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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Florence Nightingale is remembered throughout the world for her heroic, almost superhuman labors in the field of nursing. Florence Nightingale was born in Italy in 1820 and was named Florence after her birthplace. A brilliant child, Florence attained outstanding academic achievement in her years attending school. Florence grew up to be a lively and attractive young woman, admired in her families elite social circle and was expected to make a good marriage, but Florence had other concerns.
In 1837, Florence was called by God to do his work. However, Florence did not hear voices or see visions. God called her by making her think for herself. She did not think that she out to do what her family and all of society expected of herto either get married or look after her married relatives. She wanted to have a career, and this was very unusual of a woman in this time. Florence knew she wanted to help others on her own, but had no idea what she could do.
Florence refused to marry several suitors, and at the age of twenty-five told her parents that she wanted to become a nurse. Her parents were appalled at this decision because the idea of nursing was associate with working class women and it was not considered a suitable profession for well-educated women.
While the family conflicts over Florences future remained unsolved it was decided that Florence would tour Europe. In her travels, Florence undertook months of nursing training, unbeknownst to her family.
Florence returned home, still with the dream to become a working nurse, and again voiced this idea to her parents. Her parrients finally agreed and Florence was allowed to become a nurse.
Florence, now thirty-one went to work at Kaserworth Hospital in Germany, and was later promoted and moved to a hospital in London.
In 1854 Britain, France and Turkey declared war on Russia, marking the begging of the Crimean War. The allies had the upper hand in the war but there were vast criticisms of the medical felicities for the wounded soldiers.
In response, Florence asked and was granted permission to take a group of thirty-eight women nurses to look after the British soldiers fighting in the war.
Nightingale found the conditions of the hospitals appalling. The men were kept in rooms without blankets or decent food. Unwashed, they were still wearing their army uniforms, still with dirt and gore. In these conditions, Florence was not surprised that war wounds accounted for one out of every six deaths in the war. Diseases such at typhus, chorea, and dysentery ran rampant among the wounded soldiers.
Military officers and doctors objected to Nightingales view of reforming military hospitals. They interpreted her comments as an attack and she was made to feel unwelcome. Nightingale received very little help from the military until she used a contact from the London Times to report the details of the way that the British Army treated its wounded soldiers. Nightingale was given the task of organizing the barracks and by improving the quality of sanitation she was able to dramatically reduce the death rate of her patients.
Florence gained respect, and was well known amongst the soldiers. The lady in Chief, as Nightingale was called, wrote home on behalf of the solders. She acted as a banker, sending the mens wages home to their families, and introduced reading rooms to the hospital. Nightengale was also known as the land with the lamp because she roamed the halls of the hospital, late at night, when the doctors were fast asleep, caring for the sick and wounded.
The introduction of female nurses to the military hospitals was an outstanding success, and to show the nations gratitude for Miss Nightingales hard work a charity was organized to support her work. The money collected was to enable Florence Nightingale to continue her reform of nursing in the civil hospitals of Britain.
In 1856, Nightingale returned to England as a national heroine. She had been deeply shocked by the lack of hygiene and elementary care that the men received in the British Army. Nightingale therefore decided to begin a campaign to improve the quality of nursing in military hospitals. Her work resulted in the formation of the Army Medical College
To spread her opinions on reform, Nightingale published two books, Notes on Hospital, and Notes on Nursing. Notes on Nursing became a widely popular book, which laid down the principals of nursing: careful observation and sensitivity to patients needs, it was translated into eleven different languages and is still in print today.With the support of wealthy friends and The London Times Florence was able to raise one million dollars, a terrific amount of money in those days, to improve the quality of nursing. In 1860, she used this money to found the Nightingale School and Home for Nurses at Saint Thomas Hospital. She also became involved in the training of nurses for work in the workhouses.
In later life Florence Nightingale suffered from poor health and in 1895 she went blind, and soon afterwards and then became bedridden due to illness contracted when she was a nurse in the war. Bedridden, Florence still campaigned tirelessly to improve heath standards, publishing over 200 books, reports and pamphlets.
In recognition of her hard work Queen Victoria awarded Florence the Royal Red Cross in 1883. In her old age she received many honors, including the Order of Merit, becoming the first woman to receive it.
Florence Nightingale died at home at the age of 90 in August 13, 1910.
Florence Nightingale was more than a nurse. She was an outstanding, courageous woman. Her reforms have influenced the nature of modern heath care and her writing continue to be a resource for doctors, nurses, and many others worldwide. Her long life of continuous effort, marked by achievements of truly amazing character which have lived, grown and spread to the ends of the earth. Her reforms were fundamental and searching. They struck at the root of things, dealing with hospitals, the heath of the British Soldiers, the heath of the working people, and the rights of women.
Florence was outstanding, extraordinary, and loving. She did not ignore, the invalid, the deaf, the mute, the blind, she saw people and loved and nurtured them. She was a miracle brought to life.
When I am no longer even a memory, just a name, I hope my voice may perpetuate the great work of my life.
Honestly, Florence Nightingale was just a name to me before I wrote this speech. But as I sat in Mrs. Mross class, wondering whom I should write my speech on, I turned around and there she was a heroic woman, Florence Nightingale. | <urn:uuid:9c7c9c71-1fb8-4fec-b1ec-1803902d2d4d> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://santosforcongress.com/florence-nightengale/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00001.warc.gz | en | 0.98638 | 1,371 | 3.796875 | 4 | [
-0.19903552532196045,
0.4517056941986084,
0.24223268032073975,
0.28700965642929077,
-0.15918776392936707,
0.20480643212795258,
0.23507407307624817,
0.07663882523775101,
-0.07620098441839218,
0.04169904440641403,
-0.25538820028305054,
-0.04006684571504593,
0.06407484412193298,
0.08205890655... | 4 | Florence Nightingale is remembered throughout the world for her heroic, almost superhuman labors in the field of nursing. Florence Nightingale was born in Italy in 1820 and was named Florence after her birthplace. A brilliant child, Florence attained outstanding academic achievement in her years attending school. Florence grew up to be a lively and attractive young woman, admired in her families elite social circle and was expected to make a good marriage, but Florence had other concerns.
In 1837, Florence was called by God to do his work. However, Florence did not hear voices or see visions. God called her by making her think for herself. She did not think that she out to do what her family and all of society expected of herto either get married or look after her married relatives. She wanted to have a career, and this was very unusual of a woman in this time. Florence knew she wanted to help others on her own, but had no idea what she could do.
Florence refused to marry several suitors, and at the age of twenty-five told her parents that she wanted to become a nurse. Her parents were appalled at this decision because the idea of nursing was associate with working class women and it was not considered a suitable profession for well-educated women.
While the family conflicts over Florences future remained unsolved it was decided that Florence would tour Europe. In her travels, Florence undertook months of nursing training, unbeknownst to her family.
Florence returned home, still with the dream to become a working nurse, and again voiced this idea to her parents. Her parrients finally agreed and Florence was allowed to become a nurse.
Florence, now thirty-one went to work at Kaserworth Hospital in Germany, and was later promoted and moved to a hospital in London.
In 1854 Britain, France and Turkey declared war on Russia, marking the begging of the Crimean War. The allies had the upper hand in the war but there were vast criticisms of the medical felicities for the wounded soldiers.
In response, Florence asked and was granted permission to take a group of thirty-eight women nurses to look after the British soldiers fighting in the war.
Nightingale found the conditions of the hospitals appalling. The men were kept in rooms without blankets or decent food. Unwashed, they were still wearing their army uniforms, still with dirt and gore. In these conditions, Florence was not surprised that war wounds accounted for one out of every six deaths in the war. Diseases such at typhus, chorea, and dysentery ran rampant among the wounded soldiers.
