in rural areas and the south and west. However, the onset of the Great Depression following the Wall Street Crash in 1929 further weakened the case for prohibition – as newly-elected President Franklin D Roosevelt said in 1932: “What America needs now is a drink.” When did prohibition end? Passed in February 1933 and ratified on 5 December 1933, the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th and so ended prohibition in the United States. Control of alcohol after 1933 became a state rather than a federal issue. A small number of states remained ‘dry’ for some years – Mississippi was the last until 1966, but there are still local areas where the ban on alcohol remains. Neil Wynn is a professor emeritus of 20th-century American history at the University of Gloucester, and the author of several books, including The African American Experience during World War II (2010), Historical Dictionary of the Roosevelt Truman Era (2008) and Historical Dictionary From Great War to Great Depression (2003). This article was first published by History Extra in December 2017	3,073	ENGLISH	1
Franklin Delano Rooesvelt This essay will focus on the life of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Roosevelt devoted much of his later years in life to help the needy. As president, Roosevelt passed as many bills, lobbing for as much congressional support as he could get to aid him in his attempts to help the unemployed, starving and poor people that society had forgotten. President Roosevelt has often been called the most beneficial president that America has had in the twentieth century, some may argue that he was the best president since Lincoln. Roosevelt truly dedicated his life to humanitarian efforts worldwide, never stopping to take a break until his unfortunate early death. Never in the history of the United States had there ever been such a terrible, long-lasting, economic depression then the one that began just before President Roosevelt ran for his first presidential election. Thirteen million people were out of work, about one quarter of the working age population and cities – as well as states – were losing money fast, as there were no taxes to be collected. Schools were closed because the states did not have enough money to fund them and people were homeless and starving; living – and dying – on the very streets where just a few years ago America experienced its first economic boom. This sets the stage for the most triumphant presidency this country has ever seen. Triumphant not only over the war that was to follow but also over economic as well as social barriers. It would be nothing short of the truth to say that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his staff saved this country from total economic collapse. President Roosevelts heritage traces all the way back to our great nations colonial times. Being of Dutch and English ancestry, his ancestor, Klaes Martensen had been a Dutch immigrant, settling in New York in 1645. Almost two hundred years later, on January 30, 1882, Franklin Delano was born. Both of his parents had come from upper-class families. His father, James Roosevelt was the vice president of the Delaware and Hudson Railway Company. Franklin lived a life almost all would envy, growing up about 100 miles north of New York City on his parents Hyde Estate. The estate, totaling about 100 acres in size overlooked the Hudson River and had a breathtaking view of the Catskill mountains. He led a good life, going to well-renound private schools then graduating, to attend Harvard and later Colombia Law School. It was at this time that Roosevelt met and fell in love with Anna Eleanor Roosevelt, and the were promptly married. Attending the ceremonies was President Theodore Roosevelt. The assumption can be drawn that during this time Franklin was overcome with a strong desire to become president. His road to success was far from over, though, in a period of about ten to twenty years Roosevelt became a New York senator and Governor. He was forced to fade out of the public spotlight, though when he was stricken with polio after a boating trip. During this period of a few years Franklin became better aquainted with his wife and her ideals. Eleanor was his second influence, as she was a great humanitarian. Eleanor taught Franklin many of the important morals he would later use as president. When Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected for his first term, in 1933 he began to put these morals to good use. During the first one hundred days Roosevelt spent in office he passed many bills, setting up agencies like the WPA, or Works Progress Administration. Roosevelt believed in giving aid to the sick, poor and helpless, by providing hospitial care for those who needed it and by setting up food distribution centers and homeless shelters. He also believed in insurance for the elderly and unemployed, he set up Social Security to pay out money to those who could no longer work or who just could not find work. He set up mortgage relief actions for farmers and home owners, before he became president over one hundred homes were forclosed every day, and one in three farms had been forclosed or deserted. He set up public works programs to create jobs for the millions of unemployed able workers, building roads and other projects. He regulated banks, after the closing of all banks in Michigan for a day people panicked and began to withdraw their money. Roosevelt closed all banks in the United States and set up a board to review the banks, those that were deemed able to be reopened were, but many banks had to file for bankruptcy. Finally, Roosevelt believed in the preservation not only of the human soul but also of the earth we live on, so he allotted land for national parks and set up nature reserves. Having been stricken with Polio, Roosevelt knew what it was like to be helpless, always in need of someone elses help, not due to any fault of their own; for this reason his compassion for those in need was enormous The Catholic Church would back up any of these measures, as it teaches many of these same values. For instance, it is only natural to think that the church would treat the poor as Roosevelt did, because Jesus did the same, providing food and shelter for homeless and starving. Also, the church teaches that we should treat all people as equals, as we are all created in Gods own image. Franklin Delano Roosevelts bills did not exclude the poor, sick or elderly. As a matter of fact, Roosevelt set up the Social Security Act to provide for these old and sick. Also, Roosevelts public works projects included all races, providing jobs for whites as well as blacks and asians. The actions of Roosevelt and his staff represent the epitomy of the will to survive the Great Depression. They never gave up, continuing to produce bills well into his second elected term. If a bill was deemed unlawful, as some were, he would review the bill, rephrasing it to make it legal while still retaining its quality. These great actions stemmed from great beliefs. Though it was unclear to the writer what religious beliefs the former President held, it was clear that he truly believed and was empowered by God to preform many of the tasks and actions that he did. His beliefs also came from his parents and wife. Both of his parents believed that one with more money should give to one with less money. In other words, Roosevelt probably had understood the importance of giving all of his life. Roosevelt also learned a lot from his wife, Eleanor, who was a great humanitarian. During her days in the White House, Eleanor spent much time devising ways to help her husband propose new bills and give more, she was probably the biggest influence on Franklin Roosevelts life. Morris, Jeffrey B. FDR Way, The 1996, Lou Reda Productions. Franklin Delano Rooesvelt	<urn:uuid:8e5bdbd1-6aee-45c4-8648-34286b7d4bba>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://pennsylvaniaangerclass.com/franklin-delano-roosevelt/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599718.13/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120165335-20200120194335-00093.warc.gz	en	0.989316	1,348	3.4375	3	[ -0.19118955731391907, 0.23322081565856934, 0.3542643189430237, -0.06384553760290146, 0.2903396487236023, 0.40548935532569885, 0.09904206544160843, 0.4430388808250427, -0.20498386025428772, -0.39646974205970764, 0.33374106884002686, 0.24941948056221008, 0.047482430934906006, 0.7436020970344...	1	Franklin Delano Rooesvelt This essay will focus on the life of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Roosevelt devoted much of his later years in life to help the needy. As president, Roosevelt passed as many bills, lobbing for as much congressional support as he could get to aid him in his attempts to help the unemployed, starving and poor people that society had forgotten. President Roosevelt has often been called the most beneficial president that America has had in the twentieth century, some may argue that he was the best president since Lincoln. Roosevelt truly dedicated his life to humanitarian efforts worldwide, never stopping to take a break until his unfortunate early death. Never in the history of the United States had there ever been such a terrible, long-lasting, economic depression then the one that began just before President Roosevelt ran for his first presidential election. Thirteen million people were out of work, about one quarter of the working age population and cities – as well as states – were losing money fast, as there were no taxes to be collected. Schools were closed because the states did not have enough money to fund them and people were homeless and starving; living – and dying – on the very streets where just a few years ago America experienced its first economic boom. This sets the stage for the most triumphant presidency this country has ever seen. Triumphant not only over the war that was to follow but also over economic as well as social barriers. It would be nothing short of the truth to say that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his staff saved this country from total economic collapse. President Roosevelts heritage traces all the way back to our great nations colonial times. Being of Dutch and English ancestry, his ancestor, Klaes Martensen had been a Dutch immigrant, settling in New York in 1645. Almost two hundred years later, on January 30, 1882, Franklin Delano was born. Both of his parents had come from upper-class families. His father, James Roosevelt was the vice president of the Delaware and Hudson Railway Company. Franklin lived a life almost all would envy, growing up about 100 miles north of New York City on his parents Hyde Estate. The estate, totaling about 100 acres in size overlooked the Hudson River and had a breathtaking view of the Catskill mountains. He led a good life, going to well-renound private schools then graduating, to attend Harvard and later Colombia Law School. It was at this time that Roosevelt met and fell in love with Anna Eleanor Roosevelt, and the were promptly married. Attending the ceremonies was President Theodore Roosevelt. The assumption can be drawn that during this time Franklin was overcome with a strong desire to become president. His road to success was far from over, though, in a period of about ten to twenty years Roosevelt became a New York senator and Governor. He was forced to fade out of the public spotlight, though when he was stricken with polio after a boating trip. During this period of a few years Franklin became better aquainted with his wife and her ideals. Eleanor was his second influence, as she was a great humanitarian. Eleanor taught Franklin many of the important morals he would later use as president. When Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected for his first term, in 1933 he began to put these morals to good use. During the first one hundred days Roosevelt spent in office he passed many bills, setting up agencies like the WPA, or Works Progress Administration. Roosevelt believed in giving aid to the sick, poor and helpless, by providing hospitial care for those who needed it and by setting up food distribution centers and homeless shelters. He also believed in insurance for the elderly and unemployed, he set up Social Security to pay out money to those who could no longer work or who just could not find work. He set up mortgage relief actions for farmers and home owners, before he became president over one hundred homes were forclosed every day, and one in three farms had been forclosed or deserted. He set up public works programs to create jobs for the millions of unemployed able workers, building roads and other projects. He regulated banks, after the closing of all banks in Michigan for a day people panicked and began to withdraw their money. Roosevelt closed all banks in the United States and set up a board to review the banks, those that were deemed able to be reopened were, but many banks had to file for bankruptcy. Finally, Roosevelt believed in the preservation not only of the human soul but also of the earth we live on, so he allotted land for national parks and set up nature reserves. Having been stricken with Polio, Roosevelt knew what it was like to be helpless, always in need of someone elses help, not due to any fault of their own; for this reason his compassion for those in need was enormous The Catholic Church would back up any of these measures, as it teaches many of these same values. For instance, it is only natural to think that the church would treat the poor as Roosevelt did, because Jesus did the same, providing food and shelter for homeless and starving. Also, the church teaches that we should treat all people as equals, as we are all created in Gods own image. Franklin Delano Roosevelts bills did not exclude the poor, sick or elderly. As a matter of fact, Roosevelt set up the Social Security Act to provide for these old and sick. Also, Roosevelts public works projects included all races, providing jobs for whites as well as blacks and asians. The actions of Roosevelt and his staff represent the epitomy of the will to survive the Great Depression. They never gave up, continuing to produce bills well into his second elected term. If a bill was deemed unlawful, as some were, he would review the bill, rephrasing it to make it legal while still retaining its quality. These great actions stemmed from great beliefs. Though it was unclear to the writer what religious beliefs the former President held, it was clear that he truly believed and was empowered by God to preform many of the tasks and actions that he did. His beliefs also came from his parents and wife. Both of his parents believed that one with more money should give to one with less money. In other words, Roosevelt probably had understood the importance of giving all of his life. Roosevelt also learned a lot from his wife, Eleanor, who was a great humanitarian. During her days in the White House, Eleanor spent much time devising ways to help her husband propose new bills and give more, she was probably the biggest influence on Franklin Roosevelts life. Morris, Jeffrey B. FDR Way, The 1996, Lou Reda Productions. Franklin Delano Rooesvelt	1,364	ENGLISH	1
5. Early Life Zheng He was not only a Chinese Muslim explorer. He was also a court eunuch, mariner, and diplomat. He lived during the early Ming Dynasty Period in China. As a young boy, Zheng He was captured by General Fu Youde, commander of the Ming armies, in 1381. Being the custom at that time for young prisoners who were relegated to serve as pages for the royal court, he was made into a eunuch. At 10 years of age, he started his life in the household of the Prince of Yan, where he received his early education. Then, as a young man, he served as a soldier fighting against the Mongols. The early Ming dynasty was just as full of intellectual intrigues as it was of assassinations and treachery within the royal court. Zheng He, as the trusted servant of the Prince of Yan, was able to help his master win the crown after the prince chose to put up a rebellion army against his nephew emperor. As a reward, Zheng He was made admiral of an expedition to find the escaped emperor they had deposed of. He sailed with his fleet of ships and docked at several ports and countries, trading all along the way with Chinese goods, and taking exotic items and unique animals in return. He encountered resistance in some countries, but eventually subdued much of it. 3. Major Contributions The seven expeditions that Zheng He commanded lasted spanned almost three decades, from 1405 to 1433. These expeditions visited many Asian countries, and the expeditions pushed into parts of the Middle East and Africa. In these countries, he traded with silver, porcelain, silk, and gold. Trading partners reciprocated with exotic animals and ivory. One of his important contributions was reopening the old ocean routes of trade between China and the Middle East. He also collected the tributes that some countries were asked to submit to the Chinese royal court. Later expeditions reached as far as the Byzantine Empire, which would soon fall to the Ottoman Turks. He also captured pirates along the way, many of which had plagued his and others' seagoing vessels for decades. He also did much to spread Islamic influence throughout the Malay Peninsula and the island of Java. During his career and on his expeditions, Zheng He faced many challenges. He had to command one of the Prince of Yan's armies in their rebellion against the new emperor, who was stripping his master, the Prince, of his titles and property. Eventually defeating the emperor's armies, he was honored by his master, who then ascended to become the emperor himself. In his expeditionary voyages to trade and find the escaped deposed emperor, Zheng He had to fight with pirates and countries that refused to honor his emperor with tributes. As a result, he had only one recourse and that was to either take them prisoner, or make them submit to the emperor's wishes by force. He would strike up a show of military might, and most of these enemies would eventually pay tribute out of fear. 1. Death and Legacy Not much is known about Zheng He's death. There were witnesses who said that he died in 1433, but some reports conclude that he died two years later, when he was still acting as defender of the city of Nanjing. He never married in his life, but had adopted a son. In 1985, to honor his accomplishments, a tomb was built over an older grave site, and his headgear, sword, and clothes were interred therein. Zheng He's body itself had been buried at sea in either 1433 or 1435. He left behind him a legacy characterized by his contributions to international cultural relations and the Islamic traditions of China. He also built temples and mosques in the places that his ships traded with and visited along the way, particularly in what are today Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Unfortunately, imperial officials later minimized his personal importance and that of his expeditionary contributions, by omitting them from Chinese educational curricula and historical records. Who Was Zheng He? Zheng He was not only a Chinese Muslim explorer. He was also a court eunuch, mariner, and diplomat. He lived during the early Ming Dynasty Period in China. Your MLA Citation Your APA Citation Your Chicago Citation Your Harvard CitationRemember to italicize the title of this article in your Harvard citation.	<urn:uuid:c6502cbb-4ce0-4edb-9ac8-182944cef6c9>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/zheng-he-famous-explorers-of-the-world.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599789.45/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120195035-20200120224035-00027.warc.gz	en	0.991955	898	3.65625	4	[ -0.6726392507553101, 0.352141797542572, 0.38312703371047974, -0.1999548226594925, -0.2778162956237793, -0.4769367277622223, 0.4447357654571533, 0.18065789341926575, 0.15456241369247437, -0.1839854121208191, 0.569291353225708, -0.3434222340583801, 0.41117578744888306, 0.42937910556793213, ...	1	5. Early Life Zheng He was not only a Chinese Muslim explorer. He was also a court eunuch, mariner, and diplomat. He lived during the early Ming Dynasty Period in China. As a young boy, Zheng He was captured by General Fu Youde, commander of the Ming armies, in 1381. Being the custom at that time for young prisoners who were relegated to serve as pages for the royal court, he was made into a eunuch. At 10 years of age, he started his life in the household of the Prince of Yan, where he received his early education. Then, as a young man, he served as a soldier fighting against the Mongols. The early Ming dynasty was just as full of intellectual intrigues as it was of assassinations and treachery within the royal court. Zheng He, as the trusted servant of the Prince of Yan, was able to help his master win the crown after the prince chose to put up a rebellion army against his nephew emperor. As a reward, Zheng He was made admiral of an expedition to find the escaped emperor they had deposed of. He sailed with his fleet of ships and docked at several ports and countries, trading all along the way with Chinese goods, and taking exotic items and unique animals in return. He encountered resistance in some countries, but eventually subdued much of it. 3. Major Contributions The seven expeditions that Zheng He commanded lasted spanned almost three decades, from 1405 to 1433. These expeditions visited many Asian countries, and the expeditions pushed into parts of the Middle East and Africa. In these countries, he traded with silver, porcelain, silk, and gold. Trading partners reciprocated with exotic animals and ivory. One of his important contributions was reopening the old ocean routes of trade between China and the Middle East. He also collected the tributes that some countries were asked to submit to the Chinese royal court. Later expeditions reached as far as the Byzantine Empire, which would soon fall to the Ottoman Turks. He also captured pirates along the way, many of which had plagued his and others' seagoing vessels for decades. He also did much to spread Islamic influence throughout the Malay Peninsula and the island of Java. During his career and on his expeditions, Zheng He faced many challenges. He had to command one of the Prince of Yan's armies in their rebellion against the new emperor, who was stripping his master, the Prince, of his titles and property. Eventually defeating the emperor's armies, he was honored by his master, who then ascended to become the emperor himself. In his expeditionary voyages to trade and find the escaped deposed emperor, Zheng He had to fight with pirates and countries that refused to honor his emperor with tributes. As a result, he had only one recourse and that was to either take them prisoner, or make them submit to the emperor's wishes by force. He would strike up a show of military might, and most of these enemies would eventually pay tribute out of fear. 1. Death and Legacy Not much is known about Zheng He's death. There were witnesses who said that he died in 1433, but some reports conclude that he died two years later, when he was still acting as defender of the city of Nanjing. He never married in his life, but had adopted a son. In 1985, to honor his accomplishments, a tomb was built over an older grave site, and his headgear, sword, and clothes were interred therein. Zheng He's body itself had been buried at sea in either 1433 or 1435. He left behind him a legacy characterized by his contributions to international cultural relations and the Islamic traditions of China. He also built temples and mosques in the places that his ships traded with and visited along the way, particularly in what are today Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Unfortunately, imperial officials later minimized his personal importance and that of his expeditionary contributions, by omitting them from Chinese educational curricula and historical records. Who Was Zheng He? Zheng He was not only a Chinese Muslim explorer. He was also a court eunuch, mariner, and diplomat. He lived during the early Ming Dynasty Period in China. Your MLA Citation Your APA Citation Your Chicago Citation Your Harvard CitationRemember to italicize the title of this article in your Harvard citation.	913	ENGLISH	1
She never ceased to wonder at the incredible power of birds for adaptation. These had flown perhaps a thousand miles from the South to raise their families in the northern prairie. Some people thought migrations were a habit left over from the Ice Age, but nobody really knew why birds migrated. Why didn’t they just stay in the South all the time? Perhaps it was their migrations that kept them hardy and pliable and able to survive drastic changes in the world. Perhaps people ought to migrate too, and never strive to put down roots at all. It often seemed to her that the desire of human beings to own land was the cause of all their troubles. Their desire kept them enslaved, from one generation to the next. Yet how would a human being know who he was, without roots? Lois Phillips Hudson The Bones of Plenty Quoted in “Patterns of Migration” by Kirstin Vander Giessen-Reitsma on Topology	<urn:uuid:6efdb36e-a332-42a3-92ef-4e590146ddcc>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.topologymagazine.org/quote/without-roots/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595282.35/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119205448-20200119233448-00148.warc.gz	en	0.981076	197	3.296875	3	[ -0.2301291674375534, -0.28606295585632324, 0.13037997484207153, 0.12822505831718445, 0.1795608103275299, 0.0928463563323021, -0.12538035213947296, 0.04778245463967323, -0.2605597674846649, 0.19315175712108612, 0.3874474763870239, -0.13121791183948517, 0.14211000502109528, -0.07563178241252...	13	She never ceased to wonder at the incredible power of birds for adaptation. These had flown perhaps a thousand miles from the South to raise their families in the northern prairie. Some people thought migrations were a habit left over from the Ice Age, but nobody really knew why birds migrated. Why didn’t they just stay in the South all the time? Perhaps it was their migrations that kept them hardy and pliable and able to survive drastic changes in the world. Perhaps people ought to migrate too, and never strive to put down roots at all. It often seemed to her that the desire of human beings to own land was the cause of all their troubles. Their desire kept them enslaved, from one generation to the next. Yet how would a human being know who he was, without roots? Lois Phillips Hudson The Bones of Plenty Quoted in “Patterns of Migration” by Kirstin Vander Giessen-Reitsma on Topology	188	ENGLISH	1
What is it that makes a great athlete? Is it wins and losses? Is it the example that they set for others? Is it sheer athletic ability or the force of will to succeed that makes one truly "great?" The answer may be different for everyone, and perhaps it is up to the observer to decide, but arguably for no one is the title "the Greatest" more fitting than for boxer Muhammad Ali. Because of not only his accomplishments as an athlete, but for the mark he made on the time and place in which he lived, it is difficult to find any sports figure that did more to shape their world than Muhammad Ali. According to Ali opponent George Foreman, "I don't call him the best boxer of all time, but he is the best human being I ever met." The purpose of this assignment is to read about Ali and gain an understanding of why he is considered so important to the time and place in which he lived. You will be writing a three paragraph response. In the first, please give Ali's background story. Who was he, and what did he do? Be sure to mention the Vietnam War, his conversion to Islam, his philanthropy, the way he acted according to the dictates of his conscience and his performances in matches against the likes of Joe Frazier and George Foreman. In the second paragraph, I want you to define what it means to be great, and how Muhammad Ali met these criteria to so many of the people of his generation. In your final paragraph, I want you to discuss greatness. How can a person follow in the example of Muhammad Ali and become great in whatever they do. What are the key attributes necessary for someone to be considered great, and how can those attributes be developed.	<urn:uuid:2e85ef68-bf53-4b21-adbb-9907565c23d5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.mrberrigan.com/muhammad-ali	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700675.78/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127112805-20200127142805-00519.warc.gz	en	0.983465	356	3.65625	4	[ -0.12344406545162201, 0.3543435037136078, 0.009133655577898026, -0.12178371846675873, -0.4053451716899872, -0.08396755903959274, 0.9951189756393433, -0.1321503221988678, 0.10651346296072006, 0.09474541246891022, 0.2673308551311493, -0.3783034086227417, 0.15685543417930603, 0.10491833090782...	10	What is it that makes a great athlete? Is it wins and losses? Is it the example that they set for others? Is it sheer athletic ability or the force of will to succeed that makes one truly "great?" The answer may be different for everyone, and perhaps it is up to the observer to decide, but arguably for no one is the title "the Greatest" more fitting than for boxer Muhammad Ali. Because of not only his accomplishments as an athlete, but for the mark he made on the time and place in which he lived, it is difficult to find any sports figure that did more to shape their world than Muhammad Ali. According to Ali opponent George Foreman, "I don't call him the best boxer of all time, but he is the best human being I ever met." The purpose of this assignment is to read about Ali and gain an understanding of why he is considered so important to the time and place in which he lived. You will be writing a three paragraph response. In the first, please give Ali's background story. Who was he, and what did he do? Be sure to mention the Vietnam War, his conversion to Islam, his philanthropy, the way he acted according to the dictates of his conscience and his performances in matches against the likes of Joe Frazier and George Foreman. In the second paragraph, I want you to define what it means to be great, and how Muhammad Ali met these criteria to so many of the people of his generation. In your final paragraph, I want you to discuss greatness. How can a person follow in the example of Muhammad Ali and become great in whatever they do. What are the key attributes necessary for someone to be considered great, and how can those attributes be developed.	352	ENGLISH	1
On Wednesday 2nd October you may have seen the Google doodle with Sir William Ramsey (it was published to celebrate his 167th birthday): Image credit / copyright Google.com – if there is a problem post this image, please let me know and I will remove it. You may also have inferred from the doodle that William Ramsey had something to do with the noble gases (group 18)… more on this later. William Ramsey was Scottish and was born in Glasgow on the 2nd October 1852 where he eventually went on to study chemistry at the University of Glasgow. His studies and research too him to Germany, Bristol and eventually University College London (UCL). It was here, at UCL that Ramsey carried out some work that led to the discovery of a completely new group of elements. This, I think, is very cool. Imagining discovering not just an element but also a group of elements that nobody had known about before or even conceived. The discovery came about at UCL when Ramsey was listening to a lecture by Lord Rayleigh. Rayleigh had noticed that there was a slight discrepancy between the density of air produced by chemical synthesis and the density of air produced when nitrogen was isolated from air. Ramsey decided to investigate and eventually isolated the gas. But he could not do anything with it – it would not react. Ramsey named the gas Argon from the Greek word Argos or lazy / slow. Further research also led him to discover Neon, Krypton, Xenon and eventually Radon (but not Helium – we needed the sun for this) and this research culminated in him being awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1904. Noble gases are remarkable – they do not react with anything (with the exception of Xenon which has produced XeF4, Xenon Tetrafluoride) and therefore can be put to many uses (for example, protective atmospheres or inside light bulbs).However, they are not common and are therefore still expensive to extract from the air. Today we also know about the existence of one more noble gas –the newly named Oganesson (Og) – the element with the greatest relative atomic mass (at this point in time) in the periodic table. One does wonder what Ramsey would think of this approximately 120 years after his discovery of Argon. Do you have any chemists that inspire you or that you think have carried out some cool research? If you do, please feel free to post them below as I would love to hear about them. This article was adapted from the following webpage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Ramsay	<urn:uuid:b35eaecc-7a74-4eab-9a3e-07dd8e5c61c4>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://blogs.osc-ib.com/2019/12/ib-student-blogs/william-ramsey/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00149.warc.gz	en	0.982644	541	3.609375	4	[ -0.534024178981781, 0.4307416081428528, 0.2953673005104065, 0.20563161373138428, 0.013357607647776604, -0.006349922623485327, 0.044756580144166946, 0.16319410502910614, -0.23058411478996277, 0.06671241670846939, -0.2708839774131775, -0.3445517420768738, 0.03610769659280777, 0.1304622292518...	1	On Wednesday 2nd October you may have seen the Google doodle with Sir William Ramsey (it was published to celebrate his 167th birthday): Image credit / copyright Google.com – if there is a problem post this image, please let me know and I will remove it. You may also have inferred from the doodle that William Ramsey had something to do with the noble gases (group 18)… more on this later. William Ramsey was Scottish and was born in Glasgow on the 2nd October 1852 where he eventually went on to study chemistry at the University of Glasgow. His studies and research too him to Germany, Bristol and eventually University College London (UCL). It was here, at UCL that Ramsey carried out some work that led to the discovery of a completely new group of elements. This, I think, is very cool. Imagining discovering not just an element but also a group of elements that nobody had known about before or even conceived. The discovery came about at UCL when Ramsey was listening to a lecture by Lord Rayleigh. Rayleigh had noticed that there was a slight discrepancy between the density of air produced by chemical synthesis and the density of air produced when nitrogen was isolated from air. Ramsey decided to investigate and eventually isolated the gas. But he could not do anything with it – it would not react. Ramsey named the gas Argon from the Greek word Argos or lazy / slow. Further research also led him to discover Neon, Krypton, Xenon and eventually Radon (but not Helium – we needed the sun for this) and this research culminated in him being awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1904. Noble gases are remarkable – they do not react with anything (with the exception of Xenon which has produced XeF4, Xenon Tetrafluoride) and therefore can be put to many uses (for example, protective atmospheres or inside light bulbs).However, they are not common and are therefore still expensive to extract from the air. Today we also know about the existence of one more noble gas –the newly named Oganesson (Og) – the element with the greatest relative atomic mass (at this point in time) in the periodic table. One does wonder what Ramsey would think of this approximately 120 years after his discovery of Argon. Do you have any chemists that inspire you or that you think have carried out some cool research? If you do, please feel free to post them below as I would love to hear about them. This article was adapted from the following webpage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Ramsay	544	ENGLISH	1
Garum was a fish sauce, made first by the Greeks and then by the Romans. The Greeks had made a fish sauce they called “garos”, which was also a Greek word for a type of fish. When Greek slaves became cooks for Romans, they made it for the Romans. The Romans loved the sauce, took it over and made it their own, the way pizza became an American dish, and they used it far more than the Greeks had. A recipe for it written down by Gargilius Martialis in De Medicina et de Virtute Herbarum is still extant, though the proportions aren’t given; it used fresh whole mackerel, sea salt, herbs. The mackerel were layered with the salt and herbs between them, and then let ferment in the sun for 20 days. Over the following 40 days, it was stirred every day. Then it was filtered through muslim to make a salty, oily sauce that was apparently odourless. The salt drew water and juices out of the fish and started to make a sauce. The fish fermented, and broke down into a liquid. It was an enzyme in the fish intestines that caused the breakdown; it was not decay or putrefaction. There was too much salt for any bacteria to develop. Some Garum may have been made just using the blood and intestines from mackerel. It’s possible the sauce started as something that would use up the bits of fish — the entrails, etc — that were left after the fish were cleaned for eating. This might have been particularly true with the poorer Greeks. But in the hands of the wealthier Romans, it became more than just a way of using up fish leftovers. Other fish sauces could be made from other fish (muria was made from tuna) but for Garum, mackerel was generally considered to make the best sauce, though at one point, mullet was in fashion. The recipes of course varied in how much salt was used, when and which herbs were added, how long it was fermented, etc. Garum smelled while you made it, but once made it had little smell and what aroma it did have people loved. Good Garum didn’t have a fishy taste; it had a complex, layered, salty taste. Still, people were prohibited from making it at home, though, because neighbours would complain about the smell while making it. If bottled Garum smelled bad, then it had gone bad. Garum was a very basic product that everyone used, as we use ketchup or Worcestershire sauce today. It would add saltiness to a meal, and complement and bring out other flavours in a dish. Romans loved all food to have combined tastes of sour, sweet and salty, and the Garum helped in this balance. The Romans even mixed wine in with it to drink it. There were several versions of Garum. Garum made in Portugal — then called Lusitania — was considered amongst the best. In Southern Spain and in Portugal, it was big business, and there were large purpose-constructed factories. The factories had tanks in the ground with a roof overhead. The bases of many of these pillars that supported the roofs are still extant. In Portugal, there are still the remains of a large factory at Troia, at the mouth of the Sado river, as well as the ruins of the baths which the Romans built for the workers. The Garum factories would be located on shores along the coastlines, close to the source of fish — and away from neighbours who would complain about the smell. Garum Sociorum was considered at one point the best type of fish sauce (it means “Garum for friends”.) It was apparently made in Spain from the livers of mullet fish. The Greeks today still make something they call “garos”, which is a relish made from mackerel livers. Pliny the Elder has let us know that he hated Garum. Some have tried using Vietnamese fish sauce, Nuoc Mam, or the Thai Sauce Nam Pla, but others feel that these two modern sauces taste more like a soy sauce than a fish sauce, and that it isn’t pungent enough, as it uses cleaned fish, and doesn’t use the innards. Garum was definitely a sauce, as opposed to a paste: it was pourable. Garum was one of Pompeii’s main exports. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire kept on making the sauce. Literature & Lore Jean Anthelme Brillat-Savarin, in The Physiology of Taste, Dec 1825, writes: “Garum was dearer (than muria), and we know much less of it. It is thought that it was extracted by pressure from the entrailles of the scombra or mackerel; but this supposition does not account for its high price. There is reason to believe it was a foreign sauce, and was nothing else but the Indian soy, which we know to be only fish fermented with mushrooms.” (Note that Brillat-Savarin also reveals that the French of his time didn’t really know what soy sauce was.)	<urn:uuid:97884b24-10de-48e1-83b0-dc278bf015e4>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.cooksinfo.com/garum	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251684146.65/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126013015-20200126043015-00006.warc.gz	en	0.985778	1,102	3.296875	3	[ -0.17947281897068024, 0.21977414190769196, 0.02117299847304821, 0.01729186624288559, -0.3703032433986664, -0.32866567373275757, 0.09786008298397064, 0.10961589217185974, -0.3316735029220581, -0.40815770626068115, -0.37125879526138306, -0.3413020372390747, -0.03048357367515564, 0.2482094168...	1	Garum was a fish sauce, made first by the Greeks and then by the Romans. The Greeks had made a fish sauce they called “garos”, which was also a Greek word for a type of fish. When Greek slaves became cooks for Romans, they made it for the Romans. The Romans loved the sauce, took it over and made it their own, the way pizza became an American dish, and they used it far more than the Greeks had. A recipe for it written down by Gargilius Martialis in De Medicina et de Virtute Herbarum is still extant, though the proportions aren’t given; it used fresh whole mackerel, sea salt, herbs. The mackerel were layered with the salt and herbs between them, and then let ferment in the sun for 20 days. Over the following 40 days, it was stirred every day. Then it was filtered through muslim to make a salty, oily sauce that was apparently odourless. The salt drew water and juices out of the fish and started to make a sauce. The fish fermented, and broke down into a liquid. It was an enzyme in the fish intestines that caused the breakdown; it was not decay or putrefaction. There was too much salt for any bacteria to develop. Some Garum may have been made just using the blood and intestines from mackerel. It’s possible the sauce started as something that would use up the bits of fish — the entrails, etc — that were left after the fish were cleaned for eating. This might have been particularly true with the poorer Greeks. But in the hands of the wealthier Romans, it became more than just a way of using up fish leftovers. Other fish sauces could be made from other fish (muria was made from tuna) but for Garum, mackerel was generally considered to make the best sauce, though at one point, mullet was in fashion. The recipes of course varied in how much salt was used, when and which herbs were added, how long it was fermented, etc. Garum smelled while you made it, but once made it had little smell and what aroma it did have people loved. Good Garum didn’t have a fishy taste; it had a complex, layered, salty taste. Still, people were prohibited from making it at home, though, because neighbours would complain about the smell while making it. If bottled Garum smelled bad, then it had gone bad. Garum was a very basic product that everyone used, as we use ketchup or Worcestershire sauce today. It would add saltiness to a meal, and complement and bring out other flavours in a dish. Romans loved all food to have combined tastes of sour, sweet and salty, and the Garum helped in this balance. The Romans even mixed wine in with it to drink it. There were several versions of Garum. Garum made in Portugal — then called Lusitania — was considered amongst the best. In Southern Spain and in Portugal, it was big business, and there were large purpose-constructed factories. The factories had tanks in the ground with a roof overhead. The bases of many of these pillars that supported the roofs are still extant. In Portugal, there are still the remains of a large factory at Troia, at the mouth of the Sado river, as well as the ruins of the baths which the Romans built for the workers. The Garum factories would be located on shores along the coastlines, close to the source of fish — and away from neighbours who would complain about the smell. Garum Sociorum was considered at one point the best type of fish sauce (it means “Garum for friends”.) It was apparently made in Spain from the livers of mullet fish. The Greeks today still make something they call “garos”, which is a relish made from mackerel livers. Pliny the Elder has let us know that he hated Garum. Some have tried using Vietnamese fish sauce, Nuoc Mam, or the Thai Sauce Nam Pla, but others feel that these two modern sauces taste more like a soy sauce than a fish sauce, and that it isn’t pungent enough, as it uses cleaned fish, and doesn’t use the innards. Garum was definitely a sauce, as opposed to a paste: it was pourable. Garum was one of Pompeii’s main exports. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire kept on making the sauce. Literature & Lore Jean Anthelme Brillat-Savarin, in The Physiology of Taste, Dec 1825, writes: “Garum was dearer (than muria), and we know much less of it. It is thought that it was extracted by pressure from the entrailles of the scombra or mackerel; but this supposition does not account for its high price. There is reason to believe it was a foreign sauce, and was nothing else but the Indian soy, which we know to be only fish fermented with mushrooms.” (Note that Brillat-Savarin also reveals that the French of his time didn’t really know what soy sauce was.)	1,063	ENGLISH	1
Detailed engraving, illustrating the Battle of Gibeah, from the Book of Judges, Chapter XX. The Battle of Gibeah iwas triggered by an incident in which the concubine of a man from the Tribe of Levi was raped by members of the Tribe of Benjamin and later died. The Levite had offered his concubine to the mob in his place. In the morning he found the concubine unresponsive on the doorstep. He later cut her body into twelve pieces, and sent the pieces throughout all the territories of the Israelite tribes. The outraged tribes of Israel sought justice, and asked for the miscreants to be delivered for judgement. The Benjamites refused, so the tribes then sought vengeance, and in the subsequent war, the members of Tribe of Benjamin were systematically killed, including women and children. When Benjamin was nearly 'extinguished', it was decided that the tribe should be allowed to survive, and all the men from another town, Jabesh Gilead, who had refused to take part in the punishment of the Tribe of Benjamin, were killed, so that their daughters could be wed to the surviving men of Benjamin. The first king of Israel, Saul, was descended from these surviving men. Due to this war, the Tribe of Benjamin was subsequently referred to as "the smallest of all the tribes."	<urn:uuid:20133053-d04a-4a29-a664-d02f61b4a3a5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.raremaps.com/gallery/detail/49919/victoire-des-benjamites-sur-loes-onze-tribus-devant-gabaa-j-goeree?q=0	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594209.12/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119035851-20200119063851-00451.warc.gz	en	0.984145	274	3.671875	4	[ -0.3558650314807892, 0.7863491773605347, 0.03834238648414612, 0.2421909123659134, -0.33804866671562195, -0.1255698800086975, 0.4373281002044678, 0.23059435188770294, -0.0019751177169382572, -0.1922888308763504, -0.034882254898548126, -0.3574533760547638, 0.17149493098258972, 0.002364687854...	1	Detailed engraving, illustrating the Battle of Gibeah, from the Book of Judges, Chapter XX. The Battle of Gibeah iwas triggered by an incident in which the concubine of a man from the Tribe of Levi was raped by members of the Tribe of Benjamin and later died. The Levite had offered his concubine to the mob in his place. In the morning he found the concubine unresponsive on the doorstep. He later cut her body into twelve pieces, and sent the pieces throughout all the territories of the Israelite tribes. The outraged tribes of Israel sought justice, and asked for the miscreants to be delivered for judgement. The Benjamites refused, so the tribes then sought vengeance, and in the subsequent war, the members of Tribe of Benjamin were systematically killed, including women and children. When Benjamin was nearly 'extinguished', it was decided that the tribe should be allowed to survive, and all the men from another town, Jabesh Gilead, who had refused to take part in the punishment of the Tribe of Benjamin, were killed, so that their daughters could be wed to the surviving men of Benjamin. The first king of Israel, Saul, was descended from these surviving men. Due to this war, the Tribe of Benjamin was subsequently referred to as "the smallest of all the tribes."	271	ENGLISH	1
The US could manage a two front war because of the nature of the two wars it was fighting and the fact that it was, and is, a rare exception in warfare: A sea power and a land power. The previous example of such a nation was Rome in the Punic Wars. Anyway, for the Pacific War the US needed sea power and put most of their fleet there. In the Atlantic, they were facing just the German Guerre de Course of merchant raiding by U-boats. With the added advantage of having Britain, a sea power, aligned with them the naval wars the Allies faced were manageable. The US also produced a very large land army and equipped numerous allies to a high standard. This meant they had the land power to fight a land power, Germany. Of course, in terms of economics, the Germans were pretty much hit having a mere fraction of the economic power the Allies possessed. It is of interest to note that even in the late 30's as the US began to seriously invest in preparing for war they were virtually outspending the Germans who were pushing the limit of what they could economically afford.	<urn:uuid:ffc86a21-1c41-4366-bcc7-8f06ec653804>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.ww2f.com/threads/two-front-war.52459/page-4	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606872.19/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122071919-20200122100919-00347.warc.gz	en	0.988524	226	3.421875	3	[ -0.38168153166770935, 0.3217925429344177, 0.1473700851202011, -0.2512122392654419, 0.21776039898395538, -0.07972585409879684, -0.30400335788726807, 0.2636815905570984, 0.02500833570957184, -0.31684407591819763, 0.15456067025661469, -0.3372218608856201, 0.013089055195450783, 0.2581225335597...	2	The US could manage a two front war because of the nature of the two wars it was fighting and the fact that it was, and is, a rare exception in warfare: A sea power and a land power. The previous example of such a nation was Rome in the Punic Wars. Anyway, for the Pacific War the US needed sea power and put most of their fleet there. In the Atlantic, they were facing just the German Guerre de Course of merchant raiding by U-boats. With the added advantage of having Britain, a sea power, aligned with them the naval wars the Allies faced were manageable. The US also produced a very large land army and equipped numerous allies to a high standard. This meant they had the land power to fight a land power, Germany. Of course, in terms of economics, the Germans were pretty much hit having a mere fraction of the economic power the Allies possessed. It is of interest to note that even in the late 30's as the US began to seriously invest in preparing for war they were virtually outspending the Germans who were pushing the limit of what they could economically afford.	229	ENGLISH	1
Henry VIII was the second Tudor monarch and is best known for his six marriages, in particular his efforts to have his first marriage (to Catherine of Aragon) annulled; here is the famous mnemonic (saying) regarding their fates: “Divorced, beheaded, died; divorced, beheaded, survived.” Catherine of Aragon 11 June 1509 – 23 May 1533 (23 years, 11 months and 12 days) Annulled Anne Boleyn 28 May 1533 – 17 May 1536 (2 years, 11 months and 19 days) Annulled, then beheaded Died 19 May 1536. Beheaded at the Tower of London. Mother of Queen Elizabeth I. Jane Seymour 30 May 1536 – 24 October 1537 (1 year, 4 months and 24 days) Died Died 24 October 1537, twelve days after giving birth due to complications. Anne of Cleves 6 January 1540 – 9 July 1540 (6 months and 3 days) Annulled Died 16 July 1557. 5 Catherine Howard 28 July 1540 – 23 November 1541 (1 year, 3 months and 26 days) Beheaded Died 13 February 1542. Beheaded at the Tower of London. Catherine Parr 12 July 1543 – 28 January 1547 (3 years, 6 months and 16 days) Survived His disagreement with the Pope on the question of such an annulment led Henry to initiate the English Reformation, separating the Church of England from papal authority. He appointed himself the Supreme Head of the Church of England and dissolved convents and monasteries, for which he was excommunicated. Henry is also known as “the father of the Royal Navy,” as he invested heavily in the navy, increasing its size from a few to more than 50 ships, and established the Navy Board. Domestically, Henry is known for his radical changes to the English Constitution, ushering in the theory of the divine right of kings. He also greatly expanded royal power during his reign. He frequently used charges of treason and heresy to quell dissent, and those accused were often executed without a formal trial by means of bills of attainder. He achieved many of his political aims through the work of his chief ministers, some of whom were banished or executed when they fell out of his favour. Thomas Wolsey, Thomas More, Thomas Cromwell, Richard Rich, and Thomas Cranmer all figured prominently in his administration. Henry was an extravagant spender, using the proceeds from the dissolution of the monasteries and acts of the Reformation Parliament. He also converted the money that was formerly paid to Rome into royal revenue. Despite the money from these sources, he was continually on the verge of financial ruin due to his personal extravagance, as well as his numerous costly and largely unsuccessful wars, particularly with King Francis I of France, Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, James V of Scotland and the Scottish regency under the Earl of Arran and Mary of Guise. At home, he oversaw the legal union of England and Wales with the Laws in Wales Acts 1535 and 1542, and he was the first English monarch to rule as King of Ireland following the Crown of Ireland Act 1542. Henry’s contemporaries considered him an attractive, educated, and accomplished king. He has been described as “one of the most charismatic rulers to sit on the English throne”. He was an author and composer. As he aged, however, he became severely obese and his health suffered, contributing to his death in 1547. He is frequently characterised in his later life as a lustful, egotistical, harsh, and insecure king. He was succeeded by his son Edward VI. Reign 22 April 1509 – 28 January 1547 Coronation 24 June 1509 Predecessor Henry VII Successor Edward VI Born Henry Tudor 28 June 1491 Palace of Placentia, Greenwich, Kent Died 28 January 1547 (aged 55) Palace of Whitehall, London Workshop of Hans Holbein the Younger 1497/8 (German) Details of artist on Google Art Project Portrait of Henry VIII Portrait of Henry VIII Object type painting English: Portrait of Henry VIII by the workshop of Hans Holbein the Younger. (Details on Google Art Project) Depicted people Henry VIII of England Date 1537 – 1547 Medium oil on canvas	<urn:uuid:5a8d033e-db1f-41ba-a828-51a621b80725>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://bidoonism.com/people/king-henry-viii/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593295.11/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118164132-20200118192132-00407.warc.gz	en	0.980122	938	3.3125	3	[ -0.30064907670021057, 0.45087894797325134, 0.16155365109443665, -0.20502860844135284, -0.27580493688583374, -0.16357164084911346, 0.17813533544540405, 0.016084395349025726, 0.2655848264694214, -0.27309542894363403, -0.21621978282928467, -0.5674901008605957, -0.021190820261836052, 0.4099330...	11	Henry VIII was the second Tudor monarch and is best known for his six marriages, in particular his efforts to have his first marriage (to Catherine of Aragon) annulled; here is the famous mnemonic (saying) regarding their fates: “Divorced, beheaded, died; divorced, beheaded, survived.” Catherine of Aragon 11 June 1509 – 23 May 1533 (23 years, 11 months and 12 days) Annulled Anne Boleyn 28 May 1533 – 17 May 1536 (2 years, 11 months and 19 days) Annulled, then beheaded Died 19 May 1536. Beheaded at the Tower of London. Mother of Queen Elizabeth I. Jane Seymour 30 May 1536 – 24 October 1537 (1 year, 4 months and 24 days) Died Died 24 October 1537, twelve days after giving birth due to complications. Anne of Cleves 6 January 1540 – 9 July 1540 (6 months and 3 days) Annulled Died 16 July 1557. 5 Catherine Howard 28 July 1540 – 23 November 1541 (1 year, 3 months and 26 days) Beheaded Died 13 February 1542. Beheaded at the Tower of London. Catherine Parr 12 July 1543 – 28 January 1547 (3 years, 6 months and 16 days) Survived His disagreement with the Pope on the question of such an annulment led Henry to initiate the English Reformation, separating the Church of England from papal authority. He appointed himself the Supreme Head of the Church of England and dissolved convents and monasteries, for which he was excommunicated. Henry is also known as “the father of the Royal Navy,” as he invested heavily in the navy, increasing its size from a few to more than 50 ships, and established the Navy Board. Domestically, Henry is known for his radical changes to the English Constitution, ushering in the theory of the divine right of kings. He also greatly expanded royal power during his reign. He frequently used charges of treason and heresy to quell dissent, and those accused were often executed without a formal trial by means of bills of attainder. He achieved many of his political aims through the work of his chief ministers, some of whom were banished or executed when they fell out of his favour. Thomas Wolsey, Thomas More, Thomas Cromwell, Richard Rich, and Thomas Cranmer all figured prominently in his administration. Henry was an extravagant spender, using the proceeds from the dissolution of the monasteries and acts of the Reformation Parliament. He also converted the money that was formerly paid to Rome into royal revenue. Despite the money from these sources, he was continually on the verge of financial ruin due to his personal extravagance, as well as his numerous costly and largely unsuccessful wars, particularly with King Francis I of France, Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, James V of Scotland and the Scottish regency under the Earl of Arran and Mary of Guise. At home, he oversaw the legal union of England and Wales with the Laws in Wales Acts 1535 and 1542, and he was the first English monarch to rule as King of Ireland following the Crown of Ireland Act 1542. Henry’s contemporaries considered him an attractive, educated, and accomplished king. He has been described as “one of the most charismatic rulers to sit on the English throne”. He was an author and composer. As he aged, however, he became severely obese and his health suffered, contributing to his death in 1547. He is frequently characterised in his later life as a lustful, egotistical, harsh, and insecure king. He was succeeded by his son Edward VI. Reign 22 April 1509 – 28 January 1547 Coronation 24 June 1509 Predecessor Henry VII Successor Edward VI Born Henry Tudor 28 June 1491 Palace of Placentia, Greenwich, Kent Died 28 January 1547 (aged 55) Palace of Whitehall, London Workshop of Hans Holbein the Younger 1497/8 (German) Details of artist on Google Art Project Portrait of Henry VIII Portrait of Henry VIII Object type painting English: Portrait of Henry VIII by the workshop of Hans Holbein the Younger. (Details on Google Art Project) Depicted people Henry VIII of England Date 1537 – 1547 Medium oil on canvas	1,054	ENGLISH	1
Mary, Queen of Scots is often considered one of the most romantic and tragic figures in Scottish history and her enduring story and image continue to fascinate. Today a huge number of images of Mary are in circulation, with many dating to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when both her life and appearance were highly romanticised. In fact, relatively few portraits of Mary which were made during her lifetime survive. Contemporary accounts record that she was tall, over 6ft, and striking in appearance, with auburn hair and brown eyes. Ten objects which depict Mary, members of her family, and record or commemorate key moments from her life, have been highlighted and can be viewed now at the Scottish National Portrait Gallery. Mary of Guise was the mother of Mary, Queen of Scots. The Guise family was immensely powerful in France and this portrait can be seen as part of their efforts to promote their interests. It was painted to secure an advantageous second marriage for Mary of Guise, who had recently been widowed. She was sent to Scotland to become the second wife of James V, as a dynastic pawn to help maintain the ‘Auld Alliance’ between the two countries. After the king’s death, she fought for her daughter’s dynastic rights and to keep Scotland Catholic and pro-French. Despite their small size, Cornille de Lyon’s portraits offer an insight to the sitter’s personality: Mary of Guise was famed for her wit and charm. James V became King of Scotland at seventeen months old when his father, James IV, was killed at the battle of Flodden. During his reign James was eager that the Scottish court should reflect the culturally vibrant Renaissance courts of Europe. James’s second wife, Mary of Guise, was the mother of his only legitimate daughter, Mary, who, following her father’s death became Queen of Scots at just six days old. This painting is one in a series of portraits of the Kings of Scotland. In the late sixteenth century it became fashionable to commission series of portraits of rulers. It is possible that this example was created as part of the celebrations for James VI’s spectacular entry into Edinburgh in 1579. François was the Dauphin of France and Mary’s first husband. They were married in a spectacular ceremony at the Cathedral of Notre Dame, Paris on 24 April 1558 – Mary was 15 years old and François 14. The following year François became King of France and Mary, his queen consort. She is shown here wearing an embroidered court gown with slashed sleeves, a beaded French hood and holding an elaborate fan. These engravings are from a larger series of prints, which depicted 39 European royals. Couples were engraved on, and printed from one plate, although few survive together. It is likely that these prints were made around the time of Mary and Francois’ wedding. Mary I of Scotland, known as Mary, Queen of Scots (1542-1587) was sent to France in 1548, for her safekeeping. Raised and educated at court, she later married the Dauphin, the heir to the French throne, who became François II in 1559. This portrait shows her aged eighteen, in the white mourning attire of the French court. The original was painted around 1560-1 when Mary was in mourning for her father-in-law Henri II, her mother Mary of Guise, and her husband - they had all died within eighteen months of each other. The poet Pierre de Ronsard described seeing Mary in these clothes, 'like a sacred image... your long fine mourning veil billows fold upon fold like a sail on the breeze'. Soon after the original of this portrait was painted, Mary returned to Scotland, a Catholic monarch in a newly Protestant nation. Darnley was the great-grandson of Henry VII and a descendant of James II of Scotland, and therefore an heir to both the Scottish and English thrones. In 1565 he married his cousin Mary, Queen of Scots. Flattering her ambition, Mary made Darnley King of Scots, but he was spoilt, arrogant and unpredictable, and soon proved to be a liability as a royal consort. His involvement in the murder of the queen’s secretary, David Rizzio, at the Palace of Holyroodhouse, proved to be the breaking point in their marriage. Despite Mary giving birth to their son and heir, James – later James VI and I – in 1566, the couple’s marriage continued to struggle. Only nine months later the house, in Edinburgh, where Darnley was staying was blown up and his body was found in the grounds. It soon became apparent that he had been strangled and suspicion fell on the Earl of Bothwell, his supporters and Mary herself. James VI became king when he was thirteen months old, following the forced abdication of his mother Mary, Queen of Scots. Here the Netherlandish artist Arnold Bronckorst depicts him, as was the usual practice, like an adult. He is wearing a fashionable black doublet and hat, and holding a sparrow-hawk on his gloved left hand. Hawking was an outdoor pursuit appropriate to his age and royal status. This illustration of Mary and her son James, later King James VI and I, is a book plate and appeared in Bishop John Leslie’s De origine moribus, et rebus gestis Scotorum or The History of Scotland, which was published in Rome in 1578. The volume featured genealogies of the kings and queens of Scotland and this image reinforces the lineage of the Stuarts. Leslie was a long-standing supporter of Mary and so it is likely that he would have wanted the portraits in the publication to be close representations of the sitters. Below the portraits are the royal arms of Scotland which feature the lion rampant at the centre. This exquisite pair of miniatures was painted in 1566, the year in which the sitters were married. Their marriage, celebrated at the court of Mary, Queen of Scots, crossed religious boundaries. For Bothwell, a determined Protestant, it brought much needed funds. For Lady Jean, the daughter of George Gordon, 4th Earl of Huntly, it helped the political rehabilitation of her Catholic family. The countess, described as ‘a cool, detached character warmed by a masculine intelligence’, divorced Bothwell a year after their wedding, following an affair the earl had with one of her servants. Bothwell became famous as the third husband of Mary, Queen of Scots, whom he married in 1567, three months after the murder of her second husband, Lord Darnley, despite being acquitted of this crime only the month before. After returning from France, Mary ruled in Scotland for only six years. Following a rebellion, she was forced to abdicate and fled to England. Mary was retained and held captive for nearly twenty years before being executed for plotting to murder her cousin, Elizabeth I. This portrait was not painted from life, but is a version after a sixteenth-century portrait. The date 1578 marked the ten years that Mary had been held in captivity and the original was probably commissioned by one of her supporters. The inscription reminds us of Mary’s lineage, and the crusifixes reiterate her Catholic faith. One crucifix shows the biblical story of Susanna and the Elders, in which an innocent woman was saved from being put to death. Mary’s life ended on the scaffold at Fotheringhay Castle, near Northampton, on 8 February 1587. After nineteen years in captivity in England, she had been tried and condemned to death for plotting the assassination of Queen Elizabeth I. This watercolour records the moment before the executioner dropped his axe, To the left of the scaffold are two of Mary’s attendants, Jane Kennedy and Elizabeth Curle, who stand weeping. On the far left of the main scene men are burning Mary’s clothes; this was done to prevent her supporters from keeping them as relics. The buildings in the background and the costume are Dutch in style, as the drawing was created for an album of historical prints and drawings compiled by Willem Luytsz van Kittensteyn, a Delft magistrate, in 1613. Mary in 10 Objects is open now at the Scottish National Portrait Gallery. Admission to the gallery is free.	<urn:uuid:937e5e41-c4f0-44df-877c-c0b6a2668ec6>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.nationalgalleries.org/art-and-artists/features/mary-queen-scots-10-objects	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251773463.72/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128030221-20200128060221-00493.warc.gz	en	0.981703	1,769	3.46875	3	[ -0.16979606449604034, 0.14997750520706177, 0.4583703875541687, -0.12063568830490112, -0.040480829775333405, 0.14172659814357758, -0.08565743267536163, -0.08905517309904099, 0.31145530939102173, 0.017849795520305634, -0.3719993233680725, -0.47332894802093506, 0.3233821988105774, -0.13518795...	12	Mary, Queen of Scots is often considered one of the most romantic and tragic figures in Scottish history and her enduring story and image continue to fascinate. Today a huge number of images of Mary are in circulation, with many dating to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when both her life and appearance were highly romanticised. In fact, relatively few portraits of Mary which were made during her lifetime survive. Contemporary accounts record that she was tall, over 6ft, and striking in appearance, with auburn hair and brown eyes. Ten objects which depict Mary, members of her family, and record or commemorate key moments from her life, have been highlighted and can be viewed now at the Scottish National Portrait Gallery. Mary of Guise was the mother of Mary, Queen of Scots. The Guise family was immensely powerful in France and this portrait can be seen as part of their efforts to promote their interests. It was painted to secure an advantageous second marriage for Mary of Guise, who had recently been widowed. She was sent to Scotland to become the second wife of James V, as a dynastic pawn to help maintain the ‘Auld Alliance’ between the two countries. After the king’s death, she fought for her daughter’s dynastic rights and to keep Scotland Catholic and pro-French. Despite their small size, Cornille de Lyon’s portraits offer an insight to the sitter’s personality: Mary of Guise was famed for her wit and charm. James V became King of Scotland at seventeen months old when his father, James IV, was killed at the battle of Flodden. During his reign James was eager that the Scottish court should reflect the culturally vibrant Renaissance courts of Europe. James’s second wife, Mary of Guise, was the mother of his only legitimate daughter, Mary, who, following her father’s death became Queen of Scots at just six days old. This painting is one in a series of portraits of the Kings of Scotland. In the late sixteenth century it became fashionable to commission series of portraits of rulers. It is possible that this example was created as part of the celebrations for James VI’s spectacular entry into Edinburgh in 1579. François was the Dauphin of France and Mary’s first husband. They were married in a spectacular ceremony at the Cathedral of Notre Dame, Paris on 24 April 1558 – Mary was 15 years old and François 14. The following year François became King of France and Mary, his queen consort. She is shown here wearing an embroidered court gown with slashed sleeves, a beaded French hood and holding an elaborate fan. These engravings are from a larger series of prints, which depicted 39 European royals. Couples were engraved on, and printed from one plate, although few survive together. It is likely that these prints were made around the time of Mary and Francois’ wedding. Mary I of Scotland, known as Mary, Queen of Scots (1542-1587) was sent to France in 1548, for her safekeeping. Raised and educated at court, she later married the Dauphin, the heir to the French throne, who became François II in 1559. This portrait shows her aged eighteen, in the white mourning attire of the French court. The original was painted around 1560-1 when Mary was in mourning for her father-in-law Henri II, her mother Mary of Guise, and her husband - they had all died within eighteen months of each other. The poet Pierre de Ronsard described seeing Mary in these clothes, 'like a sacred image... your long fine mourning veil billows fold upon fold like a sail on the breeze'. Soon after the original of this portrait was painted, Mary returned to Scotland, a Catholic monarch in a newly Protestant nation. Darnley was the great-grandson of Henry VII and a descendant of James II of Scotland, and therefore an heir to both the Scottish and English thrones. In 1565 he married his cousin Mary, Queen of Scots. Flattering her ambition, Mary made Darnley King of Scots, but he was spoilt, arrogant and unpredictable, and soon proved to be a liability as a royal consort. His involvement in the murder of the queen’s secretary, David Rizzio, at the Palace of Holyroodhouse, proved to be the breaking point in their marriage. Despite Mary giving birth to their son and heir, James – later James VI and I – in 1566, the couple’s marriage continued to struggle. Only nine months later the house, in Edinburgh, where Darnley was staying was blown up and his body was found in the grounds. It soon became apparent that he had been strangled and suspicion fell on the Earl of Bothwell, his supporters and Mary herself. James VI became king when he was thirteen months old, following the forced abdication of his mother Mary, Queen of Scots. Here the Netherlandish artist Arnold Bronckorst depicts him, as was the usual practice, like an adult. He is wearing a fashionable black doublet and hat, and holding a sparrow-hawk on his gloved left hand. Hawking was an outdoor pursuit appropriate to his age and royal status. This illustration of Mary and her son James, later King James VI and I, is a book plate and appeared in Bishop John Leslie’s De origine moribus, et rebus gestis Scotorum or The History of Scotland, which was published in Rome in 1578. The volume featured genealogies of the kings and queens of Scotland and this image reinforces the lineage of the Stuarts. Leslie was a long-standing supporter of Mary and so it is likely that he would have wanted the portraits in the publication to be close representations of the sitters. Below the portraits are the royal arms of Scotland which feature the lion rampant at the centre. This exquisite pair of miniatures was painted in 1566, the year in which the sitters were married. Their marriage, celebrated at the court of Mary, Queen of Scots, crossed religious boundaries. For Bothwell, a determined Protestant, it brought much needed funds. For Lady Jean, the daughter of George Gordon, 4th Earl of Huntly, it helped the political rehabilitation of her Catholic family. The countess, described as ‘a cool, detached character warmed by a masculine intelligence’, divorced Bothwell a year after their wedding, following an affair the earl had with one of her servants. Bothwell became famous as the third husband of Mary, Queen of Scots, whom he married in 1567, three months after the murder of her second husband, Lord Darnley, despite being acquitted of this crime only the month before. After returning from France, Mary ruled in Scotland for only six years. Following a rebellion, she was forced to abdicate and fled to England. Mary was retained and held captive for nearly twenty years before being executed for plotting to murder her cousin, Elizabeth I. This portrait was not painted from life, but is a version after a sixteenth-century portrait. The date 1578 marked the ten years that Mary had been held in captivity and the original was probably commissioned by one of her supporters. The inscription reminds us of Mary’s lineage, and the crusifixes reiterate her Catholic faith. One crucifix shows the biblical story of Susanna and the Elders, in which an innocent woman was saved from being put to death. Mary’s life ended on the scaffold at Fotheringhay Castle, near Northampton, on 8 February 1587. After nineteen years in captivity in England, she had been tried and condemned to death for plotting the assassination of Queen Elizabeth I. This watercolour records the moment before the executioner dropped his axe, To the left of the scaffold are two of Mary’s attendants, Jane Kennedy and Elizabeth Curle, who stand weeping. On the far left of the main scene men are burning Mary’s clothes; this was done to prevent her supporters from keeping them as relics. The buildings in the background and the costume are Dutch in style, as the drawing was created for an album of historical prints and drawings compiled by Willem Luytsz van Kittensteyn, a Delft magistrate, in 1613. Mary in 10 Objects is open now at the Scottish National Portrait Gallery. Admission to the gallery is free.	1,738	ENGLISH	1
Preceding the arrival of the Dutch farmers in Algoa Bay, intrepid adventurers and naturalists were exploring the area. Amongst this band of hardy individuals was a Swedish naturalist, Carl Peter Thunberg, an apostle of Carl Linnaeus, a Swedish botanist, zoologist, and physician who formalised binomial nomenclature, the modern system of naming organisms. Due to Thunberg’s discoveries in the Cape Colony, he has been awarded the sobriquet of “the father of South African botany”. Of all the observations made by Thunberg during his three-year stay at the Cape Colony, two of them resonate with me but for vastly divergent reasons. This is the story of Thunberg’s brief sojourn in the wilderness that was Port Elizabeth in the 1770s. Main picture: Carl Peter Thunberg in later life During his stay in the Cape Colony, the Swede managed to perfect his Dutch and delve deeper into the scientific knowledge, culture and societal structure of the “Hottentotten“, the Dutch name for the Khoikhoi, the native people of the southern tip of South Africa. Fortunately for historians, Thunberg’s recorded his travels in the form of a travelogue. The Khoikhoi were the first foreign culture with which the Swede was confronted. The different customs and traditions of the native people elicited both his disgust and admiration. For example, he considered the Khoikhoi’s custom to grease their skin with fat and dust as an obnoxious habit about which he wrote in his travelogue: “For uncleanliness, the Hottentots have the greatest love. They grease their entire body with greasy substances and above this, they put cow dung, fat or something similar.” Yet, this harsh judgement is moderated by the reason he saw for this practice and so he continues that: “This clogs up their pores and their skin is covered with a thick layer which protects it from heat in summer and from cold during winter“. Since the main purpose for Thunberg’s journey was to collect specimens for the gardens in Leiden, Thunberg regularly undertook field trips and journeys into the interior of South Africa. Between September 1772 and January 1773, he accompanied the Dutch superintendent of the V.O.C garden, Johan Andreas Auge. First Trip to the Eastern Cape The first trip that Thunberg made was in December 1772. In his book, Travels at the Cape of Good Hope 1772-1775, this journey is covered in pages 100 to 105 by Thunberg. As the terminus of this sojourn was at the Gamtoos River, nothing is learnt about Port Elizabeth per se other than the abundance of game and khoikhoi. Second Trip to the Eastern Cape During his second trip, exactly a year after the first, Thunberg skirted Port Elizabeth but execute a Cooke’s Tour of the Kragga Kamma area and an area that I presume is the current Chelsea and Bushy Park. This trip is covered in pages 236 to 244 of Thunberg’s book. This is what Thunberg has to be say about the trip: “On the 10th [December 1773], we crossed the Camtous River [Gamtoos River], which at this time formed the boundary of the colony, and which was not suffered to extend farther. [On the road to the Kabeljaus River on the 9th, they came across the last white farmstead belonging to one, Jacob Van Rhenen, apparently a rich burgher in the Cape]. This was strictly prohibited [to cross] in order that the colonists might not be induced to wage war with the courageous and intrepid Caffres [as distinct from the Hottentots] , or the Company suffer any damage by that means. The country hereabouts was fine. and abounded in grass. Proceeding farther we come to the Looris River, where the country began to be hilly and mountainous, like that of Houtniquas [Outeniquas], with fine woods both in the clefts of the mountains, and near the rivulets. Here and there we saw large pits that had been dug, for the purpose of capturing elephants and buffaloes. In the middle of the pit stood a pole, which was very sharp at the top, and on which the animal is impaled alive, if it should chance to fall into the pit. The Hottentot captain, who resided in this neighbourhood, immediately upon our arrival, paid us a visit in the evening, and encamped with part of his people not far from us. He was distinguished from the rest by a cloak, made of a tyger’s (sic) skin, and by his staff that he carried in his hand. On the 11th, we passed Galgebosch [Gallows’ Wood] on our way to the Van Staden’s River where we lighted our fires and took up our night’ s lodging. The Gonaquas Hottentots that lived here, and were intermixed with Caffres, visited us in large hordes, and met with a hearty reception, and, what pleased them most, some good Dutch roll-tobacco. Several of them wore the skins of tygers, [leopards] which they had themselves killed, and by this gallant action were entitled to wear them as trophies. Many carried in their hands a fox’s tail, tied to a stick, with which they wiped the sweat off from their brows. As these people had fine cattle, we got milk from them in plenty, milked into baskets which were perfectly watertight, but for the most part so dirty that we were obliged to strain the milk through a linen cloth. On the 12th [December 1773], in the morning, we passed the Van Staden’s River, [which he probably forded about 2 ½ kms in a direct line from its mouth] and arrived at two large villages consisting of a great many round huts, disposed in a circular form. The people crowded forward in shoals to our wagon, and our tobacco seemed to have the same effect on them as the magnet has on iron. The number of adult persons appeared to me amount to at least two or three hundred. When the greatest part of them had received a little tobacco they retired well pleased, to a distance in the plain, or else returned home. The major part of them were dressed in calf-skins, and not sheep-skins, like the Hottentots. Interestingly, these Khoikhoi which Thunberg encountered on the heights, near what was to become Cadle’s Hotel, were in a settlement which Wirgman and Mayo characterize as a “town”. In all probability it was a village, at best, which Thunberg alludes to. Nevertheless, it does disprove the accepted wisdom that all khoikhoi were itinerant vagabonds especially when they intermarried with the Xhosa. Given the types of materials that were used to construct their abodes, there is little likelihood of any “ruins” being uncovered. However, in their book on St. Mary’s church, Mayo and Wirgman do provide additional information to substantiate Thunberg’s claim that there was a settled community in this vicinity. According to these authors, “arrow heads and other Hottentot implements have been found there in such numbers as to show manifest traces of the former Hottentot town”. Thunberg continues: “We had brought with us several things from town, with which we endeavoured either to gain their friendship, or reward their services, such as small knives, tinder-boxes, and small looking-glasses. To the chief of them, we presented some looking-glasses, and were highly diverted at seeing the many pranks that these simple people played with them: one or more looking at themselves in the glass at the same time, and then staring at each other, and then staring at each other, and laughing, ready to burst their sides; but the most ridiculous part of the farce was that that they even looked at the back of the glass, to see whether the same figure presented itself as they saw in the glass. These people, who were well made [built, endowed?], and of a sprightly and undaunted appearance, adorned themselves with brushes made of the tails of animals, which they wore in their hair, on their ankles, and round their waists. Some had thongs cut out of hides, and others had strings of glass-beads bound several times round their bodies. But upon no part of their dress did they set a greater value than upon small and bright metal plates of copper or brass, either round, oblong, or square. These they scoured with great care, and hung them with a string, either in their hair, on their foreheads. on their breasts, at the back of their neck, or before their posteriors; and sometimes, if they had many of them, all round their heads. My English fellow traveller had brought with him one of those medallions struck in copper, and gilt, that had been sent with the two English ships, which were at this time sailing towards the South Pole, to be distributed among the different nations in that quarter of the globe. This medal was given to one of the Caffres who was very familiar with us, and who was so very pleased with it, that he accompanied us on the whole of our journey and back again, with his medal hanging down glittering just before the middle of his forehead. Some of these people had hanging before their breasts a conical skin made of the undressed skin of an animal, which was fastened about the neck by four leather thongs and served them as a tobacco pouch. Some of them wore about their necks a necklace made of small shells, called serpents skulls strung upon a string, and to this hung a tortoise-shell, for keeping the bukku ointment in. Most of them were armed with as many javelins as they could well hold in one hand. The huts [of the local Inqua khoikhoi populations] were covered over with mats made of rushes, which, with their milk baskets, were so closed that no water could penetrate them. The range of mountains which, during our whole journey, we had hitherto had to the left, now came to a termination. [These were probably the Van Stadensberge]. And to the right of us, was seen the sea. A larger range of mountains, however proceeded farther into the country to the left. [The Suurberge, 75kms north of Port Elizabeth]. The country hereabouts was full of wild beasts of every kind, and therefore very dangerous to travel through. We were more particularly anxious concerning our draught animals which mighy easily be scared away by the lions, and lost to us for ever. Outspan at Kragga Kamma We were likewise too few in number, and not sufficiently armed, to protect ourselves against the inhabitants, whose language our Hottentots now no longer perfectly understood. We therefore came to the resolution to entice from this village another troop of Hottentots to accompany us, which we accordingly did, by promising them a reward of tobacco and other trifles that they were fond of, as also to kill for them a quantity of buffaloes sufficient for their support. This promise procured for us a great many more than we wanted, and put troop consisted now in excess of a hundred men. As an aside, how did Thunberg expect his now redundant khoikhoi assistants to return home? It is inconceivable that he provided food and other victuals let alone any serverance package negotiated with their shopstewards. It is safe to say that employees in Thunberg’s home country, Sweden, would have been treated no better than his treatment meted out to these tribesmen. The 13th. The country in which we were now were, was called Krakakamma (sic). [This area was defined in 1776 by Swellengrebel as the entire promontory between the Van Stadens and the Zwartkops rivers]. It abounded with grass and wood, as well as wild beasts of every kind, which were here still secure in some measure from the attacks of the colonists. These were chiefly buffaloes, elephants, two horned rhineocetoses, striped horses and asses [zebra and quaggas], and seversl several kids of buck, particularly large herds of hartebeests. First we travelled to the Krakakamma valley [Kraggakamma Vlei on the old farm Kraggakamma is 6kms south of Greenbushes, still conforms to the same shape as when it was mapped by C.D. Wentzel in 1752], and afterwards from hence farther downwards to the sea shore, where there was a great quantity of bushy growth, as well as wood of a larger growth, filled with numerous herds of buffaloes, that grazed in the adjacent plains. In the afternoon, when the heat of the day abated, we went out with a few of our Hottentots a hunting, in hopes of killing something wherewith to satisfy the craving stomachs of our numerous retinues. After we had got a little way into the wood, we spied an extremely large herd of wild buffaloes, which being in the act of grazing, held down their heads, and did not observe us till we came within three hundred paces of them. At this instant the whole herd, which appeared to consist of about five or six hundred large beasts, lifted up their heads, and viewed us with attention. So large an assemblage of animals, each of which taken singly is an extremely terrible object, would have made anyone shudder at the sight, even one who had not, like me, the year before, had occasion to see their astonishing strength, and experience the rough manner in which they treat their opponents. Nevertheless, as we were now apprised of the nature of the animals, and their not readily attacking anyone in the open plains we did not dread either their strength or number, but, not to frighten them, stood still a little while, till they again stooped down to feed; when, with quick steps, we approached within forty paces of them. We were three Europeans, and as many Hottentots trained to shoot, who carried muskets, and the rest of the Hottentots were armed with their throwing-spears. The whole herd now began to look up again and faced us with a brisk and undaunted air; we then judged that it was time to fire, and all at once let fly among them. No sooner had we fired, than the whole troop, intrepid as it otherwise was, surprised by the flash and report, turned about and made for the woods, and left us a spectacle not to be equalled in its kind. The wounded buffaloes separated from the rest of the herd, and either could not keep up with it, or else took another road. Amongst these was an old bull buffalo, which came close to the side where we stood, and obliged us to take to our heels, and fly before him. It is true, it is impossible for a man, how fast that he may run, to outrun these animals. Nevertheless, we were so far instructed for our preservation, as to know that a man may escape tolerably well from them, as long as he is in on an open and level plain; as the buffalo, which has very small eyes in proportion to the size of its head, does not see much side-ways, but only straight forward. When therefore it came pretty near, a man has nothing more to do than to throw himself down on one side. The buffalo, which always gallops straight forward, does not observe the man that lies on the ground, neither does it miss its enemy, till he has had time enough to run out of the way. Our wounded bull came pretty near us, but passed on one side, making the best of his way to a copse, which however he did not quite reach before he fell. In the meantime, the rest of our Hottentots had followed a cow that was mortally wounded, and with their throwing-spears killed a calf. We, for our part, immediately went up to the fallen bull, and found that the ball had entered his chest, and penetrated through the greatest part of his body, notwithstanding which he had run at full speed several hundred paces before he fell. He was certainly old, of a dark grey colour, and almost without any hairs, which, on the younger sort, are black. The body of this animal was extremely thick, but his legs, on the other hand, short. When he lay on the ground, his body was so thick, that I could not get on him without taking a running jump. When our drivers had flayed him, at least in part, we chose out the fleshiest and pickled some, and at the same time made an excellent repast on the spot. Although I had taken it into my head that the flesh of an old bull like this would have been both coarse and tough, yet, to my great astonishment, I found that it was tender, and tasted like all other game. The remainder of the bull, together with the cow and the calf, were given to the Hottentots for their share, who were not at all behind hand, but immediately made a large fire on the spot, and roasted the pieces they had cut off without delay. What they preferred, and first of all laid on the fire, were the marrowbones, of which, when broiled, they eat the marrow with great eagerness. The guts, meat, and offal, they hung up on the branches of trees; so that, in a short time, the place looked like a slaughter-house; about which the Hottentots encamped in order to broil their victuals, eat, and sleep. On the approach of night, my fellow travellers and I thought it best to repair to our wagons, and give orders for making our cattle fast, before it grew quite dark. In our way we passed within a few hundred paces of five lions, which, on seeing us, walked off into the woods. Having tied our beasts to the wheels of our wagons, fired our pieces off two or three times in the air, and kindled several fires round about our encampment, all very necessary precautions for our security, as well with respect to the elephants as more particularly to the lions, we lay down to rest, each of us with a loaded musket by his side, committing ourselves to the care of God’s gracious providence. The like precautions we always observed in future, when obliged to encamp in such places where man indeed seemed to rule by day, but wild beasts bore the sway at night. These wild animals for the most part, lie quiet and still, in the shade of woods and copses during the day, their time for feeding being in the cool of the evening and at night, at which time lions and other beasts of prey come out to seek their food, and devour the more innocent and defenceless animals. A lion cannot by dint of strength, indeed, seize a buffalo, but always has recourse to art, and lies in wait under some bush, and principally near rivulets, where the buffalo comes to drink. He then springs upon his back with the greatest agility, with his tremendous teeth biting the buffalo in the nape of his neck, and wounding him in the sides with his claws, till, quite wearied out, he sinks to the ground and dies. On the 15th, in the morning, I went out to see whether the trees of the woods, of which this part of the country consisted, had yet any blossoms upon them; but found that the summer was not far enough advanced, and that the trees were so close to each other, and so full of prickles, that without cutting my way through them, I could not advance far into the wood, which, besides, was extremely dangerous, on account of the wild beasts. Here, and in other places, where it was woody, we observed near the watering-places, the fresh tracks of buffaloes, as also the tracks and dung of elephants, two-horned rhinoceroses, and other animals. According to Wirgman and Mayo, this bushy country continued until he reached the shores of Algoa Bay, which was fringed with conical sandhills covered with dense bush all the way from the Zwartkops mouth to Cape Recife. The existence of these sandhills is confirmed in the book by Barrows which depicts these great sandhills which have now completely disappeared. Over time, these bushes were chopped down for firewood and the sandhills which had preciously been anchored by this vegetation, were blown away. In the plains there were striped horses [zebras] and asses [quagga], hartebeests, koedoes. We therefore got ready and set out for Zwartkop’s River [Thunberg would have forded it above the tidal limit between Perseverance and Despatch] and the salt-pan, not far distant from it, where we waited during the heat of the day. Near this saltpan, as it is called, we had the finest view in the world, which delighted us the more as it was very uncommon. This Zwartkop’s saltpan was now, to use the expression, in its best attire, and made a most beautiful appearance. It formed a depression of about three-quarters of a mile in diameter, and sloping off by degrees, so that the water in the middle was scarcely four feet deep. A few yards from the water’s edge this depression was encircled by a mound several fathoms high, which was overgrown with brush wood. It was rather of an oval form and took me up a good half-hour to walk round it. The soil nearest the valley was sandy; but, higher up, it appeared to consist, in many places, of a pale slate. The whole saltpan, the water of which was not deep, at the same time that the bottom was covered with a smooth and level bed of salt, at this juncture, being the middle of summer and in a hot climate, exactly resembled a frozen lake covered with ice, as clear and transparent as crystal. The water had a pure saline taste without any thing bitter in it. In the heat of the day, as fast as the water evaporated, a fine salt crystallizing on the surface first appeared there in the form of glittering scales, and afterwards settled at the bottom. It was frequently driven on one side by the wind; and, if collected at that time, proved to be a very fine and pure salt. The saltpan had begun to grow dry towards the north-east end, but to the south-westward, to which it inclined, it was fuller; to the westward it ran out into a long neck. It appeared to us somewhat strange, to find, so far from the sea, and at a considerable height above it, such a large and saturated pool of salt-water. But the water which deposits this salt, does not come at all from the sea, but solely from the rains which fall in spring, and totally evaporate in summer. The whole of the soil of this country is entirely salt. The rainwater which dissolves this, runs down from the adjacent heights, and is collected in this basin, where it remains and gradually evaporates; and the longer it is evaporating the salter it is. The colonists who live in the Lang Kloof, and in the whole country extending from thence towards this side, as also in Kamdebo, Kankou and other places, are obliged to fetch their salt from this spot. It was said, that not far from this there were two more saltpans, which however yielded no salt till they were quite dry. Several insects were found drowned in the salt water, some of which were such as I could not meet with on the bushes alive, during the few hours that I stayed here and walked about the copses, which my curiosity induced me to do, although it was a very dangerous spot, on account of the lions. Our Hottentots, of whom we had now but a few in our suite, and whom we had left to take care of our oxen that were turned out to grass, we found fast asleep, overcome by the heat of the day. Towards evening, we drove a little farther on, and arrived at Kuka, [now Coega] where the brook was already a mere stagnant puddle and only had brackish water in it. Nevertheless we took up our night’s lodging here. We were surprised to find here a poor farmer, who had encamped in this place, with his wife and children, by stealth; in order to feed and augment his small herd. And indeed these poor people were no less astonished, not to say terrified, at our arrival, in the idea, that we either had, or might, inform the government against them, for residing out of the appointed boundaries. The farmer had only a small hut made of branches of trees for his family, and another adjacent to it, by way of a kitchen. We visited them in their little abode, and, at our request, were entertained by them with fresh milk. But we had not been long seated before the whole basin of milk was covered with a swarm of flies, so as to be quite black with them; and the hut was so infested with flies, that we could not open our mouths to speak. Within so small a space I never beheld, before nor since, such an amazing number of these insects. We therefore hastened to our vehicles; and having kindled our fires and pitched our camp at a little distance from the hut, listened the whole night to the howling of wolves, [hyenas]and the dreadful roaring of lions. On the following morning, being the 16th of December, we proceeded to the Great Sunday River, the banks of which were very steep and the adjacent fields arid and meagre. The major part of our ample retinue of Hottentots had now left us, after having got, in the course of the journey, venison enough to feast on, and, as we were approaching nearer and nearer to a country which would soon be changed to a perfect desert, where no game nor venison was to be hoped The area in the vicinity of Port Elizabeth was already inhabited in 1772 – albeit sparsely – 50-years prior to the arrival of the 1820 settlers. The main inhabitants were Inqua khoikhoi interspersed with the occasional Xhosa tribesman. Another surprising point that this piece illuminates, is the quantity and diversity of wild life, especially of the megafauna variety, which were domiciled in this area. As the Dutch farmers advanced over the Gamtoos River and settled in Algoa Bay, they steadily hunted the large animals to extinction such that by time that the 1820 Settlers passed through, no mention is ever again made of elephants, rhinoceroses or buffaloes except for a small head of elephants in the Alexandria area which had eluded the predations of the big game hunters. Travels at the Cape of Good Hope by Carl Peter Thunberg (1986, Van Riebeeck Society, Cape Town) The Collegiate Church of Parish of St. Mary Port Elizabeth by Archdeacon Wirgman & Canon Cuthbert Edward Mayo (1925, Longman Green & Co, London)Continue reading	<urn:uuid:28064595-13ed-4e10-8e96-6fb6d9b1dd92>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://thecasualobserver.co.za/page/2/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00058.warc.gz	en	0.986072	5,915	3.265625	3	[ 0.19937589764595032, 1.067451000213623, -0.09681007266044617, -0.16078585386276245, 0.23478484153747559, -0.04609003663063049, 0.4948613941669464, -0.276956707239151, -0.25680527091026306, 0.02349919266998768, -0.004131179302930832, -0.5411508083343506, 0.05046907067298889, 0.0587205402553...	3	Preceding the arrival of the Dutch farmers in Algoa Bay, intrepid adventurers and naturalists were exploring the area. Amongst this band of hardy individuals was a Swedish naturalist, Carl Peter Thunberg, an apostle of Carl Linnaeus, a Swedish botanist, zoologist, and physician who formalised binomial nomenclature, the modern system of naming organisms. Due to Thunberg’s discoveries in the Cape Colony, he has been awarded the sobriquet of “the father of South African botany”. Of all the observations made by Thunberg during his three-year stay at the Cape Colony, two of them resonate with me but for vastly divergent reasons. This is the story of Thunberg’s brief sojourn in the wilderness that was Port Elizabeth in the 1770s. Main picture: Carl Peter Thunberg in later life During his stay in the Cape Colony, the Swede managed to perfect his Dutch and delve deeper into the scientific knowledge, culture and societal structure of the “Hottentotten“, the Dutch name for the Khoikhoi, the native people of the southern tip of South Africa. Fortunately for historians, Thunberg’s recorded his travels in the form of a travelogue. The Khoikhoi were the first foreign culture with which the Swede was confronted. The different customs and traditions of the native people elicited both his disgust and admiration. For example, he considered the Khoikhoi’s custom to grease their skin with fat and dust as an obnoxious habit about which he wrote in his travelogue: “For uncleanliness, the Hottentots have the greatest love. They grease their entire body with greasy substances and above this, they put cow dung, fat or something similar.” Yet, this harsh judgement is moderated by the reason he saw for this practice and so he continues that: “This clogs up their pores and their skin is covered with a thick layer which protects it from heat in summer and from cold during winter“. Since the main purpose for Thunberg’s journey was to collect specimens for the gardens in Leiden, Thunberg regularly undertook field trips and journeys into the interior of South Africa. Between September 1772 and January 1773, he accompanied the Dutch superintendent of the V.O.C garden, Johan Andreas Auge. First Trip to the Eastern Cape The first trip that Thunberg made was in December 1772. In his book, Travels at the Cape of Good Hope 1772-1775, this journey is covered in pages 100 to 105 by Thunberg. As the terminus of this sojourn was at the Gamtoos River, nothing is learnt about Port Elizabeth per se other than the abundance of game and khoikhoi. Second Trip to the Eastern Cape During his second trip, exactly a year after the first, Thunberg skirted Port Elizabeth but execute a Cooke’s Tour of the Kragga Kamma area and an area that I presume is the current Chelsea and Bushy Park. This trip is covered in pages 236 to 244 of Thunberg’s book. This is what Thunberg has to be say about the trip: “On the 10th [December 1773], we crossed the Camtous River [Gamtoos River], which at this time formed the boundary of the colony, and which was not suffered to extend farther. [On the road to the Kabeljaus River on the 9th, they came across the last white farmstead belonging to one, Jacob Van Rhenen, apparently a rich burgher in the Cape]. This was strictly prohibited [to cross] in order that the colonists might not be induced to wage war with the courageous and intrepid Caffres [as distinct from the Hottentots] , or the Company suffer any damage by that means. The country hereabouts was fine. and abounded in grass. Proceeding farther we come to the Looris River, where the country began to be hilly and mountainous, like that of Houtniquas [Outeniquas], with fine woods both in the clefts of the mountains, and near the rivulets. Here and there we saw large pits that had been dug, for the purpose of capturing elephants and buffaloes. In the middle of the pit stood a pole, which was very sharp at the top, and on which the animal is impaled alive, if it should chance to fall into the pit. The Hottentot captain, who resided in this neighbourhood, immediately upon our arrival, paid us a visit in the evening, and encamped with part of his people not far from us. He was distinguished from the rest by a cloak, made of a tyger’s (sic) skin, and by his staff that he carried in his hand. On the 11th, we passed Galgebosch [Gallows’ Wood] on our way to the Van Staden’s River where we lighted our fires and took up our night’ s lodging. The Gonaquas Hottentots that lived here, and were intermixed with Caffres, visited us in large hordes, and met with a hearty reception, and, what pleased them most, some good Dutch roll-tobacco. Several of them wore the skins of tygers, [leopards] which they had themselves killed, and by this gallant action were entitled to wear them as trophies. Many carried in their hands a fox’s tail, tied to a stick, with which they wiped the sweat off from their brows. As these people had fine cattle, we got milk from them in plenty, milked into baskets which were perfectly watertight, but for the most part so dirty that we were obliged to strain the milk through a linen cloth. On the 12th [December 1773], in the morning, we passed the Van Staden’s River, [which he probably forded about 2 ½ kms in a direct line from its mouth] and arrived at two large villages consisting of a great many round huts, disposed in a circular form. The people crowded forward in shoals to our wagon, and our tobacco seemed to have the same effect on them as the magnet has on iron. The number of adult persons appeared to me amount to at least two or three hundred. When the greatest part of them had received a little tobacco they retired well pleased, to a distance in the plain, or else returned home. The major part of them were dressed in calf-skins, and not sheep-skins, like the Hottentots. Interestingly, these Khoikhoi which Thunberg encountered on the heights, near what was to become Cadle’s Hotel, were in a settlement which Wirgman and Mayo characterize as a “town”. In all probability it was a village, at best, which Thunberg alludes to. Nevertheless, it does disprove the accepted wisdom that all khoikhoi were itinerant vagabonds especially when they intermarried with the Xhosa. Given the types of materials that were used to construct their abodes, there is little likelihood of any “ruins” being uncovered. However, in their book on St. Mary’s church, Mayo and Wirgman do provide additional information to substantiate Thunberg’s claim that there was a settled community in this vicinity. According to these authors, “arrow heads and other Hottentot implements have been found there in such numbers as to show manifest traces of the former Hottentot town”. Thunberg continues: “We had brought with us several things from town, with which we endeavoured either to gain their friendship, or reward their services, such as small knives, tinder-boxes, and small looking-glasses. To the chief of them, we presented some looking-glasses, and were highly diverted at seeing the many pranks that these simple people played with them: one or more looking at themselves in the glass at the same time, and then staring at each other, and then staring at each other, and laughing, ready to burst their sides; but the most ridiculous part of the farce was that that they even looked at the back of the glass, to see whether the same figure presented itself as they saw in the glass. These people, who were well made [built, endowed?], and of a sprightly and undaunted appearance, adorned themselves with brushes made of the tails of animals, which they wore in their hair, on their ankles, and round their waists. Some had thongs cut out of hides, and others had strings of glass-beads bound several times round their bodies. But upon no part of their dress did they set a greater value than upon small and bright metal plates of copper or brass, either round, oblong, or square. These they scoured with great care, and hung them with a string, either in their hair, on their foreheads. on their breasts, at the back of their neck, or before their posteriors; and sometimes, if they had many of them, all round their heads. My English fellow traveller had brought with him one of those medallions struck in copper, and gilt, that had been sent with the two English ships, which were at this time sailing towards the South Pole, to be distributed among the different nations in that quarter of the globe. This medal was given to one of the Caffres who was very familiar with us, and who was so very pleased with it, that he accompanied us on the whole of our journey and back again, with his medal hanging down glittering just before the middle of his forehead. Some of these people had hanging before their breasts a conical skin made of the undressed skin of an animal, which was fastened about the neck by four leather thongs and served them as a tobacco pouch. Some of them wore about their necks a necklace made of small shells, called serpents skulls strung upon a string, and to this hung a tortoise-shell, for keeping the bukku ointment in. Most of them were armed with as many javelins as they could well hold in one hand. The huts [of the local Inqua khoikhoi populations] were covered over with mats made of rushes, which, with their milk baskets, were so closed that no water could penetrate them. The range of mountains which, during our whole journey, we had hitherto had to the left, now came to a termination. [These were probably the Van Stadensberge]. And to the right of us, was seen the sea. A larger range of mountains, however proceeded farther into the country to the left. [The Suurberge, 75kms north of Port Elizabeth]. The country hereabouts was full of wild beasts of every kind, and therefore very dangerous to travel through. We were more particularly anxious concerning our draught animals which mighy easily be scared away by the lions, and lost to us for ever. Outspan at Kragga Kamma We were likewise too few in number, and not sufficiently armed, to protect ourselves against the inhabitants, whose language our Hottentots now no longer perfectly understood. We therefore came to the resolution to entice from this village another troop of Hottentots to accompany us, which we accordingly did, by promising them a reward of tobacco and other trifles that they were fond of, as also to kill for them a quantity of buffaloes sufficient for their support. This promise procured for us a great many more than we wanted, and put troop consisted now in excess of a hundred men. As an aside, how did Thunberg expect his now redundant khoikhoi assistants to return home? It is inconceivable that he provided food and other victuals let alone any serverance package negotiated with their shopstewards. It is safe to say that employees in Thunberg’s home country, Sweden, would have been treated no better than his treatment meted out to these tribesmen. The 13th. The country in which we were now were, was called Krakakamma (sic). [This area was defined in 1776 by Swellengrebel as the entire promontory between the Van Stadens and the Zwartkops rivers]. It abounded with grass and wood, as well as wild beasts of every kind, which were here still secure in some measure from the attacks of the colonists. These were chiefly buffaloes, elephants, two horned rhineocetoses, striped horses and asses [zebra and quaggas], and seversl several kids of buck, particularly large herds of hartebeests. First we travelled to the Krakakamma valley [Kraggakamma Vlei on the old farm Kraggakamma is 6kms south of Greenbushes, still conforms to the same shape as when it was mapped by C.D. Wentzel in 1752], and afterwards from hence farther downwards to the sea shore, where there was a great quantity of bushy growth, as well as wood of a larger growth, filled with numerous herds of buffaloes, that grazed in the adjacent plains. In the afternoon, when the heat of the day abated, we went out with a few of our Hottentots a hunting, in hopes of killing something wherewith to satisfy the craving stomachs of our numerous retinues. After we had got a little way into the wood, we spied an extremely large herd of wild buffaloes, which being in the act of grazing, held down their heads, and did not observe us till we came within three hundred paces of them. At this instant the whole herd, which appeared to consist of about five or six hundred large beasts, lifted up their heads, and viewed us with attention. So large an assemblage of animals, each of which taken singly is an extremely terrible object, would have made anyone shudder at the sight, even one who had not, like me, the year before, had occasion to see their astonishing strength, and experience the rough manner in which they treat their opponents. Nevertheless, as we were now apprised of the nature of the animals, and their not readily attacking anyone in the open plains we did not dread either their strength or number, but, not to frighten them, stood still a little while, till they again stooped down to feed; when, with quick steps, we approached within forty paces of them. We were three Europeans, and as many Hottentots trained to shoot, who carried muskets, and the rest of the Hottentots were armed with their throwing-spears. The whole herd now began to look up again and faced us with a brisk and undaunted air; we then judged that it was time to fire, and all at once let fly among them. No sooner had we fired, than the whole troop, intrepid as it otherwise was, surprised by the flash and report, turned about and made for the woods, and left us a spectacle not to be equalled in its kind. The wounded buffaloes separated from the rest of the herd, and either could not keep up with it, or else took another road. Amongst these was an old bull buffalo, which came close to the side where we stood, and obliged us to take to our heels, and fly before him. It is true, it is impossible for a man, how fast that he may run, to outrun these animals. Nevertheless, we were so far instructed for our preservation, as to know that a man may escape tolerably well from them, as long as he is in on an open and level plain; as the buffalo, which has very small eyes in proportion to the size of its head, does not see much side-ways, but only straight forward. When therefore it came pretty near, a man has nothing more to do than to throw himself down on one side. The buffalo, which always gallops straight forward, does not observe the man that lies on the ground, neither does it miss its enemy, till he has had time enough to run out of the way. Our wounded bull came pretty near us, but passed on one side, making the best of his way to a copse, which however he did not quite reach before he fell. In the meantime, the rest of our Hottentots had followed a cow that was mortally wounded, and with their throwing-spears killed a calf. We, for our part, immediately went up to the fallen bull, and found that the ball had entered his chest, and penetrated through the greatest part of his body, notwithstanding which he had run at full speed several hundred paces before he fell. He was certainly old, of a dark grey colour, and almost without any hairs, which, on the younger sort, are black. The body of this animal was extremely thick, but his legs, on the other hand, short. When he lay on the ground, his body was so thick, that I could not get on him without taking a running jump. When our drivers had flayed him, at least in part, we chose out the fleshiest and pickled some, and at the same time made an excellent repast on the spot. Although I had taken it into my head that the flesh of an old bull like this would have been both coarse and tough, yet, to my great astonishment, I found that it was tender, and tasted like all other game. The remainder of the bull, together with the cow and the calf, were given to the Hottentots for their share, who were not at all behind hand, but immediately made a large fire on the spot, and roasted the pieces they had cut off without delay. What they preferred, and first of all laid on the fire, were the marrowbones, of which, when broiled, they eat the marrow with great eagerness. The guts, meat, and offal, they hung up on the branches of trees; so that, in a short time, the place looked like a slaughter-house; about which the Hottentots encamped in order to broil their victuals, eat, and sleep. On the approach of night, my fellow travellers and I thought it best to repair to our wagons, and give orders for making our cattle fast, before it grew quite dark. In our way we passed within a few hundred paces of five lions, which, on seeing us, walked off into the woods. Having tied our beasts to the wheels of our wagons, fired our pieces off two or three times in the air, and kindled several fires round about our encampment, all very necessary precautions for our security, as well with respect to the elephants as more particularly to the lions, we lay down to rest, each of us with a loaded musket by his side, committing ourselves to the care of God’s gracious providence. The like precautions we always observed in future, when obliged to encamp in such places where man indeed seemed to rule by day, but wild beasts bore the sway at night. These wild animals for the most part, lie quiet and still, in the shade of woods and copses during the day, their time for feeding being in the cool of the evening and at night, at which time lions and other beasts of prey come out to seek their food, and devour the more innocent and defenceless animals. A lion cannot by dint of strength, indeed, seize a buffalo, but always has recourse to art, and lies in wait under some bush, and principally near rivulets, where the buffalo comes to drink. He then springs upon his back with the greatest agility, with his tremendous teeth biting the buffalo in the nape of his neck, and wounding him in the sides with his claws, till, quite wearied out, he sinks to the ground and dies. On the 15th, in the morning, I went out to see whether the trees of the woods, of which this part of the country consisted, had yet any blossoms upon them; but found that the summer was not far enough advanced, and that the trees were so close to each other, and so full of prickles, that without cutting my way through them, I could not advance far into the wood, which, besides, was extremely dangerous, on account of the wild beasts. Here, and in other places, where it was woody, we observed near the watering-places, the fresh tracks of buffaloes, as also the tracks and dung of elephants, two-horned rhinoceroses, and other animals. According to Wirgman and Mayo, this bushy country continued until he reached the shores of Algoa Bay, which was fringed with conical sandhills covered with dense bush all the way from the Zwartkops mouth to Cape Recife. The existence of these sandhills is confirmed in the book by Barrows which depicts these great sandhills which have now completely disappeared. Over time, these bushes were chopped down for firewood and the sandhills which had preciously been anchored by this vegetation, were blown away. In the plains there were striped horses [zebras] and asses [quagga], hartebeests, koedoes. We therefore got ready and set out for Zwartkop’s River [Thunberg would have forded it above the tidal limit between Perseverance and Despatch] and the salt-pan, not far distant from it, where we waited during the heat of the day. Near this saltpan, as it is called, we had the finest view in the world, which delighted us the more as it was very uncommon. This Zwartkop’s saltpan was now, to use the expression, in its best attire, and made a most beautiful appearance. It formed a depression of about three-quarters of a mile in diameter, and sloping off by degrees, so that the water in the middle was scarcely four feet deep. A few yards from the water’s edge this depression was encircled by a mound several fathoms high, which was overgrown with brush wood. It was rather of an oval form and took me up a good half-hour to walk round it. The soil nearest the valley was sandy; but, higher up, it appeared to consist, in many places, of a pale slate. The whole saltpan, the water of which was not deep, at the same time that the bottom was covered with a smooth and level bed of salt, at this juncture, being the middle of summer and in a hot climate, exactly resembled a frozen lake covered with ice, as clear and transparent as crystal. The water had a pure saline taste without any thing bitter in it. In the heat of the day, as fast as the water evaporated, a fine salt crystallizing on the surface first appeared there in the form of glittering scales, and afterwards settled at the bottom. It was frequently driven on one side by the wind; and, if collected at that time, proved to be a very fine and pure salt. The saltpan had begun to grow dry towards the north-east end, but to the south-westward, to which it inclined, it was fuller; to the westward it ran out into a long neck. It appeared to us somewhat strange, to find, so far from the sea, and at a considerable height above it, such a large and saturated pool of salt-water. But the water which deposits this salt, does not come at all from the sea, but solely from the rains which fall in spring, and totally evaporate in summer. The whole of the soil of this country is entirely salt. The rainwater which dissolves this, runs down from the adjacent heights, and is collected in this basin, where it remains and gradually evaporates; and the longer it is evaporating the salter it is. The colonists who live in the Lang Kloof, and in the whole country extending from thence towards this side, as also in Kamdebo, Kankou and other places, are obliged to fetch their salt from this spot. It was said, that not far from this there were two more saltpans, which however yielded no salt till they were quite dry. Several insects were found drowned in the salt water, some of which were such as I could not meet with on the bushes alive, during the few hours that I stayed here and walked about the copses, which my curiosity induced me to do, although it was a very dangerous spot, on account of the lions. Our Hottentots, of whom we had now but a few in our suite, and whom we had left to take care of our oxen that were turned out to grass, we found fast asleep, overcome by the heat of the day. Towards evening, we drove a little farther on, and arrived at Kuka, [now Coega] where the brook was already a mere stagnant puddle and only had brackish water in it. Nevertheless we took up our night’s lodging here. We were surprised to find here a poor farmer, who had encamped in this place, with his wife and children, by stealth; in order to feed and augment his small herd. And indeed these poor people were no less astonished, not to say terrified, at our arrival, in the idea, that we either had, or might, inform the government against them, for residing out of the appointed boundaries. The farmer had only a small hut made of branches of trees for his family, and another adjacent to it, by way of a kitchen. We visited them in their little abode, and, at our request, were entertained by them with fresh milk. But we had not been long seated before the whole basin of milk was covered with a swarm of flies, so as to be quite black with them; and the hut was so infested with flies, that we could not open our mouths to speak. Within so small a space I never beheld, before nor since, such an amazing number of these insects. We therefore hastened to our vehicles; and having kindled our fires and pitched our camp at a little distance from the hut, listened the whole night to the howling of wolves, [hyenas]and the dreadful roaring of lions. On the following morning, being the 16th of December, we proceeded to the Great Sunday River, the banks of which were very steep and the adjacent fields arid and meagre. The major part of our ample retinue of Hottentots had now left us, after having got, in the course of the journey, venison enough to feast on, and, as we were approaching nearer and nearer to a country which would soon be changed to a perfect desert, where no game nor venison was to be hoped The area in the vicinity of Port Elizabeth was already inhabited in 1772 – albeit sparsely – 50-years prior to the arrival of the 1820 settlers. The main inhabitants were Inqua khoikhoi interspersed with the occasional Xhosa tribesman. Another surprising point that this piece illuminates, is the quantity and diversity of wild life, especially of the megafauna variety, which were domiciled in this area. As the Dutch farmers advanced over the Gamtoos River and settled in Algoa Bay, they steadily hunted the large animals to extinction such that by time that the 1820 Settlers passed through, no mention is ever again made of elephants, rhinoceroses or buffaloes except for a small head of elephants in the Alexandria area which had eluded the predations of the big game hunters. Travels at the Cape of Good Hope by Carl Peter Thunberg (1986, Van Riebeeck Society, Cape Town) The Collegiate Church of Parish of St. Mary Port Elizabeth by Archdeacon Wirgman & Canon Cuthbert Edward Mayo (1925, Longman Green & Co, London)Continue reading	5,864	ENGLISH	1
Ancient Egyptian Funerals There were some things that the Ancient Egyptians thought that they had to do in order that they would be able to make it to the afterlife. There were a list of things that the Ancient Egyptians felt that they had to do to make sure that their loved ones made it to the afterlife including mummifying the body, casting spells, getting the tomb ready and preparing for the gods. The Egyptian Gods There were many different gods that the Egyptians would worship, and they believed that there would be different gods that judged each person after they died and before they could go to the afterlife. When someone died, the people would do different things such as parade around the town with their faces covered in mud. After the body was mummified, the people would follow around the priest and cry as the priest prayed over the body. When a person would die, the family would take the body into a place and the person would embalm the body or make the body so that it would not decay. It was thought that the only way that a person could make it into the afterlife was if their body was preserved. If the body was not preserved, there was no way that person would be allowed to enter after deal. Entering into the afterlife was the main source of focus for most of the Ancient Egyptians, so it was very important for their body to be mummified. When the body died, the priest would come and do a ceremony over the body. He would wash the body and put oil on it and cover it in water that was taken from the Nile River. The priest would pray over the body and ask the gods to take them to the afterlife. The organs would then be removed from the Ancient Egyptians body and they would be washed and put in jars. The organs were all removed except for the heart, which had to be kept in the body for the afterlife. The body was then covered with a form of cloth called natron. The organs would be packed in the natron cloth as well and it would help to dry the body to prepare it for the afterlife. For 40 days, the body would be dried out so that all of the fluids in the body would dry. After the body was dry, the natron is removed, and the organs are wrapped in the cloth and put back into the body. The body is again rubbed with oil and the nostrils are stuffed and make-up is applied to the eyes and the face. The body is then decorated with amulets and charms so that the person that died can take these things into the afterlife with them. It was very important for the dead to have treasures to take with them when they died. A mask was then put on the face of the body and it was used so that the Ba and Ka could find the body. The mask looked as close to what the person originally looked like and it was like a nametag so that the Ba and Ka could come together and know the body. After the body is washed, cleaned, oiled and decorated, the body is put into a coffin that is called a cartouche. The name of the person is written on the casket so that the Ba and Ka know where to go. The name of the dead person has to be written somewhere so the Ba and Ka know which body to go to. There is then a place where the priest takes the family and the friends, and the body is put into the tomb. People cry and follow the priest to this area while he prays. The tomb is finally locked and sealed, and the body goes into its judgement in the afterlife. Sometimes, when a king was put into a pyramid, the pyramid would be sealed, and no one would ever be able to go into the pyramid again, but the soul of the king would be able to move around the tomb. Opening of the Mouth Ceremony One ceremony that took place in Ancient Egypt was the Opening of the Mouth Ceremony. This was a time when the priest would cast a spell and touch the mummy with a copper blade. This was done so that the mummy would be able to breathe and speak when they went into the afterlife. The priest would also say a spell on the rest of the body like the legs and arms so that the mummy would be able to move in the afterlife, as well. More Facts About Ancient Egyptian Funerals: - If a person was not able to afford to be mummified, the loved ones could cast a spell that could help them to get into the afterlife. - The canopic jars were shaped like the four sons of the god Horus. - When a king took the throne, he would immediately have a temple built for him for when he died. - Some of the things found in the tombs were drinks, food and magic spells. - The wealthier a person was, the bigger their tomb was. - Most of the tombs were located close to their family place. What Did You Learn? - What is an Ancient Egyptian funeral like? Some of the funerals were different than others. Some funerals involved people walking around with mud on their faces or crying. - What was important about getting ready for a funeral? It was important that the priest prepare the body of the dead for the funeral. He had to do this because a person had to be a mummy before they could go into the afterlife. - What if a person could not afford to be mummified? If a person could not afford to be mummified, their family could cast a spell that could get them into the afterlife. - What was the Opening of the Mouth Ceremony? The Opening of the Mouth Ceremony was when the priest would pray a spell over the mummy and touch it with a copper blade so that it could talk and breathe in the afterlife. - What did the Egyptians believe about the gods? The Egyptians believed that different gods would decide about the person in the afterlife, so they worshipped many different gods.	<urn:uuid:6e85f0d2-daf0-4da3-b8d5-326d428b8e37>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.historyforkids.net/ancient-egyptian-funerals.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607596.34/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122221541-20200123010541-00423.warc.gz	en	0.989191	1,238	3.34375	3	[ -0.2158776968717575, 0.8320379853248596, 0.23790201544761658, -0.0980711579322815, -0.5452173948287964, 0.06386463344097137, 0.6461006999015808, -0.25211337208747864, 0.011990299448370934, -0.024131983518600464, -0.02592623047530651, -0.26775267720222473, -0.20569464564323425, -0.023938093...	14	Ancient Egyptian Funerals There were some things that the Ancient Egyptians thought that they had to do in order that they would be able to make it to the afterlife. There were a list of things that the Ancient Egyptians felt that they had to do to make sure that their loved ones made it to the afterlife including mummifying the body, casting spells, getting the tomb ready and preparing for the gods. The Egyptian Gods There were many different gods that the Egyptians would worship, and they believed that there would be different gods that judged each person after they died and before they could go to the afterlife. When someone died, the people would do different things such as parade around the town with their faces covered in mud. After the body was mummified, the people would follow around the priest and cry as the priest prayed over the body. When a person would die, the family would take the body into a place and the person would embalm the body or make the body so that it would not decay. It was thought that the only way that a person could make it into the afterlife was if their body was preserved. If the body was not preserved, there was no way that person would be allowed to enter after deal. Entering into the afterlife was the main source of focus for most of the Ancient Egyptians, so it was very important for their body to be mummified. When the body died, the priest would come and do a ceremony over the body. He would wash the body and put oil on it and cover it in water that was taken from the Nile River. The priest would pray over the body and ask the gods to take them to the afterlife. The organs would then be removed from the Ancient Egyptians body and they would be washed and put in jars. The organs were all removed except for the heart, which had to be kept in the body for the afterlife. The body was then covered with a form of cloth called natron. The organs would be packed in the natron cloth as well and it would help to dry the body to prepare it for the afterlife. For 40 days, the body would be dried out so that all of the fluids in the body would dry. After the body was dry, the natron is removed, and the organs are wrapped in the cloth and put back into the body. The body is again rubbed with oil and the nostrils are stuffed and make-up is applied to the eyes and the face. The body is then decorated with amulets and charms so that the person that died can take these things into the afterlife with them. It was very important for the dead to have treasures to take with them when they died. A mask was then put on the face of the body and it was used so that the Ba and Ka could find the body. The mask looked as close to what the person originally looked like and it was like a nametag so that the Ba and Ka could come together and know the body. After the body is washed, cleaned, oiled and decorated, the body is put into a coffin that is called a cartouche. The name of the person is written on the casket so that the Ba and Ka know where to go. The name of the dead person has to be written somewhere so the Ba and Ka know which body to go to. There is then a place where the priest takes the family and the friends, and the body is put into the tomb. People cry and follow the priest to this area while he prays. The tomb is finally locked and sealed, and the body goes into its judgement in the afterlife. Sometimes, when a king was put into a pyramid, the pyramid would be sealed, and no one would ever be able to go into the pyramid again, but the soul of the king would be able to move around the tomb. Opening of the Mouth Ceremony One ceremony that took place in Ancient Egypt was the Opening of the Mouth Ceremony. This was a time when the priest would cast a spell and touch the mummy with a copper blade. This was done so that the mummy would be able to breathe and speak when they went into the afterlife. The priest would also say a spell on the rest of the body like the legs and arms so that the mummy would be able to move in the afterlife, as well. More Facts About Ancient Egyptian Funerals: - If a person was not able to afford to be mummified, the loved ones could cast a spell that could help them to get into the afterlife. - The canopic jars were shaped like the four sons of the god Horus. - When a king took the throne, he would immediately have a temple built for him for when he died. - Some of the things found in the tombs were drinks, food and magic spells. - The wealthier a person was, the bigger their tomb was. - Most of the tombs were located close to their family place. What Did You Learn? - What is an Ancient Egyptian funeral like? Some of the funerals were different than others. Some funerals involved people walking around with mud on their faces or crying. - What was important about getting ready for a funeral? It was important that the priest prepare the body of the dead for the funeral. He had to do this because a person had to be a mummy before they could go into the afterlife. - What if a person could not afford to be mummified? If a person could not afford to be mummified, their family could cast a spell that could get them into the afterlife. - What was the Opening of the Mouth Ceremony? The Opening of the Mouth Ceremony was when the priest would pray a spell over the mummy and touch it with a copper blade so that it could talk and breathe in the afterlife. - What did the Egyptians believe about the gods? The Egyptians believed that different gods would decide about the person in the afterlife, so they worshipped many different gods.	1,226	ENGLISH	1
“The passions may rage furiously, like true heathens, as they are; and the desires may imagine all sorts of vain things: but judgment shall have the last word in every argument, and the casting vote in every decision. “1 Such powerful words were found in the famous romance novels of Charlotte Bronte. Through her novels Jane Eyre and The Professor Bronte’s life experiences were reflected by her main characters as they sought independence, conceived images as symbols of important events in their lives, and they exhibited commitment to their goals. Like Charlotte Bronte both William Crimsworth and Jane Eyre encountered hardships early in their lives therefore they sought independence. Crimsworth’s need to leave his brother Edward and Hunsden reflected the independence “[sought] by Charlotte in order to pursue her career as a governess. “2 Since Bronte’s mother died when Charlotte was very young her father allowed their aunt to educate and raise the children until they were old enough to seek a career. Their aunt was a stern woman and “was rather content receiving obedience than affection”3 which is similar to the character of Aunt Reed in Jane Eyre. Although Hunsden did not hold any blood relation to Crimsworth the relationship between the men was cold which forced Crimsworth to find separation form ridicule and harsh criticism as did Bronte from her aunt. The novel Jane Eyre further illustrated Bronte’s desires of seeking autonomy as the central character, Jane, represented the romantic relationship Bronte had experienced with her professor at the young age of 18. The storyline between Rochester and Eyre held true to the emotions of Charlotte Bronte because she felt the frustrations, helplessness, and happiness in a romance. Isolation allow[ed]the heroine’s self-development, but it impede[ed] her romantic yearning to be thoroughly lost in love. “4 Yet, due to the hardships she faced in her romance Bronte still saw the need for separation from her beloved as did Eyre from Rochester and Francis from Crimsworth. Although it was hard for the author to leave her happiness, her frustrations were expressed in Jane Eyre: “I grieve to leave Thornfield . . . I love it, because I have lived in it a full and delightful life. I have not been trampled on, I have not been petrified . . . [However] I see the necessity of departure; and it is like looking at death. “5 Albeit Jane and William faced the difficulty of pursuing independence from harsh family and romantic situations, most important to both characters was to find equality among their social statures. The Professor, harshly criticized for its “awkwardness in construction . . . the clumsy opening in the epistolary form, the loose arrangement of episodes, and the anticlimactic ending . . . 6 had not the intent to entertain but to inform the reader of unequal treatment of educators in the Victorian era. Compared to the highly acclaimed Jane Eyre however, the two novels still enforced the importance of seeking independence in a society that did not treat different social statures equally. Similar to Bronte, Eyre and Crimsworth tried to find independence from the hardships of their family, their romances, and their career. Also reflecting Bronte’s life was the concept of her main characters conceiving images as symbols of important events in their lives. The split tree after the storm in Jane Eyre symbolized for Jane the stability of the friendship that existed between her and Rochester. For Bronte it was merely foreshadowing future events in the novel. Still, symbolic elements such as the split tree, in both novels were common in Charlotte’s novels. Symbols were techniques used to foreshadow but also a means of formulating the decisions of the main characters. The split tree in Jane Eyre allowed Jane to examine her own motives and question if they still pursued her goals. The red room in Jane Eyre “suggest[ed] violence, enclosure, rebellion and rebirth,”7 a stage Bronte after went through after her sister Anne died. To Bronte the red room was also a symbol of failed love as the room was dark, cold, and it was the place where Jane’s uncle died under the care of Aunt Reed. Despite that The Professor didn’t carry the same measure of symbols as Jane Eyre and thus didn’t produce that same foreshadowing and ironic effect, “Bronte drew heavily on her recent experiences in Brussels [seeking] to disguise this personal element by making her narrator-protagonist a man. “8 Perhaps not looked at as a “symbol” or “conceived image,” a male narrator was created to hide Charlotte’s personal emotions of her lifetime experiences thus, in a way it can be a symbol of the need of privacy imagined by Bronte. Charlotte often incorporated motifs from her Angrian tales because they were her symbolic images that later in her life aided in her decisions regarding her family, romantic relationships, and career options. As Bronte’s life was represented through symbols and images, it was also reflected through the commitment of Crimsworth and Eyre to their personal goals. When Crimsworth came to the epiphany that he loved Frances, he saw that pursuing her was only way to win her. With this knowledge he became the hero as he stayed committed to finding and rejoicing with his love: “You tiny creature, it is your professor who seeks you now. It is I, who must love you entirely. For you have become my companion and confi- dante and you must have me the same. “9 Resembling Jane Eyre who also stayed committed to Rochester during her stay at Thornfield, both characters pursue their personal goal to fulfill their need and want for love. Charlotte, who was saddened after the loss of her “true love” still persevered to remember him and expressed her tragedies and happiness in her four novels: Shirley, Jane Eyre, Villette, and The Professor. Thus, Bronte’s commitment to her personal goals are exhibited by the commitment of Jane to Rochester, William to Frances, and both characters persistence to rise above their reputation as “dependents” in their societies. Jane Eyre and William Crimsworth from The Professor portrayed the story of Charlotte Bronte in several different methods. First they sought independence from family as well as romantic relationships. Second, they conceived images as symbols of important lifetime events. Third, they stayed committed to achieving personal goals. Since Bronte had experienced much in her life, she converted these results into her novels thus proving the statement, “The truth of the outside world is only the truth reflects the narrator’s/ [author’s] feelings and perceptions. “10 Bronte was able to create “a story of myth [since] everything that had deeply affected her was present in the book’s emotional content. “11 With all this in effect the reader becomes avid to Charlotte Bronte’s emotional plights.	<urn:uuid:d4c507e6-70a1-40d2-be34-8cf2b0a30b43>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://monsterliterature.com/jane-eyre-and-the-professor-brontes/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250624328.55/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124161014-20200124190014-00276.warc.gz	en	0.982469	1,470	3.734375	4	[ -0.23286862671375275, 0.3173442482948303, -0.05195781961083412, 0.2400008738040924, -0.30225467681884766, 0.2100169062614441, 0.1100393533706665, 0.01630229875445366, 0.1984376311302185, -0.3114219307899475, -0.12627920508384705, -0.19316518306732178, 0.3705822229385376, 0.0462694130837917...	1	“The passions may rage furiously, like true heathens, as they are; and the desires may imagine all sorts of vain things: but judgment shall have the last word in every argument, and the casting vote in every decision. “1 Such powerful words were found in the famous romance novels of Charlotte Bronte. Through her novels Jane Eyre and The Professor Bronte’s life experiences were reflected by her main characters as they sought independence, conceived images as symbols of important events in their lives, and they exhibited commitment to their goals. Like Charlotte Bronte both William Crimsworth and Jane Eyre encountered hardships early in their lives therefore they sought independence. Crimsworth’s need to leave his brother Edward and Hunsden reflected the independence “[sought] by Charlotte in order to pursue her career as a governess. “2 Since Bronte’s mother died when Charlotte was very young her father allowed their aunt to educate and raise the children until they were old enough to seek a career. Their aunt was a stern woman and “was rather content receiving obedience than affection”3 which is similar to the character of Aunt Reed in Jane Eyre. Although Hunsden did not hold any blood relation to Crimsworth the relationship between the men was cold which forced Crimsworth to find separation form ridicule and harsh criticism as did Bronte from her aunt. The novel Jane Eyre further illustrated Bronte’s desires of seeking autonomy as the central character, Jane, represented the romantic relationship Bronte had experienced with her professor at the young age of 18. The storyline between Rochester and Eyre held true to the emotions of Charlotte Bronte because she felt the frustrations, helplessness, and happiness in a romance. Isolation allow[ed]the heroine’s self-development, but it impede[ed] her romantic yearning to be thoroughly lost in love. “4 Yet, due to the hardships she faced in her romance Bronte still saw the need for separation from her beloved as did Eyre from Rochester and Francis from Crimsworth. Although it was hard for the author to leave her happiness, her frustrations were expressed in Jane Eyre: “I grieve to leave Thornfield . . . I love it, because I have lived in it a full and delightful life. I have not been trampled on, I have not been petrified . . . [However] I see the necessity of departure; and it is like looking at death. “5 Albeit Jane and William faced the difficulty of pursuing independence from harsh family and romantic situations, most important to both characters was to find equality among their social statures. The Professor, harshly criticized for its “awkwardness in construction . . . the clumsy opening in the epistolary form, the loose arrangement of episodes, and the anticlimactic ending . . . 6 had not the intent to entertain but to inform the reader of unequal treatment of educators in the Victorian era. Compared to the highly acclaimed Jane Eyre however, the two novels still enforced the importance of seeking independence in a society that did not treat different social statures equally. Similar to Bronte, Eyre and Crimsworth tried to find independence from the hardships of their family, their romances, and their career. Also reflecting Bronte’s life was the concept of her main characters conceiving images as symbols of important events in their lives. The split tree after the storm in Jane Eyre symbolized for Jane the stability of the friendship that existed between her and Rochester. For Bronte it was merely foreshadowing future events in the novel. Still, symbolic elements such as the split tree, in both novels were common in Charlotte’s novels. Symbols were techniques used to foreshadow but also a means of formulating the decisions of the main characters. The split tree in Jane Eyre allowed Jane to examine her own motives and question if they still pursued her goals. The red room in Jane Eyre “suggest[ed] violence, enclosure, rebellion and rebirth,”7 a stage Bronte after went through after her sister Anne died. To Bronte the red room was also a symbol of failed love as the room was dark, cold, and it was the place where Jane’s uncle died under the care of Aunt Reed. Despite that The Professor didn’t carry the same measure of symbols as Jane Eyre and thus didn’t produce that same foreshadowing and ironic effect, “Bronte drew heavily on her recent experiences in Brussels [seeking] to disguise this personal element by making her narrator-protagonist a man. “8 Perhaps not looked at as a “symbol” or “conceived image,” a male narrator was created to hide Charlotte’s personal emotions of her lifetime experiences thus, in a way it can be a symbol of the need of privacy imagined by Bronte. Charlotte often incorporated motifs from her Angrian tales because they were her symbolic images that later in her life aided in her decisions regarding her family, romantic relationships, and career options. As Bronte’s life was represented through symbols and images, it was also reflected through the commitment of Crimsworth and Eyre to their personal goals. When Crimsworth came to the epiphany that he loved Frances, he saw that pursuing her was only way to win her. With this knowledge he became the hero as he stayed committed to finding and rejoicing with his love: “You tiny creature, it is your professor who seeks you now. It is I, who must love you entirely. For you have become my companion and confi- dante and you must have me the same. “9 Resembling Jane Eyre who also stayed committed to Rochester during her stay at Thornfield, both characters pursue their personal goal to fulfill their need and want for love. Charlotte, who was saddened after the loss of her “true love” still persevered to remember him and expressed her tragedies and happiness in her four novels: Shirley, Jane Eyre, Villette, and The Professor. Thus, Bronte’s commitment to her personal goals are exhibited by the commitment of Jane to Rochester, William to Frances, and both characters persistence to rise above their reputation as “dependents” in their societies. Jane Eyre and William Crimsworth from The Professor portrayed the story of Charlotte Bronte in several different methods. First they sought independence from family as well as romantic relationships. Second, they conceived images as symbols of important lifetime events. Third, they stayed committed to achieving personal goals. Since Bronte had experienced much in her life, she converted these results into her novels thus proving the statement, “The truth of the outside world is only the truth reflects the narrator’s/ [author’s] feelings and perceptions. “10 Bronte was able to create “a story of myth [since] everything that had deeply affected her was present in the book’s emotional content. “11 With all this in effect the reader becomes avid to Charlotte Bronte’s emotional plights.	1,415	ENGLISH	1
The changes made by livings systems in response to their environments–this is the definition I was given for the word adaptation. Quite the powerful meaning. Imagine being shaped by outside factors in your environment in order to be better equipped for survival. Many species before us had undergone this process, and it’s still ongoing to this very day. It’s definitely an interesting topic to explain. At least, that’s what I hoped for as I prepared for today’s field trip. Me and two other field rangers led a field trip of two fourth grade classes. The structure was to break up the fourth graders into four groups and rotate them every 30 minutes to a new station until they each experienced all of them. My job was to teach them about bird beak adaptations. My assigned weapons were bird skull models of a Bald Eagle, Osprey, duck (Mallard), Common Raven, small passerine, and a Great Blue Heron (my personal favorite). “Kids like skulls, right?” is what I asked myself as I prepared my table for the soon to arrive classes. My goal was to educate the middle schoolers on what a beak shape could teach you about a bird, such as what is their diet. Raptor beaks, Bald Eagles and Ospreys for example, have prominent top beaks that curve over their bottom beak and end in a sharp hook. This design is indicative of raptors and is perfectly suited to tear into prey and rip out chunks of meat for them to consume. Ducks have beak shapes that serve a different purpose. I used a Mallard skull to point out the rounded bill tip that is relatively flat, and demonstrated their dabbling motion when foraging. Mallards dip their beaks into the water and strain small animals, insects, and plants out of the water and mud using tiny comb-like structures around the bill (called lamellae). This approach is very different relative to the raptors who utilize a more deadly approach. Next on my list of models skulls was the raven. I was very excited to share this with the kids, as ravens are one of my favorites animals. I taught every group that ravens are part of the corvid family, which has some of the smartest birds in the animal kingdom, and promptly pulled out a raven skull to show off the smart bird. Every group was able to point out the characteristics of the beak for me. “Its beak is long, but not too long,” “It’s a little curved at the end,” and “It’s thicker near the eyes.” My gosh, there are some astute kids out there. I tied it all together by telling them that ravens are generalists when it comes to food, meaning they don’t specialize in one single food item. Rather, they can eat a variety of foods–seeds, nuts, fruits, meat; they eat it all. The last two skull models I specifically saved for last. The size disparity between them is the most noticeable. Bald Eagle, Osprey, Mallard, and a raven. All these model skulls were a decent size. Not too big or too small, just right in the middle. However, our next contender was the tiniest one yet. I pulled out a tiny skull that could fit on top of a quarter. You could easily miss it among the other skulls if you weren’t paying attention. The identity of the bird was a mystery. I found it in an unlabeled box, but believe it’s a type of passerine. Every group was shocked at the size and some exclaimed, “It’s so tiny, I can barely see it.” I used this energy and encouraged everyone to lean in closer and observe it. Once again, they were quick on the draw to point out that the beak was small, slightly thick at the base, and pointy. These were great clues that tells us its diet consists of small insects (pointy bill) and seeds (thick bill). There was only one skull left, and it’s my favorite one hands down. The awesome Great Blue Heron! The reaction it evoked from everyone was great. All eyes were widened and a “whooaaaa” escaped almost every mouth. This skull was no joke. It’s approximately nine inches in length, very narrow, and never failed to grasp everyone’s attention. I used the powerful beak and guided my audience to figure out how the heron used its tool to hunt and what kind of food they ate. It’s essentially a harpoon. Great Blue Herons are large birds that can grow up to 4.5 feet tall and have a wingspan of 6.5 feet! Fearsome birds. They eat anything from fish, amphibians, reptiles, and small mammals, to insects using that amazing beak. Standing motionless and very patiently, they wait in the water and strike when anything comes within reach. Fun fact: Did you know they can impale larger fish with their dagger-like beak? Everyone in the audience loved that quick fact (I hope you do as well). Once we discussed all the various adaptations, I had one more surprise for the middle schoolers: a fun game. The rules are simple. I have two teams of two, and each group has a person with a “beak” (tweezer or clothespin) and the other is the stomach (a red solo cup). The goal of the game is for the “bird” (the player holding the beak) to get as much food (sprinkles) as possible in its stomach. It was so funny, everyone thought that both beaks would fair well and it would be an even match. They were wrong. The group would with the clothespin struggled heavily and it was obvious they were at a disadvantage. On the other hand, the group with the tweezers were picking up the food with every try. I shouted, “Time is up, beaks down” after 30 seconds, and we counted how much food each group was able to collect. The team with the clothespin was not happy about their turn at all. One group stated, “That’s not fair! They had the better beak.” This made me happy, because it allowed me to emphasize my message: Adaptation! Each bird has a beak well suited to help it hunt and forage and ultimately survive in its respective environment. The “ohhhhhh” that kids let out as it clicked in their heads made me smile. I did it. They got my message! What a sigh of relief that was. After all the kids left, I felt like the day was a success. I was able to show our future generation something new and interesting that will hopefully encourage them to appreciate the nature around them. With that, I felt it was time to reward myself. I tied my shoes and went on a hike. I mean, hey, its not raining today and the sun is actually out! Time to enjoy some more nature!	<urn:uuid:a294bf2b-d92d-4044-bb97-2b02b6220b77>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.avesblog.com/2018/04/adapting-to-field-trips/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598217.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120081337-20200120105337-00218.warc.gz	en	0.982541	1,488	3.625	4	[ -0.1901247650384903, -0.2152513861656189, 0.32971686124801636, 0.19628271460533142, 0.15457944571971893, 0.00901216920465231, 0.4191129207611084, -0.011252269148826599, -0.2596413493156433, 0.0718875378370285, -0.17826780676841736, -0.5568296313285828, -0.1788552701473236, -0.3015840053558...	5	The changes made by livings systems in response to their environments–this is the definition I was given for the word adaptation. Quite the powerful meaning. Imagine being shaped by outside factors in your environment in order to be better equipped for survival. Many species before us had undergone this process, and it’s still ongoing to this very day. It’s definitely an interesting topic to explain. At least, that’s what I hoped for as I prepared for today’s field trip. Me and two other field rangers led a field trip of two fourth grade classes. The structure was to break up the fourth graders into four groups and rotate them every 30 minutes to a new station until they each experienced all of them. My job was to teach them about bird beak adaptations. My assigned weapons were bird skull models of a Bald Eagle, Osprey, duck (Mallard), Common Raven, small passerine, and a Great Blue Heron (my personal favorite). “Kids like skulls, right?” is what I asked myself as I prepared my table for the soon to arrive classes. My goal was to educate the middle schoolers on what a beak shape could teach you about a bird, such as what is their diet. Raptor beaks, Bald Eagles and Ospreys for example, have prominent top beaks that curve over their bottom beak and end in a sharp hook. This design is indicative of raptors and is perfectly suited to tear into prey and rip out chunks of meat for them to consume. Ducks have beak shapes that serve a different purpose. I used a Mallard skull to point out the rounded bill tip that is relatively flat, and demonstrated their dabbling motion when foraging. Mallards dip their beaks into the water and strain small animals, insects, and plants out of the water and mud using tiny comb-like structures around the bill (called lamellae). This approach is very different relative to the raptors who utilize a more deadly approach. Next on my list of models skulls was the raven. I was very excited to share this with the kids, as ravens are one of my favorites animals. I taught every group that ravens are part of the corvid family, which has some of the smartest birds in the animal kingdom, and promptly pulled out a raven skull to show off the smart bird. Every group was able to point out the characteristics of the beak for me. “Its beak is long, but not too long,” “It’s a little curved at the end,” and “It’s thicker near the eyes.” My gosh, there are some astute kids out there. I tied it all together by telling them that ravens are generalists when it comes to food, meaning they don’t specialize in one single food item. Rather, they can eat a variety of foods–seeds, nuts, fruits, meat; they eat it all. The last two skull models I specifically saved for last. The size disparity between them is the most noticeable. Bald Eagle, Osprey, Mallard, and a raven. All these model skulls were a decent size. Not too big or too small, just right in the middle. However, our next contender was the tiniest one yet. I pulled out a tiny skull that could fit on top of a quarter. You could easily miss it among the other skulls if you weren’t paying attention. The identity of the bird was a mystery. I found it in an unlabeled box, but believe it’s a type of passerine. Every group was shocked at the size and some exclaimed, “It’s so tiny, I can barely see it.” I used this energy and encouraged everyone to lean in closer and observe it. Once again, they were quick on the draw to point out that the beak was small, slightly thick at the base, and pointy. These were great clues that tells us its diet consists of small insects (pointy bill) and seeds (thick bill). There was only one skull left, and it’s my favorite one hands down. The awesome Great Blue Heron! The reaction it evoked from everyone was great. All eyes were widened and a “whooaaaa” escaped almost every mouth. This skull was no joke. It’s approximately nine inches in length, very narrow, and never failed to grasp everyone’s attention. I used the powerful beak and guided my audience to figure out how the heron used its tool to hunt and what kind of food they ate. It’s essentially a harpoon. Great Blue Herons are large birds that can grow up to 4.5 feet tall and have a wingspan of 6.5 feet! Fearsome birds. They eat anything from fish, amphibians, reptiles, and small mammals, to insects using that amazing beak. Standing motionless and very patiently, they wait in the water and strike when anything comes within reach. Fun fact: Did you know they can impale larger fish with their dagger-like beak? Everyone in the audience loved that quick fact (I hope you do as well). Once we discussed all the various adaptations, I had one more surprise for the middle schoolers: a fun game. The rules are simple. I have two teams of two, and each group has a person with a “beak” (tweezer or clothespin) and the other is the stomach (a red solo cup). The goal of the game is for the “bird” (the player holding the beak) to get as much food (sprinkles) as possible in its stomach. It was so funny, everyone thought that both beaks would fair well and it would be an even match. They were wrong. The group would with the clothespin struggled heavily and it was obvious they were at a disadvantage. On the other hand, the group with the tweezers were picking up the food with every try. I shouted, “Time is up, beaks down” after 30 seconds, and we counted how much food each group was able to collect. The team with the clothespin was not happy about their turn at all. One group stated, “That’s not fair! They had the better beak.” This made me happy, because it allowed me to emphasize my message: Adaptation! Each bird has a beak well suited to help it hunt and forage and ultimately survive in its respective environment. The “ohhhhhh” that kids let out as it clicked in their heads made me smile. I did it. They got my message! What a sigh of relief that was. After all the kids left, I felt like the day was a success. I was able to show our future generation something new and interesting that will hopefully encourage them to appreciate the nature around them. With that, I felt it was time to reward myself. I tied my shoes and went on a hike. I mean, hey, its not raining today and the sun is actually out! Time to enjoy some more nature!	1,435	ENGLISH	1
Massacre at Mystic Massacre at Mystic is one of the most important events in the American History. It had set a new pattern in European/Native American relations in New England. After May 26, 1637 the colonists and native people would never became friends again. This day initiated the beginning of constant feud between them. Massacre at Mystic: New England, May 26, 1637 But at the beginning everything was totally different. English came to a new land to start new life in there as well as to establish some new colonies. They were not ready to share this land with anybody. In fact they regarded a supposition of any other inhabitants there as unthinkable. The Indians were the total surprise for Europeans. The more surprising was their way of life in the eyes of the colonists, who were mainly English. They couldn’t understand that native perception of the world was fundamentally different than theirs. They had different views of spirituality, nature, appearance, property, and division of labor, principles of warfare, and the social relationships. The English were puritans so God was their power and anyone who sought power through access to the spiritual world were communing with the devil. From that point of view English couldn’t accept also the appearance of native people. Though all of them were interested in Indian wampums, they were indignant at the Indians lack of dress. Puritans as they were, they were shocked by the relationships between men and women. Surprisingly for them women were treated as equals, they were able to speak and to earn money English were horrified comparing men’s and women’s part in getting food. They couldn’t imagine how ruthless Indian men must be to make their women work so hard. These two cultures were so differently organized that it had to cause some conflicts. The Puritans and the Pequot So it did. As the puritans and natives grew increasingly distrustful of each other, the former set up local militias to defend them against the latter. These militias were commanded by Captain John Underhill who thought that the best form of defense is certainly offence. His first step was to defend English from all threats the first of which were the Pequot. The Pequot war was the result of many conflicts between the colonists and the Indians. These were disputes over property, hunting and dishonest traders. Besides the English made natives pay “tributes” by holding their children as the hostages. In such a contingency one would expect some hostility between them. This hostility became one of the specific conditions that provoked the massacre afterwards. The other reasons are well-known – religious bigotry and diseases. Unfortunately European colonists had little respect for cultural diversity and that they had a God given right to settle this New World. They believed that their way of believing is the only correct way and that the Indians simply haven't been taught the right way. Still English felt superior to all Indians even those who became Christian. The last reason – diseases – played an important role in the relationships between colonists and the natives as well. Both sides considered it to be providential. Whereas the colonists saw in this sigh of God, that this land belongs to them, the Indians considered diseases as the terrible sign of fate. After the epidemics the Pequot population decreased very much. That’s why their rival tribes – Naragansetts and Mohegans laid claim to become a leader instead of Pequots. Still the first claimants to the land were the English colonists. Pequots were proclaimed an aggressor since they were the main obstacle to European expansion. Pequot’s power was the exact reason why the attack was planned to be a massacre: English intended to make an example of the Pequots. The soldiers were told to kill everybody and when they hesitated Captain Underhill said that according to the Bible women and children must perish with their menfolks. People were blinded with religious bigotry at that time so they obeyed. Too many children and women were killed because of strong European conviction that their interests were God’s interests. This bigotry created a whole new moral underpinning for conquest. The terror that took its place at Mystic was God’s holy terror and the weapon that took so many lives was God’s weapon. It was something like a holy crusade against non-Christians. No wonder then that by drawing the line between Christian and non-Christian Puritans were always justifying bloodshed in the name of God. But on the other side there were the native tribes Naragansetts and Mohegans who took the field. These tribes wanted to grab the power. Mohegans wanted to take vengeance on Pequots for their past. Six years before the Mystic attack the Pequots became divided into pro-English and pro-Dutch factions. Each faction wanted its leader to become the grand sachem. But it was pro-Dutch faction leader who won this competition. After that pro-English part of Pequot tribe fled to form their own tribe, the Mohegan. Thus the Mohegan and the Pequots became enemies. The Narragansett’s motivation is worth mentioning either. They saw clearly that if they won the war they would become the strongest tribe in North America. Still they had not any idea what they’re getting into. Traditional native warfare was very different from the one in the Pequot war. The purpose of Indian wars was not to kill their enemies but to capture them. They could swelled the size of the tribe and become more powerful that way. A few warriors would be killed, but women and children were by all means protected as a prize. That’s why prior to the attack on the Pequot’s, the leader of the Narragansett forces had told English that he would like for them to spare the women and children as Indian people usually did for their warfare. The English obviously agreed to this thing for they wouldn't have got the participation of the Narragansett’s and Mohegan’s. They just deceived the tribes by not telling them about their true intentions. Even during the massacre they didn’t let their allying tribes to be inside the fort and finish the runaways. Naragansetts and Mohegan didn’t know that they were wiping out the whole tribe as old as proud as Europeans. After the Mystic Massacre relationship between Europeans and Indians had changed forever. This day marks the beginning of the English promotion of the mass slaughter of Native Americans to clear them from the land. Since that day they would never be allies anymore. Overnight the balance of power had shifted from the natives to the English colonies. English finally got rid of the last obstacle to their further expansion and natives had no idea what the Mystic Massacre was about. Indians didn’t have an idea of property and seizing territory, so they were just shocked by a sudden colonist’s savagery, guessing what could possibly motivate their attackers. The destruction of Pequots made a deep impression on the other tribes. It sent a message to all the natives that life would never be the same again. Mystic Massacre was the first time English people engaged in a wholesale slaughter. That had the most profound impact on the development of America. From that day on Europeans realized that the continent was theirs for the taking. The Tragedy of Two Different Cultures This story illustrates the coexisting of two different cultures. It could be very productive if both of them could learn something new from each other. As said Tall Oak, Absentee Mashantucket Pequot and Wampanoag: “The first encounter between Europeans and Indians was positive, because our people followed way of life that was based on sharing”. Europeans could have been taught some principles of natural society; they could change their attitude towards women, for example. But they believed that they were the Indians who haven't been taught the right way. The Europeans didn’t want to share they wanted to come and to take everything they wanted. And if they didn’t understand something they believed that that is wrong. Unfortunately they showed a mean spirit: being dishonest traders, soldiers and insatiable colonists. They judged people as much by what they believed as by how they looked and that was their mistake. The religious aspect of colonization in New England remains difficult for many Europeans to understand. It can be understood only in terms of religious wars in early modern Europe. For Europeans goal was the purification of the Christian Church they got the nickname Puritans. It’s worth admitting then that religious bigotry and sacred violence could never be the right guideline for making good choices towards the others. - Preventing Prison Riots - Moby Dick: Argument on Whaling - Polyvinyl Chloride - Islam and Judaism - Innovation Ecology Big thanks to your writing team for coming through for me with my last order. I didn’t give them a lot of notice, but they were able to come up with a superb paper for me. This is the kind of service that I love. Sometimes, I get forgetful, and I forget when my paper due dates are. It is so comforting to know that I can be in a rush and contact Essays-Writer.net and that you will deliver a great paper for me, no matter what. The fact that you include an anti-plagiarism report is great, too. I appreciate knowing that my work is totally original. Essays-Writer.net rocks! Your writers are masters at time management. I turned in an order for four very difficult papers, and they were all written perfectly, even with the short deadline notice. Thanks, Essays-Writer.net! Your writing company delivers for me every time. I have never been disappointed. I was happy with the two essays that your writers did for me. Even though the subject matter was quite dense, they managed to come up with high quality work. This has been my experience with Essays-Writer.net, over the long haul. Each and every time I have needed a high quality paper, you have come through with outstanding writing examples for me. I am pleased to recommend your writing service to my friends and colleagues. The work I received from your writers was much better than expected, especially considering the affordability of your services! This is so impressive! I wasn’t aware, previously, that companies like Essays-Writer.net even existed, but then again, I’m pretty sure you are the only one that is this good. I have heard a lot of bad things about other writing companies, but never a negative word about Essays-Writer.net. You are reputed as being the best, and I, for one, am convinced that this is true.Thank you for the outstanding job you did on my essay and research papers. Thank you for the great paper! My professor gave me a high mark for it. As always, your writers have completed another impressive paper. This time, the subject matter required a lot of research. They not only completed the research. They also documented it absolutely perfectly. It would have taken me months to write a paper this thorough and of this high quality. Thank you so much for your diligence. It was greatly appreciated. I find your writing service to be staffed with serious professionals who understand the urgency of turning out great writing for your customers. I have ordered papers from you for a year and a half now, and each time, I have been given superb papers that were error free and interesting to read. I truly appreciate your efforts, and hope to continue to do business with you from this point forward. You deserve my loyalty, because you are certainly loyal to your customers! Wishing you all the best. Once again, I have sat down at my computer, because I feel I owe you big thanks. There is just no way to express how grateful I am for everything you did to make my research paper as good as it was. My professor gave me an A+ on it, which is the first A+ I have received during my entire college career. Now I know where to go when I need an excellent paper written on a short notice. I am very happy with the paper your writers just produced for me. It was absolutely perfect. Please thank the ones who handled my order and let them know that I will definitely do business with Essays-Writer.net again. Dear Writers #0019, Thank you for taking such a good care of me. I apologize for being as picky as I was, but I was only reflecting the professor’s requirements. I couldn’t believe my eyes when I got my grades back. He gave me an A+ on the paper, which is almost unheard. The paper you produced for me included each and every thing that the professor had required. He is notorious for giving us next-to-impossible tasks to perform in his class, but you managed to pull it off. I don’t know if any other student has received an A+ in this guy’s class, but he simply could not find a single thing wrong with my paper! Yay! Thanks so much. My professor told me that the essay you wrote for me was the best one in the whole class! Thanks for doing such a good job. Compliments from this professor are rare! Dear Essays-Writer.net, You handled my rush order beautifully. I am still amazed by the quality of the term paper, because your writers didn’t have a whole lot of time to write it. Still, they did a great job and I’m happy that I chose Essays-Writer.net. Thank you for taking care of this in such an eloquent way. Dear Madam or Sir, Thank you for your competence and high standards. My paper was wonderful! I shall recommend your writing services highly. You are far and above better than other writing services that I have used. Your professionalism, attention to detail, high quality writing and great prices are a few of the reasons why I will never use any other writing service. Thanks again. I am getting ready to graduate in another week, but had to take a minute to jot this line because I want you to know what a help your writing service has been to me, especially during my junior and senior years. The work has been hard, and I have had to study virtually all the time. With you helping me out with my more challenging writing projects, I have been able to move forward and do well on my tests and other school projects. I will be forever grateful to you for your help, and I wish you continued success with your fantastic writing service. All the best!	<urn:uuid:00690a08-e331-48e4-b256-82c4afc435ad>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://essays-writer.net/essays/informative/massacre-at-mystic.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687725.76/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126043644-20200126073644-00278.warc.gz	en	0.985842	3,033	3.671875	4	[ -0.014194064773619175, 0.07798142731189728, 0.2892048954963684, -0.04391119256615639, 0.16470341384410858, 0.09348049014806747, 0.49367424845695496, -0.19643975794315338, 0.01369272731244564, 0.002409607172012329, 0.3840298652648926, -0.09033453464508057, -0.16722913086414337, 0.5155622363...	3	Massacre at Mystic Massacre at Mystic is one of the most important events in the American History. It had set a new pattern in European/Native American relations in New England. After May 26, 1637 the colonists and native people would never became friends again. This day initiated the beginning of constant feud between them. Massacre at Mystic: New England, May 26, 1637 But at the beginning everything was totally different. English came to a new land to start new life in there as well as to establish some new colonies. They were not ready to share this land with anybody. In fact they regarded a supposition of any other inhabitants there as unthinkable. The Indians were the total surprise for Europeans. The more surprising was their way of life in the eyes of the colonists, who were mainly English. They couldn’t understand that native perception of the world was fundamentally different than theirs. They had different views of spirituality, nature, appearance, property, and division of labor, principles of warfare, and the social relationships. The English were puritans so God was their power and anyone who sought power through access to the spiritual world were communing with the devil. From that point of view English couldn’t accept also the appearance of native people. Though all of them were interested in Indian wampums, they were indignant at the Indians lack of dress. Puritans as they were, they were shocked by the relationships between men and women. Surprisingly for them women were treated as equals, they were able to speak and to earn money English were horrified comparing men’s and women’s part in getting food. They couldn’t imagine how ruthless Indian men must be to make their women work so hard. These two cultures were so differently organized that it had to cause some conflicts. The Puritans and the Pequot So it did. As the puritans and natives grew increasingly distrustful of each other, the former set up local militias to defend them against the latter. These militias were commanded by Captain John Underhill who thought that the best form of defense is certainly offence. His first step was to defend English from all threats the first of which were the Pequot. The Pequot war was the result of many conflicts between the colonists and the Indians. These were disputes over property, hunting and dishonest traders. Besides the English made natives pay “tributes” by holding their children as the hostages. In such a contingency one would expect some hostility between them. This hostility became one of the specific conditions that provoked the massacre afterwards. The other reasons are well-known – religious bigotry and diseases. Unfortunately European colonists had little respect for cultural diversity and that they had a God given right to settle this New World. They believed that their way of believing is the only correct way and that the Indians simply haven't been taught the right way. Still English felt superior to all Indians even those who became Christian. The last reason – diseases – played an important role in the relationships between colonists and the natives as well. Both sides considered it to be providential. Whereas the colonists saw in this sigh of God, that this land belongs to them, the Indians considered diseases as the terrible sign of fate. After the epidemics the Pequot population decreased very much. That’s why their rival tribes – Naragansetts and Mohegans laid claim to become a leader instead of Pequots. Still the first claimants to the land were the English colonists. Pequots were proclaimed an aggressor since they were the main obstacle to European expansion. Pequot’s power was the exact reason why the attack was planned to be a massacre: English intended to make an example of the Pequots. The soldiers were told to kill everybody and when they hesitated Captain Underhill said that according to the Bible women and children must perish with their menfolks. People were blinded with religious bigotry at that time so they obeyed. Too many children and women were killed because of strong European conviction that their interests were God’s interests. This bigotry created a whole new moral underpinning for conquest. The terror that took its place at Mystic was God’s holy terror and the weapon that took so many lives was God’s weapon. It was something like a holy crusade against non-Christians. No wonder then that by drawing the line between Christian and non-Christian Puritans were always justifying bloodshed in the name of God. But on the other side there were the native tribes Naragansetts and Mohegans who took the field. These tribes wanted to grab the power. Mohegans wanted to take vengeance on Pequots for their past. Six years before the Mystic attack the Pequots became divided into pro-English and pro-Dutch factions. Each faction wanted its leader to become the grand sachem. But it was pro-Dutch faction leader who won this competition. After that pro-English part of Pequot tribe fled to form their own tribe, the Mohegan. Thus the Mohegan and the Pequots became enemies. The Narragansett’s motivation is worth mentioning either. They saw clearly that if they won the war they would become the strongest tribe in North America. Still they had not any idea what they’re getting into. Traditional native warfare was very different from the one in the Pequot war. The purpose of Indian wars was not to kill their enemies but to capture them. They could swelled the size of the tribe and become more powerful that way. A few warriors would be killed, but women and children were by all means protected as a prize. That’s why prior to the attack on the Pequot’s, the leader of the Narragansett forces had told English that he would like for them to spare the women and children as Indian people usually did for their warfare. The English obviously agreed to this thing for they wouldn't have got the participation of the Narragansett’s and Mohegan’s. They just deceived the tribes by not telling them about their true intentions. Even during the massacre they didn’t let their allying tribes to be inside the fort and finish the runaways. Naragansetts and Mohegan didn’t know that they were wiping out the whole tribe as old as proud as Europeans. After the Mystic Massacre relationship between Europeans and Indians had changed forever. This day marks the beginning of the English promotion of the mass slaughter of Native Americans to clear them from the land. Since that day they would never be allies anymore. Overnight the balance of power had shifted from the natives to the English colonies. English finally got rid of the last obstacle to their further expansion and natives had no idea what the Mystic Massacre was about. Indians didn’t have an idea of property and seizing territory, so they were just shocked by a sudden colonist’s savagery, guessing what could possibly motivate their attackers. The destruction of Pequots made a deep impression on the other tribes. It sent a message to all the natives that life would never be the same again. Mystic Massacre was the first time English people engaged in a wholesale slaughter. That had the most profound impact on the development of America. From that day on Europeans realized that the continent was theirs for the taking. The Tragedy of Two Different Cultures This story illustrates the coexisting of two different cultures. It could be very productive if both of them could learn something new from each other. As said Tall Oak, Absentee Mashantucket Pequot and Wampanoag: “The first encounter between Europeans and Indians was positive, because our people followed way of life that was based on sharing”. Europeans could have been taught some principles of natural society; they could change their attitude towards women, for example. But they believed that they were the Indians who haven't been taught the right way. The Europeans didn’t want to share they wanted to come and to take everything they wanted. And if they didn’t understand something they believed that that is wrong. Unfortunately they showed a mean spirit: being dishonest traders, soldiers and insatiable colonists. They judged people as much by what they believed as by how they looked and that was their mistake. The religious aspect of colonization in New England remains difficult for many Europeans to understand. It can be understood only in terms of religious wars in early modern Europe. For Europeans goal was the purification of the Christian Church they got the nickname Puritans. It’s worth admitting then that religious bigotry and sacred violence could never be the right guideline for making good choices towards the others. - Preventing Prison Riots - Moby Dick: Argument on Whaling - Polyvinyl Chloride - Islam and Judaism - Innovation Ecology Big thanks to your writing team for coming through for me with my last order. I didn’t give them a lot of notice, but they were able to come up with a superb paper for me. This is the kind of service that I love. Sometimes, I get forgetful, and I forget when my paper due dates are. It is so comforting to know that I can be in a rush and contact Essays-Writer.net and that you will deliver a great paper for me, no matter what. The fact that you include an anti-plagiarism report is great, too. I appreciate knowing that my work is totally original. Essays-Writer.net rocks! Your writers are masters at time management. I turned in an order for four very difficult papers, and they were all written perfectly, even with the short deadline notice. Thanks, Essays-Writer.net! Your writing company delivers for me every time. I have never been disappointed. I was happy with the two essays that your writers did for me. Even though the subject matter was quite dense, they managed to come up with high quality work. This has been my experience with Essays-Writer.net, over the long haul. Each and every time I have needed a high quality paper, you have come through with outstanding writing examples for me. I am pleased to recommend your writing service to my friends and colleagues. The work I received from your writers was much better than expected, especially considering the affordability of your services! This is so impressive! I wasn’t aware, previously, that companies like Essays-Writer.net even existed, but then again, I’m pretty sure you are the only one that is this good. I have heard a lot of bad things about other writing companies, but never a negative word about Essays-Writer.net. You are reputed as being the best, and I, for one, am convinced that this is true.Thank you for the outstanding job you did on my essay and research papers. Thank you for the great paper! My professor gave me a high mark for it. As always, your writers have completed another impressive paper. This time, the subject matter required a lot of research. They not only completed the research. They also documented it absolutely perfectly. It would have taken me months to write a paper this thorough and of this high quality. Thank you so much for your diligence. It was greatly appreciated. I find your writing service to be staffed with serious professionals who understand the urgency of turning out great writing for your customers. I have ordered papers from you for a year and a half now, and each time, I have been given superb papers that were error free and interesting to read. I truly appreciate your efforts, and hope to continue to do business with you from this point forward. You deserve my loyalty, because you are certainly loyal to your customers! Wishing you all the best. Once again, I have sat down at my computer, because I feel I owe you big thanks. There is just no way to express how grateful I am for everything you did to make my research paper as good as it was. My professor gave me an A+ on it, which is the first A+ I have received during my entire college career. Now I know where to go when I need an excellent paper written on a short notice. I am very happy with the paper your writers just produced for me. It was absolutely perfect. Please thank the ones who handled my order and let them know that I will definitely do business with Essays-Writer.net again. Dear Writers #0019, Thank you for taking such a good care of me. I apologize for being as picky as I was, but I was only reflecting the professor’s requirements. I couldn’t believe my eyes when I got my grades back. He gave me an A+ on the paper, which is almost unheard. The paper you produced for me included each and every thing that the professor had required. He is notorious for giving us next-to-impossible tasks to perform in his class, but you managed to pull it off. I don’t know if any other student has received an A+ in this guy’s class, but he simply could not find a single thing wrong with my paper! Yay! Thanks so much. My professor told me that the essay you wrote for me was the best one in the whole class! Thanks for doing such a good job. Compliments from this professor are rare! Dear Essays-Writer.net, You handled my rush order beautifully. I am still amazed by the quality of the term paper, because your writers didn’t have a whole lot of time to write it. Still, they did a great job and I’m happy that I chose Essays-Writer.net. Thank you for taking care of this in such an eloquent way. Dear Madam or Sir, Thank you for your competence and high standards. My paper was wonderful! I shall recommend your writing services highly. You are far and above better than other writing services that I have used. Your professionalism, attention to detail, high quality writing and great prices are a few of the reasons why I will never use any other writing service. Thanks again. I am getting ready to graduate in another week, but had to take a minute to jot this line because I want you to know what a help your writing service has been to me, especially during my junior and senior years. The work has been hard, and I have had to study virtually all the time. With you helping me out with my more challenging writing projects, I have been able to move forward and do well on my tests and other school projects. I will be forever grateful to you for your help, and I wish you continued success with your fantastic writing service. All the best!	2,948	ENGLISH	1
Depression-era New York, through the art of children 5 things you might not know about the 19th Amendment One hundred years ago, both chambers of Congress passed the 19th Amendment, which guaranteed American women the right to vote. The landmark amendment was ratified into the U.S. Constitution the following year, in August of 1920. The amendment followed a decades-long fight for suffrage, as women chafed at the idea that a “true” woman was to be concerned only with the home and family, instead demanding that they be involved in public affairs. Women in the United States gained the right to vote only after New Zealand, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Today, women voters wield electoral power. In the 2020 presidential race, women voters may threaten President Donald Trump’s bid for reelection, and for Democrats, women of color will be a key voting bloc. To commemorate the historic breakthrough 100 years ago, the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia will open an exhibit next summer dedicated to the 19th Amendment, exploring not only the constitutional arguments that led to its passage, but also the long history of the fight for women’s suffrage, and how the battle for equality remains ever relevant today. Dozens of artifacts will be on display, including an early ballot box used to collect only women’s ballots, a copy of the “Declaration of Sentiments,” an important 19th-century document asserting women’s rights, and a wide array of paraphernalia used in the women’s suffrage movement, including banners, playing cards, postcards, even a paper cup that reads, “Drink to the Success of the Empire State,” after New York granted women the right to vote. And of course, there will be an original copy of the 19th Amendment, from the state of Pennsylvania. The exhibit won’t open until next summer, but the PBS NewsHour talked with the center’s president and CEO Jeffrey Rosen and exhibit developer Elena Popchock, who shared six facts about the 19th Amendment you might not know. 1. The fights for racial and gender equality have a shared but contentious past. “Before the Civil War, the two movements were aligned in mission,” Popchock said. “The pivot point happened during Reconstruction, and during the debates over the 14th Amendment. This is when gender was first introduced to the Constitution and women were left out. Then you had all these splits over who was going to get which rights.” Rosen added that as a result, some women decided to tolerate the rise of Jim Crow, laws that enforced racial segregation, in exchange for earning voting rights for women. At the same time, “there is no doubt that women’s support for abolition was crucial to the end of slavery, if you look at historic abolitionists from Harriet Tubman to some of the women at Seneca Falls,” Rosen said. “And abolitionists certainly influenced the women at Seneca Falls, especially and including Frederick Douglass.” Rosen noted that the last speech of Douglass’ life was on women’s suffrage, at the National Council of Women in 1895, before he died of a heart attack later that night. Popchock said that female activists of the day largely learned petitioning and political protest by participating in the abolitionist movement. “It became obvious to both movements that since the Declaration of Independence said all people are endowed with the same rights, that they were all just as entitled to equality,” Rosen said. “And it is clear that those debates about equality are just as present today, if not more so.” 2. The right to vote wasn’t the top priority of the women’s equality movement when it started. “The fight for voting rights wasn’t the main focus of the women’s rights convention at Seneca Falls in 1848,” Rosen said, referring to a major convention that was held to discuss the need for social and civil rights for women, and which laid the groundwork for the 19th Amendment. In fact, Rosen said, it was just one demand among many. At the convention, women and men signed the Declaration of Sentiments, a document modeled after the Declaration of Independence, in which women asserted that men and women were created equal “in many realms,” Rosen said. “There were actually 12 resolutions on women’s rights, including the right to vote, to own and inherit property, the right to education, and more,” Rosen said. When they addressed the ninth resolution at the convention, which was for the right to vote, he said, it barely passed. Popchock said this was because women had higher priorities. “It was perfectly reasonable at the time to believe that husbands represented their wives and their children. And so the focus was much more on the civil rights of married women,” she said. For example, some argued that the right to sue or be sued, or the right to property, was far more important than voting. 3. Women tried casting votes before it was legal. “Hundreds of women tried to vote during the Reconstruction era, between the 1860s and 1870s, believing that the 15th Amendment, which said the right to vote would not be denied on the basis of race or color or prior servitude, had guaranteed it,” Rosen said. It didn’t. Two voting rights bills had been introduced in 1868 that would have granted women the right to vote, but they did not pass. “By the spring of 1919, 15 states allowed the right to vote, so there was partial suffrage then, but not full suffrage until the 19th Amendment,” Rosen said. Among the women who tried to vote before the 19th Amendment’s passage were Susan B. Anthony, who Popchock said was famously arrested and fined for her effort, and Mary Ann Shadd Cary, an abolitionist and the first African American newspaper editor in North America, who succeeded. Cary actually voted in multiple elections before the nationwide right to vote was established. 4. Even though the 19th Amendment granted voting rights to women nationwide, states still had leverage to discriminate. “The 15th and 19th Amendments actually just say what states can’t do,” Popchock said. “They say that they can’t discriminate on the basis of race and gender. But states can use other means to discriminate. They could use poll taxes to stop the poor from voting, or literacy tests [to block those with less education]… African American women were virtually excluded at that time.” Rosen added that it was because so much leeway was left up to the states that racial discrimination was able to proliferate in the coming decades. Ultimately, these issues led to the passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965, which strengthened legal protections for black voters. 5. The passage of the 19th Amendment came down to just one vote. “It came down to one vote in Tennessee — one representative who flipped his vote — because three-fourths of the 48 states needed to pass it,” Rosen said. Tennessee state representative Harry T. Burn had planned to vote against the amendment, but ultimately decided to vote “aye,” supposedly because of a letter in his pocket from his mother asking him to be a “good old boy” and grant her the right. His vote made all the difference. “It almost sounds too good to be true,” Popchock said. “But it is. And it was a beautiful moment.”	<urn:uuid:365a481b-4fc2-47a5-9428-2ee46d66b87b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://artscanvas.org/arts-culture/5-things-you-might-not-know-about-the-19th-amendment	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250603761.28/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121103642-20200121132642-00553.warc.gz	en	0.980561	1,617	4.28125	4	[ -0.3409455716609955, 0.013342614285647869, 0.2728644609451294, 0.2981145679950714, -0.5230079889297485, 0.6956833004951477, -0.17929679155349731, 0.12159373611211777, -0.2168278992176056, -0.06609849631786346, 0.10185322910547256, 0.5442947745323181, 0.016925159841775894, 0.20937480032444,...	1	Depression-era New York, through the art of children 5 things you might not know about the 19th Amendment One hundred years ago, both chambers of Congress passed the 19th Amendment, which guaranteed American women the right to vote. The landmark amendment was ratified into the U.S. Constitution the following year, in August of 1920. The amendment followed a decades-long fight for suffrage, as women chafed at the idea that a “true” woman was to be concerned only with the home and family, instead demanding that they be involved in public affairs. Women in the United States gained the right to vote only after New Zealand, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Today, women voters wield electoral power. In the 2020 presidential race, women voters may threaten President Donald Trump’s bid for reelection, and for Democrats, women of color will be a key voting bloc. To commemorate the historic breakthrough 100 years ago, the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia will open an exhibit next summer dedicated to the 19th Amendment, exploring not only the constitutional arguments that led to its passage, but also the long history of the fight for women’s suffrage, and how the battle for equality remains ever relevant today. Dozens of artifacts will be on display, including an early ballot box used to collect only women’s ballots, a copy of the “Declaration of Sentiments,” an important 19th-century document asserting women’s rights, and a wide array of paraphernalia used in the women’s suffrage movement, including banners, playing cards, postcards, even a paper cup that reads, “Drink to the Success of the Empire State,” after New York granted women the right to vote. And of course, there will be an original copy of the 19th Amendment, from the state of Pennsylvania. The exhibit won’t open until next summer, but the PBS NewsHour talked with the center’s president and CEO Jeffrey Rosen and exhibit developer Elena Popchock, who shared six facts about the 19th Amendment you might not know. 1. The fights for racial and gender equality have a shared but contentious past. “Before the Civil War, the two movements were aligned in mission,” Popchock said. “The pivot point happened during Reconstruction, and during the debates over the 14th Amendment. This is when gender was first introduced to the Constitution and women were left out. Then you had all these splits over who was going to get which rights.” Rosen added that as a result, some women decided to tolerate the rise of Jim Crow, laws that enforced racial segregation, in exchange for earning voting rights for women. At the same time, “there is no doubt that women’s support for abolition was crucial to the end of slavery, if you look at historic abolitionists from Harriet Tubman to some of the women at Seneca Falls,” Rosen said. “And abolitionists certainly influenced the women at Seneca Falls, especially and including Frederick Douglass.” Rosen noted that the last speech of Douglass’ life was on women’s suffrage, at the National Council of Women in 1895, before he died of a heart attack later that night. Popchock said that female activists of the day largely learned petitioning and political protest by participating in the abolitionist movement. “It became obvious to both movements that since the Declaration of Independence said all people are endowed with the same rights, that they were all just as entitled to equality,” Rosen said. “And it is clear that those debates about equality are just as present today, if not more so.” 2. The right to vote wasn’t the top priority of the women’s equality movement when it started. “The fight for voting rights wasn’t the main focus of the women’s rights convention at Seneca Falls in 1848,” Rosen said, referring to a major convention that was held to discuss the need for social and civil rights for women, and which laid the groundwork for the 19th Amendment. In fact, Rosen said, it was just one demand among many. At the convention, women and men signed the Declaration of Sentiments, a document modeled after the Declaration of Independence, in which women asserted that men and women were created equal “in many realms,” Rosen said. “There were actually 12 resolutions on women’s rights, including the right to vote, to own and inherit property, the right to education, and more,” Rosen said. When they addressed the ninth resolution at the convention, which was for the right to vote, he said, it barely passed. Popchock said this was because women had higher priorities. “It was perfectly reasonable at the time to believe that husbands represented their wives and their children. And so the focus was much more on the civil rights of married women,” she said. For example, some argued that the right to sue or be sued, or the right to property, was far more important than voting. 3. Women tried casting votes before it was legal. “Hundreds of women tried to vote during the Reconstruction era, between the 1860s and 1870s, believing that the 15th Amendment, which said the right to vote would not be denied on the basis of race or color or prior servitude, had guaranteed it,” Rosen said. It didn’t. Two voting rights bills had been introduced in 1868 that would have granted women the right to vote, but they did not pass. “By the spring of 1919, 15 states allowed the right to vote, so there was partial suffrage then, but not full suffrage until the 19th Amendment,” Rosen said. Among the women who tried to vote before the 19th Amendment’s passage were Susan B. Anthony, who Popchock said was famously arrested and fined for her effort, and Mary Ann Shadd Cary, an abolitionist and the first African American newspaper editor in North America, who succeeded. Cary actually voted in multiple elections before the nationwide right to vote was established. 4. Even though the 19th Amendment granted voting rights to women nationwide, states still had leverage to discriminate. “The 15th and 19th Amendments actually just say what states can’t do,” Popchock said. “They say that they can’t discriminate on the basis of race and gender. But states can use other means to discriminate. They could use poll taxes to stop the poor from voting, or literacy tests [to block those with less education]… African American women were virtually excluded at that time.” Rosen added that it was because so much leeway was left up to the states that racial discrimination was able to proliferate in the coming decades. Ultimately, these issues led to the passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965, which strengthened legal protections for black voters. 5. The passage of the 19th Amendment came down to just one vote. “It came down to one vote in Tennessee — one representative who flipped his vote — because three-fourths of the 48 states needed to pass it,” Rosen said. Tennessee state representative Harry T. Burn had planned to vote against the amendment, but ultimately decided to vote “aye,” supposedly because of a letter in his pocket from his mother asking him to be a “good old boy” and grant her the right. His vote made all the difference. “It almost sounds too good to be true,” Popchock said. “But it is. And it was a beautiful moment.”	1,548	ENGLISH	1
Were Germany and Japan Allies in WW2? Yes, and it had to do with the importance of East Asia in global geopolitics starting from the early twentieth century and only growing in the ensuing decades. The Asian theater of the war was entirely distinct from the European, though Japan did join the defensive Tripartite Pact with Germany and Italy in 1940. In the early 1930s, the United States had studiously avoided involvement in Japanese affairs. Herbert Hoover had remained aloof when Japan occupied the northern Chinese province of Manchuria in 1931–32, arguing that no vital American interest was at stake and that he had no intention of sacrificing American lives. Moreover, since the Japanese argued that they needed a security buffer against Stalin’s Russia, it was unlikely that anything short of all-out war with Japan would have dislodged them from Manchuria. FDR would have a much more interventionist outlook in the Pacific. In 1937, when Japan and China went to war, FDR made his displeasure with the Japanese clear, and even authorized the sale of weapons to China. (He was able to evade the neutrality legislation since its prohibition on the sale of weapons to belligerents went into effect only when the president declared a war to be under way in a particular area; FDR simply refrained from officially finding a war to be in progress in China.) Were Germany and Japan Allies in WW2? As Japanese brutalities continued and Japan began to extend her influence throughout the Pacific, particularly in Korea and Indochina, FDR decided to take active measures against Japanese expansion. By 1941 he had not only frozen Japanese assets in the United States but had also coordinated a boycott of key goods, especially oil, that Japan needed to acquire from abroad. By cutting off oil shipments to Japan, FDR had dramatically increased the likelihood that the United States would one day find itself at war with Japan. But he never explained the implications of his policies to the American people. The Japanese originally had three ways in which they could have dealt with the crippling embargo. One was to surrender to American demands and lose face. Another was negotiation, but FDR refused to negotiate despite the fact that Joseph C. Grew, the American ambassador to Japan, thought that negotiations would succeed. “We in the Embassy,” he later wrote, “had no doubt that the Prime Minister would have agreed, at his meeting [which fell through] with the President, to the eventual withdrawal of all Japanese forces from all of Indochina and from all of China with the face-saving expedient of being permitted to retain a limited number of troops in North China and Inner Mongolia respectively.” Washington had closed off that option. The final possibility was war: The Japanese could strike out further into the Pacific by expanding into British and Dutch colonies where they could acquire the resources they needed. But Japan would first have to take out the American naval installation at Pearl Harbor. The Japanese gambled that swift action on these fronts would pay off. Japanese prime minister Fumimaro Konoye fell from power and was replaced by General Hideki Tojo (who had been minister of war) on October 16, 1941. War seemed increasingly inevitable to administration officials. Secretary of War Henry Stimson wrote in his diary on November 25, 1941, that the question had now come down to how “to maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot.” The administration was “doing everything they can to get us into war through the Japanese back door,” said former President Hoover in 1941. The first shot came, as Americans well know, on December 7, 1941, in the form of a Japanese attack on the American naval installation at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. More than 2,000 servicemen and civilians perished. The following day, the United States declared war on Japan. Several days later, Adolf Hitler rashly declared war on the United States. America had entered World War II. Cite This Article"Were Germany and Japan Allies in WW2?" History on the Net © 2000-2020, Salem Media. January 18, 2020 <https://www.historyonthenet.com/were-germany-and-japan-allies-in-ww2> More Citation Information.	<urn:uuid:359bcd1a-0887-4b15-bb3f-4d589bb9518e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.historyonthenet.com/were-germany-and-japan-allies-in-ww2	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00226.warc.gz	en	0.980964	875	3.953125	4	[ -0.3680326044559479, 0.032120876014232635, 0.15215638279914856, -0.2347053587436676, 0.04266990348696709, 0.32013747096061707, -0.041464049369096756, 0.38807234168052673, -0.17679768800735474, -0.2540157735347748, 0.2653535008430481, -0.040635835379362106, 0.47113630175590515, 0.8243008852...	1	Were Germany and Japan Allies in WW2? Yes, and it had to do with the importance of East Asia in global geopolitics starting from the early twentieth century and only growing in the ensuing decades. The Asian theater of the war was entirely distinct from the European, though Japan did join the defensive Tripartite Pact with Germany and Italy in 1940. In the early 1930s, the United States had studiously avoided involvement in Japanese affairs. Herbert Hoover had remained aloof when Japan occupied the northern Chinese province of Manchuria in 1931–32, arguing that no vital American interest was at stake and that he had no intention of sacrificing American lives. Moreover, since the Japanese argued that they needed a security buffer against Stalin’s Russia, it was unlikely that anything short of all-out war with Japan would have dislodged them from Manchuria. FDR would have a much more interventionist outlook in the Pacific. In 1937, when Japan and China went to war, FDR made his displeasure with the Japanese clear, and even authorized the sale of weapons to China. (He was able to evade the neutrality legislation since its prohibition on the sale of weapons to belligerents went into effect only when the president declared a war to be under way in a particular area; FDR simply refrained from officially finding a war to be in progress in China.) Were Germany and Japan Allies in WW2? As Japanese brutalities continued and Japan began to extend her influence throughout the Pacific, particularly in Korea and Indochina, FDR decided to take active measures against Japanese expansion. By 1941 he had not only frozen Japanese assets in the United States but had also coordinated a boycott of key goods, especially oil, that Japan needed to acquire from abroad. By cutting off oil shipments to Japan, FDR had dramatically increased the likelihood that the United States would one day find itself at war with Japan. But he never explained the implications of his policies to the American people. The Japanese originally had three ways in which they could have dealt with the crippling embargo. One was to surrender to American demands and lose face. Another was negotiation, but FDR refused to negotiate despite the fact that Joseph C. Grew, the American ambassador to Japan, thought that negotiations would succeed. “We in the Embassy,” he later wrote, “had no doubt that the Prime Minister would have agreed, at his meeting [which fell through] with the President, to the eventual withdrawal of all Japanese forces from all of Indochina and from all of China with the face-saving expedient of being permitted to retain a limited number of troops in North China and Inner Mongolia respectively.” Washington had closed off that option. The final possibility was war: The Japanese could strike out further into the Pacific by expanding into British and Dutch colonies where they could acquire the resources they needed. But Japan would first have to take out the American naval installation at Pearl Harbor. The Japanese gambled that swift action on these fronts would pay off. Japanese prime minister Fumimaro Konoye fell from power and was replaced by General Hideki Tojo (who had been minister of war) on October 16, 1941. War seemed increasingly inevitable to administration officials. Secretary of War Henry Stimson wrote in his diary on November 25, 1941, that the question had now come down to how “to maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot.” The administration was “doing everything they can to get us into war through the Japanese back door,” said former President Hoover in 1941. The first shot came, as Americans well know, on December 7, 1941, in the form of a Japanese attack on the American naval installation at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. More than 2,000 servicemen and civilians perished. The following day, the United States declared war on Japan. Several days later, Adolf Hitler rashly declared war on the United States. America had entered World War II. Cite This Article"Were Germany and Japan Allies in WW2?" History on the Net © 2000-2020, Salem Media. January 18, 2020 <https://www.historyonthenet.com/were-germany-and-japan-allies-in-ww2> More Citation Information.	909	ENGLISH	1
Indian Mathematician Ramanujan On 16 January 1913, Srinivasa Ramanujan wrote to G. H. Hardy. Ramanujan was a self taught mathematician from a small village in India. He had almost no formal training in mathematics. Hardy was professor of mathematics at Cambridge University and one of the leading mathematicians in the world. The letter sent by Ramanujan contained a sampling of theorems he had discovered. Hardy later said, "the theorems defeated me completely; I had never seen anything in the least like them before" and added that "they must be true, because, if they were not true, no one would have the imagination to invent them." What happened next would change both their lives. Hardy would later write about Ramanujan in his book "A Mathematician's Apology" and say that working with Ramanujan was the most significant event of his life. Ramanujan produced some amazing infinite series, including several for π that converge extraordinarily fast and form the basis of today's computer algorithms used to calculate π. His other results involved continued fractions. Ramanujan had a special love of continued fractions and used them to extraordinary effect. Hardy worked hard to try and discover how Ramanujan produced his remarkable results. He never found out. Ramanujan died on 26 April 1920. He was 32 years old. Hardy died many years later, on 1 December 1947 at the age of 70. The Ramanujan story is now part of mathematics legend and his notebooks are still being studied today. The movie "The Man Who Knew Infinity" tells the story of Ramanujan with Dev Patel in the lead role. Content written and posted by Ken Abbott email@example.com	<urn:uuid:c5bb3c63-cc98-4ef8-9908-6138f1312a62>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.math-math.com/2015/06/mathematician-ramanujan.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00275.warc.gz	en	0.987821	371	3.59375	4	[ -0.38226309418678284, 0.3255805969238281, -0.3970624804496765, -0.5699050426483154, -0.6880974769592285, 0.3022860586643219, 0.2647203207015991, 0.3474087119102478, 0.600665807723999, -0.16937850415706635, 0.164405956864357, -0.3797647953033447, 0.7055054903030396, 0.3032756745815277, 0....	7	Indian Mathematician Ramanujan On 16 January 1913, Srinivasa Ramanujan wrote to G. H. Hardy. Ramanujan was a self taught mathematician from a small village in India. He had almost no formal training in mathematics. Hardy was professor of mathematics at Cambridge University and one of the leading mathematicians in the world. The letter sent by Ramanujan contained a sampling of theorems he had discovered. Hardy later said, "the theorems defeated me completely; I had never seen anything in the least like them before" and added that "they must be true, because, if they were not true, no one would have the imagination to invent them." What happened next would change both their lives. Hardy would later write about Ramanujan in his book "A Mathematician's Apology" and say that working with Ramanujan was the most significant event of his life. Ramanujan produced some amazing infinite series, including several for π that converge extraordinarily fast and form the basis of today's computer algorithms used to calculate π. His other results involved continued fractions. Ramanujan had a special love of continued fractions and used them to extraordinary effect. Hardy worked hard to try and discover how Ramanujan produced his remarkable results. He never found out. Ramanujan died on 26 April 1920. He was 32 years old. Hardy died many years later, on 1 December 1947 at the age of 70. The Ramanujan story is now part of mathematics legend and his notebooks are still being studied today. The movie "The Man Who Knew Infinity" tells the story of Ramanujan with Dev Patel in the lead role. Content written and posted by Ken Abbott email@example.com	382	ENGLISH	1
The Mountain Meadows Massacre is a very significant event in the American Southwest, primarily because of its affect of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This church was founded in New York, but migrated to Utah after conflict in the Midwest arose. The Mormon religion was relatively new and extremely looked down upon in the 1850's because of America's war on polygamy and the Mormon's rebellion against the federal law of monogamous marriage. Because of hostility between the two groups, a terrible tragedy occurred in September of 1857 in which many innocent lives were taken. Few witnesses have documented its mysterious and morbid accounts while many have attempted to keep quiet about the massacre in order to take the blame off of the Mormon religion. The only person of the guilty party ever to be convicted on trial for this occurrence, John D. Lee, was found guilty in 1876 and put to death in the same manner that the 120 passersby experienced. Needless to say, this massacre is something the Church knows well but is very reluctant to speak of. To go further into detail on what exactly is documented, I begin in the year 1857 when the American Government, under the order of General Harney, ordered troops to go to Utah to “regulate the Mormons” (Brooks, 1950). Animosity between Followers of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and those who did not adhere had grown tremendously. The practice of polygamy was something non-Mormon American citizens rejected and their dislike for the tradition was something the U.S. government was willing to take on; this sparked rage in the Mormon community and they began to set up militias to fight oncoming American troops. Another factor aiding in the fury of the Mormon people was that a fellow brother, Parley P. Pratt, had been assassinated for partaking in polygamous activities earlier that year; this undoubtedly was the equivalent of putting gas on an open flame. However, during this time the country was expanding and settlements out west in California were growing in popularity. A trail led emigrants to the Golden State to colonize, but an area on the path, referred to as the Mormon Corridor, was something the settlers were required to pass through in order to reach their desired location. This part of the trail passed straight through the Great Salt Lake City, also known as Zion to the Mormon religion. This haven contained the majority of the Church's followers, making the trek an uneasy one for non-follows. Yet, the stop was an essential one in order to pick up supplies and re-stock necessities. On one fateful day in September of 1857, a group of non-Mormons traveling the trail just so happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. The exact date of the incident has been disputed, ranging from the 7th all the way to the 11th. However, it was on that day in September that Indians took a wagon train carrying around 120 people under siege; the standoff lasted five days. It appeared to be that the Mormons allied with the Indians for this attack to steer blame from themselves (McKeever). On the fifth day of the altercation, an unforgiving John D. Lee came to the wagon train with a truce flag in order to deceive the hostages; Lee's revenge for the death of P.P. Pratt came at a cost to the lives of those who had nothing to do with the incident. With times being strenuous and the politics of America being so controversial, many in the Mormon religion were heated and outraged; essentially, they were sick of having to fight the American people for the freedom of their beliefs. Because of their outrage, children, women, and men were convinced to drop their weapons and line up (in the above mentioned order) so that they would be led to freedom... or so they thought. Within minutes, an armed attack was in full force on the 120 innocent travelers; the only lives spared were those of seventeen children under the age of eight years old. This was the largest attack on United States civilians up until the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995 (Linder, 2006). Those involved with the massacre attempted to keep quiet about the real events that took place that day. Under the order of Brigham Young, Lee concocted a false explanation of what he claimed to be an Indian attack: “About the 22d of September, Capt. Fancher and company fell victims to their wrath, near Mountain Meadows; their cattle and horses were shot down in every direction, their wagons and property mostly committed to the flames.” (Lee, 1857) This artificial justification was then taken by Brigham Young, the prophet for the Church of Latter Day Saints and, then, Governor of Utah; he was replaced that following spring by Alfred Cumming. Cumming was credulous under the influence of Young's testimony in defending the Mormon religion; he believed Young's indication of an Indian attack and became, as an observer once noted, “mere putty” in Young's hands (Linder, 2006). During this time, America was at the brink of the Civil War and soon lost interest in the Massacre by the year 1860. Another factor leading to the apathy was that, even if a group from the Church of LDS committed the crime, the juries in Utah were entirely Mormon; they could never be fairly tried and convicted. In order to re-spark interest in the controversy of Mountain Meadows, Philip Klingensmith appeared in a Nevada court on April 10, 1871 and confessed his role in the tragedy. Klingensmith was a former Latter Day Saints Bishop who left the Church and, apparently, assisted in the murders of 120 people and the subsequent cover-up. In order to take his confession to a Utah court ruling and still be able to conduct a fair trial, the U.S. government passed the Poland Act. This act was to restrict the authority of Mormon-controlled courts and to ultimately allow all juries in the state of Utah to let non-Mormon's serve. There was finally a plausible method to convict those involved in the confrontation and the conspiracy. Bishop Philip Klingensmith was sworn in on Friday July 23, 1875 for the first trial of John D. Lee (Backus, 1995). His account was slow and nonchalant at first, but became heated and passionate once he spoke of seeing the men being shot mercilessly; he recalled that he could not see Lee because he was over the crest of the hill with the women and children. He also gave incriminating evidence that involved the Mormon prophet Brigham Young, stating that Young declared, "What you know about this affair do not tell to anybody; do not even talk about it among yourselves" (Linder, 2006). However, the controversial evidence in this first trial was not enough for the semi-Mormon jury to convict any of the men, leaving the verdict as hung. Sumner Howard soon replaced William Carey as the new U.S. Attorney in April of 1876, and decided there needed to be justice and that a new trial was imperative. The second trial ran much more smoothly; witnesses began to suddenly recall crucial details, including claims that Lee was the mastermind behind the crime. Those involved in the trial solely placed blame on Lee, leaving the other men to go free regardless of what they had actually done on that disastrous day. It was rumored that Young and Howard had secretly settled out of court that they would charge Lee with full responsibility so that they could put the matter behind them; they knew someone had to pay and he looked like the best candidate. Lee's attorney, W.W. Bishop, was obviously not aware of this deal and was baffled when a Mormon jury convicted Lee. His assumption was that another acquittal would take place in order for the Mormon community to support their fellow brother, however he was fatally incorrect. A quote from Bishop reads: "I claim that Brigham Young is the real criminal, and that John D. Lee was an instrument in his hands. That Brigham Young used John Lee, as the assassin uses the dagger to strike down his unsuspecting victim; as the assassin throws away the dagger, to avoid the bloody blade leading to his detection, so Brigham Young used John Lee to do his horrid work; and when the discovery becomes unavoidable, he hurls Lee from him...and casts him far out into the whirlpool of destruction." (Linder, 2006) On September 20, 1876, John D. Lee was found guilty for first-degree murder. The following March he was put to death at Mountain Meadows by gunshot. This atrocity in the American Southwest is something the Mormon religion hides deep within their souls, not wanting to relive or recall such a horrible episode in their, already rocky, history as an American-born religion. The Mountain Meadows Massacre has even been compared to 9/11; ironically it may have even been on that same day one hundred and forty-four years earlier (McKeever). This is a common theme we have seen throughout history: radical behavior resulting in substantial demise. When we are given the choice to fight for what we believe in, there will always be confrontation and consequence; it's human nature. This was certainly true for the many who battled, died, and conspired their way into a sinful history that lives on, regrettably, today.	<urn:uuid:77d66433-9e2f-402b-9dad-c4c56947dc50>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://writing-help.org/blog/the-mountain-meadows-massacre-essay	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592261.1/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118052321-20200118080321-00132.warc.gz	en	0.98408	1,901	3.28125	3	[ -0.16463786363601685, 0.11298526078462601, -0.07028120756149292, 0.20733870565891266, 0.19409573078155518, 0.4056776165962219, 0.015576345846056938, 0.013731958344578743, 0.056164853274822235, 0.08258023858070374, 0.5509727001190186, 0.5544309616088867, 0.4426531493663788, 0.06084060668945...	1	The Mountain Meadows Massacre is a very significant event in the American Southwest, primarily because of its affect of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This church was founded in New York, but migrated to Utah after conflict in the Midwest arose. The Mormon religion was relatively new and extremely looked down upon in the 1850's because of America's war on polygamy and the Mormon's rebellion against the federal law of monogamous marriage. Because of hostility between the two groups, a terrible tragedy occurred in September of 1857 in which many innocent lives were taken. Few witnesses have documented its mysterious and morbid accounts while many have attempted to keep quiet about the massacre in order to take the blame off of the Mormon religion. The only person of the guilty party ever to be convicted on trial for this occurrence, John D. Lee, was found guilty in 1876 and put to death in the same manner that the 120 passersby experienced. Needless to say, this massacre is something the Church knows well but is very reluctant to speak of. To go further into detail on what exactly is documented, I begin in the year 1857 when the American Government, under the order of General Harney, ordered troops to go to Utah to “regulate the Mormons” (Brooks, 1950). Animosity between Followers of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and those who did not adhere had grown tremendously. The practice of polygamy was something non-Mormon American citizens rejected and their dislike for the tradition was something the U.S. government was willing to take on; this sparked rage in the Mormon community and they began to set up militias to fight oncoming American troops. Another factor aiding in the fury of the Mormon people was that a fellow brother, Parley P. Pratt, had been assassinated for partaking in polygamous activities earlier that year; this undoubtedly was the equivalent of putting gas on an open flame. However, during this time the country was expanding and settlements out west in California were growing in popularity. A trail led emigrants to the Golden State to colonize, but an area on the path, referred to as the Mormon Corridor, was something the settlers were required to pass through in order to reach their desired location. This part of the trail passed straight through the Great Salt Lake City, also known as Zion to the Mormon religion. This haven contained the majority of the Church's followers, making the trek an uneasy one for non-follows. Yet, the stop was an essential one in order to pick up supplies and re-stock necessities. On one fateful day in September of 1857, a group of non-Mormons traveling the trail just so happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. The exact date of the incident has been disputed, ranging from the 7th all the way to the 11th. However, it was on that day in September that Indians took a wagon train carrying around 120 people under siege; the standoff lasted five days. It appeared to be that the Mormons allied with the Indians for this attack to steer blame from themselves (McKeever). On the fifth day of the altercation, an unforgiving John D. Lee came to the wagon train with a truce flag in order to deceive the hostages; Lee's revenge for the death of P.P. Pratt came at a cost to the lives of those who had nothing to do with the incident. With times being strenuous and the politics of America being so controversial, many in the Mormon religion were heated and outraged; essentially, they were sick of having to fight the American people for the freedom of their beliefs. Because of their outrage, children, women, and men were convinced to drop their weapons and line up (in the above mentioned order) so that they would be led to freedom... or so they thought. Within minutes, an armed attack was in full force on the 120 innocent travelers; the only lives spared were those of seventeen children under the age of eight years old. This was the largest attack on United States civilians up until the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995 (Linder, 2006). Those involved with the massacre attempted to keep quiet about the real events that took place that day. Under the order of Brigham Young, Lee concocted a false explanation of what he claimed to be an Indian attack: “About the 22d of September, Capt. Fancher and company fell victims to their wrath, near Mountain Meadows; their cattle and horses were shot down in every direction, their wagons and property mostly committed to the flames.” (Lee, 1857) This artificial justification was then taken by Brigham Young, the prophet for the Church of Latter Day Saints and, then, Governor of Utah; he was replaced that following spring by Alfred Cumming. Cumming was credulous under the influence of Young's testimony in defending the Mormon religion; he believed Young's indication of an Indian attack and became, as an observer once noted, “mere putty” in Young's hands (Linder, 2006). During this time, America was at the brink of the Civil War and soon lost interest in the Massacre by the year 1860. Another factor leading to the apathy was that, even if a group from the Church of LDS committed the crime, the juries in Utah were entirely Mormon; they could never be fairly tried and convicted. In order to re-spark interest in the controversy of Mountain Meadows, Philip Klingensmith appeared in a Nevada court on April 10, 1871 and confessed his role in the tragedy. Klingensmith was a former Latter Day Saints Bishop who left the Church and, apparently, assisted in the murders of 120 people and the subsequent cover-up. In order to take his confession to a Utah court ruling and still be able to conduct a fair trial, the U.S. government passed the Poland Act. This act was to restrict the authority of Mormon-controlled courts and to ultimately allow all juries in the state of Utah to let non-Mormon's serve. There was finally a plausible method to convict those involved in the confrontation and the conspiracy. Bishop Philip Klingensmith was sworn in on Friday July 23, 1875 for the first trial of John D. Lee (Backus, 1995). His account was slow and nonchalant at first, but became heated and passionate once he spoke of seeing the men being shot mercilessly; he recalled that he could not see Lee because he was over the crest of the hill with the women and children. He also gave incriminating evidence that involved the Mormon prophet Brigham Young, stating that Young declared, "What you know about this affair do not tell to anybody; do not even talk about it among yourselves" (Linder, 2006). However, the controversial evidence in this first trial was not enough for the semi-Mormon jury to convict any of the men, leaving the verdict as hung. Sumner Howard soon replaced William Carey as the new U.S. Attorney in April of 1876, and decided there needed to be justice and that a new trial was imperative. The second trial ran much more smoothly; witnesses began to suddenly recall crucial details, including claims that Lee was the mastermind behind the crime. Those involved in the trial solely placed blame on Lee, leaving the other men to go free regardless of what they had actually done on that disastrous day. It was rumored that Young and Howard had secretly settled out of court that they would charge Lee with full responsibility so that they could put the matter behind them; they knew someone had to pay and he looked like the best candidate. Lee's attorney, W.W. Bishop, was obviously not aware of this deal and was baffled when a Mormon jury convicted Lee. His assumption was that another acquittal would take place in order for the Mormon community to support their fellow brother, however he was fatally incorrect. A quote from Bishop reads: "I claim that Brigham Young is the real criminal, and that John D. Lee was an instrument in his hands. That Brigham Young used John Lee, as the assassin uses the dagger to strike down his unsuspecting victim; as the assassin throws away the dagger, to avoid the bloody blade leading to his detection, so Brigham Young used John Lee to do his horrid work; and when the discovery becomes unavoidable, he hurls Lee from him...and casts him far out into the whirlpool of destruction." (Linder, 2006) On September 20, 1876, John D. Lee was found guilty for first-degree murder. The following March he was put to death at Mountain Meadows by gunshot. This atrocity in the American Southwest is something the Mormon religion hides deep within their souls, not wanting to relive or recall such a horrible episode in their, already rocky, history as an American-born religion. The Mountain Meadows Massacre has even been compared to 9/11; ironically it may have even been on that same day one hundred and forty-four years earlier (McKeever). This is a common theme we have seen throughout history: radical behavior resulting in substantial demise. When we are given the choice to fight for what we believe in, there will always be confrontation and consequence; it's human nature. This was certainly true for the many who battled, died, and conspired their way into a sinful history that lives on, regrettably, today.	1,976	ENGLISH	1