Military officers and doctors objected to Nightingales view of reforming military hospitals. They interpreted her comments as an attack and she was made to feel unwelcome. Nightingale received very little help from the military until she used a contact from the London Times to report the details of the way that the British Army treated its wounded soldiers. Nightingale was given the task of organizing the barracks and by improving the quality of sanitation she was able to dramatically reduce the death rate of her patients.
Florence gained respect, and was well known amongst the soldiers. The lady in Chief, as Nightingale was called, wrote home on behalf of the solders. She acted as a banker, sending the mens wages home to their families, and introduced reading rooms to the hospital. Nightengale was also known as the land with the lamp because she roamed the halls of the hospital, late at night, when the doctors were fast asleep, caring for the sick and wounded.
The introduction of female nurses to the military hospitals was an outstanding success, and to show the nations gratitude for Miss Nightingales hard work a charity was organized to support her work. The money collected was to enable Florence Nightingale to continue her reform of nursing in the civil hospitals of Britain.
In 1856, Nightingale returned to England as a national heroine. She had been deeply shocked by the lack of hygiene and elementary care that the men received in the British Army. Nightingale therefore decided to begin a campaign to improve the quality of nursing in military hospitals. Her work resulted in the formation of the Army Medical College
To spread her opinions on reform, Nightingale published two books, Notes on Hospital, and Notes on Nursing. Notes on Nursing became a widely popular book, which laid down the principals of nursing: careful observation and sensitivity to patients needs, it was translated into eleven different languages and is still in print today.With the support of wealthy friends and The London Times Florence was able to raise one million dollars, a terrific amount of money in those days, to improve the quality of nursing. In 1860, she used this money to found the Nightingale School and Home for Nurses at Saint Thomas Hospital. She also became involved in the training of nurses for work in the workhouses.
In later life Florence Nightingale suffered from poor health and in 1895 she went blind, and soon afterwards and then became bedridden due to illness contracted when she was a nurse in the war. Bedridden, Florence still campaigned tirelessly to improve heath standards, publishing over 200 books, reports and pamphlets.
In recognition of her hard work Queen Victoria awarded Florence the Royal Red Cross in 1883. In her old age she received many honors, including the Order of Merit, becoming the first woman to receive it.
Florence Nightingale died at home at the age of 90 in August 13, 1910.
Florence Nightingale was more than a nurse. She was an outstanding, courageous woman. Her reforms have influenced the nature of modern heath care and her writing continue to be a resource for doctors, nurses, and many others worldwide. Her long life of continuous effort, marked by achievements of truly amazing character which have lived, grown and spread to the ends of the earth. Her reforms were fundamental and searching. They struck at the root of things, dealing with hospitals, the heath of the British Soldiers, the heath of the working people, and the rights of women.
Florence was outstanding, extraordinary, and loving. She did not ignore, the invalid, the deaf, the mute, the blind, she saw people and loved and nurtured them. She was a miracle brought to life.
When I am no longer even a memory, just a name, I hope my voice may perpetuate the great work of my life.
Honestly, Florence Nightingale was just a name to me before I wrote this speech. But as I sat in Mrs. Mross class, wondering whom I should write my speech on, I turned around and there she was a heroic woman, Florence Nightingale. | 1,383 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Age of Imperialism reached its peak in the late nineteenth century. The British Empire was the foremost colonial power, and the keystone was India. However, even at its peak, the British Raj was beset by internal rivalries and fears of external threats. In 1875, British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli chose as viceroy Lord Robert Bulwer-Lytton, diplomat and poet, the son of an old friend, but someone with no Indian experience. Lytton accepted reluctantlyand never enjoyed it. He was under the thumb of the Secretary of State for India, the shrewd and ambitious Third Marquess of Salisbury, during most of his four years in India. During his viceroyalty, Lytton had to deal with shifting British policies, a major famine, the freedom-loving people of Afghanistan, an entrenched civil service, and a rising generation of patriotic Indians. In the 1880 elections, Disraeli's Conservatives were defeated by Gladstone's Liberals, and Lytton resigned. | <urn:uuid:07609a8a-6799-4aa5-8db0-e7532b095284> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://books.mondadoristore.it/The-Accidental-Viceroy-Edwin-Hirschmann/eae978149859853/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607118.51/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122131612-20200122160612-00279.warc.gz | en | 0.982845 | 207 | 3.734375 | 4 | [
-0.010874966159462929,
0.48214930295944214,
0.6257641315460205,
-0.15589633584022522,
-0.11734355986118317,
-0.31786108016967773,
0.2983252704143524,
-0.05866098776459694,
-0.16808417439460754,
0.00790062639862299,
0.17682920396327972,
-0.4749845266342163,
0.08543261885643005,
0.4663729369... | 2 | The Age of Imperialism reached its peak in the late nineteenth century. The British Empire was the foremost colonial power, and the keystone was India. However, even at its peak, the British Raj was beset by internal rivalries and fears of external threats. In 1875, British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli chose as viceroy Lord Robert Bulwer-Lytton, diplomat and poet, the son of an old friend, but someone with no Indian experience. Lytton accepted reluctantlyand never enjoyed it. He was under the thumb of the Secretary of State for India, the shrewd and ambitious Third Marquess of Salisbury, during most of his four years in India. During his viceroyalty, Lytton had to deal with shifting British policies, a major famine, the freedom-loving people of Afghanistan, an entrenched civil service, and a rising generation of patriotic Indians. In the 1880 elections, Disraeli's Conservatives were defeated by Gladstone's Liberals, and Lytton resigned. | 213 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Enewetak Atoll was the site where most nuclear tests were carried out, 43 to be precise. It is estimated that about 8% of the terrestrial mass of the atoll was vaporised. One of the most devastating bombs was known as Mike, with a power of 10.4 megatons, 750 times the power of the Hiroshima bomb. The Mike bomb vaporised the island of Elugelab and created a crater one mile in diameter (1.6 km) and200 feetdeep (61 m).
The inhabitants of Enewetak lived as exiles in Ujelang for a period of more than thirty years. Life in Ujelang was very harsh and cases of malnutrition, illness and epidemics were frequent. It must also be taken into account that, in addition to the physical suffering, the trauma of the loss of their ancestors’ land was even more painful for a society, such as that of the Marshallese, deeply rooted in their land.
In 1958, nuclear testing was ended but the United States continued to use Enewetak Atoll until 1980 for various purposes such as testing intercontinental missiles and rocket engines (some of which used beryllium, a very polluting element), experiments in the formation of craters and studies in marine biology.
Between 1977 and 1980, the cleaning work, rehabilitation and resettlement of Enewetak residents took place, although they could only occupy a part of the atoll since the remainder still had high levels of radioactivity. | <urn:uuid:afdf1b4f-875e-4657-ae0d-8680d21c2e9a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.girona.cat/sgdap/movio8/en/44/the-tests-on-enewetak | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00093.warc.gz | en | 0.980566 | 310 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
-0.2787490487098694,
0.23299294710159302,
0.082185298204422,
-0.25437605381011963,
0.39844241738319397,
0.2802501320838928,
0.05252547934651375,
0.38072967529296875,
-0.6949021220207214,
0.171114981174469,
-0.06903509050607681,
-0.6351141333580017,
-0.025979308411478996,
0.3120228350162506... | 4 | Enewetak Atoll was the site where most nuclear tests were carried out, 43 to be precise. It is estimated that about 8% of the terrestrial mass of the atoll was vaporised. One of the most devastating bombs was known as Mike, with a power of 10.4 megatons, 750 times the power of the Hiroshima bomb. The Mike bomb vaporised the island of Elugelab and created a crater one mile in diameter (1.6 km) and200 feetdeep (61 m).