Throughout history, in order for a government to be respected and obeyed, it must possess some form of legitimacy recognized by the governed. Governmental systems have relied on a number of models for legitimacy, among them the dynastic form in which the son or close relative of the monarch succeeds to the throne and passes power down to the next generation. The dynastic model frequently includes the component of the 'divine right' of a ruler whereby the monarch is thought to have been chosen by the gods, or a single god, to rule according to divine will. In ancient China, legitimacy of rule was this very combination, but the will of the gods was paramount. A dynasty was considered just and worthy to rule only as long as it upheld divine will, and that will was clearly expressed in how well the government cared for the people. The divine will in China came to be manifest in what was known as the Mandate of Heaven – the gods’ contract with a monarch giving him the right to rule. When the ruling house showed clear signs that the people were no longer its primary interest, the government was thought to have lost that mandate and another dynasty would replace it. Although this policy of legitimization worked well enough philosophically, problems arose when more than one dynastic house – or state – lay claim to the mandate at the same time. How could it be proved, after all, that one faction was truly working in the best interests of the populace when another could provide evidence that it was doing this same thing? In 184 CE, during the waning of the Han Dynasty (206 BCE - 220 CE), this set of circumstances erupted in the social chaos of the Yellow Turban Rebellion, resulting in thousands of dead, vast swaths of land destroyed, and the disintegration of order into chaos, until the rise of the Three Kingdoms and, even then, conflict continued. The struggle to legitimize claim to the Mandate of Heaven, in fact, would fracture the country until its reunification in 280 CE under the Jin Dynasty (splintered early on by the War of the Eight Princes over succession) with stability only achieved by the Liu Song Dynasty in 420 CE. The Mandate of Heaven The concept of the Mandate of Heaven dates back to the Zhou Dynasty (1046-256 BCE) and its first king, Wu (r. 1046-1043 BCE). Prior to the Zhou, China was ruled by the Shang Dynasty (1600-1046 BCE) and Wu’s older brother, according to legend, had been killed by the king of the Shang. Wu and his family claimed the death was unwarranted and wanted justice, but the Shang were the ruling house and it was thought they held power by the will of the god Shangti – supreme god of creation, law, order, and justice – and so could not be touched. In order to justify a move against the Shang, Wu and his father Wen (and the rest of the family) had to find a new basis for legitimization, one which could be used to show that the Shang were unjust tyrants undeserving of the monarchy, and so the Mandate of Heaven was created. Shangti was the most popular god of the era and would be difficult to displace and so the Zhou claimed a previously unknown aspect of Shangti’s relationship with the Shang: the god had forged a contract with the rulers of China which was only good as long as the monarchy kept its side of the bargain. Since the Shang had broken its faith with Shangti through tyranny and unjust practices, Shangti had withdrawn the Mandate of Heaven from them and given it to the Zhou. The Zhou overthrew the Shang and established their new order but, owing to the vastness of their region, decentralized during the so-called Spring and Autumn Period (772-476 BCE) and began a slow decline. As their authority dwindled, it was said that they had lost the Mandate of Heaven and seven separate states claimed the mandate, each for itself, during the Warring States Period (476-221 BCE). Each one of these tried to show that the Zhou had forfeited the mandate, which was now rightfully theirs, by proving their worth in battle but none could best any of the others. The state of Qin finally conquered the rest and unified China through a policy of total war, without regard for the traditional rules of chivalry and honor, and Shi Huangdi (r. 221-210 BCE) became the first emperor of China. The Qin Empire was famously brutal and repressive and so, even though there were many who felt they never had the mandate to begin with, there was nothing to be done to dislodge them until Shi Huangdi died in 210 BCE. The country again erupted in civil wars culminating the Chu-Han Contention between the states of Chu and Han; the Han won and the Han Dynasty was born. Han Dynasty Decline The Han is one of the best-known dynasties of ancient China owing to its technological developments, the opening of the Silk Road, its art, and the general encouragement of cultural and spiritual refinement. Toward the end, however, the government had become corrupt to the point where people were able to buy their positions instead of earning them on merit. Compounding the government’s problems was that the actual power no longer lay with the Chinese emperor but with the palace eunuchs. Eunuchs had existed earlier as guards of the palace harem but, during the Han Dynasty, their influence extended into politics. Scholar Justin Wintle explains: Concubinage and eunuchry were commonplace throughout the ancient world. Every hereditary ruler wanted a son to succeed him, and what better way to ensure a direct male succession than a plurality of “wives”? Yet the larger the harem, the greater the risk that conception might occur away from the royal bedchamber. Only by employing eunuchs to guard and administer his concubines, could a ruler presume their “purity” remained intact. (104) The power of the eunuchs grew from harem guards to royal advisors as Han Dynasty rulers came to rely on them more and more as a kind of buffer between the various political factions of the palace and themselves. A trusted eunuch could be employed as a spy or equally well as an assassin but, on a daily basis, could deflect or delay policy requests or other entreaties and give the emperor some space. By the time of the reign of the emperor Lingdi (168-189 CE), the eunuchs had become the actual power behind the throne, epitomized in the Ten Eunuchs (also known as the Ten Attendants), the trusted advisors and councilors to the emperor. Yellow Turban Rebellion While the eunuchs and the court were engaged in their various political games, the people of China were suffering. As early as 142 CE, the people’s disgust with their government found expression in the Five Pecks of Rice Rebellion (also known as the Way of the Five Pecks of Rice, so called because anyone wishing to join had to donate five pecks of rice) led by the Taoist visionary Zhang Daoling. Zhang formed a theocratic state in the Hanzhong Valley in defiance of the government, claiming the emperor had lost the Mandate of Heaven and Zhang and his followers were, in effect, seceding from China. No one in the government did anything about Zhang or his claims (the situation was not dealt with until the general Cao Cao subdued the separate state c. 215 CE) and this encouraged another Taoist visionary, Zhang Jue (also known as Zhang Jiao, d. 184 CE, no relation to Zhang Daoling), to press the claim further in the full-scale revolt known as the Yellow Turban Rebellion (also the Yellow Scarves Rebellion, because of the color of their headwear). Zhang and his two brothers (Zhang Bao and Zhang Liang) were Taoist healers who treated their patients for free because the peasantry had so few resources. They saw, on a daily basis, how the people were suffering while the government did nothing to help them and so Zhang, a charismatic leader, launched a local revolt which quickly became nationwide rebellion. The basic claim of the Yellow Turbans was that the Han had clearly lost the Mandate of Heaven as evidenced by the corruption of the court and the suffering of the people. The Han government no longer worked for anyone but itself, they claimed, and so they could legally be deposed. They pointed out the fact that, when the Han first came to power, they associated themselves with Tian (heaven) and the color blue but then, as they engaged further with the people, aligned themselves with the earth and the color yellow but, by 184 CE, were associating themselves with fire and the color red. Why the Han did this is unclear but, to the Yellow Turbans, it was a certain sign of their betrayal of the people and loss of the mandate. The rebels invoked the spiritual principle of jiazhi (literally “worth” or “value”) which was the essential, fundamental significance of any given individual or action. The jiazhi of a person was their worth as a person, without any other consideration of what they contributed to a community. Every life had an essential, divine value, and every action that proceeded from that individual life shared in that value. Each individual, therefore, was precious and unique and should be treated with respect and dignity. The Han emperors, who favored Taoist beliefs, mouthed this same outlook but did not act on it, preferring instead to occupy their time with court intrigues and lucrative international trade. The Yellow Turban Rebellion brought the government’s attention back to the people they were supposed be caring for. Suppression & Conflict The rebellion quickly gained momentum as Zhang Jue’s vision of recognizing the peasantry’s essential jiazhi spread. Zhang and his brothers found enthusiastic participants in their patients who then spread the word to others, introducing the movement through a poem-slogan: The Blue Sky is gone; the Yellow Sky will rise In this year of jiazhi, there will be prosperity under Heaven. The phrase “under Heaven” was understood to refer to China and the blue and yellow sky, of course, to the Han and Yellow Turbans respectively. All people would be equal, Zhang preached, and this would result in a Great Peace in the land where wealth was shared and no one was forced to go without food or shelter. At the same time he was proclaiming his Great Peace, however, he was mobilizing the people for armed conflict to demand that peace through military action, knowing the government would not grant it willingly, and he was right. The Han moved quickly to suppress the rebellion but their resources by this time were spread far and thin. Invasions by the nomadic Xianbei and Xiongnu tribes had necessitated garrisoning border fortresses commanded by regional governors/commanders who were quickly mobilized. While the Han drew up its armies, the rebel forces were increasing daily and spreading. Yellow Turban enclaves were appearing all over China and their ranks were swelling into the thousands and then tens of thousands. The first Han generals sent against the rebels were Huangfu Song (d. 195 CE), Lu Zhi (d. 192 CE) and Zhu Jun (d. 195 CE) but the rebellion was finally ruthlessly crushed by the poet-warrior Cao Cao (l. 155-220 CE) within a year and Zhang Jue died with it. One of the reasons Cao Cao was able to wield the power he did was that a court advisor and general, Liu Yan (d. 194 CE), had persuaded Emperor Lingdi that he should relinquish control of military governors and their provinces and allow each to act according to their own set of circumstances. Since the rebellion was so widespread and seemed to take so many different forms of resistance, the choices of each individual regional commander would be more effective than a blanket imperial dictate. This move would essentially grant regional governors/commanders more or less complete autonomy from the emperor but, even so, Lingdi agreed to the plan. Rise of the Three Kingdoms Emperor Lingdi died in 189 CE and his successor was the crown prince Liu Bian who, at around the age of 12, became Emperor Shao of Han. Too young to rule, his uncle He Jin (d. 189 CE) was appointed as his regent. He Jin was the half-brother of the Empress He (d. 189 CE) and was frustrated by the level of control the eunuchs of the palace held over court life and politics. He contacted two of the most powerful warlords, Dong Zhuo (d. 192 CE) and Yuan Shao (d. 202 CE), requesting their full-force presence at the Han capital of Luoyang to support his action in assassinating the Ten Attendants and purging the palace of the eunuchs. The eunuchs learned of his plan, however, and had him killed. Yuan Shao arrived to find He Jin dead and avenged him by slaughtering the Ten Attendants and then killing the rest of the eunuchs and their support staff. Emperor Shao and his younger brother Liu Xie (d. 234 CE) escaped the carnage at the palace and were on the road to refuge with their attendants and family members at the same time that Dong Zhuo was marching towards Luoyang. Dong found them and brought them back to the city. He was then able to establish himself as the supreme power because he had the emperor and his brother in hand as well as the imperial seal. Shortly afterwards, favoring the younger brother, he had Emperor Shao killed and elevated his younger brother Liu Xie who took the throne name of Emperor Xian (d. 234 CE), the last of the Han emperors. Dong Zhuo was a self-indulgent and cruel despot according to later Chinese historians but must have had some redeeming features because his army was intensely loyal to him. He remained in power, dictating the policies of the child emperor Xian until he was assassinated by his close confidant, bodyguard, and general Lu Bu (d. 199 CE) in 192 CE. The agreement Liu Yan had earlier made with emperor Lingdi meant that any regional governor or military commander with enough resources and charisma was essentially his own nation and, after the death of Dong Zhuo, generals such as Liu Bei (d. 223 CE), Sun Quan (d. 252 CE), and Cao Cao (d. 220 CE) fought each other to prove they held the Mandate of Heaven and were the chosen ones to rule all of China. Cao Cao, the most powerful of the three, controlled all of northern China and marched south to take the rest and unify the country under his rule in 208 CE. He was defeated at the Battle of Red Cliffs (208 CE) and driven back north with immense losses. Afterwards, China was divided into three kingdoms: Cao Wei (led by Cao Cao), Eastern Wu (governed by Sun Quan), and Shu Han (led by Liu Bei). The three kingdoms remained in more or less constant tension until the reunification of China under the Jin Dynasty (266-420 CE) which claimed the Mandate of Heaven by virtue of the act of reunification through military conquest, just as the Qin had done centuries before. The Jin Dynasty was established by the Sima family when Sima Yan (its first emperor, r. 266-290 CE) forced the abdication of the government of Cao Wei and took control, reuniting the three kingdoms under his rule and thus demonstrating that he held the Mandate of Heaven by restoring order. The Jin Dynasty tried to stabilize the country but was broken by the conflict over succession known as the War of the Eight Princes (291-306 CE) after Sima Yan’s death, breaking into Western Jin (266-316 CE) and Eastern Jin (317-420 CE). While the Eastern Jin struggled to maintain control, the country again broke apart during the Period of the Sixteen Kingdoms and was only finally unified by the Liu Song Dynasty (420-479 CE) which also claimed the Mandate of Heaven using the same claim the Jin had earlier. The Mandate of Heaven, however noble in theory, was consistently invoked by monarchs and would-be monarchs to justify their lust for power, often at the people’s expense. The government is a living entity and, as such, self-preservation is its primary goal. Service to the people furthers this goal and so it is in the government’s best interests to take care of its people, but “care of the people” can be interpreted in many different ways. Government policies might primarily address land use or health or redistribution of wealth or simply ensuring the majority is employed. There was never a set definition for what it meant to care for the people, and the peasantry who were most affected by this had no voice in trying to form one. The Yellow Turban Rebellion was the only nationwide political movement instigated by and for the people and that was crushed by the forces which claimed the Mandate of Heaven within a year. The later Jin and Liu Song dynasties who claimed the mandate were little better than the failing Han or any of the three kingdoms – they were simply able to make the best claim for themselves at the time – and, as with earlier ruling houses, their claims were established through military force, not by any policy regarding the greatest good of the people a monarch was supposed to care for.	<urn:uuid:566e868d-5add-47af-84bd-2ef802aaa9b0>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.ancient.eu/article/1461/the-mandate-of-heaven-and-the-yellow-turban-rebell/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00350.warc.gz	en	0.985332	3,641	4.0625	4	[ -0.559680700302124, 0.46098172664642334, 0.28492364287376404, -0.4674910604953766, -0.145858496427536, 0.34362345933914185, 0.3287293314933777, -0.11162102222442627, 0.101448655128479, 0.275211900472641, 0.011723166331648827, 0.0887451022863388, 0.17097945511341095, 0.07138406485319138, ...	7	Throughout history, in order for a government to be respected and obeyed, it must possess some form of legitimacy recognized by the governed. Governmental systems have relied on a number of models for legitimacy, among them the dynastic form in which the son or close relative of the monarch succeeds to the throne and passes power down to the next generation. The dynastic model frequently includes the component of the 'divine right' of a ruler whereby the monarch is thought to have been chosen by the gods, or a single god, to rule according to divine will. In ancient China, legitimacy of rule was this very combination, but the will of the gods was paramount. A dynasty was considered just and worthy to rule only as long as it upheld divine will, and that will was clearly expressed in how well the government cared for the people. The divine will in China came to be manifest in what was known as the Mandate of Heaven – the gods’ contract with a monarch giving him the right to rule. When the ruling house showed clear signs that the people were no longer its primary interest, the government was thought to have lost that mandate and another dynasty would replace it. Although this policy of legitimization worked well enough philosophically, problems arose when more than one dynastic house – or state – lay claim to the mandate at the same time. How could it be proved, after all, that one faction was truly working in the best interests of the populace when another could provide evidence that it was doing this same thing? In 184 CE, during the waning of the Han Dynasty (206 BCE - 220 CE), this set of circumstances erupted in the social chaos of the Yellow Turban Rebellion, resulting in thousands of dead, vast swaths of land destroyed, and the disintegration of order into chaos, until the rise of the Three Kingdoms and, even then, conflict continued. The struggle to legitimize claim to the Mandate of Heaven, in fact, would fracture the country until its reunification in 280 CE under the Jin Dynasty (splintered early on by the War of the Eight Princes over succession) with stability only achieved by the Liu Song Dynasty in 420 CE. The Mandate of Heaven The concept of the Mandate of Heaven dates back to the Zhou Dynasty (1046-256 BCE) and its first king, Wu (r. 1046-1043 BCE). Prior to the Zhou, China was ruled by the Shang Dynasty (1600-1046 BCE) and Wu’s older brother, according to legend, had been killed by the king of the Shang. Wu and his family claimed the death was unwarranted and wanted justice, but the Shang were the ruling house and it was thought they held power by the will of the god Shangti – supreme god of creation, law, order, and justice – and so could not be touched. In order to justify a move against the Shang, Wu and his father Wen (and the rest of the family) had to find a new basis for legitimization, one which could be used to show that the Shang were unjust tyrants undeserving of the monarchy, and so the Mandate of Heaven was created. Shangti was the most popular god of the era and would be difficult to displace and so the Zhou claimed a previously unknown aspect of Shangti’s relationship with the Shang: the god had forged a contract with the rulers of China which was only good as long as the monarchy kept its side of the bargain. Since the Shang had broken its faith with Shangti through tyranny and unjust practices, Shangti had withdrawn the Mandate of Heaven from them and given it to the Zhou. The Zhou overthrew the Shang and established their new order but, owing to the vastness of their region, decentralized during the so-called Spring and Autumn Period (772-476 BCE) and began a slow decline. As their authority dwindled, it was said that they had lost the Mandate of Heaven and seven separate states claimed the mandate, each for itself, during the Warring States Period (476-221 BCE). Each one of these tried to show that the Zhou had forfeited the mandate, which was now rightfully theirs, by proving their worth in battle but none could best any of the others. The state of Qin finally conquered the rest and unified China through a policy of total war, without regard for the traditional rules of chivalry and honor, and Shi Huangdi (r. 221-210 BCE) became the first emperor of China. The Qin Empire was famously brutal and repressive and so, even though there were many who felt they never had the mandate to begin with, there was nothing to be done to dislodge them until Shi Huangdi died in 210 BCE. The country again erupted in civil wars culminating the Chu-Han Contention between the states of Chu and Han; the Han won and the Han Dynasty was born. Han Dynasty Decline The Han is one of the best-known dynasties of ancient China owing to its technological developments, the opening of the Silk Road, its art, and the general encouragement of cultural and spiritual refinement. Toward the end, however, the government had become corrupt to the point where people were able to buy their positions instead of earning them on merit. Compounding the government’s problems was that the actual power no longer lay with the Chinese emperor but with the palace eunuchs. Eunuchs had existed earlier as guards of the palace harem but, during the Han Dynasty, their influence extended into politics. Scholar Justin Wintle explains: Concubinage and eunuchry were commonplace throughout the ancient world. Every hereditary ruler wanted a son to succeed him, and what better way to ensure a direct male succession than a plurality of “wives”? Yet the larger the harem, the greater the risk that conception might occur away from the royal bedchamber. Only by employing eunuchs to guard and administer his concubines, could a ruler presume their “purity” remained intact. (104) The power of the eunuchs grew from harem guards to royal advisors as Han Dynasty rulers came to rely on them more and more as a kind of buffer between the various political factions of the palace and themselves. A trusted eunuch could be employed as a spy or equally well as an assassin but, on a daily basis, could deflect or delay policy requests or other entreaties and give the emperor some space. By the time of the reign of the emperor Lingdi (168-189 CE), the eunuchs had become the actual power behind the throne, epitomized in the Ten Eunuchs (also known as the Ten Attendants), the trusted advisors and councilors to the emperor. Yellow Turban Rebellion While the eunuchs and the court were engaged in their various political games, the people of China were suffering. As early as 142 CE, the people’s disgust with their government found expression in the Five Pecks of Rice Rebellion (also known as the Way of the Five Pecks of Rice, so called because anyone wishing to join had to donate five pecks of rice) led by the Taoist visionary Zhang Daoling. Zhang formed a theocratic state in the Hanzhong Valley in defiance of the government, claiming the emperor had lost the Mandate of Heaven and Zhang and his followers were, in effect, seceding from China. No one in the government did anything about Zhang or his claims (the situation was not dealt with until the general Cao Cao subdued the separate state c. 215 CE) and this encouraged another Taoist visionary, Zhang Jue (also known as Zhang Jiao, d. 184 CE, no relation to Zhang Daoling), to press the claim further in the full-scale revolt known as the Yellow Turban Rebellion (also the Yellow Scarves Rebellion, because of the color of their headwear). Zhang and his two brothers (Zhang Bao and Zhang Liang) were Taoist healers who treated their patients for free because the peasantry had so few resources. They saw, on a daily basis, how the people were suffering while the government did nothing to help them and so Zhang, a charismatic leader, launched a local revolt which quickly became nationwide rebellion. The basic claim of the Yellow Turbans was that the Han had clearly lost the Mandate of Heaven as evidenced by the corruption of the court and the suffering of the people. The Han government no longer worked for anyone but itself, they claimed, and so they could legally be deposed. They pointed out the fact that, when the Han first came to power, they associated themselves with Tian (heaven) and the color blue but then, as they engaged further with the people, aligned themselves with the earth and the color yellow but, by 184 CE, were associating themselves with fire and the color red. Why the Han did this is unclear but, to the Yellow Turbans, it was a certain sign of their betrayal of the people and loss of the mandate. The rebels invoked the spiritual principle of jiazhi (literally “worth” or “value”) which was the essential, fundamental significance of any given individual or action. The jiazhi of a person was their worth as a person, without any other consideration of what they contributed to a community. Every life had an essential, divine value, and every action that proceeded from that individual life shared in that value. Each individual, therefore, was precious and unique and should be treated with respect and dignity. The Han emperors, who favored Taoist beliefs, mouthed this same outlook but did not act on it, preferring instead to occupy their time with court intrigues and lucrative international trade. The Yellow Turban Rebellion brought the government’s attention back to the people they were supposed be caring for. Suppression & Conflict The rebellion quickly gained momentum as Zhang Jue’s vision of recognizing the peasantry’s essential jiazhi spread. Zhang and his brothers found enthusiastic participants in their patients who then spread the word to others, introducing the movement through a poem-slogan: The Blue Sky is gone; the Yellow Sky will rise In this year of jiazhi, there will be prosperity under Heaven. The phrase “under Heaven” was understood to refer to China and the blue and yellow sky, of course, to the Han and Yellow Turbans respectively. All people would be equal, Zhang preached, and this would result in a Great Peace in the land where wealth was shared and no one was forced to go without food or shelter. At the same time he was proclaiming his Great Peace, however, he was mobilizing the people for armed conflict to demand that peace through military action, knowing the government would not grant it willingly, and he was right. The Han moved quickly to suppress the rebellion but their resources by this time were spread far and thin. Invasions by the nomadic Xianbei and Xiongnu tribes had necessitated garrisoning border fortresses commanded by regional governors/commanders who were quickly mobilized. While the Han drew up its armies, the rebel forces were increasing daily and spreading. Yellow Turban enclaves were appearing all over China and their ranks were swelling into the thousands and then tens of thousands. The first Han generals sent against the rebels were Huangfu Song (d. 195 CE), Lu Zhi (d. 192 CE) and Zhu Jun (d. 195 CE) but the rebellion was finally ruthlessly crushed by the poet-warrior Cao Cao (l. 155-220 CE) within a year and Zhang Jue died with it. One of the reasons Cao Cao was able to wield the power he did was that a court advisor and general, Liu Yan (d. 194 CE), had persuaded Emperor Lingdi that he should relinquish control of military governors and their provinces and allow each to act according to their own set of circumstances. Since the rebellion was so widespread and seemed to take so many different forms of resistance, the choices of each individual regional commander would be more effective than a blanket imperial dictate. This move would essentially grant regional governors/commanders more or less complete autonomy from the emperor but, even so, Lingdi agreed to the plan. Rise of the Three Kingdoms Emperor Lingdi died in 189 CE and his successor was the crown prince Liu Bian who, at around the age of 12, became Emperor Shao of Han. Too young to rule, his uncle He Jin (d. 189 CE) was appointed as his regent. He Jin was the half-brother of the Empress He (d. 189 CE) and was frustrated by the level of control the eunuchs of the palace held over court life and politics. He contacted two of the most powerful warlords, Dong Zhuo (d. 192 CE) and Yuan Shao (d. 202 CE), requesting their full-force presence at the Han capital of Luoyang to support his action in assassinating the Ten Attendants and purging the palace of the eunuchs. The eunuchs learned of his plan, however, and had him killed. Yuan Shao arrived to find He Jin dead and avenged him by slaughtering the Ten Attendants and then killing the rest of the eunuchs and their support staff. Emperor Shao and his younger brother Liu Xie (d. 234 CE) escaped the carnage at the palace and were on the road to refuge with their attendants and family members at the same time that Dong Zhuo was marching towards Luoyang. Dong found them and brought them back to the city. He was then able to establish himself as the supreme power because he had the emperor and his brother in hand as well as the imperial seal. Shortly afterwards, favoring the younger brother, he had Emperor Shao killed and elevated his younger brother Liu Xie who took the throne name of Emperor Xian (d. 234 CE), the last of the Han emperors. Dong Zhuo was a self-indulgent and cruel despot according to later Chinese historians but must have had some redeeming features because his army was intensely loyal to him. He remained in power, dictating the policies of the child emperor Xian until he was assassinated by his close confidant, bodyguard, and general Lu Bu (d. 199 CE) in 192 CE. The agreement Liu Yan had earlier made with emperor Lingdi meant that any regional governor or military commander with enough resources and charisma was essentially his own nation and, after the death of Dong Zhuo, generals such as Liu Bei (d. 223 CE), Sun Quan (d. 252 CE), and Cao Cao (d. 220 CE) fought each other to prove they held the Mandate of Heaven and were the chosen ones to rule all of China. Cao Cao, the most powerful of the three, controlled all of northern China and marched south to take the rest and unify the country under his rule in 208 CE. He was defeated at the Battle of Red Cliffs (208 CE) and driven back north with immense losses. Afterwards, China was divided into three kingdoms: Cao Wei (led by Cao Cao), Eastern Wu (governed by Sun Quan), and Shu Han (led by Liu Bei). The three kingdoms remained in more or less constant tension until the reunification of China under the Jin Dynasty (266-420 CE) which claimed the Mandate of Heaven by virtue of the act of reunification through military conquest, just as the Qin had done centuries before. The Jin Dynasty was established by the Sima family when Sima Yan (its first emperor, r. 266-290 CE) forced the abdication of the government of Cao Wei and took control, reuniting the three kingdoms under his rule and thus demonstrating that he held the Mandate of Heaven by restoring order. The Jin Dynasty tried to stabilize the country but was broken by the conflict over succession known as the War of the Eight Princes (291-306 CE) after Sima Yan’s death, breaking into Western Jin (266-316 CE) and Eastern Jin (317-420 CE). While the Eastern Jin struggled to maintain control, the country again broke apart during the Period of the Sixteen Kingdoms and was only finally unified by the Liu Song Dynasty (420-479 CE) which also claimed the Mandate of Heaven using the same claim the Jin had earlier. The Mandate of Heaven, however noble in theory, was consistently invoked by monarchs and would-be monarchs to justify their lust for power, often at the people’s expense. The government is a living entity and, as such, self-preservation is its primary goal. Service to the people furthers this goal and so it is in the government’s best interests to take care of its people, but “care of the people” can be interpreted in many different ways. Government policies might primarily address land use or health or redistribution of wealth or simply ensuring the majority is employed. There was never a set definition for what it meant to care for the people, and the peasantry who were most affected by this had no voice in trying to form one. The Yellow Turban Rebellion was the only nationwide political movement instigated by and for the people and that was crushed by the forces which claimed the Mandate of Heaven within a year. The later Jin and Liu Song dynasties who claimed the mandate were little better than the failing Han or any of the three kingdoms – they were simply able to make the best claim for themselves at the time – and, as with earlier ruling houses, their claims were established through military force, not by any policy regarding the greatest good of the people a monarch was supposed to care for.	3,772	ENGLISH	1
Jackie Robinson was an amazing baseball player during the 40’s and into the 50’s.through baseball he also became an early pioneer of the civil rights movement. His career has been filled with ups and downs but he never lost his focus throughout his life. In this essay we will be discussing Jackie Robinson’s early life, impact on society, and the criticism he went through during his career and his early life. Born in January 31, 1919, in a small town in Georgia called Cairo in the Deep South. He was born into a family of sharecroppers. Life as a sharecropper was hard because you didn’t have much income to live off any income 95% of it went to the land owner. Jackie was the youngest of five children; he had three brothers and one sister. His dad right after Jackie’s after he was born left with the land owner’s wife and the land owner wanted the Robinsons off his property so at the age of sixteen months his family moved to Pasadena. When they arrived his mom got a job as a maid and she also got jobs as a cook. Jackie’s only sister took care of him because his mom worked so many hours. Even though she was only two years older than Jackie is sister took him to school and while he was playing outside his sister was in class and watched him to make sure he didn’t get in trouble. When he started school all of his class mates realized how fast Jackie could run and black and whites alike always wanted him on his team. His sister had once said “he always had a ball in his hand” (Herman page 15). When he turned eleven, times grew tougher as his family entered the Great Depression. To help his mom support his family, Jackie got a job mowing lawns and delivering papers. As a teen Jackie was shy and quite when around people he didn’t know. He felt closer to his brothers Mack and Frank Robinson. Jackie once claimed, “Frank was always there to protect me when I was in a scrap. While growing up he had his own little gang of his closest friends, they called themselves the Pepper Street Gang. One time they took some golf balls from a golf course and then rent right back around and sold them right back to the players. What they did wasn’t right but they never got into big trouble and never did anything violent. His mom was a strong woman but even then it was hard for Jackie to grow up without a dad. Some men from the neighborhood helped raise Jackie and guide him. One person told him that being in a gang was just fallowing the crowd. His minister of his church gave him a place to go after school. At the age of twenty he beloved brother frank died in a motorcycle accident. Jackie later wrote” I can’t believe he is gone and that I won’t have his support anymore” (Herman page 24). He really started his career in collage after his brother died. He started playing sports at Pasadena junior college. Then transferring to UCLA in 1939 where then his brother died, after his brother died Jackie threw himself into sports. He claimed “it helped take my mind off of Frank”...	<urn:uuid:d748827c-dd7c-4e65-8114-7d31848139ea>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://brightkite.com/essay-on/jackie-robinson-20	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604397.40/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121132900-20200121161900-00254.warc.gz	en	0.996925	671	3.609375	4	[ -0.4547252655029297, 0.6496370434761047, -0.05891640856862068, -0.37322360277175903, 0.01514177955687046, 0.27774208784103394, 0.5132976174354553, 0.01984989643096924, -0.002967073582112789, -0.24926245212554932, 0.09096856415271759, 0.016829943284392357, 0.037497710436582565, -0.057075090...	1	Jackie Robinson was an amazing baseball player during the 40’s and into the 50’s.through baseball he also became an early pioneer of the civil rights movement. His career has been filled with ups and downs but he never lost his focus throughout his life. In this essay we will be discussing Jackie Robinson’s early life, impact on society, and the criticism he went through during his career and his early life. Born in January 31, 1919, in a small town in Georgia called Cairo in the Deep South. He was born into a family of sharecroppers. Life as a sharecropper was hard because you didn’t have much income to live off any income 95% of it went to the land owner. Jackie was the youngest of five children; he had three brothers and one sister. His dad right after Jackie’s after he was born left with the land owner’s wife and the land owner wanted the Robinsons off his property so at the age of sixteen months his family moved to Pasadena. When they arrived his mom got a job as a maid and she also got jobs as a cook. Jackie’s only sister took care of him because his mom worked so many hours. Even though she was only two years older than Jackie is sister took him to school and while he was playing outside his sister was in class and watched him to make sure he didn’t get in trouble. When he started school all of his class mates realized how fast Jackie could run and black and whites alike always wanted him on his team. His sister had once said “he always had a ball in his hand” (Herman page 15). When he turned eleven, times grew tougher as his family entered the Great Depression. To help his mom support his family, Jackie got a job mowing lawns and delivering papers. As a teen Jackie was shy and quite when around people he didn’t know. He felt closer to his brothers Mack and Frank Robinson. Jackie once claimed, “Frank was always there to protect me when I was in a scrap. While growing up he had his own little gang of his closest friends, they called themselves the Pepper Street Gang. One time they took some golf balls from a golf course and then rent right back around and sold them right back to the players. What they did wasn’t right but they never got into big trouble and never did anything violent. His mom was a strong woman but even then it was hard for Jackie to grow up without a dad. Some men from the neighborhood helped raise Jackie and guide him. One person told him that being in a gang was just fallowing the crowd. His minister of his church gave him a place to go after school. At the age of twenty he beloved brother frank died in a motorcycle accident. Jackie later wrote” I can’t believe he is gone and that I won’t have his support anymore” (Herman page 24). He really started his career in collage after his brother died. He started playing sports at Pasadena junior college. Then transferring to UCLA in 1939 where then his brother died, after his brother died Jackie threw himself into sports. He claimed “it helped take my mind off of Frank”...	654	ENGLISH	1
January 11th 1787 was a good day for William Herschel. Not many of us get to discover even one major moon in a lifetime, but on this particular day in history Herschel was fortunate enough to find both the largest moon of Uranus, Titania, and the second largest, Oberon. Both moons were named after characters from Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Nights Dream; they were king and queen of the faeries. They joined the sprites, Ariel (from The Tempest), and Umbriel (from Alexander Pope’s The Rape of the Lock) which had been discovered in October 1851. Oberon is the outermost major Uranian moon, and the ninth most massive moon in the solar system. It is about 50/50 rock and ice, with the rock probably forming the core. It’s quite “moonish” in appearance, being fairly dark and rather cratered by impacts, much like our own companion. However, unlike our dry Moon, as well as being partly icy, Oberon may well have a layer of liquid water between the core and the mantle. Titania is similar in appearance and composition to Oberon, but is less heavily cratered, possibly as a result of internal processes that removed some of the older cratering. Both moons were probably formed in situ from an accretion disc. Only Voyager 2 has ever been close enough to Uranus to capture good shots of Oberon and Titania. It made its closest approach to the planet on January 26th 1986, but had already got to about 300,000 miles of Titania and 400,000 miles from Oberon two days earlier, at which time it took these photographs. 1865 – German astronomer Johannes Franz Hartmann born.	<urn:uuid:98e3536d-bb08-448a-ae41-599930040b35>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://iagout.wordpress.com/category/astronomers/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607118.51/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122131612-20200122160612-00069.warc.gz	en	0.980215	362	3.6875	4	[ -0.14347968995571136, -0.18159154057502747, 0.38526007533073425, -0.2290128916501999, -0.2904379665851593, -0.03907367214560509, -0.13141551613807678, 0.26461321115493774, -0.27812108397483826, -0.17779158055782318, 0.030583521351218224, -0.24721559882164001, 0.10325565934181213, 0.3480434...	2	January 11th 1787 was a good day for William Herschel. Not many of us get to discover even one major moon in a lifetime, but on this particular day in history Herschel was fortunate enough to find both the largest moon of Uranus, Titania, and the second largest, Oberon. Both moons were named after characters from Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Nights Dream; they were king and queen of the faeries. They joined the sprites, Ariel (from The Tempest), and Umbriel (from Alexander Pope’s The Rape of the Lock) which had been discovered in October 1851. Oberon is the outermost major Uranian moon, and the ninth most massive moon in the solar system. It is about 50/50 rock and ice, with the rock probably forming the core. It’s quite “moonish” in appearance, being fairly dark and rather cratered by impacts, much like our own companion. However, unlike our dry Moon, as well as being partly icy, Oberon may well have a layer of liquid water between the core and the mantle. Titania is similar in appearance and composition to Oberon, but is less heavily cratered, possibly as a result of internal processes that removed some of the older cratering. Both moons were probably formed in situ from an accretion disc. Only Voyager 2 has ever been close enough to Uranus to capture good shots of Oberon and Titania. It made its closest approach to the planet on January 26th 1986, but had already got to about 300,000 miles of Titania and 400,000 miles from Oberon two days earlier, at which time it took these photographs. 1865 – German astronomer Johannes Franz Hartmann born.	382	ENGLISH	1
1. Fire was one of the most important early technological innovation. Fire made surviving through the cold months possible. It was also useful for cooking foods. Spears were useful for hunters and gatherers. It helped catch and kill their prey. After the industrial revolution, innovations such as the plow helped in agriculture to speed the process and not have to do each individual task by hand. 2. The Neolithic Revolution was the start of agriculture. Due to it causing a surplus of good production, specialized jobs were introduced. If one person has the ability to produce enough food for the entire community, then everyone else can focus on different jobs. Along with time to focus on jobs, time for recreation was introduced giving people more free time. Another long term effect of the Neolithic Revolution was that land was thought of as property because people began living in the same place for longer periods of time. 3. The Neolithic Revolution was responsible for food surplus that gave people the opportunity to develop new technologies. Plows and hoes advanced agriculture greatly. Agriculture meant people didn’t have to move around following their food, but instead, stay in one place. This brought on the construction of stable homes and buildings. 4. A state is a nation of people unified based on their culture. Leaders such as King Hammurabi, Nebuchaddnezzar, King Menes, and Queen Hatshepsut ruled these states and were supported by 5. Culture was what	<urn:uuid:6fe7c3dc-af9f-4064-b7d0-7dfd041ee150>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.bartleby.com/essay/The-Neolithic-Revolution-A-Llist-of-Events-PKCFH4J8MRS	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607596.34/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122221541-20200123010541-00257.warc.gz	en	0.981645	299	3.65625	4	[ -0.2979905903339386, 0.5712795257568359, 0.2656649351119995, -0.28026843070983887, 0.43518757820129395, 0.08263299614191055, 0.13112516701221466, 0.1755104959011078, -0.5347182154655457, -0.21480320394039154, -0.22392500936985016, -0.4951164424419403, -0.10809601843357086, 0.29109588265419...	1	1. Fire was one of the most important early technological innovation. Fire made surviving through the cold months possible. It was also useful for cooking foods. Spears were useful for hunters and gatherers. It helped catch and kill their prey. After the industrial revolution, innovations such as the plow helped in agriculture to speed the process and not have to do each individual task by hand. 2. The Neolithic Revolution was the start of agriculture. Due to it causing a surplus of good production, specialized jobs were introduced. If one person has the ability to produce enough food for the entire community, then everyone else can focus on different jobs. Along with time to focus on jobs, time for recreation was introduced giving people more free time. Another long term effect of the Neolithic Revolution was that land was thought of as property because people began living in the same place for longer periods of time. 3. The Neolithic Revolution was responsible for food surplus that gave people the opportunity to develop new technologies. Plows and hoes advanced agriculture greatly. Agriculture meant people didn’t have to move around following their food, but instead, stay in one place. This brought on the construction of stable homes and buildings. 4. A state is a nation of people unified based on their culture. Leaders such as King Hammurabi, Nebuchaddnezzar, King Menes, and Queen Hatshepsut ruled these states and were supported by 5. Culture was what	292	ENGLISH	1
On January 27, 1945, 75-years ago this month, the Soviet Army pried open the gates of Auschwitz concentration camp in German-occupied Poland and liberated some 7,000 emaciated prisoners. About 58,000 others had been hurriedly marched westward before the Soviet Army approached. Auschwitz, the German word for the Polish town of Oswiecim, was the site of the largest Nazi concentration camp during WWII. It consisted of a concentration camp, a labor camp, and large gas chambers and crematoria. More than 1.3 million people were sent to Auschwitz between 1940-1945. Some 1.1 million of them were killed. Nine in 10 were Jews. During WWII, the Nazi regime imprisoned an estimated 15-20 million people who they perceived as a political threat or inferior, especially Jews. They were held in camps and ghettos across Europe and subjected to abominable conditions, brutality, and murder in what has become known as the Holocaust. Auschwitz was the largest of these death camps and was divided into three main camps: Auschwitz I, Auschwitz-Birkenau, and Auschwitz III. Auschwitz I housed prisoners in abandoned Polish army barracks. Some were subjected to inhumane medical experiments carried out by SS doctors. Auschwitz II, also known as Auschwitz-Birkenau, held the greatest number of prisoners and also housed large gas chambers and crematoria. Auschwitz III was a work camp that housed prisoners working at a synthetic rubber factory. Other smaller sub-camps also existed. The Nazis experimented with Zyklon B gas to kill prisoners at Auschwitz I. These tests were deemed successful and the program greatly expanded at Auschwitz-Birkenau. When new deportees arrived at Auschwitz-Birkenau, they immediately underwent selection. Some were saved to be used as forced labor, while others went directly to the gas chambers. This process tore families apart, and separated family members would typically never see one another again. One such family was the Guttmann family. Irene Guttmann and her twin brother Rene were living in Prague with their parents when German soldiers arrested Irene’s father. He was sent to Auschwitz where he was killed in December 1941. The twins and their mother were deported to Theresienstadt ghetto and later to Auschwitz where their mother died. The 5-year-old twins were separated and subjected to horrific medical experiments under Dr. Josef Mengele. Their story is just one of many that occurred during the Holocaust. On January 18, 1945, as the Soviet Army approached, the Nazis abandoned Auschwitz. The SS tried to hide evidence of the crimes committed at the camp by burning documents and blowing up several crematoria. The ‘healthy’ prisoners, numbering about 58,000, set off westward on a death march. Very few of them survived. The remaining prisoners, some 7,000, were too sick and starving to march and left to die in the camp. Rene Guttman was herded onto a truck to be sent to his death, but Dr. Mengele countermanded the order, saying that only he could kill his twins. With this order, both Rene and Irene remained in the camp. On that bitterly cold morning of January 27th, prisoners huddled in their barracks. “We heard a grenade exploding near the entrance area,” recalled a former prisoner. “We looked out and saw some Soviet reconnaissance soldiers approaching, guns in their hands. The soldiers came up and said: ‘You are free at last.’” The Guttmann twins recalled liberation day. “I remember walking out of Auschwitz. I do remember trying to look back and around me to see if I could find Irene because I was leaving this place. I did see her, but we had to march on. There was shooting all around us…then we were surrounded by Russians dressed in white uniforms, that was the liberation,” said Rene. Irene, who was too weak to walk, was carried by a Polish peasant woman to her home. One year later, a charity organization arranged for Irene to come to the United States along with other war orphans, where she was adopted. She wondered if she would ever see her brother Rene again. With the help of her adoptive family, they managed to locate Rene, who was living in Prague. The family adopted him as well, reuniting the twins in 1950. When evidence of the atrocities committed at Auschwitz and other concentration camps came to light, the world was shocked. Decades later, the 2005 United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution naming January 27th, the day that Auschwitz was liberated, as International Holocaust Remembrance Day. To learn more about the Holocaust, including survivor stories, photographs, and other related documents, see our Holocaust Collection on Fold3.	<urn:uuid:654a7c06-31af-48e5-9cc3-2b2d9933d114>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://blog.fold3.com/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672537.90/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125131641-20200125160641-00422.warc.gz	en	0.985439	995	3.828125	4	[ -0.22109414637088776, 0.6800560355186462, 0.008277257904410362, 0.16328585147857666, 0.17600208520889282, 0.17923755943775177, 0.1891142576932907, 0.034492574632167816, -0.3192225694656372, -0.2967705726623535, 0.48150742053985596, -0.13789460062980652, -0.040061380714178085, 0.53173047304...	16	On January 27, 1945, 75-years ago this month, the Soviet Army pried open the gates of Auschwitz concentration camp in German-occupied Poland and liberated some 7,000 emaciated prisoners. About 58,000 others had been hurriedly marched westward before the Soviet Army approached. Auschwitz, the German word for the Polish town of Oswiecim, was the site of the largest Nazi concentration camp during WWII. It consisted of a concentration camp, a labor camp, and large gas chambers and crematoria. More than 1.3 million people were sent to Auschwitz between 1940-1945. Some 1.1 million of them were killed. Nine in 10 were Jews. During WWII, the Nazi regime imprisoned an estimated 15-20 million people who they perceived as a political threat or inferior, especially Jews. They were held in camps and ghettos across Europe and subjected to abominable conditions, brutality, and murder in what has become known as the Holocaust. Auschwitz was the largest of these death camps and was divided into three main camps: Auschwitz I, Auschwitz-Birkenau, and Auschwitz III. Auschwitz I housed prisoners in abandoned Polish army barracks. Some were subjected to inhumane medical experiments carried out by SS doctors. Auschwitz II, also known as Auschwitz-Birkenau, held the greatest number of prisoners and also housed large gas chambers and crematoria. Auschwitz III was a work camp that housed prisoners working at a synthetic rubber factory. Other smaller sub-camps also existed. The Nazis experimented with Zyklon B gas to kill prisoners at Auschwitz I. These tests were deemed successful and the program greatly expanded at Auschwitz-Birkenau. When new deportees arrived at Auschwitz-Birkenau, they immediately underwent selection. Some were saved to be used as forced labor, while others went directly to the gas chambers. This process tore families apart, and separated family members would typically never see one another again. One such family was the Guttmann family. Irene Guttmann and her twin brother Rene were living in Prague with their parents when German soldiers arrested Irene’s father. He was sent to Auschwitz where he was killed in December 1941. The twins and their mother were deported to Theresienstadt ghetto and later to Auschwitz where their mother died. The 5-year-old twins were separated and subjected to horrific medical experiments under Dr. Josef Mengele. Their story is just one of many that occurred during the Holocaust. On January 18, 1945, as the Soviet Army approached, the Nazis abandoned Auschwitz. The SS tried to hide evidence of the crimes committed at the camp by burning documents and blowing up several crematoria. The ‘healthy’ prisoners, numbering about 58,000, set off westward on a death march. Very few of them survived. The remaining prisoners, some 7,000, were too sick and starving to march and left to die in the camp. Rene Guttman was herded onto a truck to be sent to his death, but Dr. Mengele countermanded the order, saying that only he could kill his twins. With this order, both Rene and Irene remained in the camp. On that bitterly cold morning of January 27th, prisoners huddled in their barracks. “We heard a grenade exploding near the entrance area,” recalled a former prisoner. “We looked out and saw some Soviet reconnaissance soldiers approaching, guns in their hands. The soldiers came up and said: ‘You are free at last.’” The Guttmann twins recalled liberation day. “I remember walking out of Auschwitz. I do remember trying to look back and around me to see if I could find Irene because I was leaving this place. I did see her, but we had to march on. There was shooting all around us…then we were surrounded by Russians dressed in white uniforms, that was the liberation,” said Rene. Irene, who was too weak to walk, was carried by a Polish peasant woman to her home. One year later, a charity organization arranged for Irene to come to the United States along with other war orphans, where she was adopted. She wondered if she would ever see her brother Rene again. With the help of her adoptive family, they managed to locate Rene, who was living in Prague. The family adopted him as well, reuniting the twins in 1950. When evidence of the atrocities committed at Auschwitz and other concentration camps came to light, the world was shocked. Decades later, the 2005 United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution naming January 27th, the day that Auschwitz was liberated, as International Holocaust Remembrance Day. To learn more about the Holocaust, including survivor stories, photographs, and other related documents, see our Holocaust Collection on Fold3.	1,014	ENGLISH	1
Sometimes an unrecognized capability has been close at hand, but doesn’t actually come to fruition until years, decades, or even centuries later. Sometimes an unrecognized capability has been close at hand, with means readily available, but doesn’t actually come to fruition until years, decades, or even centuries later. Please consider some examples of what almost might have happened. Consider first a device called the aeolipile. This was a steam engine invented in ancient times. From Wikipedia, we find the following description: It is not known whether the aeolipile was put to any practical use in ancient times, and if it was seen as a pragmatic device, a whimsical novelty, an object of reverence, or some other thing. A source described it as a mere curiosity for the ancient Greeks, or a “party trick”. The ancient Greeks had advanced metal working, advanced ceramics, advanced fabrics, and they had discovered lodestone so they knew about magnetism. With all of those things at hand, they might have developed electromagnetics and constructed viable motors and generators, but it didn't happen. Vacuum tube triode Thomas Edison was experimenting further with his electric light bulb when he added a metal plate as in the following sketch. Edison’s light bulb experiment included a metal plate. Thermionic emission from the hot filament was inducing a current flow in the plate. Edison detected the current flow but he never understood why it was happening. If he had reasoned it out and had added a grid between the filament and the plate, he would have invented the vacuum tube triode decades ahead of the work of Fleming or DeForest, but it didn't happen. Carbon dioxide gas laser I took a course in lasers at Northeastern University in the summer of 1967. The instructor was Dr. Richard Seed, who had a company called Seed Electronics that specialized in diode and gas lasers. One day, he invited the class to his laboratory to see a working carbon dioxide gas laser. The device was built along the lines of the following sketch. This is a diagram for a carbon dioxide gas laser. The infrared wavelength was 10.6 microns at an output power of 20 watts. It was aimed at a large steel object, a kitchen refrigerator, which wasn't much affected by the impinging infrared. However, when he held a wooden yardstick in the beam path, the yardstick immediately caught fire. It was in an impressive show. What struck me about all of the goodies being shown was that everything had all been available for many years. If one had sought to buy these things perhaps back in 1930, it would have been no problem, even for the monocrystalline NaCl window. Ergo, the construction of such a laser might have taken place many years before the first lasers were actually built, but it didn't happen. John Dunn is an electronics consultant, and a graduate of The Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn (BSEE) and of New York University (MSEE).	<urn:uuid:0462c78c-3496-4f35-b367-87e95998b21d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.ednasia.com/news/article/Inventions-that-were-almost-ahead-of-their-time	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251799918.97/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129133601-20200129163601-00046.warc.gz	en	0.98232	631	3.484375	3	[ -0.4320274591445923, 0.23627513647079468, 0.16613280773162842, 0.2862907648086548, -0.4111390709877014, -0.02014777436852455, 0.14419499039649963, 0.28095197677612305, -0.45928138494491577, -0.010460460558533669, -0.1759301722049713, -0.0857555940747261, -0.005130186676979065, 0.0539757199...	1	Sometimes an unrecognized capability has been close at hand, but doesn’t actually come to fruition until years, decades, or even centuries later. Sometimes an unrecognized capability has been close at hand, with means readily available, but doesn’t actually come to fruition until years, decades, or even centuries later. Please consider some examples of what almost might have happened. Consider first a device called the aeolipile. This was a steam engine invented in ancient times. From Wikipedia, we find the following description: It is not known whether the aeolipile was put to any practical use in ancient times, and if it was seen as a pragmatic device, a whimsical novelty, an object of reverence, or some other thing. A source described it as a mere curiosity for the ancient Greeks, or a “party trick”. The ancient Greeks had advanced metal working, advanced ceramics, advanced fabrics, and they had discovered lodestone so they knew about magnetism. With all of those things at hand, they might have developed electromagnetics and constructed viable motors and generators, but it didn't happen. Vacuum tube triode Thomas Edison was experimenting further with his electric light bulb when he added a metal plate as in the following sketch. Edison’s light bulb experiment included a metal plate. Thermionic emission from the hot filament was inducing a current flow in the plate. Edison detected the current flow but he never understood why it was happening. If he had reasoned it out and had added a grid between the filament and the plate, he would have invented the vacuum tube triode decades ahead of the work of Fleming or DeForest, but it didn't happen. Carbon dioxide gas laser I took a course in lasers at Northeastern University in the summer of 1967. The instructor was Dr. Richard Seed, who had a company called Seed Electronics that specialized in diode and gas lasers. One day, he invited the class to his laboratory to see a working carbon dioxide gas laser. The device was built along the lines of the following sketch. This is a diagram for a carbon dioxide gas laser. The infrared wavelength was 10.6 microns at an output power of 20 watts. It was aimed at a large steel object, a kitchen refrigerator, which wasn't much affected by the impinging infrared. However, when he held a wooden yardstick in the beam path, the yardstick immediately caught fire. It was in an impressive show. What struck me about all of the goodies being shown was that everything had all been available for many years. If one had sought to buy these things perhaps back in 1930, it would have been no problem, even for the monocrystalline NaCl window. Ergo, the construction of such a laser might have taken place many years before the first lasers were actually built, but it didn't happen. John Dunn is an electronics consultant, and a graduate of The Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn (BSEE) and of New York University (MSEE).	615	ENGLISH	1
African Americans struggled for racial equality in the 1950’s and 1960’s. The Civil Rights Movement began in serious conflict as African Americans and concerned white people joined to protest racial equality. The non-violent movement for civil rights was only starting to become effective in the early 60’s. As technology started to develop civil rights activists used television programs to show Americans the horrid reactions towards the protests. When the desegregation movement faced resistance the Congress Of Racial Equality (CORE) sent Freedom Riders to help protestors. These buses were attacked, one was firebombed and the other was boarded by Ku Klux Klan (KKK) members who assaulted the activists. The group or ‘gang’ known as the Ku Klux Klan or White Knights were established in Mississippi. These gangs would go around killing innocent African Americans because they were considered and perceived as less than human. They believed white people were the dominant race. They tortured African American’s by hanging them, burning their houses, assaulting them, lynching and burning crosses on their lawn. They would do anything to make African Americans lives miserable. The KKK did not only hate the African Americans but also the Jews, homosexuals, Catholics or anybody considered to be an outsider. Though most of this hatred was aimed at the African Americans. This leads us to the brutal murders of Michael Schwerner, James Chaney and Andrew Goodman. Chaney was a local 21 year old African American from Mississippi and both Goodman and Schwerner were from New York. Goodman was 20 years old and a college student and Schwerner was 24 years old and was a social worker. All three boys were members of CORE and dedicated. They were working towards registering African Americans to vote during the ‘Freedom Summer’ campaign. The local Klan’s Wizard Sam Bowers, decided Michael was a bad influence and needed to be killed. The three boys travelled to the Longdale church to investigate a recent KKK attack. After viewing the remains of the burnt church, the three young men were stopped by Sheriff Cecil Ray Price for ‘speeding’. He arrested them and held them in custody for eight hours. All three boys were denied a phone call. The boys were then released by the Deputy. By prearrangement the boys were again stopped while travelling on a lonely road by the Sheriff again but this time, accompanied by other KKK members. They were murdered in cold blood and their bodies were hidden in an earthen dam several miles away and buried with a bulldozer. Chaney was beaten and all three were shot. The disappearance of the three boys resulted in an intensive FBI investigation involving 150 FBI agents. The code name used was ‘Mississippi Burning’. A re-enactment of this event is in the movie of the same name. ”You didn’t leave me nothing but a nigger. But at least I killed me a nigger1” was a piece of dialogue that came directly from a confession in FBI files. Since Mississippi refused to prosecute the men involved in the murders, the Federal Government charged 18 men with conspiracy to violate the civil rights of the three young men. Eight of the men were acquitted. The men who did get charged, got trailed under civil rights laws and received sentences ranging from only three to ten years. Not one served more than six years. The Judge William Cox quoted ‘They killed one nigger, one Jew and a white man. I gave them all what I thought they…	<urn:uuid:3f750c69-553a-4989-a04e-b3f8fb02fd17>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.majortests.com/essay/Was-There-Justice-For-Civil-Right-532206.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599718.13/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120165335-20200120194335-00492.warc.gz	en	0.984202	719	3.53125	4	[ -0.19751028716564178, 0.07826225459575653, -0.08334033191204071, 0.15204286575317383, 0.0003707972355186939, 0.35584113001823425, -0.28707772493362427, -0.12517739832401276, -0.2838975191116333, 0.15591979026794434, 0.36126378178596497, 0.3542843163013458, -0.1550043672323227, -0.205758810...	1	African Americans struggled for racial equality in the 1950’s and 1960’s. The Civil Rights Movement began in serious conflict as African Americans and concerned white people joined to protest racial equality. The non-violent movement for civil rights was only starting to become effective in the early 60’s. As technology started to develop civil rights activists used television programs to show Americans the horrid reactions towards the protests. When the desegregation movement faced resistance the Congress Of Racial Equality (CORE) sent Freedom Riders to help protestors. These buses were attacked, one was firebombed and the other was boarded by Ku Klux Klan (KKK) members who assaulted the activists. The group or ‘gang’ known as the Ku Klux Klan or White Knights were established in Mississippi. These gangs would go around killing innocent African Americans because they were considered and perceived as less than human. They believed white people were the dominant race. They tortured African American’s by hanging them, burning their houses, assaulting them, lynching and burning crosses on their lawn. They would do anything to make African Americans lives miserable. The KKK did not only hate the African Americans but also the Jews, homosexuals, Catholics or anybody considered to be an outsider. Though most of this hatred was aimed at the African Americans. This leads us to the brutal murders of Michael Schwerner, James Chaney and Andrew Goodman. Chaney was a local 21 year old African American from Mississippi and both Goodman and Schwerner were from New York. Goodman was 20 years old and a college student and Schwerner was 24 years old and was a social worker. All three boys were members of CORE and dedicated. They were working towards registering African Americans to vote during the ‘Freedom Summer’ campaign. The local Klan’s Wizard Sam Bowers, decided Michael was a bad influence and needed to be killed. The three boys travelled to the Longdale church to investigate a recent KKK attack. After viewing the remains of the burnt church, the three young men were stopped by Sheriff Cecil Ray Price for ‘speeding’. He arrested them and held them in custody for eight hours. All three boys were denied a phone call. The boys were then released by the Deputy. By prearrangement the boys were again stopped while travelling on a lonely road by the Sheriff again but this time, accompanied by other KKK members. They were murdered in cold blood and their bodies were hidden in an earthen dam several miles away and buried with a bulldozer. Chaney was beaten and all three were shot. The disappearance of the three boys resulted in an intensive FBI investigation involving 150 FBI agents. The code name used was ‘Mississippi Burning’. A re-enactment of this event is in the movie of the same name. ”You didn’t leave me nothing but a nigger. But at least I killed me a nigger1” was a piece of dialogue that came directly from a confession in FBI files. Since Mississippi refused to prosecute the men involved in the murders, the Federal Government charged 18 men with conspiracy to violate the civil rights of the three young men. Eight of the men were acquitted. The men who did get charged, got trailed under civil rights laws and received sentences ranging from only three to ten years. Not one served more than six years. The Judge William Cox quoted ‘They killed one nigger, one Jew and a white man. I gave them all what I thought they…	710	ENGLISH	1
Despite great obstacles, Jews throughout occupied Europe attempted armed resistance against the Germans and their Axis partners. They faced overwhelming odds and desperate scenarios, including lack of weapons and training, operating in hostile zones, parting from family members, and facing an ever-present Nazi terror. Yet thousands resisted by joining or forming partisan units. Among them was Romi Cohn. Romi Cohn was born in Bratislava, Czechoslovakia, on March 10, 1929. He was only ten years old when Germany invaded his country in 1938. When mass deportations of Jews from Slovakia began in 1942, his family was granted an 'economic exception' and allowed to stay. As the war dragged on, however, they realized that their position was becoming dangerous. Romi was eventually smuggled over the border into Hungary. Unable to speak Hungarian, Romi knew that merely opening his mouth exposed him as an illegal refugee. He settled in a small town and enrolled at a local yeshiva, where the headmaster was sympathetic to his plight. He continued his education until 1944. When mass deportations of Jews from Hungary began, Romi returned home to Czechoslovakia, this time carrying forged Christian identification papers. Romi became an informal member of the underground and used his connections to help find housing for Jewish refugees and to supply them with false Christian papers. The identity papers he made were very realistic: a connection working at Gestapo headquarters supplied him with German seals to stamp the documents. Eventually Romi was arrested on suspicion of carrying false documents and, after a daring escape, he decided to join the partisans hiding in the mountains. To reach the mountains, Romi forged a German military travel order, sending him to the last German outpost before partisan-controlled territory. “[The Germans] all shook my hand and wished me luck. They thought I was going to go strike a blow for the Reich,” Romi remembers. By the time he joined the partisans, the Germans were already in retreat, and his brigade drove them back westward, while capturing, interrogating, and executing SS officers. When Hungary was liberated, Romi returned to Czechoslovakia. Today he lives in the United States, and has written a book about his wartime experiences, entitled The Youngest Partisan. Critical Thinking Questions - What obstacles and limitations did Jews face when considering resistance? - What pressures and motivations may have influenced Romi Cohn's decisions and actions? Are these factors unique to this history or universal? - How can societies, communities, and individuals reinforce and strengthen the willingness to stand up for others?	<urn:uuid:1fefa52b-6c15-4d99-92ae-5e43b63c1b5a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/romi-cohn	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607407.48/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122191620-20200122220620-00506.warc.gz	en	0.980245	526	3.71875	4	[ -0.45734158158302307, 0.8357685208320618, -0.38409897685050964, 0.21984803676605225, 0.15068045258522034, 0.41583970189094543, 0.33387866616249084, 0.1162356361746788, -0.18565335869789124, -0.4349368214607239, 0.08798270672559738, 0.007076006382703781, 0.31818723678588867, 0.2443342208862...	12	Despite great obstacles, Jews throughout occupied Europe attempted armed resistance against the Germans and their Axis partners. They faced overwhelming odds and desperate scenarios, including lack of weapons and training, operating in hostile zones, parting from family members, and facing an ever-present Nazi terror. Yet thousands resisted by joining or forming partisan units. Among them was Romi Cohn. Romi Cohn was born in Bratislava, Czechoslovakia, on March 10, 1929. He was only ten years old when Germany invaded his country in 1938. When mass deportations of Jews from Slovakia began in 1942, his family was granted an 'economic exception' and allowed to stay. As the war dragged on, however, they realized that their position was becoming dangerous. Romi was eventually smuggled over the border into Hungary. Unable to speak Hungarian, Romi knew that merely opening his mouth exposed him as an illegal refugee. He settled in a small town and enrolled at a local yeshiva, where the headmaster was sympathetic to his plight. He continued his education until 1944. When mass deportations of Jews from Hungary began, Romi returned home to Czechoslovakia, this time carrying forged Christian identification papers. Romi became an informal member of the underground and used his connections to help find housing for Jewish refugees and to supply them with false Christian papers. The identity papers he made were very realistic: a connection working at Gestapo headquarters supplied him with German seals to stamp the documents. Eventually Romi was arrested on suspicion of carrying false documents and, after a daring escape, he decided to join the partisans hiding in the mountains. To reach the mountains, Romi forged a German military travel order, sending him to the last German outpost before partisan-controlled territory. “[The Germans] all shook my hand and wished me luck. They thought I was going to go strike a blow for the Reich,” Romi remembers. By the time he joined the partisans, the Germans were already in retreat, and his brigade drove them back westward, while capturing, interrogating, and executing SS officers. When Hungary was liberated, Romi returned to Czechoslovakia. Today he lives in the United States, and has written a book about his wartime experiences, entitled The Youngest Partisan. Critical Thinking Questions - What obstacles and limitations did Jews face when considering resistance? - What pressures and motivations may have influenced Romi Cohn's decisions and actions? Are these factors unique to this history or universal? - How can societies, communities, and individuals reinforce and strengthen the willingness to stand up for others?	541	ENGLISH	1
The First Castles The first buildings that we think of as castles are the Roman Saxon Shore Forts. These were constructed during the first to third centuries following the invasion in AD53. Ten castles were built between Hampshire and Norfolk and parts of most of them still survive. One, Pevensey, was still in use during the Second World War. Other stone fortifications guarded the borders with Wales and Scotland, the most impressive being Hadrian's Wall. After the collapse of the Roman Empire it was another eight centuries before such powerful defences were required. The Norman Castles The next castles to be built in England were constructed in the middle of the 11th century by Edward the Confessor and followed the pattern being developed by the Normans who has conquered France. A mound, or motte, was raised up to one hundred feet in height. These could be a natural feature, a man made mound of earth or a combination of the two. A wooden fortification, a keep, protected the top of the motte and another surrounded the motte and some adjacent land forming a bailey where most of the inhabitants lived. A ditch outside the bailey was an additional defence. An example of one of the first castles of this design is Richard's Castle in Herefordshire. The Norman Invasion Immediately after the invasion in 1066, the Normans commenced a massive programme of castle building to protect themselves and local supporters while they advanced across the rest of the country. These initially followed the same motte and bailey design, and were predominantly constructed of wood, but some later ones such as Totnes Castle (pictured left) are believed to have been started with stone defences. The earliest keeps were generally circular, but rectangular or square ones became more popular as it was easier to construct living accommodation inside. Some of these early castles still remain but many were abandoned as the invasion progressed. Those that did survive have been extended over the years but the remainder either have vanished altogether or just a motte still stands. The motte & bailey design was the standard defence of the 11th and 12th century, but the shell keep, a much larger keep on a lower motte into which most of the accommodation could be fitted became more common in the 12th century. After the invasion was complete there was time for more extensive defences to be built up in the most important cities. By 1085 there were approximately 100 well defended fortifications built both by the King and his Barons. Wood was readily available across most of the country but is not the ideal defence because of its flammability so existing structures were rebuilt in stone over the next 100 years. Rebuilding in Stone Initially some were simple rebuilds, but from the last quarter of the 11th century (until the middle of the 14th century) larger, more powerful square stone keeps, protected by an outer stone wall, were designed, for example the White Tower at the Tower of London and at Rochester Castle. Circular keeps came into use from the middle of the 12th century as they had no weak corner spots that could be undermined. The disadvantage was the difficulty of building living space inside, but to overcome this a few were circular on the inside but square on the inside. Enlargement and Strengthening Towards the end of the 12th century castle building became a royal prerogative as the Barons had lost much of their earlier power. King Richard 1 instituted a new system at the end of the 12th century known as a Licence to Crennelate which required the Kings's approval before new buildings or fortifications were constructed. The designs of new buildings slowly evolved with the emphasis towards high walls which were well fortified with towers. The keep lost its importance and was often replaced by a tall strong gatehouse - a barbican. The towers then were placed closer together and were more numerous. As the next stage towers were added to provide a concentric structure where a breach in the outer wall could still be defended from an inner defensive structure e.g. Pembroke & Beeston castles. Additional baileys protected with walls were also added to existing castles such as Corfe and Chepstow. The most highly refined concentric castles date from the late 13th to early 14th century during the invasion of Wales when a string of purpose built structures was erected across North Wales including Caernarvon & Harlech castles. These were the last of the massive residential castles to be built by the monarchs and most are still in good condition, due mainly to the strength of their construction. Comfort vs Strength Whilst renovation of the existing major castles continued, new developments in England between 1350 and 1450 were limited to smaller structures such as fortified manor houses built with high walls and towers, and tower houses or pele towers, like stand alone keeps. These were built mainly by rich landowners rather than the nobility and were often constructed of brick, rather than stone. Whilst these buildings provided protection they were not as strong as earlier castles as they were built to be lived in with comfort and often had large windows. Pele towers were very numerous near the Scottish borders. A New Design During the next hundred years, the changing political climate meant that there was little need for new castles and fortifications. This continued until 1540, Tudor times, when the threat from abroad re-emerged. To defend the coast a number of new, extremely strong and well armed gun batteries with a low profile and a central keep were constructed close to the shore such as Calshot and St Mawes castles. In terms of their design these would be better described as "forts" than "castles". The Civil War This period, from 1642 to 1660, caused the downfall of so many of the once splendid castles of England and Wales. Sieges and cannon bombardment caused massive damage, and towards the end of the war many were punished by slighting or destruction of the major defences to prevent them being used for future conflicts. Following such damage the most common outcome was that the castle was abandoned and its stone was removed for building local houses. Castles that were spared this damage were mainly those held by the Parliamentary troops and which were essential to the defences of the country, which is why those like Windsor and Dover castles are still in such good condition today. This marked the point in time when the development of armaments outstripped that of stone walls and a new approach to defence was needed. The final stage in the development of English fortifications started in the 17th century, but only fully flourished in the period 1860 to 1880, in both cases as a response to invasion. In general the low profile of the 1540 castles was maintained, but the construction now was of earth and brick with dry moat surrounds. The exception to this were the 103 early 19th century Martello towers protecting the coast of East Anglia, Sussex and Kent. The most extensive and final construction of major fortifications was that of the 79 Palmerston forts of the 19th century defending the Thames and the coastal naval bases of Plymouth, Chatham, Dover, Milford Haven and Portsmouth. These were a mainly land based forts but six additional structures were built in the shallow waters approaching three of the ports. These low level forts were never tested in combat, but before the end of the 19th century they lost their effectiveness as armament technology developed rapidly. Within a few years of their construction the size and design of cannon developed and rapidly and the range of guns increased from 3 miles to over 15 miles meaning the forts could be destroyed by ships that were potentially out of sight over the horizon. For more information see the A brief history of Armament page. There was a last flourish of "castle" building in the 19th century when a number of extremely wealthy industrialists built their new mansions to look like castles - Castell Coch, Bodelwyddan. The final stage in the development of defensive structures in England and Wales took place in the 1950's and 1960's with the creation of deep underground nuclear shelters - very strong but nothing to look at! The distribution of castle building across England and Wales century by century is shown on the "Locations (Century by Century)" page.	<urn:uuid:7f1cc8e8-c60a-4c21-a2a4-b2acc260cf24>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://ecastles.co.uk/history.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250603761.28/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121103642-20200121132642-00323.warc.gz	en	0.988105	1,691	3.609375	4	[ -0.11757324635982513, 0.2374049872159958, 0.36592549085617065, -0.10253803431987762, -0.13924096524715424, -0.14414538443088531, -0.21183739602565765, -0.19093482196331024, -0.044316984713077545, -0.335857629776001, -0.1016567051410675, -0.48684966564178467, -0.015331818722188473, 0.223991...	5	The First Castles The first buildings that we think of as castles are the Roman Saxon Shore Forts. These were constructed during the first to third centuries following the invasion in AD53. Ten castles were built between Hampshire and Norfolk and parts of most of them still survive. One, Pevensey, was still in use during the Second World War. Other stone fortifications guarded the borders with Wales and Scotland, the most impressive being Hadrian's Wall. After the collapse of the Roman Empire it was another eight centuries before such powerful defences were required. The Norman Castles The next castles to be built in England were constructed in the middle of the 11th century by Edward the Confessor and followed the pattern being developed by the Normans who has conquered France. A mound, or motte, was raised up to one hundred feet in height. These could be a natural feature, a man made mound of earth or a combination of the two. A wooden fortification, a keep, protected the top of the motte and another surrounded the motte and some adjacent land forming a bailey where most of the inhabitants lived. A ditch outside the bailey was an additional defence. An example of one of the first castles of this design is Richard's Castle in Herefordshire. The Norman Invasion Immediately after the invasion in 1066, the Normans commenced a massive programme of castle building to protect themselves and local supporters while they advanced across the rest of the country. These initially followed the same motte and bailey design, and were predominantly constructed of wood, but some later ones such as Totnes Castle (pictured left) are believed to have been started with stone defences. The earliest keeps were generally circular, but rectangular or square ones became more popular as it was easier to construct living accommodation inside. Some of these early castles still remain but many were abandoned as the invasion progressed. Those that did survive have been extended over the years but the remainder either have vanished altogether or just a motte still stands. The motte & bailey design was the standard defence of the 11th and 12th century, but the shell keep, a much larger keep on a lower motte into which most of the accommodation could be fitted became more common in the 12th century. After the invasion was complete there was time for more extensive defences to be built up in the most important cities. By 1085 there were approximately 100 well defended fortifications built both by the King and his Barons. Wood was readily available across most of the country but is not the ideal defence because of its flammability so existing structures were rebuilt in stone over the next 100 years. Rebuilding in Stone Initially some were simple rebuilds, but from the last quarter of the 11th century (until the middle of the 14th century) larger, more powerful square stone keeps, protected by an outer stone wall, were designed, for example the White Tower at the Tower of London and at Rochester Castle. Circular keeps came into use from the middle of the 12th century as they had no weak corner spots that could be undermined. The disadvantage was the difficulty of building living space inside, but to overcome this a few were circular on the inside but square on the inside. Enlargement and Strengthening Towards the end of the 12th century castle building became a royal prerogative as the Barons had lost much of their earlier power. King Richard 1 instituted a new system at the end of the 12th century known as a Licence to Crennelate which required the Kings's approval before new buildings or fortifications were constructed. The designs of new buildings slowly evolved with the emphasis towards high walls which were well fortified with towers. The keep lost its importance and was often replaced by a tall strong gatehouse - a barbican. The towers then were placed closer together and were more numerous. As the next stage towers were added to provide a concentric structure where a breach in the outer wall could still be defended from an inner defensive structure e.g. Pembroke & Beeston castles. Additional baileys protected with walls were also added to existing castles such as Corfe and Chepstow. The most highly refined concentric castles date from the late 13th to early 14th century during the invasion of Wales when a string of purpose built structures was erected across North Wales including Caernarvon & Harlech castles. These were the last of the massive residential castles to be built by the monarchs and most are still in good condition, due mainly to the strength of their construction. Comfort vs Strength Whilst renovation of the existing major castles continued, new developments in England between 1350 and 1450 were limited to smaller structures such as fortified manor houses built with high walls and towers, and tower houses or pele towers, like stand alone keeps. These were built mainly by rich landowners rather than the nobility and were often constructed of brick, rather than stone. Whilst these buildings provided protection they were not as strong as earlier castles as they were built to be lived in with comfort and often had large windows. Pele towers were very numerous near the Scottish borders. A New Design During the next hundred years, the changing political climate meant that there was little need for new castles and fortifications. This continued until 1540, Tudor times, when the threat from abroad re-emerged. To defend the coast a number of new, extremely strong and well armed gun batteries with a low profile and a central keep were constructed close to the shore such as Calshot and St Mawes castles. In terms of their design these would be better described as "forts" than "castles". The Civil War This period, from 1642 to 1660, caused the downfall of so many of the once splendid castles of England and Wales. Sieges and cannon bombardment caused massive damage, and towards the end of the war many were punished by slighting or destruction of the major defences to prevent them being used for future conflicts. Following such damage the most common outcome was that the castle was abandoned and its stone was removed for building local houses. Castles that were spared this damage were mainly those held by the Parliamentary troops and which were essential to the defences of the country, which is why those like Windsor and Dover castles are still in such good condition today. This marked the point in time when the development of armaments outstripped that of stone walls and a new approach to defence was needed. The final stage in the development of English fortifications started in the 17th century, but only fully flourished in the period 1860 to 1880, in both cases as a response to invasion. In general the low profile of the 1540 castles was maintained, but the construction now was of earth and brick with dry moat surrounds. The exception to this were the 103 early 19th century Martello towers protecting the coast of East Anglia, Sussex and Kent. The most extensive and final construction of major fortifications was that of the 79 Palmerston forts of the 19th century defending the Thames and the coastal naval bases of Plymouth, Chatham, Dover, Milford Haven and Portsmouth. These were a mainly land based forts but six additional structures were built in the shallow waters approaching three of the ports. These low level forts were never tested in combat, but before the end of the 19th century they lost their effectiveness as armament technology developed rapidly. Within a few years of their construction the size and design of cannon developed and rapidly and the range of guns increased from 3 miles to over 15 miles meaning the forts could be destroyed by ships that were potentially out of sight over the horizon. For more information see the A brief history of Armament page. There was a last flourish of "castle" building in the 19th century when a number of extremely wealthy industrialists built their new mansions to look like castles - Castell Coch, Bodelwyddan. The final stage in the development of defensive structures in England and Wales took place in the 1950's and 1960's with the creation of deep underground nuclear shelters - very strong but nothing to look at! The distribution of castle building across England and Wales century by century is shown on the "Locations (Century by Century)" page.	1,776	ENGLISH	1
OCCUPATION: Military Leader, Dictator BIRTH DATE: April 20, 1889 DEATH DATE: April 30, 1945 PLACE OF BIRTH: Braunau am Inn, Austria Baptized a Catholic, Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) was born on April 20, 1889, in the Upper Austrian border town Braunau am Inn, located approximately 65 miles east of Munich and nearly 30 miles north of Salzburg. His father, Alois Hitler (1837-1903), was a mid-level customs official. Born out of wedlock to Maria Anna Schickelgruber in 1837, Alois Schickelgruber changed his name in 1876 to Hitler, the Christian name of the man who married his mother five years after his birth. Alois Hitler's illegitimacy would cause speculation as early as the 1920s -- and still present in popular culture today -- that Hitler's grandfather was Jewish. Credible evidence to support the notion of Hitler's Jewish descent has never turned up. The two most likely candidates to have been Hitler's grandfather are the man who married his grandmother and that man's brother. Hitler did extremely well at primary school and it appeared he had a bright academic future in front of him. He was also popular with other pupils and was much admired for his leadership qualities. He was also a deeply religious child and for a while considered the possibility of becoming a monk. Competition was much tougher in the larger secondary school and his reaction to not being top of the class was to stop trying. His father was furious as he had high hopes that Hitler would follow his example and join the Austrian civil service when he left school. However, Hitler was a stubborn child and attempts by his parents and teachers to change his attitude towards his studies were unsuccessful. Hitler also lost his popularity with his fellow pupils. They were no longer willing to accept him as one of their leaders. As Hitler liked giving orders he spent his time with younger pupils. He enjoyed games that involved fighting and he loved re-enacting battles from the Boer War. His favourite game was playing the role of a commando rescuing Boers from English concentration camps The Great Depression in Germany provided a political opportunity for Hitler. Germans were ambivalent to the parliamentary republic and increasingly open to extremist options. In 1932, Hitler ran against Paul von Hindenburg for the presidency. Hitler came in second in both rounds of the election, garnering more than 35 percent of the vote in the final election. The election established Hitler as a strong force in German politics. Hindenburg reluctantly agreed to appoint Hitler as chancellor in order to promote political balance. Hitler used his position as chancellor to form a de facto legal dictatorship. The Reichtag Fire Decree, announced after a suspicious fire at the Reichtag, suspended basic rights and allowed detention without trial. Hitler also engineered the passage of the Enabling Act, which gave his cabinet full legislative powers for a period of four years and allowed deviations from the constitution. Having achieved full control over the legislative and executive branches of government, Hitler and his political allies embarked on a systematic suppression of the remaining political opposition. By the end of June, the other parties had been intimidated into disbanding. On July 14, 1933, Hitler's Nazi Party was declared the only legal political party in Germany. Military opposition was also punished. The demands of the SA for more…	<urn:uuid:ec0ed113-3e06-4bb2-b0ce-42cc9b7ee2de>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.majortests.com/essay/Adolf-Hitler-Occupation-581718.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251669967.70/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125041318-20200125070318-00088.warc.gz	en	0.989586	702	3.28125	3	[ -0.3304506540298462, 0.9056417942047119, 0.09356065094470978, -0.2389710247516632, -0.22164250910282135, 0.25433140993118286, 0.36626341938972473, -0.2950461506843567, 0.05482013523578644, -0.15717393159866333, 0.27953189611434937, -0.2891564965248108, 0.3128598928451538, 0.509045779705047...	1	OCCUPATION: Military Leader, Dictator BIRTH DATE: April 20, 1889 DEATH DATE: April 30, 1945 PLACE OF BIRTH: Braunau am Inn, Austria Baptized a Catholic, Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) was born on April 20, 1889, in the Upper Austrian border town Braunau am Inn, located approximately 65 miles east of Munich and nearly 30 miles north of Salzburg. His father, Alois Hitler (1837-1903), was a mid-level customs official. Born out of wedlock to Maria Anna Schickelgruber in 1837, Alois Schickelgruber changed his name in 1876 to Hitler, the Christian name of the man who married his mother five years after his birth. Alois Hitler's illegitimacy would cause speculation as early as the 1920s -- and still present in popular culture today -- that Hitler's grandfather was Jewish. Credible evidence to support the notion of Hitler's Jewish descent has never turned up. The two most likely candidates to have been Hitler's grandfather are the man who married his grandmother and that man's brother. Hitler did extremely well at primary school and it appeared he had a bright academic future in front of him. He was also popular with other pupils and was much admired for his leadership qualities. He was also a deeply religious child and for a while considered the possibility of becoming a monk. Competition was much tougher in the larger secondary school and his reaction to not being top of the class was to stop trying. His father was furious as he had high hopes that Hitler would follow his example and join the Austrian civil service when he left school. However, Hitler was a stubborn child and attempts by his parents and teachers to change his attitude towards his studies were unsuccessful. Hitler also lost his popularity with his fellow pupils. They were no longer willing to accept him as one of their leaders. As Hitler liked giving orders he spent his time with younger pupils. He enjoyed games that involved fighting and he loved re-enacting battles from the Boer War. His favourite game was playing the role of a commando rescuing Boers from English concentration camps The Great Depression in Germany provided a political opportunity for Hitler. Germans were ambivalent to the parliamentary republic and increasingly open to extremist options. In 1932, Hitler ran against Paul von Hindenburg for the presidency. Hitler came in second in both rounds of the election, garnering more than 35 percent of the vote in the final election. The election established Hitler as a strong force in German politics. Hindenburg reluctantly agreed to appoint Hitler as chancellor in order to promote political balance. Hitler used his position as chancellor to form a de facto legal dictatorship. The Reichtag Fire Decree, announced after a suspicious fire at the Reichtag, suspended basic rights and allowed detention without trial. Hitler also engineered the passage of the Enabling Act, which gave his cabinet full legislative powers for a period of four years and allowed deviations from the constitution. Having achieved full control over the legislative and executive branches of government, Hitler and his political allies embarked on a systematic suppression of the remaining political opposition. By the end of June, the other parties had been intimidated into disbanding. On July 14, 1933, Hitler's Nazi Party was declared the only legal political party in Germany. Military opposition was also punished. The demands of the SA for more…	743	ENGLISH	1
Since time immemorial, the black community has been put in the limelight for all wrong reasons and as a result suffered turmoil and discrimination in that matter. This form of misperception is borne out of the fact that stereotyping has taken roots within the American society. It should be noted that this social disorder has been made a basis upon which black identity, irrespective of gender and class, is gauged and criticized in that matter. In this stereotyping, African-Americans are considered to be lazy, dishonest and violent people, whose life is ruined in jails. Therefore, this assignment tries to examine the reasons put forth by the American community in portraying this race in a negative manner. The origin of the black community in America comes from Africa. African-American community entered America as slaves and they were, thus, considered people of low class and race. For instance, in the 18th century they were subjected to different social atrocities in the society which included unemployment and poor salary. In that case, they were forced to embark on such unsocial activities as theft and burglary in effort to seek basic needs. Notwithstanding, as a result of unemployment, this race was forced to stay in highly populated areas within cities. It should also be noted that, as a result of unemployment, they were forced to stay behind in homes so that they received government welfare every month. In my opinion, I think that is the main reason behind the race being termed to be lazy and dishonest. In the course of the 18th century, history has it that this group faced racial stereotyping from their white masters, since they were perceived to be buffoons and lazy servants. Also, it is noted that as a result of this misperception, the black community lost confidence in their race and ethnical background. The positive element of self-esteem diminished with time and, as a result, most of them embarked on selling drugs in the streets, where they formed gangs and cliques that developed to be violent with time. Most of the black youth embarked on drug abuse, which made them disinterested with education. Consequently, there was increased crime rate and security personnel targeted the aforementioned gangs who ended up in jail. However, this facet did not deter others from pursuing education, since they got educated and launched sensitive-campaigns against segregation of black people. The negative image put forth to black people is considered a ‘metaphorical symbol’, since it is perceived that black people lack the necessary skills and abilities to conduct such positive activities as legal businesses. The aforementioned reason contributed to the high rate of unemployment amongst the black communities. Subsequently, the black community is sometimes blamed for the atrocities which befell them. It is noted that they contributed to this negative perception by way of unhealthy competition for limited resources as well as opportunities. For instance, the drug-related gangs in the streets killed each other to occupy and control certain marketing niche. However, in the contemporary society this negative image continues to exist due to the manner in which black people were perceived. Nowadays, the majority of the black people have defeated all odds to access quality education and, just like any other community in the United States, have received a substantial amount of support, which they have used to explore different opportunities in both public and private sector of the American economy. Unlike the past, nowadays, black people have managed to secure leadership roles which they have used to sensitize people on the matter at hand. In that case, they now own both legal businesses as well as quality homes. Most of them have college degrees, which they have put in use to enrich the society at all costs. Thus, it is insensitive for people to continue believing that black people are still cocooned in past vices like violence and drug abuse, since these vices cut-across all races in the United States of America. It is fair to assume that there are still some of the black people irrespective of class and gender engaging in the societal vice, but it is unsafe to generalize the matter at hand.	<urn:uuid:7d148e0e-ed1f-40f9-ad7e-c475be03d1de>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://essaysprofessor.com/samples/sociology/african-american-community.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250620381.59/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124130719-20200124155719-00030.warc.gz	en	0.983941	819	3.671875	4	[ 0.08340295404195786, 0.49036258459091187, 0.07512945681810379, 0.18644383549690247, -0.06010174751281738, 0.2992909550666809, -0.04367934912443161, -0.145588219165802, -0.24456170201301575, 0.1041208803653717, 0.5961229801177979, -0.13143770396709442, -0.15965096652507782, 0.19846689701080...	11	Since time immemorial, the black community has been put in the limelight for all wrong reasons and as a result suffered turmoil and discrimination in that matter. This form of misperception is borne out of the fact that stereotyping has taken roots within the American society. It should be noted that this social disorder has been made a basis upon which black identity, irrespective of gender and class, is gauged and criticized in that matter. In this stereotyping, African-Americans are considered to be lazy, dishonest and violent people, whose life is ruined in jails. Therefore, this assignment tries to examine the reasons put forth by the American community in portraying this race in a negative manner. The origin of the black community in America comes from Africa. African-American community entered America as slaves and they were, thus, considered people of low class and race. For instance, in the 18th century they were subjected to different social atrocities in the society which included unemployment and poor salary. In that case, they were forced to embark on such unsocial activities as theft and burglary in effort to seek basic needs. Notwithstanding, as a result of unemployment, this race was forced to stay in highly populated areas within cities. It should also be noted that, as a result of unemployment, they were forced to stay behind in homes so that they received government welfare every month. In my opinion, I think that is the main reason behind the race being termed to be lazy and dishonest. In the course of the 18th century, history has it that this group faced racial stereotyping from their white masters, since they were perceived to be buffoons and lazy servants. Also, it is noted that as a result of this misperception, the black community lost confidence in their race and ethnical background. The positive element of self-esteem diminished with time and, as a result, most of them embarked on selling drugs in the streets, where they formed gangs and cliques that developed to be violent with time. Most of the black youth embarked on drug abuse, which made them disinterested with education. Consequently, there was increased crime rate and security personnel targeted the aforementioned gangs who ended up in jail. However, this facet did not deter others from pursuing education, since they got educated and launched sensitive-campaigns against segregation of black people. The negative image put forth to black people is considered a ‘metaphorical symbol’, since it is perceived that black people lack the necessary skills and abilities to conduct such positive activities as legal businesses. The aforementioned reason contributed to the high rate of unemployment amongst the black communities. Subsequently, the black community is sometimes blamed for the atrocities which befell them. It is noted that they contributed to this negative perception by way of unhealthy competition for limited resources as well as opportunities. For instance, the drug-related gangs in the streets killed each other to occupy and control certain marketing niche. However, in the contemporary society this negative image continues to exist due to the manner in which black people were perceived. Nowadays, the majority of the black people have defeated all odds to access quality education and, just like any other community in the United States, have received a substantial amount of support, which they have used to explore different opportunities in both public and private sector of the American economy. Unlike the past, nowadays, black people have managed to secure leadership roles which they have used to sensitize people on the matter at hand. In that case, they now own both legal businesses as well as quality homes. Most of them have college degrees, which they have put in use to enrich the society at all costs. Thus, it is insensitive for people to continue believing that black people are still cocooned in past vices like violence and drug abuse, since these vices cut-across all races in the United States of America. It is fair to assume that there are still some of the black people irrespective of class and gender engaging in the societal vice, but it is unsafe to generalize the matter at hand.	808	ENGLISH	1