The inhabitants of Enewetak lived as exiles in Ujelang for a period of more than thirty years. Life in Ujelang was very harsh and cases of malnutrition, illness and epidemics were frequent. It must also be taken into account that, in addition to the physical suffering, the trauma of the loss of their ancestors’ land was even more painful for a society, such as that of the Marshallese, deeply rooted in their land.
In 1958, nuclear testing was ended but the United States continued to use Enewetak Atoll until 1980 for various purposes such as testing intercontinental missiles and rocket engines (some of which used beryllium, a very polluting element), experiments in the formation of craters and studies in marine biology.
Between 1977 and 1980, the cleaning work, rehabilitation and resettlement of Enewetak residents took place, although they could only occupy a part of the atoll since the remainder still had high levels of radioactivity. | 333 | ENGLISH | 1 |
No pestilence had ever been so fatal, or so hideous.
Both his parents died within three years after his birth. After, he was adopted by a wealthy tobacco merchant. Poe was trained to become a businessman, but his interest was in poetry.
When he went back to his house in Richmond, Virginia, he found that his fiance was engaged to another man. Enraged, Poe set out to become a great poet.
Poe enrolled in West Point; after a few months he was kicked out. Later, when his father died, Poe was left out of the will. Before, Poe had already moved to Baltimore and wrote for a magazine, he also married a girl named Virginia Chemm.
But, Poe was extremely dissatisfied with his impoverished life. At this time, his wife contracted tuberculosis. Poe moved his family to New York. In New York, he published his poem The Raven looking not only for commercial success, but also possibly as a remembrance to all the loved ones he lost.
Later that winter, his wife died. Poe died two years later October 7, One notable characteristic of Dark Romanticism is the shadowy approach to the text. In The Raven, the narrator starts off by describing the weary mood he is in reading long forgotten books.
This sets up the shadowy beginning of the poem. Another characteristic of Dark Romanticism is that there are many creepy symbols. In The Raven, the creepiest symbol is the raven itself. Also, characters in Dark Romantic novels often experience the effects of guilt and sin.
That is why The Raven is categorized as a Dark Romantic poem. The narrator is reading is reading a really old book and he is feeling very weak and weary.
He is starting to fall asleep, but a sudden tapping sound wakes him up. The character was just mourning a woman named Lenore. The narrator starts to freak out about every sound or movement in his room.
But, he gathers up courage and opens his door. He hears the rapping again; this time, he decides to check the window. The narrator is very surprised that the raven could talk, but he starts to feel depressed again.
He waits for the Raven to leave thinking that the bird is no more than someone who will leave him by sunrise just like all his friends. The narrator is drawn by the bird and he becomes extremely interested in it to the point where he pulls up a chair and sits in front of it.
The narrator is imagining and guessing things about the raven, where it came from, what it experienced. As the narrator is thinking, his mind starts thinking about Lenore again, and how she will never be with him again.Poe Museum; Edgar Allan Poe (January 19, – October 7, ) was an American writer, poet, editor and literary critic, considered part of the American Romantic Movement.
Best known for his tales of mystery and the macabre, Poe was one of the earliest American practitioners of the short story and is considered the inventor of the detective-fiction genre.
The Masque of the Red Death.
Literature Network» Edgar Allan Poe» The Masque of the Red Death The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym. Plays.
Politian. Short Stories. The Assignation. Berenice. The Black Cat. The Cask of Amontillado. A Descent into the Maelstrom.
The Devil in the Belfry. "The Masque of the Red Death", originally published as "The Mask of the Red Death: A Fantasy" (), is a short story by American writer Edgar Allan Poe.
The story follows Prince Prospero's attempts to avoid a dangerous plague, known as the Red Death, by hiding in his abbey. THE LIFE OF EDGAR ALLAN POE Edgar Allan Poe was born January 19, , the last of three siblings.
Both his parents died within three years after his birth. Dark Romanticism is a literary subgenre of Romanticism, reflecting popular fascination with the irrational, the demonic and the webkandii.com conflated with Gothicism, it has shadowed the euphoric Romantic movement ever since its 18th-century beginnings.
Edgar Allan Poe is often celebrated as the supreme exponent of the tradition. The Raven - Kindle edition by Edgar Allan Poe, Gustave Doré.
Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading The Raven. | <urn:uuid:ec46d82e-47de-4968-8100-b4c94ab52f91> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://wowuhocakyhivi.webkandii.com/dark-romanticism-in-the-short-stories-the-raven-and-the-masque-of-red-death-by-edgar-allan-poe-42868wx.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250628549.43/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125011232-20200125040232-00487.warc.gz | en | 0.983962 | 913 | 3.5 | 4 | [
-0.19268879294395447,
0.42987769842147827,
0.2267572581768036,
0.40401899814605713,
-0.2196725308895111,
0.1493198573589325,
0.4527425765991211,
0.047711409628391266,
0.027089588344097137,
-0.3297886252403259,
-0.06890366971492767,
0.3024478852748871,
-0.0664442852139473,
0.065796211361885... | 1 | No pestilence had ever been so fatal, or so hideous.
Both his parents died within three years after his birth. After, he was adopted by a wealthy tobacco merchant. Poe was trained to become a businessman, but his interest was in poetry.
When he went back to his house in Richmond, Virginia, he found that his fiance was engaged to another man. Enraged, Poe set out to become a great poet.
Poe enrolled in West Point; after a few months he was kicked out. Later, when his father died, Poe was left out of the will. Before, Poe had already moved to Baltimore and wrote for a magazine, he also married a girl named Virginia Chemm.
But, Poe was extremely dissatisfied with his impoverished life. At this time, his wife contracted tuberculosis. Poe moved his family to New York. In New York, he published his poem The Raven looking not only for commercial success, but also possibly as a remembrance to all the loved ones he lost.
Later that winter, his wife died. Poe died two years later October 7, One notable characteristic of Dark Romanticism is the shadowy approach to the text. In The Raven, the narrator starts off by describing the weary mood he is in reading long forgotten books.
This sets up the shadowy beginning of the poem. Another characteristic of Dark Romanticism is that there are many creepy symbols. In The Raven, the creepiest symbol is the raven itself. Also, characters in Dark Romantic novels often experience the effects of guilt and sin.
That is why The Raven is categorized as a Dark Romantic poem. The narrator is reading is reading a really old book and he is feeling very weak and weary.
He is starting to fall asleep, but a sudden tapping sound wakes him up. The character was just mourning a woman named Lenore. The narrator starts to freak out about every sound or movement in his room.
But, he gathers up courage and opens his door. He hears the rapping again; this time, he decides to check the window. The narrator is very surprised that the raven could talk, but he starts to feel depressed again.
He waits for the Raven to leave thinking that the bird is no more than someone who will leave him by sunrise just like all his friends. The narrator is drawn by the bird and he becomes extremely interested in it to the point where he pulls up a chair and sits in front of it.
The narrator is imagining and guessing things about the raven, where it came from, what it experienced. As the narrator is thinking, his mind starts thinking about Lenore again, and how she will never be with him again.Poe Museum; Edgar Allan Poe (January 19, – October 7, ) was an American writer, poet, editor and literary critic, considered part of the American Romantic Movement.
Best known for his tales of mystery and the macabre, Poe was one of the earliest American practitioners of the short story and is considered the inventor of the detective-fiction genre.
The Masque of the Red Death.
Literature Network» Edgar Allan Poe» The Masque of the Red Death The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym. Plays.
Politian. Short Stories. The Assignation. Berenice. The Black Cat. The Cask of Amontillado. A Descent into the Maelstrom.
The Devil in the Belfry. "The Masque of the Red Death", originally published as "The Mask of the Red Death: A Fantasy" (), is a short story by American writer Edgar Allan Poe.
The story follows Prince Prospero's attempts to avoid a dangerous plague, known as the Red Death, by hiding in his abbey. THE LIFE OF EDGAR ALLAN POE Edgar Allan Poe was born January 19, , the last of three siblings.
Both his parents died within three years after his birth. Dark Romanticism is a literary subgenre of Romanticism, reflecting popular fascination with the irrational, the demonic and the webkandii.com conflated with Gothicism, it has shadowed the euphoric Romantic movement ever since its 18th-century beginnings.
Edgar Allan Poe is often celebrated as the supreme exponent of the tradition. The Raven - Kindle edition by Edgar Allan Poe, Gustave Doré.
Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading The Raven. | 905 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Where Is The Green Sheep?
The children in Johnson House toddlers continue to very interested in sharing stories together. A very popular picture book throughout this year has been ‘Where is the Green Sheep?’ Leila, Evan, Finley and Eva were very eager to engage in some play experiences linked to this story. The children helped educator Cathy to read the story and they took turns to turn the pages. As they read the text the children were building on their knowledge of prepositions.
The children’s interests in zoos and Australian animals continues to evolve in Murray House infants. The stories ‘Dear Zoo’ and ‘Aussie Animals’, written by Rod Campbell, are still our children’s favourite books.
When children are asked about their favourite books during gathering time, they all say, with one voice, “Animals!”, and when ‘Aussie Animals’ has been read, they all say, “More!”, or tap their chests (which means ‘more’ in sign language).
To support the children’s ongoing learning, educator Jung recently introduced natural materials (small wooden tiles) that had printed pictures of Australian animals to explore texts in a new way. The children were encouraged to carefully observe the animals printed on the tiles and to discuss which animals they were. They also played a matching game with the tiles.
This experience allowed the children to engage in structured and collaborative play. They were also practicing their problem-solving skills as they identified the similarities and differences in the animal pictures and looked for matches.
Over the past few weeks, the children in Rigby House have noticed the smoke in the air, and we have been talking about how this can make us feel, and that staying indoors protects us from feeling unwell.
During these discussions many of the children explained to us that the smoke was here because of the bush fires which were burning the trees and grass, and making lots of smoke. Some of the children told us that their mummies and daddies had told them about the koalas and other animals that had been hurt in the bushfires. They had seen pictures of koalas being given water to drink and medicine and Band-Aids to help them feel better.
The children became very interested in this topic, and often brought it up for discussion, so the educators put together a ‘koala hospital’, with photos and a collection of toy koalas and other Australian animals, medical equipment and bandages, to follow up on the children’s interest.
It has been lovely to see the children role play in this area. They are so caring as they gently wrap the animals in bandages, and give them pretend injections, and medicine and water to drink. The children talk to each other and their educators, explaining how they imagine the animals must feel. Through play children make sense of their world, and develop knowledge and understanding.
This week at Robinson House there has been so much excitement from the children who will be moving on to primary school next year. Several learning opportunities have been embedded in the program based on discussions and shared ideas from the children.
An example of this the set-up of a ‘school class room’ by educators, who have invited the children to engage in role play where they can explore, experience wearing a school uniform, carry a backpack and practice tying their shoe laces as they get ready to embark on a new journey heading to primary school.
Alongside this, educators are also respectful and aware that change can impact children, and that each child will have their own ideas and understanding about school and they will also have different expectations about primary school. Other fun and practical ways to prepare for school have been introduced, such as sharing feelings and stories about school and orientation together. Children have also engaged in food preparation experiences, where they have brought in their own lunch boxes from home and made sandwiches to enjoy at a picnic together.
At Robinson House, educators believe that having children’s input and involvement in joint decision making on their learning has significantly supported how they respond to and participate in the program.
Last Saturday was the final Fathers’ and Children’s Playgroup for the year. The children enjoyed making reindeer ears, painting Christmas trees, playing in the sandpit and building Santa’s workshop with blocks. A morning tea was enjoyed by all, and we wished our friends Amelia and Harrison all the very best as they are off to kindy at big school next year.
We wish all of our families a very merry Christmas and festive season, and a Happy New year! | <urn:uuid:18252e75-94d0-411c-9dad-12b5176933f4> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://theinfantshome.org.au/article/this-week-at-the-infants-home-9-december-to-13-december/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591234.15/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117205732-20200117233732-00278.warc.gz | en | 0.981127 | 956 | 3.609375 | 4 | [
0.24315443634986877,
0.10037803649902344,
0.19540072977542877,
0.1947067677974701,
0.03671487420797348,
0.23885154724121094,
-0.4371825158596039,
-0.005207925569266081,
-0.2259555459022522,
0.5413767099380493,
0.022398777306079865,
-0.41762202978134155,
-0.07222291827201843,
0.713562965393... | 13 | Where Is The Green Sheep?
The children in Johnson House toddlers continue to very interested in sharing stories together. A very popular picture book throughout this year has been ‘Where is the Green Sheep?’ Leila, Evan, Finley and Eva were very eager to engage in some play experiences linked to this story. The children helped educator Cathy to read the story and they took turns to turn the pages. As they read the text the children were building on their knowledge of prepositions.
The children’s interests in zoos and Australian animals continues to evolve in Murray House infants. The stories ‘Dear Zoo’ and ‘Aussie Animals’, written by Rod Campbell, are still our children’s favourite books.
When children are asked about their favourite books during gathering time, they all say, with one voice, “Animals!”, and when ‘Aussie Animals’ has been read, they all say, “More!”, or tap their chests (which means ‘more’ in sign language).
To support the children’s ongoing learning, educator Jung recently introduced natural materials (small wooden tiles) that had printed pictures of Australian animals to explore texts in a new way. The children were encouraged to carefully observe the animals printed on the tiles and to discuss which animals they were. They also played a matching game with the tiles.
This experience allowed the children to engage in structured and collaborative play. They were also practicing their problem-solving skills as they identified the similarities and differences in the animal pictures and looked for matches.
Over the past few weeks, the children in Rigby House have noticed the smoke in the air, and we have been talking about how this can make us feel, and that staying indoors protects us from feeling unwell.
During these discussions many of the children explained to us that the smoke was here because of the bush fires which were burning the trees and grass, and making lots of smoke. Some of the children told us that their mummies and daddies had told them about the koalas and other animals that had been hurt in the bushfires. They had seen pictures of koalas being given water to drink and medicine and Band-Aids to help them feel better.
The children became very interested in this topic, and often brought it up for discussion, so the educators put together a ‘koala hospital’, with photos and a collection of toy koalas and other Australian animals, medical equipment and bandages, to follow up on the children’s interest.
It has been lovely to see the children role play in this area. They are so caring as they gently wrap the animals in bandages, and give them pretend injections, and medicine and water to drink. The children talk to each other and their educators, explaining how they imagine the animals must feel. Through play children make sense of their world, and develop knowledge and understanding.
This week at Robinson House there has been so much excitement from the children who will be moving on to primary school next year. Several learning opportunities have been embedded in the program based on discussions and shared ideas from the children.
An example of this the set-up of a ‘school class room’ by educators, who have invited the children to engage in role play where they can explore, experience wearing a school uniform, carry a backpack and practice tying their shoe laces as they get ready to embark on a new journey heading to primary school.
Alongside this, educators are also respectful and aware that change can impact children, and that each child will have their own ideas and understanding about school and they will also have different expectations about primary school. Other fun and practical ways to prepare for school have been introduced, such as sharing feelings and stories about school and orientation together. Children have also engaged in food preparation experiences, where they have brought in their own lunch boxes from home and made sandwiches to enjoy at a picnic together.