Today, the philosophy of Stoicism is categorized into three time periods: Early Stoa, Middle Stoa, and Late Stoa. The works of Late Stoa do not survive in their entirety but are more intact and voluminous than any other time period of Stoic philosophy. The works of the Late Stoa writers, and today the most famous of the Stoics or, the “Main Three Stoics”, is that of Marcus Aurelius, Seneca the Younger, and Epictetus. Below is a brief look at each. “You have power over your mind – not outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength.” Marcus Aurelius was the emperor of Rome starting in 161 AD and continued until his death in 180 AD. His book or personal journal known today as The Meditations or simply Meditations, is one of the most widely read works of the ancient time and showcases the mentality and mindfulness of the emperor during his final years. During his reign as emperor, Marcus was the most powerful man in the world. He was known as the last of the “Five Good Emperors”, a time characterized by substantial peace which brought stability to Rome. He was known for his calm demeanor, his pursuit of knowledge and virtue was one of his highest qualities. While he brought great strength and stability to Rome, his reign was not without adversity. During his time as emperor, the country faced wars with Parthia and the Germanic tribes. He was crowned the Philosopher King, a title which was bestowed upon those who held great power, and pursued a simple life through wisdom and intelligence. SENECA THE YOUNGER “It is not that we have a short time to live, but that we waste a lot of it.” Seneca the Younger was the son of the Roman writer Seneca the Elder. He was one of the most known and regarded philosophers, dramatists, and statesman during his lifetime. Compared to other Stoics, much of Seneca’s work still survives, his most notable works being Letters from a Stoic and his essay On the Shortness of Life. Around 41 AD, Seneca was exiled to the island of Corsica by emperor Claudius. Seneca was offered to return from exile after eight years when he was requested to become the tutor of Nero. Nero would grow into one of the most powerful and notorious emperors of Rome. Later in his life, Seneca would find himself accused of being a traitor to Nero and was implicated in a plot to overthrow the emperor. Nero sent down the orders for Seneca to be killed. Seneca was forced to commit suicide in 65 AD. “Circumstances don’t make the man, they only reveal him to himself.” Epictetus was born into this world as a slave. The household to which he was a slave was a wealthy one and his master allowed him to pursue an education in liberal studies. It is from this that Epictetus began studying Stoic philosophy through the teachings of Musonius Rufus. After Nero’s death, Epictetus was granted freedom from his masters and went on to teach Stoic philosophy for nearly 25 years. Epictetus would eventually be forced to flee Rome for Greece when the Roman emperor Domitian banned all of the philosophers from the country. Epictetus would make the most of his situation and continue teaching philosophy in Greece until his demise. The writings that survive today of Epictetus are not his own, but rather, notes written by one of his students, Arrian, who composed his lessons in what is now known as The Discourses of Epictetus and The Enchiridion. The works of Epictetus were amongst the most influential on Marcus Aurelius. In addition to the three main Stoics, there is a handful of works and Stoic philosophers who are influential throughout the philosophy and whose work, at least in part, survive to this day. Zeno was the founder of Stoic philosophy and he began teaching the philosophy around 300 BC. The Stoic philosophy which Zeno started was based on ideas and morals which he learned from the Cynic school of philosophy around this time. Where the two differed was that Zeno believed living a virtuous life consisted of living good in accord with Nature and having a clear-mind to better understand ourselves. Cleanthes was a student of Zeno’s and the second head of the Stoic philosophy. As a student of Zeno’s, Cleanthes became known as “the ass” while a student of Zeno’s because of his slowness which was said to be a characteristic of his lac of intellect.. It is said that he greatly enjoyed this nickname as it demonstrated his ability to accept and carry anything Zeno gave him. Like many philosophers and writers, Cleanthes lived dual lives wherein during the day he studied and promoted philosophy while at night he was a water-carrier, “drawing water in the gardens.” Chrysippus was the third head of Stoic philosophy and is the last of the Stoic philosophers from the Early Stoa period. He was known as a prolific writer and spent his time teaching and expounding on the ideas which Zeno and Cleanthes had set forth for the philosophy. Chrysippus was known for his love of learning and had a great desire to pursue intellectual studies. He is known today for building out the Stoic philosophy to what the later Stoics would come to study and worked diligently to protect the school from criticism that arose through the teachings of Zeno and Cleanthes, as well as solidify its importance to protect against future attacks. Musonius Rufus was a Stoic philosopher in the 1st century AD and is remembered today for both being the teacher of Epictetus as well as his writings which survive partially in the form of speeches he had given. His approach to philosophy was built on the belief that anyone could pursue it and how philosophy was a practical instrument to help individuals in almost any situation. Cato the Younger is one of the most regarded of all the Stoics for his virtue and continued pursuit of living the values of Stoic philosophy. Cato had a long career in both the military and politics, and was known for his guidance and wisdom. Cicero, the famous orator and statesman, regarded Cato as one of the brightest of all the philosophers. Cicero goes so far as to write How to Grow Old in the voice of Cato in order to properly convey the wisdom of the Stoic.	<urn:uuid:1f46934b-a66e-4e30-8146-b5238e8f6cf7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://stoicwithin.com/the-stoics/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599789.45/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120195035-20200120224035-00191.warc.gz	en	0.9902	1,375	3.703125	4	[ 0.14929887652397156, 0.40876543521881104, 0.18218176066875458, -0.202669158577919, -0.49373292922973633, -0.3222651779651642, -0.06896409392356873, 0.055275946855545044, 0.02778441458940506, -0.22611752152442932, 0.0023212803062051535, -0.05988569185137749, -0.17248672246932983, 0.33633166...	6	Today, the philosophy of Stoicism is categorized into three time periods: Early Stoa, Middle Stoa, and Late Stoa. The works of Late Stoa do not survive in their entirety but are more intact and voluminous than any other time period of Stoic philosophy. The works of the Late Stoa writers, and today the most famous of the Stoics or, the “Main Three Stoics”, is that of Marcus Aurelius, Seneca the Younger, and Epictetus. Below is a brief look at each. “You have power over your mind – not outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength.” Marcus Aurelius was the emperor of Rome starting in 161 AD and continued until his death in 180 AD. His book or personal journal known today as The Meditations or simply Meditations, is one of the most widely read works of the ancient time and showcases the mentality and mindfulness of the emperor during his final years. During his reign as emperor, Marcus was the most powerful man in the world. He was known as the last of the “Five Good Emperors”, a time characterized by substantial peace which brought stability to Rome. He was known for his calm demeanor, his pursuit of knowledge and virtue was one of his highest qualities. While he brought great strength and stability to Rome, his reign was not without adversity. During his time as emperor, the country faced wars with Parthia and the Germanic tribes. He was crowned the Philosopher King, a title which was bestowed upon those who held great power, and pursued a simple life through wisdom and intelligence. SENECA THE YOUNGER “It is not that we have a short time to live, but that we waste a lot of it.” Seneca the Younger was the son of the Roman writer Seneca the Elder. He was one of the most known and regarded philosophers, dramatists, and statesman during his lifetime. Compared to other Stoics, much of Seneca’s work still survives, his most notable works being Letters from a Stoic and his essay On the Shortness of Life. Around 41 AD, Seneca was exiled to the island of Corsica by emperor Claudius. Seneca was offered to return from exile after eight years when he was requested to become the tutor of Nero. Nero would grow into one of the most powerful and notorious emperors of Rome. Later in his life, Seneca would find himself accused of being a traitor to Nero and was implicated in a plot to overthrow the emperor. Nero sent down the orders for Seneca to be killed. Seneca was forced to commit suicide in 65 AD. “Circumstances don’t make the man, they only reveal him to himself.” Epictetus was born into this world as a slave. The household to which he was a slave was a wealthy one and his master allowed him to pursue an education in liberal studies. It is from this that Epictetus began studying Stoic philosophy through the teachings of Musonius Rufus. After Nero’s death, Epictetus was granted freedom from his masters and went on to teach Stoic philosophy for nearly 25 years. Epictetus would eventually be forced to flee Rome for Greece when the Roman emperor Domitian banned all of the philosophers from the country. Epictetus would make the most of his situation and continue teaching philosophy in Greece until his demise. The writings that survive today of Epictetus are not his own, but rather, notes written by one of his students, Arrian, who composed his lessons in what is now known as The Discourses of Epictetus and The Enchiridion. The works of Epictetus were amongst the most influential on Marcus Aurelius. In addition to the three main Stoics, there is a handful of works and Stoic philosophers who are influential throughout the philosophy and whose work, at least in part, survive to this day. Zeno was the founder of Stoic philosophy and he began teaching the philosophy around 300 BC. The Stoic philosophy which Zeno started was based on ideas and morals which he learned from the Cynic school of philosophy around this time. Where the two differed was that Zeno believed living a virtuous life consisted of living good in accord with Nature and having a clear-mind to better understand ourselves. Cleanthes was a student of Zeno’s and the second head of the Stoic philosophy. As a student of Zeno’s, Cleanthes became known as “the ass” while a student of Zeno’s because of his slowness which was said to be a characteristic of his lac of intellect.. It is said that he greatly enjoyed this nickname as it demonstrated his ability to accept and carry anything Zeno gave him. Like many philosophers and writers, Cleanthes lived dual lives wherein during the day he studied and promoted philosophy while at night he was a water-carrier, “drawing water in the gardens.” Chrysippus was the third head of Stoic philosophy and is the last of the Stoic philosophers from the Early Stoa period. He was known as a prolific writer and spent his time teaching and expounding on the ideas which Zeno and Cleanthes had set forth for the philosophy. Chrysippus was known for his love of learning and had a great desire to pursue intellectual studies. He is known today for building out the Stoic philosophy to what the later Stoics would come to study and worked diligently to protect the school from criticism that arose through the teachings of Zeno and Cleanthes, as well as solidify its importance to protect against future attacks. Musonius Rufus was a Stoic philosopher in the 1st century AD and is remembered today for both being the teacher of Epictetus as well as his writings which survive partially in the form of speeches he had given. His approach to philosophy was built on the belief that anyone could pursue it and how philosophy was a practical instrument to help individuals in almost any situation. Cato the Younger is one of the most regarded of all the Stoics for his virtue and continued pursuit of living the values of Stoic philosophy. Cato had a long career in both the military and politics, and was known for his guidance and wisdom. Cicero, the famous orator and statesman, regarded Cato as one of the brightest of all the philosophers. Cicero goes so far as to write How to Grow Old in the voice of Cato in order to properly convey the wisdom of the Stoic.	1,335	ENGLISH	1
Grace's Guide is the leading source of historical information on industry and manufacturing in Britain. This web publication contains 137,357 pages of information and 220,748 images on early companies, their products and the people who designed and built them. The Leeds and Selby Railway was a railway company in the United Kingdom which opened in 1834, between Leeds and Selby. For a number of years the manufacturers in Leeds had been becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the route to the North Sea ports via the Aire and Calder Navigation. Not only were the charges high, there had been problems with the water supply in Summer. In 1814 This led to a discussion in the local newspaper of the merits of a railway similar to the recently-opened Middleton Colliery Railway. 1824 December 8th. 'We understand it is in contemplation to establish a rail-road between Leeds and Selby'. 1825 It's route was surveyed by George Stephenson, but James Walker in 1829, furnished a better plan. Stephenson's line included three inclined planes and the crossing on the level of several turnpike roads. Walker's had none of these difficulties. There was no gradient steeper than 1 in 35, and locomotives could be used. The only feature for the worse was the tunnel, 700 yards long, under Richmond Hill, outside the Leeds terminus. 1830 The idea, however, remained dormant until 1829, when, with the example of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, then nearing completion, a new scheme was floated to connect Leeds with a port on the River Humber at Selby and this received Parliamentary assent in 1830. This was necessary mainly to raise funds by public subscription, since much of the land already belonged to the directors. The route had the advantage of passing close by a number of quarries and coal mines. The terrain was easy by the standards of later railways, with gentle curves and the steepest gradient being two miles at 1 in 150. To achieve this however there were a number of embankments (some six and a half miles) and cuttings, the longest being 1.5 miles. There was one tunnel of 700 yards, and forty three bridges, the latter being wide enough to allow future expansion to four tracks. The rails used were similar to those used on the Liverpool and Manchester, 15 foot T shaped of 35 lb to the yard, space at 4 foot 8½ inches. They were set on to either stone blocks or timber sleepers. The quality of stone initially used proved to be unsatisfactory. In some places the experiment was tried of using stones laid longitudinally under the rails and joined laterally with iron ties. By 1845, heavier rails, at 42lb per yard, began to be used. 1834 The line opened to passengers on the 22nd September 1834 from a station at Marsh Lane in Leeds. None of the stations had platforms although they were provided with well-proportioned buildings. At Leeds there was a separate goods depot and a repair shop. The original station at Selby was very large for the time, having by 1845 a three bay train shed capable of housing 98 carriages and wagons. Trains would pass through the station to a jetty by the waterside where passengers would alight the train and walk across the road to the connecting boat on the river. This site was just behind the current station site. Selby station was the first railway station to be built in Yorkshire, a fact commemorated by a plaque on the original building. The original engines were of the lightweight four-wheeled "Bury type" built by Fenton, Murray and Jackson of Leeds and Kirtley and Co of Warrington. There were first and second class carriages, tickets of different colours being used for different stations. This was one of the first railways and its directors had no experience of managing such a venture. It, therefore, did not prosper as it should have done. In 1839, the York and North Midland Railway opened, terminating with a branch to the Leeds and Selby Railway. The following year the York and North Midland Railway extended to meet the North Midland Railway at Normanton and Hudson bought a lease on the Leeds and Selby Railway to avoid competition into Leeds, buying it outright in 1844. In 1840 they were running four trains each day with fares at 4s and 3s	<urn:uuid:2ec861b9-ba70-41a6-901b-33b4516ac05b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://gracesguide.co.uk/Leeds_and_Selby_Railway	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250609478.50/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123071220-20200123100220-00287.warc.gz	en	0.982568	901	3.390625	3	[ 0.09061877429485321, -0.45993340015411377, 0.45485901832580566, 0.27772819995880127, -0.07349152117967606, -0.04157520458102226, -0.635662317276001, -0.1671840250492096, -0.38801074028015137, 0.12205681204795837, 0.09339931607246399, -0.6005852222442627, -0.18099047243595123, 0.00815832894...	1	Grace's Guide is the leading source of historical information on industry and manufacturing in Britain. This web publication contains 137,357 pages of information and 220,748 images on early companies, their products and the people who designed and built them. The Leeds and Selby Railway was a railway company in the United Kingdom which opened in 1834, between Leeds and Selby. For a number of years the manufacturers in Leeds had been becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the route to the North Sea ports via the Aire and Calder Navigation. Not only were the charges high, there had been problems with the water supply in Summer. In 1814 This led to a discussion in the local newspaper of the merits of a railway similar to the recently-opened Middleton Colliery Railway. 1824 December 8th. 'We understand it is in contemplation to establish a rail-road between Leeds and Selby'. 1825 It's route was surveyed by George Stephenson, but James Walker in 1829, furnished a better plan. Stephenson's line included three inclined planes and the crossing on the level of several turnpike roads. Walker's had none of these difficulties. There was no gradient steeper than 1 in 35, and locomotives could be used. The only feature for the worse was the tunnel, 700 yards long, under Richmond Hill, outside the Leeds terminus. 1830 The idea, however, remained dormant until 1829, when, with the example of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, then nearing completion, a new scheme was floated to connect Leeds with a port on the River Humber at Selby and this received Parliamentary assent in 1830. This was necessary mainly to raise funds by public subscription, since much of the land already belonged to the directors. The route had the advantage of passing close by a number of quarries and coal mines. The terrain was easy by the standards of later railways, with gentle curves and the steepest gradient being two miles at 1 in 150. To achieve this however there were a number of embankments (some six and a half miles) and cuttings, the longest being 1.5 miles. There was one tunnel of 700 yards, and forty three bridges, the latter being wide enough to allow future expansion to four tracks. The rails used were similar to those used on the Liverpool and Manchester, 15 foot T shaped of 35 lb to the yard, space at 4 foot 8½ inches. They were set on to either stone blocks or timber sleepers. The quality of stone initially used proved to be unsatisfactory. In some places the experiment was tried of using stones laid longitudinally under the rails and joined laterally with iron ties. By 1845, heavier rails, at 42lb per yard, began to be used. 1834 The line opened to passengers on the 22nd September 1834 from a station at Marsh Lane in Leeds. None of the stations had platforms although they were provided with well-proportioned buildings. At Leeds there was a separate goods depot and a repair shop. The original station at Selby was very large for the time, having by 1845 a three bay train shed capable of housing 98 carriages and wagons. Trains would pass through the station to a jetty by the waterside where passengers would alight the train and walk across the road to the connecting boat on the river. This site was just behind the current station site. Selby station was the first railway station to be built in Yorkshire, a fact commemorated by a plaque on the original building. The original engines were of the lightweight four-wheeled "Bury type" built by Fenton, Murray and Jackson of Leeds and Kirtley and Co of Warrington. There were first and second class carriages, tickets of different colours being used for different stations. This was one of the first railways and its directors had no experience of managing such a venture. It, therefore, did not prosper as it should have done. In 1839, the York and North Midland Railway opened, terminating with a branch to the Leeds and Selby Railway. The following year the York and North Midland Railway extended to meet the North Midland Railway at Normanton and Hudson bought a lease on the Leeds and Selby Railway to avoid competition into Leeds, buying it outright in 1844. In 1840 they were running four trains each day with fares at 4s and 3s	971	ENGLISH	1
There's new evidence that a widely used family of pesticides called neonicotinoids, already controversial because they can be harmful to pollinators, could be risky for insects and fish that live in water, too. The evidence comes from Lake Shinji, which lies near Japan's coast, next to the Sea of Japan. Masumi Yamamuro, a scientist with the Geological Survey of Japan, says the lake is famous for its views of the setting sun. "It's amazingly beautiful," she says. Lake Shinji was also the site of thriving fisheries. People harvested clams, and eels, and small fish called smelts. But, Yamamuro says, about a decade ago, people noticed that fish populations had declined drastically. "I was asked to investigate the cause of this decrease," she says. It was a puzzle. Yamamuro says the decline in fish populations did not seem to coincide with anything that people were keeping track of, like the lake's salinity, or levels of pollution. But she noticed something curious. One kind of fish in the lake was doing fine. This one had a more diverse diet; it could eat algae, as well as tiny insects in the water. The eels and the smelts that were dying off relied on insects and crustaceans for food. And that food source was vanishing. "So we concluded [that] something killed the food of the eels and the smelt," Yamamuro says. She and her colleagues now believe that they've identified the culprit: pesticides called neonicotinoids. The evidence is circumstantial. Right around the time the fish started having problems, early in the 1990s, farmers near the lake started using these pesticides on their rice paddies to control insect pests. Yamamuro also found traces of these chemicals in some parts of the lake. Those levels, she thinks, are high enough to cause problems for tiny aquatic animals. Also, neonicotinoids kill insects, but not the algae that the thriving fish were eating. She and her colleagues just published their findings in the journal Science. Source: NPR, November 2, 2019	<urn:uuid:2b8063a5-fb51-447d-815d-c585f0e7ae36>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.farmlandbirds.net/node/6241	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601628.36/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121074002-20200121103002-00216.warc.gz	en	0.985801	435	3.296875	3	[ -0.18826967477798462, -0.03684762120246887, 0.16507375240325928, -0.10068268328905106, 0.48990264534950256, 0.18001991510391235, 0.35782623291015625, 0.5480502247810364, -0.35848864912986755, -0.008711575530469418, 0.033935461193323135, -0.23519636690616608, 0.5513502359390259, 0.426955699...	12	There's new evidence that a widely used family of pesticides called neonicotinoids, already controversial because they can be harmful to pollinators, could be risky for insects and fish that live in water, too. The evidence comes from Lake Shinji, which lies near Japan's coast, next to the Sea of Japan. Masumi Yamamuro, a scientist with the Geological Survey of Japan, says the lake is famous for its views of the setting sun. "It's amazingly beautiful," she says. Lake Shinji was also the site of thriving fisheries. People harvested clams, and eels, and small fish called smelts. But, Yamamuro says, about a decade ago, people noticed that fish populations had declined drastically. "I was asked to investigate the cause of this decrease," she says. It was a puzzle. Yamamuro says the decline in fish populations did not seem to coincide with anything that people were keeping track of, like the lake's salinity, or levels of pollution. But she noticed something curious. One kind of fish in the lake was doing fine. This one had a more diverse diet; it could eat algae, as well as tiny insects in the water. The eels and the smelts that were dying off relied on insects and crustaceans for food. And that food source was vanishing. "So we concluded [that] something killed the food of the eels and the smelt," Yamamuro says. She and her colleagues now believe that they've identified the culprit: pesticides called neonicotinoids. The evidence is circumstantial. Right around the time the fish started having problems, early in the 1990s, farmers near the lake started using these pesticides on their rice paddies to control insect pests. Yamamuro also found traces of these chemicals in some parts of the lake. Those levels, she thinks, are high enough to cause problems for tiny aquatic animals. Also, neonicotinoids kill insects, but not the algae that the thriving fish were eating. She and her colleagues just published their findings in the journal Science. Source: NPR, November 2, 2019	444	ENGLISH	1
In August 1096, on the occasion of the first crusade, the Northern Europeans (known collectively as ‘Franks’ by the Muslims) mounted horses at their various starting points with the intention of riding to rendezvous at Constantinople. Here they crossed the Bosporus, making their way through Anatolia and along the coast until they neared Jerusalem. Read our post ‘The Road to Jerusalem’ or click The Landing in Topics for more information about this and then pick up book II of The Wayward Prince for the full story. By the time of the third crusade lessons had been learned. So that in contrast to the first crusade, the leaders, including Richard I, made preparations to cross the sea from Sicily to Acre by ship. What ships were available to them? Let us see. The image above is a Cog, or Kogge, and was typical of northern European ships of the time. They were useful for stores, men, or horses. They were built in various sizes to a similar design. Then a much more suitable design was developed from the Cog for the transportation of animals. See the woodcut below. Ships such as these were adopted for the transport of horses. They were easier to load through the side door ramps, which were sealed for passage at sea. In addition, the ships had flat keels which made them suitable for beaching in order to disembark the animals. Note the side ramp in the illustration below, and also examine those ships in the background. Some are clearly of Viking heritage. The steering oar can be seen on the third ship from the bottom, but the ship at the top of the picture shows a vessel with a fighting castle at the bow – the fore castle, which came to be known as the fo’c’s’le. The illustration is by Raymond Hawkins for a compendium, now discontinued, of eyewitness accounts from the third crusade. It was originally published in 1958 by The Folio Society, which I acknowledge with thanks. Finding out more We will continue our crossing the sea theme in later posts. It will also be a feature of the upcoming book about Berengaria and Richard I.	<urn:uuid:0d0df660-decb-40ac-a147-c97715493436>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.history-reimagined.co.uk/the-crusades-and-the-sea/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251789055.93/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129071944-20200129101944-00193.warc.gz	en	0.980002	453	3.671875	4	[ -0.3241455852985382, 0.1765882968902588, 0.13986311852931976, -0.009226859547197819, -0.3468799889087677, -0.03018159419298172, -0.37530243396759033, 0.3473537862300873, -0.010495203547179699, 0.04270173981785774, -0.25457531213760376, -0.5594778060913086, -0.2965107858181, 0.0284204967319...	7	In August 1096, on the occasion of the first crusade, the Northern Europeans (known collectively as ‘Franks’ by the Muslims) mounted horses at their various starting points with the intention of riding to rendezvous at Constantinople. Here they crossed the Bosporus, making their way through Anatolia and along the coast until they neared Jerusalem. Read our post ‘The Road to Jerusalem’ or click The Landing in Topics for more information about this and then pick up book II of The Wayward Prince for the full story. By the time of the third crusade lessons had been learned. So that in contrast to the first crusade, the leaders, including Richard I, made preparations to cross the sea from Sicily to Acre by ship. What ships were available to them? Let us see. The image above is a Cog, or Kogge, and was typical of northern European ships of the time. They were useful for stores, men, or horses. They were built in various sizes to a similar design. Then a much more suitable design was developed from the Cog for the transportation of animals. See the woodcut below. Ships such as these were adopted for the transport of horses. They were easier to load through the side door ramps, which were sealed for passage at sea. In addition, the ships had flat keels which made them suitable for beaching in order to disembark the animals. Note the side ramp in the illustration below, and also examine those ships in the background. Some are clearly of Viking heritage. The steering oar can be seen on the third ship from the bottom, but the ship at the top of the picture shows a vessel with a fighting castle at the bow – the fore castle, which came to be known as the fo’c’s’le. The illustration is by Raymond Hawkins for a compendium, now discontinued, of eyewitness accounts from the third crusade. It was originally published in 1958 by The Folio Society, which I acknowledge with thanks. Finding out more We will continue our crossing the sea theme in later posts. It will also be a feature of the upcoming book about Berengaria and Richard I.	451	ENGLISH	1
CULLODEN was a crucial point in Scotland’s history, but why did such an important battle take place outside Inverness, and what effect did the outcome have? Historian Murray Pittock of Glasgow University, author of Culloden (OUP, £18.99) told Gavin Sherriff the Honest Truth about the battle. Why did you write the book? I’ve been a historian of the period for a long time, and in the 1990s I unearthed significant archival information that showed the Jacobites were armed and organised in a much more conventional way than was previously thought. The battlefield archaeology demonstrated that the findings were correct in terms of the physical evidence. This book, for the first time, brings these major advances in research together. Who fought at Culloden? The two sides were the Jacobites, who wanted to restore the Stuart dynasty and to change the constitutional arrangements of the United Kingdom, and the British Army. What misunderstandings have people had about Culloden? The conventional picture was that the Jacobite army was largely armed with swords, and that they faced a force armed conventionally with firearms and cannon. The Jacobite army at Culloden, when they had to discard most of their artillery, still deployed about 13 cannons. They also fired more rounds per man from their muskets than the British army fired, so that’s a significant shift in our understanding. Culloden wasn’t a victory of British muskets over Jacobite swords, but a victory of British swords over Jacobite muskets. Why did the sides meet there? The Jacobite army had retreated from the east coast ports. They were running out of supplies. Inverness was the last major borough that they had control of. What was left of their supplies was in Inverness and without them the army would have starved, so they had to contest the road to Inverness. Culloden was fought to defend that road against the oncoming British army. How many were involved? The British army numbered around 9,000. The Jacobites might have reached around 5,500 but are more likely to have been fewer in number. The conventional figure for British casualties was given as around 50, but it was actually about 300. The Jacobites probably lost about a thousand. The battle only lasted an hour or so. A small battle but an important one? In some ways it was a small battle fought in a marginal location, but the reason it remains so important is that it was the last contest between England and Scotland by force of arms. It made possible the rise of the British Empire, the enlistment of large numbers of Highland Scots to the British army and so on. It’s the point at which the modern UK becomes possible and the British Empire is massively reinforced. It’s a decisive battle in the history of the world. Did people realise how important it was at the time? They did, but people didn’t visit the site because they felt very awkward about it. It wasn’t until the 19th century that there was any kind of commemoration. The National Trust took over a large part of the site in 1937 and in 2009 it was designated a war grave, which is quite unusual for an early modern battlefield. What’s the battlefield like to visit? Everyone finds it an eerie site to visit. It’s enormously atmospheric to walk both the front line and get a sense of how both sides lined up on the day. The other thing to consider, if you visit Fort George, is that you can see the Moray Firth from the Jacobite Lines. The Royal Navy were in the firth and could see the whole thing, although they were too far away to intervene. Not all the battlefield is open to the public. Much of the site is privately owned.	<urn:uuid:5db34e15-6ea4-4cac-9f1f-ae8c3edfdeff>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/story-behind-culloden-battle-change-history/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250624328.55/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124161014-20200124190014-00229.warc.gz	en	0.981062	815	3.546875	4	[ -0.014411572366952896, 0.19013622403144836, 0.21041250228881836, 0.4219037592411041, 0.07601552456617355, -0.03341743350028992, 0.001391418743878603, 0.014649486169219017, 0.11835954338312149, -0.029438108205795288, -0.23664113879203796, -0.3759257197380066, 0.2121511548757553, 0.478392809...	2	CULLODEN was a crucial point in Scotland’s history, but why did such an important battle take place outside Inverness, and what effect did the outcome have? Historian Murray Pittock of Glasgow University, author of Culloden (OUP, £18.99) told Gavin Sherriff the Honest Truth about the battle. Why did you write the book? I’ve been a historian of the period for a long time, and in the 1990s I unearthed significant archival information that showed the Jacobites were armed and organised in a much more conventional way than was previously thought. The battlefield archaeology demonstrated that the findings were correct in terms of the physical evidence. This book, for the first time, brings these major advances in research together. Who fought at Culloden? The two sides were the Jacobites, who wanted to restore the Stuart dynasty and to change the constitutional arrangements of the United Kingdom, and the British Army. What misunderstandings have people had about Culloden? The conventional picture was that the Jacobite army was largely armed with swords, and that they faced a force armed conventionally with firearms and cannon. The Jacobite army at Culloden, when they had to discard most of their artillery, still deployed about 13 cannons. They also fired more rounds per man from their muskets than the British army fired, so that’s a significant shift in our understanding. Culloden wasn’t a victory of British muskets over Jacobite swords, but a victory of British swords over Jacobite muskets. Why did the sides meet there? The Jacobite army had retreated from the east coast ports. They were running out of supplies. Inverness was the last major borough that they had control of. What was left of their supplies was in Inverness and without them the army would have starved, so they had to contest the road to Inverness. Culloden was fought to defend that road against the oncoming British army. How many were involved? The British army numbered around 9,000. The Jacobites might have reached around 5,500 but are more likely to have been fewer in number. The conventional figure for British casualties was given as around 50, but it was actually about 300. The Jacobites probably lost about a thousand. The battle only lasted an hour or so. A small battle but an important one? In some ways it was a small battle fought in a marginal location, but the reason it remains so important is that it was the last contest between England and Scotland by force of arms. It made possible the rise of the British Empire, the enlistment of large numbers of Highland Scots to the British army and so on. It’s the point at which the modern UK becomes possible and the British Empire is massively reinforced. It’s a decisive battle in the history of the world. Did people realise how important it was at the time? They did, but people didn’t visit the site because they felt very awkward about it. It wasn’t until the 19th century that there was any kind of commemoration. The National Trust took over a large part of the site in 1937 and in 2009 it was designated a war grave, which is quite unusual for an early modern battlefield. What’s the battlefield like to visit? Everyone finds it an eerie site to visit. It’s enormously atmospheric to walk both the front line and get a sense of how both sides lined up on the day. The other thing to consider, if you visit Fort George, is that you can see the Moray Firth from the Jacobite Lines. The Royal Navy were in the firth and could see the whole thing, although they were too far away to intervene. Not all the battlefield is open to the public. Much of the site is privately owned.	799	ENGLISH	1
Early Aborigiens40,000 years ago, Australia was joined to Asia. The early Aborigines carne from south-east Asia. They crossed the land on foot, or sailed short distances in canoes or other boats. They settled near the coast and lived on fish and shellfish. Over thousands of years, their lives changed. There was often flooding on the coast, so they moved inland. They began to depend more on the land. The women fished and gathered plants and nuts. The men hunted wild birds, kangaroos and other creatures, including large lizards called goannas. The Aborigines were a peaceful people. They were nomads, who travelled from place to place. They understood their environment. They knew where to find water and edible plants and insects, and they knew about the habits of animals. The Aborigines had many legends about the creation of the world. They believed that the spirits of their ancestors had come out of the earth and created the land. They called this time in their history the Dreamtime. They told stories and composed songs and dances about the Dreamtime. The Aborigines decorated thousands of rocks and caves with paintings and engravings. Some show animals such as kangaroos, turtles, lizards and whales. Perhaps these pictures tell Dreamtime stories of the creation of the world. Other pictures show the arrival of European ships and fighting between the Aborigines and the settlers.	<urn:uuid:8ec30422-ae3e-4b84-8f6b-95ce50667f0c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.skuola.net/civilta-inglese/early-aborigiens.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250620381.59/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124130719-20200124155719-00155.warc.gz	en	0.985737	295	3.953125	4	[ 0.20630328357219696, 0.3699709177017212, 0.17492513358592987, 0.2166278064250946, -0.1946699023246765, 0.24568964540958405, 0.05314004793763161, 0.0011841995874419808, -0.1448768973350525, 0.15453164279460907, 0.21074293553829193, -0.7363736629486084, 0.13763661682605743, 0.350303679704666...	1	Early Aborigiens40,000 years ago, Australia was joined to Asia. The early Aborigines carne from south-east Asia. They crossed the land on foot, or sailed short distances in canoes or other boats. They settled near the coast and lived on fish and shellfish. Over thousands of years, their lives changed. There was often flooding on the coast, so they moved inland. They began to depend more on the land. The women fished and gathered plants and nuts. The men hunted wild birds, kangaroos and other creatures, including large lizards called goannas. The Aborigines were a peaceful people. They were nomads, who travelled from place to place. They understood their environment. They knew where to find water and edible plants and insects, and they knew about the habits of animals. The Aborigines had many legends about the creation of the world. They believed that the spirits of their ancestors had come out of the earth and created the land. They called this time in their history the Dreamtime. They told stories and composed songs and dances about the Dreamtime. The Aborigines decorated thousands of rocks and caves with paintings and engravings. Some show animals such as kangaroos, turtles, lizards and whales. Perhaps these pictures tell Dreamtime stories of the creation of the world. Other pictures show the arrival of European ships and fighting between the Aborigines and the settlers.	294	ENGLISH	1
Century-old photos from P.E.I. debunk famous study on how foxes were tamed, says scientist Foxes from famous Russian study on domestication were from Prince Edward Island It was old photos at the International Fox Museum and Hall of Fame on Prince Edward Island that first led researchers to question a famous study on the domestication of foxes. In the 1950s, Russian scientist Dmitri Belyaev started breeding foxes with the goal of domesticating them. Within 10 generations, he had succeeded. This was surprising. It was also surprising that his foxes had physically changed. They had white spotting, curly tails and floppy ears, just like dogs and pigs. He linked these traits to being a direct result of tameness — now known as domestication syndrome. "It was really surprising that you could create something as complicated as domestication or tame behaviour within something as short a time period as 10 generations," Elinor Karlsson, a genomic scientist at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, told As It Happens host Carol Off. In fact, it appears the foxes Belyaev started from already may have been relatively tame. A trip to P.E.I. Belyaev's theory was widely accepted. And then Karlsson's late colleague Raymond Coppinger, a biologist at Hampshire College in Massachusetts, stumbled upon a fox museum in Summerside, P.E.I. during a 2015 vacation. "[He] wandered into the fox museum and saw pictures of these incredibly friendly, white-spotted foxes from decades before the Russian project had started," Karlsson said. The photos were taken at the Rosebank Fur Farms in 1922. Karlsson said Belyaev had always been clear that he began his experiment with foxes from a fur farm. But what researchers hadn't realized was that the Russian fox industry had started with foxes shipped from P.E.I. "[Belyaev's foxes] were actually foxes from exactly the same population of foxes that Ray was seeing pictures of at this fox museum," Karlsson said. These P.E.I. foxes — with their friendly demeanours and white spotting — called into question how realistic it was that Belyaev's foxes had developed these traits in just 10 generations. P.E.I. has a long history of farming foxes for fur, and Karlsson said farmers looked for certain traits in the foxes. Foxes that were more comfortable around humans were selected, as well as foxes that had interesting coats — like white spots. Karlsson said they even came across a magazine article from 1921 describing a P.E.I. fox fur industry big-wig walking two foxes on leashes, and girls doing the fox trot with those same foxes draped around their necks. The scientists argued that while it's true that Belyaev's foxes did change their appearance and demeanour, it likely happened so quickly because farmers had started the process decades earlier. "There's no evidence that they're actually linked in a biological way," Karlsson said. The study was published Dec. 1 in the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution. Once the scientists discovered the history of Belyaev's foxes, they decided to look for data and research that supported domestication syndrome in other species. The problem was, they couldn't find anything. The theory of domestication syndrome has been around as long as Charles Darwin, but they say Belyaev's research was the only scientific validation. "It actually really surprised me as a scientist," Karlsson said. Other scientists disagree with paper The paper has mixed reviews within the scientific community. Anna Kukekova, a geneticist at the University of Illinois who researches the genetics of Russian foxes, told the New York Times that Belyaev recognized that fur farmers would have chosen animals comfortable with humans, but he described his foxes as wild animals. She also argued that the old photos from P.E.I. of friendly foxes are not scientific evidence, and there is no proof that these animals sought out human contact as they did in the case of Belyaev's foxes. "I completely understand their frustration with domestication syndrome," Kukekova told the Times, speaking about Karlsson and her colleagues. '[But] many aspects of the fox domestication experiment were not presented correctly." Karlsson says she hopes her research will allow scientists to discover more about this population of foxes and domestication syndrome. "From my point of view, it actually is just as exciting because it opens up an opportunity to look at the experiment differently, take the data that we have now ... and ask questions that might be able to get at what's really going on," she said. She also plans to make a trip to P.E.I. "I've already been talking to my co-authors about how we clearly need to have a trip up to … visit the fox museum," she said. Written by Sarah Jackson. Produced by Kate Swoger.	<urn:uuid:7758f3b4-f5f9-40cf-97e3-0f0177c424ea>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/century-old-photos-from-p-e-i-debunk-famous-study-on-how-foxes-were-tamed-says-scientist-1.5392806	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250611127.53/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123160903-20200123185903-00295.warc.gz	en	0.984109	1,071	3.421875	3	[ 0.0575028732419014, 0.11584609001874924, -0.11445213854312897, 0.3669469356536865, 0.12597960233688354, 0.055103205144405365, 0.3153555989265442, 0.38616397976875305, -0.42307454347610474, 0.20283490419387817, 0.1442895382642746, -0.2424847036600113, 0.15047156810760498, 0.7573544979095459...	2	Century-old photos from P.E.I. debunk famous study on how foxes were tamed, says scientist Foxes from famous Russian study on domestication were from Prince Edward Island It was old photos at the International Fox Museum and Hall of Fame on Prince Edward Island that first led researchers to question a famous study on the domestication of foxes. In the 1950s, Russian scientist Dmitri Belyaev started breeding foxes with the goal of domesticating them. Within 10 generations, he had succeeded. This was surprising. It was also surprising that his foxes had physically changed. They had white spotting, curly tails and floppy ears, just like dogs and pigs. He linked these traits to being a direct result of tameness — now known as domestication syndrome. "It was really surprising that you could create something as complicated as domestication or tame behaviour within something as short a time period as 10 generations," Elinor Karlsson, a genomic scientist at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, told As It Happens host Carol Off. In fact, it appears the foxes Belyaev started from already may have been relatively tame. A trip to P.E.I. Belyaev's theory was widely accepted. And then Karlsson's late colleague Raymond Coppinger, a biologist at Hampshire College in Massachusetts, stumbled upon a fox museum in Summerside, P.E.I. during a 2015 vacation. "[He] wandered into the fox museum and saw pictures of these incredibly friendly, white-spotted foxes from decades before the Russian project had started," Karlsson said. The photos were taken at the Rosebank Fur Farms in 1922. Karlsson said Belyaev had always been clear that he began his experiment with foxes from a fur farm. But what researchers hadn't realized was that the Russian fox industry had started with foxes shipped from P.E.I. "[Belyaev's foxes] were actually foxes from exactly the same population of foxes that Ray was seeing pictures of at this fox museum," Karlsson said. These P.E.I. foxes — with their friendly demeanours and white spotting — called into question how realistic it was that Belyaev's foxes had developed these traits in just 10 generations. P.E.I. has a long history of farming foxes for fur, and Karlsson said farmers looked for certain traits in the foxes. Foxes that were more comfortable around humans were selected, as well as foxes that had interesting coats — like white spots. Karlsson said they even came across a magazine article from 1921 describing a P.E.I. fox fur industry big-wig walking two foxes on leashes, and girls doing the fox trot with those same foxes draped around their necks. The scientists argued that while it's true that Belyaev's foxes did change their appearance and demeanour, it likely happened so quickly because farmers had started the process decades earlier. "There's no evidence that they're actually linked in a biological way," Karlsson said. The study was published Dec. 1 in the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution. Once the scientists discovered the history of Belyaev's foxes, they decided to look for data and research that supported domestication syndrome in other species. The problem was, they couldn't find anything. The theory of domestication syndrome has been around as long as Charles Darwin, but they say Belyaev's research was the only scientific validation. "It actually really surprised me as a scientist," Karlsson said. Other scientists disagree with paper The paper has mixed reviews within the scientific community. Anna Kukekova, a geneticist at the University of Illinois who researches the genetics of Russian foxes, told the New York Times that Belyaev recognized that fur farmers would have chosen animals comfortable with humans, but he described his foxes as wild animals. She also argued that the old photos from P.E.I. of friendly foxes are not scientific evidence, and there is no proof that these animals sought out human contact as they did in the case of Belyaev's foxes. "I completely understand their frustration with domestication syndrome," Kukekova told the Times, speaking about Karlsson and her colleagues. '[But] many aspects of the fox domestication experiment were not presented correctly." Karlsson says she hopes her research will allow scientists to discover more about this population of foxes and domestication syndrome. "From my point of view, it actually is just as exciting because it opens up an opportunity to look at the experiment differently, take the data that we have now ... and ask questions that might be able to get at what's really going on," she said. She also plans to make a trip to P.E.I. "I've already been talking to my co-authors about how we clearly need to have a trip up to … visit the fox museum," she said. Written by Sarah Jackson. Produced by Kate Swoger.	1,035	ENGLISH	1
Martha Baldwin (1840-1913) was committed to education and worked diligently to improve her community. Martha became a teacher and educator in the Birmingham area after attending Kalamazoo Baptist College in the 1860s. She worked in the Detroit Public School system from 1872-1898 and eventually became principal at Norvell School, an impressive accomplishment for a woman at the time. Martha was devoted to the Birmingham community and improving the lives of her fellow citizens. She pushed the village council to make progressive changes, formed a beautification society and worked toward women’s suffrage.One of Martha’s greatest contributions to Birmingham is the Baldwin Public Library, which she founded and helped financially support. She also left funds in her will to build a new school with a female locker room to encourage girls in athletics.	<urn:uuid:d3b8729b-fbce-4f24-850a-d89f8c537807>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://miwf.org/timeline/martha-baldwin/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593994.14/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118221909-20200119005909-00040.warc.gz	en	0.984488	165	3.328125	3	[ -0.3450448513031006, 0.14789286255836487, 0.0631040409207344, 0.4025142192840576, -0.4511745572090149, 0.18553012609481812, 0.08954321593046188, 0.30641114711761475, -0.32606804370880127, 0.05756792426109314, 0.2756219804286957, -0.5648699402809143, -0.26622334122657776, -0.099306449294090...	11	Martha Baldwin (1840-1913) was committed to education and worked diligently to improve her community. Martha became a teacher and educator in the Birmingham area after attending Kalamazoo Baptist College in the 1860s. She worked in the Detroit Public School system from 1872-1898 and eventually became principal at Norvell School, an impressive accomplishment for a woman at the time. Martha was devoted to the Birmingham community and improving the lives of her fellow citizens. She pushed the village council to make progressive changes, formed a beautification society and worked toward women’s suffrage.One of Martha’s greatest contributions to Birmingham is the Baldwin Public Library, which she founded and helped financially support. She also left funds in her will to build a new school with a female locker room to encourage girls in athletics.	174	ENGLISH	1
On this day in history : 29th December 1860 – HMS Warrior, Britain’s first iron clad warship, is launched – during the coldest winter London had seen for 50 years…. It was so cold Warrior froze to the slipway during her launch and it took 6 tugs to help haul her into the River Thames…. Warrior was built to rival the French iron clad ship ‘La Gloire’….the first ship of its kind in the world…. The First Lord of the Admiralty, Sir John Somerset Pakington, was determined to have a ship bigger, faster and with more gun power than that of a French ship…. Warrior was designed by Chief Constructor of the Royal Navy, Isaac Watts and Chief Engineer Thomas Lloyd…. The 40-gun, steam powered armoured frigate was built between 1859-61….and the contract for the great iron hull was won by the Thames Iron Works and Shipbuilding Company, in Blackwall, London…. On the day of the launch large crowds gathered to watch – braving the bitter cold….the dockyard and even the Thames covered in frozen snow…. Braziers had been lit down each side of the ship the day before and kept burning through the night – but despite this Warrior remained frozen to the slipway…. Sir John Pakington named the ship….but she was stuck fast…. On the upper deck hundreds of men ran from side to side to try and rock her free…. In the end tugs and hydraulic rams had to be employed and some twenty minutes later the ship began to move…. “God speed the Warrior” shouted Sir John….as he broke a bottle of wine upon her bow…. Cheers erupted from the watching crowd as she took to the water…. The morning after the launch Warrior was moved to the Victoria Docks, ready for fitting out…. She eventually left the Thames bound for Portsmouth on the 19th of September 1861…. When commissioned Warrior was the largest warship in the world – 60% bigger than La Gloire and weighing 9,210 tons…. Along with her sister ship, ‘Black Prince’, the pair were to become the most feared ships to sail the seas…. Warrior began active service in June 1862, patrolling coastal waters and sailing to Gibraltar and Lisbon…. She was the pride of the British Navy – and was crewed by 50 officers and 656 sailors…. The majority of the crew lived on the gun deck – with up to 18 men, sleeping in hammocks, between each gun…. Life would have been very similar to that on board the traditional wooden ships….the work hard, with a lot of heavy labour involved…. The anchor alone was one of the heaviest manually hauled anchors in history…. The officers were allocated small, individual cabins at the rear of the ship…. Whereas, the Captain had two spacious and well-furnished cabins…. By 1871 Warrior had been superseded by faster ships with bigger guns….and she was downgraded to coastguard patrol and reserve purposes…. In May 1883 it was discovered that her masts were rotting – and it was decided it would not be economic to repair her…. In 1904 she was renamed Vernon III and was converted into a floating naval torpedo training school…. In 1924 Warrior was put up for sale as scrap – but no buyers came forward…. So in March 1929 she was taken to Pembroke Dock and turned into a floating oil pontoon and give the rather un-majestic name ‘Oil Fuel Hulk C77’…. Between 1861 and 1877 forty five iron hulled warships were built for the Royal Navy….by 1978 Warrior was the only one left…. It took a £9 million restoration project to restore her to her 1862 condition…. The work was completed in Hartlepool – and she has been back in Portsmouth at the Historic Dockyard as a museum ship since 1987….and well worth a visit if you are able….	<urn:uuid:a47af3e7-281d-45ac-b0d3-568eccc1dff2>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://cottagecapers.com/tag/maritime/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00253.warc.gz	en	0.986973	802	3.296875	3	[ 0.06629306823015213, 0.46317344903945923, 0.6117037534713745, -0.393544465303421, -0.3846532702445984, -0.718489408493042, 0.015504281967878342, 0.3036734461784363, -0.08935541659593582, -0.3573434352874756, 0.12077143043279648, -0.5852841138839722, -0.14927569031715393, 0.7343027591705322...	8	On this day in history : 29th December 1860 – HMS Warrior, Britain’s first iron clad warship, is launched – during the coldest winter London had seen for 50 years…. It was so cold Warrior froze to the slipway during her launch and it took 6 tugs to help haul her into the River Thames…. Warrior was built to rival the French iron clad ship ‘La Gloire’….the first ship of its kind in the world…. The First Lord of the Admiralty, Sir John Somerset Pakington, was determined to have a ship bigger, faster and with more gun power than that of a French ship…. Warrior was designed by Chief Constructor of the Royal Navy, Isaac Watts and Chief Engineer Thomas Lloyd…. The 40-gun, steam powered armoured frigate was built between 1859-61….and the contract for the great iron hull was won by the Thames Iron Works and Shipbuilding Company, in Blackwall, London…. On the day of the launch large crowds gathered to watch – braving the bitter cold….the dockyard and even the Thames covered in frozen snow…. Braziers had been lit down each side of the ship the day before and kept burning through the night – but despite this Warrior remained frozen to the slipway…. Sir John Pakington named the ship….but she was stuck fast…. On the upper deck hundreds of men ran from side to side to try and rock her free…. In the end tugs and hydraulic rams had to be employed and some twenty minutes later the ship began to move…. “God speed the Warrior” shouted Sir John….as he broke a bottle of wine upon her bow…. Cheers erupted from the watching crowd as she took to the water…. The morning after the launch Warrior was moved to the Victoria Docks, ready for fitting out…. She eventually left the Thames bound for Portsmouth on the 19th of September 1861…. When commissioned Warrior was the largest warship in the world – 60% bigger than La Gloire and weighing 9,210 tons…. Along with her sister ship, ‘Black Prince’, the pair were to become the most feared ships to sail the seas…. Warrior began active service in June 1862, patrolling coastal waters and sailing to Gibraltar and Lisbon…. She was the pride of the British Navy – and was crewed by 50 officers and 656 sailors…. The majority of the crew lived on the gun deck – with up to 18 men, sleeping in hammocks, between each gun…. Life would have been very similar to that on board the traditional wooden ships….the work hard, with a lot of heavy labour involved…. The anchor alone was one of the heaviest manually hauled anchors in history…. The officers were allocated small, individual cabins at the rear of the ship…. Whereas, the Captain had two spacious and well-furnished cabins…. By 1871 Warrior had been superseded by faster ships with bigger guns….and she was downgraded to coastguard patrol and reserve purposes…. In May 1883 it was discovered that her masts were rotting – and it was decided it would not be economic to repair her…. In 1904 she was renamed Vernon III and was converted into a floating naval torpedo training school…. In 1924 Warrior was put up for sale as scrap – but no buyers came forward…. So in March 1929 she was taken to Pembroke Dock and turned into a floating oil pontoon and give the rather un-majestic name ‘Oil Fuel Hulk C77’…. Between 1861 and 1877 forty five iron hulled warships were built for the Royal Navy….by 1978 Warrior was the only one left…. It took a £9 million restoration project to restore her to her 1862 condition…. The work was completed in Hartlepool – and she has been back in Portsmouth at the Historic Dockyard as a museum ship since 1987….and well worth a visit if you are able….	861	ENGLISH	1
Try saying that title 3 times in a row! For a play-of-the-day, here is a fine motor or small muscle activity that needs 1 pumpkin, lots of push pins, and a pair of small hands. Before carving the pumpkin, let your child use it as a giant pincushion. For this activity, you will need a small handful of push pins. Kids get to stick the pins right into the pumpkin. The pumpkin skin is usually fairly thin and pins go in it quite easily. Big Sister did some first and she quickly put in a few push pins in practically no time. Her 6-year old fingers could grasp the pins and aim them with level hands. Little Sister took much longer to put in each pin. Her 3-year old fingers sometimes picked the pin up with the point going toward her rather than out. She would then use the other hand to help her turn it around. The pin did not go in as easily because she did not always aim the point level or straight. The pin would sometimes point up, down, or sideways and she would have to adjust her hands to get the pin to go in. It was quite surprising to see the difference in dexterity between the two kids. Big Sister could stick in several pins in the same time that Little Sister needed for only one or two. Watching the younger child, I noticed that she had to move her hand left or right as well as up or down to get the angle on the pin so it would go into the pumpkin. Sometimes, she over corrected and then would have to try again. There was no doubt this activity was valuable for practicing control of the small muscles in the fingers and wrists. This activity will be easier for some kids than others because these muscles need strengthening and coordinating but it’s fun to do. Did the pumpkin change into a colorful hedgehog?	<urn:uuid:c39a5d3f-10e3-44c8-add5-dc2b02f85bc7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://123kindergarten.com/2014/10/28/pumpkin-pin-fun/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672537.90/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125131641-20200125160641-00048.warc.gz	en	0.983341	379	3.53125	4	[ -0.010222143493592739, -0.6112781167030334, 0.4437429904937744, 0.05426778644323349, -0.4137978255748749, 0.06773071736097336, 0.4654214084148407, 0.11658194661140442, 0.03911682218313217, 0.04046189785003662, 0.16187432408332825, -0.07105288654565811, -0.039614323526620865, 0.283487230539...	2	Try saying that title 3 times in a row! For a play-of-the-day, here is a fine motor or small muscle activity that needs 1 pumpkin, lots of push pins, and a pair of small hands. Before carving the pumpkin, let your child use it as a giant pincushion. For this activity, you will need a small handful of push pins. Kids get to stick the pins right into the pumpkin. The pumpkin skin is usually fairly thin and pins go in it quite easily. Big Sister did some first and she quickly put in a few push pins in practically no time. Her 6-year old fingers could grasp the pins and aim them with level hands. Little Sister took much longer to put in each pin. Her 3-year old fingers sometimes picked the pin up with the point going toward her rather than out. She would then use the other hand to help her turn it around. The pin did not go in as easily because she did not always aim the point level or straight. The pin would sometimes point up, down, or sideways and she would have to adjust her hands to get the pin to go in. It was quite surprising to see the difference in dexterity between the two kids. Big Sister could stick in several pins in the same time that Little Sister needed for only one or two. Watching the younger child, I noticed that she had to move her hand left or right as well as up or down to get the angle on the pin so it would go into the pumpkin. Sometimes, she over corrected and then would have to try again. There was no doubt this activity was valuable for practicing control of the small muscles in the fingers and wrists. This activity will be easier for some kids than others because these muscles need strengthening and coordinating but it’s fun to do. Did the pumpkin change into a colorful hedgehog?	375	ENGLISH	1
Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, better known as Lenin (help·info) (22 April 1870 – 21 January 1924) was a Russian lawyer, revolutionary, the leader of the Bolshevik party and of the October Revolution. He was the first leader of the USSR and the government that took over Russia in 1917. Lenin's ideas became known as Leninism. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin Влади́мир Ильи́ч Ленин Lenin in July 1920. Photo by Pavel Zhukov. \|Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the Soviet Union\| 30 December 1922 – 21 January 1924 \|Preceded by\|\|Office established\| \|Succeeded by\|\|Alexei Rykov\| \|Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the Russian SFSR\| 8 November 1917 – 21 January 1924 \|Preceded by\|\|Office established\| \|Succeeded by\|\|Alexei Rykov\| Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov 22 April 1870 Simbirsk, Russian Empire \|Died\|\|21 January 1924 (aged 53)\| Gorki, Moscow Governorate, Russian SFSR, Soviet Union \|Resting place\|\|Lenin's Mausoleum, Moscow, Russian Federation\| \|League of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class (1895–1898)\| Nadezhda Krupskaya (m. 1898–1924) \|Alma mater\|\|Saint Petersburg Imperial University\| Lenin was born on 22 April 1870 in the town of Simbirsk in the Russian Empire. His mother was a schoolteacher and his father was an education official (technically, his father's job made him and his family noblemen). Lenin began studying politics in high school. Lenin was good in school and learned the Latin and Greek languages. In 1887, he was thrown out of Kazan State University because he protested against the Tsar who was the king of the Russian Empire. He continued to read books and study ideas by himself, and in 1891 he got a license to become a lawyer. In the same year that Lenin was expelled from University, his brother Alexander was hanged for his part in a bomb plot to kill Tsar Alexander III, and their sister Anna was sent to Tatarstan. This made Lenin furious, and he promised to get revenge for his brother's death. Before the revolutionEdit While he studied law in St. Petersburg he learned about the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, who were both philosophers from Germany. Karl Marx's thoughts were called Marxism. To talk or write about Marxism like it was a good thing was illegal in Russia, and Lenin was arrested for that and sent to prison in Siberia. This punishment was harsh because Siberia is known for being very cold and isolated, and almost impossible to escape. In July 1898, when he was still in Siberia, Lenin married Nadezhda Krupskaya. In 1899 he wrote a book he called The Development of Capitalism in Russia. In 1900, Lenin was set free from prison and allowed to go back home. He then traveled around Europe. He began to publish a Marxist newspaper called Iskra, the Russian word for "spark" or "lightning". He also became an important member of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, or RSDLP. In 1903, Lenin had a major argument with another leader of the party, Julius Martov, which divided the party in two. Lenin wanted to establish socialism right away, rather than establishing capitalism first and then making the transition to socialism. Martov disagreed, he wanted to cling to the Classical Marxist idea that in order to achieve socialism, you must go through capitalism first. People who agreed with Martov were called Mensheviks (meaning "the minority"). The people who agreed with Lenin were called Bolsheviks ("the majority"). In 1907 he travelled around Europe again, and visited many socialist meetings and events. During World War I he lived in big European cities like London, Paris and Geneva. At the beginning of the war, a big left-wing meeting called the Second International included the Bolsheviks. The meeting shut down when a lot of the groups argued whether or not to support the war. Lenin and the Bolsheviks were one of only a few groups who were against the war because of their Marxist ideas. After Tsar Nicholas II gave up his throne during the February Revolution, Lenin went back to Russia where he was still a very important Bolshevik leader. He wrote that he wanted a revolution by ordinary workers to overthrow the government that had replaced Nicholas II. In 1917, The Kadets, a right-wing party, and elements of the Okhrana (secret police) started rumors that Lenin had got money from the Germans, because they had sent him through Germany in a special train to reach Russia. That may have made him look bad because a lot of Russians had died fighting Germany in the war. After the July Days, a popular uprising in Petrograd which was crushed by the Russian Provisional Government, he left Russia and went to Finland, where he could hide and carry on with his work on Communism. In October 1917, the Bolsheviks, led by Lenin and Trotsky, headed the Petrograd Soviet and other Soviets all over Russia in a revolution against Kerensky's government, which was known as the October Revolution. They won, and announced that Russia was a socialist country. In November, Lenin was chosen as its leader. Because Lenin wanted an end to World War I in Russia, he signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk with Germany in February 1918. While the treaty ended the attack by Germany, Russia lost a large amount of land that it used for farming. The treaty also made Germany's other enemies angry, and together with Russian people who supported the Tsar or Kerensky's government, they attacked Russia. Lenin made rules that as much food as possible was to be given to Bolshevik soldiers in Russia's new Red Army. This meant that they won the war, but ordinary people were starving, and many died of hunger or disease. After the war, Lenin brought in the New Economic Policy to try and make things better for the country and move from capitalism towards socialism. Some private enterprise was still allowed, but not much. Businessmen, known as nepmen, could only own small industries, not factories. Factories and large industry became public property to be owned by the workers. A woman named Fanni Kaplan shot Lenin whilst he was making an official visit. She missed his head and instead the bullet was lodged into his neck. Fearing that he would be killed by political dissenters, he refused to have the bullet removed until a guaranteed Communist doctor could be found. As a result of his direct refusal to be treated, the bullet was never removed, and is often cited as the reason he started having strokes in May and December 1922 (both of which he recovered from). In March 1923 a stroke paralyzed him and left him unable to speak, and in January 1924 a stroke killed him. Just before he died, Lenin had wanted to get rid of Stalin because he thought he was dangerous to the country and the government. The city of St. Petersburg had been renamed Petrograd by the Tsar in 1914, but was renamed Leningrad in memory of Lenin in 1924. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 Leningrad was again named St. Petersburg, which it remains to this day. Before Lenin died, he said he wished to be buried beside his mother. When he died, Stalin let the people in Russia look at his body. Because people kept coming they decided not to bury him, and preserved his body instead. A building was built in Red Square, Moscow over the body so that people could see it. It is called the Lenin Mausoleum. Many Russians and tourists still go there to see his body today. \| Prime Minister of Russia and the Soviet Union	<urn:uuid:acbb7728-1988-4119-bc6e-517fcad91ee5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250615407.46/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124040939-20200124065939-00474.warc.gz	en	0.985434	1,659	3.28125	3	[ -0.3751775324344635, -0.23656319081783295, 0.3044409453868866, 0.06973454356193542, -0.20293733477592468, -0.25762876868247986, 0.43239936232566833, 0.2527150511741638, -0.3750002384185791, 0.13404938578605652, 0.2569367289543152, 0.22016635537147522, 0.14442652463912964, 0.407706141471862...	1	Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, better known as Lenin (help·info) (22 April 1870 – 21 January 1924) was a Russian lawyer, revolutionary, the leader of the Bolshevik party and of the October Revolution. He was the first leader of the USSR and the government that took over Russia in 1917. Lenin's ideas became known as Leninism. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin Влади́мир Ильи́ч Ленин Lenin in July 1920. Photo by Pavel Zhukov. \|Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the Soviet Union\| 30 December 1922 – 21 January 1924 \|Preceded by\|\|Office established\| \|Succeeded by\|\|Alexei Rykov\| \|Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the Russian SFSR\| 8 November 1917 – 21 January 1924 \|Preceded by\|\|Office established\| \|Succeeded by\|\|Alexei Rykov\| Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov 22 April 1870 Simbirsk, Russian Empire \|Died\|\|21 January 1924 (aged 53)\| Gorki, Moscow Governorate, Russian SFSR, Soviet Union \|Resting place\|\|Lenin's Mausoleum, Moscow, Russian Federation\| \|League of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class (1895–1898)\| Nadezhda Krupskaya (m. 1898–1924) \|Alma mater\|\|Saint Petersburg Imperial University\| Lenin was born on 22 April 1870 in the town of Simbirsk in the Russian Empire. His mother was a schoolteacher and his father was an education official (technically, his father's job made him and his family noblemen). Lenin began studying politics in high school. Lenin was good in school and learned the Latin and Greek languages. In 1887, he was thrown out of Kazan State University because he protested against the Tsar who was the king of the Russian Empire. He continued to read books and study ideas by himself, and in 1891 he got a license to become a lawyer. In the same year that Lenin was expelled from University, his brother Alexander was hanged for his part in a bomb plot to kill Tsar Alexander III, and their sister Anna was sent to Tatarstan. This made Lenin furious, and he promised to get revenge for his brother's death. Before the revolutionEdit While he studied law in St. Petersburg he learned about the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, who were both philosophers from Germany. Karl Marx's thoughts were called Marxism. To talk or write about Marxism like it was a good thing was illegal in Russia, and Lenin was arrested for that and sent to prison in Siberia. This punishment was harsh because Siberia is known for being very cold and isolated, and almost impossible to escape. In July 1898, when he was still in Siberia, Lenin married Nadezhda Krupskaya. In 1899 he wrote a book he called The Development of Capitalism in Russia. In 1900, Lenin was set free from prison and allowed to go back home. He then traveled around Europe. He began to publish a Marxist newspaper called Iskra, the Russian word for "spark" or "lightning". He also became an important member of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, or RSDLP. In 1903, Lenin had a major argument with another leader of the party, Julius Martov, which divided the party in two. Lenin wanted to establish socialism right away, rather than establishing capitalism first and then making the transition to socialism. Martov disagreed, he wanted to cling to the Classical Marxist idea that in order to achieve socialism, you must go through capitalism first. People who agreed with Martov were called Mensheviks (meaning "the minority"). The people who agreed with Lenin were called Bolsheviks ("the majority"). In 1907 he travelled around Europe again, and visited many socialist meetings and events. During World War I he lived in big European cities like London, Paris and Geneva. At the beginning of the war, a big left-wing meeting called the Second International included the Bolsheviks. The meeting shut down when a lot of the groups argued whether or not to support the war. Lenin and the Bolsheviks were one of only a few groups who were against the war because of their Marxist ideas. After Tsar Nicholas II gave up his throne during the February Revolution, Lenin went back to Russia where he was still a very important Bolshevik leader. He wrote that he wanted a revolution by ordinary workers to overthrow the government that had replaced Nicholas II. In 1917, The Kadets, a right-wing party, and elements of the Okhrana (secret police) started rumors that Lenin had got money from the Germans, because they had sent him through Germany in a special train to reach Russia. That may have made him look bad because a lot of Russians had died fighting Germany in the war. After the July Days, a popular uprising in Petrograd which was crushed by the Russian Provisional Government, he left Russia and went to Finland, where he could hide and carry on with his work on Communism. In October 1917, the Bolsheviks, led by Lenin and Trotsky, headed the Petrograd Soviet and other Soviets all over Russia in a revolution against Kerensky's government, which was known as the October Revolution. They won, and announced that Russia was a socialist country. In November, Lenin was chosen as its leader. Because Lenin wanted an end to World War I in Russia, he signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk with Germany in February 1918. While the treaty ended the attack by Germany, Russia lost a large amount of land that it used for farming. The treaty also made Germany's other enemies angry, and together with Russian people who supported the Tsar or Kerensky's government, they attacked Russia. Lenin made rules that as much food as possible was to be given to Bolshevik soldiers in Russia's new Red Army. This meant that they won the war, but ordinary people were starving, and many died of hunger or disease. After the war, Lenin brought in the New Economic Policy to try and make things better for the country and move from capitalism towards socialism. Some private enterprise was still allowed, but not much. Businessmen, known as nepmen, could only own small industries, not factories. Factories and large industry became public property to be owned by the workers. A woman named Fanni Kaplan shot Lenin whilst he was making an official visit. She missed his head and instead the bullet was lodged into his neck. Fearing that he would be killed by political dissenters, he refused to have the bullet removed until a guaranteed Communist doctor could be found. As a result of his direct refusal to be treated, the bullet was never removed, and is often cited as the reason he started having strokes in May and December 1922 (both of which he recovered from). In March 1923 a stroke paralyzed him and left him unable to speak, and in January 1924 a stroke killed him. Just before he died, Lenin had wanted to get rid of Stalin because he thought he was dangerous to the country and the government. The city of St. Petersburg had been renamed Petrograd by the Tsar in 1914, but was renamed Leningrad in memory of Lenin in 1924. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 Leningrad was again named St. Petersburg, which it remains to this day. Before Lenin died, he said he wished to be buried beside his mother. When he died, Stalin let the people in Russia look at his body. Because people kept coming they decided not to bury him, and preserved his body instead. A building was built in Red Square, Moscow over the body so that people could see it. It is called the Lenin Mausoleum. Many Russians and tourists still go there to see his body today. \| Prime Minister of Russia and the Soviet Union	1,752	ENGLISH	1
The Caesarean Section in Ancient Roman Times One form of surgery in ancient Rome was the Caesarean section childbirth procedure. A common misconception is that Gaius Julius Caesar himself was born under this procedure, but that is completely without merit. A Caesarean Section in the ancient world was a last resort operation to comply with Roman ritual and religious custom and had little to do with saving either mother or child. Roman, or Caesarean Law, demanded that when a pregnant woman died she could not be buried until the child had been delivered. Thus the procedure was developed to remove the infant prior to the burial. It later became more customary as a last ditch effort to save the child, depending on circumstances. The law stated that a living, pregnant woman could not give birth under Caesarean section until she was into her 10th month of pregnancy (also indicating a fine knowledge of the reproductive cycle). As the mother assuredly wouldn't survive, the procedure was delayed as long as possible to give her a chance, before the baby might be in trouble. Knowing that Caesar's mother, Aurelia, survived well into Julius' adult life proves that he was not born of this procedure, or she would've died at his birth. Did you know... In the 8th Century BC, the Roman ruler Numa Pompillus passed a law requiring all women who died in labour to have a post-mortem delivery. This law continued throughout the reign of the Roman Emperors, and was known as Lex Caesarea - caesus being the Latin for 'cut' or 'incision'; a more likely root for the term.	<urn:uuid:612c4e88-57c9-4472-9975-df9e3f521c6c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.unrv.com/culture/caesarean-section.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594333.5/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119064802-20200119092802-00254.warc.gz	en	0.985263	340	3.921875	4	[ 0.0027781620156019926, 0.3314085900783539, 0.3207336664199829, 0.2712053954601288, -0.35525572299957275, 0.007298583164811134, -0.1349705457687378, 0.3593577444553375, 0.23779453337192535, -0.027508500963449478, -0.0761779323220253, -0.3321131765842438, -0.21809598803520203, 0.504596590995...	7	The Caesarean Section in Ancient Roman Times One form of surgery in ancient Rome was the Caesarean section childbirth procedure. A common misconception is that Gaius Julius Caesar himself was born under this procedure, but that is completely without merit. A Caesarean Section in the ancient world was a last resort operation to comply with Roman ritual and religious custom and had little to do with saving either mother or child. Roman, or Caesarean Law, demanded that when a pregnant woman died she could not be buried until the child had been delivered. Thus the procedure was developed to remove the infant prior to the burial. It later became more customary as a last ditch effort to save the child, depending on circumstances. The law stated that a living, pregnant woman could not give birth under Caesarean section until she was into her 10th month of pregnancy (also indicating a fine knowledge of the reproductive cycle). As the mother assuredly wouldn't survive, the procedure was delayed as long as possible to give her a chance, before the baby might be in trouble. Knowing that Caesar's mother, Aurelia, survived well into Julius' adult life proves that he was not born of this procedure, or she would've died at his birth. Did you know... In the 8th Century BC, the Roman ruler Numa Pompillus passed a law requiring all women who died in labour to have a post-mortem delivery. This law continued throughout the reign of the Roman Emperors, and was known as Lex Caesarea - caesus being the Latin for 'cut' or 'incision'; a more likely root for the term.	338	ENGLISH	1
The idea of a character feigning madness is not foreign to great literary works; in fact, many authors use it to show the sanity of the character. Odysseus shows his sanity by pretending to be mad in Homer's The Iliad to avoid going to war. If his plan had been successful, he would have stayed safe at home, away from the dangers of war. The idea of feigning madness is also apparent throughout Shakespeare's Hamlet. The tragic character puts on an act after he is told of his father's murder, perhaps to have something on which he can place the blame after he avenges his father's death, or perhaps it is to capture the attention of certain characters so that he may find out exactly what has gone "rotten in Denmark." Though it sounds like a crazy idea, Hamlet is feigning madness in Shakespear's tragic play. . It is certainly understandable for someone who has just lost their father, and gained a stepfather to suddenly go mad. However, some time passes before Hamlet is "mad." In fact, before he even begins showing signs of madness, he says to his friend Horatio "As I perchance hereafter shall think meet to put an antic disposition on" (Act I, scene V, lines 166-167). It is not until after this statement that Hamlet becomes mad, and in saying this statement, it is implied that he is in fact feigning madness. Later, as Hamlet is speaking to Guildenstern, he makes the analogy that he is "but mad north-north-west: when the wind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw" (Act II, scene II, lines 408-410), again indicating that he is only shamming insanity. Also, in a heated conversation in which his mother is questioning his sanity, Hamlet says "I essentially am not in madness, But mad in craft" (Act III, scene IV, lines 168-169). Hamlet is putting on an act, a deceiving performance in order to confirm who was involved with his father's death. . Hamlet only performs his act for certain characters, though.	<urn:uuid:da857dd4-7baa-4d7a-9e38-83558cdac725>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.exampleessays.com/viewpaper/52672.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594391.21/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119093733-20200119121733-00176.warc.gz	en	0.988446	443	3.265625	3	[ 0.015817580744624138, 0.10220789909362793, 0.16214722394943237, -0.18526583909988403, -0.23703430593013763, 0.0127521688118577, 0.5124842524528503, 0.4646781384944916, 0.0849522054195404, -0.44693291187286377, -0.07894164323806763, -0.34783869981765747, -0.33496588468551636, 0.231666415929...	2	The idea of a character feigning madness is not foreign to great literary works; in fact, many authors use it to show the sanity of the character. Odysseus shows his sanity by pretending to be mad in Homer's The Iliad to avoid going to war. If his plan had been successful, he would have stayed safe at home, away from the dangers of war. The idea of feigning madness is also apparent throughout Shakespeare's Hamlet. The tragic character puts on an act after he is told of his father's murder, perhaps to have something on which he can place the blame after he avenges his father's death, or perhaps it is to capture the attention of certain characters so that he may find out exactly what has gone "rotten in Denmark." Though it sounds like a crazy idea, Hamlet is feigning madness in Shakespear's tragic play. . It is certainly understandable for someone who has just lost their father, and gained a stepfather to suddenly go mad. However, some time passes before Hamlet is "mad." In fact, before he even begins showing signs of madness, he says to his friend Horatio "As I perchance hereafter shall think meet to put an antic disposition on" (Act I, scene V, lines 166-167). It is not until after this statement that Hamlet becomes mad, and in saying this statement, it is implied that he is in fact feigning madness. Later, as Hamlet is speaking to Guildenstern, he makes the analogy that he is "but mad north-north-west: when the wind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw" (Act II, scene II, lines 408-410), again indicating that he is only shamming insanity. Also, in a heated conversation in which his mother is questioning his sanity, Hamlet says "I essentially am not in madness, But mad in craft" (Act III, scene IV, lines 168-169). Hamlet is putting on an act, a deceiving performance in order to confirm who was involved with his father's death. . Hamlet only performs his act for certain characters, though.	461	ENGLISH	1
September 29, 1917 – The Battle of Ramadi was fought in central Iraq late in September 1917 between the British and the Ottomans; it was part of the Mesopotamian Campaign in World War I. The 15th Indian Division was sent to the town of Ramadi, about 100 kilometers (62 mi) west of Baghdad on the south bank of the Euphrates River, where an important Ottoman garrison was quartered. A defeat of that garrison would allow the British further advance along the river. There had already been an abortive attack on the town on 11 July, where the British forces were driven off and retreated to Dhibban at a cost of 566 casualties. General Brooking ordered the building of a dummy bridge and road on the north bank, to fool the Ottoman forces that the assault they expected would come from that side. He then sent the 6th Cavalry Brigade on a wide flanking march to take up positions to the west of the town (on the Ottoman line of retreat). The attack began on September 28, on the south bank of the Euphrates, with two brigades of the 15th Div forcing their way into the town. Although the Ottomans expected an enemy assault, the British made ample use of armoured cars, which the defenders of the town were not ready to fight against, and the Ottoman garrison was quickly outflanked and surrounded. Nocturnal escape attempt was thwarted by the British cavalry, and the Ottoman forces surrendered in the morning of September 29. The British maneuver had been especially effective, and Ramadi was conquered quickly and with fewer-than-usual casualties.	<urn:uuid:32f42e39-ed18-4984-b51a-7d67ab6cebd7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://mwh52.wordpress.com/2013/09/29/september-29-this-day-during-world-war-l/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251799918.97/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129133601-20200129163601-00286.warc.gz	en	0.984913	325	3.578125	4	[ 0.006292083766311407, 0.21066923439502716, 0.12716400623321533, -0.018394818529486656, -0.31955021619796753, -0.3265779912471771, -0.1445537805557251, 0.1157696470618248, -0.08475029468536377, -0.09791833907365799, 0.06806395947933197, -0.624647319316864, 0.2655244767665863, 0.696555376052...	2	September 29, 1917 – The Battle of Ramadi was fought in central Iraq late in September 1917 between the British and the Ottomans; it was part of the Mesopotamian Campaign in World War I. The 15th Indian Division was sent to the town of Ramadi, about 100 kilometers (62 mi) west of Baghdad on the south bank of the Euphrates River, where an important Ottoman garrison was quartered. A defeat of that garrison would allow the British further advance along the river. There had already been an abortive attack on the town on 11 July, where the British forces were driven off and retreated to Dhibban at a cost of 566 casualties. General Brooking ordered the building of a dummy bridge and road on the north bank, to fool the Ottoman forces that the assault they expected would come from that side. He then sent the 6th Cavalry Brigade on a wide flanking march to take up positions to the west of the town (on the Ottoman line of retreat). The attack began on September 28, on the south bank of the Euphrates, with two brigades of the 15th Div forcing their way into the town. Although the Ottomans expected an enemy assault, the British made ample use of armoured cars, which the defenders of the town were not ready to fight against, and the Ottoman garrison was quickly outflanked and surrounded. Nocturnal escape attempt was thwarted by the British cavalry, and the Ottoman forces surrendered in the morning of September 29. The British maneuver had been especially effective, and Ramadi was conquered quickly and with fewer-than-usual casualties.	361	ENGLISH	1
On December 22, 1704, a historic battle was fought between the Sikhs and the Mughals at Sirsa River, Chamkaur. There were only 40 Sikhs to fight against an army of 10 lack Mughals led by Wazir Khan. Guru Gobind Singh Ji was leading his army of 40 Sikhs. The battle in the history of Sikhs and their valor is known for its religious faith. Guru Gobind Singh described the war in “Jafarnama”. Guru Gobind Singh did not accept defeat to the Mughals. On this wazir khan was furious and wanted to capture him. The Aurangzeb kept 2 lacs troops under Lahore due to fear of an invasion of the Persian empire. Several Mughal rulers of Anandpur kept their forces in a safe place for 6 months. They were under the illusion that as the supplies will end, the Sikhs will surrender. One night Guru Gobind Singh flew out with all his colleagues towards Sirsa river, Chamkaur. As soon as Gurudeva with his 40 Sikhs reached Chamkaur, they were welcomed warmly by the locals. They decided not to go ahead because everyone was aware that death was certain. The Khalsa principle says not to give up until you die. Meanwhile, the Mughals came to know of their location and reached there to capture GuruJi. Now, Sikhs had no option but to either surrender themselves to Mughals or fight against them till last breath. Guru Gobind Singh Ji decided to let one Sikh fight with one and a 25 lakh Mughals (‘sava lakh’). Gurudeva made a strategy for the war. He sent the first batch of five Sikhs to the battlefield. They killed hundreds of Mughals but also lost their lives in battle. Then Gurudeva sent the second batch of five Sikhs. This group also finished a heavy toll of the enemy. Thus this tactic was applied and a batch of five was sent to the battlefield. Now Nawab Wazir Khan decided to go with a one-time attack. This time everyone was worried about how to stop such a big attack. So the remaining Sikhs urged Gurudev to step back from the war along with his sons. Hearing this, Gurudeva said: “what sons are you talking about, you all are my sons. All Sikhs were surprised to hear the response. Then four other Sikhs came forward and put many soldiers to death. Ajit Singh led a batch of five lions and jostled hundreds of Mughals. But in the process of killing a thousand soldiers, he also lost his life. After a long battle, only 7 Sikhs were left excluding Guru Gobind Ji. They decided to send Guru Ji at a safe place while they kept the Mughals engaged. But he refused to show his back to the battlefield. They knew that sacrificing him will prove to be very harmful to the Panth. Saying: ‘Guruji da Khalsa, Guru Ji di Fateh’, eventually, Guru Ji left for a safer place because this policy was good for the Khalsa Panth. All Sikhs shed their blood in order to protect Khalsa Panth. The next morning was a huge disappointment because the land was full of blood. Thousands of corpses were lying against only thirty-five bodies of Sikhs. And they were stunned when they did not find Guru Gobind Singh Ji. It was a tight slap on the Mughals’ face. Though the Mughals captured Kashmir, Lahore, Delhi. Thousands of Mughal army died in this battle but could not capture Guru Gobind Singh. Sikhs did not let their mission fulfill. Sikh’s valor and courage were prominent in the battle. They not only fought with courage but also managed to save their Guru and their legacy. This battle made its place in the list of deadliest wars in history. Sacrifices of 40 Sikhs will be remembered forever by generations.	<urn:uuid:15bdf884-4768-41ac-a9cc-bd66fa3245b4>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.theyouth.in/2019/12/15/battle-of-chamkaur-40-deadly-sikhs-fought-an-army-of-10-lack-mughals-read-full-story/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672440.80/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125101544-20200125130544-00432.warc.gz	en	0.985687	841	3.890625	4	[ -0.23445585370063782, 0.6055774688720703, 0.017278531566262245, -0.07731033861637115, -0.5590240955352783, 0.007238457910716534, 0.5625066757202148, 0.011038072407245636, 0.04169999063014984, -0.10153195261955261, 0.1405336856842041, -0.5614041686058044, 0.1976596713066101, 0.0919889584183...	6	On December 22, 1704, a historic battle was fought between the Sikhs and the Mughals at Sirsa River, Chamkaur. There were only 40 Sikhs to fight against an army of 10 lack Mughals led by Wazir Khan. Guru Gobind Singh Ji was leading his army of 40 Sikhs. The battle in the history of Sikhs and their valor is known for its religious faith. Guru Gobind Singh described the war in “Jafarnama”. Guru Gobind Singh did not accept defeat to the Mughals. On this wazir khan was furious and wanted to capture him. The Aurangzeb kept 2 lacs troops under Lahore due to fear of an invasion of the Persian empire. Several Mughal rulers of Anandpur kept their forces in a safe place for 6 months. They were under the illusion that as the supplies will end, the Sikhs will surrender. One night Guru Gobind Singh flew out with all his colleagues towards Sirsa river, Chamkaur. As soon as Gurudeva with his 40 Sikhs reached Chamkaur, they were welcomed warmly by the locals. They decided not to go ahead because everyone was aware that death was certain. The Khalsa principle says not to give up until you die. Meanwhile, the Mughals came to know of their location and reached there to capture GuruJi. Now, Sikhs had no option but to either surrender themselves to Mughals or fight against them till last breath. Guru Gobind Singh Ji decided to let one Sikh fight with one and a 25 lakh Mughals (‘sava lakh’). Gurudeva made a strategy for the war. He sent the first batch of five Sikhs to the battlefield. They killed hundreds of Mughals but also lost their lives in battle. Then Gurudeva sent the second batch of five Sikhs. This group also finished a heavy toll of the enemy. Thus this tactic was applied and a batch of five was sent to the battlefield. Now Nawab Wazir Khan decided to go with a one-time attack. This time everyone was worried about how to stop such a big attack. So the remaining Sikhs urged Gurudev to step back from the war along with his sons. Hearing this, Gurudeva said: “what sons are you talking about, you all are my sons. All Sikhs were surprised to hear the response. Then four other Sikhs came forward and put many soldiers to death. Ajit Singh led a batch of five lions and jostled hundreds of Mughals. But in the process of killing a thousand soldiers, he also lost his life. After a long battle, only 7 Sikhs were left excluding Guru Gobind Ji. They decided to send Guru Ji at a safe place while they kept the Mughals engaged. But he refused to show his back to the battlefield. They knew that sacrificing him will prove to be very harmful to the Panth. Saying: ‘Guruji da Khalsa, Guru Ji di Fateh’, eventually, Guru Ji left for a safer place because this policy was good for the Khalsa Panth. All Sikhs shed their blood in order to protect Khalsa Panth. The next morning was a huge disappointment because the land was full of blood. Thousands of corpses were lying against only thirty-five bodies of Sikhs. And they were stunned when they did not find Guru Gobind Singh Ji. It was a tight slap on the Mughals’ face. Though the Mughals captured Kashmir, Lahore, Delhi. Thousands of Mughal army died in this battle but could not capture Guru Gobind Singh. Sikhs did not let their mission fulfill. Sikh’s valor and courage were prominent in the battle. They not only fought with courage but also managed to save their Guru and their legacy. This battle made its place in the list of deadliest wars in history. Sacrifices of 40 Sikhs will be remembered forever by generations.	843	ENGLISH	1
Vespasian was Roman emperor from 69 to 79 AD. He was the last of the four emperors who ruled the ancient Roman Empire in the 69 AD. Interestingly, the previous three leaders died because of the suicide or murder, while Vespasian death happened ten years later because of natural causes. He had two sons: Titus and Domitian. All together they represented the Flavian Dynasty. Titus Flavius Vespasianus was born in the small town just north of Rome on November 17, 9 AD. The future emperor was raised by his paternal grandmother, Terulla, but was actually the son of Sabinus and Vespasia Polla. He had an older brother, whose name was also Sabinus and he was a consul and governor. When Vespasian grew up, he married Flavia Domitilla and they had three children: Titus, Domitian, and Domitilla, but his daughter died in infancy. When his wife died, Vespasian married his ex-mistress Caenis, but the wedding wasn’t official since she was a slave. Vespasian fought in over 30 battles and captured about 20 cities Later, he served in Africa in the early 60 AD. Vespasian spent long time out of Rome during the reigns of Caligula and Claudius. The future emperor had a political success, but not the financial one. However, under the reign of Nero, rebellions broke out in Judea in 66 AD and Vespasian sent his son Titus to disperse the rioters. Later, when Nero died and Galba became the new emperor, Vespasian and Titus were waiting for the orders in Judea. Soon, Galba died and several emperors were changed. In this situation, the feature was the patience of Vespasian, who didn’t involve himself in troublesome affairs and didn’t show any hostility to emperors if there was some. After all the changes and short rules of several emperors, Vespasian spet by step came to the reign by December 26, 69 AD. In 66 AD, Vespasian was appointed to suppress the Jewish revolt in Judea. A lot of military forces under the rule of Vespasian and Titus took place in the revolt. Thousands of Jews were killed and the Romans destroyed many of their towns. The Romans took Jerusalem in 70 AD Around 10,000 Jewish people were either killed or sold into slavery. Moreover, most of the Jews who became slaves took part in the construction of the Colosseum, originally called the Flavian Amphitheater, which started in 72 AD. Undoubtedly, in compare to all the emperors who were before Vespasian, the emperor was famous for a time of peace and calm under his rule. However, one of the most notable features of his reign was his remedy to increase existing taxes. The most famous example is his composition of a tax on the use of public toilets. When his son Titus asked him about such an unusual source of getting money, Vespasian is said to have held a coin from the first intake of the tax to Titus’ nose and asked him if its smell revolted him. Titus replied that it did not and the emperor said “and yeat it comes from urine!” This is how “money does not stink” phrase was created. 👇👍Our Friends Service👍👇 Vespasian’s reign started when he was declared emperor by the Senate while he was in Egypt in December of 69 AD. Administration of the empire was given to Mucianus, who was aided by Domitian, Vespasian’s son. Mucianus’ aim was to make tax reform to restore the empire’s finances. When the emperor arrived in Rome in 70 AD, Mucianus conitnued to press him to gather as more taxes as possible. Old taxes and instituted ones were renewed and increased. Later, between 71 and 79 AD, there were many new buildings created in Rome. The emperor helped rebuild the Eternal City after the civil war. For instance, he added the Temple of Peace and the Temple to the Deifed Claudius. Later, in 75 AD, he erected a large statue of Apollo, which was begun under Nero, and Vespasian dedicated a stage of the Theater of Marcellus. Most importantly and notably, he began the construction of the Colosseum, using funds from the spoils of the Jewish Temple after the War of Jerusalem. There were constant conspiracies against Vespasian Vespasian ruled for almost ten years, when he fell ill and died. Unlike many other emperors, he died because of natural causes. According to several historians, his last words were: “It is fitting that an emperor should die on his feet!” – he pronounced after he felt sure that his last moment came. The throne of Vespasian was passed to his eldest son Titus, thus establishing the Flavian dyansty Moreover, before the death, Vespasian declared to the senate that either his sons would succeed him or no one would. Author: Kate Zusmann For the last 6 years I live in the Eternal City. Traveling, exploring new things, writing blogs, shooting vlogs are my main hobbies, but the thing that I like even more is to share my experience and thoughts with you! Explore Rome with Us :) Rome.us © 2020. All Rights Reserved	<urn:uuid:b663fbab-f2d3-48a0-a4f4-e3798bb21b1f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://rome.us/roman-emperors/vespasian.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00157.warc.gz	en	0.989692	1,163	3.46875	3	[ -0.11038430035114288, 0.4062885642051697, 0.5689530968666077, -0.01581197790801525, -0.47931089997291565, -0.1947728991508484, -0.08325369656085968, 0.20484046638011932, 0.18444007635116577, -0.26329997181892395, -0.01731245219707489, -0.6985780596733093, 0.2112937718629837, 0.185502320528...	1	Vespasian was Roman emperor from 69 to 79 AD. He was the last of the four emperors who ruled the ancient Roman Empire in the 69 AD. Interestingly, the previous three leaders died because of the suicide or murder, while Vespasian death happened ten years later because of natural causes. He had two sons: Titus and Domitian. All together they represented the Flavian Dynasty. Titus Flavius Vespasianus was born in the small town just north of Rome on November 17, 9 AD. The future emperor was raised by his paternal grandmother, Terulla, but was actually the son of Sabinus and Vespasia Polla. He had an older brother, whose name was also Sabinus and he was a consul and governor. When Vespasian grew up, he married Flavia Domitilla and they had three children: Titus, Domitian, and Domitilla, but his daughter died in infancy. When his wife died, Vespasian married his ex-mistress Caenis, but the wedding wasn’t official since she was a slave. Vespasian fought in over 30 battles and captured about 20 cities Later, he served in Africa in the early 60 AD. Vespasian spent long time out of Rome during the reigns of Caligula and Claudius. The future emperor had a political success, but not the financial one. However, under the reign of Nero, rebellions broke out in Judea in 66 AD and Vespasian sent his son Titus to disperse the rioters. Later, when Nero died and Galba became the new emperor, Vespasian and Titus were waiting for the orders in Judea. Soon, Galba died and several emperors were changed. In this situation, the feature was the patience of Vespasian, who didn’t involve himself in troublesome affairs and didn’t show any hostility to emperors if there was some. After all the changes and short rules of several emperors, Vespasian spet by step came to the reign by December 26, 69 AD. In 66 AD, Vespasian was appointed to suppress the Jewish revolt in Judea. A lot of military forces under the rule of Vespasian and Titus took place in the revolt. Thousands of Jews were killed and the Romans destroyed many of their towns. The Romans took Jerusalem in 70 AD Around 10,000 Jewish people were either killed or sold into slavery. Moreover, most of the Jews who became slaves took part in the construction of the Colosseum, originally called the Flavian Amphitheater, which started in 72 AD. Undoubtedly, in compare to all the emperors who were before Vespasian, the emperor was famous for a time of peace and calm under his rule. However, one of the most notable features of his reign was his remedy to increase existing taxes. The most famous example is his composition of a tax on the use of public toilets. When his son Titus asked him about such an unusual source of getting money, Vespasian is said to have held a coin from the first intake of the tax to Titus’ nose and asked him if its smell revolted him. Titus replied that it did not and the emperor said “and yeat it comes from urine!” This is how “money does not stink” phrase was created. 👇👍Our Friends Service👍👇 Vespasian’s reign started when he was declared emperor by the Senate while he was in Egypt in December of 69 AD. Administration of the empire was given to Mucianus, who was aided by Domitian, Vespasian’s son. Mucianus’ aim was to make tax reform to restore the empire’s finances. When the emperor arrived in Rome in 70 AD, Mucianus conitnued to press him to gather as more taxes as possible. Old taxes and instituted ones were renewed and increased. Later, between 71 and 79 AD, there were many new buildings created in Rome. The emperor helped rebuild the Eternal City after the civil war. For instance, he added the Temple of Peace and the Temple to the Deifed Claudius. Later, in 75 AD, he erected a large statue of Apollo, which was begun under Nero, and Vespasian dedicated a stage of the Theater of Marcellus. Most importantly and notably, he began the construction of the Colosseum, using funds from the spoils of the Jewish Temple after the War of Jerusalem. There were constant conspiracies against Vespasian Vespasian ruled for almost ten years, when he fell ill and died. Unlike many other emperors, he died because of natural causes. According to several historians, his last words were: “It is fitting that an emperor should die on his feet!” – he pronounced after he felt sure that his last moment came. The throne of Vespasian was passed to his eldest son Titus, thus establishing the Flavian dyansty Moreover, before the death, Vespasian declared to the senate that either his sons would succeed him or no one would. Author: Kate Zusmann For the last 6 years I live in the Eternal City. Traveling, exploring new things, writing blogs, shooting vlogs are my main hobbies, but the thing that I like even more is to share my experience and thoughts with you! Explore Rome with Us :) Rome.us © 2020. All Rights Reserved	1,182	ENGLISH	1
Author: Thorstein Veblen was an American economist and sociologist who is famous for his combination of Darwinian theories and institutional economics. He was born in 1857 in Wisconsin to Norwegian immigrants. Context: The Theory of the Leisure Class was written in 1899 during a boom in industry called the Gilded Age. It also brought a great many immigrants with a promise of abundant new jobs. Language: He makes fun of the “leisure class” calling them rather useless to society. They provide no stimulation to the economy and no betterment to the social aspect of the country. They are distant and disconnected. Audience: He wrote to an educated audience. He wrote for scholars that were intelligent enough to recognize his satiric writing and understand his slightly complex writing style. Intent: Veblen wanted to broadcast his views of the leisure class and their uselessness. He also wanted to share his views on the new industrial boom. It was good for the economy, stimulated growth and provided new jobs for immigrants coming from all over the world. Message: He was trying to bring to light the divide between the newly emerged working class. Those actually earn an honest living and those who oppress their workers to squeeze as much profit out of them as possible. Society was rapidly growing and becoming industry based. With this industrial change came the mistreatment of workers and the exploitation of immigrants who came with the promise of good, honest work.	<urn:uuid:e1cdd54b-da42-49fa-9894-db1fc1eefde5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://blogs.dickinson.edu/quallsk/2014/02/23/the-leisure-class/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592394.9/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118081234-20200118105234-00443.warc.gz	en	0.988706	293	3.71875	4	[ -0.13208602368831635, 0.13368961215019226, -0.11694680154323578, 0.21739476919174194, 0.2128128856420517, 0.36599695682525635, -0.03937716409564018, 0.4464247226715088, -0.22151817381381989, -0.2462887018918991, 0.0003197125915903598, 0.20310023427009583, 0.12350594252347946, 0.38043293356...	7	Author: Thorstein Veblen was an American economist and sociologist who is famous for his combination of Darwinian theories and institutional economics. He was born in 1857 in Wisconsin to Norwegian immigrants. Context: The Theory of the Leisure Class was written in 1899 during a boom in industry called the Gilded Age. It also brought a great many immigrants with a promise of abundant new jobs. Language: He makes fun of the “leisure class” calling them rather useless to society. They provide no stimulation to the economy and no betterment to the social aspect of the country. They are distant and disconnected. Audience: He wrote to an educated audience. He wrote for scholars that were intelligent enough to recognize his satiric writing and understand his slightly complex writing style. Intent: Veblen wanted to broadcast his views of the leisure class and their uselessness. He also wanted to share his views on the new industrial boom. It was good for the economy, stimulated growth and provided new jobs for immigrants coming from all over the world. Message: He was trying to bring to light the divide between the newly emerged working class. Those actually earn an honest living and those who oppress their workers to squeeze as much profit out of them as possible. Society was rapidly growing and becoming industry based. With this industrial change came the mistreatment of workers and the exploitation of immigrants who came with the promise of good, honest work.	292	ENGLISH	1
In Greek mythology, Pan was the god of the wild, shepherds, hunting and rustic music and chaser of the nymphs. Originally a pastoral god of Arcadia and considered basically as the patron of shepherds and their flocks, Pan was believed to dwell in the mountains and forests of ancient Greece. His parentage is ambiguous and a wide assortment of myths surrounds Pan’s parentage. However, according to many accounts, he was born to Hemes, the messenger of the gods and a wood nymph, named Dryope. He was born with extremely horrific features, with the upper body and hands of a human male, resembling a faun and cloven hooves, a tail, two horns, pointed ears and the horizontal eyes of a goat. As his depressed and miserable mother became very much frightened and distressed by his appearance, she left the child on his birth and ran away. However, Hermes wrapped the baby in the pelt of a hare and carried him off to Mount Olympus. Pan is famous for his unfettered sexuality and he is the patron of sex for the sake of lust and physical satisfaction. In the ancient world, depictions of small penises were culturally valued and large penises were associated with lust and ugliness. Unlike many other male gods, Pan is often depicted with a huge erect phallus. His unbridled crave for sex often prompted him to chase the nymphs, but he was rarely successful in his courting, as his abnormal appearance and unusual harsh voice made the nymphs scary and they used to run away from him in panic with pounding hearts. Thus, the word ‘panic’ was originated from the name of Pan. Once Pan was completely blown away by the breathtaking beauty of a young nymph, named Syrinx. As he was strongly attracted by her sexual charm, he immediately started to chase her to satisfy his lust. However, Syrinx was not interested. She was an ardent follower of Artemis or Diana and had decided to abstain from any type of sexual pleasure. Apart from that, she became frightened by the strange look of Pan and ran away to save her life and virginity. Pan pursued the scared nymph from the Mount Lycaeum until she came upon the bank of the River Ladon, where she desperately started to appeal to her sisters, the river nymphs, to save her from the imminent embrace of Pan. In response to her prayer, the river nymphs transformed Syrinx into the reeds growing on the river bank and as Pan spread his arms to embrace and fondle her, all he found in his arms was a plain tuft of reeds. He sighed in deep grief, collected seven reeds and crafted a Pan Pipe, which he dedicated to the memory of his lost love and named it ‘Syrinx’. Like Syrinx, Pan was also avoided by another nymph named Pitys, when she was transformed into a pine tree by the gods. However, he was not so unfortunate with the Maenads, the crazy female followers of Dionysus, the Greek god of wine (Roman Bacchus), making love to each of them. According to some accounts, Pan also had sex with the beautiful the moon goddess Selene, as he cheated her by wrapping himself in a sheepskin to hide his hairy black goat form and drew Selene down from the sky into the forest where he had sex with her. In a sculpture of Aphrodite, Pan and Eros, exhibited in the National Archaeological Museum of Athens, stark naked Aphrodite, the goddess of beauty and love is depicted brandishing a sandal in her slightly raised right hand and her face with a veiled smile. The angle of her head is such that she is not directly looking at Pan. It appears that she is not at all tensed or worried about the sexual intention or the strength of Pan and she is neglecting the poor, persisting and comical Pan, with her indifferent attitude and just enjoying the situation. In fact, the goat-footed, ugly and horned Pan presents a miserable and pathetic figure in the sculpture. Pan was thought to inspire panic, which has the immense power to abate reasoning and destroy confidence in the human soul. It is said that, in the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC, Pan created panic in the hearts of the Persians, allowing the Athenians, whom he favoured, to gain the upper hand. Pan was most commonly worshipped in Arcadia, where the Arcadian hunters used to scourge the statue of the god, if they had been disappointed in the chase. However, being a rustic god, he was worshipped in natural settings, usually in caves or grottoes, with the exceptions of the temple of Pan on the Neda River gorge in the southwest Peloponnese and at Apollonopolis Magana in ancient Egypt. However, by the fifth century BC, a number of cults were dedicated to him in Athens and other major Greek cities. The Roman counterpart to Pan is Faunus.	<urn:uuid:3ae4db83-43ae-4d58-84a0-3260c9641b39>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.tutorialathome.in/strange-deities/pan-ancient-greece	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606696.26/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122042145-20200122071145-00026.warc.gz	en	0.987716	1,047	3.359375	3	[ 0.39481574296951294, 0.5010358691215515, 0.45755672454833984, 0.0659104511141777, -0.47288256883621216, -0.3003983497619629, 0.5964025259017944, 0.11605759710073471, 0.4546552002429962, -0.1391698718070984, -0.6338916420936584, -0.49926066398620605, 0.13132867217063904, 0.13906243443489075...	5	In Greek mythology, Pan was the god of the wild, shepherds, hunting and rustic music and chaser of the nymphs. Originally a pastoral god of Arcadia and considered basically as the patron of shepherds and their flocks, Pan was believed to dwell in the mountains and forests of ancient Greece. His parentage is ambiguous and a wide assortment of myths surrounds Pan’s parentage. However, according to many accounts, he was born to Hemes, the messenger of the gods and a wood nymph, named Dryope. He was born with extremely horrific features, with the upper body and hands of a human male, resembling a faun and cloven hooves, a tail, two horns, pointed ears and the horizontal eyes of a goat. As his depressed and miserable mother became very much frightened and distressed by his appearance, she left the child on his birth and ran away. However, Hermes wrapped the baby in the pelt of a hare and carried him off to Mount Olympus. Pan is famous for his unfettered sexuality and he is the patron of sex for the sake of lust and physical satisfaction. In the ancient world, depictions of small penises were culturally valued and large penises were associated with lust and ugliness. Unlike many other male gods, Pan is often depicted with a huge erect phallus. His unbridled crave for sex often prompted him to chase the nymphs, but he was rarely successful in his courting, as his abnormal appearance and unusual harsh voice made the nymphs scary and they used to run away from him in panic with pounding hearts. Thus, the word ‘panic’ was originated from the name of Pan. Once Pan was completely blown away by the breathtaking beauty of a young nymph, named Syrinx. As he was strongly attracted by her sexual charm, he immediately started to chase her to satisfy his lust. However, Syrinx was not interested. She was an ardent follower of Artemis or Diana and had decided to abstain from any type of sexual pleasure. Apart from that, she became frightened by the strange look of Pan and ran away to save her life and virginity. Pan pursued the scared nymph from the Mount Lycaeum until she came upon the bank of the River Ladon, where she desperately started to appeal to her sisters, the river nymphs, to save her from the imminent embrace of Pan. In response to her prayer, the river nymphs transformed Syrinx into the reeds growing on the river bank and as Pan spread his arms to embrace and fondle her, all he found in his arms was a plain tuft of reeds. He sighed in deep grief, collected seven reeds and crafted a Pan Pipe, which he dedicated to the memory of his lost love and named it ‘Syrinx’. Like Syrinx, Pan was also avoided by another nymph named Pitys, when she was transformed into a pine tree by the gods. However, he was not so unfortunate with the Maenads, the crazy female followers of Dionysus, the Greek god of wine (Roman Bacchus), making love to each of them. According to some accounts, Pan also had sex with the beautiful the moon goddess Selene, as he cheated her by wrapping himself in a sheepskin to hide his hairy black goat form and drew Selene down from the sky into the forest where he had sex with her. In a sculpture of Aphrodite, Pan and Eros, exhibited in the National Archaeological Museum of Athens, stark naked Aphrodite, the goddess of beauty and love is depicted brandishing a sandal in her slightly raised right hand and her face with a veiled smile. The angle of her head is such that she is not directly looking at Pan. It appears that she is not at all tensed or worried about the sexual intention or the strength of Pan and she is neglecting the poor, persisting and comical Pan, with her indifferent attitude and just enjoying the situation. In fact, the goat-footed, ugly and horned Pan presents a miserable and pathetic figure in the sculpture. Pan was thought to inspire panic, which has the immense power to abate reasoning and destroy confidence in the human soul. It is said that, in the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC, Pan created panic in the hearts of the Persians, allowing the Athenians, whom he favoured, to gain the upper hand. Pan was most commonly worshipped in Arcadia, where the Arcadian hunters used to scourge the statue of the god, if they had been disappointed in the chase. However, being a rustic god, he was worshipped in natural settings, usually in caves or grottoes, with the exceptions of the temple of Pan on the Neda River gorge in the southwest Peloponnese and at Apollonopolis Magana in ancient Egypt. However, by the fifth century BC, a number of cults were dedicated to him in Athens and other major Greek cities. The Roman counterpart to Pan is Faunus.	1,030	ENGLISH	1
For thousands of Belgian people, the signing of the Armistice on 11 November 1918 marked the beginning of another grim struggle that was to last for decades Armistice Day 1918 marked the end of the First World War. It’s easy to think of the relief and optimism sweeping across Europe that the signing of the peace treaty must have brought. Perhaps we have visions of people returning to their homes in previously occupied territories, greeting loved ones, restocking the shops, and getting “back to normal”. Or we imagine citizens and soldiers dancing in the streets of villages and towns, to the pealing of church bells. But for thousands of Flemish people returning to Flanders Fields, the reality was totally different – and brutal. For them, there were no bells pealing from village churches. There was no dancing in the streets. There was no restocking of shop shelves. Why? Because there were no churches, no shops, no streets. In fact, there were no villages, nor towns. There was absolutely nothing remaining of the land they used to know. The bloody battlefield For most of the First World War, Allied and German forces were involved in trench warfare along the Western Front. This bloody battlefield stretched from the North Sea to the Swiss frontier with France. Despite the efforts of both sides, it remained essentially unchanged for the duration of the war. In Flanders the Front Line extended from Nieuwpoort on the coast, along the banks of the previously picturesque River Ijzer, past Diksmuide, around the medieval town of Ieper, and past Mesen to the French border. Its width varied between two and ten kilometres. On a clear day, a Belgian soldier would have been able to stand in relative safety behind the Front Line and see the German army moving in relative peace on the other side. The land in between, however, was a monstrous hell of death and destruction. In this long, narrow stretch of West Flanders, more than half a million soldiers were killed, wounded or missing. Tens of thousands of civilians were forced to flee for their lives. Towns, villages, farms, woods and fields were totally devastated. When peace was finally restored on 11 November 1918, virtually nothing was left of the original landscape. The area became known as the Verwoeste Gewesten – the Devastated Lands. What happened next and how the landscape was restored to its previous state is a remarkable story of the perseverance and opportunism of the Flemish people. Two action plans after Armistice Day After the Armistice, two action plans were hastily formulated and implemented. The first was to retrieve, identify if possible, and bury the bodies of the soldiers who had died on the front. Many of these had lain unburied for years and all clues to their identity had been lost. Others had been buried in temporary graves. These were exhumed and laid to rest in permanent cemeteries. The second task was to level the ground. The British Army’s Chinese Labour Corps played a key role in this work. Initially shipped over from China to dig trenches and latrines and provide other support to the fighting soldiers, they stayed in Flanders after 1918 to help clean up the war zone. They did not return to China until 1920. German prisoners of war were also used. Trenches, craters and shell holes were filled in and at some point it was declared that civilians could be allowed to re-enter the war zone. They were told to expect the worst. It would have been an extremely traumatic return – a nightmare scenario. One farmer returned to his farm, found absolutely nothing recognisable, and committed suicide. Another man from Ieper couldn’t find a trace of his farm until he found a tap to an underground water pipe that he had installed in 1914. It was the only thing remaining of his property. Their first priority was to build temporary accommodation, and the resourcefulness and ingenuity of the Flemings came to the fore. Scattered around the battlefields were huge dumps of wood and scrap iron. Using such materials, basic huts and sheds were constructed. Other families took over abandoned Nissen huts. These were prefabricated, portable multi-purpose huts developed by Major Peter Nissen of the Royal Engineers in 1916. At least 100,000 of them were produced in World War One as temporary barracks for soldiers. The Belgian government also provided their people with temporary wooden huts. The availability of clean drinking water was a problem. The River Ijzer and the two lakes that provided water to Ieper were totally contaminated and unfit to drink. Local breweries came to the rescue. They drilled deep bore holes and pumped up clean water. They used it for their own brewing processes and to provide potable water to local inhabitants. The next task was to re-develop and re-stock the land. This was necessary not only in the war zone itself but up to ten kilometres on either side. One of the reasons was the extensive use of chlorine, phosgene and mustard gases in the region. These poisonous gases were not only fatal to humans but killed everything living in their path, including livestock as well as vegetation. The Belgian Ministry of Agriculture provided new seeds and plants, while farmers in the Netherlands – particularly from the province of Limburg – donated cattle, horses and even chickens. Slowly but surely, new life began to return to the Devastated Lands. Danger lurks beneath However, working in Flanders Fields in the early 1920s was a dangerous occupation. It has been estimated that a quarter of the one billion projectiles fired during the First World War failed to explode, but remained live. That’s 250 million projectiles. Farm labourers were constantly being maimed or killed by unexploded ordinance. It was apparent that the initial clean-up operation had been too superficial. Around this time some clever opportunists appeared on the scene. They would perform a service of “deep digging”. For a fee they would thoroughly dig out a hectare of land, remove all the shells, and proclaim it as clean land. A number of family fortunes were made in this way. Also amassing great personal wealth were the scrap metal merchants who went from battlefield to battlefield collecting shells and selling the iron and copper. Both jobs were fraught with danger and frequently led to workers losing limbs, if not their lives. With the land beginning to yield its first crops and livestock increasing in numbers, farm buildings could be rebuilt. Often the same architect would be commissioned for a number of farms and he would use the same design. The deaths continue Unbelievably, the so-called Period of Reconstruction of the Verwoeste Gewesten lasted until 1967, when the final annex to the Cloth Hall in Ypres was finished. Unfortunately, it’s not quite the end of the trauma. Each year, nearly 300 tons of rusting bombs, grenades, mortars and shells are unearthed. About one in 20 contains poison gases that are still potent enough to kill. The locals call it the “Iron Harvest”. In 2014, two people were killed in Flanders by a century-old unexploded shell. Despite all the efforts, the legacy of this horrendous episode in European history still remains in Flanders Fields. (Photos copyright of In Flanders Fields Museum)	<urn:uuid:2dd4ea77-ea37-43ff-8a39-12eac733d52a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://discoveringbelgium.com/2018/11/11/armistice/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00490.warc.gz	en	0.980402	1,528	3.609375	4	[ -0.32292869687080383, 0.34055227041244507, 0.27834171056747437, -0.0720701664686203, -0.12411174178123474, -0.05768322944641113, -0.3593349754810333, 0.0778491199016571, 0.01973753049969673, 0.06391842663288116, 0.3213404417037964, -0.46391531825065613, 0.13252565264701843, 0.3760915994644...	2	For thousands of Belgian people, the signing of the Armistice on 11 November 1918 marked the beginning of another grim struggle that was to last for decades Armistice Day 1918 marked the end of the First World War. It’s easy to think of the relief and optimism sweeping across Europe that the signing of the peace treaty must have brought. Perhaps we have visions of people returning to their homes in previously occupied territories, greeting loved ones, restocking the shops, and getting “back to normal”. Or we imagine citizens and soldiers dancing in the streets of villages and towns, to the pealing of church bells. But for thousands of Flemish people returning to Flanders Fields, the reality was totally different – and brutal. For them, there were no bells pealing from village churches. There was no dancing in the streets. There was no restocking of shop shelves. Why? Because there were no churches, no shops, no streets. In fact, there were no villages, nor towns. There was absolutely nothing remaining of the land they used to know. The bloody battlefield For most of the First World War, Allied and German forces were involved in trench warfare along the Western Front. This bloody battlefield stretched from the North Sea to the Swiss frontier with France. Despite the efforts of both sides, it remained essentially unchanged for the duration of the war. In Flanders the Front Line extended from Nieuwpoort on the coast, along the banks of the previously picturesque River Ijzer, past Diksmuide, around the medieval town of Ieper, and past Mesen to the French border. Its width varied between two and ten kilometres. On a clear day, a Belgian soldier would have been able to stand in relative safety behind the Front Line and see the German army moving in relative peace on the other side. The land in between, however, was a monstrous hell of death and destruction. In this long, narrow stretch of West Flanders, more than half a million soldiers were killed, wounded or missing. Tens of thousands of civilians were forced to flee for their lives. Towns, villages, farms, woods and fields were totally devastated. When peace was finally restored on 11 November 1918, virtually nothing was left of the original landscape. The area became known as the Verwoeste Gewesten – the Devastated Lands. What happened next and how the landscape was restored to its previous state is a remarkable story of the perseverance and opportunism of the Flemish people. Two action plans after Armistice Day After the Armistice, two action plans were hastily formulated and implemented. The first was to retrieve, identify if possible, and bury the bodies of the soldiers who had died on the front. Many of these had lain unburied for years and all clues to their identity had been lost. Others had been buried in temporary graves. These were exhumed and laid to rest in permanent cemeteries. The second task was to level the ground. The British Army’s Chinese Labour Corps played a key role in this work. Initially shipped over from China to dig trenches and latrines and provide other support to the fighting soldiers, they stayed in Flanders after 1918 to help clean up the war zone. They did not return to China until 1920. German prisoners of war were also used. Trenches, craters and shell holes were filled in and at some point it was declared that civilians could be allowed to re-enter the war zone. They were told to expect the worst. It would have been an extremely traumatic return – a nightmare scenario. One farmer returned to his farm, found absolutely nothing recognisable, and committed suicide. Another man from Ieper couldn’t find a trace of his farm until he found a tap to an underground water pipe that he had installed in 1914. It was the only thing remaining of his property. Their first priority was to build temporary accommodation, and the resourcefulness and ingenuity of the Flemings came to the fore. Scattered around the battlefields were huge dumps of wood and scrap iron. Using such materials, basic huts and sheds were constructed. Other families took over abandoned Nissen huts. These were prefabricated, portable multi-purpose huts developed by Major Peter Nissen of the Royal Engineers in 1916. At least 100,000 of them were produced in World War One as temporary barracks for soldiers. The Belgian government also provided their people with temporary wooden huts. The availability of clean drinking water was a problem. The River Ijzer and the two lakes that provided water to Ieper were totally contaminated and unfit to drink. Local breweries came to the rescue. They drilled deep bore holes and pumped up clean water. They used it for their own brewing processes and to provide potable water to local inhabitants. The next task was to re-develop and re-stock the land. This was necessary not only in the war zone itself but up to ten kilometres on either side. One of the reasons was the extensive use of chlorine, phosgene and mustard gases in the region. These poisonous gases were not only fatal to humans but killed everything living in their path, including livestock as well as vegetation. The Belgian Ministry of Agriculture provided new seeds and plants, while farmers in the Netherlands – particularly from the province of Limburg – donated cattle, horses and even chickens. Slowly but surely, new life began to return to the Devastated Lands. Danger lurks beneath However, working in Flanders Fields in the early 1920s was a dangerous occupation. It has been estimated that a quarter of the one billion projectiles fired during the First World War failed to explode, but remained live. That’s 250 million projectiles. Farm labourers were constantly being maimed or killed by unexploded ordinance. It was apparent that the initial clean-up operation had been too superficial. Around this time some clever opportunists appeared on the scene. They would perform a service of “deep digging”. For a fee they would thoroughly dig out a hectare of land, remove all the shells, and proclaim it as clean land. A number of family fortunes were made in this way. Also amassing great personal wealth were the scrap metal merchants who went from battlefield to battlefield collecting shells and selling the iron and copper. Both jobs were fraught with danger and frequently led to workers losing limbs, if not their lives. With the land beginning to yield its first crops and livestock increasing in numbers, farm buildings could be rebuilt. Often the same architect would be commissioned for a number of farms and he would use the same design. The deaths continue Unbelievably, the so-called Period of Reconstruction of the Verwoeste Gewesten lasted until 1967, when the final annex to the Cloth Hall in Ypres was finished. Unfortunately, it’s not quite the end of the trauma. Each year, nearly 300 tons of rusting bombs, grenades, mortars and shells are unearthed. About one in 20 contains poison gases that are still potent enough to kill. The locals call it the “Iron Harvest”. In 2014, two people were killed in Flanders by a century-old unexploded shell. Despite all the efforts, the legacy of this horrendous episode in European history still remains in Flanders Fields. (Photos copyright of In Flanders Fields Museum)	1,531	ENGLISH	1
In "The Five Orange Pips" , Explain in detail why the KKK were chasing after Elias. "The Five Orange Pips", sherlock holmes. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle The Ku Klux Klan was a real group that did spring up after the Civil War in the United States. At the time that it began it was dedicated to ending the Northern rule of the South during Reconstruction. The group was made illegal soon after it was created. The KKK are chasing after him because he has run away from America with some of their important papers in his possession. They are worried because the papers he is carrying will implicate some of the more important men in the South -- it will show that they are members of this group. check Approved by eNotes Editorial	<urn:uuid:aa74cc0c-9123-4d81-9e14-8e973da09d91>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/five-orange-pips-explain-detail-why-kkk-were-133215	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778272.69/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128122813-20200128152813-00343.warc.gz	en	0.987691	154	3.453125	3	[ -0.3187626004219055, -0.14068974554538727, -0.092221200466156, -0.08847145736217499, 0.4727648198604584, -0.05784149095416069, 0.26977893710136414, 0.023877529427409172, -0.2766488790512085, 0.2859722077846527, 0.37791189551353455, -0.056747496128082275, -0.11779136210680008, -0.2014830410...	2	In "The Five Orange Pips" , Explain in detail why the KKK were chasing after Elias. "The Five Orange Pips", sherlock holmes. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle The Ku Klux Klan was a real group that did spring up after the Civil War in the United States. At the time that it began it was dedicated to ending the Northern rule of the South during Reconstruction. The group was made illegal soon after it was created. The KKK are chasing after him because he has run away from America with some of their important papers in his possession. They are worried because the papers he is carrying will implicate some of the more important men in the South -- it will show that they are members of this group. check Approved by eNotes Editorial	154	ENGLISH	1
Saint Catherine of Alexandria was a popular figure in Catholic iconography. She was of noble origins, and dedicated herself as a Christian after having a vision. At the age of 18 she confronted the Roman Emperor Maximus (presumably this refers to Galerius Maximianus), debated his pagan philosophers, and succeeded in converting many of them to Christianity. Imprisoned by the emperor, she converted his empress and the leader of his armies. Maximus executed her converts (including the empress) and ordered that Catherine herself be put to death on a spiked wheel. The wheel reportedly shattered the moment Catherine touched it. Maximus then had her beheaded. She became patron saint of libraries and librarians, as well as teachers, archivists, and all those associated with wisdom and teaching, and all those whose livelihoods depended upon wheels. The year of her martyrdom was traditionally held to have been 305, (the year of a major persecution of Christians under Galerius), and her feastday was celebrated on 25 November. In 1969 the Church, persuaded by the overwhelming opinion of historians that Catherine had probably never existed, removed her from the calendar of saints; by 2002, while the majority of historians had not changed their minds, the Church had, and she was reinstated. Her qualities are supposed to be those of beauty, fearlessness, virginity, and intelligence.	<urn:uuid:3d329f12-d7e6-40b7-a567-b3fc6c6d3124>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.bbuzzart.com/work/61504	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00343.warc.gz	en	0.987117	277	3.46875	3	[ -0.0715223029255867, 0.5695935487747192, 0.08253191411495209, 0.15626361966133118, -0.6553221344947815, -0.41087454557418823, 0.018703246489167213, 0.42634478211402893, 0.3291376829147339, 0.0778002217411995, -0.0054413750767707825, -0.2647647559642792, -0.06874389201402664, -0.01535458397...	4	Saint Catherine of Alexandria was a popular figure in Catholic iconography. She was of noble origins, and dedicated herself as a Christian after having a vision. At the age of 18 she confronted the Roman Emperor Maximus (presumably this refers to Galerius Maximianus), debated his pagan philosophers, and succeeded in converting many of them to Christianity. Imprisoned by the emperor, she converted his empress and the leader of his armies. Maximus executed her converts (including the empress) and ordered that Catherine herself be put to death on a spiked wheel. The wheel reportedly shattered the moment Catherine touched it. Maximus then had her beheaded. She became patron saint of libraries and librarians, as well as teachers, archivists, and all those associated with wisdom and teaching, and all those whose livelihoods depended upon wheels. The year of her martyrdom was traditionally held to have been 305, (the year of a major persecution of Christians under Galerius), and her feastday was celebrated on 25 November. In 1969 the Church, persuaded by the overwhelming opinion of historians that Catherine had probably never existed, removed her from the calendar of saints; by 2002, while the majority of historians had not changed their minds, the Church had, and she was reinstated. Her qualities are supposed to be those of beauty, fearlessness, virginity, and intelligence.	294	ENGLISH	1
Decorative map of Scandinavia and Northern Europe, with an inset of Denmark and part of Norway and Sweden. Two decorative cartouches. Wells map is 1 of a set of 22 maps dedicated to William, Duke of Glouchester, who at the time of publication of the maps was studying at Oxford. Edward Wells, teacher of mathematics and geography at Christchurch College of Oxford University. The 13-year-old William, heir to the throne, began studies at Christchurch in 1700 at the age of 11, and died a few months after the map was issued. The engraver of the map, Michael Burghers, was an engraver and draftsman from Holland, who came to England and settled in Oxford in 1673. There he worked under David Loggan and succeeded him as Engraver to the University. Burghers engraved the first Oxford Almanack in 1676, and continued to engrave most of them for the next 43 years. He also illustrated books and produced architectural, botanical and portrait engravings. Edward Wells was a Church of England clergyman and advocate for education. He published prolifically, including several atlases of the ancient and contemporary world. Wells was the son of a vicar and entered Christ Church, Oxford in late 1686. He graduated BA in 1690, MA in 1693, and worked as a tutor at his college from 1691 to 1702. Then, he entered into a living at Cotesbach, Leicestershire, from where he continued to publish his many works. He attained the degrees of BD and DD in 1704, after he was already at Cotesbach. From roughly 1698 onward, Wells wrote many sermons, books, and atlases. He focused on catechismal and pastoral works, as well as educational books. For example, some of his first works were mathematics texts for young gentlemen, which included how to use globes and determine latitude and longitude. He also translated classical and Christian texts, sometimes adding geographical annotations. His descriptive geographies were not overly original works, but they were popular in their time. First, he produced a Treatise of Antient and Present Geography in 1701; it went on to four more editions. Next was a Historical Geography of the New Testament (1708), accompanied by a Historical Geography of the Old Testament (1711-12).	<urn:uuid:7679d6af-554b-4045-9bc7-6298049bd425>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.raremaps.com/gallery/detail/57878mp2/a-new-map-of-ancient-scandinavia-together-with-as-much-more-wells	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250610919.33/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123131001-20200123160001-00089.warc.gz	en	0.982496	493	3.3125	3	[ 0.1865769922733307, -0.022413551807403564, 0.3740050196647644, 0.010171189904212952, -0.08791405707597733, -0.07100813090801239, -0.2635717988014221, 0.023490235209465027, -0.012010935693979263, -0.19604286551475525, -0.21990379691123962, -0.5430300235748291, 0.09745146334171295, -0.028784...	7	Decorative map of Scandinavia and Northern Europe, with an inset of Denmark and part of Norway and Sweden. Two decorative cartouches. Wells map is 1 of a set of 22 maps dedicated to William, Duke of Glouchester, who at the time of publication of the maps was studying at Oxford. Edward Wells, teacher of mathematics and geography at Christchurch College of Oxford University. The 13-year-old William, heir to the throne, began studies at Christchurch in 1700 at the age of 11, and died a few months after the map was issued. The engraver of the map, Michael Burghers, was an engraver and draftsman from Holland, who came to England and settled in Oxford in 1673. There he worked under David Loggan and succeeded him as Engraver to the University. Burghers engraved the first Oxford Almanack in 1676, and continued to engrave most of them for the next 43 years. He also illustrated books and produced architectural, botanical and portrait engravings. Edward Wells was a Church of England clergyman and advocate for education. He published prolifically, including several atlases of the ancient and contemporary world. Wells was the son of a vicar and entered Christ Church, Oxford in late 1686. He graduated BA in 1690, MA in 1693, and worked as a tutor at his college from 1691 to 1702. Then, he entered into a living at Cotesbach, Leicestershire, from where he continued to publish his many works. He attained the degrees of BD and DD in 1704, after he was already at Cotesbach. From roughly 1698 onward, Wells wrote many sermons, books, and atlases. He focused on catechismal and pastoral works, as well as educational books. For example, some of his first works were mathematics texts for young gentlemen, which included how to use globes and determine latitude and longitude. He also translated classical and Christian texts, sometimes adding geographical annotations. His descriptive geographies were not overly original works, but they were popular in their time. First, he produced a Treatise of Antient and Present Geography in 1701; it went on to four more editions. Next was a Historical Geography of the New Testament (1708), accompanied by a Historical Geography of the Old Testament (1711-12).	528	ENGLISH	1
The navy is the part of a country's military that fights on water using boats. People in the navy are called sailors. The navy is mostly made up of warships. It may also have its own air force and soldiers. It may have special boats that can go underwater, called submarines, or another kind of special boat that is meant to carry airplanes, called aircraft carriers. Originally, Naval war was fought by ramming other ships and then jumping onto them to fight the crew. In Ancient Greece and Rome, the ships were usually powered by oars. During the Middle Ages, the cannon was invented. These could be shot at other ships from a great distance. Warships around this time also began to use sails instead of oars for power. In the middle 19th century, ships began to be plated in armor for protection. Steam engines allowed them move while carrying the armor, and better ones soon made them much faster. These early warships, called ironclads, are thought to have begun the type of Naval warfare used today. Ships soon became much larger. \|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Navy.\|	<urn:uuid:fc97f1a8-b7d3-4daa-a8b0-e744b6ba1a9a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navy	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00502.warc.gz	en	0.985847	228	3.46875	3	[ -0.10678631067276001, 0.2794523239135742, 0.123074971139431, -0.5602123737335205, 0.043771348893642426, -0.3244371712207794, 0.11808712035417557, 0.336465984582901, -0.2834451198577881, -0.4358454644680023, 0.27816328406333923, -0.10041472315788269, -0.10999318212270737, 0.26345095038414, ...	5	The navy is the part of a country's military that fights on water using boats. People in the navy are called sailors. The navy is mostly made up of warships. It may also have its own air force and soldiers. It may have special boats that can go underwater, called submarines, or another kind of special boat that is meant to carry airplanes, called aircraft carriers. Originally, Naval war was fought by ramming other ships and then jumping onto them to fight the crew. In Ancient Greece and Rome, the ships were usually powered by oars. During the Middle Ages, the cannon was invented. These could be shot at other ships from a great distance. Warships around this time also began to use sails instead of oars for power. In the middle 19th century, ships began to be plated in armor for protection. Steam engines allowed them move while carrying the armor, and better ones soon made them much faster. These early warships, called ironclads, are thought to have begun the type of Naval warfare used today. Ships soon became much larger. \|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Navy.\|	228	ENGLISH	1
Amun was one of the eight ancient Egyptian gods who formed the Ogdoad of Hermopolis. He was the god of the air and his consort was Ament (Amaunet). However, during the Twelfth dynasty (Middle Kingdom) Amun was adopted in Thebes as the King of the gods withMut as his consort. Amun and Mut had one child, the moon god Khonsu. He was promoted to national god byAhmose I, the first pharaoh of the New Kingdom because the king believed that Amun had helped him drive theHyksos from Egypt. He was also adopted into the Ennead of Heliopolis when he merged with the ancient sun god (Ra) to become Amun-Ra. It is possible that there were once two separate gods with the same name, but equally likely that Amun of Heliopolis merely took on the attributes of the Theban god Montu (Montju) when he replaced him as the principle god of the nome in the later period. His name is generally translated as "the hidden one" or "the secret one" and it was thought that he created himself and then created everything else while remaining distanced and separate from the world. In that sense he was the original inscrutable and indivisible creator. When he merged with Ra he became both a visible and invisible deity. This duality (the hidden god and the visible sun) appealed to the Egyptian concept of balance and duality leading to an association between Amun-Ra and Ma´at.	<urn:uuid:97b9f071-b87e-42c6-a3fe-94f39026a685>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.egyptomania777.com/amon-re-	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594333.5/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119064802-20200119092802-00356.warc.gz	en	0.988093	319	3.28125	3	[ -0.08423909544944763, 0.7495018839836121, 0.03947798162698746, -0.1104627475142479, -0.8199939727783203, -0.22966165840625763, 0.3155452013015747, -0.26596134901046753, 0.08936573565006256, -0.029251109808683395, -0.25695449113845825, -0.6857250928878784, 0.2374439239501953, 0.034707095474...	8	Amun was one of the eight ancient Egyptian gods who formed the Ogdoad of Hermopolis. He was the god of the air and his consort was Ament (Amaunet). However, during the Twelfth dynasty (Middle Kingdom) Amun was adopted in Thebes as the King of the gods withMut as his consort. Amun and Mut had one child, the moon god Khonsu. He was promoted to national god byAhmose I, the first pharaoh of the New Kingdom because the king believed that Amun had helped him drive theHyksos from Egypt. He was also adopted into the Ennead of Heliopolis when he merged with the ancient sun god (Ra) to become Amun-Ra. It is possible that there were once two separate gods with the same name, but equally likely that Amun of Heliopolis merely took on the attributes of the Theban god Montu (Montju) when he replaced him as the principle god of the nome in the later period. His name is generally translated as "the hidden one" or "the secret one" and it was thought that he created himself and then created everything else while remaining distanced and separate from the world. In that sense he was the original inscrutable and indivisible creator. When he merged with Ra he became both a visible and invisible deity. This duality (the hidden god and the visible sun) appealed to the Egyptian concept of balance and duality leading to an association between Amun-Ra and Ma´at.	318	ENGLISH	1
The lynching of 14-year-old Emmett Till is one of the most heinous crimes ever committed, highlighting the cruel injustice suffered by Black Americans at the hands of racist Whites. Till was killed August 28, 1955, following rumors that he was flirting with a White woman. The gruesome killing set the growing Civil Rights Movement into motion and a rallying cry was heard nationwide. On August 24, 1955, it was rumored that he flirted with a White cashier at a local store, which was a huge offence at the time. This speculation led to two White men kidnapping Till, later beating him, and shooting him dead. More about this Till’s disfigured body was discovered by some boys fishing three days after he was kidnapped. The body was identified by his uncle, and his mother demanded the body be sent to Chicago. Newspapers across the nation covered the story, and Black organizations, such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) were angered at the findings. His mother’s decision to leave the casket open at the funeral left the world with the jarring image of her son’s body, which was hardly recognizable. Her aim was to let the world know the vicious attack on her son. Later, Ms. Till would say that she realized her son’s death helped the Civil Rights Movement rise to prominence. Rosa Parks, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and several other powerful Black figures would reference Till’s savage murder. Mamie Till passed away January 6, 2003. Take a look at a video of her emotionally describing how her son looked when she saw him the first time after his horrific and sinister murder.	<urn:uuid:f65c02e4-ccfe-40d1-92a1-1f7b120b92c5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://face2faceafrica.com/article/watch-emmett-tills-mother-emotionally-describe-how-her-son-looked-after-his-brutal-murder	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599789.45/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120195035-20200120224035-00514.warc.gz	en	0.980994	354	3.390625	3	[ -0.27252432703971863, -0.07193120568990707, 0.2647363841533661, -0.023074163123965263, 0.17527525126934052, 0.20690074563026428, 0.3361089527606964, 0.02396085485816002, 0.046589188277721405, -0.15062102675437927, 0.5688965320587158, 0.08450783789157867, -0.2933881878852844, 0.270819842815...	3	The lynching of 14-year-old Emmett Till is one of the most heinous crimes ever committed, highlighting the cruel injustice suffered by Black Americans at the hands of racist Whites. Till was killed August 28, 1955, following rumors that he was flirting with a White woman. The gruesome killing set the growing Civil Rights Movement into motion and a rallying cry was heard nationwide. On August 24, 1955, it was rumored that he flirted with a White cashier at a local store, which was a huge offence at the time. This speculation led to two White men kidnapping Till, later beating him, and shooting him dead. More about this Till’s disfigured body was discovered by some boys fishing three days after he was kidnapped. The body was identified by his uncle, and his mother demanded the body be sent to Chicago. Newspapers across the nation covered the story, and Black organizations, such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) were angered at the findings. His mother’s decision to leave the casket open at the funeral left the world with the jarring image of her son’s body, which was hardly recognizable. Her aim was to let the world know the vicious attack on her son. Later, Ms. Till would say that she realized her son’s death helped the Civil Rights Movement rise to prominence. Rosa Parks, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and several other powerful Black figures would reference Till’s savage murder. Mamie Till passed away January 6, 2003. Take a look at a video of her emotionally describing how her son looked when she saw him the first time after his horrific and sinister murder.	355	ENGLISH	1
Wenceslaus, Saint wĕn´səsləs [key], d. 929, duke of Bohemia. He was reared in the Christian faith by his grandmother, St. Ludmilla. He became duke at an early age, and during his minority his mother, Drahomira, acted as regent. She, like many other Czech nobles, opposed Christianity and persecuted the Christians. She incurred the enmity of the German king, Henry I (Henry the Fowler), by aiding the Wends, a Slavic people, against Henry; Henry invaded Bohemia. Wenceslaus, who had then begun to rule, recognized the futility of resistance and negotiated a peace. During his reign Wenceslaus was noted for his piety; he worked vigorously to strengthen Christianity in Bohemia. His religion and his friendly relations with Henry I caused much discontent among the nobles, and he was assassinated by his brother Boleslav I, who succeeded him. By the beginning of the 11th cent., he was already recognized as the patron saint of Bohemia. Václav is the Czech form of his name. Feast: Sept. 28. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2012, Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. See more Encyclopedia articles on: Czech and Slovak History: Biographies	<urn:uuid:92484d4d-87f3-4cbd-b335-3ceef8a10109>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.factmonster.com/encyclopedia/history/bios/czech-slovakia/wenceslaus-saint-duke-of-bohemia	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687725.76/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126043644-20200126073644-00246.warc.gz	en	0.982285	279	3.375	3	[ -0.022464871406555176, 0.374693363904953, -0.3978436291217804, -0.3291875123977661, 0.14984826743602753, -0.2634924352169037, 0.38819944858551025, 0.08105110377073288, 0.08468516916036606, -0.04218977689743042, 0.00336519000120461, -0.4160540699958801, -0.1272912621498108, -0.3388164341449...	7	Wenceslaus, Saint wĕn´səsləs [key], d. 929, duke of Bohemia. He was reared in the Christian faith by his grandmother, St. Ludmilla. He became duke at an early age, and during his minority his mother, Drahomira, acted as regent. She, like many other Czech nobles, opposed Christianity and persecuted the Christians. She incurred the enmity of the German king, Henry I (Henry the Fowler), by aiding the Wends, a Slavic people, against Henry; Henry invaded Bohemia. Wenceslaus, who had then begun to rule, recognized the futility of resistance and negotiated a peace. During his reign Wenceslaus was noted for his piety; he worked vigorously to strengthen Christianity in Bohemia. His religion and his friendly relations with Henry I caused much discontent among the nobles, and he was assassinated by his brother Boleslav I, who succeeded him. By the beginning of the 11th cent., he was already recognized as the patron saint of Bohemia. Václav is the Czech form of his name. Feast: Sept. 28. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2012, Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. See more Encyclopedia articles on: Czech and Slovak History: Biographies	285	ENGLISH	1
Mediaeval usage of the terms "duke", "count", "baron" and "lord" were fuzzier than many people like to believe, but generally have some broad connotations which Herbert seemed to be following. Duke (derived from the Latin dux bellorum, war leader) was a major land-holder who, in many kingdoms, was also related in some way to the King/Emperor. In France, a duke's duchy sometimes contained counties, thus making him literally superior to the counts within his jurisdiction; in the English system, dukes were merely earls who were related to the Crown. Counts (derived from the Latin comes, companion, implying courtier) were also major land-holders. On the continent, they were often the actual feudal lords over counties; in England, their equivalent, earls, were merely named after shires (the equivalent of counties), and often held the equivalent quantity of land to a county, but rarely actually governed a contiguous county. Viscounts (also derived from comes) were, as the title implies, slightly less than counts, possibly holding subsidiary fiefs. In England, the title was not used until fairly late in the Middle Ages, but the Latin word viscomes was used to described sheriffs--royal appointees in those days charged with the actual governance of a shire--in Latin documents. Baron is a really fuzzy term, whose derivation is actually largely unknown. In England for much of the Middle Ages, "baron" was more a descriptor than a title and applied to anyone who was a tenant in chief of the Crown, regardless of their actual rank. Thus, when we hear about the barons revolting against John, it doesn't mean just the lesser nobles, but all of John's direct vassals, including earls (there were no dukes as yet). Later on, as Parliament emerged as a part of English government, "baron" came to signify anyone who had a right to expect a summons to sit in the House of Lords for a session of parliament, even if they were not a tenant-in-chief. Applying these titles to Dune: The Atreides were explicitly glossed to be actual cousins--not just cousins in the sense of being fellow nobles--to the royal family, and hence, despite not being very wealthy, entitled to style themselves dukes. In theory, Leto had a (distant) claim to the throne, which was one of several reasons the Padishah Emperor feared him and worked to bring down his house. (In the end, Paul did not rely upon this claim, but on a combination of right-of-conquest and marriage to Irulan). If the Fenrings have any ancestral, permanent fief, we never learn of it, but Hasimir is a companion to the Emperor, and for this alone, the styling of "Count" fits one of this historical uses of the title. The Harkonnens may or may not have had any blood relationship to the throne, but were in a house in long-standing disgrace. Despite this, they were clearly land-holders of some note, with two permanent fiefdoms (Giedi Prime and, through marriage, Lankiveil) and the siridar-governorship of Arrakis. Vladimir Harkonnen held a seat in the Landsraad. Thus, the style of "baron" fits him in both its older English sense of "tenant-in-chief of the Crown" and its later-mediaeval sense of "entitled to sit in Parliament", even though his family's disgrace prevents them as being recognized with higher ranking titles such as "Count".	<urn:uuid:7b966656-8b3c-4e3b-9b23-89c3ff8daa2c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/110631/peerage-and-titles-in-dune	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604397.40/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121132900-20200121161900-00026.warc.gz	en	0.984385	773	3.3125	3	[ -0.27732139825820923, 0.029809845611453056, 0.11232329905033112, -0.21557559072971344, 0.28438812494277954, -0.43366333842277527, 0.6675001382827759, -0.25966161489486694, 0.11620765924453735, 0.062167584896087646, 0.3047116696834564, -0.23758138716220856, 0.2525663375854492, -0.1374509930...	3	Mediaeval usage of the terms "duke", "count", "baron" and "lord" were fuzzier than many people like to believe, but generally have some broad connotations which Herbert seemed to be following. Duke (derived from the Latin dux bellorum, war leader) was a major land-holder who, in many kingdoms, was also related in some way to the King/Emperor. In France, a duke's duchy sometimes contained counties, thus making him literally superior to the counts within his jurisdiction; in the English system, dukes were merely earls who were related to the Crown. Counts (derived from the Latin comes, companion, implying courtier) were also major land-holders. On the continent, they were often the actual feudal lords over counties; in England, their equivalent, earls, were merely named after shires (the equivalent of counties), and often held the equivalent quantity of land to a county, but rarely actually governed a contiguous county. Viscounts (also derived from comes) were, as the title implies, slightly less than counts, possibly holding subsidiary fiefs. In England, the title was not used until fairly late in the Middle Ages, but the Latin word viscomes was used to described sheriffs--royal appointees in those days charged with the actual governance of a shire--in Latin documents. Baron is a really fuzzy term, whose derivation is actually largely unknown. In England for much of the Middle Ages, "baron" was more a descriptor than a title and applied to anyone who was a tenant in chief of the Crown, regardless of their actual rank. Thus, when we hear about the barons revolting against John, it doesn't mean just the lesser nobles, but all of John's direct vassals, including earls (there were no dukes as yet). Later on, as Parliament emerged as a part of English government, "baron" came to signify anyone who had a right to expect a summons to sit in the House of Lords for a session of parliament, even if they were not a tenant-in-chief. Applying these titles to Dune: The Atreides were explicitly glossed to be actual cousins--not just cousins in the sense of being fellow nobles--to the royal family, and hence, despite not being very wealthy, entitled to style themselves dukes. In theory, Leto had a (distant) claim to the throne, which was one of several reasons the Padishah Emperor feared him and worked to bring down his house. (In the end, Paul did not rely upon this claim, but on a combination of right-of-conquest and marriage to Irulan). If the Fenrings have any ancestral, permanent fief, we never learn of it, but Hasimir is a companion to the Emperor, and for this alone, the styling of "Count" fits one of this historical uses of the title. The Harkonnens may or may not have had any blood relationship to the throne, but were in a house in long-standing disgrace. Despite this, they were clearly land-holders of some note, with two permanent fiefdoms (Giedi Prime and, through marriage, Lankiveil) and the siridar-governorship of Arrakis. Vladimir Harkonnen held a seat in the Landsraad. Thus, the style of "baron" fits him in both its older English sense of "tenant-in-chief of the Crown" and its later-mediaeval sense of "entitled to sit in Parliament", even though his family's disgrace prevents them as being recognized with higher ranking titles such as "Count".	751	ENGLISH	1
SIDNEY — Isaac Shelby was born in Frederick County (now Washington County) Maryland on Dec. 11, 1750. He was the second son and third child of Evan and Letitia Cox Shelby. Evan Shelby had immigrated to America in 1734 from Cardingshire, Wales along with his parents, Evan and Catherine (Morgan) Shelby. Although they had been members of the Church of England prior to immigrating, they practiced the Presbyterian faith in America. Early in his life, Isaac became proficient in the use of arms, received a decent education, and adapted easily to the rigorous life of a frontiersman. He worked on his father’s Maryland plantation, learned the craft of the surveyor, and at age eighteen, was appointed a deputy sheriff for Frederick County. In 1773, the extended Shelby family moved to Fincastle County, Virginia (now part of Tennessee) in the region along the Holston River. There Isaac spent most of his days caring for herds of cattle grazing the extensive ranges of the region. Isaac’s first experience in a military engagement took place on Oct. 10, 1774, when he served as a lieutenant in the Fincastle Company led by his father. The engagement, the only major battle of Lord Dunmore’s War, is known both as the Battle of Point Pleasant and the Battle of Kanawha. The battle was fought at what is now Point Pleasant, West Virginia, near the mouth of the Kanawha River. It resulted in victory for the Virginia frontiersmen and the defeat of the combined tribes of Native Americans primarily from the Mingo and Shawnee tribes. The Indians had hoped that by combining forces, they could halt the westward movement of settlers. The struggle was fierce, with no clear winner until the Indian tribes withdrew. The end of the battle saw Evan Shelby in command of all Virginian troops, as all higher-ranking officers had been killed. The Indians were pursued into the Ohio Valley, and Shawnee Chief Cornstalk was forced to sign the Treaty of Camp Charlotte, in which he ceded to Virginia all the Shawnee lands south of the Ohio River (the present states of West Virginia and Kentucky). Cornstalk also agreed to return all white captives being held by the Shawnee and to cease attacking traffic on the Ohio River. Fort Blair was constructed at the mouth of the Kanawha River. Isaac was second in command of the fort’s garrison. He remained there until Lord Dunmore ordered the fortification destroyed in July 1775, fearful that it would fall into the hands of American rebel forces. Once he completed his duties at Fort Blair, Isaac went to Virginia’s Kentucky County, where he surveyed lands for the Transylvania Company. He returned home for the winter months, returning the following year to survey lands for himself and to improve upon the previous surveys of lands claimed by his father. While he was away in 1776, the Virginia Committee of Public Safety appointed him captain of a company of Minutemen. As winter approached and he returned to Fincastle County, he undertook his duties. He spent the better part of the next two years – well into 1779 – securing supplies for Virginia’s troops as well as the Continental Army, sometimes paying for those supplies out of his own pocket. In the spring of 1779, Isaac Shelby was elected to represent Virginia in the Virginia Assembly. Later that year, Shelby was commissioned a major and assigned to command the escort guard for the surveyors whose task it was to survey the boundary between Virginia and North Carolina. As a result of the survey, Shelby and his neighbors found that their properties, which they had always believed were in Virginia, were actually a part of North Carolina. Many of Shelby’s neighbors refused to believe that they were not Virginians, and began to refer to the area in which they lived as the Squabble State. Shelby, by then himself an accomplished surveyor, fully understood the impact of the survey. As a result of his change of residence, Shelby was commissioned colonel of militia in the newly established Sullivan County, carved out of what had previously been a part of Virginia’s Fincastle County. Most of the militia in his unit were men he had previously commanded as Virginia militiamen. In the summer of 1780, Shelby returned to Kentucky County to further secure his claims to the property (1400 acres) he had previously surveyed. He had no sooner arrived and began improving the property than he received news in June that the British had captured Charleston (May 12, 1780). Shelby packed his equipment and returned to his home in Sullivan County. He arrived in July to find a message from General Charles McDowell requesting that his militia unit join in helping slow the advance of British forces, who had already captured Georgia and South Carolina, and were advancing on North Carolina. Shelby led his 300 militiamen to McDowell’s encampment near Cherokee Ford in South Carolina. Over the course of the next three weeks, Shelby’s unit was in no small part responsible for three important rebel victories over the combined forces of regular British troops and Tory sympathizers. Those victories included Thicketty Fort (July 26, 1780), Wofford’s Iron Works (August 8, 1780), and Musgrove’s Mill (August 18, 1780). Their forward movement was soon halted by news of the British victory at Camden (August 16, 1780). However, Shelby proposed to his men that they join other rebel units in attacking a force led by British Major Patrick Ferguson Ferguson led a group of Provincials and Tories that had been operating in the South Carolina uplands and was moving to join the British force led by General Lord Charles Cornwallis. Attacking early in the morning of October 7, 1880, the battle led to a decisive rebel victory in which Ferguson met his death. Shelby was also instrumental in developing the plans for the attack of rebel forces under Brigadier General Daniel Morgan at Cowpens (January 17, 1781). It was there that colonial forces scored a decisive victory against British forces led by Lieutenant Colonel Sir Banastre Tarleton. In response to a request for aid from General Nathanael Greene, Shelby raised a force of four hundred riflemen later in 1781. His force joined a force of two hundred riflemen led by Colonel John Sevier, marching into the South Carolina low country to join Greene’s army. Greene’s plan to block General Cornwallis’s march back to the safety of Charleston was shuttled aside when Cornwallis surrendered his army at Yorktown (October 18, 1781). Shelby then marched his troops to join the forces of General Francis Marion along the Pee Dee River. Collaborating with troops led by Colonel Hezekiah Maham, Shelby captured the British post at Fair Lawn (November 27, 1781) near Monck’s Corner, South Carolina. Learning that he had been elected to serve in the North Carolina House of Commons, Shelby obtained a leave of absence and attended the legislative sessions in December 1781. He was reelected in 1782, and again attended the sessions in Hillsborough in 1782. In 1783, Shelby was one of three commissioners appointed to supervise the surveying of lands south of the Cumberland River in Middle Tennessee. Unable to afford to pay the soldiers who served in the Continental Army, “western lands” had been set aside as payment to the officers and men who had served in the war. Shelby and his fellow commissioners completed their work, which also settled the preemption claims on the Cumberland River, and by the following April, had returned to Kentucky. Shelby settled on 1,400 acres of land he had previously claimed near Boonesboro, land now ceded to him by the United States in the Revolutionary War. Shelby named his new plantation ‘Traveler’s Rest’, and he spent much of his time over the course of the next half dozen years improving the property, cultivating the soil, and raising livestock. He became a leading breeder of fine beef cattle. He married Susannah Hart, the daughter of Sarah (Simpson) Hart and Captain Nathaniel Hart, one of the first settlers in Kentucky and one of the owners of the Transylvania Company, on April 19, 1783. Together they began building their home, perhaps the first stone house in Kentucky. The main section of the home was two stories high, with single story wings on either side. One side contained the kitchen, the other the master bedroom. Isaac and Susannah’s union resulted in eleven children: James (1784-1848); Sarah Hart (1785-1846); Evan (1787-1875); Thomas Hart (1789-1869); Susannah Hart (1791-1868); Nancy (1792-1815); Isaac, Jr. (1795-1886); John (1797-1868); Letitia (1797-1868); Catherine (1801-1801); and, Alfred Evan (1804-1832). In addition to his agrarian pursuits, Shelby was appointed a trustee of Transylvania Seminary (later Transylvania University) in 1783. He was also chair of the convention of military officers that met at Danville November 7 and 8, 1783, to give consideration to conducting a punitive expedition against the Indians as well as to discuss the potential separation from Virginia and the establishment of a new state. Shelby founded the Kentucky Society for the Promotion of Useful Knowledge which was organized at Danville December 1, 1787. In January 1791, Shelby was appointed a member of the Board of War for the District of Kentucky (a political subdivision created by Congress and authorized to provide for the defense of Kentucky’s frontier settlements and to conduct punitive raids against the Indians.) For several years Shelby served as the sheriff of Lincoln County (Lincoln County, named for Revolutionary War General Benjamin Lincoln, was one of three counties created by the Virginia General Assembly in June 1780 from the original Kentucky County; the other two were Fayette and Jefferson). Shelby also served in every convention that met at Danville for the purpose of securing independent statehood for Kentucky. He was also present for the convention that met April 2–19, 1792, that drafted the first Kentucky constitution. In May 1792 Shelby was chosen the first governor for the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Shelby was chosen for the four-year term by the electors to whom the constitutional convention had designated the selection of the state’s first leader. Shelby was inaugurated at Lexington on June 4, 1792, and shortly after, moved to Frankfort, which had been designated the state capital. As the first governor of Kentucky, Shelby deftly handled the many problems encountered in establishing the state’s infant government. He provided strong support for the actions of the Army under the leadership of General “Mad” Anthony Wayne against the Native Americans, who proved to be the chief threat to the country’s newest state. There was also great concern that Spain would close the port of New Orleans to American commerce. There were any number of intrigues involving current and former government officials that would have taken Kentucky out of the Union and established a separate country. Perhaps chief among those involved were former United States Vice President Aaron Burr, who was eventually arrested in 1807 and charged with treason (he was eventually found not guilty, but left the country, having lost most of his friends as well as a great deal of money as a result of his schemes) and US Army Brigadier General James Wilkerson, who deftly conspired against Wayne’s leadership of the Army and was a paid agent of the Spanish Empire. Although Shelby’s policies received criticism then and later, he was able to frustrate the various mechanizations of those whose goals would have taken the Commonwealth in an entirely different direction. In the end, he was able to keep Kentucky firmly in the Union. At the conclusion of his term in 1796, he returned to Lincoln County. He spent his days making improvements to Traveler’s Rest and active farming. Never able to completely divorce himself from public life, Shelby served as a presidential elector representing Kentucky in the Electoral College in 1797, 1801, and 1805. The War of 1812 brought to his door any number of friends, acquaintances, and even those he did not know who raised a chorus both insisting and demanding that he return to office. The outbreak of hostilities had brought renewed threats from various Native American tribes, nearly all of whom sided with the British against the Americans. Shelby, acquiesced, and was overwhelmingly elected Kentucky’s fifth governor in August 1812. As governor, Shelby understood the peril the young country faced. He also understood that the country’s defeat would mark the end of his life’s efforts, including his desire to spend his retirement years in Kentucky. As a result, he cooperated wholeheartedly with the national government in the prosecution of the war. In 1813 he personally raised, organized, and led four thousand Kentucky volunteers. They joined the Army of the Northwest, commanded by Brigadier General William Henry Harrison, in the invasion of Canada. The invasion resulted in the defeat of the British and their Indian allies in the Battle of the Thames. The decisiveness of the October 5, 1813, battle made it the major victory of the war (the Battle of New Orleans actually occurred after the treaty ending the war had been signed.) As he returned home, people in Michigan, Ohio and Kentucky lined the route he traveled to gain a glimpse of the battle’s hero. In appreciation for his heroic service, Congress presented him with a gold medal on April 4, 1818. At the conclusion of his gubernatorial term in 1816, Shelby again retired from office. Citing his age, he declined President James Monroe’s 1817 invitation that he serve as Secretary of War. In 1818, he did agree to assist General Andrew Jackson in arranging a treaty with the Chickasaw Indians. The treaty ceded to the United States their lands west of the Tennessee River, excepting a four-square mile reservation. Even that reservation they were required to lease to settlers. Also in 1818, he agreed to serve as the first president of the Kentucky Agricultural Society. Under his leadership, the society distributed materials on the most innovative farming techniques, and supported agricultural education. Shelby also agreed to serve as the chair of the first board of trustees of Centre College, so-named because of its location near the center of the Commonwealth. Established by the Kentucky General Assembly on January 21, 1819, the four-year college was affiliated with the Presbyterian Church and located in Danville. During his life, Shelby reluctantly served in three wars and two governorships. All he had desired in his life was to be a good farmer and to raise good cattle. The positions and battles which brought him fame and prestige were but interruptions in his life. In each case when his mission was accomplished, he lost little time in galloping back to Traveler’s Rest, to resume his life as a husband, father and farmer. By the end of his life, Shelby’s land holdings included 4800 acres. He annually sold 40-50 head of beef cattle and 25-40 hogs. In addition, he raised horses, mules, and sheep. He grew corn, tobacco, hemp, fruit and vegetables, often selling that which he did not need for his family’s needs to others in the surrounding area. Shelby also had a successful distillery, known throughout the region for producing fine whiskey. He sold approximately 2000 gallons each year. In addition, he also produced cider and apple brandy, also products that he sold. In 1820, Shelby suffered a stroke that paralyzed his right side. He remained clear of mind until his death July 18, 1826. He was buried in the family cemetery at Traveler’s Rest. The following year, the Commonwealth of Kentucky erected a monument at his gravesite. In 1952, the stone-walled family cemetery, which along with his grave, contains 22 graves including his wife and their relatives, became Kentucky’s smallest state park. Author’s Note: At the time of his death, Isaac Shelby was one of the most well-known and respected figures in America. As a sign of the high esteem in which he was held, nine states named one of their counties in his honor. Putting that in perspective, only eight states have a county named in honor of Edmund Randolph, the first Attorney General, only eight states have a county named for the legendary frontiersman Daniel Boone, and only eight states have a county named for William Henry Harrison, the country’s ninth President. The writer is the mayor of Sidney, local historian and co-chairman of the Shelby County/Sidney Bicetennial Committee.	<urn:uuid:efed8987-ae07-4aba-ae22-7425b036c548>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.sidneydailynews.com/news/163806/happy-birthday-to-shelby-countys-namesake	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597458.22/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120052454-20200120080454-00228.warc.gz	en	0.984047	3,550	3.34375	3	[ -0.33198609948158264, 0.15472698211669922, 0.09350553154945374, 0.2516234517097473, -0.34404343366622925, 0.005846974439918995, 0.029832612723112106, 0.09772662818431854, -0.4912947416305542, 0.11005547642707825, 0.11717446893453598, -0.42633122205734253, 0.10703086853027344, 0.03554413467...	4	SIDNEY — Isaac Shelby was born in Frederick County (now Washington County) Maryland on Dec. 11, 1750. He was the second son and third child of Evan and Letitia Cox Shelby. Evan Shelby had immigrated to America in 1734 from Cardingshire, Wales along with his parents, Evan and Catherine (Morgan) Shelby. Although they had been members of the Church of England prior to immigrating, they practiced the Presbyterian faith in America. Early in his life, Isaac became proficient in the use of arms, received a decent education, and adapted easily to the rigorous life of a frontiersman. He worked on his father’s Maryland plantation, learned the craft of the surveyor, and at age eighteen, was appointed a deputy sheriff for Frederick County. In 1773, the extended Shelby family moved to Fincastle County, Virginia (now part of Tennessee) in the region along the Holston River. There Isaac spent most of his days caring for herds of cattle grazing the extensive ranges of the region. Isaac’s first experience in a military engagement took place on Oct. 10, 1774, when he served as a lieutenant in the Fincastle Company led by his father. The engagement, the only major battle of Lord Dunmore’s War, is known both as the Battle of Point Pleasant and the Battle of Kanawha. The battle was fought at what is now Point Pleasant, West Virginia, near the mouth of the Kanawha River. It resulted in victory for the Virginia frontiersmen and the defeat of the combined tribes of Native Americans primarily from the Mingo and Shawnee tribes. The Indians had hoped that by combining forces, they could halt the westward movement of settlers. The struggle was fierce, with no clear winner until the Indian tribes withdrew. The end of the battle saw Evan Shelby in command of all Virginian troops, as all higher-ranking officers had been killed. The Indians were pursued into the Ohio Valley, and Shawnee Chief Cornstalk was forced to sign the Treaty of Camp Charlotte, in which he ceded to Virginia all the Shawnee lands south of the Ohio River (the present states of West Virginia and Kentucky). Cornstalk also agreed to return all white captives being held by the Shawnee and to cease attacking traffic on the Ohio River. Fort Blair was constructed at the mouth of the Kanawha River. Isaac was second in command of the fort’s garrison. He remained there until Lord Dunmore ordered the fortification destroyed in July 1775, fearful that it would fall into the hands of American rebel forces. Once he completed his duties at Fort Blair, Isaac went to Virginia’s Kentucky County, where he surveyed lands for the Transylvania Company. He returned home for the winter months, returning the following year to survey lands for himself and to improve upon the previous surveys of lands claimed by his father. While he was away in 1776, the Virginia Committee of Public Safety appointed him captain of a company of Minutemen. As winter approached and he returned to Fincastle County, he undertook his duties. He spent the better part of the next two years – well into 1779 – securing supplies for Virginia’s troops as well as the Continental Army, sometimes paying for those supplies out of his own pocket. In the spring of 1779, Isaac Shelby was elected to represent Virginia in the Virginia Assembly. Later that year, Shelby was commissioned a major and assigned to command the escort guard for the surveyors whose task it was to survey the boundary between Virginia and North Carolina. As a result of the survey, Shelby and his neighbors found that their properties, which they had always believed were in Virginia, were actually a part of North Carolina. Many of Shelby’s neighbors refused to believe that they were not Virginians, and began to refer to the area in which they lived as the Squabble State. Shelby, by then himself an accomplished surveyor, fully understood the impact of the survey. As a result of his change of residence, Shelby was commissioned colonel of militia in the newly established Sullivan County, carved out of what had previously been a part of Virginia’s Fincastle County. Most of the militia in his unit were men he had previously commanded as Virginia militiamen. In the summer of 1780, Shelby returned to Kentucky County to further secure his claims to the property (1400 acres) he had previously surveyed. He had no sooner arrived and began improving the property than he received news in June that the British had captured Charleston (May 12, 1780). Shelby packed his equipment and returned to his home in Sullivan County. He arrived in July to find a message from General Charles McDowell requesting that his militia unit join in helping slow the advance of British forces, who had already captured Georgia and South Carolina, and were advancing on North Carolina. Shelby led his 300 militiamen to McDowell’s encampment near Cherokee Ford in South Carolina. Over the course of the next three weeks, Shelby’s unit was in no small part responsible for three important rebel victories over the combined forces of regular British troops and Tory sympathizers. Those victories included Thicketty Fort (July 26, 1780), Wofford’s Iron Works (August 8, 1780), and Musgrove’s Mill (August 18, 1780). Their forward movement was soon halted by news of the British victory at Camden (August 16, 1780). However, Shelby proposed to his men that they join other rebel units in attacking a force led by British Major Patrick Ferguson Ferguson led a group of Provincials and Tories that had been operating in the South Carolina uplands and was moving to join the British force led by General Lord Charles Cornwallis. Attacking early in the morning of October 7, 1880, the battle led to a decisive rebel victory in which Ferguson met his death. Shelby was also instrumental in developing the plans for the attack of rebel forces under Brigadier General Daniel Morgan at Cowpens (January 17, 1781). It was there that colonial forces scored a decisive victory against British forces led by Lieutenant Colonel Sir Banastre Tarleton. In response to a request for aid from General Nathanael Greene, Shelby raised a force of four hundred riflemen later in 1781. His force joined a force of two hundred riflemen led by Colonel John Sevier, marching into the South Carolina low country to join Greene’s army. Greene’s plan to block General Cornwallis’s march back to the safety of Charleston was shuttled aside when Cornwallis surrendered his army at Yorktown (October 18, 1781). Shelby then marched his troops to join the forces of General Francis Marion along the Pee Dee River. Collaborating with troops led by Colonel Hezekiah Maham, Shelby captured the British post at Fair Lawn (November 27, 1781) near Monck’s Corner, South Carolina. Learning that he had been elected to serve in the North Carolina House of Commons, Shelby obtained a leave of absence and attended the legislative sessions in December 1781. He was reelected in 1782, and again attended the sessions in Hillsborough in 1782. In 1783, Shelby was one of three commissioners appointed to supervise the surveying of lands south of the Cumberland River in Middle Tennessee. Unable to afford to pay the soldiers who served in the Continental Army, “western lands” had been set aside as payment to the officers and men who had served in the war. Shelby and his fellow commissioners completed their work, which also settled the preemption claims on the Cumberland River, and by the following April, had returned to Kentucky. Shelby settled on 1,400 acres of land he had previously claimed near Boonesboro, land now ceded to him by the United States in the Revolutionary War. Shelby named his new plantation ‘Traveler’s Rest’, and he spent much of his time over the course of the next half dozen years improving the property, cultivating the soil, and raising livestock. He became a leading breeder of fine beef cattle. He married Susannah Hart, the daughter of Sarah (Simpson) Hart and Captain Nathaniel Hart, one of the first settlers in Kentucky and one of the owners of the Transylvania Company, on April 19, 1783. Together they began building their home, perhaps the first stone house in Kentucky. The main section of the home was two stories high, with single story wings on either side. One side contained the kitchen, the other the master bedroom. Isaac and Susannah’s union resulted in eleven children: James (1784-1848); Sarah Hart (1785-1846); Evan (1787-1875); Thomas Hart (1789-1869); Susannah Hart (1791-1868); Nancy (1792-1815); Isaac, Jr. (1795-1886); John (1797-1868); Letitia (1797-1868); Catherine (1801-1801); and, Alfred Evan (1804-1832). In addition to his agrarian pursuits, Shelby was appointed a trustee of Transylvania Seminary (later Transylvania University) in 1783. He was also chair of the convention of military officers that met at Danville November 7 and 8, 1783, to give consideration to conducting a punitive expedition against the Indians as well as to discuss the potential separation from Virginia and the establishment of a new state. Shelby founded the Kentucky Society for the Promotion of Useful Knowledge which was organized at Danville December 1, 1787. In January 1791, Shelby was appointed a member of the Board of War for the District of Kentucky (a political subdivision created by Congress and authorized to provide for the defense of Kentucky’s frontier settlements and to conduct punitive raids against the Indians.) For several years Shelby served as the sheriff of Lincoln County (Lincoln County, named for Revolutionary War General Benjamin Lincoln, was one of three counties created by the Virginia General Assembly in June 1780 from the original Kentucky County; the other two were Fayette and Jefferson). Shelby also served in every convention that met at Danville for the purpose of securing independent statehood for Kentucky. He was also present for the convention that met April 2–19, 1792, that drafted the first Kentucky constitution. In May 1792 Shelby was chosen the first governor for the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Shelby was chosen for the four-year term by the electors to whom the constitutional convention had designated the selection of the state’s first leader. Shelby was inaugurated at Lexington on June 4, 1792, and shortly after, moved to Frankfort, which had been designated the state capital. As the first governor of Kentucky, Shelby deftly handled the many problems encountered in establishing the state’s infant government. He provided strong support for the actions of the Army under the leadership of General “Mad” Anthony Wayne against the Native Americans, who proved to be the chief threat to the country’s newest state. There was also great concern that Spain would close the port of New Orleans to American commerce. There were any number of intrigues involving current and former government officials that would have taken Kentucky out of the Union and established a separate country. Perhaps chief among those involved were former United States Vice President Aaron Burr, who was eventually arrested in 1807 and charged with treason (he was eventually found not guilty, but left the country, having lost most of his friends as well as a great deal of money as a result of his schemes) and US Army Brigadier General James Wilkerson, who deftly conspired against Wayne’s leadership of the Army and was a paid agent of the Spanish Empire. Although Shelby’s policies received criticism then and later, he was able to frustrate the various mechanizations of those whose goals would have taken the Commonwealth in an entirely different direction. In the end, he was able to keep Kentucky firmly in the Union. At the conclusion of his term in 1796, he returned to Lincoln County. He spent his days making improvements to Traveler’s Rest and active farming. Never able to completely divorce himself from public life, Shelby served as a presidential elector representing Kentucky in the Electoral College in 1797, 1801, and 1805. The War of 1812 brought to his door any number of friends, acquaintances, and even those he did not know who raised a chorus both insisting and demanding that he return to office. The outbreak of hostilities had brought renewed threats from various Native American tribes, nearly all of whom sided with the British against the Americans. Shelby, acquiesced, and was overwhelmingly elected Kentucky’s fifth governor in August 1812. As governor, Shelby understood the peril the young country faced. He also understood that the country’s defeat would mark the end of his life’s efforts, including his desire to spend his retirement years in Kentucky. As a result, he cooperated wholeheartedly with the national government in the prosecution of the war. In 1813 he personally raised, organized, and led four thousand Kentucky volunteers. They joined the Army of the Northwest, commanded by Brigadier General William Henry Harrison, in the invasion of Canada. The invasion resulted in the defeat of the British and their Indian allies in the Battle of the Thames. The decisiveness of the October 5, 1813, battle made it the major victory of the war (the Battle of New Orleans actually occurred after the treaty ending the war had been signed.) As he returned home, people in Michigan, Ohio and Kentucky lined the route he traveled to gain a glimpse of the battle’s hero. In appreciation for his heroic service, Congress presented him with a gold medal on April 4, 1818. At the conclusion of his gubernatorial term in 1816, Shelby again retired from office. Citing his age, he declined President James Monroe’s 1817 invitation that he serve as Secretary of War. In 1818, he did agree to assist General Andrew Jackson in arranging a treaty with the Chickasaw Indians. The treaty ceded to the United States their lands west of the Tennessee River, excepting a four-square mile reservation. Even that reservation they were required to lease to settlers. Also in 1818, he agreed to serve as the first president of the Kentucky Agricultural Society. Under his leadership, the society distributed materials on the most innovative farming techniques, and supported agricultural education. Shelby also agreed to serve as the chair of the first board of trustees of Centre College, so-named because of its location near the center of the Commonwealth. Established by the Kentucky General Assembly on January 21, 1819, the four-year college was affiliated with the Presbyterian Church and located in Danville. During his life, Shelby reluctantly served in three wars and two governorships. All he had desired in his life was to be a good farmer and to raise good cattle. The positions and battles which brought him fame and prestige were but interruptions in his life. In each case when his mission was accomplished, he lost little time in galloping back to Traveler’s Rest, to resume his life as a husband, father and farmer. By the end of his life, Shelby’s land holdings included 4800 acres. He annually sold 40-50 head of beef cattle and 25-40 hogs. In addition, he raised horses, mules, and sheep. He grew corn, tobacco, hemp, fruit and vegetables, often selling that which he did not need for his family’s needs to others in the surrounding area. Shelby also had a successful distillery, known throughout the region for producing fine whiskey. He sold approximately 2000 gallons each year. In addition, he also produced cider and apple brandy, also products that he sold. In 1820, Shelby suffered a stroke that paralyzed his right side. He remained clear of mind until his death July 18, 1826. He was buried in the family cemetery at Traveler’s Rest. The following year, the Commonwealth of Kentucky erected a monument at his gravesite. In 1952, the stone-walled family cemetery, which along with his grave, contains 22 graves including his wife and their relatives, became Kentucky’s smallest state park. Author’s Note: At the time of his death, Isaac Shelby was one of the most well-known and respected figures in America. As a sign of the high esteem in which he was held, nine states named one of their counties in his honor. Putting that in perspective, only eight states have a county named in honor of Edmund Randolph, the first Attorney General, only eight states have a county named for the legendary frontiersman Daniel Boone, and only eight states have a county named for William Henry Harrison, the country’s ninth President. The writer is the mayor of Sidney, local historian and co-chairman of the Shelby County/Sidney Bicetennial Committee.	3,658	ENGLISH	1
During the 1920`s many economic problems occurred in Britain. However the main problems did not occur until 1929 when the Wall Street Crash occurred. The Wall Street Crash involved share prices falling to about 1/4 or even less than what they were bought for. This essay will examine how Britain was affected during the 1930`s and will look at the reforms introduced by the National Government. This will be done by examining four areas namely Depression, Labours Response, National Governments Response and other reasons for recovery. By examining these four areas it will hopefully become evident whether or not the reforms introduced by the National Government contributed to economic recovery.Order now Depression was felt world wide especially in America and Britain. America was affected by the wall street crash more than other countries because many people held shares and due to prices falling were unable to pay their debts which led to financial ruin. Due to many people relying on trade from America and little money being available meant that America could not provide trade to the same extent as previous years. Britain was badly hit by depression in areas where industries such as coal, steal and shipbuilding were based. Due to demand for trade in these areas being low many of these industries had to lay off their workforce or even close down. Due to these redundancies and closures the levels of unemployment rose. Areas in Britain which were drastically affected by these closures were Clydeside, South Wales, the North East of England and Northern Ireland. During this time of high unemployment figures peaked at 3 million. This level of unemployment stayed the same for a period of three years. Overall it can be seen that depression occurred world wide and that full economic recovery was going to be hard to achieve. It can also be seen that it was going to take a long time to achieve full economic recovery especially in areas which relied on traditional industries. The first party to try and tackle the economic problems was the Labour party led by Ramsey McDonald. Labours approach to tackling the economic problems was to follow the traditional line of the classical economists which was to balance the budget and use laissez faire. Laissez faire meant that the government did not get involved in the economy. Their immediate response was to introduce 10% wage cuts for those working in the public sector e.g. teachers. Another change they introduced involved withdrawing about 200,000 women from being eligible to receive benefits. These steps clearly show that the labour party were tackling economic recovery the wrong way. Labours financial advisors called the May Committee wanted Labour to take reform even further. They wanted labour to reduce benefits and introduce a scheme called means testing. Means testing meant families incomes would be examined before any benefit would be handed out. However many of labours party members opposed further reform as they felt that they were elected to help the poor and the working class. By introducing the May Committees proposals the opposing members felt that they would be breaking their promises. Due to the mixed reaction occurring within the labour party and people having different ideas on how to tackle the economic problems the labour party split. Overall it can be seen that the labour party set out to try and solve the economic problems but could not go to the extent needed. It can also be seen that labour took the wrong direction when trying to tackle the problems. The split of the labour party showed that lots of people had different ideas on how to combat the economic problems. As a result of the labour party splitting a National Coalition Government was formed. This party consisted of the whole Conservative party and a minority of the Labour party. The coalition party was led by the ex labour prime minister Ramsey McDonald. The National Government continued on the same line as the labour party which was to use laissez faire and balance the budget. The first thing they did was to introduce the proposals of the May Committee which meant that Means Testing was introduced and benefits were made available for a period of 26 weeks. These changes led to a public out cry and clearly showed that laissez faire was not the right way to tackle the economic problems. The National Government realised this and gradually changed their line thought to the way of the keynesian economists. This change involved government intervention and meant that finacial resources were used and borrowing was increased. The changes introduced involved taking Britain off the Gold Standard in 1931. This resulted in cheap exports and meant Britain could make more money. The reason for this change working was that when Britain went on the Gold Standard in the 1920`s they went on to high. The idea behind Britain going on the Gold Standard was to make the pound seem strong and to attract people to buy the pound. However this did not happen, instead people sold the pound as they had no confidence in Britain. As a result there was no point in staying on the Gold Standard. So Britain came off. In 1932 the national government introduced import duties. This involved introducing a 10% duty on foreign goods and even higher duties on products directly competing with British goods. These duties resulted in protecting British goods and meant British goods would be cheaper and would be more likely to be bought. In 1932 there was also an Ottawa Conference where the national government agreed with the countries in the British Empire to treat each others goods more favourably than those from foreign countries. This again meant that more money would be coming into Britain therefore improving the economy as people would buy british products as they would be cheaper. The most important change involved lowering interest rates. This allowed the Goverment, other public bodies and private companies and individuals to borrow cheaply. As a result this led to slum clearance, an increase in lower rent council housing . A housing boom also occurred as prices of houses fell. This change resulted in money coming in and employment rising due to the demand for houses. Industries and Agriculture were given subsidies. In Agriculture the government introduced a Wheat Act which guaranteed the price of the home product. Other acts involved Agriculture Marketing Act which involved setting up marketing boards to deal with selling and buying of products such as milk, potatoes etc. In Industry acts set up involved the cattle industry and the sugar industry. Other reforms involved Nationalisation. This meant that some industries were take over by the government and had money injected into them. Industries affected by this were the new aircraft industry, some aspects of coal and transport in London. By injecting money into these industries employment was produced and worthwhile industries were saved. In 1934 an unemployment act was introduced. This act restored the cuts of 1931 and replaced the local bodies for dealing with unemployment with Central Government Unemployment Assistance Board. These boards were set up as people thought that some local bodies were more generous than others. In 1935 a Depressed Areas Act was introduced. This involved the Government providing money and incentives to attract businesses to those areas which had relied on traditional industries and needed special help. This would result in employment rising and would be good for areas which were badly hit by depression. Other reasons for economic recovery involved the re-armandent program. This programme created work in the areas which were linked to heavy industry. Work was created in these areas as ships and weapons had to be built for World War 2. Another reason for recovery was due to the fact depression was world wide. This meant prices had fallen all over the world and this had led to a consumer boom as people who had money could afford products as prices were cheap. Overall it can be seen that the changes introduced by the National Government were good and contributed to economic recovery. This is most evident when you look at unemployment figures. Unemployment fell from 3 million to 1 million, more houses were being built and electricity was being provided, there was an increase in public spending especially on goods such as hoovers, radios etc and finally living standards had improved. However these changes introduced by the National Government may have made some difference in some areas but not in others. In the Shipbuilding industry 20% of the workforce was still unemployed. In society as a whole 1 million people were still unemployed, there was also families still living in poverty and high death rates also occurred. By examining areas such as depression, labours response, national governments response and other reasons for recovery it can be seen that recovery was hard to tackle but once the National Government found the right way to tackle these economic problems they did it well. Recovery may not have been totally made but this is understandable considering the extent of depression.	<urn:uuid:32ac7a48-1de0-4b27-8287-e391c057f19f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://artscolumbia.org/essays/economic-recovery-during-the-1-essay-70085/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00477.warc.gz	en	0.987158	1,677	3.28125	3	[ -0.38820624351501465, -0.12151560187339783, 0.3107278048992157, 0.11981405317783356, -0.05633818358182907, 0.1167692318558693, -0.46059805154800415, 0.15177997946739197, -0.04529473930597305, -0.1986280083656311, 0.19171185791492462, 0.044344231486320496, 0.07656333595514297, 0.07841148972...	2	During the 1920`s many economic problems occurred in Britain. However the main problems did not occur until 1929 when the Wall Street Crash occurred. The Wall Street Crash involved share prices falling to about 1/4 or even less than what they were bought for. This essay will examine how Britain was affected during the 1930`s and will look at the reforms introduced by the National Government. This will be done by examining four areas namely Depression, Labours Response, National Governments Response and other reasons for recovery. By examining these four areas it will hopefully become evident whether or not the reforms introduced by the National Government contributed to economic recovery.Order now Depression was felt world wide especially in America and Britain. America was affected by the wall street crash more than other countries because many people held shares and due to prices falling were unable to pay their debts which led to financial ruin. Due to many people relying on trade from America and little money being available meant that America could not provide trade to the same extent as previous years. Britain was badly hit by depression in areas where industries such as coal, steal and shipbuilding were based. Due to demand for trade in these areas being low many of these industries had to lay off their workforce or even close down. Due to these redundancies and closures the levels of unemployment rose. Areas in Britain which were drastically affected by these closures were Clydeside, South Wales, the North East of England and Northern Ireland. During this time of high unemployment figures peaked at 3 million. This level of unemployment stayed the same for a period of three years. Overall it can be seen that depression occurred world wide and that full economic recovery was going to be hard to achieve. It can also be seen that it was going to take a long time to achieve full economic recovery especially in areas which relied on traditional industries. The first party to try and tackle the economic problems was the Labour party led by Ramsey McDonald. Labours approach to tackling the economic problems was to follow the traditional line of the classical economists which was to balance the budget and use laissez faire. Laissez faire meant that the government did not get involved in the economy. Their immediate response was to introduce 10% wage cuts for those working in the public sector e.g. teachers. Another change they introduced involved withdrawing about 200,000 women from being eligible to receive benefits. These steps clearly show that the labour party were tackling economic recovery the wrong way. Labours financial advisors called the May Committee wanted Labour to take reform even further. They wanted labour to reduce benefits and introduce a scheme called means testing. Means testing meant families incomes would be examined before any benefit would be handed out. However many of labours party members opposed further reform as they felt that they were elected to help the poor and the working class. By introducing the May Committees proposals the opposing members felt that they would be breaking their promises. Due to the mixed reaction occurring within the labour party and people having different ideas on how to tackle the economic problems the labour party split. Overall it can be seen that the labour party set out to try and solve the economic problems but could not go to the extent needed. It can also be seen that labour took the wrong direction when trying to tackle the problems. The split of the labour party showed that lots of people had different ideas on how to combat the economic problems. As a result of the labour party splitting a National Coalition Government was formed. This party consisted of the whole Conservative party and a minority of the Labour party. The coalition party was led by the ex labour prime minister Ramsey McDonald. The National Government continued on the same line as the labour party which was to use laissez faire and balance the budget. The first thing they did was to introduce the proposals of the May Committee which meant that Means Testing was introduced and benefits were made available for a period of 26 weeks. These changes led to a public out cry and clearly showed that laissez faire was not the right way to tackle the economic problems. The National Government realised this and gradually changed their line thought to the way of the keynesian economists. This change involved government intervention and meant that finacial resources were used and borrowing was increased. The changes introduced involved taking Britain off the Gold Standard in 1931. This resulted in cheap exports and meant Britain could make more money. The reason for this change working was that when Britain went on the Gold Standard in the 1920`s they went on to high. The idea behind Britain going on the Gold Standard was to make the pound seem strong and to attract people to buy the pound. However this did not happen, instead people sold the pound as they had no confidence in Britain. As a result there was no point in staying on the Gold Standard. So Britain came off. In 1932 the national government introduced import duties. This involved introducing a 10% duty on foreign goods and even higher duties on products directly competing with British goods. These duties resulted in protecting British goods and meant British goods would be cheaper and would be more likely to be bought. In 1932 there was also an Ottawa Conference where the national government agreed with the countries in the British Empire to treat each others goods more favourably than those from foreign countries. This again meant that more money would be coming into Britain therefore improving the economy as people would buy british products as they would be cheaper. The most important change involved lowering interest rates. This allowed the Goverment, other public bodies and private companies and individuals to borrow cheaply. As a result this led to slum clearance, an increase in lower rent council housing . A housing boom also occurred as prices of houses fell. This change resulted in money coming in and employment rising due to the demand for houses. Industries and Agriculture were given subsidies. In Agriculture the government introduced a Wheat Act which guaranteed the price of the home product. Other acts involved Agriculture Marketing Act which involved setting up marketing boards to deal with selling and buying of products such as milk, potatoes etc. In Industry acts set up involved the cattle industry and the sugar industry. Other reforms involved Nationalisation. This meant that some industries were take over by the government and had money injected into them. Industries affected by this were the new aircraft industry, some aspects of coal and transport in London. By injecting money into these industries employment was produced and worthwhile industries were saved. In 1934 an unemployment act was introduced. This act restored the cuts of 1931 and replaced the local bodies for dealing with unemployment with Central Government Unemployment Assistance Board. These boards were set up as people thought that some local bodies were more generous than others. In 1935 a Depressed Areas Act was introduced. This involved the Government providing money and incentives to attract businesses to those areas which had relied on traditional industries and needed special help. This would result in employment rising and would be good for areas which were badly hit by depression. Other reasons for economic recovery involved the re-armandent program. This programme created work in the areas which were linked to heavy industry. Work was created in these areas as ships and weapons had to be built for World War 2. Another reason for recovery was due to the fact depression was world wide. This meant prices had fallen all over the world and this had led to a consumer boom as people who had money could afford products as prices were cheap. Overall it can be seen that the changes introduced by the National Government were good and contributed to economic recovery. This is most evident when you look at unemployment figures. Unemployment fell from 3 million to 1 million, more houses were being built and electricity was being provided, there was an increase in public spending especially on goods such as hoovers, radios etc and finally living standards had improved. However these changes introduced by the National Government may have made some difference in some areas but not in others. In the Shipbuilding industry 20% of the workforce was still unemployed. In society as a whole 1 million people were still unemployed, there was also families still living in poverty and high death rates also occurred. By examining areas such as depression, labours response, national governments response and other reasons for recovery it can be seen that recovery was hard to tackle but once the National Government found the right way to tackle these economic problems they did it well. Recovery may not have been totally made but this is understandable considering the extent of depression.	1,718	ENGLISH	1
Tuesday, December 29, 2015 Jefferson Davis 9 The divisions engendered by the Civil War are nowhere more evident than in the eventual fate of the former president of the Confederate States of America Jefferson Davis. He was captured the month after Lee's surrender at Appomattox and spent the following two and a half years in prison, some of that time in leg irons. A number of lawyers offered to defend him for free against charges of treason, but the government, without explanation, never actually charged him with anything, maybe because Davis was such a divisive figure, maybe because they thought they might lose the case. He was eventually released and went to Canada for a time to regain his shattered health. On returning to his native Mississippi he was encouraged to run for his old Senate seat, but refused because the prerequisite was a request for amnesty - he refused to seek amnesty because he contended that he had done nothing wrong. He continued as one of the principal faces of what came to be called The Lost Cause until his death in the 1880s. Ironically, his citizenship was restored to him posthumously in the 1970's. Indeed, it is probable that he would have interpreted such a gesture as an insult. In any event, even in death, Jefferson Davis represented a figure of profound national division.	<urn:uuid:1885d479-ef54-4268-98b3-f06e59e83a22>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://lucidspeaker.blogspot.com/2015/12/jefferson-davis-9.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00531.warc.gz	en	0.992839	261	3.78125	4	[ -0.6364228129386902, 0.4034096896648407, 0.24980828166007996, -0.3193906545639038, -0.06406055390834808, -0.3118719756603241, 0.26363182067871094, 0.0019776816479861736, 0.2684005796909332, 0.2031594067811966, 0.3200192153453827, 0.06684837490320206, -0.05342785269021988, 0.281463205814361...	1	Tuesday, December 29, 2015 Jefferson Davis 9 The divisions engendered by the Civil War are nowhere more evident than in the eventual fate of the former president of the Confederate States of America Jefferson Davis. He was captured the month after Lee's surrender at Appomattox and spent the following two and a half years in prison, some of that time in leg irons. A number of lawyers offered to defend him for free against charges of treason, but the government, without explanation, never actually charged him with anything, maybe because Davis was such a divisive figure, maybe because they thought they might lose the case. He was eventually released and went to Canada for a time to regain his shattered health. On returning to his native Mississippi he was encouraged to run for his old Senate seat, but refused because the prerequisite was a request for amnesty - he refused to seek amnesty because he contended that he had done nothing wrong. He continued as one of the principal faces of what came to be called The Lost Cause until his death in the 1880s. Ironically, his citizenship was restored to him posthumously in the 1970's. Indeed, it is probable that he would have interpreted such a gesture as an insult. In any event, even in death, Jefferson Davis represented a figure of profound national division.	278	ENGLISH	1
Paper type: Essay Pages: 6 (1389 words) The expectations of males and females in parenting and caring are constantly changing. Stereotypically, females are seen as the carer and males are seen as the provider. Societal changes such as equal pay for equal work, work environment policies and changing family structures, i.e. single parents are changing these traditional expectations. This discussion will show how the empowerment of women and men influences the way they function in society. · Traditionally, a father’s role was in the public realm of work, while female roles were based around their husband’s household (known as the domestic sphere. Men are often viewed as assertive, aggressive and domineering, while the women were viewed as house-makers and child-bearers. Now tasks are shared equally around the home, such as discipline. Discipline is shared between both parents, whereas, men used to discipline and children were taught to fear their fathers. Both parents are now seen equally, as providers and carers for their families. Both should determine the child’s education, set appropriate societal limits and have legal, welfare and responsibility of the child. However, traditional roles still exist in older generations, which may be influential on younger generations. · Prior to WW2, women did not work as they were told that their role was to care for their husband and family. If women did work, it was usually in hard physical labour repetitive tasks. However, women were called up to the workforce when their husbands were sent to WW2 to stabilise the economy. When their husbands returned, they were told to go back to their traditional roles. Many women protested for their rights are formed women’s liberation. Equal pay for equal work allowed freedom for women. Before this legislation was passed in Australia in 1975, women were receiving 54% of the male rate. Women embraced the workforce, freeing them of their traditional roles. Women are now encouraged to have a career, but policies such as maternity leave, which is available for up to 52 weeks also allow women to have a family. Thus, due to the introduction of equal pay, women are now encouraged to have a carer, and not expected to stay at home and look after their children as a career. · The introduction of the contraceptive pill in the 1970s also gave women more freedom in their domestic lives. Women were and are able to control their family structure, i.e. how many children they have and when they have children. Women were able to establish their career before having a family. Thus, females were no longer expected to have children early and not have a career, due to the freedom of the pill. · Males are embracing the “radical” notion of equality due to societal changes. The role of “father” has dramatically changed over the post-war years an now fathers are serving as role models who support their children in sports and arts. Many husbands have supported their wives returning to work and have become the primary carer of their child. Paternity leave enables fathers to take up to 51 weeks for the employee who is the primary care giver of the child allowing the father to bond with the child. David a lawyer choose to become the primary care giver of his child while his wife went back to work, to be involved in his child’s life, but admits that it is hard work as “there is no promotion”. Father support groups, such as “New Pin” in Western Sydney has been created to offer support by linking fathers together to discuss problems and provide strategies. Thus, societal changes such as paternity leave allows the mother to go to work and be the provider, and the father to take on the primary care giver role, with support offered to males who find the role challenging. · Single parents are more accepted than they were 50 years ago. According to the ABS, 64% of male parents and 49% of female single parents work. Divorce is more common, but single-parenthood can also occur from a death of a partner, unplanned pregnancy or a planned pregnancy eg IVF. When individuals got divorced in the 1950s-1970s, women had sole custody of the child, as traditionally their role was the carer. Times have changed, however, and men are gaining sole custody of their children. Barry Hooker, a full time Dad and single parent of Leah “doesn’t regret his decision for a second” for leaving his job as a boilermaker. Thus, due to the acceptance of single parents, men are now gaining sole custody of children, which traditionally would not happen. · However, in many aspects, our society has reinforced the traditional parenting roles for males and females. Generally, when children are sick, it is the mother who takes the day off. Women are the ones who drop of and pick up the kids from childcare and go to playgroup. Men support their son’s activities in sport, while women support their daughter’s activities in more passive arenas such as ballet. Currently, 20.9% of men are primary school teachers and 44.9% are high school teachers. Teaching may be unattractive to males due to the salary, status, and working with children runs counter to the male psyche. Parents are unintentionally or intentionally treating genders differently, which enforces these traditional gender roles through further generations. For eg, male babies are dressed in darker shades, while female babies are dressed in paler shades and boys are played with actively, while girls are handled more delicately. The concept of “male” and “female” develops from our experiences and observations. Household tasks should be shared equally, so children do not learn that one task is for males, while another task is for females. · Pregnancy in teenage mothers is also now accepted by most parts of society, which may have been shunned in earlier years. Teenage mothers were not expected to have an education, but this has changed due to Principal Glenn Sargent’s young mothers program at Plumpton High. Here, young mothers are given an education, but the school also provides $5 a day day-care, support by counsellor Rebecca and shelter. He has created a suitable environment for young mothers to reach their full potential. His success is measured “for each individual’s marks and attendance”. Same sex-couples are also more accepted. Both parents can be free to parent equally, which forms intimacy with the child. Family and friends can form a network of social and emotional support as well as to offer their children suitable adult role models of the opposite sex. Mainstream organisations also support same-sex couple’s i.e. alternative lifestyle association in Australia. Whoever the parents, all children need love and supervision. They all need to be sheltered, fed, taken to school and so on, thus the daily routine of same-sex couples is largely similar to heterosexual families. Thus, due to the social acceptance of pregnant teens, young mothers can raise a child and also gain an education due to Glenn Sargent’s young mothers programs, which would be unable in earlier years. Acceptance of same-sex couples has allowed individuals to create their own parenting skills in a nurturing and loving environment, similar to heterosexual environments. Both groups however are still often morally and socially stigmatised due to their lifestyle choices. · Many employers in small and medium sized business provide a family friendly workforce. When women fell pregnant in the 1950s-1970s, women were forced to resign from their careers. But due to women’s liberation and workforce policies, women can now have a career and a family at the same time. Maternity leave is available for women up to 52 weeks. Work hours are changing to become more flexible for both parents, there are now split shifts and some business have child-care where parents can easily drop off and pick up their children. This places the stress off families who have both parents who work. Thus, many businesses have changed their workforces to accommodate to the changing expectations of men and women. Workforces now provide flexibility for both parents, and allow women to have a career and family. Thus, expectations of males and females are currently changing, due to societal changes such as post WW2, work friendly environments and changing family structures. However, stereotypical male and female roles are still being enforced by parents, whose children will pass onto their own families, thus their roles will not change. Cite this page Describe the roles of parents and carers. (2016, Jul 05). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/describe-the-roles-of-parents-and-carers-essay	<urn:uuid:cb2d8bdb-8d5e-4e8b-9ef7-368ac1f85d5b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studymoose.com/describe-the-roles-of-parents-and-carers-essay	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778168.77/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128091916-20200128121916-00410.warc.gz	en	0.985618	1,798	3.546875	4	[ 0.10531451553106308, 0.42845064401626587, -0.03820617124438286, -0.31531620025634766, 0.13893654942512512, 0.5784237384796143, -0.05762515589594841, -0.04455523192882538, 0.08104822039604187, -0.00212936382740736, -0.046694234013557434, 0.31844857335090637, -0.2235843688249588, 0.094080716...	1	Paper type: Essay Pages: 6 (1389 words) The expectations of males and females in parenting and caring are constantly changing. Stereotypically, females are seen as the carer and males are seen as the provider. Societal changes such as equal pay for equal work, work environment policies and changing family structures, i.e. single parents are changing these traditional expectations. This discussion will show how the empowerment of women and men influences the way they function in society. · Traditionally, a father’s role was in the public realm of work, while female roles were based around their husband’s household (known as the domestic sphere. Men are often viewed as assertive, aggressive and domineering, while the women were viewed as house-makers and child-bearers. Now tasks are shared equally around the home, such as discipline. Discipline is shared between both parents, whereas, men used to discipline and children were taught to fear their fathers. Both parents are now seen equally, as providers and carers for their families. Both should determine the child’s education, set appropriate societal limits and have legal, welfare and responsibility of the child. However, traditional roles still exist in older generations, which may be influential on younger generations. · Prior to WW2, women did not work as they were told that their role was to care for their husband and family. If women did work, it was usually in hard physical labour repetitive tasks. However, women were called up to the workforce when their husbands were sent to WW2 to stabilise the economy. When their husbands returned, they were told to go back to their traditional roles. Many women protested for their rights are formed women’s liberation. Equal pay for equal work allowed freedom for women. Before this legislation was passed in Australia in 1975, women were receiving 54% of the male rate. Women embraced the workforce, freeing them of their traditional roles. Women are now encouraged to have a career, but policies such as maternity leave, which is available for up to 52 weeks also allow women to have a family. Thus, due to the introduction of equal pay, women are now encouraged to have a carer, and not expected to stay at home and look after their children as a career. · The introduction of the contraceptive pill in the 1970s also gave women more freedom in their domestic lives. Women were and are able to control their family structure, i.e. how many children they have and when they have children. Women were able to establish their career before having a family. Thus, females were no longer expected to have children early and not have a career, due to the freedom of the pill. · Males are embracing the “radical” notion of equality due to societal changes. The role of “father” has dramatically changed over the post-war years an now fathers are serving as role models who support their children in sports and arts. Many husbands have supported their wives returning to work and have become the primary carer of their child. Paternity leave enables fathers to take up to 51 weeks for the employee who is the primary care giver of the child allowing the father to bond with the child. David a lawyer choose to become the primary care giver of his child while his wife went back to work, to be involved in his child’s life, but admits that it is hard work as “there is no promotion”. Father support groups, such as “New Pin” in Western Sydney has been created to offer support by linking fathers together to discuss problems and provide strategies. Thus, societal changes such as paternity leave allows the mother to go to work and be the provider, and the father to take on the primary care giver role, with support offered to males who find the role challenging. · Single parents are more accepted than they were 50 years ago. According to the ABS, 64% of male parents and 49% of female single parents work. Divorce is more common, but single-parenthood can also occur from a death of a partner, unplanned pregnancy or a planned pregnancy eg IVF. When individuals got divorced in the 1950s-1970s, women had sole custody of the child, as traditionally their role was the carer. Times have changed, however, and men are gaining sole custody of their children. Barry Hooker, a full time Dad and single parent of Leah “doesn’t regret his decision for a second” for leaving his job as a boilermaker. Thus, due to the acceptance of single parents, men are now gaining sole custody of children, which traditionally would not happen. · However, in many aspects, our society has reinforced the traditional parenting roles for males and females. Generally, when children are sick, it is the mother who takes the day off. Women are the ones who drop of and pick up the kids from childcare and go to playgroup. Men support their son’s activities in sport, while women support their daughter’s activities in more passive arenas such as ballet. Currently, 20.9% of men are primary school teachers and 44.9% are high school teachers. Teaching may be unattractive to males due to the salary, status, and working with children runs counter to the male psyche. Parents are unintentionally or intentionally treating genders differently, which enforces these traditional gender roles through further generations. For eg, male babies are dressed in darker shades, while female babies are dressed in paler shades and boys are played with actively, while girls are handled more delicately. The concept of “male” and “female” develops from our experiences and observations. Household tasks should be shared equally, so children do not learn that one task is for males, while another task is for females. · Pregnancy in teenage mothers is also now accepted by most parts of society, which may have been shunned in earlier years. Teenage mothers were not expected to have an education, but this has changed due to Principal Glenn Sargent’s young mothers program at Plumpton High. Here, young mothers are given an education, but the school also provides $5 a day day-care, support by counsellor Rebecca and shelter. He has created a suitable environment for young mothers to reach their full potential. His success is measured “for each individual’s marks and attendance”. Same sex-couples are also more accepted. Both parents can be free to parent equally, which forms intimacy with the child. Family and friends can form a network of social and emotional support as well as to offer their children suitable adult role models of the opposite sex. Mainstream organisations also support same-sex couple’s i.e. alternative lifestyle association in Australia. Whoever the parents, all children need love and supervision. They all need to be sheltered, fed, taken to school and so on, thus the daily routine of same-sex couples is largely similar to heterosexual families. Thus, due to the social acceptance of pregnant teens, young mothers can raise a child and also gain an education due to Glenn Sargent’s young mothers programs, which would be unable in earlier years. Acceptance of same-sex couples has allowed individuals to create their own parenting skills in a nurturing and loving environment, similar to heterosexual environments. Both groups however are still often morally and socially stigmatised due to their lifestyle choices. · Many employers in small and medium sized business provide a family friendly workforce. When women fell pregnant in the 1950s-1970s, women were forced to resign from their careers. But due to women’s liberation and workforce policies, women can now have a career and a family at the same time. Maternity leave is available for women up to 52 weeks. Work hours are changing to become more flexible for both parents, there are now split shifts and some business have child-care where parents can easily drop off and pick up their children. This places the stress off families who have both parents who work. Thus, many businesses have changed their workforces to accommodate to the changing expectations of men and women. Workforces now provide flexibility for both parents, and allow women to have a career and family. Thus, expectations of males and females are currently changing, due to societal changes such as post WW2, work friendly environments and changing family structures. However, stereotypical male and female roles are still being enforced by parents, whose children will pass onto their own families, thus their roles will not change. Cite this page Describe the roles of parents and carers. (2016, Jul 05). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/describe-the-roles-of-parents-and-carers-essay	1,769	ENGLISH	1