At Robinson House, educators believe that having children’s input and involvement in joint decision making on their learning has significantly supported how they respond to and participate in the program.
Last Saturday was the final Fathers’ and Children’s Playgroup for the year. The children enjoyed making reindeer ears, painting Christmas trees, playing in the sandpit and building Santa’s workshop with blocks. A morning tea was enjoyed by all, and we wished our friends Amelia and Harrison all the very best as they are off to kindy at big school next year.
We wish all of our families a very merry Christmas and festive season, and a Happy New year! | 899 | ENGLISH | 1 |
How Henry Ford Negatively Impacted The Way Automobiles And The Assembly Line
Henry Ford was born on July 30, 1863 on his family 's farm. They lived just outside of Greenfield Township, Michigan. He grew up in a good and stable environment. His parents were William and Mary Ford. Henry had two brothers: William Ford Jr. and Robert Ford. He had two sisters: Margaret Ford and Jane Ford. His father William was very firm when it came to religion. Their religion they practiced was called Anglicanism. Henry wasn’t big on going to church, even as he got older. He thought believing in God was a waste of time.
In 1832, George and Samuel Ford arrive in Ireland and settled in Dearborn Township. Henry as a young child was very smart. Henry was the smartest in his class. After high school, he went on to the Detroit Business Institute. He studied there until 1888, where he met Clara Ala Bryant. He was 24 years old and she was 22 years old on the day they got married in Michigan. | <urn:uuid:bdb97aba-ab2e-4b47-b8c2-96a15f40d69a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.cram.com/essay/How-Henry-Ford-Negatively-Impacted-The-Way/F3PCAJMFNM5YW | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599789.45/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120195035-20200120224035-00117.warc.gz | en | 0.991515 | 216 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
-0.016503779217600822,
0.24089041352272034,
0.3986912965774536,
0.4702746868133545,
-0.32897594571113586,
0.12518629431724548,
0.2801699638366699,
0.3493701219558716,
-0.3584945499897003,
-0.2742609977722168,
-0.1340116560459137,
0.017170852050185204,
-0.1309651881456375,
0.474008202552795... | 1 | How Henry Ford Negatively Impacted The Way Automobiles And The Assembly Line
Henry Ford was born on July 30, 1863 on his family 's farm. They lived just outside of Greenfield Township, Michigan. He grew up in a good and stable environment. His parents were William and Mary Ford. Henry had two brothers: William Ford Jr. and Robert Ford. He had two sisters: Margaret Ford and Jane Ford. His father William was very firm when it came to religion. Their religion they practiced was called Anglicanism. Henry wasn’t big on going to church, even as he got older. He thought believing in God was a waste of time.
In 1832, George and Samuel Ford arrive in Ireland and settled in Dearborn Township. Henry as a young child was very smart. Henry was the smartest in his class. After high school, he went on to the Detroit Business Institute. He studied there until 1888, where he met Clara Ala Bryant. He was 24 years old and she was 22 years old on the day they got married in Michigan. | 231 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Advancing on the Rhine River in Germany one victory after another, a U.S. tank battalion led by commander George S. Patton arrived in Metz, which is located along the Moselle River at the German borders with Lorraine Province in northeastern France. Taken by France in 1552, the city later became part of German territory, but was reclaimed by France again after World War I. Metz was surrounded by a fortress designed by legendary French architect Sébastien Le Prestre, Seigneur de Vauban (1633-1707). The development of cannons made it difficult for existing citadels to protect cities. Then, the design and technics regarding “star forts” were devised by architects centered around Vauban.
Despite its prestige as a historic masterpiece, the fortress of the 18th century, part of which was reinforced after the Franco-Prussian War, would never been considered to get in the way of the strongest U.S. corps equipped with cutting edge weapons. The 20th U.S. corps led attack in Metz under leadership of Gen. Walton Walker, who earned Patton’s trust and later died during the Korean War. Even with their poor combat competency, German guards survived fierce attacks by the 20th U.S. corps. The walls of the fortress were strong enough to weather destructive cannon shots.
The U.S. foot soldiers rushed toward the fortress to take it down with a series of potent strikes as if it were a siege warfare in the Middle Age. Although thought to end in a few days, the battle turned out to be a three-month war with massive casualties. The Battle of Metz left a defamatory scar to Patton. French architect Vauban would have had mixed feelings if he had known that his fortress was used to contribute to the victory of German troops. However, what matters more in terms of war is not a cause but a practical way of thinking. As Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu says, the best tool during war is to take away and use the other’s weapon. | <urn:uuid:ef908489-9718-48cd-aafa-21f287ef9095> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.donga.com/en/article/all/20190514/1729095/1/Old-day-fortress-that-blocked-U-S-tank-battalion | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250615407.46/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124040939-20200124065939-00389.warc.gz | en | 0.985706 | 431 | 4 | 4 | [
-0.3931055963039398,
0.7415316700935364,
0.11797089129686356,
0.15854687988758087,
-0.25337696075439453,
-0.09488014131784439,
-0.00009560295438859612,
0.2545502185821533,
-0.3190769553184509,
-0.3231562376022339,
0.04128720611333847,
-0.1696603149175644,
0.031229473650455475,
0.2560969293... | 3 | Advancing on the Rhine River in Germany one victory after another, a U.S. tank battalion led by commander George S. Patton arrived in Metz, which is located along the Moselle River at the German borders with Lorraine Province in northeastern France. Taken by France in 1552, the city later became part of German territory, but was reclaimed by France again after World War I. Metz was surrounded by a fortress designed by legendary French architect Sébastien Le Prestre, Seigneur de Vauban (1633-1707). The development of cannons made it difficult for existing citadels to protect cities. Then, the design and technics regarding “star forts” were devised by architects centered around Vauban.
Despite its prestige as a historic masterpiece, the fortress of the 18th century, part of which was reinforced after the Franco-Prussian War, would never been considered to get in the way of the strongest U.S. corps equipped with cutting edge weapons. The 20th U.S. corps led attack in Metz under leadership of Gen. Walton Walker, who earned Patton’s trust and later died during the Korean War. Even with their poor combat competency, German guards survived fierce attacks by the 20th U.S. corps. The walls of the fortress were strong enough to weather destructive cannon shots.
The U.S. foot soldiers rushed toward the fortress to take it down with a series of potent strikes as if it were a siege warfare in the Middle Age. Although thought to end in a few days, the battle turned out to be a three-month war with massive casualties. The Battle of Metz left a defamatory scar to Patton. French architect Vauban would have had mixed feelings if he had known that his fortress was used to contribute to the victory of German troops. However, what matters more in terms of war is not a cause but a practical way of thinking. As Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu says, the best tool during war is to take away and use the other’s weapon. | 424 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Spain’s desire to find riches and spices, as well as to spread Christianity to the world, leads them to conquer the Philippines.
When the Legazpi Fleet landed at Cebu, they established the first Spanish Community in the country. The constructed a triangle-shaped community in a land given by Raha Tupaz. The first two sides faces the sea and has a fence that was made up of hard wood, while each side bears several cannons for protection. They also constructed a deep-well to which they gather their drinking water. Legazpi named it “San Miguel”. But he changed it to “City of the Holy Jesus”.
This is the first town and Spanish community in the Philippines. This also signals the formal invasion of Spain to the Philippines.
The Spanish Missionaries had preached and propagated the Christian religion in Cebu while Legazpi was arranging the Spanish Government in the province. After several months, he sent several troops to all nearby provinces of Cebu which includes Negros, Samar, Leyte and Panay. Legazpi also sent his grandson Juan de Salcedo in Mindanao to fight for the Muslim forces who are frequently attacking the Visayas region.