(Last Updated on : 25/02/2015) Before the arrival of the Mughal rulers conditions in the country were very unsettled and thus the Indian Army during Mughal rule witnessed several significant changes. With the arrival of Babur on the Indian scene, some important changes were introduced in the organisation of the armed forces. It was he who for the first time effectively used artillery on the battle-field. This had far reaching effects on the strategic concept of warfare in the country. Within a short period the forts ceased to hold the age-old key to the strength and power and were progressively abandoned by the Rajputs for a more mobile warfare. Guerilla tactics were developed by them and later by the Marathas. The undisciplined and dividing scenario of the Indian Army that was common in the ancient times was a bit improved in the Mughal period. The Indian Army during Mughal period actually reflected the social divisions of the Indian society and that is why, they failed to project power out of South Asia, though the Mughal Emperors were ardently desired to do so. The unity among different sections of the Indian Army was somehow missing due to the social division that it reflected. Before the Mughal invasion, the central government at Delhi had been weakened considerably by intrigues, internal wars and independent rulers raised the standards of revolt very often. The undisciplined and dividing scenario of the Indian Army that was common in the ancient times was a bit improved in the Mughal period. Mughal rulers have done some good job in changing the formation, structure and strength of the Indian Army, during their reigns. The character of the Indian military system during the Mughal period had some similarity with that of the Delhi Sultanate , which was ethnically Afghan. As the state was primarily a military oligarchy, the army organisation gained in strength. All officials, who were foreigners, held higher posts and the area under their administration were divided into military commands. Regular mustering and enrolment was also done. There was a good set-up at the centre with army headquarters. A system of regular payment was in force and lands were also distributed in consideration of military service. The Rajputs , who formerly formed the military classes, were replaced by the new rulers and their own co-religionists. The Mughal rulers introduced a novel element and a new tactical doctrine. The arrival of artillery and matchlocks revolutionised the concept of pitched battles. The elephants were no more a decisive factor on the battlefield though they continued to be used by the commanders and served as the rallying point with the Royal standard. In spite of these factors the forts continued to be pre-eminent and provided the back-bone of the defenders. Some of the forts were converted into town fortresses for the immediate defence of the civilian population. Mandu, Chittor and Bharatpur are ideal examples of these town fortresses and took long to be reduced. The Mughals continued to pay increased attention to the armed forces. It was, however, not regarded as a national army as it was pre-dominated by foreigners. The locals who formed the main bulk did not identify themselves with the national aspirations. During the Mughal rule, great progress was made in the artillery branch also. There was the artillery-of-the-stirrup and the heavy artillery. The Mughals even had a navy during the latter part of their rule in Eastern India. Mansabdars who formed the military leadership held all the important military commands. They provided at once the strength under strong Emperors and the main source of weakness under weak ones. Another cause of the weakness of the system was that they held the purse-strings for their contingents. By virtue of their high military office they were made governors of provinces and had to lead military expeditions also. There was no central training establishment and the commanders were mostly appointed by virtue of their birth. Others rose from the subordinate ranks by sheer dint of merit. Akbar who started this institution kept them under check, but degeneration soon set in under the later Mughals. In spite of its mobile element, the Mughal army was heavy and cumbersome with the presence (during campaigns) of the Court, the harem and a large commissariat department. This large administrative tail became the undoing of the Mughals. Elephants and chariots also formed a part of the armies during campaigns. The very fact that the Mughals had to undertake regular campaigns indicate the presence of a firm streak of opposition to their rule. Aurangzeb accelerated this process with his strong anti-Hindu religious policy. In the Mughals' military scheme of things, cavalry and artillery came into prominence, and the infantry started wielding muskets and bows. Logistical trains, consisting of carts drawn by camels, oxen and even elephants were streamlined, thus ensuring a field army greater freedom of action, flexibility and sustainability. Recruitment was based in the 'mansabdari' system, which entailed the raising of a large army for campaigns, but without incurring very heavy expenditure, by the central government in power. The Delhi Sultanate had coined this name for a system long prevalent in the subcontinent, but it was refined and reintroduced by the Mughals. The Indian society was mainly divided by the local caste-system and also by religion during the Mughal period. The Mughal rulers of that time had organised a huge and vast Indian Army for protecting their empire from the attack of the outsiders. However, though the Army was large, the Mughal emperors did not make any significant efforts to separate them from the society or even professionalise them. The earlier emperors of the Mughal emperor, like the founder, Zahir-ud-din Mohammad Babur and others became successful to keep the unity of the Indian Army intact and that helped them in expanding the territory of their emperor. They did so with the help of their intelligence. However, the later Mughal emperors like Jahangir and the others could not control the vast Indian Army properly and as a result, rebellion and revolution was common sights during their reigns. Though, Jahangir had an ardent desire to expand his territory out side South Asia and also capture his homeland, Ferghana, he could not do so because of this inability. Jahangir wrote in his memoirs that the weakness of his military did not let him to expand his territory outside South Asia. He was actually militarily unable to do anything more than keep his existing possessions more or less under control. During Jahangir's reign, the Mughal Dynasty faced a lot of revolts from different parts and the Indian Army also showed lack of progress against the rebellion in the area of central India south of the Narmada River known as the Deccan. The Indian Army failed to restrain the revolts of the Afghan population of Bengal, and failed to control the wars of the Hindu population of Rajasthan, as well. After Jahangir, the Indian Army became weaker and a large portion of the Mughal emperor was exhausted and destroyed during the reign of Aurangzeb. According to some of the scholars, the main reason behind the Mughal rulers' failure to increase the strength of the Indian Army was the internal social problems of India. The inability of the Mughal emperors to develop a surplus of military power that was necessary for internal control of existing possessions eventually led to the demolition of the Mughal Empire in India. The scholars say that the Mughal emperors fail to utilise their revenues properly for purchasing good amount of artillery for the well being of the empire, just like the Ottomans did. As a result, they failed to expand the Indian Army as well. In fact, the Mughal emperors in India could not consolidate its internal control through its Army and also to expand in the way that the Ottoman Empire did. Some of the scholars say that the alien elite Mughal emperors actually could not establish effective control over a massive indigenous population with different languages and religions in India. This inability was clearly reflected in the organisation of the Indian Army during the Mughal period. Mughal rule prevailed over India for 300 years, fusing the country in many diverse fields like the arts, craft, music, architecture, literature and culture.	<urn:uuid:00c2ef4c-10f5-4dd9-b8cc-ccc3a60773be>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.indianetzone.com/37/indian_army_during_mughal_rule.htm	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00206.warc.gz	en	0.984457	1,735	3.84375	4	[ -0.2875416576862335, 0.4722418785095215, 0.6127468347549438, -0.06176592409610748, -0.19289055466651917, -0.17628023028373718, 0.13210636377334595, -0.20241762697696686, -0.02103395015001297, -0.1501283198595047, 0.2932472229003906, -0.152203768491745, 0.3364146649837494, 0.179480835795402...	2	(Last Updated on : 25/02/2015) Before the arrival of the Mughal rulers conditions in the country were very unsettled and thus the Indian Army during Mughal rule witnessed several significant changes. With the arrival of Babur on the Indian scene, some important changes were introduced in the organisation of the armed forces. It was he who for the first time effectively used artillery on the battle-field. This had far reaching effects on the strategic concept of warfare in the country. Within a short period the forts ceased to hold the age-old key to the strength and power and were progressively abandoned by the Rajputs for a more mobile warfare. Guerilla tactics were developed by them and later by the Marathas. The undisciplined and dividing scenario of the Indian Army that was common in the ancient times was a bit improved in the Mughal period. The Indian Army during Mughal period actually reflected the social divisions of the Indian society and that is why, they failed to project power out of South Asia, though the Mughal Emperors were ardently desired to do so. The unity among different sections of the Indian Army was somehow missing due to the social division that it reflected. Before the Mughal invasion, the central government at Delhi had been weakened considerably by intrigues, internal wars and independent rulers raised the standards of revolt very often. The undisciplined and dividing scenario of the Indian Army that was common in the ancient times was a bit improved in the Mughal period. Mughal rulers have done some good job in changing the formation, structure and strength of the Indian Army, during their reigns. The character of the Indian military system during the Mughal period had some similarity with that of the Delhi Sultanate , which was ethnically Afghan. As the state was primarily a military oligarchy, the army organisation gained in strength. All officials, who were foreigners, held higher posts and the area under their administration were divided into military commands. Regular mustering and enrolment was also done. There was a good set-up at the centre with army headquarters. A system of regular payment was in force and lands were also distributed in consideration of military service. The Rajputs , who formerly formed the military classes, were replaced by the new rulers and their own co-religionists. The Mughal rulers introduced a novel element and a new tactical doctrine. The arrival of artillery and matchlocks revolutionised the concept of pitched battles. The elephants were no more a decisive factor on the battlefield though they continued to be used by the commanders and served as the rallying point with the Royal standard. In spite of these factors the forts continued to be pre-eminent and provided the back-bone of the defenders. Some of the forts were converted into town fortresses for the immediate defence of the civilian population. Mandu, Chittor and Bharatpur are ideal examples of these town fortresses and took long to be reduced. The Mughals continued to pay increased attention to the armed forces. It was, however, not regarded as a national army as it was pre-dominated by foreigners. The locals who formed the main bulk did not identify themselves with the national aspirations. During the Mughal rule, great progress was made in the artillery branch also. There was the artillery-of-the-stirrup and the heavy artillery. The Mughals even had a navy during the latter part of their rule in Eastern India. Mansabdars who formed the military leadership held all the important military commands. They provided at once the strength under strong Emperors and the main source of weakness under weak ones. Another cause of the weakness of the system was that they held the purse-strings for their contingents. By virtue of their high military office they were made governors of provinces and had to lead military expeditions also. There was no central training establishment and the commanders were mostly appointed by virtue of their birth. Others rose from the subordinate ranks by sheer dint of merit. Akbar who started this institution kept them under check, but degeneration soon set in under the later Mughals. In spite of its mobile element, the Mughal army was heavy and cumbersome with the presence (during campaigns) of the Court, the harem and a large commissariat department. This large administrative tail became the undoing of the Mughals. Elephants and chariots also formed a part of the armies during campaigns. The very fact that the Mughals had to undertake regular campaigns indicate the presence of a firm streak of opposition to their rule. Aurangzeb accelerated this process with his strong anti-Hindu religious policy. In the Mughals' military scheme of things, cavalry and artillery came into prominence, and the infantry started wielding muskets and bows. Logistical trains, consisting of carts drawn by camels, oxen and even elephants were streamlined, thus ensuring a field army greater freedom of action, flexibility and sustainability. Recruitment was based in the 'mansabdari' system, which entailed the raising of a large army for campaigns, but without incurring very heavy expenditure, by the central government in power. The Delhi Sultanate had coined this name for a system long prevalent in the subcontinent, but it was refined and reintroduced by the Mughals. The Indian society was mainly divided by the local caste-system and also by religion during the Mughal period. The Mughal rulers of that time had organised a huge and vast Indian Army for protecting their empire from the attack of the outsiders. However, though the Army was large, the Mughal emperors did not make any significant efforts to separate them from the society or even professionalise them. The earlier emperors of the Mughal emperor, like the founder, Zahir-ud-din Mohammad Babur and others became successful to keep the unity of the Indian Army intact and that helped them in expanding the territory of their emperor. They did so with the help of their intelligence. However, the later Mughal emperors like Jahangir and the others could not control the vast Indian Army properly and as a result, rebellion and revolution was common sights during their reigns. Though, Jahangir had an ardent desire to expand his territory out side South Asia and also capture his homeland, Ferghana, he could not do so because of this inability. Jahangir wrote in his memoirs that the weakness of his military did not let him to expand his territory outside South Asia. He was actually militarily unable to do anything more than keep his existing possessions more or less under control. During Jahangir's reign, the Mughal Dynasty faced a lot of revolts from different parts and the Indian Army also showed lack of progress against the rebellion in the area of central India south of the Narmada River known as the Deccan. The Indian Army failed to restrain the revolts of the Afghan population of Bengal, and failed to control the wars of the Hindu population of Rajasthan, as well. After Jahangir, the Indian Army became weaker and a large portion of the Mughal emperor was exhausted and destroyed during the reign of Aurangzeb. According to some of the scholars, the main reason behind the Mughal rulers' failure to increase the strength of the Indian Army was the internal social problems of India. The inability of the Mughal emperors to develop a surplus of military power that was necessary for internal control of existing possessions eventually led to the demolition of the Mughal Empire in India. The scholars say that the Mughal emperors fail to utilise their revenues properly for purchasing good amount of artillery for the well being of the empire, just like the Ottomans did. As a result, they failed to expand the Indian Army as well. In fact, the Mughal emperors in India could not consolidate its internal control through its Army and also to expand in the way that the Ottoman Empire did. Some of the scholars say that the alien elite Mughal emperors actually could not establish effective control over a massive indigenous population with different languages and religions in India. This inability was clearly reflected in the organisation of the Indian Army during the Mughal period. Mughal rule prevailed over India for 300 years, fusing the country in many diverse fields like the arts, craft, music, architecture, literature and culture.	1,729	ENGLISH	1
ORE-A1 – Male – Culture: Icelandic Viking The Icelandic individuals from the Viking Age were uncovered between 1900 and 1996 and are stored at the National Museum of Iceland. They represent the first few generations after the settlement of Iceland (870-930 AD) based on context and radiocarbon dating. The Norse religion started being replaced by Christianity around 1000 AD which led to visible changes in burial customs. Old Norse customs would have the body lying in a north-south orientation as single inhumations, whereas Christian burials would use coffins in relatively large cemetaries with graves in an east-west orientation. Also Norse graves would typically involve burying goods that would be taken to the afterlife such as weapons, animals, boats, jewelry and household items. This individual was found in 1966 near an old farmstead in Ormstadir (ORE). He was buried with an axe, a knife and three lead weights. A single human bone from another individual was found nearby.	<urn:uuid:63add8a8-294b-4df0-86c8-edb4e6edee13>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://rickster.org/ore-a1	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604397.40/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121132900-20200121161900-00055.warc.gz	en	0.982412	197	3.5	4	[ 0.2775655686855316, 0.6614298224449158, 0.18143564462661743, -0.1779245287179947, 0.10317902266979218, 0.18289680778980255, -0.09522625058889389, 0.09691054373979568, -0.4131407141685486, 0.06033250689506531, 0.30976632237434387, -0.3768594563007355, 0.04366755485534668, 0.2942636609077453...	6	ORE-A1 – Male – Culture: Icelandic Viking The Icelandic individuals from the Viking Age were uncovered between 1900 and 1996 and are stored at the National Museum of Iceland. They represent the first few generations after the settlement of Iceland (870-930 AD) based on context and radiocarbon dating. The Norse religion started being replaced by Christianity around 1000 AD which led to visible changes in burial customs. Old Norse customs would have the body lying in a north-south orientation as single inhumations, whereas Christian burials would use coffins in relatively large cemetaries with graves in an east-west orientation. Also Norse graves would typically involve burying goods that would be taken to the afterlife such as weapons, animals, boats, jewelry and household items. This individual was found in 1966 near an old farmstead in Ormstadir (ORE). He was buried with an axe, a knife and three lead weights. A single human bone from another individual was found nearby.	216	ENGLISH	1
Ramses the Great In the Egyptian pyramids of Giza, Ramses the Great ruled as the greatest pharaoh of all times. Ramses the Great, also known as Ramses II, was born in 1304 B.C., and was given the name the Justice of Ray is Powerful. He had the knowledge of the kingdom, and became the focus of the court at an early age. Ramses and his father, Seti I, spent most of their time together, and at age ten, Ramses became heir to the thrown. He took the thrown in the year of 1292 B.C, between the ages of 22 or 32. The pharaoh lived over all other people in the kingdom. Ramses II reigned in the 19th dynasty. Ramses was thought of an incredible pharaoh, and was a great war leader to the Egyptians. He was one of the best known kings in Egyptian history. When Ramses became pharaoh, he got many riches. For example, Ramses had as many women as his heart desired. The women did everything for Ramses, which includes dancing for him. Ramses II was the most powerful king in all of ancient Egypt, and his Queens were his greatest supporters. Ramses II had many main wives ( six to eight) as well as many secondary wives. With these wives he had over one-hundred children. Thirty of the children were thought to be daughters. Ramses married his first wife Nefertari in 1267 B.C., even before he took the throne. She was his first and greatest love. Ramses appointed Nefertari, after his father’s death, as the “Great Royal Wife” and the “Mistress of Upper and Lower Nile”. She had born his first son. Ramses went as far as to construct an enormous statue of his beloved wife next to his statue in Abu Simbel. Unfortunately, Nefertari died when Ramses was only 48 years old. He then married one of their daughters, Meryt-Amun and then continued to marry other wives including a Babylonian princess, a Syrian princess, a Hittite princess, one of his sisters, and several daughters. When Ramses II first became pharaoh he crusaded along the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea taking back all of Egypt’s land. As his father did, he fought with the Hittite too. When he went into war with the Hittite, in 1275 B.C., he had an army of about twenty- thousand men camped in Kadesh, Syria, planning a surprise attack. When he was waiting for his men to get ready he found himself with few men, and surrounded by Hittite warriors, luckily he escapade with his life. After that battle he said “I was all alone, none of my men who had fled came back to help me, they left me for dead.” Later, Ramses II had scenes from the battle carved on temple was all over Egypt. According to the carvings, Ramses prayed to Amon, the chief Egyptian god, to save him. He said, “My soldiers and charioteers have forsaken me, but I call and find that Amon is worth more to me than millions of foot soldiers and hundreds of thousands of chariots.” After that, the carvings show that he rallied his forces and had victory over the Hittites. Furthermore, Ramses II raised many monuments to commemorate all of his victories. Despite their battle, in 1284 B.C., Ramses and the Hittites signed a treaty that set the borders of two empires, which ended the costly struggle between them. Many historians believe that Ramses the Great is the pharaoh that is written about in the Bible. The story that they think Ramses might be in, is the one where Moses told the pharaoh to let his people go. Other people also think that when Ramses died, he became a god. Ramses spent most of his 67-year reign reviving the empire and fighting the Hittites of Asia Minor. Ramses was 92 years old when he died, and was mummified and put into a temple. The process of mummification took about 70 days. Three of the four gods are carved in the side of a large temple, and are said to guard Ramses. The fourth god was the god of the underground, so he remains in eternal darkness underground, on the inside of the temple. Many buildings were made for Ramses II. He spent most of his life building projects. His father, Set I, once started to build a building, but never completed it, Ramses II came along and tried to finish it, but could not complete building it. Ramseseum was built on the west bank of the Nile at Thebes in upper Egypt. He completed the great Hypostyle Hall at Karnak. He built seven major temples in Nubia, he also constructed more than six other temples in Nubia. Ramses II completed a temple that his father started, which featured over seventy priceless treasures, each all over three thousand years old. His name is found all over Egypt on all the buildings that he had made. He had faces on existing statues re-carved to match his own face. The tombs that he built were cut into cliffs and consisted of a long corridor with several halls ending in a burial chamber. Ramses II also had several monuments built, one was called “The Abu-Simbel” ,which is one hundred and eighty five feet in length and ninety feet high, portrays eight of his children and one of his wives the other represented his thirtieth year at the throne of Egypt. The Abu-Simbel was his best piece of work. Several statues honoring Ramses II were built to look just like him ,they were each seventy feet high. The “Hall of Columns” of Kanark is the largest room in the world Ramses II was a good king that people worshipped. Most of the Ramses II children died before him. All of Ramses accomplishments were accomplished. The bad things that happened to Ramses cost him a lot. Ramses II wished that he did all of his accomplishments with his father.	<urn:uuid:a1f58333-e1f8-4fd9-b2b3-06fc63ec9e0b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://essay.ua-referat.com/Ramses	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589560.16/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117123339-20200117151339-00203.warc.gz	en	0.993679	1,302	3.40625	3	[ -0.05368071794509888, 1.0981429815292358, 0.11429796367883682, 0.011367215774953365, -0.6255452036857605, -0.36327892541885376, 0.31178224086761475, -0.22058314085006714, 0.25301095843315125, -0.0034479214809834957, -0.4955037236213684, -0.38720041513442993, 0.3598327338695526, 0.041072480...	1	Ramses the Great In the Egyptian pyramids of Giza, Ramses the Great ruled as the greatest pharaoh of all times. Ramses the Great, also known as Ramses II, was born in 1304 B.C., and was given the name the Justice of Ray is Powerful. He had the knowledge of the kingdom, and became the focus of the court at an early age. Ramses and his father, Seti I, spent most of their time together, and at age ten, Ramses became heir to the thrown. He took the thrown in the year of 1292 B.C, between the ages of 22 or 32. The pharaoh lived over all other people in the kingdom. Ramses II reigned in the 19th dynasty. Ramses was thought of an incredible pharaoh, and was a great war leader to the Egyptians. He was one of the best known kings in Egyptian history. When Ramses became pharaoh, he got many riches. For example, Ramses had as many women as his heart desired. The women did everything for Ramses, which includes dancing for him. Ramses II was the most powerful king in all of ancient Egypt, and his Queens were his greatest supporters. Ramses II had many main wives ( six to eight) as well as many secondary wives. With these wives he had over one-hundred children. Thirty of the children were thought to be daughters. Ramses married his first wife Nefertari in 1267 B.C., even before he took the throne. She was his first and greatest love. Ramses appointed Nefertari, after his father’s death, as the “Great Royal Wife” and the “Mistress of Upper and Lower Nile”. She had born his first son. Ramses went as far as to construct an enormous statue of his beloved wife next to his statue in Abu Simbel. Unfortunately, Nefertari died when Ramses was only 48 years old. He then married one of their daughters, Meryt-Amun and then continued to marry other wives including a Babylonian princess, a Syrian princess, a Hittite princess, one of his sisters, and several daughters. When Ramses II first became pharaoh he crusaded along the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea taking back all of Egypt’s land. As his father did, he fought with the Hittite too. When he went into war with the Hittite, in 1275 B.C., he had an army of about twenty- thousand men camped in Kadesh, Syria, planning a surprise attack. When he was waiting for his men to get ready he found himself with few men, and surrounded by Hittite warriors, luckily he escapade with his life. After that battle he said “I was all alone, none of my men who had fled came back to help me, they left me for dead.” Later, Ramses II had scenes from the battle carved on temple was all over Egypt. According to the carvings, Ramses prayed to Amon, the chief Egyptian god, to save him. He said, “My soldiers and charioteers have forsaken me, but I call and find that Amon is worth more to me than millions of foot soldiers and hundreds of thousands of chariots.” After that, the carvings show that he rallied his forces and had victory over the Hittites. Furthermore, Ramses II raised many monuments to commemorate all of his victories. Despite their battle, in 1284 B.C., Ramses and the Hittites signed a treaty that set the borders of two empires, which ended the costly struggle between them. Many historians believe that Ramses the Great is the pharaoh that is written about in the Bible. The story that they think Ramses might be in, is the one where Moses told the pharaoh to let his people go. Other people also think that when Ramses died, he became a god. Ramses spent most of his 67-year reign reviving the empire and fighting the Hittites of Asia Minor. Ramses was 92 years old when he died, and was mummified and put into a temple. The process of mummification took about 70 days. Three of the four gods are carved in the side of a large temple, and are said to guard Ramses. The fourth god was the god of the underground, so he remains in eternal darkness underground, on the inside of the temple. Many buildings were made for Ramses II. He spent most of his life building projects. His father, Set I, once started to build a building, but never completed it, Ramses II came along and tried to finish it, but could not complete building it. Ramseseum was built on the west bank of the Nile at Thebes in upper Egypt. He completed the great Hypostyle Hall at Karnak. He built seven major temples in Nubia, he also constructed more than six other temples in Nubia. Ramses II completed a temple that his father started, which featured over seventy priceless treasures, each all over three thousand years old. His name is found all over Egypt on all the buildings that he had made. He had faces on existing statues re-carved to match his own face. The tombs that he built were cut into cliffs and consisted of a long corridor with several halls ending in a burial chamber. Ramses II also had several monuments built, one was called “The Abu-Simbel” ,which is one hundred and eighty five feet in length and ninety feet high, portrays eight of his children and one of his wives the other represented his thirtieth year at the throne of Egypt. The Abu-Simbel was his best piece of work. Several statues honoring Ramses II were built to look just like him ,they were each seventy feet high. The “Hall of Columns” of Kanark is the largest room in the world Ramses II was a good king that people worshipped. Most of the Ramses II children died before him. All of Ramses accomplishments were accomplished. The bad things that happened to Ramses cost him a lot. Ramses II wished that he did all of his accomplishments with his father.	1,301	ENGLISH	1
The hoard is composed of over 1500 pieces of bejeweled gold and silver. It is believed to be from the 7th century AD, a time of much warring between neighboring kingdoms established after the exit of the Romans from the British isle. The 7th century AD was a time of religious intolerance and violence with old gods being challenged by the new with the beginning of the spread of Christianity, and the balance of power shifting between Christian and pagan tribes. The Anglo-Saxons, ancestors of the modern English, were made up of different tribal groups who arrived from Northern Europe and fought to settle all over England. The 7th century AD has long been called the Dark Ages because virtually no written history survives. The gold hoard was found by amateur metal detector enthusiast Terry Herbert. The hoard was valued at about £3.3 million, the value of which was split between the finder, Terry Herbert, and the owner of the land it was found on, Fred Johnson. An unprecedented find, this is the only Anglo Saxon gold hoard ever found. Most of the artifacts from the hoard are bent, mangled and torn. Archeologists had to keep the find secret until they could go back to the site and remove everything before looters found out about it. As a cover, the landowner told his neighbors that there had been a murder and investigators were searching for a body. Although no one is sure exactly why these objects were buried, archeologists tentatively believe that the hoard is war booty, since it is composed almost exclusively of military and religious artifacts. The hoard was found in a field in southern Staffordshire, England in July of 2009. This area was once the heart of the ancient kingdom of Mercia, one of the most powerful of the warring Anglo Saxon kingdoms. The Saxons were renowned craftsmen working with wood, bone and iron, but the skills required to make gold and garnet jewelry was something that only a few master craftsmen possessed. The hoard objects are of an amazing quality of craftsmanship. Archeologists still don't know how goldsmiths were able to create some of these pieces. Some of the objects have a patterned foil under the garnets to enhance their sparkle. The ridged pattern has points less than a fiftieth of an inch apart - how medieval craftsmen were able to create such a thing is a technique lost to history. The artifacts found include helmet fragments, pommel caps, and processional crosses. The artifacts consist of about11 pounds of gold and 3 lbs of silver. More than 40,000 people went to see the hoard when it was on temporary exhibit over a two and half week period. It was decided that the hoard should be forever displayed in the area it was found. So Birmingham and Stoke Museums had just 3 months to raise the millions and pay for its return.	<urn:uuid:b0b221cc-932d-4fd8-bb8f-e65d38bc9924>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.natgeotv.com/int/secrets-of-saxon-gold/saxon-gold-facts	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250620381.59/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124130719-20200124155719-00047.warc.gz	en	0.982296	596	3.53125	4	[ -0.02687993273139, 0.5878232717514038, 0.608129620552063, 0.0931987464427948, 0.384182333946228, 0.009621737524867058, -0.24719670414924622, 0.13600394129753113, -0.35242557525634766, -0.2989047169685364, 0.22444918751716614, -0.6551967263221741, 0.12474647164344788, 0.31145650148391724, ...	6	The hoard is composed of over 1500 pieces of bejeweled gold and silver. It is believed to be from the 7th century AD, a time of much warring between neighboring kingdoms established after the exit of the Romans from the British isle. The 7th century AD was a time of religious intolerance and violence with old gods being challenged by the new with the beginning of the spread of Christianity, and the balance of power shifting between Christian and pagan tribes. The Anglo-Saxons, ancestors of the modern English, were made up of different tribal groups who arrived from Northern Europe and fought to settle all over England. The 7th century AD has long been called the Dark Ages because virtually no written history survives. The gold hoard was found by amateur metal detector enthusiast Terry Herbert. The hoard was valued at about £3.3 million, the value of which was split between the finder, Terry Herbert, and the owner of the land it was found on, Fred Johnson. An unprecedented find, this is the only Anglo Saxon gold hoard ever found. Most of the artifacts from the hoard are bent, mangled and torn. Archeologists had to keep the find secret until they could go back to the site and remove everything before looters found out about it. As a cover, the landowner told his neighbors that there had been a murder and investigators were searching for a body. Although no one is sure exactly why these objects were buried, archeologists tentatively believe that the hoard is war booty, since it is composed almost exclusively of military and religious artifacts. The hoard was found in a field in southern Staffordshire, England in July of 2009. This area was once the heart of the ancient kingdom of Mercia, one of the most powerful of the warring Anglo Saxon kingdoms. The Saxons were renowned craftsmen working with wood, bone and iron, but the skills required to make gold and garnet jewelry was something that only a few master craftsmen possessed. The hoard objects are of an amazing quality of craftsmanship. Archeologists still don't know how goldsmiths were able to create some of these pieces. Some of the objects have a patterned foil under the garnets to enhance their sparkle. The ridged pattern has points less than a fiftieth of an inch apart - how medieval craftsmen were able to create such a thing is a technique lost to history. The artifacts found include helmet fragments, pommel caps, and processional crosses. The artifacts consist of about11 pounds of gold and 3 lbs of silver. More than 40,000 people went to see the hoard when it was on temporary exhibit over a two and half week period. It was decided that the hoard should be forever displayed in the area it was found. So Birmingham and Stoke Museums had just 3 months to raise the millions and pay for its return.	606	ENGLISH	1
The St Louis Cemetery No. 1 was established in 1789 and is the oldest remaining cemetery in New Orleans. The cemetery is a leading tourist attraction given the connections between the city's early history and the public's fascination with New Orlean's unique funeral traditions, as well as myths and legends that connect this cemetery with voodoo culture. The cemetery is still active, with a few burials occurring each year. New Orleans is below sea level, so when is time to bury the dead, they place the remains of the deceased in above-ground tombs. There are a handful of licensed tour guides that offer daily tours of the cemetery, including the histories of some of the cemetery's most famous tombs and the people interned within them. This cemetery was created on August 14, 1789 by the Spanish imperial government. Due to the scarcity of ground above sea level, government officials chose a swampy site on St. Louis Street. This site was just 40 yards behind the city's charity hospital but still far enough away from many homes-an important consideration as many connected burial plots to disease and other maladies. A canal was inserted to drain the swamp around the city as well as delivering goods. The canal led to the development of warehouses and depots in the city's Treme’ neighborhood. The first few burials were done in a careless way, something that accounts for the current maze of tombs. It is believed that the first burials were below ground or semi-below ground until the cemetery converted to only permit the above ground tombs seen today. Flooding was a never-ending battle for the cemetery. Engineers added sand and shells around the cemetery and also worked to create slightly elevated pathways. The cemetery was temporarily closed in 1816 after the waters of Macarty Crevasse flooded the location in 1816. In response, the city worked to create additional cemeteries even after the waters receded. The City of New Orleans wanted to expand Treme’ Street, but the Protestant section of the cemetery was in the way. To please the growing Protestant community, the city proposed a site in the Faubourg St. Marie in 1822, which is now known as the Girod Street cemetery. The city also worked with the church to build St. Louis Cemetery No. 2 further from the center of town. Most of the burials at that time were being held at Cemetery No. 2, though Cemetery No. 1 was still open. As the city population grew, the development caused the site of Cemetery No.1 to shrink in size. By the end of the 19th century, the surrounding area had become mostly residential. The area of Storyville was created around the cemetery which was known as the “Red Light District”. It had a boundary made up of Iberville, North Robertson, St. Louis and Basin Streets until the Navy shut it down in Storyville was the torn down to make room for Iberville housing project. In 1930, the Municipal Auditorium was built and the canal was filled in by 1938. The area was decreasing due to the construction of Interstate 10 even after the city’s may attempts to restore. Cemetery No. 1 received the reputation of being extremely dangerous and this led to families and locals staying away. The cemetery became overgrown and abandoned and since then has been used for scenes in movies and finally turned into a top tourist attraction with the approval of the Archdiocese.	<urn:uuid:3812c079-e836-4ec3-b07f-5b2dfc0725df>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.theclio.com/entry/21639	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783621.89/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129010251-20200129040251-00093.warc.gz	en	0.981966	741	3.65625	4	[ -0.31220442056655884, 0.04244430363178253, 0.4649844169616699, -0.2837100028991699, -0.22099041938781738, 0.2991653084754944, -0.38758328557014465, 0.07934604585170746, -0.06532120704650879, 0.013319198973476887, 0.5522047281265259, 0.06574142724275589, -0.33213338255882263, 0.526065289974...	1	The St Louis Cemetery No. 1 was established in 1789 and is the oldest remaining cemetery in New Orleans. The cemetery is a leading tourist attraction given the connections between the city's early history and the public's fascination with New Orlean's unique funeral traditions, as well as myths and legends that connect this cemetery with voodoo culture. The cemetery is still active, with a few burials occurring each year. New Orleans is below sea level, so when is time to bury the dead, they place the remains of the deceased in above-ground tombs. There are a handful of licensed tour guides that offer daily tours of the cemetery, including the histories of some of the cemetery's most famous tombs and the people interned within them. This cemetery was created on August 14, 1789 by the Spanish imperial government. Due to the scarcity of ground above sea level, government officials chose a swampy site on St. Louis Street. This site was just 40 yards behind the city's charity hospital but still far enough away from many homes-an important consideration as many connected burial plots to disease and other maladies. A canal was inserted to drain the swamp around the city as well as delivering goods. The canal led to the development of warehouses and depots in the city's Treme’ neighborhood. The first few burials were done in a careless way, something that accounts for the current maze of tombs. It is believed that the first burials were below ground or semi-below ground until the cemetery converted to only permit the above ground tombs seen today. Flooding was a never-ending battle for the cemetery. Engineers added sand and shells around the cemetery and also worked to create slightly elevated pathways. The cemetery was temporarily closed in 1816 after the waters of Macarty Crevasse flooded the location in 1816. In response, the city worked to create additional cemeteries even after the waters receded. The City of New Orleans wanted to expand Treme’ Street, but the Protestant section of the cemetery was in the way. To please the growing Protestant community, the city proposed a site in the Faubourg St. Marie in 1822, which is now known as the Girod Street cemetery. The city also worked with the church to build St. Louis Cemetery No. 2 further from the center of town. Most of the burials at that time were being held at Cemetery No. 2, though Cemetery No. 1 was still open. As the city population grew, the development caused the site of Cemetery No.1 to shrink in size. By the end of the 19th century, the surrounding area had become mostly residential. The area of Storyville was created around the cemetery which was known as the “Red Light District”. It had a boundary made up of Iberville, North Robertson, St. Louis and Basin Streets until the Navy shut it down in Storyville was the torn down to make room for Iberville housing project. In 1930, the Municipal Auditorium was built and the canal was filled in by 1938. The area was decreasing due to the construction of Interstate 10 even after the city’s may attempts to restore. Cemetery No. 1 received the reputation of being extremely dangerous and this led to families and locals staying away. The cemetery became overgrown and abandoned and since then has been used for scenes in movies and finally turned into a top tourist attraction with the approval of the Archdiocese.	750	ENGLISH	1
Kosher tours through Portugal and Spain are sure to be fulfilling experiences, considering the rich Jewish heritage that can be found in that ancient land. Before the Alhambra Decree, the Jews of the Iberian Peninsula played important roles in the courts of the disparate Iberian kingdoms, kingdoms that would later solidify into Portugal and Spain. Even during the 711 Muslim conquest, When the Umayyads took control of the Peninsula from the Visigoths, Jewish reliability and honor led to them being granted important positions of custodians and advisors, positions that the performed to the best of their ability. Although relations between Muslims and Jews in the Iberian Peninsula would fluctuate over the centuries, Jews continued serving the various kings and queens of Antiquity. In Lisbon, there once lived a great Jewish statesman, who advised kings and wrote extensive comments on the Bible. His name was Isaac Abravanel. Life of Abravanel Abravanel was born in Lisbon, 1437, almost sixty years before the port city became infamous for its role in the expulsion of Jews from Portugal. Abravanel’s father Judah was the treasurer, an occupation that he would later follow in the service of King Alfonso V, whom he served faithfully until the latter’s death in 1481. Abravanel was forced to flee Portugal after the late king’s successor, King John II, accused him of treason and demanded his execution. He escaped to Spain and settled in Toledo, where he worked on his Biblical commentaries. In 1484, he began serving as the royal treasurer, collecting taxes and using his financial capacities to benefit the royalty of Castille, particularly in their campaign in Granada. When King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, his former patrons, decided to expel the Jews of Spain, he pleaded for them to reconsider, even gathering a sizable amount of money to convince them not to scatter his people once more. They refused, and in 1492, he was forced to relinquish his position and flee with his brethren. Abravanel and his family found refuge in Naples, where he served once again as a Tax collector for its king. In an interesting bookend, the last king that Abravanel served was also named Alfonso, whom he served while the king was in exile. He died in Venice, aged 71. Isaac was an influential statesman, who used his financial capabilities to benefit the people he served under. He was also an extensive commentator of the Bible, providing insights on books like Joshua, Judges, and Deuteronomy. His philosophical views had an interesting relationship with that of his predecessor Maimonides, in that while he agreed on certain points, many of his views opposed that of Rambam, particularly in the latter’s rationalism in religion. He also wrote apologetics or defenses of religious doctrine. He wrote criticisms of Christianity while also defending the Messianic concept of Judaism. Abravabel was a brilliant Jewish figure of antiquity, contributing both to the economic prosperity of material kingdoms and the analysis of transcendental truths. While he was spurned by many of the people that he used to serve, his influence will not be forgotten, especially not by the scholars and Jewish descendants whose ancestors came from the Iberian Peninsula. Join us on a Jewish travel cruise through the Douro region, where the legacy of people like Abravanel live on.	<urn:uuid:6201d6d0-f742-4e8c-8e3b-aebaaa000713>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://kosherrivercruise.com/the-statesman-of-lisbon/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251779833.86/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128153713-20200128183713-00304.warc.gz	en	0.985459	702	3.359375	3	[ 0.10086978226900101, 0.7805014848709106, 0.07851150631904602, -0.28147220611572266, -0.3391401469707489, -0.06004316359758377, 0.07920267432928085, 0.1232808381319046, 0.06945527344942093, -0.19476348161697388, -0.3483520746231079, -0.3697626292705536, -0.43776723742485046, 0.3148065209388...	13	Kosher tours through Portugal and Spain are sure to be fulfilling experiences, considering the rich Jewish heritage that can be found in that ancient land. Before the Alhambra Decree, the Jews of the Iberian Peninsula played important roles in the courts of the disparate Iberian kingdoms, kingdoms that would later solidify into Portugal and Spain. Even during the 711 Muslim conquest, When the Umayyads took control of the Peninsula from the Visigoths, Jewish reliability and honor led to them being granted important positions of custodians and advisors, positions that the performed to the best of their ability. Although relations between Muslims and Jews in the Iberian Peninsula would fluctuate over the centuries, Jews continued serving the various kings and queens of Antiquity. In Lisbon, there once lived a great Jewish statesman, who advised kings and wrote extensive comments on the Bible. His name was Isaac Abravanel. Life of Abravanel Abravanel was born in Lisbon, 1437, almost sixty years before the port city became infamous for its role in the expulsion of Jews from Portugal. Abravanel’s father Judah was the treasurer, an occupation that he would later follow in the service of King Alfonso V, whom he served faithfully until the latter’s death in 1481. Abravanel was forced to flee Portugal after the late king’s successor, King John II, accused him of treason and demanded his execution. He escaped to Spain and settled in Toledo, where he worked on his Biblical commentaries. In 1484, he began serving as the royal treasurer, collecting taxes and using his financial capacities to benefit the royalty of Castille, particularly in their campaign in Granada. When King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, his former patrons, decided to expel the Jews of Spain, he pleaded for them to reconsider, even gathering a sizable amount of money to convince them not to scatter his people once more. They refused, and in 1492, he was forced to relinquish his position and flee with his brethren. Abravanel and his family found refuge in Naples, where he served once again as a Tax collector for its king. In an interesting bookend, the last king that Abravanel served was also named Alfonso, whom he served while the king was in exile. He died in Venice, aged 71. Isaac was an influential statesman, who used his financial capabilities to benefit the people he served under. He was also an extensive commentator of the Bible, providing insights on books like Joshua, Judges, and Deuteronomy. His philosophical views had an interesting relationship with that of his predecessor Maimonides, in that while he agreed on certain points, many of his views opposed that of Rambam, particularly in the latter’s rationalism in religion. He also wrote apologetics or defenses of religious doctrine. He wrote criticisms of Christianity while also defending the Messianic concept of Judaism. Abravabel was a brilliant Jewish figure of antiquity, contributing both to the economic prosperity of material kingdoms and the analysis of transcendental truths. While he was spurned by many of the people that he used to serve, his influence will not be forgotten, especially not by the scholars and Jewish descendants whose ancestors came from the Iberian Peninsula. Join us on a Jewish travel cruise through the Douro region, where the legacy of people like Abravanel live on.	711	ENGLISH	1
The Journey of The Indian Woman: A Brief Timeline The modern woman of the twenty-first century is slowly becoming a rapid movement to keep up with. But let us look back, to a time when, the Indian soils, drew strength from women of a different time. A time when the media intrusion was unheard of. Several leaders, queens, poets and mystics, made pivotal achievements during the Mughal era. However, for the masses or remaining women, be it Hindu or Muslim, it was either a life in pardah or child marriage. The concept of equality, or even social democracy, as is prevalent today did not exist. When we speak of the history of India, it is important we consider the factor that it was largely a monarchy. The concept of equality, or even social democracy, as is prevalent today did not exist. In the times of the kings, the government was coloured by conquered territories, and religious warships. A time when equality was only a distant dream that one could look at from a window. Under the Britishers Under the rule of the British, when they had officially taken India as one of its colonies, we became subject to their rule. However, it is they who rectified several practices, with new laws of widow re-marriage, the abolition of Sati, etc. A wife, walking into a fire, was prevalent in medieval India. Locked under the cast of religious justification, they were forced to accept reality. The girl child, with no value to the household, was more often than not, the subject of discrimination or death. A wife, walking into a fire, was prevalent in medieval India. It was not uncommon, and one cannot stress enough, the practice of Sati, which plagued the countryside, along with, female infanticide, slavery, lack of education, were mere social customs. It is under the medieval period, that one sees a significant drop in the status of women in relation to equality and justice. However, one cannot deny the noteworthy achievements of women, princesses and queens, who were business women, and would partake in trade and royal construct. And many, including Jahangir’s wife, were highly influential in the same. Noor Jahan not only the known as the most powerful woman in the Mughal Empire, but also dominated her relatively weak-minded husband. Jahangir seemed to share his passion for gardening with his wife. Salima Sultana, one of Akbar’s wives, was his favorite. However, she did not bear him any children. She was highly influential, and the emperor greatly valued her opinion. She appears to have been intelligent, exceptionally well-read, and an accomplished poetess. Kings would seek wives with high political influence at times, getting married at young ages, and some simply loved affairs. It is said that Akbar the Great, “had three chief queens, 800 other wives and a harem of 5000”. One can only imagine that not all women were queens, and he, as their ruler and husband, decided what status they might achieve in society. Mystics and the Bhakti Movement Interestingly enough, several women, during a time of no hope, and in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, found expression in mystical poetry. They belonged to a larger sect of the Bhakti movement and expressed their unhappiness in their poems. Bhakti movement is known to have empowered the lowest rungs of Indian society. Lal Ded’s (14th-century Kashmiri mystic poet) songs, for example, mocked her mother in law and the stupefying task of household chores. Similarly, Bahina Bai (Varkari female-saint from Maharashtra) describes being hemmed in and ‘cornered in by marriage’. Mira Bai, described her annoyances with her ‘restricted life, in her husbands’ home’. These are all facing tumultuous times, and their only escape was the mystic movement. The Bhakti movement was prevalent in India, started in the 7th century Tamil Nadu. ‘The Bhakti movement was more about the wanderings of another time, and a break from family and community. However, evidence shows, that women struggled to find a place within these movements as well.’ ‘The bhaktas were not social emancipator, they were individuals trying to lead a liberated life. It is their individualism, that continues to inspire us’. Neera Desai, a leading lady in the studies of women in India (1925-2009). If one gets into the complexities of the Mughal empire, we will find out a thousand sources and memoirs, all painted with their own views on the livelihood of one and many during the time. The man was the bread earner, in a primarily agricultural economy. The woman helped in the domestic sector, as a wife or mother. It was considered her role, to stay at home “Can man be free if woman is a slave?” said the famous romantic poet PB Shelly. A potent question, that resonates deeply in one’s heart, how far have we come? Navina Singh is an intern with SheThePeople.TV.	<urn:uuid:501245eb-3e60-460b-bfe5-9179191e2b68>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.shethepeople.tv/news/journey-indian-woman-timeline	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251705142.94/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127174507-20200127204507-00399.warc.gz	en	0.983513	1,096	3.4375	3	[ -0.18532873690128326, 0.2535848617553711, -0.06537213921546936, 0.04277435690164566, -0.5671520233154297, 0.28822919726371765, 0.08773423731327057, -0.1429259181022644, 0.34473055601119995, -0.11279730498790741, -0.012675638310611248, -0.053563956171274185, 0.10245019197463989, 0.109534874...	3	The Journey of The Indian Woman: A Brief Timeline The modern woman of the twenty-first century is slowly becoming a rapid movement to keep up with. But let us look back, to a time when, the Indian soils, drew strength from women of a different time. A time when the media intrusion was unheard of. Several leaders, queens, poets and mystics, made pivotal achievements during the Mughal era. However, for the masses or remaining women, be it Hindu or Muslim, it was either a life in pardah or child marriage. The concept of equality, or even social democracy, as is prevalent today did not exist. When we speak of the history of India, it is important we consider the factor that it was largely a monarchy. The concept of equality, or even social democracy, as is prevalent today did not exist. In the times of the kings, the government was coloured by conquered territories, and religious warships. A time when equality was only a distant dream that one could look at from a window. Under the Britishers Under the rule of the British, when they had officially taken India as one of its colonies, we became subject to their rule. However, it is they who rectified several practices, with new laws of widow re-marriage, the abolition of Sati, etc. A wife, walking into a fire, was prevalent in medieval India. Locked under the cast of religious justification, they were forced to accept reality. The girl child, with no value to the household, was more often than not, the subject of discrimination or death. A wife, walking into a fire, was prevalent in medieval India. It was not uncommon, and one cannot stress enough, the practice of Sati, which plagued the countryside, along with, female infanticide, slavery, lack of education, were mere social customs. It is under the medieval period, that one sees a significant drop in the status of women in relation to equality and justice. However, one cannot deny the noteworthy achievements of women, princesses and queens, who were business women, and would partake in trade and royal construct. And many, including Jahangir’s wife, were highly influential in the same. Noor Jahan not only the known as the most powerful woman in the Mughal Empire, but also dominated her relatively weak-minded husband. Jahangir seemed to share his passion for gardening with his wife. Salima Sultana, one of Akbar’s wives, was his favorite. However, she did not bear him any children. She was highly influential, and the emperor greatly valued her opinion. She appears to have been intelligent, exceptionally well-read, and an accomplished poetess. Kings would seek wives with high political influence at times, getting married at young ages, and some simply loved affairs. It is said that Akbar the Great, “had three chief queens, 800 other wives and a harem of 5000”. One can only imagine that not all women were queens, and he, as their ruler and husband, decided what status they might achieve in society. Mystics and the Bhakti Movement Interestingly enough, several women, during a time of no hope, and in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, found expression in mystical poetry. They belonged to a larger sect of the Bhakti movement and expressed their unhappiness in their poems. Bhakti movement is known to have empowered the lowest rungs of Indian society. Lal Ded’s (14th-century Kashmiri mystic poet) songs, for example, mocked her mother in law and the stupefying task of household chores. Similarly, Bahina Bai (Varkari female-saint from Maharashtra) describes being hemmed in and ‘cornered in by marriage’. Mira Bai, described her annoyances with her ‘restricted life, in her husbands’ home’. These are all facing tumultuous times, and their only escape was the mystic movement. The Bhakti movement was prevalent in India, started in the 7th century Tamil Nadu. ‘The Bhakti movement was more about the wanderings of another time, and a break from family and community. However, evidence shows, that women struggled to find a place within these movements as well.’ ‘The bhaktas were not social emancipator, they were individuals trying to lead a liberated life. It is their individualism, that continues to inspire us’. Neera Desai, a leading lady in the studies of women in India (1925-2009). If one gets into the complexities of the Mughal empire, we will find out a thousand sources and memoirs, all painted with their own views on the livelihood of one and many during the time. The man was the bread earner, in a primarily agricultural economy. The woman helped in the domestic sector, as a wife or mother. It was considered her role, to stay at home “Can man be free if woman is a slave?” said the famous romantic poet PB Shelly. A potent question, that resonates deeply in one’s heart, how far have we come? Navina Singh is an intern with SheThePeople.TV.	1,068	ENGLISH	1
Money and Credit in the Virginia Colony Money in the Virginia Colony • Money was not often used in the early Virginia Colony. • Money – a medium of exchange – (currency, which includes coins and paper bills). • Barter – trading or exchange of goods and services without the use of money! Money in the Virginia Colony • Credit – buying a good or service now and paying for it later. • Debt – a good or service owed to another. • Saving – money put away to save or to spend at a later time. Money in the Virginia Colony • Few people had paper money and coins to use to buy goods and services. • Bartering (trading) was commonly used instead of money. • Tobacco was used as money! Tobacco Used as Money • A tobacco farmer could use his tobacco to pay for goods and services. • Farmers and other consumers (customers) could also buy goods and services on credit and pay their debts when their crops were harvested and sold. • Colonial Virginia had NO BANKS!	<urn:uuid:c458a2da-4493-4c17-9b56-5f239bf8d765>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studylib.net/doc/17605214/money-and-credit-in-the-virginia-colony	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608295.52/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123041345-20200123070345-00395.warc.gz	en	0.983844	205	3.34375	3	[ -0.20232601463794708, 0.08689382672309875, 0.11919307708740234, -0.2521537244319916, 0.46478271484375, -0.19284598529338837, 0.14978785812854767, 0.0328889861702919, -0.22415725886821747, 0.32385626435279846, 0.24855022132396698, -0.2515295743942261, -0.43823710083961487, 0.137881621718406...	4	Money and Credit in the Virginia Colony Money in the Virginia Colony • Money was not often used in the early Virginia Colony. • Money – a medium of exchange – (currency, which includes coins and paper bills). • Barter – trading or exchange of goods and services without the use of money! Money in the Virginia Colony • Credit – buying a good or service now and paying for it later. • Debt – a good or service owed to another. • Saving – money put away to save or to spend at a later time. Money in the Virginia Colony • Few people had paper money and coins to use to buy goods and services. • Bartering (trading) was commonly used instead of money. • Tobacco was used as money! Tobacco Used as Money • A tobacco farmer could use his tobacco to pay for goods and services. • Farmers and other consumers (customers) could also buy goods and services on credit and pay their debts when their crops were harvested and sold. • Colonial Virginia had NO BANKS!	203	ENGLISH	1
He was seen as a pioneer in pursuing a naturalistic approach to representation based on observation. He was known as the Father of Western Pictorial art. Regardless of other influences on hi style, his true teacher was nature, ???the world of visible things.??? He introduced the Byzantine style along with restoring the naturalistic approach the ancient??™s developed and medieval artists largely abandoned. He also inaugurated an age that method of pictorial expression based on observation and initiated an age that might be called ???early scientific.??? With his art he and his successors contributed to the foundation of empirical science, revealed nature while observing it and divining its visible order, and turning western artists resolutely towards the visible world as their source of knowledge of nature. A lot of the art did around the 13th and 14th century was commissioned by patrons. An artist would not do any type of large art work unless commission to do so. Mostly the patrons were civic groups, religious entity, private individual, or even the artists guild itself. Monastic orders, confraternities, and the popes were major patrons along with the wealthy families that could afford a custom art. Art know a days are free for everyone to see and no one really commissions artist to do a specific piece. Artist are allowed to do as they want and are able to show case their art to a great many in hopes that their piece is found interesting and that someone will buy it for a good amount. While in the 13th and 14th the artist were asked to enter into a contract that went over many details as to what was use in the painting, what it would look like, how long before deadline and etc. Though as always the artist was compensated for their work only if the work met the standards of those who ordered it.	<urn:uuid:55e9edf6-e266-451a-99f1-aedeb05eaccc>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://yorkepeninsulaaccommodation.com/34680/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601040.47/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120224950-20200121013950-00491.warc.gz	en	0.990066	362	3.53125	4	[ -0.014049950987100601, 0.26740700006484985, 0.24387302994728088, -0.18079303205013275, 0.02354823611676693, 0.2080407440662384, -0.132253035902977, 0.2730388045310974, -0.24666689336299896, -0.000372407550457865, 0.11709070950746536, 0.020017050206661224, 0.010120007209479809, 0.3271090686...	4	He was seen as a pioneer in pursuing a naturalistic approach to representation based on observation. He was known as the Father of Western Pictorial art. Regardless of other influences on hi style, his true teacher was nature, ???the world of visible things.??? He introduced the Byzantine style along with restoring the naturalistic approach the ancient??™s developed and medieval artists largely abandoned. He also inaugurated an age that method of pictorial expression based on observation and initiated an age that might be called ???early scientific.??? With his art he and his successors contributed to the foundation of empirical science, revealed nature while observing it and divining its visible order, and turning western artists resolutely towards the visible world as their source of knowledge of nature. A lot of the art did around the 13th and 14th century was commissioned by patrons. An artist would not do any type of large art work unless commission to do so. Mostly the patrons were civic groups, religious entity, private individual, or even the artists guild itself. Monastic orders, confraternities, and the popes were major patrons along with the wealthy families that could afford a custom art. Art know a days are free for everyone to see and no one really commissions artist to do a specific piece. Artist are allowed to do as they want and are able to show case their art to a great many in hopes that their piece is found interesting and that someone will buy it for a good amount. While in the 13th and 14th the artist were asked to enter into a contract that went over many details as to what was use in the painting, what it would look like, how long before deadline and etc. Though as always the artist was compensated for their work only if the work met the standards of those who ordered it.	371	ENGLISH	1
Thanksgiving has been around for a long time; in America it started with an ocean voyage. We are all familiar with the Pilgrims coming to America on the Mayflower. It had been a long voyage across the ocean in 1620 when the Mayflower set sail on September 6, 1620 and arrived at Plymouth, Massachusetts on November 9, 1620. It's landing site was known as the Plymouth Colony since it had sailed from Plymouth, England. The 66 day voyage had taken its toll as it crossed the Atlantic ocean. With a crew of between 20 and 25, the ship carried 102 passengers, 37 were members of the separatist Leiden congregation seeking freedom of worship in the New World. Two people died during the voyage, and two babies were born on the ship during the trip. About half of the individuals who were aboard the Mayflower died during the first winter of 1620-1621. At harvest time in 1621 those who survived, 53 in all, celebrated the harvest with what has been recognized as America's first Thanksgiving. Through the years the group aboard that ship and the settlement at Plymouth, Massachusetts, even though some were "strangers" while others were "saints" have all become known as "Pilgrims." Emerging from a very difficult voyage from England, a very tough winter, with the loss of nearly half of their company through death, with each family having lost a loved one and touched by the harshness of the times, God had now come through with a bountiful harvest, much better health and the Pilgrims felt the blessings flow through their hearts. With those who took leadership, and those who were following, they collectively with one heart began to see the importance of remembering a custom they had practiced in their home country, and they planted a new custom in this new-found land that would bathe each of them in Thanksgiving to their Creator for delivering them into a new life of freedom and abundance. Through the years into modern America the celebration of Thanksgiving has not only endured, but flourished. It was Abraham Lincoln who began the tradition of a national Thanksgiving in 1863. Prior to that some state Governors proclaimed the day, and some Presidents encouraged a day of Thanksgiving; some did not. In modern times we celebrate Thanksgiving as a day to be grateful for all the blessings we have; not only nationally, but individually as well. As we look to our own 21st century Thanksgiving celebrations, may we first remember that we are the creation of God, and we are to celebrate by giving Him thanks and worship in spirit and truth reflecting on the vastness of Grace that He has given us through His work on the cross to secure the salvation He offers. To Him be Praise and Glory forever!	<urn:uuid:fd96562e-2296-482f-bf7c-82496a3df23e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.lincolncourier.com/news/20191129/letters-thanksgiving	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00548.warc.gz	en	0.985946	555	3.296875	3	[ 0.2271513044834137, 0.11420706659555435, 0.48479416966438293, -0.29501450061798096, -0.10531400889158249, -0.04814659804105759, -0.22416365146636963, 0.3260508179664612, 0.0795765072107315, 0.2626205086708069, -0.1034008264541626, 0.16664151847362518, -0.26421451568603516, 0.10624268651008...	2	Thanksgiving has been around for a long time; in America it started with an ocean voyage. We are all familiar with the Pilgrims coming to America on the Mayflower. It had been a long voyage across the ocean in 1620 when the Mayflower set sail on September 6, 1620 and arrived at Plymouth, Massachusetts on November 9, 1620. It's landing site was known as the Plymouth Colony since it had sailed from Plymouth, England. The 66 day voyage had taken its toll as it crossed the Atlantic ocean. With a crew of between 20 and 25, the ship carried 102 passengers, 37 were members of the separatist Leiden congregation seeking freedom of worship in the New World. Two people died during the voyage, and two babies were born on the ship during the trip. About half of the individuals who were aboard the Mayflower died during the first winter of 1620-1621. At harvest time in 1621 those who survived, 53 in all, celebrated the harvest with what has been recognized as America's first Thanksgiving. Through the years the group aboard that ship and the settlement at Plymouth, Massachusetts, even though some were "strangers" while others were "saints" have all become known as "Pilgrims." Emerging from a very difficult voyage from England, a very tough winter, with the loss of nearly half of their company through death, with each family having lost a loved one and touched by the harshness of the times, God had now come through with a bountiful harvest, much better health and the Pilgrims felt the blessings flow through their hearts. With those who took leadership, and those who were following, they collectively with one heart began to see the importance of remembering a custom they had practiced in their home country, and they planted a new custom in this new-found land that would bathe each of them in Thanksgiving to their Creator for delivering them into a new life of freedom and abundance. Through the years into modern America the celebration of Thanksgiving has not only endured, but flourished. It was Abraham Lincoln who began the tradition of a national Thanksgiving in 1863. Prior to that some state Governors proclaimed the day, and some Presidents encouraged a day of Thanksgiving; some did not. In modern times we celebrate Thanksgiving as a day to be grateful for all the blessings we have; not only nationally, but individually as well. As we look to our own 21st century Thanksgiving celebrations, may we first remember that we are the creation of God, and we are to celebrate by giving Him thanks and worship in spirit and truth reflecting on the vastness of Grace that He has given us through His work on the cross to secure the salvation He offers. To Him be Praise and Glory forever!	592	ENGLISH	1
Prometheus was a son of Iapsotes and a Titan who existed before the gods of Olympus. After winning the war against the Titans, Zeus shared the universe with his siblings and bought Prometheus to Olympus. Prometheus was angry with Zeus and his despotism, however, and wished to avenge his ancestors. He created the first human with Athena and Zagreus out of clay from the ground where the other Titans had died. Zagreus was Zeus’ own son from Persephone, and Zeus said about him, “Let all my rule, my riches, my abilities, and my knowledge be his.” Humanity could then replace the hegemony of Zeus. Interestingly, a similar prophecy exists for Athena, who also helped in the creation of the first human. Athena would help end the rule of Zeus. After Zeus copulated with his first wife Metis, Gaia prophesized that the resulting child would overthrow him. Zeus then devoured Metis with her unborn child, but Athena was later born out of his head. Zeus did not deny the wishes and desires of Athena, however, and presented a friendly demeanor. We see another connection between Prometheus and Athena in this birth. Zeus suffered extreme headaches after consuming Metis, and Prometheus told Zeus the real cause of his pain and what needed to be done. After Athena was born out of the head of Zeus, Prometheus learned from the Goddess of Intelligence what was needed for “a civilized life” and the importance of reason and uprising, which was symbolized with fire. As regards Zagreus, Zeus fell in love with his sister Demeter and copulated with her, with Persephone being born from this union. Once she reached adulthood, Zeus fell in love with her. He saw her sitting alone in a forest, so he transformed into a snake and joined with her. Persephone was then pregnant with Zagreus. Zeus wanted to protect his son Zagreus, but Hera did not want this fruit of such a forbidden love to survive. Zeus, knowing the harm that Hera could inflict, hid his son. He entrusted him to the Kouretes, who had protected Zeus as an infant in their cave. Hera then ordered the Titans to find and kill Zagreus, and they searched for him everywhere before finally finding out about the cave. They could not retrieve him from the cave, however, so the Titans placed a mirror at the cave entrance. Intrigued by the mirror, Zagreus came out of the cave, after which the Titans tore him to pieces and ate his flesh, leaving only the bones. On discovering the crime, Zeus hurled a bolt of lightning at the Titans, turning them and the bones of Zagreus to ashes. As time passed, another Titan, Prometheus, gave shape to the clay from this spot and created a human body. Athena, who was passing by, then breathed life into this clay body. Thus, humanity was created, but along with the purity and goodness of Zagreus, there was the evil and cruelty of the Titans. In each story of creation, the material may be different, but Athena is always involved. It is believed that Prometheus pitied the weakness of the humans, so he took another move toward the destruction of Zeus. He stole fire from Olympus and gave it to humanity. In retaliation, Zeus chained Prometheus to the Caucasian Mountains. Prometheus, with his ability to foresee the future, had the power to topple Zeus, and he had created all the right conditions to enable this. Zeus feared him for this. He had created humanity to replace him with help from Athena, who was also prophesized to destroy Zeus. Zeus believed he had done all this because he could see the future. The Caucasian eagle, an automaton created by Hephaestus, was set to gnaw at Prometheus’s liver, although it regenerated every day. Hercules eventually released him, and Zeus finally forgave him. (For a different view, follow the article.) In a later philosophy, Prometheus became symbolic of freedom, knowledge, and resistance against oppressive forces and political abuse. In the struggle between Zeus and the Titans, Prometheus manage to avoid directly opposing Zeus, but it seems that he still discretely favored the side of the Titans. In philosophy, the importance of taking a logical approach over believing myths, and the importance of humanity, rose together with a natural philosophy solidified by the character of Prometheus. In Greek, the root meaning of the word “math” relates to learning, and this comes from a view that says existence is based on numbers, and this is very relevant as a demonstration of the transition from mythology to reason. Zeus, out of mythology, represents an illogical exaltation, while Prometheus, as the anarchist of logos, was completely opposed to him. Even in today’s astrological literature, we see how Zeus (in the form of Jupiter) is exalted despite the destruction he has caused. Even when a disaster occurs, and despite his undeniable presence in the maps, we seek other sources to explain it. In the torch races that were common among the Greeks of Athens (of which Athena is the protector), Prometheus was considered a religious cult. People expressed their respect for logos by organizing ceremonies dedicated to Prometheus to fight myths and the exalted rule of the illogical (i.e., Zeus). The torches held by the runners carry the flame that Prometheus gifted to humanity. This is why the torch symbolizes knowledge even today. I don’t care about Zeus at all. While he rules, let him do as he wishes. Let him slaughter. His rule in the skies will not last long! Prometheus (Aeschylus BC 525-456) As we can see, Prometheus has an archetype that directs the future through small adjustments. It is inadequate to attribute to him with just knowledge and uprising through logic. Some stories say that Prometheus traded his mortality with the immortality of the centaur Chiron, who was then able to die and escape from his pain. Prometheus did not have mortality to trade, however, because he was a Titan. He existed long before the gods of Olympus and was already immortal. In many myths, Prometheus was rescued from his torture by Hercules. In other words, it was the strengthening (Hercules) of logic and uprising. The accounts of this differ, however. Another lesser known myth, one that seems more reasonable to me, goes like this. It clearly explains the salvation of knowledge through gaining strength: You will see, one day, Zeus with all his firmness will soften, Because the bed he tries to enter will topple him from his power and throne. Prometheus (Aeschylus BC 525-456) Zeus, who knew that Prometheus could see the future, released Prometheus to find out “which bed” this was. The bed was that of Thetis, but Athena and humanity still have logic… - Astrology (64) - Bulletin (1) - Featured (54) - Health (78) - Life (254) - Mystery (62) - Soul (400) - Story (23) - Sufi (38) - Top (4) - Traveller (35) - Uncategorized (2) - Video (3)	<urn:uuid:65c88377-27de-417d-80ee-f33ca2b24caf>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.thewisemag.com/mystery/the-future-forged-by-prometheus-the-wavering-throne-of-zeus/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251773463.72/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128030221-20200128060221-00195.warc.gz	en	0.982171	1,516	3.46875	3	[ -0.17372441291809082, 0.3916791081428528, -0.09108326584100723, -0.16547399759292603, -0.7159046530723572, -0.47101637721061707, 0.3408273756504059, 0.4561687111854553, -0.029738692566752434, 0.2668221592903137, -0.04785551875829697, -0.4557270109653473, 0.22946511209011078, 0.322698920965...	2	Prometheus was a son of Iapsotes and a Titan who existed before the gods of Olympus. After winning the war against the Titans, Zeus shared the universe with his siblings and bought Prometheus to Olympus. Prometheus was angry with Zeus and his despotism, however, and wished to avenge his ancestors. He created the first human with Athena and Zagreus out of clay from the ground where the other Titans had died. Zagreus was Zeus’ own son from Persephone, and Zeus said about him, “Let all my rule, my riches, my abilities, and my knowledge be his.” Humanity could then replace the hegemony of Zeus. Interestingly, a similar prophecy exists for Athena, who also helped in the creation of the first human. Athena would help end the rule of Zeus. After Zeus copulated with his first wife Metis, Gaia prophesized that the resulting child would overthrow him. Zeus then devoured Metis with her unborn child, but Athena was later born out of his head. Zeus did not deny the wishes and desires of Athena, however, and presented a friendly demeanor. We see another connection between Prometheus and Athena in this birth. Zeus suffered extreme headaches after consuming Metis, and Prometheus told Zeus the real cause of his pain and what needed to be done. After Athena was born out of the head of Zeus, Prometheus learned from the Goddess of Intelligence what was needed for “a civilized life” and the importance of reason and uprising, which was symbolized with fire. As regards Zagreus, Zeus fell in love with his sister Demeter and copulated with her, with Persephone being born from this union. Once she reached adulthood, Zeus fell in love with her. He saw her sitting alone in a forest, so he transformed into a snake and joined with her. Persephone was then pregnant with Zagreus. Zeus wanted to protect his son Zagreus, but Hera did not want this fruit of such a forbidden love to survive. Zeus, knowing the harm that Hera could inflict, hid his son. He entrusted him to the Kouretes, who had protected Zeus as an infant in their cave. Hera then ordered the Titans to find and kill Zagreus, and they searched for him everywhere before finally finding out about the cave. They could not retrieve him from the cave, however, so the Titans placed a mirror at the cave entrance. Intrigued by the mirror, Zagreus came out of the cave, after which the Titans tore him to pieces and ate his flesh, leaving only the bones. On discovering the crime, Zeus hurled a bolt of lightning at the Titans, turning them and the bones of Zagreus to ashes. As time passed, another Titan, Prometheus, gave shape to the clay from this spot and created a human body. Athena, who was passing by, then breathed life into this clay body. Thus, humanity was created, but along with the purity and goodness of Zagreus, there was the evil and cruelty of the Titans. In each story of creation, the material may be different, but Athena is always involved. It is believed that Prometheus pitied the weakness of the humans, so he took another move toward the destruction of Zeus. He stole fire from Olympus and gave it to humanity. In retaliation, Zeus chained Prometheus to the Caucasian Mountains. Prometheus, with his ability to foresee the future, had the power to topple Zeus, and he had created all the right conditions to enable this. Zeus feared him for this. He had created humanity to replace him with help from Athena, who was also prophesized to destroy Zeus. Zeus believed he had done all this because he could see the future. The Caucasian eagle, an automaton created by Hephaestus, was set to gnaw at Prometheus’s liver, although it regenerated every day. Hercules eventually released him, and Zeus finally forgave him. (For a different view, follow the article.) In a later philosophy, Prometheus became symbolic of freedom, knowledge, and resistance against oppressive forces and political abuse. In the struggle between Zeus and the Titans, Prometheus manage to avoid directly opposing Zeus, but it seems that he still discretely favored the side of the Titans. In philosophy, the importance of taking a logical approach over believing myths, and the importance of humanity, rose together with a natural philosophy solidified by the character of Prometheus. In Greek, the root meaning of the word “math” relates to learning, and this comes from a view that says existence is based on numbers, and this is very relevant as a demonstration of the transition from mythology to reason. Zeus, out of mythology, represents an illogical exaltation, while Prometheus, as the anarchist of logos, was completely opposed to him. Even in today’s astrological literature, we see how Zeus (in the form of Jupiter) is exalted despite the destruction he has caused. Even when a disaster occurs, and despite his undeniable presence in the maps, we seek other sources to explain it. In the torch races that were common among the Greeks of Athens (of which Athena is the protector), Prometheus was considered a religious cult. People expressed their respect for logos by organizing ceremonies dedicated to Prometheus to fight myths and the exalted rule of the illogical (i.e., Zeus). The torches held by the runners carry the flame that Prometheus gifted to humanity. This is why the torch symbolizes knowledge even today. I don’t care about Zeus at all. While he rules, let him do as he wishes. Let him slaughter. His rule in the skies will not last long! Prometheus (Aeschylus BC 525-456) As we can see, Prometheus has an archetype that directs the future through small adjustments. It is inadequate to attribute to him with just knowledge and uprising through logic. Some stories say that Prometheus traded his mortality with the immortality of the centaur Chiron, who was then able to die and escape from his pain. Prometheus did not have mortality to trade, however, because he was a Titan. He existed long before the gods of Olympus and was already immortal. In many myths, Prometheus was rescued from his torture by Hercules. In other words, it was the strengthening (Hercules) of logic and uprising. The accounts of this differ, however. Another lesser known myth, one that seems more reasonable to me, goes like this. It clearly explains the salvation of knowledge through gaining strength: You will see, one day, Zeus with all his firmness will soften, Because the bed he tries to enter will topple him from his power and throne. Prometheus (Aeschylus BC 525-456) Zeus, who knew that Prometheus could see the future, released Prometheus to find out “which bed” this was. The bed was that of Thetis, but Athena and humanity still have logic… - Astrology (64) - Bulletin (1) - Featured (54) - Health (78) - Life (254) - Mystery (62) - Soul (400) - Story (23) - Sufi (38) - Top (4) - Traveller (35) - Uncategorized (2) - Video (3)	1,486	ENGLISH	1
The English and French courts meet in France to make peace. Burgundy, who has worked hard to make the negotiations possible, speaks at length, about the devastating effects of the war on all aspects of French life. He compares France to a garden that has not been cared for. Why can there not be peace between their nations? Henry replies that the French must buy peace by acceding to the English demands. King Charles says that he will study the documents further and give his decision. Henry sends his nobles away to assist with the negotiations. Henry is left alone with Catherine and Alice. He begins to woo the princess, protesting that he is a plain man who can only speak bluntly. He is a man of action, not words, so he claims to be at a loss for what to say to persuade her to accept him. He says he is not handsome but has a good heart. Katherine, who speaks little English, is dubious. How can she love an enemy of France? Henry replies that he is not an enemy of France, since he loves it so much he will not part with a single village of it. He tries to talk to her in French, but he has no grasp of the language. He promises that they will produce children who will make great soldiers, who will recapture Constantinople from the Turks. Catherine remains unconvinced. She finally consents when she acknowledges that by marrying him she will please her father, the king. He kisses her on the lips, and is not discouraged even when she and Alice inform him that it is not the custom in France for ladies to kiss before they are married. King Charles and the other French and English nobles return. Henry and Burgundy engage in a conversation about how best to woo a woman, after which King Charles consents to the marriage of his daughter. He also says that France has agreed to the English demands. King Charles hopes that the marriage of Henry and Catherine will put an end to the enmity between the two countries. This is echoed by Queen Isabel. The Chorus then speaks the epilogue. He praises Henry, but then explains that he reigned only for a short time. He passed his throne on to Henry VI, who lost France and created harsh times for England. Commentators usually see Act 5 as an anti-climax, after the stirring English victory in battle. Burgundy's speech, like the scene with Pistol before, undermines the romantic idea of war. He paints the real picture of how devastating the war with England has been for France. Henry comes across as a sincere, if rather clumsy suitor. In the way that he arranges the terms of peace to maximize his own advantage, he shows that he is still a master of political maneuvering.	<urn:uuid:28a5f007-6fb5-4b75-9097-18c77835e919>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.novelguide.com/henry-v/summaries/act5-scen2	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601628.36/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121074002-20200121103002-00364.warc.gz	en	0.981139	561	3.296875	3	[ -0.615906834602356, 0.41061413288116455, -0.07673338800668716, -0.2638033926486969, -0.23399260640144348, -0.27535849809646606, 0.36182764172554016, -0.09336452931165695, 0.3691534399986267, -0.005628922954201698, -0.0408867672085762, -0.22335520386695862, 0.19538769125938416, 0.2236233800...	7	The English and French courts meet in France to make peace. Burgundy, who has worked hard to make the negotiations possible, speaks at length, about the devastating effects of the war on all aspects of French life. He compares France to a garden that has not been cared for. Why can there not be peace between their nations? Henry replies that the French must buy peace by acceding to the English demands. King Charles says that he will study the documents further and give his decision. Henry sends his nobles away to assist with the negotiations. Henry is left alone with Catherine and Alice. He begins to woo the princess, protesting that he is a plain man who can only speak bluntly. He is a man of action, not words, so he claims to be at a loss for what to say to persuade her to accept him. He says he is not handsome but has a good heart. Katherine, who speaks little English, is dubious. How can she love an enemy of France? Henry replies that he is not an enemy of France, since he loves it so much he will not part with a single village of it. He tries to talk to her in French, but he has no grasp of the language. He promises that they will produce children who will make great soldiers, who will recapture Constantinople from the Turks. Catherine remains unconvinced. She finally consents when she acknowledges that by marrying him she will please her father, the king. He kisses her on the lips, and is not discouraged even when she and Alice inform him that it is not the custom in France for ladies to kiss before they are married. King Charles and the other French and English nobles return. Henry and Burgundy engage in a conversation about how best to woo a woman, after which King Charles consents to the marriage of his daughter. He also says that France has agreed to the English demands. King Charles hopes that the marriage of Henry and Catherine will put an end to the enmity between the two countries. This is echoed by Queen Isabel. The Chorus then speaks the epilogue. He praises Henry, but then explains that he reigned only for a short time. He passed his throne on to Henry VI, who lost France and created harsh times for England. Commentators usually see Act 5 as an anti-climax, after the stirring English victory in battle. Burgundy's speech, like the scene with Pistol before, undermines the romantic idea of war. He paints the real picture of how devastating the war with England has been for France. Henry comes across as a sincere, if rather clumsy suitor. In the way that he arranges the terms of peace to maximize his own advantage, he shows that he is still a master of political maneuvering.	558	ENGLISH	1
Hermann the German greets travelers as they enter the town. Visitors crossing over the majestic Missouri River on the Bond Bridge, coming into Hermann, are greeted by an impressive display of German American craftsmanship. Hermann the German is the perfect representation of town history, culture, and hospitality. But, do you know the real story behind this statue? To start, Hermann the German was not always referred to this way. His given name was Arminius but was changed to Hermann during the times of Martin Luther. Arminius was responsible for liberating parts of Germany from Roman occupation. This act, in turn, allowed Germans to leave and settle new areas in America. As a central character in the narrative of our historic town, getting this statue right was of utmost importance. The Hermann area is synonymous with Missouri Wine Country. It serves as the state center seat for viticulture with a long German history of winemaking to back up this claim. The first model used in the designing of this statue was a soldier in battle armor with a sword and knife. To soften the image, the figure’s arm would be extended, greeting guests with a goblet of Hermann wine. The German Liberator (who was almost not German) The statue that you see today, depicts a proud German man openly inviting you to the town of Hermann. However, the original drawings and small-scale figures took the project in a different direction. Thankfully, multiple historians were involved in the project, and it was quickly realized that the original references were actually of a Roman soldier and not a German one! Though the Romans of this era were civilized—guiding the world in art and recorded history—this was a critical catch in the project. From that point on, particular consideration was given to being utterly authentic. The plans were revised with extreme detail and accuracy. Anyone carefully inspecting this monument will notice these details. Easy examples are a ring and necklace—both additions to the original work. Critical decisions were made to construct the measurements of the statue as well. The original sculpture had stripped the soldier of his weapons. But, a soldier would never have been without his spear in public, so that change, was also adopted. Delivery of a Landmark Upon complete design approval, the production of the statue began. Art rarely abides by a schedule, and this was not a fast project. As deadlines were repeatedly pushed back, it was difficult to believe that the day had finally arrived for the statue to be delivered. Hermann rode into town on an open-air trailer after passing through a snowstorm. While the weather did not allow for a warm welcome, Hermann was installed in his new home. Anyone encountering him will admit it was worth the wait! Two thousand years after Arminius’s bold effort at Battle of Teutoburg Forest, the town of Hermann erected a statue in honor of the Germanic namesake. Now, this heroic landmark takes in the rewarding hillside views of his achievement every day—greeting and celebrating visitors to Hermann, while reminding the town of the role he played in their story. Hermann the German is now another piece of town history. This is the first installment of a three-part series on the statues that serve as landmarks in Hermann. Keep an eye out for part two in the weeks ahead!	<urn:uuid:be52fa1d-1f14-42b7-a00c-1bddc665bf11>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://visithermann.com/2020/the-statues-of-hermann-part-1/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250609478.50/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123071220-20200123100220-00189.warc.gz	en	0.981459	695	3.453125	3	[ 0.06906025856733322, 0.34393587708473206, 0.4497740864753723, -0.13330024480819702, 0.021296575665473938, -0.31516098976135254, 0.2728497385978699, 0.106462761759758, -0.4763830900192261, -0.2180493026971817, 0.35570669174194336, -0.5461218357086182, -0.27783650159835815, 0.276299744844436...	10	Hermann the German greets travelers as they enter the town. Visitors crossing over the majestic Missouri River on the Bond Bridge, coming into Hermann, are greeted by an impressive display of German American craftsmanship. Hermann the German is the perfect representation of town history, culture, and hospitality. But, do you know the real story behind this statue? To start, Hermann the German was not always referred to this way. His given name was Arminius but was changed to Hermann during the times of Martin Luther. Arminius was responsible for liberating parts of Germany from Roman occupation. This act, in turn, allowed Germans to leave and settle new areas in America. As a central character in the narrative of our historic town, getting this statue right was of utmost importance. The Hermann area is synonymous with Missouri Wine Country. It serves as the state center seat for viticulture with a long German history of winemaking to back up this claim. The first model used in the designing of this statue was a soldier in battle armor with a sword and knife. To soften the image, the figure’s arm would be extended, greeting guests with a goblet of Hermann wine. The German Liberator (who was almost not German) The statue that you see today, depicts a proud German man openly inviting you to the town of Hermann. However, the original drawings and small-scale figures took the project in a different direction. Thankfully, multiple historians were involved in the project, and it was quickly realized that the original references were actually of a Roman soldier and not a German one! Though the Romans of this era were civilized—guiding the world in art and recorded history—this was a critical catch in the project. From that point on, particular consideration was given to being utterly authentic. The plans were revised with extreme detail and accuracy. Anyone carefully inspecting this monument will notice these details. Easy examples are a ring and necklace—both additions to the original work. Critical decisions were made to construct the measurements of the statue as well. The original sculpture had stripped the soldier of his weapons. But, a soldier would never have been without his spear in public, so that change, was also adopted. Delivery of a Landmark Upon complete design approval, the production of the statue began. Art rarely abides by a schedule, and this was not a fast project. As deadlines were repeatedly pushed back, it was difficult to believe that the day had finally arrived for the statue to be delivered. Hermann rode into town on an open-air trailer after passing through a snowstorm. While the weather did not allow for a warm welcome, Hermann was installed in his new home. Anyone encountering him will admit it was worth the wait! Two thousand years after Arminius’s bold effort at Battle of Teutoburg Forest, the town of Hermann erected a statue in honor of the Germanic namesake. Now, this heroic landmark takes in the rewarding hillside views of his achievement every day—greeting and celebrating visitors to Hermann, while reminding the town of the role he played in their story. Hermann the German is now another piece of town history. This is the first installment of a three-part series on the statues that serve as landmarks in Hermann. Keep an eye out for part two in the weeks ahead!	676	ENGLISH	1
Difference between revisions of "King Lear" \|Line 1:\|\|Line 1:\| '''''King Lear'' Plot Summary''' '''''King Lear'' Plot Summary''' Revision as of 20:12, 23 July 2007 King Lear Plot Summary The beginning of Shakespeare’s classic tragedy shows King Lear, the rapidly aging monarch of Britain, making the decision to step down from his throne. He has decided to evenly distribute his land between his three daughters, Goneril, Regan, and Cordelia. Before he does so though, he decides to test them all by asking how much they love him. Both Goneril and Regan offer the flattering answers of unconditional love that he seeks. Cordelia however, remains silent and claims there are no words to describe her love. Lear becomes incredibly angry and disowns her, forcing her to move to France to marry the King there. Despite her being disowned, the planned wedding between the two goes forward with the King of France still interested in her, despite the lack of Lear’s blessing. Soon enough though, it becomes apparent that Lear’s decision to disown his youngest daughter was poor. Goneril and Regan both quickly go about removing Lear of any remaining power and divvying up the land between them and their husbands. While his daughters slowly betray him, Lear begins to go mad, even running into the midst of a thunderstorm at one point with his Fool and Kent, a disguised nobleman. Another nobleman and confidante to Lear has his own problems in Gloucester. The father of two sons, Edmund and Edgar, he is soon betrayed by the illegitimate of the two. The illegitimate son, Edmund manages to convince him that Edgar is trying to kill him, sending Edgar into hiding as a beggar named “Poor Tom”. He also heads to the heath where Lear had gone during the thunderstorm. Gloucester makes the decision to assist Lear after he learns of Regan and Goneril’s treachery. However, it is not long before Regan and her husband Cornwall discover his assistance to Lear and take their retribution. Accusing him of treason, they blind him and set him to wander the countryside. Edgar, disguised as Tom guides him to Dover where Lear is currently staying. It is in Dover that Cordelia finally returns to the scene, leading an army of French forces to invade and save her father. Edmund, after betraying his father Gloucester has taken to a romantic involvement with both Gonerial and Regan. Because of his growing sympathy for Lear’s plight, Albany becomes the target of a plot by his wife Goneril and Edmund to be killed. Gloucester attempts at one point in his despair to commit suicide. Edgar though, keeping careful vigil over his father, tricks him into walking over an imaginary cliff and saves his life. Back in Dover, the English troops arrive and take on the French forces led by Cordelia. They defeat the French and capture both Lear and Cordelia. The final scene of the play is full of deaths, betrayals and fights. Edgar and Edmund finally duel, with Edgar defeating and killing Edmund. He then reveals that Gloucester died upon realizing it was Edgar who had saved him and that he was going to fight Edmund. Goneril poisons Regan in her jealousy of her relationship with Edmund, then kills herself after her plot to kill Albany is revealed. Because Edmund betrayed Cordelia, she dies unnecessarily in the prison, and finally Lear dies in grief over Cordelia’s death. The only survivors of the blood letting are Albany, Edgar, and Kent. - 1 King Lear Characters - 2 King Lear act and scene summaries - 2.1 Act 1 - 2.2 Act II - 2.3 Act III - 2.4 Act IV - 2.5 Act V King Lear Characters As the elderly king of England and the title character of the play, Lear’s main fault is his pride and controlling nature as displayed in the first scene of the play. He does not accept contradiction or challenges and when Cordelia does not immediately speak her love for him, he disowns her, a mistake he will later regret unto his death. For him it is the appearance of love rather than literal devotion that he values most. Driven mad by the horrible acts of his family later in the play, he eventually realizes the errors of his ways and the true love Cordelia had for him. As the only one of Lear’s daughters (and the youngest) to refuse the flattering attention he demands, Cordelia is quickly disowned. She leaves the country, marrying the King of France even after the disowning. Regardless of her father’s anger and cruelty, she remains loyal and returns to England with an army of French to fight her sisters and their power grabbing. She is reticent to speak and quiet in her actions, and eventually dies for her convictions after being imprisoned by her sisters. As Lear’s oldest daughter, Goneril is frequently jealous, prone to treachery, and completely lacking in morals. Married to the Duke of Albany, her strong and aggressive character was atypical in the time in which Shakespeare penned the play. She not only removes her father from power, she has a torrid affair, and removes military power from her husband before eventually taking her own life in the final scene. As the middle of Lear’s three daughters, Regan is just as treacherous and ruthless as Goneril and shows it many of the same ways. She is considerably similar to her sister in almost every way. They never work together in their treachery, but prompt further cruelty from each other until they both fight for the adulterous attentions of the same man and lose their lives in their jealousy. Gloucester is an Earl loyal to Lear who at one pointed had an affair and fathered a bastard son, Edmund. His story in the play is very similar to that of Lear’s, following the same cycle of close mindedness and betrayal with his children. He trusts the wrong child and drives away Edgar, his loyal true son and pays for it with his sight and eventually his health. After helping Lear, he is blinded and stripped of his title by Lear’s daughters. Eventually he dies in grief over the fate of his two sons. Edgar is the older and legitimate of Gloucester’s two sons. At first he is easily tricked by his brother, after which he takes on the guise of a beggar to hide from the men hunting him on behalf of his father. He uses this persona to aid his father and Lear, and eventually returning triumphantly to defeat his brother. Edmund is Gloucester’s illegitimate younger son who is unhappy as a bastard son and soon plots to take both Gloucester and Edgar’s titles and worldly possessions. He is incredibly sly and almost manages to succeed in every aspect of his plans. Everyone he encounters and speaks to is hurt. Another of Lear’s loyal Earls, Kent spends much of the play in disguise, assisting Lear after he is banished by the King, still loyal. He is very loyal but also too outspoken, a trait that causes his banishment and creates problems in various other situations. Goneril’s husband and a Duke, Albany is naturally good at heart and eventually turns against his wife and Regan, unhappy with their actions. He is unfortunately too indecisive though and is not nearly so cunning or intelligent as his wife. He takes much too long to realize what horrors his wife is wreaking. Regan’s husband and another Duke of Lear’s. He is very much like his wife, working with her and sister-in-law to destroy the rule of Lear and take control of the nation, wreaking violence and persecution on both Lear and Gloucester. He stays with Lear throughout the play and offers seemingly empty songs as advice for the maddening King. King Lear act and scene summaries The beginning of the play opens with Gloucester and Kent, two nobles loyal to King Lear, in the throne room discussing how he plans to divide his kingdom among his three daughters. They change the topic though as Kent asks to be introduced to Gloucester’s son Edmund. Gloucester tells Kent that Edmund is a bastard son raised away from his home, but that he loves him all the same. Lear then enters the throne room and continues describing how he plans to divide the kingdom. He wants to retire from the throne and enjoy his old age, visiting his children, free of the burden of the government. In deciding how, he declares that each of his daughters must announce how much they love their father. The daughter to display the most love will receive the largest share. Goneril and Regan, the oldest and most conniving of Lear’s daughters flatter him immensely, describing their love in flowering, over the top forms. When he comes to his third and youngest daughter (also his favorite) though, he is greeted with silence. She doesn’t say anything except that she loves him as much as a daughter should love a father. She describes how neither of her sisters could possibly be married if they loved Lear so much as they said. Lear is unhappy with the response though and disowns her in a rage, giving her share to Regan and Goneril. Kent is the only man willing to speak up and tell Lear the error of his decision, disagreeing with what he’s done. He calls the king insane and states that Cordelia clearly loves him more. Lear then banishes Kent as well, giving him six days to leave the kingdom. Awaiting a decision as to who will marry Cordelia are the King of France and Duke of Burgandy. When Lear tells them of his disowning of Cordelia, Burgandy immediately withdraws his offer and leaves. The King of France however is impressed and still wishes to marry her. Lear does not give his blessing. At the end of the scene, Goneril and Regan speak in private, planning how to best utilize their complete power of the kingdom. They decide to limit their father’s power and take full control. Edmund returns to the stage again alone, delivering a soliloquy about how bastards are treated and his unhappiness with society. He angrily denounces his legitimate half-brother Edgar and decides he will do in his brother and take the lands and privilege that he feels he’s been denied. He begins by forging a letter that depicts Edgar as plotting to kill his father, Gloucester. Edmund pretends to hide it from Gloucester who then demands to read it. Edmund carefully lies to his father and lets on that Edgar is plotting against him to more quickly inherit his land and money. Edmund goes on to tell Edgar that Gloucester is angry with him and to avoid him and carry a sword at all times. For the first part of his retirement, Lear visits Goneril and her husband in their castle. Goneril is angry and complains to her steward Oswald that Lear is being obnoxious and his men are too rowdy. She then orders her servants to behave rudely in turn to provoke confrontation. Arriving at Goneril’s castle disguised as a peasant named Caius, Kent finds a means to intercept Lear and convince the King to take him into his service as a blunt servant. When Goneril’s servants begin ignoring the orders of Lear’s men, Oswald makes a show of being rude to Lear as well. He is rude and eventually provokes Lear to strike him, bringing Kent in to help push the Steward away. For the first time, Lear’s fool arrives and through a series of doublespeak begins to tell Lear of the mistake he has made in giving so much power to his daughters. Goneril finally arrives and tells her father that she wants for him to send his servants and soldiers away as they have been too rude and ill-mannered in her home. Shocked by his daughter’s behavior, Lear has no choice but to accept his daughter’s decision that half of his men must leave. He angrily curses his daughter for the treachery, wishing he had never given her the power. In tears, he calls for his horses and decides to leave for Regan’s castle instead, believing her to be a better daughter still. After Lear leaves, Goneril’s husband Albany is upset about how she treated her father. She describes how she wrote a letter to Regan and her sister will not house Lear’s knights either. Lear sends Kent to Gloucester with a message about his situation. The Fool continues to assail Lear for his poor decisions and describes how horrible Regan will likely be to Lear as well. Lear feels himself beginning to mad and readies himself to leave for Regan’s home. Back in Gloucester’s castle, a courier announces to Edmund that Regan and Cornwall will arrive in the evening to visit and that Cornwall and Albany have been feuding. Because he hopes to use Cornwall against Edgar, Edmund grows excited by the visit. Because things are looking promising, Edmund convinces Edgar to slip away that night, to protect himself. He then draws him into a fake battle and wounds himself to discredit his brother and make his father sympathetic to his cause. Because of the attack and Edmund’s machinations, Gloucester is convinced that Edgar has done something horrible and vows to make Edmund his heir instead. Regan and Cornwall finally arrive and quickly and easily fall for Edmund’s lies and turn against Edgar. Cornwall joins forces with Edmund. Regan then attempts to flatter Gloucester by asking for his advice about the letters her father and sister sent to her. Kent and Oswald arrive outside of Gloucester’s castle to present letters to Regan. Oswald is confused at first as Kent condemns him for his lack of honor and when Oswald states that he does not know him, Kent attacks him with his sword. Oswald calls for help and when Cornwall arrives, Kent describes how horrible Oswald has been, stating that he lacks any virtues. Cornwall takes up Oswald’s side and tries to have Kent placed in the stocks. Gloucester stops this from happening however, stating that putting a servant of the king into stocks would be a grave injustice. However, Regan states that the acts against Goneril’s servant are a worse injustice. Everyone leaves except Gloucester and Kent who then reads a letter from Cordelia stating she will soon send help for her father’s cause. Edgar is alone in the woods and speaks a soliloquy about his running from the law. He hides inside of a tree and decides he must disguise himself to remain safe from the authorities. He decides he will disguise himself as a beggar covered in dirt, and buried in a blanket. His name as a beggar will be Poor Tom. When Lear arrives at Gloucester’s castle, he is greeted by Kent in the stocks. He demands to know who put his messenger in the stocks and can’t believe that his other daughter would do such a thing. Regan however, refuses to speak to him, stating that they are fatigued. Gloucester goes about finding Regan and Cornwall to have Kent released, and the Fool arrives again to comment on the proceedings. Regan finally arrives to greet her father, pretending to be affectionate as he tells of the horrible deeds Goneril committed. Regan tells Lear he must calm himself and seek Goneril’s forgiveness, making him even angrier. Cornwall then admits to Lear that it was he who ordered Kent to be put in the stocks. Regan angers her father further when she refuses to house his retinue of knights and along with Goneril, she conspires to refuse him harbor for any of his men. In his anger, Lear once again calls for his horse and states he would rather live outside or in France than with his daughters. Regan and Goneril tell Gloucester to let Lear leave and in the process allow him to venture forth into a wild storm at night. Kent speaks with a random gentleman about how Lear and his Fool disappeared into the storm, and that Albany and Cornwall are pretending to be nice. Kent discusses how the King of France has heard of what’s happening and will soon send an invasion force to assist Lear and his ailing kingdom. He sends the gentleman to Dover to announce how horribly Lear has been treated and to deliver a ring to Cordelia to disclose the identity of the letter’s author as Kent. He then leaves to find Lear. On the heath the storm rages on with Lear’s mood equally matching its intensity. He angrily rails against his daughters’ horrible treatment. The Fool tries to reason with Lear to go inside and enjoy the safety and warmth of a dry house in shame rather than the pain of his rejection. When Kent arrives he leads the three to a hovel where they can wait out the storm. He then returns to Gloucester’s castle to request space for Lear out of the weather. Back in Gloucester’s castle, Gloucester and Edmund discuss how Regan and Cornwall seized his home when he asked them to leave. He is a prisoner of sorts now and is forbidden to speak to the King. He divulges the plans to avenge Lear’s daughter’s acts, unknowingly telling someone who is secretly plotting against him. When Gloucester leaves, Edmund reveals his plans to tell Cornwall of the plans to gain more favor. As Kent tries to get Lear to go inside the Hovel, Lear resists, stating he is too anguished mentally to care and that he can barely feel the wrath of the storm. He sends the Fool inside and prays in the storm. He decides that while he was King he didn’t take the necessary time to care for the homeless and poor. The Fool flees the hovel though, running from a spirit within. The spirit in question is Edgar dressed as the beggar Tom. He pretends to be mad, stating he is chased by a devil and that a fiend possesses his body. Lear is already losing his mind and isn’t fazed by Tom’s statements. He empathizes with Edgar and decides that his daughters will destroy him. Lear questions Edgar on his life before being a beggar to which Edgar replies that he was once wealthy and a courtier who had relations with many women and drank much wine. Lear tears the clothes from his body in sympathy of Edgar’s plight. Gloucester finally arrives with a torch, looking for the king. He is upset that Lear is with such men and tries to bring him back to his castle, regardless of Regan and Goneril’s decree. Kent and Gloucester finally get Lear to return, but they must allow Tom to come with him. Cornwall vows that he will get revenge against Gloucester for helping Lear. Edmund has given Cornwall the letter from Gloucester supporting the French invasion and pretends to be distraught by his father’s acts. He is secretly overjoyed for the situation and is given the title of Earl of Gloucester by Cornwall and sent to find Gloucester. Edmund decides that he must find and catch Gloucester in the act of helping Lear to convince Cornwall of his treachery. Leaving Lear and his friends in a farmhouse outside his castle, Gloucester searches for food. The Fool and Edgar along with Lear present a mock trial of his daughters after which Gloucester reenters and announces that he has uncovered a plot to kill Lear. They prepare to leave for Dover where friends await. Back in Gloucester’s castle, Cornwall sends Goneril to Albany with a letter telling him of the invasion force from France. He also orders Gloucester to be brought back to him. Edmund is to leave with Goneril to not be present when Gloucester is punished. Before he leaves though, Oswald arrives and describes that Gloucester has told Lear of the plot and helped him escape to Dover. Gloucester soon enters the scene and is bound down, where Regan begins to call him a traitor and physically harass him. Eventually their torture advances to gouging out Gloucester’s eye. A servant attempts to step in and is slain by Regan for helping and Cornwall proceeds to gouge out Gloucester’s other eye. Gloucester calls for Edmunds help and Regan discovers that Edmund betrayed his father. Gloucester learns that Edgar was not the evilest of his sons. Regan throws him out of the castle, blinded, to find his way to Dover alone and helps Cornwall out of the room. Everyone leaves for Dover. While talking to himself on the heath, commenting on how bad his situation could be, Gloucester arrives, blinded and wandering. An old man that Edgar recognizes as an 80 year long tenant of their household leads him while Gloucester tells him that he wants nothing more than to touch his son once more. Edgar doesn’t give up his disguise but speaks to the men as Tom, the beggar. Gloucester has clothes brought him and requests to be led to the highest cliff. Back in Goneril’s home palace, she and Edmund arrive to find that Albany is displeased by her actions and hasn’t greeted her. He is glad for the arrival of the French and not happy to see her. She turns on him immediately, declaring him a coward and taking control over his military might. She then sends Edmund back to Cornwall’s home and tells him to raise Cornwall’s troops to fight the French. She announces that she will send Oswald out with numerous messages and before Edmund leaves, gives him a kiss farewell, hinting at a potential affair between the two. Albany finally enters the scene when Edmund departs and assails Goneril for her actions. He does not even know about Gloucester’s treatment yet, but is angered greatly by Lear’s madness and treatment by his daughters. She argues back that he is a coward and that he she prepare for the French. He condemns her for her evil and calls her a monster. Shortly after, a messenger arrives announcing that Cornwall has died from wounds received while torturing Gloucester. At the report of Gloucester’s treatment Albany is outraged and sees Albany’s death as a divine commentary on his actions. Goneril is happy that the death has weakened her sister’s position, but upset that Regan might pursue Edmund on her own now that she is a widow. She leaves the room to respond to the messages from her sister. Albany immediately questions why Edmund allowed such a thing to happen and when he learns that Edmund was Gloucester’s betrayer and took over the house by decree of Cornwall, he vows revenge upon Edmund and assistance for Gloucester. Kent, in disguise still, speaks with a nobleman in the French camp at Dover. He learns that the French recently landed but that the King returned quickly to deal with his own problems at home. As the Queen of France, Cordelia receives Kent’s letters and has taken control of the army herself. The nobleman comments on Cordelia’s sorrow over what had happened to her father. Kent informs him that Lear has also arrived in Dover, though he is floating on the border of madness and sanity. He refuses to see Cordelia in his shame though, and sits alone, wallowing in grief. The nobleman confirms for Kent that both Albany and Cornwall’s armies are marching to Dover to fight the French. With Lear hiding among the cornfields among flowers and singing madly, Cordelia enters and sends soldiers to retrieve him for her. Talking to a doctor, she wonders if it is possible for him to recover his sanity and safely resume normal living. The doctor responds that he needs sleep more than anything and gives her sleeping pills. A messenger arrives with the same news that Kent received about Cornwall and Albany’s troops approaching Dover to fight the French. She readies her troops for the ensuing battle. Oswald arrives to inform Regan that Albany’s army has finally set forth with Goneril having taken control. Along with a letter to her, there is a letter from Goneril to Edmund that causes Regan to become rather upset. She guesses that the two are having an affair and tells Oswald that she desires Edmund as well. She has already discussed the matter with Edmund and how much he should be with her instead as a widow, in a situation that makes more sense. It is not a crime nor adultery in that case. She then gives Oswald something to deliver to Edmund and offers a reward for Oswald if he can find and kill Gloucester. While in disguise, Edgar leads Gloucester forward to Dover. Despite his request, Edgar only pretends to take Gloucester off a cliff, convincing him that they are climbing and they are near the sea. When he informs Gloucester that they have reached the pinnacle of the cliff and that he has vertigo from the height, he allows the blinded Earl to stand at the spot, saying his goodbyes and prayers before walking off what he thinks is a cliff, fainting in the process. When Edgar wakes Gloucester, he takes on the demeanor of a gentleman and throws off his disguise as the beggar. He doesn’t admit that he is Edgar but says he saw Gloucester fall and that his survival is a miracle. The Gods must not want him dead for some reason. He tells Gloucester that a devil of sorts was with Gloucester at the top of the cliff not a man, prompting Gloucester to accept the story and accept Edgar’s explanations. Still wandering on his own, Lear stumbles across the two and with a crown of wild flowers on he babbles on madly. He is at times incredibly mad and at other strangely perceptive. He does recognize Gloucester though and mentions the adultery that has plagued him all his life. He pardons the crime though and begins to babble onward about adultery, womankind, and sexuality, eventually breaking down completely and abandoning the constant iambic verse of Shakespeare’s play with “Fie, fie, fie ! pah! Pah!” Cordelia’s men find him in this state and when they try to take him in, the runs away with them in pursuit. Soon Oswald arrives as well intent on killing Gloucester and collecting the reward Regan has offered. Edgar disguises himself once again with the Western accent of a peasant and kills Oswald with his cudgel, taking the letters Oswald is carrying. Though Gloucester is unhappy to still be alive, Edgar is intrigued by Oswald’s letters, including the letter to Edmund from Goneril urging him to dispatch of Albany so they can be together. He holds the letter so as to offer it to Albany later and buries Oswald before leading Gloucester to safety. Back in Dover, Cordelia is in conversation with Kent, having discerned his true identity. She agrees to keep it secret, and soon Lear is brought before her. He barely recognizes her in his madness and babbles on about how she likely wants to kill him as her sisters do. Cordelia however is happy to see her father and offers forgiveness for his earlier banishment. The camp learns of Cornwall’s death and that Edmund is now at the head of his forces. The battle between the French and English is soon to begin. Between Regan and Edmund, the question of his love for Goneril arises. Edmund denies any feelings for her and that he has slept with her while Regan expresses her jealousy for Goneril and begs Edmund to not take up with her in any way. Goneril and Albany soon arrive with their troops. Albany states his case that Lear is with the French and may have a legitimate right to be angry and fight them. He does not reject his role in fighting the French though and announces he will remain by his wife and sister-in-law in the ensuing battle. Regan and Goneril display their jealousy over Edmund once more before they leave. Albany is greeted by Edgar slightly before he leaves and receives the letter from Oswald detailing his wife’s plans to have Edmund kill him. He tells Albany that he will provide a champion to defend the claims of the letter if he and the English win the battle that is about to begin. Edgar then leaves with Edmund soon entering and telling Albany to go to the field where the battle is nearly underway. Edmund delivers a soliloquy in which he describes his dual claims of love for both Goneril and Regan, relating his inability to decide what to do. He decides to wait until the battle is won to make his decision and that he will leave Albany for Goneril to kill if she likes. He reiterates his plan to show no mercy for Lear or Cordelia if they should be captured. After the battle begins, Edgar leads Gloucester to the woods and leaves him their in safety. He goes to fight beside Lear and very soon after returns announcing that the French and Lear have lost, with Lear and Cordelia captured. Gloucester tries to stay where he is, but is convinced by Edgar to go with him, willing his father to not so readily accept death. With Edmund leading the way, Lear and Cordelia enter, preparing to meet Goneril and Regan. Cordelia is ready but Lear does not want to meet his daughters, instead expressing a fantasy in which he and Cordelia are birds in a cage, listening to the world but not being bothered by its frivolities. He sends both off with the captain of his guards and a note with unspoken instructions as to their fates. The note isn’t made clear to the audience, but the ominous tone it is written in is. With Goneril and Regan beside him, Albany arrives and gives praise to Edmund for his skill in the battle. He orders him to bring Lear and Cordelia forward, to which Edmund lies and says both were sent far away to keep the British from a mutiny. Albany angrily chides him for taking too many liberties but Regan jumps to defend Edmund declaring that he will marry her. Goneril declares that this will not happen, but Regan, who is suddenly ill, claims him as her own. Albany however, ignores the proceedings and arrests Edmund for treason and gives him the opportunity to defend himself in trial by combat. He sounds the trumpet to summon Edgar, who arrives in his full armor and bring charges against Edmund for treason. He quickly defeats Edmund, with Regan having gone to Albany’s tent with her illness. Albany request that Edgar leave Edmund alive and produces the letter for Goneril to show he has learned of her plot to have him killed. Edgar finally reveals who he is by taking off his helmet and tells everyone how he disguised himself as Tom and led Gloucester through the wilderness. As he prepared to fight Edmund, he revealed his identity to his father as well, but the revelation of such grief and happiness in Gloucester brought about his death. A gentleman soon enters with a knife and declares that both Goneril and Regan are dead. Goneril poisoned Regan and committed suicide in one fell swoop. After entering the scene, Kent requests the location of Lear and Albany remembers that he never learned from Edmund their whereabouts. Edmund finally reveals his crimes and decides in his final moments to repent. He had ordered Cordelia to be hanged and so they send a messenger to intervene before the deed is done. However, as Lear enters, it is learned that the messenger was too late. He carries Cordelia’s body in his arms and in a grieving state of insanity he weeps over her body. He barely recognizes Kent and soon Edmund’s death is announced as well. Lear thinks he sees a bit of breath in Cordelia and asks for her button to be loosened. When he sees what he thinks is a mote of life, he dies. Albany returns Edgar and Kent’s powers and titles and invites them to assist in ruling the nation. Kent is old and near death so he refuses, but Edgar apparently takes up the offer and the very few survivors exit with the funeral march playing in the background.	