Legaspi heard that the Panay province was reached in food source. He then sailed to this province in 1569 along with his fleet. In the shore of Panay, Legaspi constructed the second Spanish community. Legazpi made Panay as the center of his operation. He also heard that there is a progressive community in the Luzon region. In his desire to invade as many provinces as possible, Legazpi send an expedition toward Manila in May 8, 1570.
The expedition was headed by Martin de Gioti, along with 120 Spanish soldiers and 600 native warriors. Manila was very advance and more progressive compared to the rest of the country during those era. Manila was under the leadership of a Muslim Datu named Raha Sulayman. His kingdom was located South of the Pasig River while in the North was the Kingdom of his step-father Raha Lakan Dula.
When Legazpi reached Manila, he imposes and ask Raha Sulayman to pay for taxes to Spain. Raha Sulayman refuses to pay the taxes which prompted Legazpi to attack the whole Manila area. Raha Sulayman and his warriors fought bravely against the Spanish soldiers. But because the foreigners had a better weapons, Raha Sulayman’s troops was beaten. This battle was held on May 24, 1570. Sulayman’s troops retreated through the other side of the Pasig River. While Goiti return to Panay to report to Legazpi.
This time, Legazpi headed the attack on the Northern side of Pasig River in the next year. When Raha Lakan Dula sees the very strong and very advanced weapons of the invaders, he did not attempt to fight back but rather invited Legaspi and make friend with him. He then convinces Raha Sulayman to accept the invaders but Sulayman refuses to abide. He then set fire the whole of Manila before retreating boarding at least 40 big boats towards the Manila Bay via the Pasig River. In route to the Pasig River, near Bankusay, Tondo, they encountered Legazpi’s forces and a battle begins. Sulayman’s warriors were defeated. There had been no recorded history on whether Raha Sulayman was able to escape or had died during this battle.
Legazpi was sadden to see that whole of Manila burn to ashes. He then constructed houses for the Spanish citizens, churches, and a palace to serve as his house and a camp for his Spanish soldiers. On June 24, 1571, he made Manila as the center of the country and was named as “Katangi-tangi at Laging Tapat na Lungsod”. After this, Legazpi founded the City Government of Spain which was called “ayuntamiento”. He also appointed a leader who will look after the new government. Legazpi then went on to invade more areas of the country. With this, Legazpi was denoted as the first Spanish Conqueror and the first Governor-general of the Philippines.
Because of the lack of unity of the native Filipino during that era, Spain had invaded the country with ease. The different tribes of the country had its own leaders which makes it more advantageous for the Spanish invaders. Every ethnic group then has its own culture and dialects so that they themselves do not understand each other. The Spanish settlers sees this and uses it as a weapon. They let these tribes fight against each other and help other tribes during a battle. They also convince their native allies to fight along their side to other tribes who do not want to be invaded.
They convinced many tribes that their motives in coming to our country was for the benefit of our people. They also easily conquered all of the Philippines because they were seasoned warriors with more advanced and modern weapons.
Author’s note: Another compiling story and history of my motherland and its citizens.
The First World War was something that brought change to the world on an enormous scale. Read a brief history here..
The article compares the beautiful landscape of Kodaikanal with that of Genting Highlands. While one is in India and the other in Malaysia both have their own natural diversity..
These are some of the major achievements in the course of history. A few persons did the impossible feats and proved the word has no meaning. | <urn:uuid:aaeec48d-28e5-4a38-9a24-fb530055cf82> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://travelandculture.expertscolumn.com/establishing-first-spanish-community-and-invading-rest-philippines | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595282.35/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119205448-20200119233448-00477.warc.gz | en | 0.983454 | 1,163 | 3.5625 | 4 | [
-0.0048849135637283325,
0.2700706720352173,
0.22010618448257446,
0.004012330435216427,
-0.24223986268043518,
-0.20637422800064087,
-0.04457993060350418,
0.27012717723846436,
-0.13167330622673035,
0.07170775532722473,
0.02703777700662613,
-0.49456626176834106,
0.004611142911016941,
0.487653... | 1 | Spain’s desire to find riches and spices, as well as to spread Christianity to the world, leads them to conquer the Philippines.
When the Legazpi Fleet landed at Cebu, they established the first Spanish Community in the country. The constructed a triangle-shaped community in a land given by Raha Tupaz. The first two sides faces the sea and has a fence that was made up of hard wood, while each side bears several cannons for protection. They also constructed a deep-well to which they gather their drinking water. Legazpi named it “San Miguel”. But he changed it to “City of the Holy Jesus”.
This is the first town and Spanish community in the Philippines. This also signals the formal invasion of Spain to the Philippines.
The Spanish Missionaries had preached and propagated the Christian religion in Cebu while Legazpi was arranging the Spanish Government in the province. After several months, he sent several troops to all nearby provinces of Cebu which includes Negros, Samar, Leyte and Panay. Legazpi also sent his grandson Juan de Salcedo in Mindanao to fight for the Muslim forces who are frequently attacking the Visayas region.
Legaspi heard that the Panay province was reached in food source. He then sailed to this province in 1569 along with his fleet. In the shore of Panay, Legaspi constructed the second Spanish community. Legazpi made Panay as the center of his operation. He also heard that there is a progressive community in the Luzon region. In his desire to invade as many provinces as possible, Legazpi send an expedition toward Manila in May 8, 1570.
The expedition was headed by Martin de Gioti, along with 120 Spanish soldiers and 600 native warriors. Manila was very advance and more progressive compared to the rest of the country during those era. Manila was under the leadership of a Muslim Datu named Raha Sulayman. His kingdom was located South of the Pasig River while in the North was the Kingdom of his step-father Raha Lakan Dula.
When Legazpi reached Manila, he imposes and ask Raha Sulayman to pay for taxes to Spain. Raha Sulayman refuses to pay the taxes which prompted Legazpi to attack the whole Manila area. Raha Sulayman and his warriors fought bravely against the Spanish soldiers. But because the foreigners had a better weapons, Raha Sulayman’s troops was beaten. This battle was held on May 24, 1570. Sulayman’s troops retreated through the other side of the Pasig River. While Goiti return to Panay to report to Legazpi.
This time, Legazpi headed the attack on the Northern side of Pasig River in the next year. When Raha Lakan Dula sees the very strong and very advanced weapons of the invaders, he did not attempt to fight back but rather invited Legaspi and make friend with him. He then convinces Raha Sulayman to accept the invaders but Sulayman refuses to abide. He then set fire the whole of Manila before retreating boarding at least 40 big boats towards the Manila Bay via the Pasig River. In route to the Pasig River, near Bankusay, Tondo, they encountered Legazpi’s forces and a battle begins. Sulayman’s warriors were defeated. There had been no recorded history on whether Raha Sulayman was able to escape or had died during this battle.
Legazpi was sadden to see that whole of Manila burn to ashes. He then constructed houses for the Spanish citizens, churches, and a palace to serve as his house and a camp for his Spanish soldiers. On June 24, 1571, he made Manila as the center of the country and was named as “Katangi-tangi at Laging Tapat na Lungsod”. After this, Legazpi founded the City Government of Spain which was called “ayuntamiento”. He also appointed a leader who will look after the new government. Legazpi then went on to invade more areas of the country. With this, Legazpi was denoted as the first Spanish Conqueror and the first Governor-general of the Philippines.
Because of the lack of unity of the native Filipino during that era, Spain had invaded the country with ease. The different tribes of the country had its own leaders which makes it more advantageous for the Spanish invaders. Every ethnic group then has its own culture and dialects so that they themselves do not understand each other. The Spanish settlers sees this and uses it as a weapon. They let these tribes fight against each other and help other tribes during a battle. They also convince their native allies to fight along their side to other tribes who do not want to be invaded.
They convinced many tribes that their motives in coming to our country was for the benefit of our people. They also easily conquered all of the Philippines because they were seasoned warriors with more advanced and modern weapons.
Author’s note: Another compiling story and history of my motherland and its citizens.
The First World War was something that brought change to the world on an enormous scale. Read a brief history here..
The article compares the beautiful landscape of Kodaikanal with that of Genting Highlands. While one is in India and the other in Malaysia both have their own natural diversity..
These are some of the major achievements in the course of history. A few persons did the impossible feats and proved the word has no meaning. | 1,145 | ENGLISH | 1 |
how come before 1948 you couldn't get Italian citizenship through the mother? I guess it's out of historical curiosity
- GenevievesMomLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
Patriarchial societies struggled with modernizing their rules. The reality is that Italy as a nation was very young in 1948 and it took them a few years to catch up with the more liberal ideas coming in from western Europe and the US. Until WWII, most of Southern Europe and Eastern Europe maintained a standard that citizenship was held by men and that women and children held the citizenship of the husband and father. It was true in the US until the 1905/06 reforms.
When women and children were property, only the "man of the house" had rights of citizenship. Luckily, that fell aside and was replaced with universal sufferage. | <urn:uuid:31c1ae08-80fc-4387-9d29-4b8ff085f666> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080411224708AAA4Mcm | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694071.63/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126230255-20200127020255-00013.warc.gz | en | 0.985687 | 164 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
-0.45973262190818787,
0.6198394894599915,
0.12813004851341248,
-0.26647278666496277,
-0.4407387673854828,
0.2437458485364914,
-0.0642511174082756,
0.0868716761469841,
0.1908005326986313,
-0.02515341527760029,
-0.1633480191230774,
0.12750795483589172,
0.13979877531528473,
0.5020787715911865... | 1 | how come before 1948 you couldn't get Italian citizenship through the mother? I guess it's out of historical curiosity
- GenevievesMomLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
Patriarchial societies struggled with modernizing their rules. The reality is that Italy as a nation was very young in 1948 and it took them a few years to catch up with the more liberal ideas coming in from western Europe and the US. Until WWII, most of Southern Europe and Eastern Europe maintained a standard that citizenship was held by men and that women and children held the citizenship of the husband and father. It was true in the US until the 1905/06 reforms.
When women and children were property, only the "man of the house" had rights of citizenship. Luckily, that fell aside and was replaced with universal sufferage. | 178 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Jean-Baptiste and Alphonse Nothomb
FREE Catholic Classes
Belgian statesman, b. 3 July, 1805, at Messancy, Luxemburg ; d. at Berlin, 16 September, 1881. He received his secondary education at the athénée of Luxemburg, studied law in the University of Liège, and was awarded a doctor's degree in 1826. He practiced law in Luxemburg, then in Brussels, where he took an active part in the war that was then waged in the press in behalf of the independence of Belgium. During the riots of August, 1830, he was in his native province; but hearing of the fight which had taken place between the patriots and the troops of the Prince of Orange he hurried back to the capital.
The provisional government appointed him secretary of the committee which was preparing the first draft of a new constitution. Three electoral districts of Luxemburg chose him as their representative in the first legislature of Belgium. He declared for the district of Arlon to which, in 1831, he gave proof of his gratitude by doing his utmost to prevent its union with Germany. Nothomb, who was the youngest member of the legislative assembly, was appointed one of its secretaries and a member of the committee on foreign affairs. In the chamber he strongly opposed the advocates of the union of Belgium with France and those who were for a republican government. His political ideal, which he defended with great eloquence, was a representative monarchy with two houses, liberty of the press, and complete independence, in their own spheres, of the secular and religious powers.
From 1831-36 he was general secretary for foreign affairs; with Devaux he went to London to carry on secret negotiations at the conference which had met in that city to settle the new state of affairs created by the Belgian revolution, and did much to remove the difficulties which had delayed the departure for Belgium of Leopold of Saxe-Coburg. He published in 1833 his "Essai historique et politique sur la révolution beige", a remarkable work which was translated into German and Italian and was reprinted three times in the same year. In 1836 Nothomb resigned as general secretary for foreign affairs and in 1837 became minister of Public Works in the Catholic administration of de Theux. He gave a powerful impetus to the construction of railroads and when he resigned in 1840 more than 300 kilometers had been built. In the same year he was sent as an extraordinary envoy to the German Confederation and in 1841 became minister of the interior in a unionist administration; but the positions of the parties were not what they had been in the preceding decade, and Nothomb soon realized that a union of the Catholics and Liberals was no longer possible. In 1845 he withdrew from the political arena to enter the diplomatic corps. He was for many years minister plenipotentiary of Belgium in Berlin. In 1840 he had become a member of the Royal Academy of Brussels ; and he received many distinctions from foreign countries.
Brother of Jean-Baptiste, b. 12 July, 1817; d. 15 May, 1898. He had a brilliant career in the magistracy, was minister of justice in 1855, and became a member of the lower house of Parliament in 1859. In 1884 he was made a minister of State. Like his brother he was a staunch Catholic ; in the latter part of his life he had become a convert to the political creed of the new Catholic democratic party.
Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. All materials contained on this site, whether written, audible or visual are the exclusive property of Catholic Online and are protected under U.S. and International copyright laws, © Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. Any unauthorized use, without prior written consent of Catholic Online is strictly forbidden and prohibited.
Catholic Online is a Project of Your Catholic Voice Foundation, a Not-for-Profit Corporation. Your Catholic Voice Foundation has been granted a recognition of tax exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Federal Tax Identification Number: 81-0596847. Your gift is tax-deductible as allowed by law. | <urn:uuid:3f92a28a-54a7-45a6-aa20-dc2d0c8a489b> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=8547 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607118.51/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122131612-20200122160612-00392.warc.gz | en | 0.983685 | 852 | 3.3125 | 3 | [
-0.2527412176132202,
0.5511386394500732,
0.15671288967132568,
-0.3319976031780243,
-0.0995558649301529,
-0.5265264511108398,
-0.12005786597728729,
0.1601366102695465,
0.0006084744818508625,
0.04884812980890274,
0.16400088369846344,
-0.19136568903923035,
0.14042958617210388,
0.0890992134809... | 3 | Jean-Baptiste and Alphonse Nothomb
FREE Catholic Classes
Belgian statesman, b. 3 July, 1805, at Messancy, Luxemburg ; d. at Berlin, 16 September, 1881. He received his secondary education at the athénée of Luxemburg, studied law in the University of Liège, and was awarded a doctor's degree in 1826. He practiced law in Luxemburg, then in Brussels, where he took an active part in the war that was then waged in the press in behalf of the independence of Belgium. During the riots of August, 1830, he was in his native province; but hearing of the fight which had taken place between the patriots and the troops of the Prince of Orange he hurried back to the capital.
The provisional government appointed him secretary of the committee which was preparing the first draft of a new constitution. Three electoral districts of Luxemburg chose him as their representative in the first legislature of Belgium. He declared for the district of Arlon to which, in 1831, he gave proof of his gratitude by doing his utmost to prevent its union with Germany. Nothomb, who was the youngest member of the legislative assembly, was appointed one of its secretaries and a member of the committee on foreign affairs. In the chamber he strongly opposed the advocates of the union of Belgium with France and those who were for a republican government. His political ideal, which he defended with great eloquence, was a representative monarchy with two houses, liberty of the press, and complete independence, in their own spheres, of the secular and religious powers.