<urn:uuid:3cb7dfa8-7c48-4bf9-839c-0f644716619f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.wikisummaries.org/w/index.php?title=King_Lear&diff=prev&oldid=7071	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593994.14/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118221909-20200119005909-00362.warc.gz	en	0.982526	6,745	3.359375	3	[ -0.05117413029074669, 0.005331297405064106, 0.5241861343383789, 0.3785041570663452, -0.22536736726760864, -0.10533928126096725, 0.12812106311321259, 0.1211017370223999, -0.10977793484926224, -0.2707517445087433, 0.06067594513297081, -0.3088086247444153, 0.15665441751480103, 0.0394652858376...	1	Difference between revisions of "King Lear" \|Line 1:\|\|Line 1:\| '''''King Lear'' Plot Summary''' '''''King Lear'' Plot Summary''' Revision as of 20:12, 23 July 2007 King Lear Plot Summary The beginning of Shakespeare’s classic tragedy shows King Lear, the rapidly aging monarch of Britain, making the decision to step down from his throne. He has decided to evenly distribute his land between his three daughters, Goneril, Regan, and Cordelia. Before he does so though, he decides to test them all by asking how much they love him. Both Goneril and Regan offer the flattering answers of unconditional love that he seeks. Cordelia however, remains silent and claims there are no words to describe her love. Lear becomes incredibly angry and disowns her, forcing her to move to France to marry the King there. Despite her being disowned, the planned wedding between the two goes forward with the King of France still interested in her, despite the lack of Lear’s blessing. Soon enough though, it becomes apparent that Lear’s decision to disown his youngest daughter was poor. Goneril and Regan both quickly go about removing Lear of any remaining power and divvying up the land between them and their husbands. While his daughters slowly betray him, Lear begins to go mad, even running into the midst of a thunderstorm at one point with his Fool and Kent, a disguised nobleman. Another nobleman and confidante to Lear has his own problems in Gloucester. The father of two sons, Edmund and Edgar, he is soon betrayed by the illegitimate of the two. The illegitimate son, Edmund manages to convince him that Edgar is trying to kill him, sending Edgar into hiding as a beggar named “Poor Tom”. He also heads to the heath where Lear had gone during the thunderstorm. Gloucester makes the decision to assist Lear after he learns of Regan and Goneril’s treachery. However, it is not long before Regan and her husband Cornwall discover his assistance to Lear and take their retribution. Accusing him of treason, they blind him and set him to wander the countryside. Edgar, disguised as Tom guides him to Dover where Lear is currently staying. It is in Dover that Cordelia finally returns to the scene, leading an army of French forces to invade and save her father. Edmund, after betraying his father Gloucester has taken to a romantic involvement with both Gonerial and Regan. Because of his growing sympathy for Lear’s plight, Albany becomes the target of a plot by his wife Goneril and Edmund to be killed. Gloucester attempts at one point in his despair to commit suicide. Edgar though, keeping careful vigil over his father, tricks him into walking over an imaginary cliff and saves his life. Back in Dover, the English troops arrive and take on the French forces led by Cordelia. They defeat the French and capture both Lear and Cordelia. The final scene of the play is full of deaths, betrayals and fights. Edgar and Edmund finally duel, with Edgar defeating and killing Edmund. He then reveals that Gloucester died upon realizing it was Edgar who had saved him and that he was going to fight Edmund. Goneril poisons Regan in her jealousy of her relationship with Edmund, then kills herself after her plot to kill Albany is revealed. Because Edmund betrayed Cordelia, she dies unnecessarily in the prison, and finally Lear dies in grief over Cordelia’s death. The only survivors of the blood letting are Albany, Edgar, and Kent. - 1 King Lear Characters - 2 King Lear act and scene summaries - 2.1 Act 1 - 2.2 Act II - 2.3 Act III - 2.4 Act IV - 2.5 Act V King Lear Characters As the elderly king of England and the title character of the play, Lear’s main fault is his pride and controlling nature as displayed in the first scene of the play. He does not accept contradiction or challenges and when Cordelia does not immediately speak her love for him, he disowns her, a mistake he will later regret unto his death. For him it is the appearance of love rather than literal devotion that he values most. Driven mad by the horrible acts of his family later in the play, he eventually realizes the errors of his ways and the true love Cordelia had for him. As the only one of Lear’s daughters (and the youngest) to refuse the flattering attention he demands, Cordelia is quickly disowned. She leaves the country, marrying the King of France even after the disowning. Regardless of her father’s anger and cruelty, she remains loyal and returns to England with an army of French to fight her sisters and their power grabbing. She is reticent to speak and quiet in her actions, and eventually dies for her convictions after being imprisoned by her sisters. As Lear’s oldest daughter, Goneril is frequently jealous, prone to treachery, and completely lacking in morals. Married to the Duke of Albany, her strong and aggressive character was atypical in the time in which Shakespeare penned the play. She not only removes her father from power, she has a torrid affair, and removes military power from her husband before eventually taking her own life in the final scene. As the middle of Lear’s three daughters, Regan is just as treacherous and ruthless as Goneril and shows it many of the same ways. She is considerably similar to her sister in almost every way. They never work together in their treachery, but prompt further cruelty from each other until they both fight for the adulterous attentions of the same man and lose their lives in their jealousy. Gloucester is an Earl loyal to Lear who at one pointed had an affair and fathered a bastard son, Edmund. His story in the play is very similar to that of Lear’s, following the same cycle of close mindedness and betrayal with his children. He trusts the wrong child and drives away Edgar, his loyal true son and pays for it with his sight and eventually his health. After helping Lear, he is blinded and stripped of his title by Lear’s daughters. Eventually he dies in grief over the fate of his two sons. Edgar is the older and legitimate of Gloucester’s two sons. At first he is easily tricked by his brother, after which he takes on the guise of a beggar to hide from the men hunting him on behalf of his father. He uses this persona to aid his father and Lear, and eventually returning triumphantly to defeat his brother. Edmund is Gloucester’s illegitimate younger son who is unhappy as a bastard son and soon plots to take both Gloucester and Edgar’s titles and worldly possessions. He is incredibly sly and almost manages to succeed in every aspect of his plans. Everyone he encounters and speaks to is hurt. Another of Lear’s loyal Earls, Kent spends much of the play in disguise, assisting Lear after he is banished by the King, still loyal. He is very loyal but also too outspoken, a trait that causes his banishment and creates problems in various other situations. Goneril’s husband and a Duke, Albany is naturally good at heart and eventually turns against his wife and Regan, unhappy with their actions. He is unfortunately too indecisive though and is not nearly so cunning or intelligent as his wife. He takes much too long to realize what horrors his wife is wreaking. Regan’s husband and another Duke of Lear’s. He is very much like his wife, working with her and sister-in-law to destroy the rule of Lear and take control of the nation, wreaking violence and persecution on both Lear and Gloucester. He stays with Lear throughout the play and offers seemingly empty songs as advice for the maddening King. King Lear act and scene summaries The beginning of the play opens with Gloucester and Kent, two nobles loyal to King Lear, in the throne room discussing how he plans to divide his kingdom among his three daughters. They change the topic though as Kent asks to be introduced to Gloucester’s son Edmund. Gloucester tells Kent that Edmund is a bastard son raised away from his home, but that he loves him all the same. Lear then enters the throne room and continues describing how he plans to divide the kingdom. He wants to retire from the throne and enjoy his old age, visiting his children, free of the burden of the government. In deciding how, he declares that each of his daughters must announce how much they love their father. The daughter to display the most love will receive the largest share. Goneril and Regan, the oldest and most conniving of Lear’s daughters flatter him immensely, describing their love in flowering, over the top forms. When he comes to his third and youngest daughter (also his favorite) though, he is greeted with silence. She doesn’t say anything except that she loves him as much as a daughter should love a father. She describes how neither of her sisters could possibly be married if they loved Lear so much as they said. Lear is unhappy with the response though and disowns her in a rage, giving her share to Regan and Goneril. Kent is the only man willing to speak up and tell Lear the error of his decision, disagreeing with what he’s done. He calls the king insane and states that Cordelia clearly loves him more. Lear then banishes Kent as well, giving him six days to leave the kingdom. Awaiting a decision as to who will marry Cordelia are the King of France and Duke of Burgandy. When Lear tells them of his disowning of Cordelia, Burgandy immediately withdraws his offer and leaves. The King of France however is impressed and still wishes to marry her. Lear does not give his blessing. At the end of the scene, Goneril and Regan speak in private, planning how to best utilize their complete power of the kingdom. They decide to limit their father’s power and take full control. Edmund returns to the stage again alone, delivering a soliloquy about how bastards are treated and his unhappiness with society. He angrily denounces his legitimate half-brother Edgar and decides he will do in his brother and take the lands and privilege that he feels he’s been denied. He begins by forging a letter that depicts Edgar as plotting to kill his father, Gloucester. Edmund pretends to hide it from Gloucester who then demands to read it. Edmund carefully lies to his father and lets on that Edgar is plotting against him to more quickly inherit his land and money. Edmund goes on to tell Edgar that Gloucester is angry with him and to avoid him and carry a sword at all times. For the first part of his retirement, Lear visits Goneril and her husband in their castle. Goneril is angry and complains to her steward Oswald that Lear is being obnoxious and his men are too rowdy. She then orders her servants to behave rudely in turn to provoke confrontation. Arriving at Goneril’s castle disguised as a peasant named Caius, Kent finds a means to intercept Lear and convince the King to take him into his service as a blunt servant. When Goneril’s servants begin ignoring the orders of Lear’s men, Oswald makes a show of being rude to Lear as well. He is rude and eventually provokes Lear to strike him, bringing Kent in to help push the Steward away. For the first time, Lear’s fool arrives and through a series of doublespeak begins to tell Lear of the mistake he has made in giving so much power to his daughters. Goneril finally arrives and tells her father that she wants for him to send his servants and soldiers away as they have been too rude and ill-mannered in her home. Shocked by his daughter’s behavior, Lear has no choice but to accept his daughter’s decision that half of his men must leave. He angrily curses his daughter for the treachery, wishing he had never given her the power. In tears, he calls for his horses and decides to leave for Regan’s castle instead, believing her to be a better daughter still. After Lear leaves, Goneril’s husband Albany is upset about how she treated her father. She describes how she wrote a letter to Regan and her sister will not house Lear’s knights either. Lear sends Kent to Gloucester with a message about his situation. The Fool continues to assail Lear for his poor decisions and describes how horrible Regan will likely be to Lear as well. Lear feels himself beginning to mad and readies himself to leave for Regan’s home. Back in Gloucester’s castle, a courier announces to Edmund that Regan and Cornwall will arrive in the evening to visit and that Cornwall and Albany have been feuding. Because he hopes to use Cornwall against Edgar, Edmund grows excited by the visit. Because things are looking promising, Edmund convinces Edgar to slip away that night, to protect himself. He then draws him into a fake battle and wounds himself to discredit his brother and make his father sympathetic to his cause. Because of the attack and Edmund’s machinations, Gloucester is convinced that Edgar has done something horrible and vows to make Edmund his heir instead. Regan and Cornwall finally arrive and quickly and easily fall for Edmund’s lies and turn against Edgar. Cornwall joins forces with Edmund. Regan then attempts to flatter Gloucester by asking for his advice about the letters her father and sister sent to her. Kent and Oswald arrive outside of Gloucester’s castle to present letters to Regan. Oswald is confused at first as Kent condemns him for his lack of honor and when Oswald states that he does not know him, Kent attacks him with his sword. Oswald calls for help and when Cornwall arrives, Kent describes how horrible Oswald has been, stating that he lacks any virtues. Cornwall takes up Oswald’s side and tries to have Kent placed in the stocks. Gloucester stops this from happening however, stating that putting a servant of the king into stocks would be a grave injustice. However, Regan states that the acts against Goneril’s servant are a worse injustice. Everyone leaves except Gloucester and Kent who then reads a letter from Cordelia stating she will soon send help for her father’s cause. Edgar is alone in the woods and speaks a soliloquy about his running from the law. He hides inside of a tree and decides he must disguise himself to remain safe from the authorities. He decides he will disguise himself as a beggar covered in dirt, and buried in a blanket. His name as a beggar will be Poor Tom. When Lear arrives at Gloucester’s castle, he is greeted by Kent in the stocks. He demands to know who put his messenger in the stocks and can’t believe that his other daughter would do such a thing. Regan however, refuses to speak to him, stating that they are fatigued. Gloucester goes about finding Regan and Cornwall to have Kent released, and the Fool arrives again to comment on the proceedings. Regan finally arrives to greet her father, pretending to be affectionate as he tells of the horrible deeds Goneril committed. Regan tells Lear he must calm himself and seek Goneril’s forgiveness, making him even angrier. Cornwall then admits to Lear that it was he who ordered Kent to be put in the stocks. Regan angers her father further when she refuses to house his retinue of knights and along with Goneril, she conspires to refuse him harbor for any of his men. In his anger, Lear once again calls for his horse and states he would rather live outside or in France than with his daughters. Regan and Goneril tell Gloucester to let Lear leave and in the process allow him to venture forth into a wild storm at night. Kent speaks with a random gentleman about how Lear and his Fool disappeared into the storm, and that Albany and Cornwall are pretending to be nice. Kent discusses how the King of France has heard of what’s happening and will soon send an invasion force to assist Lear and his ailing kingdom. He sends the gentleman to Dover to announce how horribly Lear has been treated and to deliver a ring to Cordelia to disclose the identity of the letter’s author as Kent. He then leaves to find Lear. On the heath the storm rages on with Lear’s mood equally matching its intensity. He angrily rails against his daughters’ horrible treatment. The Fool tries to reason with Lear to go inside and enjoy the safety and warmth of a dry house in shame rather than the pain of his rejection. When Kent arrives he leads the three to a hovel where they can wait out the storm. He then returns to Gloucester’s castle to request space for Lear out of the weather. Back in Gloucester’s castle, Gloucester and Edmund discuss how Regan and Cornwall seized his home when he asked them to leave. He is a prisoner of sorts now and is forbidden to speak to the King. He divulges the plans to avenge Lear’s daughter’s acts, unknowingly telling someone who is secretly plotting against him. When Gloucester leaves, Edmund reveals his plans to tell Cornwall of the plans to gain more favor. As Kent tries to get Lear to go inside the Hovel, Lear resists, stating he is too anguished mentally to care and that he can barely feel the wrath of the storm. He sends the Fool inside and prays in the storm. He decides that while he was King he didn’t take the necessary time to care for the homeless and poor. The Fool flees the hovel though, running from a spirit within. The spirit in question is Edgar dressed as the beggar Tom. He pretends to be mad, stating he is chased by a devil and that a fiend possesses his body. Lear is already losing his mind and isn’t fazed by Tom’s statements. He empathizes with Edgar and decides that his daughters will destroy him. Lear questions Edgar on his life before being a beggar to which Edgar replies that he was once wealthy and a courtier who had relations with many women and drank much wine. Lear tears the clothes from his body in sympathy of Edgar’s plight. Gloucester finally arrives with a torch, looking for the king. He is upset that Lear is with such men and tries to bring him back to his castle, regardless of Regan and Goneril’s decree. Kent and Gloucester finally get Lear to return, but they must allow Tom to come with him. Cornwall vows that he will get revenge against Gloucester for helping Lear. Edmund has given Cornwall the letter from Gloucester supporting the French invasion and pretends to be distraught by his father’s acts. He is secretly overjoyed for the situation and is given the title of Earl of Gloucester by Cornwall and sent to find Gloucester. Edmund decides that he must find and catch Gloucester in the act of helping Lear to convince Cornwall of his treachery. Leaving Lear and his friends in a farmhouse outside his castle, Gloucester searches for food. The Fool and Edgar along with Lear present a mock trial of his daughters after which Gloucester reenters and announces that he has uncovered a plot to kill Lear. They prepare to leave for Dover where friends await. Back in Gloucester’s castle, Cornwall sends Goneril to Albany with a letter telling him of the invasion force from France. He also orders Gloucester to be brought back to him. Edmund is to leave with Goneril to not be present when Gloucester is punished. Before he leaves though, Oswald arrives and describes that Gloucester has told Lear of the plot and helped him escape to Dover. Gloucester soon enters the scene and is bound down, where Regan begins to call him a traitor and physically harass him. Eventually their torture advances to gouging out Gloucester’s eye. A servant attempts to step in and is slain by Regan for helping and Cornwall proceeds to gouge out Gloucester’s other eye. Gloucester calls for Edmunds help and Regan discovers that Edmund betrayed his father. Gloucester learns that Edgar was not the evilest of his sons. Regan throws him out of the castle, blinded, to find his way to Dover alone and helps Cornwall out of the room. Everyone leaves for Dover. While talking to himself on the heath, commenting on how bad his situation could be, Gloucester arrives, blinded and wandering. An old man that Edgar recognizes as an 80 year long tenant of their household leads him while Gloucester tells him that he wants nothing more than to touch his son once more. Edgar doesn’t give up his disguise but speaks to the men as Tom, the beggar. Gloucester has clothes brought him and requests to be led to the highest cliff. Back in Goneril’s home palace, she and Edmund arrive to find that Albany is displeased by her actions and hasn’t greeted her. He is glad for the arrival of the French and not happy to see her. She turns on him immediately, declaring him a coward and taking control over his military might. She then sends Edmund back to Cornwall’s home and tells him to raise Cornwall’s troops to fight the French. She announces that she will send Oswald out with numerous messages and before Edmund leaves, gives him a kiss farewell, hinting at a potential affair between the two. Albany finally enters the scene when Edmund departs and assails Goneril for her actions. He does not even know about Gloucester’s treatment yet, but is angered greatly by Lear’s madness and treatment by his daughters. She argues back that he is a coward and that he she prepare for the French. He condemns her for her evil and calls her a monster. Shortly after, a messenger arrives announcing that Cornwall has died from wounds received while torturing Gloucester. At the report of Gloucester’s treatment Albany is outraged and sees Albany’s death as a divine commentary on his actions. Goneril is happy that the death has weakened her sister’s position, but upset that Regan might pursue Edmund on her own now that she is a widow. She leaves the room to respond to the messages from her sister. Albany immediately questions why Edmund allowed such a thing to happen and when he learns that Edmund was Gloucester’s betrayer and took over the house by decree of Cornwall, he vows revenge upon Edmund and assistance for Gloucester. Kent, in disguise still, speaks with a nobleman in the French camp at Dover. He learns that the French recently landed but that the King returned quickly to deal with his own problems at home. As the Queen of France, Cordelia receives Kent’s letters and has taken control of the army herself. The nobleman comments on Cordelia’s sorrow over what had happened to her father. Kent informs him that Lear has also arrived in Dover, though he is floating on the border of madness and sanity. He refuses to see Cordelia in his shame though, and sits alone, wallowing in grief. The nobleman confirms for Kent that both Albany and Cornwall’s armies are marching to Dover to fight the French. With Lear hiding among the cornfields among flowers and singing madly, Cordelia enters and sends soldiers to retrieve him for her. Talking to a doctor, she wonders if it is possible for him to recover his sanity and safely resume normal living. The doctor responds that he needs sleep more than anything and gives her sleeping pills. A messenger arrives with the same news that Kent received about Cornwall and Albany’s troops approaching Dover to fight the French. She readies her troops for the ensuing battle. Oswald arrives to inform Regan that Albany’s army has finally set forth with Goneril having taken control. Along with a letter to her, there is a letter from Goneril to Edmund that causes Regan to become rather upset. She guesses that the two are having an affair and tells Oswald that she desires Edmund as well. She has already discussed the matter with Edmund and how much he should be with her instead as a widow, in a situation that makes more sense. It is not a crime nor adultery in that case. She then gives Oswald something to deliver to Edmund and offers a reward for Oswald if he can find and kill Gloucester. While in disguise, Edgar leads Gloucester forward to Dover. Despite his request, Edgar only pretends to take Gloucester off a cliff, convincing him that they are climbing and they are near the sea. When he informs Gloucester that they have reached the pinnacle of the cliff and that he has vertigo from the height, he allows the blinded Earl to stand at the spot, saying his goodbyes and prayers before walking off what he thinks is a cliff, fainting in the process. When Edgar wakes Gloucester, he takes on the demeanor of a gentleman and throws off his disguise as the beggar. He doesn’t admit that he is Edgar but says he saw Gloucester fall and that his survival is a miracle. The Gods must not want him dead for some reason. He tells Gloucester that a devil of sorts was with Gloucester at the top of the cliff not a man, prompting Gloucester to accept the story and accept Edgar’s explanations. Still wandering on his own, Lear stumbles across the two and with a crown of wild flowers on he babbles on madly. He is at times incredibly mad and at other strangely perceptive. He does recognize Gloucester though and mentions the adultery that has plagued him all his life. He pardons the crime though and begins to babble onward about adultery, womankind, and sexuality, eventually breaking down completely and abandoning the constant iambic verse of Shakespeare’s play with “Fie, fie, fie ! pah! Pah!” Cordelia’s men find him in this state and when they try to take him in, the runs away with them in pursuit. Soon Oswald arrives as well intent on killing Gloucester and collecting the reward Regan has offered. Edgar disguises himself once again with the Western accent of a peasant and kills Oswald with his cudgel, taking the letters Oswald is carrying. Though Gloucester is unhappy to still be alive, Edgar is intrigued by Oswald’s letters, including the letter to Edmund from Goneril urging him to dispatch of Albany so they can be together. He holds the letter so as to offer it to Albany later and buries Oswald before leading Gloucester to safety. Back in Dover, Cordelia is in conversation with Kent, having discerned his true identity. She agrees to keep it secret, and soon Lear is brought before her. He barely recognizes her in his madness and babbles on about how she likely wants to kill him as her sisters do. Cordelia however is happy to see her father and offers forgiveness for his earlier banishment. The camp learns of Cornwall’s death and that Edmund is now at the head of his forces. The battle between the French and English is soon to begin. Between Regan and Edmund, the question of his love for Goneril arises. Edmund denies any feelings for her and that he has slept with her while Regan expresses her jealousy for Goneril and begs Edmund to not take up with her in any way. Goneril and Albany soon arrive with their troops. Albany states his case that Lear is with the French and may have a legitimate right to be angry and fight them. He does not reject his role in fighting the French though and announces he will remain by his wife and sister-in-law in the ensuing battle. Regan and Goneril display their jealousy over Edmund once more before they leave. Albany is greeted by Edgar slightly before he leaves and receives the letter from Oswald detailing his wife’s plans to have Edmund kill him. He tells Albany that he will provide a champion to defend the claims of the letter if he and the English win the battle that is about to begin. Edgar then leaves with Edmund soon entering and telling Albany to go to the field where the battle is nearly underway. Edmund delivers a soliloquy in which he describes his dual claims of love for both Goneril and Regan, relating his inability to decide what to do. He decides to wait until the battle is won to make his decision and that he will leave Albany for Goneril to kill if she likes. He reiterates his plan to show no mercy for Lear or Cordelia if they should be captured. After the battle begins, Edgar leads Gloucester to the woods and leaves him their in safety. He goes to fight beside Lear and very soon after returns announcing that the French and Lear have lost, with Lear and Cordelia captured. Gloucester tries to stay where he is, but is convinced by Edgar to go with him, willing his father to not so readily accept death. With Edmund leading the way, Lear and Cordelia enter, preparing to meet Goneril and Regan. Cordelia is ready but Lear does not want to meet his daughters, instead expressing a fantasy in which he and Cordelia are birds in a cage, listening to the world but not being bothered by its frivolities. He sends both off with the captain of his guards and a note with unspoken instructions as to their fates. The note isn’t made clear to the audience, but the ominous tone it is written in is. With Goneril and Regan beside him, Albany arrives and gives praise to Edmund for his skill in the battle. He orders him to bring Lear and Cordelia forward, to which Edmund lies and says both were sent far away to keep the British from a mutiny. Albany angrily chides him for taking too many liberties but Regan jumps to defend Edmund declaring that he will marry her. Goneril declares that this will not happen, but Regan, who is suddenly ill, claims him as her own. Albany however, ignores the proceedings and arrests Edmund for treason and gives him the opportunity to defend himself in trial by combat. He sounds the trumpet to summon Edgar, who arrives in his full armor and bring charges against Edmund for treason. He quickly defeats Edmund, with Regan having gone to Albany’s tent with her illness. Albany request that Edgar leave Edmund alive and produces the letter for Goneril to show he has learned of her plot to have him killed. Edgar finally reveals who he is by taking off his helmet and tells everyone how he disguised himself as Tom and led Gloucester through the wilderness. As he prepared to fight Edmund, he revealed his identity to his father as well, but the revelation of such grief and happiness in Gloucester brought about his death. A gentleman soon enters with a knife and declares that both Goneril and Regan are dead. Goneril poisoned Regan and committed suicide in one fell swoop. After entering the scene, Kent requests the location of Lear and Albany remembers that he never learned from Edmund their whereabouts. Edmund finally reveals his crimes and decides in his final moments to repent. He had ordered Cordelia to be hanged and so they send a messenger to intervene before the deed is done. However, as Lear enters, it is learned that the messenger was too late. He carries Cordelia’s body in his arms and in a grieving state of insanity he weeps over her body. He barely recognizes Kent and soon Edmund’s death is announced as well. Lear thinks he sees a bit of breath in Cordelia and asks for her button to be loosened. When he sees what he thinks is a mote of life, he dies. Albany returns Edgar and Kent’s powers and titles and invites them to assist in ruling the nation. Kent is old and near death so he refuses, but Edgar apparently takes up the offer and the very few survivors exit with the funeral march playing in the background.	6,505	ENGLISH	1
Who was Margaret Thatcher? Margaret Thatcher was the first female Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. She was nicknamed ‘The Iron Lady’. She was born on October 13, 1925, in Grantham, England and was the leader of the country for more than 10 years. Margaret studied chemistry when she was younger but learnt a lot about politics from her father. Later she became the leader of the Conservative Political Party. Two wars took place while Margaret was Prime Minister, the Falklands War and the Cold War. The United Kingdom won both of them. Some people didn’t like the changes Margaret was making. Millions of people lost their jobs while she was Prime Minister but other good changes to the economy were made. She was known for having very strong opinions. She retired from politics and died at age 87.	<urn:uuid:94f01c2f-65f5-41f8-8e22-96b48dd3f711>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://primaryleap.co.uk/activity/margaret-thatcher	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589861.0/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117152059-20200117180059-00152.warc.gz	en	0.994418	173	3.453125	3	[ -0.4388185143470764, 0.3919122517108917, 0.26955467462539673, -0.1669272631406784, -0.05297919362783432, 0.39046207070350647, 0.2609306871891022, -0.03170875087380409, -0.14357613027095795, 0.0036188282538205385, 0.3207239806652069, -0.5604800581932068, 0.2674066722393036, -0.0163356214761...	2	Who was Margaret Thatcher? Margaret Thatcher was the first female Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. She was nicknamed ‘The Iron Lady’. She was born on October 13, 1925, in Grantham, England and was the leader of the country for more than 10 years. Margaret studied chemistry when she was younger but learnt a lot about politics from her father. Later she became the leader of the Conservative Political Party. Two wars took place while Margaret was Prime Minister, the Falklands War and the Cold War. The United Kingdom won both of them. Some people didn’t like the changes Margaret was making. Millions of people lost their jobs while she was Prime Minister but other good changes to the economy were made. She was known for having very strong opinions. She retired from politics and died at age 87.	173	ENGLISH	1
Use these tips to help you speak about your past in English. Remember to use the past form of the verb “to be” with “born”: I was born You were born He was born We were born They were born I was born … (in 1990) He was born … (twenty five years ago) They were born … (in London / in hospital / at home) For the first ten years of my life, we lived in a small flat. Then we moved to… I started school at the age of 5. In total, I attended school for 12 years. In 2006 I got my first job. Emotions, feelings and states Use the verb “to be” to talk about emotions in the past. “We were poor, but happy.” You can also use “feel” (“felt” in the past tense) but this is less common. “When there was no news from their son they felt worried.” “They were worried when there was no news from their son.” Use “was” or “were” to talk about jobs. “My mother was a nurse.” You can also use “worked as a / an”: “My mother worked as a nurse.” To talk about how many or how much of something, use “there was” or “there were”. “There were three of us at the beginning.” “In my family there were three of us.” “There wasn’t much money when I was a child.” Be careful how you use these: You only start something once. “I started my job in 2010.” “I started my job three years ago.” (Not “I started my job for three years ago.”) You meet someone on a single or repeated occasion. It doesn’t mean “to know” (see below). “I met him at a party.” “I met him in 2001 and then again in 2005.” To know someone or something is a state – not an event. When I was a child, I didn’t know anything about politics. I knew lots of interesting people when I lived in London. (Not “I knew him at a party” – see above). Use simple connectors to tell a story and = adds an idea “I got up early and made breakfast for my family.” but = gives a contrast “She came from a rich family but she was unhappy.” so = gives a result “There was nobody at the party so I went home.” (When you write English, you don’t need a comma before and, but or so if both parts of the sentence are short.) because = gives a reason “We moved in 2008 because my father got a new job.” “Because” can go at the beginning or in the middle of a sentence. “Because my father got a new job in 2008, we moved.” then = explains what happened next “We moved house in 2008, then I changed school.” after = says what happened in a time following an event, or as a result of something else After the party, the house was very untidy. The house was very untidy after the party. After she got married, she lived in France. See Telling a story in English for more connecting words. Speak English Fluently! Hi! I’m Clare, an English teacher and the founder of this site. I can help you speak English more easily! Here are two things for you:	<urn:uuid:02022bea-ee9e-4a2c-96ef-d67cd86df524>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.english-at-home.com/speaking-tips-past/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607596.34/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122221541-20200123010541-00558.warc.gz	en	0.984263	840	3.484375	3	[ -0.12191452085971832, -0.07436069846153259, 0.4743828773498535, -0.3066633343696594, -0.41966012120246887, 0.049499839544296265, 0.7384884357452393, -0.20235882699489594, -0.18543699383735657, -0.5319170355796814, 0.2859412133693695, 0.09368153661489487, 0.1408793032169342, 0.2018904983997...	5	Use these tips to help you speak about your past in English. Remember to use the past form of the verb “to be” with “born”: I was born You were born He was born We were born They were born I was born … (in 1990) He was born … (twenty five years ago) They were born … (in London / in hospital / at home) For the first ten years of my life, we lived in a small flat. Then we moved to… I started school at the age of 5. In total, I attended school for 12 years. In 2006 I got my first job. Emotions, feelings and states Use the verb “to be” to talk about emotions in the past. “We were poor, but happy.” You can also use “feel” (“felt” in the past tense) but this is less common. “When there was no news from their son they felt worried.” “They were worried when there was no news from their son.” Use “was” or “were” to talk about jobs. “My mother was a nurse.” You can also use “worked as a / an”: “My mother worked as a nurse.” To talk about how many or how much of something, use “there was” or “there were”. “There were three of us at the beginning.” “In my family there were three of us.” “There wasn’t much money when I was a child.” Be careful how you use these: You only start something once. “I started my job in 2010.” “I started my job three years ago.” (Not “I started my job for three years ago.”) You meet someone on a single or repeated occasion. It doesn’t mean “to know” (see below). “I met him at a party.” “I met him in 2001 and then again in 2005.” To know someone or something is a state – not an event. When I was a child, I didn’t know anything about politics. I knew lots of interesting people when I lived in London. (Not “I knew him at a party” – see above). Use simple connectors to tell a story and = adds an idea “I got up early and made breakfast for my family.” but = gives a contrast “She came from a rich family but she was unhappy.” so = gives a result “There was nobody at the party so I went home.” (When you write English, you don’t need a comma before and, but or so if both parts of the sentence are short.) because = gives a reason “We moved in 2008 because my father got a new job.” “Because” can go at the beginning or in the middle of a sentence. “Because my father got a new job in 2008, we moved.” then = explains what happened next “We moved house in 2008, then I changed school.” after = says what happened in a time following an event, or as a result of something else After the party, the house was very untidy. The house was very untidy after the party. After she got married, she lived in France. See Telling a story in English for more connecting words. Speak English Fluently! Hi! I’m Clare, an English teacher and the founder of this site. I can help you speak English more easily! Here are two things for you:	715	ENGLISH	1
Reflection And Assessment: The Trading Game In our envelope, we were missing some of the really important resources like scissors, ruler, compass, etc. My group started the task with lots of paper, four pencils and $200. We spent almost ten minutes trying to acquire scissors so we could cut out our different shapes. It was really challenging to find a group that would trade or shares scissors with us. Once we found a way to share scissors with another group, we started cutting out our shapes as fast as we can. We were very efficient on the first half of the game that we were leading, But when it comes to the second half we were falling behind everyone else because we were sharing the scissors, so it was really hard to cut out all our shapes at once, since the other group also need to use the scissors.At the end, we found out that we came last but we tried our very best.and how some country I’m not quite sure what our group supposes to represent, but I think our group was a low economically developed country( LEDC) with some natural resources that are really important. According to all of the group, we have the most pencils. So we did not know that if we trade the pencil with something that we need, we would actually get it because everyone needs the pencil to draw with, in order for them to cut out their shapes. We really did have a lot of pencils, but we didn’t know how important it will be to other group until it was too late, but we still manage to trade with some things. We represented a LEDC country and lacked a lot of the tools that we need in order to turn our natural resources into money. We didn’t have any scissors, ruler or compasses. We went to other NIC or MEDC group to trade what we had for something that we need. None of the group were willing to trade but we were lucky enough that one group decided to share the scissors with us. We started making really good money on that first half of the game. I personally think that this is a true reflection on world trade as the papers represents the natural resources and the tools (scissors,pencils,etc) represents the technology and other different skilful things. All this shows what a country has and how people started off with very different amount of money. It also shows the disparity between two countries in the world and how some countries natural resources don’t have the means to turn their natural resources into making money. The game is also accurate as it takes into to demand of the world trade the prices of the things would change if too many people were making the same products.	<urn:uuid:e9f776c9-d08d-441f-bc57-ee2d1873c762>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://portfolios.uwcsea.edu.sg/tuima75409/2017/11/22/reflection-and-assessment-the-trading-game/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593295.11/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118164132-20200118192132-00158.warc.gz	en	0.986705	554	3.453125	3	[ -0.2981826066970825, -0.020173251628875732, 0.1062423512339592, -0.19560693204402924, 0.1767515391111374, 0.04298516362905502, 0.3646451234817505, 0.4548729956150055, -0.03791926056146622, -0.15381088852882385, 0.14257708191871643, -0.49730128049850464, 0.15668998658657074, 0.2557745873928...	2	Reflection And Assessment: The Trading Game In our envelope, we were missing some of the really important resources like scissors, ruler, compass, etc. My group started the task with lots of paper, four pencils and $200. We spent almost ten minutes trying to acquire scissors so we could cut out our different shapes. It was really challenging to find a group that would trade or shares scissors with us. Once we found a way to share scissors with another group, we started cutting out our shapes as fast as we can. We were very efficient on the first half of the game that we were leading, But when it comes to the second half we were falling behind everyone else because we were sharing the scissors, so it was really hard to cut out all our shapes at once, since the other group also need to use the scissors.At the end, we found out that we came last but we tried our very best.and how some country I’m not quite sure what our group supposes to represent, but I think our group was a low economically developed country( LEDC) with some natural resources that are really important. According to all of the group, we have the most pencils. So we did not know that if we trade the pencil with something that we need, we would actually get it because everyone needs the pencil to draw with, in order for them to cut out their shapes. We really did have a lot of pencils, but we didn’t know how important it will be to other group until it was too late, but we still manage to trade with some things. We represented a LEDC country and lacked a lot of the tools that we need in order to turn our natural resources into money. We didn’t have any scissors, ruler or compasses. We went to other NIC or MEDC group to trade what we had for something that we need. None of the group were willing to trade but we were lucky enough that one group decided to share the scissors with us. We started making really good money on that first half of the game. I personally think that this is a true reflection on world trade as the papers represents the natural resources and the tools (scissors,pencils,etc) represents the technology and other different skilful things. All this shows what a country has and how people started off with very different amount of money. It also shows the disparity between two countries in the world and how some countries natural resources don’t have the means to turn their natural resources into making money. The game is also accurate as it takes into to demand of the world trade the prices of the things would change if too many people were making the same products.	539	ENGLISH	1
Hamelin is a beautiful town on the bank of the river Weser in Germany. About six hundred years ago the people ago in this town lived in constant fear. They were afraid of rats. There were hundred and hundreds of rats in every house. Any grain the people kept in the store was eaten up. Every morning they found their flour , bread and cheese eaten up. Any place appeared to be good enough for the rats to live in comfort ; the people found rats even in their shoes and hats and pockets . When it was time for the children to be put to bed , mothers found rats lying in comfort in beds and cradles. The rats weren't afraid of cats and dogs. In fact, these animals lived in fear of rats and whenever they saw the rats they turned tail. Poor little kittens and puppies were constantly attacked and killed. People tried to catch the rats in traps. But the rats were too clever to be caught in traps. even if one was caught other rats came to it, helped and set in free. i. Rats went into the granary and ate up grains. ii. They lived in comfort. iii. They killed young dogs and young cats also. iv. they helped any rats caught in trap make free. i. Cats and Dogs would turn up their tail when they saw rats. ii . Mother saw rats lying in comfort in beds. iii. Rats live in comfort in beds and cradles.	<urn:uuid:ff235238-d019-4e8c-9a78-f1902d9397f1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.kullabs.com/classes/subjects/units/lessons/notes/note-detail/2370	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778168.77/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128091916-20200128121916-00035.warc.gz	en	0.987269	298	3.5	4	[ 0.03131537884473801, 0.39952945709228516, 0.229842409491539, 0.08683425188064575, 0.15332390367984772, 0.1273868829011917, 0.4555656313896179, 0.12518739700317383, -0.3512814939022064, -0.18230107426643372, -0.10512598603963852, -0.6350669264793396, 0.23353175818920135, 0.1696653962135315,...	1	Hamelin is a beautiful town on the bank of the river Weser in Germany. About six hundred years ago the people ago in this town lived in constant fear. They were afraid of rats. There were hundred and hundreds of rats in every house. Any grain the people kept in the store was eaten up. Every morning they found their flour , bread and cheese eaten up. Any place appeared to be good enough for the rats to live in comfort ; the people found rats even in their shoes and hats and pockets . When it was time for the children to be put to bed , mothers found rats lying in comfort in beds and cradles. The rats weren't afraid of cats and dogs. In fact, these animals lived in fear of rats and whenever they saw the rats they turned tail. Poor little kittens and puppies were constantly attacked and killed. People tried to catch the rats in traps. But the rats were too clever to be caught in traps. even if one was caught other rats came to it, helped and set in free. i. Rats went into the granary and ate up grains. ii. They lived in comfort. iii. They killed young dogs and young cats also. iv. they helped any rats caught in trap make free. i. Cats and Dogs would turn up their tail when they saw rats. ii . Mother saw rats lying in comfort in beds. iii. Rats live in comfort in beds and cradles.	292	ENGLISH	1
U.S. House of Representatives About this object This free frank, in which John Quincy Adams mailed a speech he made in the House to a fellow Massachusetts Whig, illustrates three hallmarks of 19th-century congressional life. On this date, President John Tyler sent a formal message of protest to the U.S. House of Representatives defending his use of executive power. During the 27th Congress (1841–1843), President Tyler repeatedly vetoed bills he opposed including many that addressed the nation’s finances and which had the support of his own Whig Party in Congress. Frustration spread, and many in Congress wondered why Tyler refused to sign their legislation. Some called for impeachment. After a fourth veto in the summer of 1842, Representative John Quincy Adams , a Whig from Massachusetts who had served as President more than a decade earlier, took to the House Floor on August 10 to declare that Tyler’s actions had placed the legislative and executive branch “in a state of civil war.” The next day, the House referred the President’s latest veto message to the newly created Select Committee on the Veto. The 13-member select committee, led by Adams, set out to investigate why the President exercised his veto power so zealously. On August 16, the select committee’s majority submitted its report which found that the President, “by the mere act of his will,” abused his veto power. In effect, the report continued, Tyler had “strangled” Congress, barring it from addressing the needs of the nation. While the Members did not endorse impeachment, they suggested an amendment to restrict the executive’s veto power. On August 30, President Tyler responded with his protest message. He apologized to the country if the vetoes came off as insults. But he also defended himself, noting that such actions were within his power as executive and adding that he had “been accused without evidence and condemned without a hearing.” He recognized the hostility surrounding his presidency but made it clear that if the House had moved forward with impeachment, he would have stood trial rather than resign. Tyler requested that his letter be entered in the House Journal, but the chamber refused. The battle between Congress and Tyler continued throughout his presidency; he vetoed six additional bills. On the last day of the 27th Congress , however, the House successfully overrode a presidential veto for the first time in American history.	<urn:uuid:aae0f00a-2367-43c2-9754-fc0a434bed74>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://history.house.gov/HistoricalHighlight/Detail/25769807410?current_search_qs=%3FPreviousSearch%3DSearch%252cAll%252cFalse%252cFalse%252cFalse%252cFalse%252cFalse%252c%252cmm%252fdd%252fyyyy%252cmm%252fdd%252fyyyy%252cDate%26CurrentPage%3D8%26SortOrder%3DDate%26Command%3DNext	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597230.18/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120023523-20200120051523-00136.warc.gz	en	0.983728	505	4.21875	4	[ -0.27356117963790894, 0.18146544694900513, 0.3220525085926056, 0.13818693161010742, -0.3735736012458801, 0.24391046166419983, 0.4318912625312805, 0.0829000174999237, 0.2122490406036377, 0.20957030355930328, 0.46921491622924805, 0.13564273715019226, -0.1433997005224228, 0.2080402672290802, ...	2	U.S. House of Representatives About this object This free frank, in which John Quincy Adams mailed a speech he made in the House to a fellow Massachusetts Whig, illustrates three hallmarks of 19th-century congressional life. On this date, President John Tyler sent a formal message of protest to the U.S. House of Representatives defending his use of executive power. During the 27th Congress (1841–1843), President Tyler repeatedly vetoed bills he opposed including many that addressed the nation’s finances and which had the support of his own Whig Party in Congress. Frustration spread, and many in Congress wondered why Tyler refused to sign their legislation. Some called for impeachment. After a fourth veto in the summer of 1842, Representative John Quincy Adams , a Whig from Massachusetts who had served as President more than a decade earlier, took to the House Floor on August 10 to declare that Tyler’s actions had placed the legislative and executive branch “in a state of civil war.” The next day, the House referred the President’s latest veto message to the newly created Select Committee on the Veto. The 13-member select committee, led by Adams, set out to investigate why the President exercised his veto power so zealously. On August 16, the select committee’s majority submitted its report which found that the President, “by the mere act of his will,” abused his veto power. In effect, the report continued, Tyler had “strangled” Congress, barring it from addressing the needs of the nation. While the Members did not endorse impeachment, they suggested an amendment to restrict the executive’s veto power. On August 30, President Tyler responded with his protest message. He apologized to the country if the vetoes came off as insults. But he also defended himself, noting that such actions were within his power as executive and adding that he had “been accused without evidence and condemned without a hearing.” He recognized the hostility surrounding his presidency but made it clear that if the House had moved forward with impeachment, he would have stood trial rather than resign. Tyler requested that his letter be entered in the House Journal, but the chamber refused. The battle between Congress and Tyler continued throughout his presidency; he vetoed six additional bills. On the last day of the 27th Congress , however, the House successfully overrode a presidential veto for the first time in American history.	503	ENGLISH	1
The Sons of Liberty. The Boston Tea Party was organized and carried out by a group of Patriots led by Samuel Adams known as the Sons of Liberty. The Sons of Liberty were made up of males from all walks of colonial society, and among its membership were artisans, craftsmen, business owners, tradesmen, apprentices, and common laborers who organized to defend their rights, and to protest and undermine British rule. Famous Boston Patriots who were members of the Sons of Liberty included John Adams, John Hancock, James Otis, Josiah Quincy, Paul Revere, and Dr. Joseph Warren. Incited by the Sons of Liberty, over 5,000 people gathered at the Old South Meeting House, the largest public building in Boston at the time, at 10:00 AM on December 16, 1773, to decide what was to be done about the tea and to plan the Boston Tea Party. Many factors including “taxation without representation,” the 1767 Townshend Revenue Act, and the 1773 Tea Act. In simplest terms, the Boston Tea Party happened as a result of “taxation without representation”, yet the cause is more complex than that. The American colonists believed Britain was unfairly taxing them to pay for expenses incurred during the French and Indian War. Additionally, colonists believed Parliament did not have the right to tax them because the American colonies were not represented in Parliament. Since the beginning of the 18th century, tea had been regularly imported to the American colonies. By the time of the Boston Tea Party, it has been estimated American colonists drank approximately 1.2 million pounds of tea each year. Britain realized it could make even more money off of the lucrative tea trade by imposing taxes onto the American colonies. In effect, the cost of British tea became high, and, in response, American colonists began a very lucrative industry of smuggling tea from the Dutch and other European markets. These smuggling operations violated the Navigation Acts which had been in place since the middle of the 17th century. The smuggling of tea was undercutting the lucrative British tea trade. In response to the smuggling, in 1767 Parliament passed the Indemnity Act, which repealed the tax on tea and made British tea the same price as the Dutch. The Indemnity Act greatly cut down on American tea smuggling, but later in 1767 a new tax on tea was put in place by the Townshend Revenue Act. The act also taxed glass, lead, oil, paint, and paper. Due to boycotts and protests, the Townshend Revenue Act taxes on all commodities except tea were repealed in 1770. In 1773, the Tea Act was passed and granted the British East India Company a monopoly on tea sales in the American colonies. The smuggling of tea grew rampant and was a lucrative business venture for American colonists, such as John Hancock and Samuel Adams. The Townshend Revenue Act tea tax remained in place despite proposals to have it waived. American colonists were outraged over the tea tax. They believed the Tea Act was a tactic to gain colonial support for the tax already enforced. The direct sale of tea by agents of the British East India Company to the American colonies undercut the business of colonial merchants. The smuggled tea became more expensive than the British East India Company tea. Smugglers like John Hancock and Samuel Adams were trying to protect their economic interests by opposing the Tea Act, and Samuel Adams sold the opposition of British tea to the Patriots on the pretext of the abolishment of human rights by being taxed without representation. December 16, 1773. The Boston Tea Party took place on the winter night of Thursday, December 16, 1773. According to eyewitness testimonies, the Boston Tea Party occurred between the hours of 7:00 and 10:00 PM and lasted for approximately three hours. The Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor were moored at Griffin’s Wharf in Boston. It is at this location where the December 16, 1773 destruction of the tea occurred. The original location of the Boston Tea Party no longer exists because of extensive landfills that destroyed the location. This was caused by the city of Boston’s rapid expansion in the 19th century. In 18th century Boston, Griffin’s Wharf was a bustling center for maritime commerce and shipping. The exact location of the original Griffin’s Wharf is open to debate, but the Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum, located on the Congress Street Bridge, is located near the approximate area where the Boston Tea Party took place. A historical marker commemorating the Boston Tea Party stands on the corner of Congress and Purchase streets. It is estimated that hundreds took part in the Boston Tea Party. For fear of punishment, many participants of the Boston Tea Party remained anonymous for many years after the event. To date it is known that 116 people are documented to have participated. Not all of the participants of the Boston Tea Party are known; many carried the secret of their participation to their graves. The participants were made up of males from all walks of colonial society. Many were from Boston or the surrounding area, but some participants are documented to have come from as far away as Worcester in central Massachusetts and Maine. The vast majority was of English descent, but men of Irish, Scottish, French, Portuguese, and African ancestry were documented to have also participated. The participants were off all ages, but the majority of the documented participants was under the age of forty. Sixteen participants were teenagers, and only nine men were above the age of forty. Many of the Boston Tea Party participants fled Boston immediately after the destruction of the tea to avoid arrest. Thousands witnessed the event, and the implication and impact of this action were enormous ultimately leading to the start of the American Revolution. In an effort to hide their true identities, many of the Sons of Liberty attempted to pass themselves off as Mohawk Indians because if caught for their actions they would have faced severe punishment. Reports from the time describe the participants as dressed as Mohawks or Narragansett Indians. The disguise was mostly symbolic in nature; they knew they would be recognized as non-Indians. The act of wearing “Indian dress” was to express to the world that the American colonists identified themselves as “Americans” and no longer considered themselves British subjects. They were not dressed as Indians in the classic sense with headdresses and full authentic regalia; rather they wore wool blankets matchcoat style, painted their faces with soot, and employed other modes of dress commonly known at the time as “Indian dress”, which had been adopted by soldiers during the French and Indian War. An observer of the Boston Tea Party, John Andrews wrote the following in 1773: “They say the actors were Indians… Whether they were or not to a transient observer they appear’d as such, being cloth’d in blankets with the heads muffled and copper color’d countenances, each being arm’d with a hatchet or ax, and pair pistols, nor was their dialect different from what I conceive these geniusses to speak, as their jargon was unintelligible to all but themselves.” Boston Tea Party participant George Hewes recorded the following: “It was now evening, and I immediately dressed myself in the costume of an Indian, equipped with a small hatchet, which I and my associates denominated the tomahawk, with which, and a club, after having painted my face and hands with coal dust in the shop of a blacksmith, I repaired to Griffin’s wharf, where the ships lay that contained the tea. When I first appeared in the street after being thus disguised, I fell in with many who were dressed, equipped and painted as I was, and who fell in with me and marched in order to the place of our destination.” On the night of the Boston Tea Party, three ships that had sailed from London carrying cargoes of British East India Company tea were moored in Boston Harbor. The three ships were the Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor. The Dartmouth arrived in Boston on November 28, 1773, the Eleanor on December 2, and the Beaver on December 15. Each of the three ships carried more than one hundred chests of British East India Company tea. The Sons of Liberty on the night of December 16, 1773, offloaded the tea cargoes of all three ships. There were to be four ships sailing from London carrying cargoes of British East India Company tea to Boston, but the William ran aground off Cape Cod on December 10, 1773 in a violent storm. The cargo of 58 chests of British East India Company tea was salvaged before the William was abandoned. A portion of the salvaged tea cargo ended up in Boston and was later destroyed by the Sons of Liberty. Samuel Adams recorded the following about the fate of the William: “The only remaining vessel which was expected with this detested article, is by the act of righteous heaven cast on shore on the back of Cape Cod, which has often been the sad fate of many a more valuable cargo.” If you would like more information about each of the ships, visit these links to dedicated pages:DartmouthEleanor A popular misconception is the belief the Tea Party Ships were British. In fact, the vessels were built in America and owned by Americans, but the cargo of tea they were carrying from London to Boston was owned by the British East India Company. The Beaver and Dartmouth were built and owned by the Rotch’s, an affluent Nantucket Quaker family. The Eleanor was one of several vessels owned by leading Boston merchant, John Rowe. Contrary to popular belief, the British East India Company tea the Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor transported to Boston was not from India. The tea the Sons of Liberty dumped into Boston Harbor was in fact from China. In addition to India, the British East India Company had extensive dealings in China because of the lucrative opium trade. The tea destroyed during the Boston Tea Party was described as “Bohea” type. In the 18th century tea trade, black tea was referred to as “Bohea.” Traditionally, the Bohea variety of black tea came from the Wuyi Mountains in the Chinese province of Fujian, but the term “Bohea” was hijacked by the tea trade to refer to all black tea varieties. The black teas (“Bohea”) the Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor transported were of the Bohea, Congou, and Souchong varieties. Additionally, they also transported Hyson and Singlo teas, which were both green teas from the Chinese province of Anhui. The shipment of British East India Company tea the three ships delivered to Boston consisted of 240 chests of Bohea, 60 chests of Singlo, 15 chests of Congou, 15 chests of Hyson, and 10 chests of Souchong. Tories, Loyalists, Royalists, or King’s men. The terms Tory, Loyalist, Royalist, or King’s men were used by Patriots to label those who remained loyal to the mother country Britain. The word Tory comes from several Middle Irish words meaning robbers, outlaws or pursued men. Prior to the American Revolution, the term Tory evolved into describing those who upheld the right of the King over Parliament, and during the Revolution took on the form to describe anyone who remained loyal to Britain. The most famous Boston Tories and targets of the Sons of Liberty were public official Andrew Oliver and Lieutenant Governor and Chief Justice of Massachusetts Thomas Hutchinson. During the American Revolution, it is documented that over twenty thousand Tories took up arms and fought with the British Army against the Patriots. They were branded traitors for remaining loyal to their king and fighting for what they believed in. When American independence was achieved at the close of the American Revolution, many Tories either fled or were kicked out of the newly formed United States and relocated primarily to Britain, Canada, the Bahamas, and Africa where they founded Sierra Leone. During the American Revolution it is estimated one-third of the population of the Thirteen Colonies were Tories, one-third were Patriots, and one-third remained neutral. £9,659 worth of damage in 1773 currency. 340 chests of British East India Company tea, weighing over 92,000 pounds (roughly 46 tons), onboard the Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor were smashed open with axes and dumped into Boston Harbor the night of December 16, 1773. The damage the Sons of Liberty caused by destroying 340 chests of tea, in today’s money, was worth more than $1,700,000 dollars. The British East India Company reported £9,659 worth of damage caused by the Boston Tea Party. According to some modern estimates, the destroyed tea could have brewed 18,523,000 cups of tea! The destruction of the tea was a very costly blow to the British. Besides the destruction of the tea, historical accounts record no damage was done to any of the three ships, the crew or any other items onboard the ships except for one broken padlock. The padlock was the personal property of one of the ships’ captains and was promptly replaced the next day by the Patriots. Great care was taken by the Sons of Liberty to avoid the destruction of personal property – save for the cargo of British East India Company tea. Nothing was stolen or looted from the ships, not even the tea. One participant tried to steal some tea but was reprimanded and stopped. The Sons of Liberty were very careful about how the action was carried out and made sure nothing besides the tea was damaged. After the destruction of the tea, the participants swept the decks of the ships clean, and anything that was moved was put back in its proper place. The crews of the ships attested to the fact there had been no damage to any of the ships except for the destruction of their cargoes of tea. No one died during the Boston Tea Party. There was no violence and no confrontation between the Patriots, the Tories and the British soldiers garrisoned in Boston. No members of the crews of the Beaver, Dartmouth, or Eleanor were harmed. This was the first organized act of rebellion against British rule, and the Sons of Liberty were very careful about how the Boston Tea Party was planned and executed. In fact, only one member of the Sons of Liberty, Francis Akeley, was caught and imprisoned for his participation. He was the only person ever to be arrested for the Boston Tea Party. Boston Harbor was shut down. For weeks after the Boston Tea Party, the 92,000 pounds of tea dumped into the harbor caused it to smell. As a result of the Boston Tea Party, the British shut down Boston Harbor until all of the 340 chests of British East India Company tea were paid for. This was implemented under the 1774 Intolerable Acts and known as the Boston Port Act. The Intolerable Acts outraged and unified the American colonists even more against British rule. In addition to the Boston Port Act, the Intolerable Acts also implemented the Massachusetts Government Act, the Administration of Justice Act, the Quartering Act, and the Quebec Act. American colonists responded with protests and coordinated resistance by convening the First Continental Congress in September and October of 1774 to petition Britain to repeal the Intolerable Acts. The Boston Tea Party was the first significant act of defiance by American colonists. The implication and impact of the Boston Tea Party was enormous ultimately leading to the sparking of the American Revolution which began in Massachusetts on April 19, 1775. While he was in absolute favor of the revolution, George Washington did not approve of the destruction of the tea. It was against his beliefs about property ownership. It wasn’t actually called The Boston Tea Party until much, much later. The Boston Tea Party name did not come about until the early 1820’s. Before that, the event was deemed a much less creative name, “the destruction of the tea.” There was a second Boston Tea Party three months later. In March of 1774, 60 men disguised themselves and boarded the Fortune to threw 30 chests of tea overboard. Being a much smaller protest, it did not get the attention of the original. There was only one person injured in the event (and they mistakenly thought he was dead). John Crane was thought to be dead when he was knocked unconscious during the Boston Tea Party. His fellow patriots hid him under a pile of wood shavings in a nearby shop. He regained consciousness a few hours later and was the only person injured during the protest. Benjamin Franklin offered to pay for the tea that was dumped. Ben Franklin was a rich and generous man and as such, he offered to pay for the tea on the condition that Britain would reopen the harbor. They refused, so they were never compensated. The participants were never punished. There was a strict code of secrecy surrounding the events of the Boston Tea Party and as a result, no one ever identified who the participants were. One person was named in an anonymous tip, and he was stripped, tarred and feathered. After and since, no one else ever came forward with any information. It was an expensive protest. If measured in today’s financial terms, the value of the more than 92,000 pounds of tea dumped into the Boston Harbor would be around $1 million. The location of the protest is now a busy street corner. The actual location of the Boston Tea Party is thought to be at the corner of Congress and Purchase Streets—once under water, it is now a busy intersection.	<urn:uuid:6eafd0b0-73e0-4f85-88cd-e35f1829eb41>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.bostonteapartyship.com/boston-tea-party-facts	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606975.49/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122101729-20200122130729-00057.warc.gz	en	0.982114	3,619	3.96875	4	[ 0.20835348963737488, -0.3146044909954071, 0.0690050721168518, -0.6624875068664551, -0.2296917885541916, -0.13364839553833008, 0.5452557802200317, -0.17871509492397308, -0.24715685844421387, 0.27637141942977905, 0.34106719493865967, 0.13751192390918732, 0.047709546983242035, 0.3073195517063...	8	The Sons of Liberty. The Boston Tea Party was organized and carried out by a group of Patriots led by Samuel Adams known as the Sons of Liberty. The Sons of Liberty were made up of males from all walks of colonial society, and among its membership were artisans, craftsmen, business owners, tradesmen, apprentices, and common laborers who organized to defend their rights, and to protest and undermine British rule. Famous Boston Patriots who were members of the Sons of Liberty included John Adams, John Hancock, James Otis, Josiah Quincy, Paul Revere, and Dr. Joseph Warren. Incited by the Sons of Liberty, over 5,000 people gathered at the Old South Meeting House, the largest public building in Boston at the time, at 10:00 AM on December 16, 1773, to decide what was to be done about the tea and to plan the Boston Tea Party. Many factors including “taxation without representation,” the 1767 Townshend Revenue Act, and the 1773 Tea Act. In simplest terms, the Boston Tea Party happened as a result of “taxation without representation”, yet the cause is more complex than that. The American colonists believed Britain was unfairly taxing them to pay for expenses incurred during the French and Indian War. Additionally, colonists believed Parliament did not have the right to tax them because the American colonies were not represented in Parliament. Since the beginning of the 18th century, tea had been regularly imported to the American colonies. By the time of the Boston Tea Party, it has been estimated American colonists drank approximately 1.2 million pounds of tea each year. Britain realized it could make even more money off of the lucrative tea trade by imposing taxes onto the American colonies. In effect, the cost of British tea became high, and, in response, American colonists began a very lucrative industry of smuggling tea from the Dutch and other European markets. These smuggling operations violated the Navigation Acts which had been in place since the middle of the 17th century. The smuggling of tea was undercutting the lucrative British tea trade. In response to the smuggling, in 1767 Parliament passed the Indemnity Act, which repealed the tax on tea and made British tea the same price as the Dutch. The Indemnity Act greatly cut down on American tea smuggling, but later in 1767 a new tax on tea was put in place by the Townshend Revenue Act. The act also taxed glass, lead, oil, paint, and paper. Due to boycotts and protests, the Townshend Revenue Act taxes on all commodities except tea were repealed in 1770. In 1773, the Tea Act was passed and granted the British East India Company a monopoly on tea sales in the American colonies. The smuggling of tea grew rampant and was a lucrative business venture for American colonists, such as John Hancock and Samuel Adams. The Townshend Revenue Act tea tax remained in place despite proposals to have it waived. American colonists were outraged over the tea tax. They believed the Tea Act was a tactic to gain colonial support for the tax already enforced. The direct sale of tea by agents of the British East India Company to the American colonies undercut the business of colonial merchants. The smuggled tea became more expensive than the British East India Company tea. Smugglers like John Hancock and Samuel Adams were trying to protect their economic interests by opposing the Tea Act, and Samuel Adams sold the opposition of British tea to the Patriots on the pretext of the abolishment of human rights by being taxed without representation. December 16, 1773. The Boston Tea Party took place on the winter night of Thursday, December 16, 1773. According to eyewitness testimonies, the Boston Tea Party occurred between the hours of 7:00 and 10:00 PM and lasted for approximately three hours. The Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor were moored at Griffin’s Wharf in Boston. It is at this location where the December 16, 1773 destruction of the tea occurred. The original location of the Boston Tea Party no longer exists because of extensive landfills that destroyed the location. This was caused by the city of Boston’s rapid expansion in the 19th century. In 18th century Boston, Griffin’s Wharf was a bustling center for maritime commerce and shipping. The exact location of the original Griffin’s Wharf is open to debate, but the Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum, located on the Congress Street Bridge, is located near the approximate area where the Boston Tea Party took place. A historical marker commemorating the Boston Tea Party stands on the corner of Congress and Purchase streets. It is estimated that hundreds took part in the Boston Tea Party. For fear of punishment, many participants of the Boston Tea Party remained anonymous for many years after the event. To date it is known that 116 people are documented to have participated. Not all of the participants of the Boston Tea Party are known; many carried the secret of their participation to their graves. The participants were made up of males from all walks of colonial society. Many were from Boston or the surrounding area, but some participants are documented to have come from as far away as Worcester in central Massachusetts and Maine. The vast majority was of English descent, but men of Irish, Scottish, French, Portuguese, and African ancestry were documented to have also participated. The participants were off all ages, but the majority of the documented participants was under the age of forty. Sixteen participants were teenagers, and only nine men were above the age of forty. Many of the Boston Tea Party participants fled Boston immediately after the destruction of the tea to avoid arrest. Thousands witnessed the event, and the implication and impact of this action were enormous ultimately leading to the start of the American Revolution. In an effort to hide their true identities, many of the Sons of Liberty attempted to pass themselves off as Mohawk Indians because if caught for their actions they would have faced severe punishment. Reports from the time describe the participants as dressed as Mohawks or Narragansett Indians. The disguise was mostly symbolic in nature; they knew they would be recognized as non-Indians. The act of wearing “Indian dress” was to express to the world that the American colonists identified themselves as “Americans” and no longer considered themselves British subjects. They were not dressed as Indians in the classic sense with headdresses and full authentic regalia; rather they wore wool blankets matchcoat style, painted their faces with soot, and employed other modes of dress commonly known at the time as “Indian dress”, which had been adopted by soldiers during the French and Indian War. An observer of the Boston Tea Party, John Andrews wrote the following in 1773: “They say the actors were Indians… Whether they were or not to a transient observer they appear’d as such, being cloth’d in blankets with the heads muffled and copper color’d countenances, each being arm’d with a hatchet or ax, and pair pistols, nor was their dialect different from what I conceive these geniusses to speak, as their jargon was unintelligible to all but themselves.” Boston Tea Party participant George Hewes recorded the following: “It was now evening, and I immediately dressed myself in the costume of an Indian, equipped with a small hatchet, which I and my associates denominated the tomahawk, with which, and a club, after having painted my face and hands with coal dust in the shop of a blacksmith, I repaired to Griffin’s wharf, where the ships lay that contained the tea. When I first appeared in the street after being thus disguised, I fell in with many who were dressed, equipped and painted as I was, and who fell in with me and marched in order to the place of our destination.” On the night of the Boston Tea Party, three ships that had sailed from London carrying cargoes of British East India Company tea were moored in Boston Harbor. The three ships were the Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor. The Dartmouth arrived in Boston on November 28, 1773, the Eleanor on December 2, and the Beaver on December 15. Each of the three ships carried more than one hundred chests of British East India Company tea. The Sons of Liberty on the night of December 16, 1773, offloaded the tea cargoes of all three ships. There were to be four ships sailing from London carrying cargoes of British East India Company tea to Boston, but the William ran aground off Cape Cod on December 10, 1773 in a violent storm. The cargo of 58 chests of British East India Company tea was salvaged before the William was abandoned. A portion of the salvaged tea cargo ended up in Boston and was later destroyed by the Sons of Liberty. Samuel Adams recorded the following about the fate of the William: “The only remaining vessel which was expected with this detested article, is by the act of righteous heaven cast on shore on the back of Cape Cod, which has often been the sad fate of many a more valuable cargo.” If you would like more information about each of the ships, visit these links to dedicated pages:DartmouthEleanor A popular misconception is the belief the Tea Party Ships were British. In fact, the vessels were built in America and owned by Americans, but the cargo of tea they were carrying from London to Boston was owned by the British East India Company. The Beaver and Dartmouth were built and owned by the Rotch’s, an affluent Nantucket Quaker family. The Eleanor was one of several vessels owned by leading Boston merchant, John Rowe. Contrary to popular belief, the British East India Company tea the Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor transported to Boston was not from India. The tea the Sons of Liberty dumped into Boston Harbor was in fact from China. In addition to India, the British East India Company had extensive dealings in China because of the lucrative opium trade. The tea destroyed during the Boston Tea Party was described as “Bohea” type. In the 18th century tea trade, black tea was referred to as “Bohea.” Traditionally, the Bohea variety of black tea came from the Wuyi Mountains in the Chinese province of Fujian, but the term “Bohea” was hijacked by the tea trade to refer to all black tea varieties. The black teas (“Bohea”) the Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor transported were of the Bohea, Congou, and Souchong varieties. Additionally, they also transported Hyson and Singlo teas, which were both green teas from the Chinese province of Anhui. The shipment of British East India Company tea the three ships delivered to Boston consisted of 240 chests of Bohea, 60 chests of Singlo, 15 chests of Congou, 15 chests of Hyson, and 10 chests of Souchong. Tories, Loyalists, Royalists, or King’s men. The terms Tory, Loyalist, Royalist, or King’s men were used by Patriots to label those who remained loyal to the mother country Britain. The word Tory comes from several Middle Irish words meaning robbers, outlaws or pursued men. Prior to the American Revolution, the term Tory evolved into describing those who upheld the right of the King over Parliament, and during the Revolution took on the form to describe anyone who remained loyal to Britain. The most famous Boston Tories and targets of the Sons of Liberty were public official Andrew Oliver and Lieutenant Governor and Chief Justice of Massachusetts Thomas Hutchinson. During the American Revolution, it is documented that over twenty thousand Tories took up arms and fought with the British Army against the Patriots. They were branded traitors for remaining loyal to their king and fighting for what they believed in. When American independence was achieved at the close of the American Revolution, many Tories either fled or were kicked out of the newly formed United States and relocated primarily to Britain, Canada, the Bahamas, and Africa where they founded Sierra Leone. During the American Revolution it is estimated one-third of the population of the Thirteen Colonies were Tories, one-third were Patriots, and one-third remained neutral. £9,659 worth of damage in 1773 currency. 340 chests of British East India Company tea, weighing over 92,000 pounds (roughly 46 tons), onboard the Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor were smashed open with axes and dumped into Boston Harbor the night of December 16, 1773. The damage the Sons of Liberty caused by destroying 340 chests of tea, in today’s money, was worth more than $1,700,000 dollars. The British East India Company reported £9,659 worth of damage caused by the Boston Tea Party. According to some modern estimates, the destroyed tea could have brewed 18,523,000 cups of tea! The destruction of the tea was a very costly blow to the British. Besides the destruction of the tea, historical accounts record no damage was done to any of the three ships, the crew or any other items onboard the ships except for one broken padlock. The padlock was the personal property of one of the ships’ captains and was promptly replaced the next day by the Patriots. Great care was taken by the Sons of Liberty to avoid the destruction of personal property – save for the cargo of British East India Company tea. Nothing was stolen or looted from the ships, not even the tea. One participant tried to steal some tea but was reprimanded and stopped. The Sons of Liberty were very careful about how the action was carried out and made sure nothing besides the tea was damaged. After the destruction of the tea, the participants swept the decks of the ships clean, and anything that was moved was put back in its proper place. The crews of the ships attested to the fact there had been no damage to any of the ships except for the destruction of their cargoes of tea. No one died during the Boston Tea Party. There was no violence and no confrontation between the Patriots, the Tories and the British soldiers garrisoned in Boston. No members of the crews of the Beaver, Dartmouth, or Eleanor were harmed. This was the first organized act of rebellion against British rule, and the Sons of Liberty were very careful about how the Boston Tea Party was planned and executed. In fact, only one member of the Sons of Liberty, Francis Akeley, was caught and imprisoned for his participation. He was the only person ever to be arrested for the Boston Tea Party. Boston Harbor was shut down. For weeks after the Boston Tea Party, the 92,000 pounds of tea dumped into the harbor caused it to smell. As a result of the Boston Tea Party, the British shut down Boston Harbor until all of the 340 chests of British East India Company tea were paid for. This was implemented under the 1774 Intolerable Acts and known as the Boston Port Act. The Intolerable Acts outraged and unified the American colonists even more against British rule. In addition to the Boston Port Act, the Intolerable Acts also implemented the Massachusetts Government Act, the Administration of Justice Act, the Quartering Act, and the Quebec Act. American colonists responded with protests and coordinated resistance by convening the First Continental Congress in September and October of 1774 to petition Britain to repeal the Intolerable Acts. The Boston Tea Party was the first significant act of defiance by American colonists. The implication and impact of the Boston Tea Party was enormous ultimately leading to the sparking of the American Revolution which began in Massachusetts on April 19, 1775. While he was in absolute favor of the revolution, George Washington did not approve of the destruction of the tea. It was against his beliefs about property ownership. It wasn’t actually called The Boston Tea Party until much, much later. The Boston Tea Party name did not come about until the early 1820’s. Before that, the event was deemed a much less creative name, “the destruction of the tea.” There was a second Boston Tea Party three months later. In March of 1774, 60 men disguised themselves and boarded the Fortune to threw 30 chests of tea overboard. Being a much smaller protest, it did not get the attention of the original. There was only one person injured in the event (and they mistakenly thought he was dead). John Crane was thought to be dead when he was knocked unconscious during the Boston Tea Party. His fellow patriots hid him under a pile of wood shavings in a nearby shop. He regained consciousness a few hours later and was the only person injured during the protest. Benjamin Franklin offered to pay for the tea that was dumped. Ben Franklin was a rich and generous man and as such, he offered to pay for the tea on the condition that Britain would reopen the harbor. They refused, so they were never compensated. The participants were never punished. There was a strict code of secrecy surrounding the events of the Boston Tea Party and as a result, no one ever identified who the participants were. One person was named in an anonymous tip, and he was stripped, tarred and feathered. After and since, no one else ever came forward with any information. It was an expensive protest. If measured in today’s financial terms, the value of the more than 92,000 pounds of tea dumped into the Boston Harbor would be around $1 million. The location of the protest is now a busy street corner. The actual location of the Boston Tea Party is thought to be at the corner of Congress and Purchase Streets—once under water, it is now a busy intersection.	3,694	ENGLISH	1
Puerto Ricans indians are The Tainos. The Borinqueña is the national anthem of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. The current music and lyrics were written in 1903 and since then has been taught in schools and was adopted by most people. The music was made official by the government as the national anthem in 1952, and the letter in 1977. The title refers to the aboriginal Taíno name for the island of Puerto Rico, which was Boriken or Borinquen. Christopher Columbus arrived at Puerto Rico in 1493. He originally called the island San Juan Bautista, but thanks to the gold in the river, it was soon known as Puerto Rico, or “rich port;” and the capital city took the name San Juan. Soon, Puerto Rico was a Spanish colony on its way to becoming an important military outpost. "One who is not proud of his origins , never be worth anything , because begins to despise himself " Pedro Albizua Campo is the Puerto Rican patriot and politician who was the most important figure in the struggle for the independence of Puerto Rico during the first half of the twentieth century.	<urn:uuid:4790d50b-d770-4e86-a38b-c81e23040b10>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://puertoricoarte.com/category/about-pr/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597230.18/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120023523-20200120051523-00150.warc.gz	en	0.985072	235	3.484375	3	[ -0.06487591564655304, -0.06121446192264557, 0.035674355924129486, -0.31452280282974243, 0.03652158007025719, 0.28390073776245117, 0.47197046875953674, 0.14593861997127533, -0.07037245482206345, -0.2221992462873459, 0.1723073571920395, -0.1457434892654419, -0.3566999137401581, -0.1496985107...	5	Puerto Ricans indians are The Tainos. The Borinqueña is the national anthem of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. The current music and lyrics were written in 1903 and since then has been taught in schools and was adopted by most people. The music was made official by the government as the national anthem in 1952, and the letter in 1977. The title refers to the aboriginal Taíno name for the island of Puerto Rico, which was Boriken or Borinquen. Christopher Columbus arrived at Puerto Rico in 1493. He originally called the island San Juan Bautista, but thanks to the gold in the river, it was soon known as Puerto Rico, or “rich port;” and the capital city took the name San Juan. Soon, Puerto Rico was a Spanish colony on its way to becoming an important military outpost. "One who is not proud of his origins , never be worth anything , because begins to despise himself " Pedro Albizua Campo is the Puerto Rican patriot and politician who was the most important figure in the struggle for the independence of Puerto Rico during the first half of the twentieth century.	244	ENGLISH	1
The Mexican-American War occurred between 1846 and 1848 and was a war that took around 30,000 lives during the course of the conflict. The question is, with this being such a large scale war causing so many deaths why don’t you know about it? This is a great question and the answer generally comes to be that the most important and well known war of the century from a United States perspective is the American Civil War. The people of the United States will know of the Mexican-American War, but even they may not know the causes so today we will talk about the causes of the Mexican-American War. Causes of the Mexican-American War Between 1835 and 1836 the Texas Revolution occurred. This revolution was because Texas, being a part of Mexico at this time, was not happy about the Mexican government. One of the biggest bones of contention was economic because the Mexican government micromanaged peoples land by telling them what they could and couldn’t grow. With the boom of the cotton industry and the large revenues it generated many land owners wished to start a cotton plantation, the Mexican government only wanted them to grow corn and other foodstuff or have cattle. Another issue was that many of the settlers in Texas were American migrants and they wanted to use slave labour as a form of managing their land at a low cost, the Mexican government was against slavery too. The outcome of the Texas Revolution was that Texas won and gained independence from Mexico at the Treaties of Velasco. At this point Mexico had promised that should Texas succeed in then being annexed into the United States they would wage war against the U.S. For ten years Texas ran as an independent state, Mexico however still deemed it a Mexican state that was being rebellious and that would eventually fall back under the umbrella of the Mexican government. The United States, Britain and France however had all recognised Texas as its own state and advised Mexico not to try and retake the lands with force. In 1845 things changed when the Americans reviewed whether to tender to Texas the idea of becoming a part of the United States. Once the tender was put forward Texas readily agreed and the U.S. Congress made Texas a state of America in December 1845. This angered the Mexicans As part of the annexation of Texas into the United States the dispute on Texas boundaries caused more anger as American President Polk claimed the Rio Grande River as part of Texas and the border between Mexico and Texas. With all this going on there was also the issue of another Mexican territory, California. The United States for ten years, ever since Texas independence, had a roving eye on California and they wished to annex these lands too. Initially the American stance was to enter negotiations with Mexico to be given the lands in lieu of debts. Mexico didn’t agree to the move so an intrepid American explorer called John Fremont took a small band of armed men and entered California on the pretext he was buying supplies. Once in California he then states he wanted to buy a home near the sea for his mother. The Mexicans didn’t believe the story of Fremont and asked him to leave California but Fremont decided a different course of action and built a fort on the mountainous Gavilan Peak (now Fremont Peak). Here Fremont raised the American flag before leaving California for a small time and then returning. Upon his return in 1845 he mustered the American immigrants into a revolt declaring the independence of California from Mexico. The Americans sent John Slidell to Mexico City to try and negotiate but the Mexicans were not interested and carried on their view of Texas being a part of Mexico. Slidell returned to the United States and Mexico started building an army. This army went north and in 1846 2,000 Mexicans attacked a 70 strong U.S patrol killing 16 and thus giving America reason for war.	<urn:uuid:c4327769-04aa-4ec9-8db7-5a3325377cfd>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.thefinertimes.com/Mexican-War/causes-of-the-mexican-american-war.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250619323.41/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124100832-20200124125832-00520.warc.gz	en	0.980707	793	3.734375	4	[ -0.07912646234035492, 0.10434921085834503, 0.5213660001754761, 0.23850849270820618, 0.08679372072219849, 0.17690375447273254, -0.17439627647399902, 0.29153433442115784, -0.31343165040016174, -0.10198470950126648, 0.21057404577732086, 0.12324433773756027, -0.14753884077072144, 0.25617635250...	13	The Mexican-American War occurred between 1846 and 1848 and was a war that took around 30,000 lives during the course of the conflict. The question is, with this being such a large scale war causing so many deaths why don’t you know about it? This is a great question and the answer generally comes to be that the most important and well known war of the century from a United States perspective is the American Civil War. The people of the United States will know of the Mexican-American War, but even they may not know the causes so today we will talk about the causes of the Mexican-American War. Causes of the Mexican-American War Between 1835 and 1836 the Texas Revolution occurred. This revolution was because Texas, being a part of Mexico at this time, was not happy about the Mexican government. One of the biggest bones of contention was economic because the Mexican government micromanaged peoples land by telling them what they could and couldn’t grow. With the boom of the cotton industry and the large revenues it generated many land owners wished to start a cotton plantation, the Mexican government only wanted them to grow corn and other foodstuff or have cattle. Another issue was that many of the settlers in Texas were American migrants and they wanted to use slave labour as a form of managing their land at a low cost, the Mexican government was against slavery too. The outcome of the Texas Revolution was that Texas won and gained independence from Mexico at the Treaties of Velasco. At this point Mexico had promised that should Texas succeed in then being annexed into the United States they would wage war against the U.S. For ten years Texas ran as an independent state, Mexico however still deemed it a Mexican state that was being rebellious and that would eventually fall back under the umbrella of the Mexican government. The United States, Britain and France however had all recognised Texas as its own state and advised Mexico not to try and retake the lands with force. In 1845 things changed when the Americans reviewed whether to tender to Texas the idea of becoming a part of the United States. Once the tender was put forward Texas readily agreed and the U.S. Congress made Texas a state of America in December 1845. This angered the Mexicans As part of the annexation of Texas into the United States the dispute on Texas boundaries caused more anger as American President Polk claimed the Rio Grande River as part of Texas and the border between Mexico and Texas. With all this going on there was also the issue of another Mexican territory, California. The United States for ten years, ever since Texas independence, had a roving eye on California and they wished to annex these lands too. Initially the American stance was to enter negotiations with Mexico to be given the lands in lieu of debts. Mexico didn’t agree to the move so an intrepid American explorer called John Fremont took a small band of armed men and entered California on the pretext he was buying supplies. Once in California he then states he wanted to buy a home near the sea for his mother. The Mexicans didn’t believe the story of Fremont and asked him to leave California but Fremont decided a different course of action and built a fort on the mountainous Gavilan Peak (now Fremont Peak). Here Fremont raised the American flag before leaving California for a small time and then returning. Upon his return in 1845 he mustered the American immigrants into a revolt declaring the independence of California from Mexico. The Americans sent John Slidell to Mexico City to try and negotiate but the Mexicans were not interested and carried on their view of Texas being a part of Mexico. Slidell returned to the United States and Mexico started building an army. This army went north and in 1846 2,000 Mexicans attacked a 70 strong U.S patrol killing 16 and thus giving America reason for war.	805	ENGLISH	1
Containing The Interval Of Two Hundred And Twenty Years. From The Death Of Isaac To The Exodus Out Of Egypt. How Joseph When He Was Become Famous In Egypt, Had His Brethren In Subjection. 1. JOSEPH was now grown up to thirty years of age, and enjoyed great honors from the king, who called him Psothom Phanech, out of regard to his prodigious degree of wisdom; for that name denotes the revealer of secrets. He also married a wife of very high quality; for he married the daughter of Petephres, (4) one of the priests of Heliopolis; she was a virgin, and her name was Asenath. By her he had children before the scarcity came on; Manasseh, the elder, which signifies forgetful, because his present happiness made him forget his former misfortunes; and Ephraim, the younger, which signifies restored, because he was restored to the freedom of his forefathers. Now after Egypt had happily passed over seven years, according to Joseph's interpretation of the dreams, the famine came upon them in the eighth year; and because this misfortune fell upon them when they had no sense of it beforehand, (5) they were all sorely afflicted by it, and came running to the king's gates; and he called upon Joseph, who sold the corn to them, being become confessedly a savior to the whole multitude of the Egyptians. Nor did he open this market of corn for the people of that country only, but strangers had liberty to buy also; Joseph being willing that all men, who are naturally akin to one another, should have assistance from those that lived in happiness. 2. Now Jacob also, when he understood that foreigners might come, sent all his sons into Egypt to buy corn, for the land of Canaan was grievously afflicted with the famine; and this great misery touched the whole continent. He only retained Benjamin, who was born to him by Rachel, and was of the same mother with Joseph. These sons of Jacob then came into Egypt, and applied themselves to Joseph, wanting to buy corn; for nothing of this kind was done without his approbation, since even then only was the honor that was paid the king himself advantageous to the persons that paid it, when they took care to honor Joseph also. Now when he well knew his brethren, they thought nothing of him; for he was but a youth when he left them, and was now come to an age so much greater, that the lineaments of his face were changed, and he was not known by them: besides this, the greatness of the dignity wherein he appeared, suffered them not so much as to suspect it was he. He now made trial what sentiments they had about affairs of the greatest consequence; for he refused to sell them corn, and said they were come as spies of the king's affairs; and that they came from several countries, and joined themselves together, and pretended that they were of kin,it not being possible that a private man should breed up so many sons, and those of so great beauty of countenance as they were, such an education of so many children being not easily obtained by kings themselves. Now this he did in order to discover what concerned his father, and what happened to him after his own departure from him, and as desiring to know what was become of Benjamin his brother; for he was afraid that they had ventured on the like wicked enterprise against him that they had done to himself, and had taken him off also. 3. Now these brethren of his were under distraction and terror, and thought that very great danger hung over them; yet not at all reflecting upon their brother Joseph, and standing firm under the accusations laid against them, they made their defense by Reubel, the eldest of them, who now became their spokesman: "We come not hither," said he, "with any unjust design, nor in order to bring any harm to the king's affairs; we only want to be preserved,as supposing your humanity might be a refuge for us from the miseries which our country labors under, we having heard that you proposed to sell corn, not only to your own countrymen, but to strangers also, and that you determined to allow that corn, in order to preserve all that want it; but that we are brethren, and of the same common blood, the peculiar lineaments of our faces, and those not so much different from one another, plainly show. 4. And thus did Reubel endeavor to persuade Joseph to have a better opinion of them. But when he had learned from them that Jacob was alive, and that his brother was not destroyed by them, he for the present put them in prison, as intending to examine more into their affairs when he should be at leisure. But on the third day he brought them out, and said to them, "Since you constantly affirm that you are not come to do any harm to the king's affairs; that you are brethren, and the sons of the father whom you named; you will satisfy me of the truth of what you say, if you leave one of your company with me, who shall suffer no injury here; and if, when ye have carried corn to your father, you will come to me again, and bring your brother, whom you say you left there, along with you, for this shall be by me esteemed an assurance of the truth of what you have told me." Hereupon they were in greater grief than before; they wept, and perpetually deplored one among another the calamity of Joseph; and said, "They were fallen into this misery as a punishment inflicted by God for what evil contrivances they had against him." And Reubel was large in his reproaches of them for their too late repentance, whence no profit arose to Joseph; and earnestly exhorted them to bear with patience whatever they suffered, since it was done by God in way of punishment, on his account. Thus they spake to one another, not imagining that Joseph understood their language. A general sadness also seized on them at Reubel's words, and a repentance for what they had done; and they condemned the wickedness they had perpetrated, for which they judged they were justly punished by God. Now when Joseph saw that they were in this distress, he was so affected at it that he fell into tears, and not being willing that they should take notice of him, he retired; and after a while came to them again, and taking Symeon (6) in order to his being a pledge for his brethren's return, he bid them take the corn they had bought, and go their way. He also commanded his steward privily to put the money which they had brought with them for the purchase of corn into their sacks, and to dismiss them therewith; who did what he was commanded to do. 5. Now when Jacob's sons were come into the land of Canaan, they told their father what had happened to them in Egypt, and that they were taken to have come thither as spies upon the king; and how they said they were brethren, and had left their eleventh brother with their father, but were not believed; and how they had left Symeon with the governor, until Benjamin should go thither, and be a testimonial of the truth of what they had said: and they begged of their father to fear nothing, but to send the lad along with them. But Jacob was not pleased with any thing his sons had done; and he took the detention of Symeon heinously, and thence thought it a foolish thing to give up Benjamin also. Neither did he yield to Reubel's persuasion, though he begged it of him, and gave leave that the grandfather might, in way of requital, kill his own sons, in case any harm came to Benjamin in the journey. So they were distressed, and knew not what to do; nay, there was another accident that still disturbed them more, - the money that was found hidden in their sacks of corn. Yet when the corn they had brought failed them, and when the famine still afflicted them, and necessity forced them, Jacob did (7) [not] still resolve to send Benjamin with his brethren, although there was no returning into Egypt unless they came with what they had promised. Now the misery growing every day worse, and his sons begging it of him, he had no other course to take in his present circumstances. And Judas, who was of a bold temper on other occasions, spake his mind very freely to him: "That it did not become him to be afraid on account of his son, nor to suspect the worst, as he did; for nothing could be done to his son but by the appointment of God, which must also for certain come to pass, though he were at home with him; that he ought not to condemn them to such manifest destruction; nor deprive them of that plenty of food they might have from Pharaoh, by his unreasonable fear about his son Benjamin, but ought to take care of the preservation of Symeon, lest, by attempting to hinder Benjamin's journey, Symeon should perish. He exhorted him to trust God for him; and said he would either bring his son back to him safe, or, together with his, lose his own life." So that Jacob was at length persuaded, and delivered Benjamin to them, with the price of the corn doubled; he also sent presents to Joseph of the fruits of the land of Canaan, balsam and rosin, as also turpentine and honey. (8) Now their father shed many tears at the departure of his sons, as well as themselves. His concern was, that he might receive them back again safe after their journey; and their concern was, that they might find their father well, and no way afflicted with grief for them. And this lamentation lasted a whole day; so that the old man was at last tired with grief, and staid behind; but they went on their way for Egypt, endeavoring to mitigate their grief for their present misfortunes, with the hopes of better success hereafter. 6. As soon as they came into Egypt, they were brought down to Joseph: but here no small fear disturbed them, lest they should be accused about the price of the corn, as if they had cheated Joseph. They then made a long apology to Joseph's steward; and told him, that when they came home they found the money in their sacks, and that they had now brought it along with them. He said he did not know what they meant: so they were delivered from that fear. And when he had loosed Symeon, and put him into a handsome habit, he suffered him to be with his brethren; at which time Joseph came from his attendance on the king. So they offered him their presents; and upon his putting the question to them about their father, they answered that they found him well. He also, upon his discovery that Benjamin was alive, asked whether this was their younger brother; for he had seen him. Whereupon they said he was: he replied, that the God over all was his protector. But when his affection to him made him shed tears, he retired, desiring he might not be seen in that plight by his brethren. Then Joseph took them to supper, and they were set down in the same order as they used to sit at their father's table. And although Joseph treated them all kindly, yet did he send a mess to Benjamin that was double to what the rest of the guests had for their shares. 7. Now when after supper they had composed themselves to sleep, Joseph commanded his steward both to give them their measures of corn, and to hide its price again in their sacks; and that withal they should put into Benjamin's sack the golden cup, out of which he loved himself to drink. - which things he did, in order to make trial of his brethren, whether they would stand by Benjamin when he should be accused of having stolen the cup, and should appear to be in danger; or whether they would leave him, and, depending on their own innocency, go to their father without him. When the servant had done as he was bidden, the sons of Jacob, knowing nothing of all this, went their way, and took Symeon along with them, and had a double cause of joy, both because they had received him again, and because they took back Benjamin to their father, as they had promised. But presently a troop of horsemen encompassed them, and brought with them Joseph's servant, who had put the cup into Benjamin's sack. Upon which unexpected attack of the horsemen they were much disturbed, and asked what the reason was that they came thus upon men, who a little before had been by their lord thought worthy of an honorable and hospitable reception? They replied, by calling them wicked wretches, who had forgot that very hospitable and kind treatment which Joseph had given them, and did not scruple to be injurious to him, and to carry off that cup out of which he had, in so friendly a manner, drank to them, and not regarding their friendship with Joseph, no more than the danger they should be in if they were taken, in comparison of the unjust gain. Hereupon he threatened that they should be punished; for though they had escaped the knowledge of him who was but a servant, yet had they not escaped the knowledge of God, nor had gone off with what they had stolen; and, after all, asked why we come upon them, as if they knew nothing of the matter: and he told them that they should immediately know it by their punishment. This, and more of the same nature, did the servant say, in way of reproach to them: but they being wholly ignorant of any thing here that concerned them, laughed at what he said, and wondered at the abusive language which the servant gave them, when he was so hardy as to accuse those who did not before so much as retain the price of their corn, which was found in their sacks, but brought it again, though nobody else knew of any such thing, - so far were they from offering any injury to Joseph voluntarily. But still, supposing that a search would be a more sure justification of themselves than their own denial of the fact, they bid him search them, and that if any of them had been guilty of the theft, to punish them all; for being no way conscious to themselves of any crime, they spake with assurance, and, as they thought, without any danger to themselves also. The servants desired there might be a search made; but they said the punishment should extend to him alone who should be found guilty of the theft. So they made the search; and, having searched all the rest, they came last of all to Benjamin, as knowing it was Benjamin's sack in which they had hidden the cup, they having indeed searched the rest only for a show of accuracy: so the rest were out of fear for themselves, and were now only concerned about Benjamin, but still were well assured that he would also be found innocent; and they reproached those that came after them for their hindering them, while they might, in the mean while, have gotten a good way on their journey. But as soon as they had searched Benjamin's sack, they found the cup, and took it from him; and all was changed into mourning and lamentation. They rent their garments, and wept for the punishment which their brother was to undergo for his theft, and for the delusion they had put on their father, when they promised they would bring Benjamin safe to him. What added to their misery was,that this melancholy accident came unfortunately at a time when they thought they had been gotten off clear; but they confessed that this misfortune of their brother, as well as the grief of their father for him, was owing to themselves, since it was they that forced their father to send him with them, when he was averse to it. 8. The horsemen therefore took Benjamin and brought him to Joseph, his brethren also following him; who, when he saw him in custody, and them in the habit of mourners, said, "Howcame you, vile wretches as you are, to have such a strange notion of my kindness to you, and of God's providence, as impudently to do thus to your benefactor, who in such an hospitable manner had entertained you ?" Whereupon they gave up themselves to be punished, in order to save Benjamin; and called to mind what a wicked enterprise they had been guilty of against Joseph. They also pronounced him more happy than themselves, if he were dead, in being freed from the miseries of this life; and if he were alive, that he enjoyed the pleasure of seeing God's vengeance upon them. They said further; that they were the plague of their father, since they should now add to his former affliction for Joseph, this other affliction for Benjamin. Reubel also was large in cutting them upon this occasion. But Joseph dismissed them; for he said they had been guilty of no offense, and that he would content himself with the lad's punishment; for he said it was not a fit thing to let him go free, for the sake of those who had not offended; nor was it a fit thing to punish them together with him who had been guilty of stealing. And when he promised to give them leave to go away in safety, the rest of them were under great consternation, and were able to say nothing on this sad occasion. But Judas, who had persuaded their father to send the lad from him, being otherwise also a very bold and active man, determined to hazard himself for the preservation of his brother. So Judas, being very willing to undergo any thing whatever for the deliverance of his brother, cast himself down at Joseph's feet, and earnestly labored to assuage and pacify his anger. All his brethren also fell down before him, weeping and delivering themselves up to destruction for the preservation of the life of Benjamin. 10. But Joseph, as overcome now with his affections, and no longer able to personate an angry man, commanded all that were present to depart, that he might make himself known to his brethren when they were alone; and when the rest were gone out, he made himself known to his brethren; and said, When Joseph had said this, he embraced his brethren, who were in tears and sorrow; but the generous kindness of their brother seemed to leave among them no room for fear, lest they should be punished on account of what they had consulted and acted against him; and they were then feasting. Now the king, as soon as he heard that Joseph's brethren were come to him, was exceeding glad of it, as if it had been a part of his own good fortune; and gave them wagons full of corn and gold and silver, to be conveyed to his father. Now when they had received more of their brother part to be carried to their father, and part as free gifts to every one of themselves, Benjamin having still more than the rest, they departed. (4) This Potiphar, or, as Josephus, Petephres, who was now a priest of On, or Heliopolis, is the same name in Josephus, and perhaps in Moses also, with him who is before called head cook or captain of the guard, and to whom Joseph was sold. See Genesis 37:36; 39:1, with 41:50. They are also affirmed to be one and the same person in the Testament of Joseph, Sect. 18, for he is there said to have married the daughter of his master and mistress. Nor is this a notion peculiar to that Testament, but, as Dr. Bernard confesses, note on Antiq. B. II. Ch. 4. Sect. 1, common to Josephus, to the Septuagint interpreters, and to other learned Jews of old time. (5) This entire ignorance of the Egyptians of these years of famine before they came, told us before, as well as here, Ch. 5. Sect. 7, by Josephus, seems to me almost incredible. It is in no other copy that I know of. (6) The reason why Symeon might be selected out of the rest for Joseph's prisoner, is plain in the Testament of Symeon, namely that he was one of the bitterest of all Joseph's brethren against him, Sect. 2; which appears also in part by the Testament of Zabulon, Sect. 3. (7) The coherence seems to me to show that the negative particle is here wanting, which I have supplied in brackets, and I wonder none have hitherto suspected that it ought to be supplied. (9) This oration seems to me too large, and too unusual a digression, to have been composed by Judas on this occasion. It seems to me a speech or declamation composed formerly, in the person of Judas, and in the way of oratory, that lay by him and which he thought fit to insert on this occasion. See two more such speeches or declamations, Antiq. B. VI. Ch. 14. Sect. 4 (10) In all this speech of Judas we may observe, that Josephus still supposed that death was the punishment of theft in Egypt, in the days of Joseph, though it never was so among the Jews, by the law of Moses.	<urn:uuid:25744557-fe16-4f07-b096-6bcb02997883>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.christianwalks.org/ancient_writings/AntiquitiesJews/ajb02c06.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607407.48/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122191620-20200122220620-00216.warc.gz	en	0.995032	4,476	3.265625	3	[ -0.3459060788154602, 0.8314636945724487, 0.26509132981300354, -0.1016535684466362, -0.5858594179153442, 0.021922500804066658, 0.7282422184944153, -0.017294440418481827, -0.03297068551182747, -0.02668566256761551, 0.05299961566925049, -0.20024628937244415, 0.2298106551170349, 0.121701389551...	3	Containing The Interval Of Two Hundred And Twenty Years. From The Death Of Isaac To The Exodus Out Of Egypt. How Joseph When He Was Become Famous In Egypt, Had His Brethren In Subjection. 1. JOSEPH was now grown up to thirty years of age, and enjoyed great honors from the king, who called him Psothom Phanech, out of regard to his prodigious degree of wisdom; for that name denotes the revealer of secrets. He also married a wife of very high quality; for he married the daughter of Petephres, (4) one of the priests of Heliopolis; she was a virgin, and her name was Asenath. By her he had children before the scarcity came on; Manasseh, the elder, which signifies forgetful, because his present happiness made him forget his former misfortunes; and Ephraim, the younger, which signifies restored, because he was restored to the freedom of his forefathers. Now after Egypt had happily passed over seven years, according to Joseph's interpretation of the dreams, the famine came upon them in the eighth year; and because this misfortune fell upon them when they had no sense of it beforehand, (5) they were all sorely afflicted by it, and came running to the king's gates; and he called upon Joseph, who sold the corn to them, being become confessedly a savior to the whole multitude of the Egyptians. Nor did he open this market of corn for the people of that country only, but strangers had liberty to buy also; Joseph being willing that all men, who are naturally akin to one another, should have assistance from those that lived in happiness. 2. Now Jacob also, when he understood that foreigners might come, sent all his sons into Egypt to buy corn, for the land of Canaan was grievously afflicted with the famine; and this great misery touched the whole continent. He only retained Benjamin, who was born to him by Rachel, and was of the same mother with Joseph. These sons of Jacob then came into Egypt, and applied themselves to Joseph, wanting to buy corn; for nothing of this kind was done without his approbation, since even then only was the honor that was paid the king himself advantageous to the persons that paid it, when they took care to honor Joseph also. Now when he well knew his brethren, they thought nothing of him; for he was but a youth when he left them, and was now come to an age so much greater, that the lineaments of his face were changed, and he was not known by them: besides this, the greatness of the dignity wherein he appeared, suffered them not so much as to suspect it was he. He now made trial what sentiments they had about affairs of the greatest consequence; for he refused to sell them corn, and said they were come as spies of the king's affairs; and that they came from several countries, and joined themselves together, and pretended that they were of kin,it not being possible that a private man should breed up so many sons, and those of so great beauty of countenance as they were, such an education of so many children being not easily obtained by kings themselves. Now this he did in order to discover what concerned his father, and what happened to him after his own departure from him, and as desiring to know what was become of Benjamin his brother; for he was afraid that they had ventured on the like wicked enterprise against him that they had done to himself, and had taken him off also. 3. Now these brethren of his were under distraction and terror, and thought that very great danger hung over them; yet not at all reflecting upon their brother Joseph, and standing firm under the accusations laid against them, they made their defense by Reubel, the eldest of them, who now became their spokesman: "We come not hither," said he, "with any unjust design, nor in order to bring any harm to the king's affairs; we only want to be preserved,as supposing your humanity might be a refuge for us from the miseries which our country labors under, we having heard that you proposed to sell corn, not only to your own countrymen, but to strangers also, and that you determined to allow that corn, in order to preserve all that want it; but that we are brethren, and of the same common blood, the peculiar lineaments of our faces, and those not so much different from one another, plainly show. 4. And thus did Reubel endeavor to persuade Joseph to have a better opinion of them. But when he had learned from them that Jacob was alive, and that his brother was not destroyed by them, he for the present put them in prison, as intending to examine more into their affairs when he should be at leisure. But on the third day he brought them out, and said to them, "Since you constantly affirm that you are not come to do any harm to the king's affairs; that you are brethren, and the sons of the father whom you named; you will satisfy me of the truth of what you say, if you leave one of your company with me, who shall suffer no injury here; and if, when ye have carried corn to your father, you will come to me again, and bring your brother, whom you say you left there, along with you, for this shall be by me esteemed an assurance of the truth of what you have told me." Hereupon they were in greater grief than before; they wept, and perpetually deplored one among another the calamity of Joseph; and said, "They were fallen into this misery as a punishment inflicted by God for what evil contrivances they had against him." And Reubel was large in his reproaches of them for their too late repentance, whence no profit arose to Joseph; and earnestly exhorted them to bear with patience whatever they suffered, since it was done by God in way of punishment, on his account. Thus they spake to one another, not imagining that Joseph understood their language. A general sadness also seized on them at Reubel's words, and a repentance for what they had done; and they condemned the wickedness they had perpetrated, for which they judged they were justly punished by God. Now when Joseph saw that they were in this distress, he was so affected at it that he fell into tears, and not being willing that they should take notice of him, he retired; and after a while came to them again, and taking Symeon (6) in order to his being a pledge for his brethren's return, he bid them take the corn they had bought, and go their way. He also commanded his steward privily to put the money which they had brought with them for the purchase of corn into their sacks, and to dismiss them therewith; who did what he was commanded to do. 5. Now when Jacob's sons were come into the land of Canaan, they told their father what had happened to them in Egypt, and that they were taken to have come thither as spies upon the king; and how they said they were brethren, and had left their eleventh brother with their father, but were not believed; and how they had left Symeon with the governor, until Benjamin should go thither, and be a testimonial of the truth of what they had said: and they begged of their father to fear nothing, but to send the lad along with them. But Jacob was not pleased with any thing his sons had done; and he took the detention of Symeon heinously, and thence thought it a foolish thing to give up Benjamin also. Neither did he yield to Reubel's persuasion, though he begged it of him, and gave leave that the grandfather might, in way of requital, kill his own sons, in case any harm came to Benjamin in the journey. So they were distressed, and knew not what to do; nay, there was another accident that still disturbed them more, - the money that was found hidden in their sacks of corn. Yet when the corn they had brought failed them, and when the famine still afflicted them, and necessity forced them, Jacob did (7) [not] still resolve to send Benjamin with his brethren, although there was no returning into Egypt unless they came with what they had promised. Now the misery growing every day worse, and his sons begging it of him, he had no other course to take in his present circumstances. And Judas, who was of a bold temper on other occasions, spake his mind very freely to him: "That it did not become him to be afraid on account of his son, nor to suspect the worst, as he did; for nothing could be done to his son but by the appointment of God, which must also for certain come to pass, though he were at home with him; that he ought not to condemn them to such manifest destruction; nor deprive them of that plenty of food they might have from Pharaoh, by his unreasonable fear about his son Benjamin, but ought to take care of the preservation of Symeon, lest, by attempting to hinder Benjamin's journey, Symeon should perish. He exhorted him to trust God for him; and said he would either bring his son back to him safe, or, together with his, lose his own life." So that Jacob was at length persuaded, and delivered Benjamin to them, with the price of the corn doubled; he also sent presents to Joseph of the fruits of the land of Canaan, balsam and rosin, as also turpentine and honey. (8) Now their father shed many tears at the departure of his sons, as well as themselves. His concern was, that he might receive them back again safe after their journey; and their concern was, that they might find their father well, and no way afflicted with grief for them. And this lamentation lasted a whole day; so that the old man was at last tired with grief, and staid behind; but they went on their way for Egypt, endeavoring to mitigate their grief for their present misfortunes, with the hopes of better success hereafter. 6. As soon as they came into Egypt, they were brought down to Joseph: but here no small fear disturbed them, lest they should be accused about the price of the corn, as if they had cheated Joseph. They then made a long apology to Joseph's steward; and told him, that when they came home they found the money in their sacks, and that they had now brought it along with them. He said he did not know what they meant: so they were delivered from that fear. And when he had loosed Symeon, and put him into a handsome habit, he suffered him to be with his brethren; at which time Joseph came from his attendance on the king. So they offered him their presents; and upon his putting the question to them about their father, they answered that they found him well. He also, upon his discovery that Benjamin was alive, asked whether this was their younger brother; for he had seen him. Whereupon they said he was: he replied, that the God over all was his protector. But when his affection to him made him shed tears, he retired, desiring he might not be seen in that plight by his brethren. Then Joseph took them to supper, and they were set down in the same order as they used to sit at their father's table. And although Joseph treated them all kindly, yet did he send a mess to Benjamin that was double to what the rest of the guests had for their shares. 7. Now when after supper they had composed themselves to sleep, Joseph commanded his steward both to give them their measures of corn, and to hide its price again in their sacks; and that withal they should put into Benjamin's sack the golden cup, out of which he loved himself to drink. - which things he did, in order to make trial of his brethren, whether they would stand by Benjamin when he should be accused of having stolen the cup, and should appear to be in danger; or whether they would leave him, and, depending on their own innocency, go to their father without him. When the servant had done as he was bidden, the sons of Jacob, knowing nothing of all this, went their way, and took Symeon along with them, and had a double cause of joy, both because they had received him again, and because they took back Benjamin to their father, as they had promised. But presently a troop of horsemen encompassed them, and brought with them Joseph's servant, who had put the cup into Benjamin's sack. Upon which unexpected attack of the horsemen they were much disturbed, and asked what the reason was that they came thus upon men, who a little before had been by their lord thought worthy of an honorable and hospitable reception? They replied, by calling them wicked wretches, who had forgot that very hospitable and kind treatment which Joseph had given them, and did not scruple to be injurious to him, and to carry off that cup out of which he had, in so friendly a manner, drank to them, and not regarding their friendship with Joseph, no more than the danger they should be in if they were taken, in comparison of the unjust gain. Hereupon he threatened that they should be punished; for though they had escaped the knowledge of him who was but a servant, yet had they not escaped the knowledge of God, nor had gone off with what they had stolen; and, after all, asked why we come upon them, as if they knew nothing of the matter: and he told them that they should immediately know it by their punishment. This, and more of the same nature, did the servant say, in way of reproach to them: but they being wholly ignorant of any thing here that concerned them, laughed at what he said, and wondered at the abusive language which the servant gave them, when he was so hardy as to accuse those who did not before so much as retain the price of their corn, which was found in their sacks, but brought it again, though nobody else knew of any such thing, - so far were they from offering any injury to Joseph voluntarily. But still, supposing that a search would be a more sure justification of themselves than their own denial of the fact, they bid him search them, and that if any of them had been guilty of the theft, to punish them all; for being no way conscious to themselves of any crime, they spake with assurance, and, as they thought, without any danger to themselves also. The servants desired there might be a search made; but they said the punishment should extend to him alone who should be found guilty of the theft. So they made the search; and, having searched all the rest, they came last of all to Benjamin, as knowing it was Benjamin's sack in which they had hidden the cup, they having indeed searched the rest only for a show of accuracy: so the rest were out of fear for themselves, and were now only concerned about Benjamin, but still were well assured that he would also be found innocent; and they reproached those that came after them for their hindering them, while they might, in the mean while, have gotten a good way on their journey. But as soon as they had searched Benjamin's sack, they found the cup, and took it from him; and all was changed into mourning and lamentation. They rent their garments, and wept for the punishment which their brother was to undergo for his theft, and for the delusion they had put on their father, when they promised they would bring Benjamin safe to him. What added to their misery was,that this melancholy accident came unfortunately at a time when they thought they had been gotten off clear; but they confessed that this misfortune of their brother, as well as the grief of their father for him, was owing to themselves, since it was they that forced their father to send him with them, when he was averse to it. 8. The horsemen therefore took Benjamin and brought him to Joseph, his brethren also following him; who, when he saw him in custody, and them in the habit of mourners, said, "Howcame you, vile wretches as you are, to have such a strange notion of my kindness to you, and of God's providence, as impudently to do thus to your benefactor, who in such an hospitable manner had entertained you ?" Whereupon they gave up themselves to be punished, in order to save Benjamin; and called to mind what a wicked enterprise they had been guilty of against Joseph. They also pronounced him more happy than themselves, if he were dead, in being freed from the miseries of this life; and if he were alive, that he enjoyed the pleasure of seeing God's vengeance upon them. They said further; that they were the plague of their father, since they should now add to his former affliction for Joseph, this other affliction for Benjamin. Reubel also was large in cutting them upon this occasion. But Joseph dismissed them; for he said they had been guilty of no offense, and that he would content himself with the lad's punishment; for he said it was not a fit thing to let him go free, for the sake of those who had not offended; nor was it a fit thing to punish them together with him who had been guilty of stealing. And when he promised to give them leave to go away in safety, the rest of them were under great consternation, and were able to say nothing on this sad occasion. But Judas, who had persuaded their father to send the lad from him, being otherwise also a very bold and active man, determined to hazard himself for the preservation of his brother. So Judas, being very willing to undergo any thing whatever for the deliverance of his brother, cast himself down at Joseph's feet, and earnestly labored to assuage and pacify his anger. All his brethren also fell down before him, weeping and delivering themselves up to destruction for the preservation of the life of Benjamin. 10. But Joseph, as overcome now with his affections, and no longer able to personate an angry man, commanded all that were present to depart, that he might make himself known to his brethren when they were alone; and when the rest were gone out, he made himself known to his brethren; and said, When Joseph had said this, he embraced his brethren, who were in tears and sorrow; but the generous kindness of their brother seemed to leave among them no room for fear, lest they should be punished on account of what they had consulted and acted against him; and they were then feasting. Now the king, as soon as he heard that Joseph's brethren were come to him, was exceeding glad of it, as if it had been a part of his own good fortune; and gave them wagons full of corn and gold and silver, to be conveyed to his father. Now when they had received more of their brother part to be carried to their father, and part as free gifts to every one of themselves, Benjamin having still more than the rest, they departed. (4) This Potiphar, or, as Josephus, Petephres, who was now a priest of On, or Heliopolis, is the same name in Josephus, and perhaps in Moses also, with him who is before called head cook or captain of the guard, and to whom Joseph was sold. See Genesis 37:36; 39:1, with 41:50. They are also affirmed to be one and the same person in the Testament of Joseph, Sect. 18, for he is there said to have married the daughter of his master and mistress. Nor is this a notion peculiar to that Testament, but, as Dr. Bernard confesses, note on Antiq. B. II. Ch. 4. Sect. 1, common to Josephus, to the Septuagint interpreters, and to other learned Jews of old time. (5) This entire ignorance of the Egyptians of these years of famine before they came, told us before, as well as here, Ch. 5. Sect. 7, by Josephus, seems to me almost incredible. It is in no other copy that I know of. (6) The reason why Symeon might be selected out of the rest for Joseph's prisoner, is plain in the Testament of Symeon, namely that he was one of the bitterest of all Joseph's brethren against him, Sect. 2; which appears also in part by the Testament of Zabulon, Sect. 3. (7) The coherence seems to me to show that the negative particle is here wanting, which I have supplied in brackets, and I wonder none have hitherto suspected that it ought to be supplied. (9) This oration seems to me too large, and too unusual a digression, to have been composed by Judas on this occasion. It seems to me a speech or declamation composed formerly, in the person of Judas, and in the way of oratory, that lay by him and which he thought fit to insert on this occasion. See two more such speeches or declamations, Antiq. B. VI. Ch. 14. Sect. 4 (10) In all this speech of Judas we may observe, that Josephus still supposed that death was the punishment of theft in Egypt, in the days of Joseph, though it never was so among the Jews, by the law of Moses.	4,462	ENGLISH	1
The rise of Joseph Stalin. Joseph Stalin was the authoritarian leader of the Soviet Union for 31 years between 1922 and his death in 1953. During this time, he revolutionized the Russian economy with a combination of rapid industrialization and centralized economic collectivism, reforms that in some instances caused massive devastation in rural parts of the country (including the famine of 1932-1933, in which up to mm people starved to death). A hugely controversial figure on the global political stage, Stalin carried out ruthless purges of the Soviet military, political and Judicial classes (Applicable, 2004), ending political opponents to work in work camps (or gulags) in Siberia from which few ever returned. He also led Russia into a non-aggression pact with Germany’s Addle Hitler that lasted until Hitter’s spectacular miscalculation in June 1941 when the German army attempted to invade the Soviet Union. Upon Stalin’s death in 1953, he was simultaneously one of the most revered and feared political leaders in modern times, and the influence of his shadow remains strong in Russia even today. Before the Russian revolution of 1917, Stalin was a Bolshevik operative in the Caucasus, organizing resistance against the Tsar. This earned him the respect and trust of Vladimir Lenin, who invited Stalin to Join the highest levels of Bolshevik power, although others – including Leon Trotsky – subsequently criticized the brutality of Stalin and his troops while suppressing counter-revolutionary insurgents in Poland and Ukraine. By 1921, Stalin had been asked by Lenin to help secure his power base against a perceived threat from Trotsky, culminating in Linen’s victory at the Tenth Party Congress later that year. As a reward for his help, Stalin was appointed by Lenin to become General Secretary f the party, and following Linen’s first stroke in 1922 it was Stalin, more than any other party member, who became the link between Lenin and the rest of the world. However, the relationship between Stalin and Lenin grew strained, and by the time of Linen’s death in 1924 the two men were on bitter terms. Stalin, meanwhile, had formed an alliance with Level Keener and Gregory Genevieve, in an attempt to out- maneuver Trotsky, with the latter angling (like Stalin) to replace Lenin as leader of Russia. Lenin had foreseen the potential for conflict following his own death, and had attempted to set in place a system that would prevent the party being weakened by in-fighting. These efforts were cut short by his sharp deterioration in health between 1922 and 1924, which effectively allowed Stalin to take control in the developing vacuum of power. Although Lenin had been fiercely critical of Trotsky by this point, there is evidence to suggest that he saw him as a preferable alternative to Stalin, and that and en lived longer Lenin might nave engineered a situation in which Trotsky possibly supported by Keener and Genevieve, would have assumed power in the place of Stalin (Monitored, 2008). However, Stalin took advantage of Linen’s weakness in order to firmly establish his own dominance. Stalin ultimately grew to distrust most of those around him. Paranoid, he had taken to sleeping in a different room each night in order to confuse would-be assassins, and he set about working to remove not only Trotsky but also his former allies Keener and Genevieve from the party. Forming a new alliance, this time with Nikolas Buchanan, Stalin worked to reduce party support for Keener and Genevieve, and called for a new policy of consolidating the communist ideology in current Soviet tastes rather than attempting to expand the empire to new territories (Fifes, 2008). This new policy was directly opposed by Trotsky, Keener and Genevieve, who formed the United Opposition party in an attempt to destabilize Stalin. Although influential, the United Opposition group was never able to cause serious damage to Stalin, who ultimately was able to force all three men to sign letters of submission to his own authority. By 1927, Trotsky, Keener and Genevieve had been ejected from the party due to their disloyalty to Stalin, although only Trotsky remained permanently outside the party, moving to Mexico where, in 1940, he was eventually assassinated by an operative working for Stalin. Stalin went on to create a cult of personality in the Soviet Union, focused on both himself and Lenin. Some historians have described the cult surrounding Stalin as one of the most perfect ever devised, certainly on such a massive scale, and among his efforts was a significant rewriting of Russian history that aimed to establish him as a much more important player during the revolution than had been the case (although he had certainly been influential). This personality cult was one of the main reasons for the division between Stalin and Trotsky, with the latter believing that Stalin was not only turning his back on Linen’s philosophy but was using Linen’s name to do so. After his death, his successor Nikkei Khrushchev argued that Stalin’s cult of personality was contrary to the spirit of Marxism-Leninism and had gone too far towards the elevation of Stalin to the role of a virtual superhuman. By the time of his death, Stalin has by some estimations become Just as tyrannical figure as the Tsar he had helped to overthrow (Service, 2010), and was certainly a very different leader from his predecessor Lenin. He successfully purged all opposition, even going so far as to have his great enemy Trotsky assassinated on the other side of the world. To some, Stalin was a paranoid egomaniac, and there is certainly evidence to support such a view. However, others argue that in the dangerous world of twentieth century Russian politics this was the only way in which any figure could survive (Monitored, 2003), an argument that omits to mention that it was Stalin himself who helped to create such a world. Modern Russia is still strongly influenced by Stalin, with leaders such as Yelling and Putting frequently held up to be compared to their most notorious predecessor.	<urn:uuid:dbf331c0-a2be-4b05-9d44-92372365df64>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://clikngo.com/the-rise-of-joseph-stalin/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598800.30/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120135447-20200120164447-00095.warc.gz	en	0.98557	1,225	4	4	[ -0.7592801451683044, -0.06605308502912521, 0.19666486978530884, 0.25652438402175903, 0.07404161989688873, 0.049375079572200775, 0.39013612270355225, 0.2187773585319519, -0.31883174180984497, -0.1376705765724182, 0.2649742364883423, 0.08426779508590698, 0.729937732219696, 0.3286813795566559...	3	The rise of Joseph Stalin. Joseph Stalin was the authoritarian leader of the Soviet Union for 31 years between 1922 and his death in 1953. During this time, he revolutionized the Russian economy with a combination of rapid industrialization and centralized economic collectivism, reforms that in some instances caused massive devastation in rural parts of the country (including the famine of 1932-1933, in which up to mm people starved to death). A hugely controversial figure on the global political stage, Stalin carried out ruthless purges of the Soviet military, political and Judicial classes (Applicable, 2004), ending political opponents to work in work camps (or gulags) in Siberia from which few ever returned. He also led Russia into a non-aggression pact with Germany’s Addle Hitler that lasted until Hitter’s spectacular miscalculation in June 1941 when the German army attempted to invade the Soviet Union. Upon Stalin’s death in 1953, he was simultaneously one of the most revered and feared political leaders in modern times, and the influence of his shadow remains strong in Russia even today. Before the Russian revolution of 1917, Stalin was a Bolshevik operative in the Caucasus, organizing resistance against the Tsar. This earned him the respect and trust of Vladimir Lenin, who invited Stalin to Join the highest levels of Bolshevik power, although others – including Leon Trotsky – subsequently criticized the brutality of Stalin and his troops while suppressing counter-revolutionary insurgents in Poland and Ukraine. By 1921, Stalin had been asked by Lenin to help secure his power base against a perceived threat from Trotsky, culminating in Linen’s victory at the Tenth Party Congress later that year. As a reward for his help, Stalin was appointed by Lenin to become General Secretary f the party, and following Linen’s first stroke in 1922 it was Stalin, more than any other party member, who became the link between Lenin and the rest of the world. However, the relationship between Stalin and Lenin grew strained, and by the time of Linen’s death in 1924 the two men were on bitter terms. Stalin, meanwhile, had formed an alliance with Level Keener and Gregory Genevieve, in an attempt to out- maneuver Trotsky, with the latter angling (like Stalin) to replace Lenin as leader of Russia. Lenin had foreseen the potential for conflict following his own death, and had attempted to set in place a system that would prevent the party being weakened by in-fighting. These efforts were cut short by his sharp deterioration in health between 1922 and 1924, which effectively allowed Stalin to take control in the developing vacuum of power. Although Lenin had been fiercely critical of Trotsky by this point, there is evidence to suggest that he saw him as a preferable alternative to Stalin, and that and en lived longer Lenin might nave engineered a situation in which Trotsky possibly supported by Keener and Genevieve, would have assumed power in the place of Stalin (Monitored, 2008). However, Stalin took advantage of Linen’s weakness in order to firmly establish his own dominance. Stalin ultimately grew to distrust most of those around him. Paranoid, he had taken to sleeping in a different room each night in order to confuse would-be assassins, and he set about working to remove not only Trotsky but also his former allies Keener and Genevieve from the party. Forming a new alliance, this time with Nikolas Buchanan, Stalin worked to reduce party support for Keener and Genevieve, and called for a new policy of consolidating the communist ideology in current Soviet tastes rather than attempting to expand the empire to new territories (Fifes, 2008). This new policy was directly opposed by Trotsky, Keener and Genevieve, who formed the United Opposition party in an attempt to destabilize Stalin. Although influential, the United Opposition group was never able to cause serious damage to Stalin, who ultimately was able to force all three men to sign letters of submission to his own authority. By 1927, Trotsky, Keener and Genevieve had been ejected from the party due to their disloyalty to Stalin, although only Trotsky remained permanently outside the party, moving to Mexico where, in 1940, he was eventually assassinated by an operative working for Stalin. Stalin went on to create a cult of personality in the Soviet Union, focused on both himself and Lenin. Some historians have described the cult surrounding Stalin as one of the most perfect ever devised, certainly on such a massive scale, and among his efforts was a significant rewriting of Russian history that aimed to establish him as a much more important player during the revolution than had been the case (although he had certainly been influential). This personality cult was one of the main reasons for the division between Stalin and Trotsky, with the latter believing that Stalin was not only turning his back on Linen’s philosophy but was using Linen’s name to do so. After his death, his successor Nikkei Khrushchev argued that Stalin’s cult of personality was contrary to the spirit of Marxism-Leninism and had gone too far towards the elevation of Stalin to the role of a virtual superhuman. By the time of his death, Stalin has by some estimations become Just as tyrannical figure as the Tsar he had helped to overthrow (Service, 2010), and was certainly a very different leader from his predecessor Lenin. He successfully purged all opposition, even going so far as to have his great enemy Trotsky assassinated on the other side of the world. To some, Stalin was a paranoid egomaniac, and there is certainly evidence to support such a view. However, others argue that in the dangerous world of twentieth century Russian politics this was the only way in which any figure could survive (Monitored, 2003), an argument that omits to mention that it was Stalin himself who helped to create such a world. Modern Russia is still strongly influenced by Stalin, with leaders such as Yelling and Putting frequently held up to be compared to their most notorious predecessor.	1,281	ENGLISH	1
John Muir was born in Scotland on April 21st, 1838. His Father wanted his children to have a stricter Religious upbringing and therefore moved the family to the United States. John Muir is perhaps known today as the most pre-eminent naturalist and advocate for the preservation of much of the western United States. Today being an environmentalist is laudable but in Muir's days the country was there to be exploited but by hard work and lobbying Muir did much to turn such beautiful areas as Yosemite into protected National Parks. His writing is not only an invaluable guidebook to these unspoilt places but also a hymn to their spirituality. As a keen scientific mind he helped to push the understanding of nature forward by observing and writing upon the glaciers and their actions in eroding and shaping much of the land. Muir helped to also create The Sierra Club, which he led for many years, on projects to preserve these and other areas of outstanding natural beauty. He was equally adept at persuading politicians, from Presidents to local State officials, and the common man to come together in the defence of Nature.	<urn:uuid:851f5f2e-3a29-46e0-b05f-2f3c02857d5e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/john-muir-the-mountains-of-california-john-muir/1121181591	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694908.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127051112-20200127081112-00459.warc.gz	en	0.985009	226	3.53125	4	[ -0.03491787239909172, 0.5798908472061157, 0.33518707752227783, 0.1146712601184845, 0.1767106056213379, 0.1402488499879837, -0.11863866448402405, 0.0720650777220726, -0.19012193381786346, 0.12326064705848694, -0.16347503662109375, -0.5351161956787109, 0.07441673427820206, 0.1577317863702774...	1	John Muir was born in Scotland on April 21st, 1838. His Father wanted his children to have a stricter Religious upbringing and therefore moved the family to the United States. John Muir is perhaps known today as the most pre-eminent naturalist and advocate for the preservation of much of the western United States. Today being an environmentalist is laudable but in Muir's days the country was there to be exploited but by hard work and lobbying Muir did much to turn such beautiful areas as Yosemite into protected National Parks. His writing is not only an invaluable guidebook to these unspoilt places but also a hymn to their spirituality. As a keen scientific mind he helped to push the understanding of nature forward by observing and writing upon the glaciers and their actions in eroding and shaping much of the land. Muir helped to also create The Sierra Club, which he led for many years, on projects to preserve these and other areas of outstanding natural beauty. He was equally adept at persuading politicians, from Presidents to local State officials, and the common man to come together in the defence of Nature.	230	ENGLISH	1
Chief Joseph Orono. A Penobscot chief, born, according to tradition, on Penobscot River, Maine, in or about 16881. According to one tradition he was a descendant of Baron de Castine, and although Williamson, who seems to have seen him and was familiar with his later career, is disposed to reject this story2, yet from Orono’s own admissions it is possible that he was a son of Castine’s daughter, who married a Frenchman, and with her children was taken captive in 1704. Nickolar, who was related to Orono by marriage, asserted, according to Williamson, that Orono was in some way related to old Castine; moreover he asserts that Orono was not of full blood, but part white-“a half breed or more.” Orono informed Capt. Munsell3 that his father was a Frenchman and his mother half French and half Indian. He had none of the physical characteristics of an Indian save that he was tall, straight, and well proportioned. Very little is known of him until he had passed his 50th year. That he embraced the Roman Catholic faith while comparatively young, and that he was only a subordinate chief until he had reached his 75th year, are confirmed by the scanty records of his history. Until 1759 Tomasus, or Tomer, was head-chief of the Penobscot, when he was succeeded by Osson, who in turn was succeeded by Orono about 1770 or 1774. These three were ardent advocates of peace at the commencement of the French and Indian war in 1754, and until war was declared against the tribe by the English colonists. In 1775 Orono and three of his colleagues went, with one Andrew Gilman as interpreter, to profess their friendship and to tender their services to the Massachusetts government. They met the Provincial Congress at Watertown on June 21, where they entered into a treaty of amity with that body and offered assistance, and afterward proved faithful allies of the colonists during their struggle for independence. Orono was held in as high esteem after the war as before; and in 1785 and 1796 entered into treaties with Massachusetts, by which his tribe ceded certain portions of their lands and fixed permanent limits to the parts reserved. At the time of the latter treaty Orono is said to have reached his 108th year. He died at his home at Oldtown, Maine, Feb. 5. 1802. His wife. who was a full blood Indian and his almost lifelong companion, served him a few years. Orono had a son, who was accidentally shot about 1774, aged 25 years; and a daughter who married Capt. Nickolar. Orono was buried in the cemetery at Stillwater, Penobscot County, Maine, in the vicinity of the town that bears his name.4 Orono – Catholic Indian Chief There is very little authentic history of the chiefs or sagamores of the Penobscot tribe of Indians before Madokawando who lived in the 17th century. The time of his birth is not given by any historian, but it is certain that he was very active in the wars of King Philip and was on intimate terms with Baron de St. Castin, whom he met for the first time at Quebec. Madokawando, a Tarratine chief, was the adopted son of Assiminasqua, a sagamore of the Kanabis, or Canibas, one of the Abenaki tribes. In the summer time Madokawando, with his brother Indians, was accustomed to make yearly trips in their birch canoes down the Penobscot to its mouth, and in the salt water to catch fish in sufficient quantities to supply their needs during winter, in their homes around Orono. On these annual excursions he again fell in with Baron de St. Castin, who was then sojourning on a peninsula in Penobscot Bay, and which now bears that nobleman’s name. The sagamore and the explorer became fast friends and so great was his admiration for the Baron that he gave his daughter Matilde to him as wife, and of this union were born several children. Among them was one fair daughter who, afterwards, married a Frenchman of Castin’s suite, and to them was born, about 1691, Orono, the hero of this sketch. In confirmation of the above. Captain Joseph Munsell, of Bangor, Maine, who knew Orono well, said, and his words are on record, that Orono himself told him, (the Captain), his father was a Frenchman and his mother half French and half Indian. Hence, we may conclude as almost certain, that Orono was the grandson of Baron de St. Castin and Matilde, the daughter of the celebrated sagamore, Madokawando. There are two other accounts of Orono’s birth which I deem fit to give, but which I consider improbable: - Orono, according to a tradition that received credence among the old settlers of this town (Orono), was the child of white parents and was kidnapped, in infancy, by the Tarratines, from the banks of the Androscoggin, near where the town of Brunswick now stands. But this story I hold to be incorrect. Mr. Phineas Vinal, at present a venerated citizen of Orono, told me that he had heard his mother say that Chief Orono was certainly part Indian; his countenance indicated it although he had but few, if any, of the characteristics of that race. Mr. Vinal says his mother knew the old chief well. On his mother’s side Mr. Vinal is a grandson of John Marsh, the interpreter, who acted in that capacity between the Indians and the English in the war of 1812, when the latter occupied Bangor. Marsh Island, containing five thousand acres, (on which are Old Town and a part of Orono) was purchased by him from the Indians for fifteen bushels of corn. - The other story is that he was a native of York in Cumberland County, this state, and was one of several captive children taken in 1692 by the Indians who ravaged that place. Orono, according to this story, was four years old at the time. Also the same tradition states that the Indians, soon after, sent back to the garrison-houses the old women, and the children between the ages of three and seven years, so as to recompense the English who, on a former occasion, spared the lives of several Indian women and children. Hence, if Orono, who was then four years, was among the captives, he must have been among those who were returned. Again this tradition says, that his family name was Donmel or Donnel, but, at that time, 1692. the Donnel family was one of the most, if not the most distinguished family in all that section, or in the province, and hence, if a son of that distinguished family had been taken captive, he would in all probability, have been returned or recovered. Besides, there is no mention of this, even traditionally, among the people of York. Madokawando died about 1700. It is said that he always treated his prisoners well, and that he was known for his sagacity and sincerity. We have no reliable data concerning his immediate successors, but of this we are certain, that at the beginning of the American Revolution, Orono, who had acquired the confidence of his people by his ability, integrity and prudence, was acclaimed their Chief. Some reviewers of his life make him chief long before this date and place his birth in 1688; but I cannot find a particle of evidence to sustain the former; on the contrary, in 1754, when the Indians were at war with the French, Tomasus was sagamore of the tribe and though Orono was at that time a man of ability and held important positions, yet we have no evidence of his being chief so early. Tomasus, or Tamor, as he is sometimes called, was succeeded by Osson, a chief who believed in the policy of peace until his patience was exasperated by the nefarious and bloody actions of Captain Casgill of Newcastle, who, one day with his company of volunteers, wickedly and inhumanely shot a party of peaceable Indian hunters on Owl’s Head. Osson died about the beginning of the American Revolution and Orono succeeded him. Orono was a man of intelligence, though not much of a reader or writer, a gentle, benign chief, and very sedate. He was very thoughtful and reserved, saying little and that after mature consideration. When he expressed his views they were always to the point and in as few words as possible. He had an analytic mind and good common sense which served him in the place of higher education, “a sensible, serious man and a hearty friend.” Naturally, he knew both the French and Indian languages, his father being French and his mother half French and half Indian. He could also speak the English language quite fluently, particularly towards the end, when he associated a great deal with the whites. Orono belonged to the Tarratine tribe of Indians who were among the earliest converts to Catholicity made by the Jesuit Fathers east of the Mississippi. He is sometimes referred to as a convert to the Faith, but this is a mistake, as his father and mother were both Catholics. To the Catholic religion he was ardently attached. He loved its ritual and considered it an honor to be allowed to take part in its ceremonies. He was a staunch supporter of the faith planted in the hearts of his sagamore ancestors by the “black robes,” and when, after the Revolution, Protestant missionaries were sent to the tribe to proselytize them, they failed to shake the faith of their fathers. In figure, he was tall and stately, finely proportioned, with noble bearing, fair hair, blue eyes benignly penetrating and intelligent the grand specimen of a warrior, and it is said that in his gait, even in old age, there were a gracefulness and elasticity which at once attracted and marked his superiority. But his breadth of mind, his gentlemanly manners and kind disposition made him a chief not alone among the Indians butt also among the white men, and gave him that distinction which posterity recognizes. Williamson says that: His manners were both conciliating and commanding, and his habits worthy of all imitation. For he was not only honest, chaste, temperate and industrious, but his word was sacred and his friendship unchanging. Though he was not deficient in courage or any of the martial virtues, he was so fully aware how much wars had wasted his tribe and entailed misery on the survivors, as to become, from principle, a uniform and persevering advocate of peace. He knew, and always labored to convince his people, that they flourished best and enjoyed most under its refreshing shade. And even after Casgill’s murderous assault, Orono, who was then a warrior passed middle age, was still for peace. “To kill the living will not bring the dead to life,” said he, speaking of the Owl’s Head wicked transaction. The crimes of few never sprinkle blood on all. Strike the murderers I Let the rest be quiet. Peace is the Voice of God. Everyone is blessed under its wings. Everything withers in war; Indians are killed; squaws starve. Nothing is gained, not plunder, not glory. Englishmen are now too many. Let the hatchet lay buried. Smoke the calumet once more. Strive for peace. Exact a recompense by treaty for wrongs done us. None! Ay, then fight ‘em. Orono could not understand how England could persecute, plunder or enslave her colonies, which he looked upon as her children in a far off land, and he could not conceive how England, professing Christianity, could be a factor in such unnatural a warfare. There was nothing so dear to Orono’s heart, after his religion, as liberty. It was the sweetest sound to the Christian sagamore’s ears. “Give me liberty or give me death,” was the key note of his soul. On one, occasion, addressing his braves, at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, before he proffered aid to the Americans, he made use of these noble and patriotic words: The Great Spirit gives us freely all things. Our white brothers tell us they came to the Indian’s country to enjoy liberty and life. Their Great Sagamore (the English King) is coming to bind them in chains, to kill them. We must fight him. We will stand on the same ground with them. For should he bind them in bonds, next he will treat us as bears. Indians liberties and lands, his proud spirit will tear away from them. Help his ill-treated sons’; they will return good for good, and the law of love runs through the hearts of their children and ours when we are dead. Look down the stream of time. Look up to the Great Spirit. Be kind, be valiant, be free: then are Indians Sons of Glory. Captivated by these patriotic sentiments, his people applauded him and swore fealty to him, whatever cause he espoused. So, when the Revolutionary War broke out, resisting all solicitations of other tribes, he extended his sympathy and proffered the aid of his warriors to the American cause; and at a moment when Indians, in other parts of the state, were threatening to join the English, Orono, with three of his colleagues, as a deputation of the Penobscot Indians, arrived in Watertown, Massachusetts, two days after the battle of Bunker Hill, and tendered their services to the Provincial Congress held there on June 21, 1775. Orono, addressing a committee of the Provincial Congress among other things, said: “In behalf of the whole Penobscot tribe I hereby declare to you, if the grievance under which our people labor were removed, they would aid with their whole force to defend the country.” The grievances, spoken of by Orono, were principally trespasses by the whites upon their timber lands and cheating them in trade. Though the smoke of battle of Bunker Hill had scarcely cleared away, the committee of the Provincial Congress said nothing about accepting Orono’s offer, but promised him that, “as soon as they could take breath from this present fight” their complaints should be attended to. In the same year the above mentioned grievances were removed, and, on July of the following year, three of the Penobscot tribes acknowledged the independence of the United States, withheld all succor from the British enemy, and, eventually, some of them engaged in the war, under Captain John Preble, Lieutenants Andrew Oilman, Joseph Munsell and Orono, who then bore a Continental Commission as he led his braves to the field of battle. When Castine, (the peninsula) was taken by the British in 1779, and other settlements on either bank of the Penobscot were under their sway, Orono proved himself faithful to his engagements and true to the American cause by communicating, with great dispatch to the government important and repeated intelligence, and his zeal to the last was inspiring to his tribe. The war being over Orono entered into negotiations with Massachusetts. Through him assignments of large tracts of lands, for valuable considerations, were made to the State and the limits of the territory retained by the tribe were agreed upon. He then retired to his island home at Old Town, rich in years, honor and renown, respected by the commonwealth, loved by the whites and idolized by his tribe. At that time, Father Romaigne, a French priest, had charge of the Tarratines of this section, who held the faith through weal and woe, defying bribes and threats, since their conversion from paganism more than a century before. In all the public services of the Church, Orono took a prominent part. His assiduity at Mass, his joining in its Chant, his responding to the litanies, and his reception of the sacraments, furnished a grand exemplar of all that was noble and elevating in Christian life, which materially advanced the spirituality of his tribe, by spurring them on to the practice of their religion. Whilst he never peremptorily commanded them to observe the laws of their Church, his example in this regard amounted to the same. During his lifetime there were very few delinquents in religious matters among the Tarratines of Marsh Island, and it was a pleasure for the “black robes” to expound to them the teaching of the church. At length, under the weight of over one hundred years, Joseph Orono died, (according to Captain Samuel Lowder, of Bangor) in his wigwam on a Sunday morning, 1801, on the banks of the Penobscot just opposite where Mt. Hope Cemetery now lies, mourned by all who knew him irrespective of creed or color. He retained his mental faculties to the last; and his erect attitude and sickly whiteness of face, flowing white hair and spiritual aspect, gave him the appearance of a grand old saint. Captain Munsell of Bangor, who talked with him in his last sickness, says that Orono told him he was no years at that time, thus fixing his birth in 1691. Mrs. Hall, who died over thirty years ago in this town, aged 100 years, had a distinct recollection of this chief, and saw his funeral cortege pass by. Captain Lowder says that he was buried on the Jameson farm, upper Stillwater, but more likely he was buried in Old Town, probably on Indian Island; but there is absolutely nothing left to make the spot where his remains were consigned to Mother Earth. All my investigations have failed to discover his grave, and not one of the Indians now on Indian Island knows where their great Chief’s dust awaits the resurrection. That nothing exists to indicate the grave of the celebrated Orono appears incredible, but such is the fact. Nobody has yet explained what the grand and sonorous name, Orono, signifies, but it will be perpetuated and honored as long as this township exists, which was incorporated March 12, 1806, and called “Orono”‘ in compliment to him. To my astonishment I discovered a few years ago that the pupils of the public schools here did not know that Joseph Orono professed the Christian faith, and to my great astonishment I discovered also that even some teachers, in the higher grades, never heard of Joseph Orono; though the town from which they get their living was called after that worthy chief. Had he descended from the “Pilgrim Fathers” (and held the creed of the “Reformers”), his name in all probability, would be emblazoned in letters of gold in the school rooms of the town; his praises would be sounded for the children, by every teacher in the district, and a monument would have been erected long since, by the citizens to perpetuate his name and speak his renown. This honor was left for the Knights of Columbus, and on the 12th of October, 1911, the unveiling and dedication of a monument to the memory of the old Indian chief were carried out under the auspices of Joseph Orono Council by whose good work the monument was completed and erected on a lot owned by the writer of this sketch. When the town was incorporated it is said that some protested against its being name after Orono. The protest came from those who hesitated to have the town named after a Catholic Indian chief, and whose descendants even today, objected to having this monument erected in the little public park of the town because, forsooth, the inscription read: Erected in memory of By the Knights of Columbus But the shaft is erected to do honor to Orono, whose virtues are worthy of imitation by the noblest and best of our race, and on it is inscribed the word, Catholic, a word which is historic, brought here by the Northmen even before Catholic Columbus5 touched the American shores, a word which is firmly rooted in our soil and which will adorn other monuments on this continent in centuries yet to come.6 Chief Orono’s nickname, K’tolaqu, translates to “Big Ship.” He was given this nickname as a result of the many tales he told of the big ships he saw during a trip to Boston in 1780 to offer Penobscot aid to the Americans in the Revolutionary War.7 - The Penobscot Tribe This should provide you additional details on the Penobscot tribe specifically. For a general view of all Abenaki’s see: Abenaki Tribe. - The Penobscots in Maine: Orono, the Chief of the Penobscots An interesting chapter from Catholics and the American Revolution which provides a narration of Joseph Orono’s life. Some of the claims by this manuscript are countered by John Harrington in our biography. - A Collection Of American Epitaphs And Inscriptions With Occasional Notes. By Rev. Timothy Alden, A.M., Honorary Member of the Massachusetts and of the New York Historical Societies, Member of the American Antiquarian Society, etc. Pentade I. Vol. I. pp. 60-62. This epitath began the “Donnel” claims of heritage for Chief Joseph Orono. - Joseph Orono – Wikipedia This article as seen on 9 August 2014 is completely unsourced, declares as facts that which is in contention, and contains errors; as such it should be given little credence. See <em>Orono – Catholic Indian Chief</em> below for a contradictory statement by John Harrington ↩ Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, 3d s., ix, 82-91, 1846 ↩ Williamson, Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll, 3d s., ix, 83, 1846 ↩ Hodge, Frederick Webb. <cite>Handbook of American Indians</cite>. Bulletin 30, Bureau of American Ethnology, part 2, p. 155-6. Washington:Government Printing Office. 1912. ↩ The Catholic Columbus is what is in the book ↩ Harrington, Reverend John M. <cite>Orono – Catholic Indian Chief</cite>. Published in Sprague’s Journal of Maine History, Vol. 2 No. 3. Dover, Maine: John Francis Sprague. July 1914. Also published in the <a href="http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1913&dat=19111028&id=BZ0gAAAAIBAJ&sjid=JWgFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1790,1365130">Lewiston Evening Journal</a>, Oct 28, 1911. ↩ <a href="http://www.mainememory.net/artifact/80710">Maine Memory Network</a> ↩	<urn:uuid:a5156d19-b95a-4767-a490-ac5f255529dc>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://accessgenealogy.com/native/orono.htm	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00039.warc.gz	en	0.986814	4,942	3.28125	3	[ -0.12113644182682037, 0.5636253356933594, 0.49697214365005493, -0.42991599440574646, -0.7062568068504333, 0.2154098004102707, 0.39320647716522217, 0.09628260880708694, -0.3238374590873718, 0.009706198237836361, -0.11956167966127396, -0.29776671528816223, 0.2511620819568634, -0.025630962103...	1	Chief Joseph Orono. A Penobscot chief, born, according to tradition, on Penobscot River, Maine, in or about 16881. According to one tradition he was a descendant of Baron de Castine, and although Williamson, who seems to have seen him and was familiar with his later career, is disposed to reject this story2, yet from Orono’s own admissions it is possible that he was a son of Castine’s daughter, who married a Frenchman, and with her children was taken captive in 1704. Nickolar, who was related to Orono by marriage, asserted, according to Williamson, that Orono was in some way related to old Castine; moreover he asserts that Orono was not of full blood, but part white-“a half breed or more.” Orono informed Capt. Munsell3 that his father was a Frenchman and his mother half French and half Indian. He had none of the physical characteristics of an Indian save that he was tall, straight, and well proportioned. Very little is known of him until he had passed his 50th year. That he embraced the Roman Catholic faith while comparatively young, and that he was only a subordinate chief until he had reached his 75th year, are confirmed by the scanty records of his history. Until 1759 Tomasus, or Tomer, was head-chief of the Penobscot, when he was succeeded by Osson, who in turn was succeeded by Orono about 1770 or 1774. These three were ardent advocates of peace at the commencement of the French and Indian war in 1754, and until war was declared against the tribe by the English colonists. In 1775 Orono and three of his colleagues went, with one Andrew Gilman as interpreter, to profess their friendship and to tender their services to the Massachusetts government. They met the Provincial Congress at Watertown on June 21, where they entered into a treaty of amity with that body and offered assistance, and afterward proved faithful allies of the colonists during their struggle for independence. Orono was held in as high esteem after the war as before; and in 1785 and 1796 entered into treaties with Massachusetts, by which his tribe ceded certain portions of their lands and fixed permanent limits to the parts reserved. At the time of the latter treaty Orono is said to have reached his 108th year. He died at his home at Oldtown, Maine, Feb. 5. 1802. His wife. who was a full blood Indian and his almost lifelong companion, served him a few years. Orono had a son, who was accidentally shot about 1774, aged 25 years; and a daughter who married Capt. Nickolar. Orono was buried in the cemetery at Stillwater, Penobscot County, Maine, in the vicinity of the town that bears his name.4 Orono – Catholic Indian Chief There is very little authentic history of the chiefs or sagamores of the Penobscot tribe of Indians before Madokawando who lived in the 17th century. The time of his birth is not given by any historian, but it is certain that he was very active in the wars of King Philip and was on intimate terms with Baron de St. Castin, whom he met for the first time at Quebec. Madokawando, a Tarratine chief, was the adopted son of Assiminasqua, a sagamore of the Kanabis, or Canibas, one of the Abenaki tribes. In the summer time Madokawando, with his brother Indians, was accustomed to make yearly trips in their birch canoes down the Penobscot to its mouth, and in the salt water to catch fish in sufficient quantities to supply their needs during winter, in their homes around Orono. On these annual excursions he again fell in with Baron de St. Castin, who was then sojourning on a peninsula in Penobscot Bay, and which now bears that nobleman’s name. The sagamore and the explorer became fast friends and so great was his admiration for the Baron that he gave his daughter Matilde to him as wife, and of this union were born several children. Among them was one fair daughter who, afterwards, married a Frenchman of Castin’s suite, and to them was born, about 1691, Orono, the hero of this sketch. In confirmation of the above. Captain Joseph Munsell, of Bangor, Maine, who knew Orono well, said, and his words are on record, that Orono himself told him, (the Captain), his father was a Frenchman and his mother half French and half Indian. Hence, we may conclude as almost certain, that Orono was the grandson of Baron de St. Castin and Matilde, the daughter of the celebrated sagamore, Madokawando. There are two other accounts of Orono’s birth which I deem fit to give, but which I consider improbable: - Orono, according to a tradition that received credence among the old settlers of this town (Orono), was the child of white parents and was kidnapped, in infancy, by the Tarratines, from the banks of the Androscoggin, near where the town of Brunswick now stands. But this story I hold to be incorrect. Mr. Phineas Vinal, at present a venerated citizen of Orono, told me that he had heard his mother say that Chief Orono was certainly part Indian; his countenance indicated it although he had but few, if any, of the characteristics of that race. Mr. Vinal says his mother knew the old chief well. On his mother’s side Mr. Vinal is a grandson of John Marsh, the interpreter, who acted in that capacity between the Indians and the English in the war of 1812, when the latter occupied Bangor. Marsh Island, containing five thousand acres, (on which are Old Town and a part of Orono) was purchased by him from the Indians for fifteen bushels of corn. - The other story is that he was a native of York in Cumberland County, this state, and was one of several captive children taken in 1692 by the Indians who ravaged that place. Orono, according to this story, was four years old at the time. Also the same tradition states that the Indians, soon after, sent back to the garrison-houses the old women, and the children between the ages of three and seven years, so as to recompense the English who, on a former occasion, spared the lives of several Indian women and children. Hence, if Orono, who was then four years, was among the captives, he must have been among those who were returned. Again this tradition says, that his family name was Donmel or Donnel, but, at that time, 1692. the Donnel family was one of the most, if not the most distinguished family in all that section, or in the province, and hence, if a son of that distinguished family had been taken captive, he would in all probability, have been returned or recovered. Besides, there is no mention of this, even traditionally, among the people of York. Madokawando died about 1700. It is said that he always treated his prisoners well, and that he was known for his sagacity and sincerity. We have no reliable data concerning his immediate successors, but of this we are certain, that at the beginning of the American Revolution, Orono, who had acquired the confidence of his people by his ability, integrity and prudence, was acclaimed their Chief. Some reviewers of his life make him chief long before this date and place his birth in 1688; but I cannot find a particle of evidence to sustain the former; on the contrary, in 1754, when the Indians were at war with the French, Tomasus was sagamore of the tribe and though Orono was at that time a man of ability and held important positions, yet we have no evidence of his being chief so early. Tomasus, or Tamor, as he is sometimes called, was succeeded by Osson, a chief who believed in the policy of peace until his patience was exasperated by the nefarious and bloody actions of Captain Casgill of Newcastle, who, one day with his company of volunteers, wickedly and inhumanely shot a party of peaceable Indian hunters on Owl’s Head. Osson died about the beginning of the American Revolution and Orono succeeded him. Orono was a man of intelligence, though not much of a reader or writer, a gentle, benign chief, and very sedate. He was very thoughtful and reserved, saying little and that after mature consideration. When he expressed his views they were always to the point and in as few words as possible. He had an analytic mind and good common sense which served him in the place of higher education, “a sensible, serious man and a hearty friend.” Naturally, he knew both the French and Indian languages, his father being French and his mother half French and half Indian. He could also speak the English language quite fluently, particularly towards the end, when he associated a great deal with the whites. Orono belonged to the Tarratine tribe of Indians who were among the earliest converts to Catholicity made by the Jesuit Fathers east of the Mississippi. He is sometimes referred to as a convert to the Faith, but this is a mistake, as his father and mother were both Catholics. To the Catholic religion he was ardently attached. He loved its ritual and considered it an honor to be allowed to take part in its ceremonies. He was a staunch supporter of the faith planted in the hearts of his sagamore ancestors by the “black robes,” and when, after the Revolution, Protestant missionaries were sent to the tribe to proselytize them, they failed to shake the faith of their fathers. In figure, he was tall and stately, finely proportioned, with noble bearing, fair hair, blue eyes benignly penetrating and intelligent the grand specimen of a warrior, and it is said that in his gait, even in old age, there were a gracefulness and elasticity which at once attracted and marked his superiority. But his breadth of mind, his gentlemanly manners and kind disposition made him a chief not alone among the Indians butt also among the white men, and gave him that distinction which posterity recognizes. Williamson says that: His manners were both conciliating and commanding, and his habits worthy of all imitation. For he was not only honest, chaste, temperate and industrious, but his word was sacred and his friendship unchanging. Though he was not deficient in courage or any of the martial virtues, he was so fully aware how much wars had wasted his tribe and entailed misery on the survivors, as to become, from principle, a uniform and persevering advocate of peace. He knew, and always labored to convince his people, that they flourished best and enjoyed most under its refreshing shade. And even after Casgill’s murderous assault, Orono, who was then a warrior passed middle age, was still for peace. “To kill the living will not bring the dead to life,” said he, speaking of the Owl’s Head wicked transaction. The crimes of few never sprinkle blood on all. Strike the murderers I Let the rest be quiet. Peace is the Voice of God. Everyone is blessed under its wings. Everything withers in war; Indians are killed; squaws starve. Nothing is gained, not plunder, not glory. Englishmen are now too many. Let the hatchet lay buried. Smoke the calumet once more. Strive for peace. Exact a recompense by treaty for wrongs done us. None! Ay, then fight ‘em. Orono could not understand how England could persecute, plunder or enslave her colonies, which he looked upon as her children in a far off land, and he could not conceive how England, professing Christianity, could be a factor in such unnatural a warfare. There was nothing so dear to Orono’s heart, after his religion, as liberty. It was the sweetest sound to the Christian sagamore’s ears. “Give me liberty or give me death,” was the key note of his soul. On one, occasion, addressing his braves, at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, before he proffered aid to the Americans, he made use of these noble and patriotic words: The Great Spirit gives us freely all things. Our white brothers tell us they came to the Indian’s country to enjoy liberty and life. Their Great Sagamore (the English King) is coming to bind them in chains, to kill them. We must fight him. We will stand on the same ground with them. For should he bind them in bonds, next he will treat us as bears. Indians liberties and lands, his proud spirit will tear away from them. Help his ill-treated sons’; they will return good for good, and the law of love runs through the hearts of their children and ours when we are dead. Look down the stream of time. Look up to the Great Spirit. Be kind, be valiant, be free: then are Indians Sons of Glory. Captivated by these patriotic sentiments, his people applauded him and swore fealty to him, whatever cause he espoused. So, when the Revolutionary War broke out, resisting all solicitations of other tribes, he extended his sympathy and proffered the aid of his warriors to the American cause; and at a moment when Indians, in other parts of the state, were threatening to join the English, Orono, with three of his colleagues, as a deputation of the Penobscot Indians, arrived in Watertown, Massachusetts, two days after the battle of Bunker Hill, and tendered their services to the Provincial Congress held there on June 21, 1775. Orono, addressing a committee of the Provincial Congress among other things, said: “In behalf of the whole Penobscot tribe I hereby declare to you, if the grievance under which our people labor were removed, they would aid with their whole force to defend the country.” The grievances, spoken of by Orono, were principally trespasses by the whites upon their timber lands and cheating them in trade. Though the smoke of battle of Bunker Hill had scarcely cleared away, the committee of the Provincial Congress said nothing about accepting Orono’s offer, but promised him that, “as soon as they could take breath from this present fight” their complaints should be attended to. In the same year the above mentioned grievances were removed, and, on July of the following year, three of the Penobscot tribes acknowledged the independence of the United States, withheld all succor from the British enemy, and, eventually, some of them engaged in the war, under Captain John Preble, Lieutenants Andrew Oilman, Joseph Munsell and Orono, who then bore a Continental Commission as he led his braves to the field of battle. When Castine, (the peninsula) was taken by the British in 1779, and other settlements on either bank of the Penobscot were under their sway, Orono proved himself faithful to his engagements and true to the American cause by communicating, with great dispatch to the government important and repeated intelligence, and his zeal to the last was inspiring to his tribe. The war being over Orono entered into negotiations with Massachusetts. Through him assignments of large tracts of lands, for valuable considerations, were made to the State and the limits of the territory retained by the tribe were agreed upon. He then retired to his island home at Old Town, rich in years, honor and renown, respected by the commonwealth, loved by the whites and idolized by his tribe. At that time, Father Romaigne, a French priest, had charge of the Tarratines of this section, who held the faith through weal and woe, defying bribes and threats, since their conversion from paganism more than a century before. In all the public services of the Church, Orono took a prominent part. His assiduity at Mass, his joining in its Chant, his responding to the litanies, and his reception of the sacraments, furnished a grand exemplar of all that was noble and elevating in Christian life, which materially advanced the spirituality of his tribe, by spurring them on to the practice of their religion. Whilst he never peremptorily commanded them to observe the laws of their Church, his example in this regard amounted to the same. During his lifetime there were very few delinquents in religious matters among the Tarratines of Marsh Island, and it was a pleasure for the “black robes” to expound to them the teaching of the church. At length, under the weight of over one hundred years, Joseph Orono died, (according to Captain Samuel Lowder, of Bangor) in his wigwam on a Sunday morning, 1801, on the banks of the Penobscot just opposite where Mt. Hope Cemetery now lies, mourned by all who knew him irrespective of creed or color. He retained his mental faculties to the last; and his erect attitude and sickly whiteness of face, flowing white hair and spiritual aspect, gave him the appearance of a grand old saint. Captain Munsell of Bangor, who talked with him in his last sickness, says that Orono told him he was no years at that time, thus fixing his birth in 1691. Mrs. Hall, who died over thirty years ago in this town, aged 100 years, had a distinct recollection of this chief, and saw his funeral cortege pass by. Captain Lowder says that he was buried on the Jameson farm, upper Stillwater, but more likely he was buried in Old Town, probably on Indian Island; but there is absolutely nothing left to make the spot where his remains were consigned to Mother Earth. All my investigations have failed to discover his grave, and not one of the Indians now on Indian Island knows where their great Chief’s dust awaits the resurrection. That nothing exists to indicate the grave of the celebrated Orono appears incredible, but such is the fact. Nobody has yet explained what the grand and sonorous name, Orono, signifies, but it will be perpetuated and honored as long as this township exists, which was incorporated March 12, 1806, and called “Orono”‘ in compliment to him. To my astonishment I discovered a few years ago that the pupils of the public schools here did not know that Joseph Orono professed the Christian faith, and to my great astonishment I discovered also that even some teachers, in the higher grades, never heard of Joseph Orono; though the town from which they get their living was called after that worthy chief. Had he descended from the “Pilgrim Fathers” (and held the creed of the “Reformers”), his name in all probability, would be emblazoned in letters of gold in the school rooms of the town; his praises would be sounded for the children, by every teacher in the district, and a monument would have been erected long since, by the citizens to perpetuate his name and speak his renown. This honor was left for the Knights of Columbus, and on the 12th of October, 1911, the unveiling and dedication of a monument to the memory of the old Indian chief were carried out under the auspices of Joseph Orono Council by whose good work the monument was completed and erected on a lot owned by the writer of this sketch. When the town was incorporated it is said that some protested against its being name after Orono. The protest came from those who hesitated to have the town named after a Catholic Indian chief, and whose descendants even today, objected to having this monument erected in the little public park of the town because, forsooth, the inscription read: Erected in memory of By the Knights of Columbus But the shaft is erected to do honor to Orono, whose virtues are worthy of imitation by the noblest and best of our race, and on it is inscribed the word, Catholic, a word which is historic, brought here by the Northmen even before Catholic Columbus5 touched the American shores, a word which is firmly rooted in our soil and which will adorn other monuments on this continent in centuries yet to come.6 Chief Orono’s nickname, K’tolaqu, translates to “Big Ship.” He was given this nickname as a result of the many tales he told of the big ships he saw during a trip to Boston in 1780 to offer Penobscot aid to the Americans in the Revolutionary War.7 - The Penobscot Tribe This should provide you additional details on the Penobscot tribe specifically. For a general view of all Abenaki’s see: Abenaki Tribe. - The Penobscots in Maine: Orono, the Chief of the Penobscots An interesting chapter from Catholics and the American Revolution which provides a narration of Joseph Orono’s life. Some of the claims by this manuscript are countered by John Harrington in our biography. - A Collection Of American Epitaphs And Inscriptions With Occasional Notes. By Rev. Timothy Alden, A.M., Honorary Member of the Massachusetts and of the New York Historical Societies, Member of the American Antiquarian Society, etc. Pentade I. Vol. I. pp. 60-62. This epitath began the “Donnel” claims of heritage for Chief Joseph Orono. - Joseph Orono – Wikipedia This article as seen on 9 August 2014 is completely unsourced, declares as facts that which is in contention, and contains errors; as such it should be given little credence. See <em>Orono – Catholic Indian Chief</em> below for a contradictory statement by John Harrington ↩ Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, 3d s., ix, 82-91, 1846 ↩ Williamson, Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll, 3d s., ix, 83, 1846 ↩ Hodge, Frederick Webb. <cite>Handbook of American Indians</cite>. Bulletin 30, Bureau of American Ethnology, part 2, p. 155-6. Washington:Government Printing Office. 1912. ↩ The Catholic Columbus is what is in the book ↩ Harrington, Reverend John M. <cite>Orono – Catholic Indian Chief</cite>. Published in Sprague’s Journal of Maine History, Vol. 2 No. 3. Dover, Maine: John Francis Sprague. July 1914. Also published in the <a href="http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1913&dat=19111028&id=BZ0gAAAAIBAJ&sjid=JWgFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1790,1365130">Lewiston Evening Journal</a>, Oct 28, 1911. ↩ <a href="http://www.mainememory.net/artifact/80710">Maine Memory Network</a> ↩	4,982	ENGLISH	1
Interesting Facts About King Henry VIII and His Six Wives One of England's most iconic rulers, King Henry VIII was the second monarch of the Tudor dynasty. He played a key role in the the dramatic separation of the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church. He is also remembered for his six wives and problems in acquiring a male heir for his throne. Facts about King Henry VIII - Henry was born on 28 June 1491 at Greenwich Palace, Greenwich. His father was the ruling king, Henry VII. - He received an excellent education and learned to speak Latin and French, as well as some Italian. - He wasn’t expected to become King of England, but in 1502 his older brother Arthur died at the age of 15, and Henry was next in line for the throne. - The young Henry was athletic and sporty. He loved jousting, hunting and playing tennis. - He also loved music. He could play the lute and the organ and had a good singing voice. - Henry had six wives during his lifetime: Catharine of Aragon (1509 - 1533); Anne Bolyn (1533 - 1536); Jane Seymour (1536 - 1537); Anne of Cleves (1540 - 1540); Catherine Howard (1540 - 1541); and Catherine Parr (1543 - 1547). - After numerous disagreements with the pope, in 1534 he separated the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church and declared himself to be the head of the Church of England. - Henry was a gambler and an extravagant spender. By the time of his death, he was seriously in debt. - He was unhorsed in a jousting tournament in 1536 and received a serious injury to his leg. The injury may have contributed to the weight gains and mood swings that became common as he grew older. - Henry became obese at the end of his life. His waistline measured 4 and half feet in circumference and there had to be mechanical devices constructed to help him get in and out of bed, as well as on and off his horse. Catherine of Aragon - Catherine of Aragon was the daughter of King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, who's marriage had united Spain. - Before Henry, Catherine was married to his older brother, Arthur, but the marriage was brief due to Arthur's untimely death at age 15. - She was tutored in religion and classics and was a devout Roman Catholic all of her life. - Catherine of Aragon married Henry in 1509. Their wedding was low-key, but their coronation was a grand affair. She was 23 years old when they married, he was nearly 18. - Catherine fell pregnant six times during the marriage. Unfortunately, only one of these pregnancies produced a child who lived beyond infancy (Mary I). - With Catherine apparently unable to produce a male heir to the throne, Henry turned his attentions to her lady-in-waiting, Anne Boleyn. - In 1527 Henry requested that the Pope annul his marriage, so he could marry his mistress. He declard that the marriage was cursed, due to Catherine being the widow of his brother. - Supported by the pope, Catherine refused to give up the marriage, however. - Meanwhile, Anne Boleyn was now pregnant with Henry's child. They married in secret in 1533. Henry passed the Act of Supremacy, declared himself head of the newly separated Church of England, and had his marriage to Catherine annulled. - Catherine was forced to leave court, spending her final years in reduced circumstances and unable to keep contact with her daughter, Mary. Catherine died in 1536. - The marriage of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn was fraught with problems pretty much from the start, mainly due to Anne refusing to slip into the passive role of being a royal wife. The couple had some calm periods, but it was their fierce arguments in public that people remembered. - Despite Henry's desperation for a boy, Anne gave birth to a girl, Princess Elizabeth, on September 7 1533. - Anne became pregnant again in 1534 and 1535, each time, suffering false pregnancy or miscarriage. Unable to produce a male heir, as well as Henry's increasing romantic interest in one of her ladies-in-waiting, Jane Seymour, meant that Anne's life was now in danger. - Anne had made lots of enemies in the king's court, and there were plots against her. On May 2 1536 she was arrested was charged with adultery, incest and plotting to murder the King. She was held in the Tower of London and later tried there in the On Monday the 15th, the Queen and her brother were put on trial at the Great Hall. It is estimated that around 2000 people attended the trial. - At 8 am on 19 May 1536, Anne was executed on Tower Green. O Death, rock me asleep, bring me to quiet rest, let pass my weary guiltless ghost out of my careful breast.— Anne Boleyn - The day after Anne Boleyn's execution, Henry became engaged to Jane Seymour, and ten days later they were married. - Jane formed a very close relationship with Henry's daughter, Mary Tudor (later Mary I), and helped to mend the relationship between Henry and Mary. - In 1537 Jane became pregnant. She went on to give birth to a boy later that year. The child was a boy, the male heir Henry so desperately desired, and was named, Edward (later Edward VI). - Jane died less than two weeks after Edward's christening, however, probably from complications following the birth. - Jane Seymour was given a Queen's funeral, the only one of Henry's wives to have this honor, and when he died in 1547, Henry chose to be buried next to her grave, at his request. Anne of Cleves - Henry wanted to marry again, and after suggestions that Anne of Cleves might be suitable, Henry sent his favorite portrait painter, Hans Holbein the Younger, to Germany to paint a likeness of her. Henry liked what he saw in the picture and agreed to wed Anne. - Henry quickly regretted the decision, however, and asked for an annulment. Anne was happy to agree to the union being dissolved on the grounds that it had not been consummated. - She was rewarded with two houses and a generous allowance for her compliance with the king. - Catherine Howard was a first cousin and lady-in-waiting of Anne Boleyn. - Henry married her on 28 July 1540. The king was nearly fifty years old and a long way from his former vigorous self, while Catherine was only around 19 years of age (her birth year is not known for sure). - She was attractive and lively, which gained her the attention of the king before marriage, but failed to adapt to her new, more formal role of being queen. She liked the company of younger men and her flirtatious nature encouraged malicious rumors about her to spread around the court. - Henry initially didn't believe allegations of affairs behind his back, but when it came to light that Catherine had had sexual relations before her marriage to Henry, meaning she was not a virgin, Henry flew into a rage. - Catherine Howard was beheaded on 13 February 1542. - Henry VIII married his sixth and final wife, Catherine Parr, in July 1543. - Catherine Parr was a wealthy widow who argued with Henry about religion (Catherine was a reformer, whereas Henry held onto a unique mixture of Catholic and Protestant ideas). - She helped to restore Henry's relationship with his two daughters, Mary and Elizabeth, and was involved in helping to get a law passed that put the two daughters back in the line of succession after Edward. Catherine Parr outlived Henry and remarried after his death in 1547. The marriage was short-lived, however, and she died in 1548, probably due to complications in giving birth to her only child, Mary Seymour. Questions & Answers How many calories did Henry VIII consume in later life? Towards the end of his life, Henry ate 13 dishes each day, which included meats such as pork, rabbit, and game. Additional calories came from the 70 pints of ale that he drank each week. In total, historians estimate that he averaged around 5,000 calories a day.Helpful 19 How many kids did Henry VIII have? Henry had a number of children with his wives; the most famous were: Elizabeth I of England, Mary I of England, and Edward VI of England. Some children were stillborn, died through miscarriage, or died shortly after birth. Henry, Duke of Cornwall died after only a couple of months. Henry VIII is also suspected of having a number of illegitimate children, although he only acknowledged Henry FitzRoy, 1st Duke of Richmond and Somerset as his own. Historians dispute six other illegitimate children.Helpful 18 How many wives did Henry VIII have? Henry VIII had six wives: Catherine of Aragon, Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleves, Catherine Howard, and Catherine Parr.Helpful 14 When were Henry VIII's wives born? Catherine of Aragon was born in 1485, Anne Boleyn around 1501 to 1507, Jane Seymour 1508, Anne of Cleves 1515, Catherine Howard 1523, Catherine Parr 1512.Helpful 13 Why did Henry VIII want a son? A male heir was essential to Henry in order to maintain the royal line and secure the kingdom. There had never been a female monarch in England. On top of that, Henry was only the second monarch of the Tudor dynasty to rule. The Tudors had taken the crown by force, rather than inherited it, which left their legitimacy open to question. Henry feared that a daughter’s accession to the throne would be challenged.Helpful 13 © 2015 Paul Goodman	<urn:uuid:e7ea7ae2-9799-4c48-a501-41e6563bf605>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://owlcation.com/humanities/Facts-about-King-Henry-VIII-and-His-Six-Wives	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251776516.99/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128060946-20200128090946-00439.warc.gz	en	0.987349	2,084	3.28125	3	[ -0.05377497151494026, 0.5612671375274658, 0.31111496686935425, -0.3050534725189209, -0.25745689868927, -0.06561484932899475, 0.5127607583999634, 0.1079644039273262, 0.44670525193214417, -0.14143982529640198, -0.28469714522361755, -0.561240553855896, 0.08559868484735489, 0.4539911150932312,...	1	Interesting Facts About King Henry VIII and His Six Wives One of England's most iconic rulers, King Henry VIII was the second monarch of the Tudor dynasty. He played a key role in the the dramatic separation of the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church. He is also remembered for his six wives and problems in acquiring a male heir for his throne. Facts about King Henry VIII - Henry was born on 28 June 1491 at Greenwich Palace, Greenwich. His father was the ruling king, Henry VII. - He received an excellent education and learned to speak Latin and French, as well as some Italian. - He wasn’t expected to become King of England, but in 1502 his older brother Arthur died at the age of 15, and Henry was next in line for the throne. - The young Henry was athletic and sporty. He loved jousting, hunting and playing tennis. - He also loved music. He could play the lute and the organ and had a good singing voice. - Henry had six wives during his lifetime: Catharine of Aragon (1509 - 1533); Anne Bolyn (1533 - 1536); Jane Seymour (1536 - 1537); Anne of Cleves (1540 - 1540); Catherine Howard (1540 - 1541); and Catherine Parr (1543 - 1547). - After numerous disagreements with the pope, in 1534 he separated the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church and declared himself to be the head of the Church of England. - Henry was a gambler and an extravagant spender. By the time of his death, he was seriously in debt. - He was unhorsed in a jousting tournament in 1536 and received a serious injury to his leg. The injury may have contributed to the weight gains and mood swings that became common as he grew older. - Henry became obese at the end of his life. His waistline measured 4 and half feet in circumference and there had to be mechanical devices constructed to help him get in and out of bed, as well as on and off his horse. Catherine of Aragon - Catherine of Aragon was the daughter of King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, who's marriage had united Spain. - Before Henry, Catherine was married to his older brother, Arthur, but the marriage was brief due to Arthur's untimely death at age 15. - She was tutored in religion and classics and was a devout Roman Catholic all of her life. - Catherine of Aragon married Henry in 1509. Their wedding was low-key, but their coronation was a grand affair. She was 23 years old when they married, he was nearly 18. - Catherine fell pregnant six times during the marriage. Unfortunately, only one of these pregnancies produced a child who lived beyond infancy (Mary I). - With Catherine apparently unable to produce a male heir to the throne, Henry turned his attentions to her lady-in-waiting, Anne Boleyn. - In 1527 Henry requested that the Pope annul his marriage, so he could marry his mistress. He declard that the marriage was cursed, due to Catherine being the widow of his brother. - Supported by the pope, Catherine refused to give up the marriage, however. - Meanwhile, Anne Boleyn was now pregnant with Henry's child. They married in secret in 1533. Henry passed the Act of Supremacy, declared himself head of the newly separated Church of England, and had his marriage to Catherine annulled. - Catherine was forced to leave court, spending her final years in reduced circumstances and unable to keep contact with her daughter, Mary. Catherine died in 1536. - The marriage of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn was fraught with problems pretty much from the start, mainly due to Anne refusing to slip into the passive role of being a royal wife. The couple had some calm periods, but it was their fierce arguments in public that people remembered. - Despite Henry's desperation for a boy, Anne gave birth to a girl, Princess Elizabeth, on September 7 1533. - Anne became pregnant again in 1534 and 1535, each time, suffering false pregnancy or miscarriage. Unable to produce a male heir, as well as Henry's increasing romantic interest in one of her ladies-in-waiting, Jane Seymour, meant that Anne's life was now in danger. - Anne had made lots of enemies in the king's court, and there were plots against her. On May 2 1536 she was arrested was charged with adultery, incest and plotting to murder the King. She was held in the Tower of London and later tried there in the On Monday the 15th, the Queen and her brother were put on trial at the Great Hall. It is estimated that around 2000 people attended the trial. - At 8 am on 19 May 1536, Anne was executed on Tower Green. O Death, rock me asleep, bring me to quiet rest, let pass my weary guiltless ghost out of my careful breast.— Anne Boleyn - The day after Anne Boleyn's execution, Henry became engaged to Jane Seymour, and ten days later they were married. - Jane formed a very close relationship with Henry's daughter, Mary Tudor (later Mary I), and helped to mend the relationship between Henry and Mary. - In 1537 Jane became pregnant. She went on to give birth to a boy later that year. The child was a boy, the male heir Henry so desperately desired, and was named, Edward (later Edward VI). - Jane died less than two weeks after Edward's christening, however, probably from complications following the birth. - Jane Seymour was given a Queen's funeral, the only one of Henry's wives to have this honor, and when he died in 1547, Henry chose to be buried next to her grave, at his request. Anne of Cleves - Henry wanted to marry again, and after suggestions that Anne of Cleves might be suitable, Henry sent his favorite portrait painter, Hans Holbein the Younger, to Germany to paint a likeness of her. Henry liked what he saw in the picture and agreed to wed Anne. - Henry quickly regretted the decision, however, and asked for an annulment. Anne was happy to agree to the union being dissolved on the grounds that it had not been consummated. - She was rewarded with two houses and a generous allowance for her compliance with the king. - Catherine Howard was a first cousin and lady-in-waiting of Anne Boleyn. - Henry married her on 28 July 1540. The king was nearly fifty years old and a long way from his former vigorous self, while Catherine was only around 19 years of age (her birth year is not known for sure). - She was attractive and lively, which gained her the attention of the king before marriage, but failed to adapt to her new, more formal role of being queen. She liked the company of younger men and her flirtatious nature encouraged malicious rumors about her to spread around the court. - Henry initially didn't believe allegations of affairs behind his back, but when it came to light that Catherine had had sexual relations before her marriage to Henry, meaning she was not a virgin, Henry flew into a rage. - Catherine Howard was beheaded on 13 February 1542. - Henry VIII married his sixth and final wife, Catherine Parr, in July 1543. - Catherine Parr was a wealthy widow who argued with Henry about religion (Catherine was a reformer, whereas Henry held onto a unique mixture of Catholic and Protestant ideas). - She helped to restore Henry's relationship with his two daughters, Mary and Elizabeth, and was involved in helping to get a law passed that put the two daughters back in the line of succession after Edward. Catherine Parr outlived Henry and remarried after his death in 1547. The marriage was short-lived, however, and she died in 1548, probably due to complications in giving birth to her only child, Mary Seymour. Questions & Answers How many calories did Henry VIII consume in later life? Towards the end of his life, Henry ate 13 dishes each day, which included meats such as pork, rabbit, and game. Additional calories came from the 70 pints of ale that he drank each week. In total, historians estimate that he averaged around 5,000 calories a day.Helpful 19 How many kids did Henry VIII have? Henry had a number of children with his wives; the most famous were: Elizabeth I of England, Mary I of England, and Edward VI of England. Some children were stillborn, died through miscarriage, or died shortly after birth. Henry, Duke of Cornwall died after only a couple of months. Henry VIII is also suspected of having a number of illegitimate children, although he only acknowledged Henry FitzRoy, 1st Duke of Richmond and Somerset as his own. Historians dispute six other illegitimate children.Helpful 18 How many wives did Henry VIII have? Henry VIII had six wives: Catherine of Aragon, Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleves, Catherine Howard, and Catherine Parr.Helpful 14 When were Henry VIII's wives born? Catherine of Aragon was born in 1485, Anne Boleyn around 1501 to 1507, Jane Seymour 1508, Anne of Cleves 1515, Catherine Howard 1523, Catherine Parr 1512.Helpful 13 Why did Henry VIII want a son? A male heir was essential to Henry in order to maintain the royal line and secure the kingdom. There had never been a female monarch in England. On top of that, Henry was only the second monarch of the Tudor dynasty to rule. The Tudors had taken the crown by force, rather than inherited it, which left their legitimacy open to question. Henry feared that a daughter’s accession to the throne would be challenged.Helpful 13 © 2015 Paul Goodman	2,175	ENGLISH	1
This American Revolution was supported by the thirteen states in America colonies that had been colonized by Britain (Bailyn). The colonies protested against the British rule on the basis of no representation and overseas governance. The resistance led to a political upheaval, which led to the British parliament being kicked away from the country. The revolution lasted eight years and the United States gained independence in 1783 through the signing of a treaty in Paris (Bailyn). Causes of the Revolution Buy American Revolution Research essay paper online Mercantilism and the Navigation Acts The British government employed mercantilism where they ensued that Americans did not trade with any other country. They diminished trade with France through navigation Acts, and this triggered resistance from America. The restrictions remained active for three decades, ending in 1763. The Great Awakening The clergy used this method that was based on the Bible. American preachers started to make political sermons that would be supported by the Bible. They would condemn the British law and compare themselves to the Hebrew struggles. They believed in the Bible, which says that no one is bigger before God. On the other hand, Anglican Church taught loyalty to the king. The acts of preachers triggered some emotional response from the people and encouraged them to fight their colonizers (Bailyn). The French and Indian War Between 1754-1763, the region colonized by the British started to fight with the New France, both of which were controlled by their respective mother countries (Wood). The British America won the war, and after that, they decided to increase the rate of revenue collection to offset debts incurred during war. The French loss was a loss to the Americans who would team up to fight the Britons. From then on, they believed that they had to achieve self-liberation. This process triggered the revolution. Americans became more literate and were able to read works by other people such as Hobbes and Locke, giving them another point of view on the colonizers. They started to think of their liberation, which they eventually achieved between 1715 and 1789. At this point, Americans were able to understand and appreciate such concepts as separation of powers, limited government, and social contracts, among others. Articles of Confederation The Articles of Confederation was the initial agreement that was adopted by the 13 American states. It gave directions over international relations, territorial issues, and the relationship between the US and India. These articles have been criticized by people due to their lack of assertion on crucial matters; hence, it was deemed a weak governance system. They would be later replaced in 1789 by the US Constitution (Jensen). Most popular orders	<urn:uuid:bdbf3feb-e8c5-4593-a4ed-650932f8d74e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://exclusivepapers.com/essays/humanities/american-revolution-research.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598217.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120081337-20200120105337-00554.warc.gz	en	0.980063	544	3.90625	4	[ -0.08956421911716461, 0.2947389483451843, -0.06168101727962494, -0.05202316492795944, -0.035150252282619476, 0.10599233210086823, -0.2818736732006073, 0.5615366697311401, -0.047328881919384, 0.1504305601119995, -0.2089444100856781, -0.014724751934409142, -0.09304734319448471, 0.05652517080...	1	This American Revolution was supported by the thirteen states in America colonies that had been colonized by Britain (Bailyn). The colonies protested against the British rule on the basis of no representation and overseas governance. The resistance led to a political upheaval, which led to the British parliament being kicked away from the country. The revolution lasted eight years and the United States gained independence in 1783 through the signing of a treaty in Paris (Bailyn). Causes of the Revolution Buy American Revolution Research essay paper online Mercantilism and the Navigation Acts The British government employed mercantilism where they ensued that Americans did not trade with any other country. They diminished trade with France through navigation Acts, and this triggered resistance from America. The restrictions remained active for three decades, ending in 1763. The Great Awakening The clergy used this method that was based on the Bible. American preachers started to make political sermons that would be supported by the Bible. They would condemn the British law and compare themselves to the Hebrew struggles. They believed in the Bible, which says that no one is bigger before God. On the other hand, Anglican Church taught loyalty to the king. The acts of preachers triggered some emotional response from the people and encouraged them to fight their colonizers (Bailyn). The French and Indian War Between 1754-1763, the region colonized by the British started to fight with the New France, both of which were controlled by their respective mother countries (Wood). The British America won the war, and after that, they decided to increase the rate of revenue collection to offset debts incurred during war. The French loss was a loss to the Americans who would team up to fight the Britons. From then on, they believed that they had to achieve self-liberation. This process triggered the revolution. Americans became more literate and were able to read works by other people such as Hobbes and Locke, giving them another point of view on the colonizers. They started to think of their liberation, which they eventually achieved between 1715 and 1789. At this point, Americans were able to understand and appreciate such concepts as separation of powers, limited government, and social contracts, among others. Articles of Confederation The Articles of Confederation was the initial agreement that was adopted by the 13 American states. It gave directions over international relations, territorial issues, and the relationship between the US and India. These articles have been criticized by people due to their lack of assertion on crucial matters; hence, it was deemed a weak governance system. They would be later replaced in 1789 by the US Constitution (Jensen). Most popular orders	562	ENGLISH	1
Conclusion: Category 1: Momentum was found that after the collision was less than before the collision by 10%. This was not what has been expected, so the difference was fairly significant. This happened because of friction, when the two pucks collided, they have lost a bit of their momentum, so the momentum after the collision differed. Kinetic energy differed more than what was expected, it was significantly less after the collision, the difference before and after the collision was 63. 7%, so 36. 3% of that momentum was lost. This have occurred because the collision is inelastic and since there was friction when the two pucks collided, their speed became less, and speed is directly proportional to kinetic energy. Category 2: the change of momentum before and after the collisions differed slightly, the change of momentum before the collision was less than that after the collision. This was not what was expected, but because the collision was inelastic and experienced friction when the two pucks collided, the time before the collision differed from that after the collision. After the collision, the pucks lost some speed and so it took more time to cover the same distance before the collisions. In the equation time will become less and change in momentum is directly proportional to time. Category 3: the pucks did stick together when they collided and moved together. The total kinetic energy did differ significantly, the difference between the collision before and after was 77. 3%, so 22. 7% of the energy was lost after the collision. This occurred because it was an inelastic collision. Due to the colliding and sticking together, that rest of the energy lost, was transferred to thermal and sound energy. What has been expected about this category was true to conclude then. Category 4: isolating and solving for the mass using the conservation of momentum formula seemed fairly workable. The mass that was calculated tended to be 0. 152kg or 152g. this seems reasonable since the mass was put on didn’t seem heavy and seemed to be in that range by just giving an estimate. The mass wasn’t found to be negative or really heavy, so it can be concluded that the method used does work.	<urn:uuid:ca56fc22-3dcb-4b66-bc95-67bdd9a33341>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://lagas.org/collision-physics-lab-conclusion/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00506.warc.gz	en	0.986109	446	4.1875	4	[ -0.3936759829521179, -0.305606871843338, 0.16363823413848877, -0.03439689055085182, -0.3055309057235718, 0.5067925453186035, 0.14502955973148346, 0.13295453786849976, 0.4974580705165863, 0.2139519304037094, 0.43567538261413574, -0.33191314339637756, 0.36604878306388855, 0.1701698750257492,...	2	Conclusion: Category 1: Momentum was found that after the collision was less than before the collision by 10%. This was not what has been expected, so the difference was fairly significant. This happened because of friction, when the two pucks collided, they have lost a bit of their momentum, so the momentum after the collision differed. Kinetic energy differed more than what was expected, it was significantly less after the collision, the difference before and after the collision was 63. 7%, so 36. 3% of that momentum was lost. This have occurred because the collision is inelastic and since there was friction when the two pucks collided, their speed became less, and speed is directly proportional to kinetic energy. Category 2: the change of momentum before and after the collisions differed slightly, the change of momentum before the collision was less than that after the collision. This was not what was expected, but because the collision was inelastic and experienced friction when the two pucks collided, the time before the collision differed from that after the collision. After the collision, the pucks lost some speed and so it took more time to cover the same distance before the collisions. In the equation time will become less and change in momentum is directly proportional to time. Category 3: the pucks did stick together when they collided and moved together. The total kinetic energy did differ significantly, the difference between the collision before and after was 77. 3%, so 22. 7% of the energy was lost after the collision. This occurred because it was an inelastic collision. Due to the colliding and sticking together, that rest of the energy lost, was transferred to thermal and sound energy. What has been expected about this category was true to conclude then. Category 4: isolating and solving for the mass using the conservation of momentum formula seemed fairly workable. The mass that was calculated tended to be 0. 152kg or 152g. this seems reasonable since the mass was put on didn’t seem heavy and seemed to be in that range by just giving an estimate. The mass wasn’t found to be negative or really heavy, so it can be concluded that the method used does work.	460	ENGLISH	1

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.