From 1831-36 he was general secretary for foreign affairs; with Devaux he went to London to carry on secret negotiations at the conference which had met in that city to settle the new state of affairs created by the Belgian revolution, and did much to remove the difficulties which had delayed the departure for Belgium of Leopold of Saxe-Coburg. He published in 1833 his "Essai historique et politique sur la révolution beige", a remarkable work which was translated into German and Italian and was reprinted three times in the same year. In 1836 Nothomb resigned as general secretary for foreign affairs and in 1837 became minister of Public Works in the Catholic administration of de Theux. He gave a powerful impetus to the construction of railroads and when he resigned in 1840 more than 300 kilometers had been built. In the same year he was sent as an extraordinary envoy to the German Confederation and in 1841 became minister of the interior in a unionist administration; but the positions of the parties were not what they had been in the preceding decade, and Nothomb soon realized that a union of the Catholics and Liberals was no longer possible. In 1845 he withdrew from the political arena to enter the diplomatic corps. He was for many years minister plenipotentiary of Belgium in Berlin. In 1840 he had become a member of the Royal Academy of Brussels ; and he received many distinctions from foreign countries.
Brother of Jean-Baptiste, b. 12 July, 1817; d. 15 May, 1898. He had a brilliant career in the magistracy, was minister of justice in 1855, and became a member of the lower house of Parliament in 1859. In 1884 he was made a minister of State. Like his brother he was a staunch Catholic ; in the latter part of his life he had become a convert to the political creed of the new Catholic democratic party.
Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. All materials contained on this site, whether written, audible or visual are the exclusive property of Catholic Online and are protected under U.S. and International copyright laws, © Copyright 2020 Catholic Online. Any unauthorized use, without prior written consent of Catholic Online is strictly forbidden and prohibited.
Catholic Online is a Project of Your Catholic Voice Foundation, a Not-for-Profit Corporation. Your Catholic Voice Foundation has been granted a recognition of tax exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Federal Tax Identification Number: 81-0596847. Your gift is tax-deductible as allowed by law. | 933 | ENGLISH | 1 |
This is one of the stories in our First Grade Curriculum currently being developed.
You may remember the tale of The Princess and The Pea. We have adapted it to now be The Prince and The Pea. How does it feel reading this story from a different perspective for you as an adult? Consider the messages our society sends to our children about gender roles on an ongoing basis, even through fairy tales. Dig deep within yourself and tailor your stories, your example and your messages in a way you feel most appropriate for the lessons you wish to teach your family and your child.
As we were developing our curriculum, we truly struggled with how often women were being portrayed as helpless… how often they were required to be attractive to be desirable .. and how the tales seemed to always make the happy ending be when a man came to save her.
We decided to put a bit of a twist on some of these classic fairy tales to balance and fit a society that should strive harder to see both women and men as equals. In this particular twist, our princess knows just what she wants.
You can enhance this story with simple pieces of fabric and a pea. Layer them one by one as the queen does over the pea.
The Prince and The Pea
~Adapted from the original Princess and The Pea by Hans Christian Andersen
Once upon a time there was a princess who decided she wanted to marry a prince; but he would have to be a REAL and handsome prince if she was to decide to marry him. She told her brothers that she may be in the market and they travelled all over the world to find one for her, but nowhere could they find a prince worthy of their sister’s requests. There were princes enough, but it was difficult to find out whether they were real ones and worthy of her love. There was always something about them that was not as it should be. So, when her brothers returned with the bad news, the princess was disappointed but kept herself interested in other things as most princess do, although she would have liked very much to have a real prince.
One evening a terrible storm came on; there was thunder and lightning, and the rain poured down in torrents. Suddenly a knocking was heard at the city gate, and the old king and his sons went to open it.
It was a prince standing out there in front of the gate. He was cold and helpless and good gracious what a sight the rain and the wind had made him look. The water ran down from his hair and clothes; it ran down into the toes of his shoes and out again at the heels. And yet he kept insisting that he was a real prince.
Well, we’ll soon find that out if he is a real prince or not, thought the old queen. But she said nothing, went into the bedroom, took all the bedding off the bedstead, and laid a pea on the bottom; then she took twenty mattresses and laid them on the pea, and then twenty eiderdown beds on top of the mattresses.
On this the prince had to lie all night. In the morning he was asked how he had slept.
“Oh, very badly!” said he. “I have scarcely closed my eyes all night. Heaven only knows what was in the bed, but I was lying on something hard, so that I am black and blue all over my body. It’s horrible!”
Now they knew that he was a real prince because he had felt the pea right through the twenty mattresses and the twenty eiderdown beds.
Nobody but a real prince could be as sensitive as that.
So, the princess agreed to take him for her husband, for now she knew that she had a real prince as she wanted; and the pea was put in the museum, where it may still be seen, if no one has stolen it. | <urn:uuid:383eeef4-e2d6-4533-bf28-6b02a8ed57a7> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://littleacornlearning.com/2020/01/02/the-prince-and-the-pea-not-the-helpless-little-princess/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694071.63/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126230255-20200127020255-00280.warc.gz | en | 0.989385 | 807 | 3.390625 | 3 | [
-0.05044145509600639,
0.20364628732204437,
0.3449722230434418,
-0.3026445209980011,
-0.31132984161376953,
0.21434326469898224,
0.06373124569654465,
0.07138451933860779,
-0.18125328421592712,
0.4780731797218323,
0.05757177621126175,
0.16719630360603333,
0.5824306607246399,
-0.04547552764415... | 2 | This is one of the stories in our First Grade Curriculum currently being developed.
You may remember the tale of The Princess and The Pea. We have adapted it to now be The Prince and The Pea. How does it feel reading this story from a different perspective for you as an adult? Consider the messages our society sends to our children about gender roles on an ongoing basis, even through fairy tales. Dig deep within yourself and tailor your stories, your example and your messages in a way you feel most appropriate for the lessons you wish to teach your family and your child.
As we were developing our curriculum, we truly struggled with how often women were being portrayed as helpless… how often they were required to be attractive to be desirable .. and how the tales seemed to always make the happy ending be when a man came to save her.
We decided to put a bit of a twist on some of these classic fairy tales to balance and fit a society that should strive harder to see both women and men as equals. In this particular twist, our princess knows just what she wants.
You can enhance this story with simple pieces of fabric and a pea. Layer them one by one as the queen does over the pea.
The Prince and The Pea
~Adapted from the original Princess and The Pea by Hans Christian Andersen
Once upon a time there was a princess who decided she wanted to marry a prince; but he would have to be a REAL and handsome prince if she was to decide to marry him. She told her brothers that she may be in the market and they travelled all over the world to find one for her, but nowhere could they find a prince worthy of their sister’s requests. There were princes enough, but it was difficult to find out whether they were real ones and worthy of her love. There was always something about them that was not as it should be. So, when her brothers returned with the bad news, the princess was disappointed but kept herself interested in other things as most princess do, although she would have liked very much to have a real prince.
One evening a terrible storm came on; there was thunder and lightning, and the rain poured down in torrents. Suddenly a knocking was heard at the city gate, and the old king and his sons went to open it.
It was a prince standing out there in front of the gate. He was cold and helpless and good gracious what a sight the rain and the wind had made him look. The water ran down from his hair and clothes; it ran down into the toes of his shoes and out again at the heels. And yet he kept insisting that he was a real prince.
Well, we’ll soon find that out if he is a real prince or not, thought the old queen. But she said nothing, went into the bedroom, took all the bedding off the bedstead, and laid a pea on the bottom; then she took twenty mattresses and laid them on the pea, and then twenty eiderdown beds on top of the mattresses.
On this the prince had to lie all night. In the morning he was asked how he had slept.
“Oh, very badly!” said he. “I have scarcely closed my eyes all night. Heaven only knows what was in the bed, but I was lying on something hard, so that I am black and blue all over my body. It’s horrible!”
Now they knew that he was a real prince because he had felt the pea right through the twenty mattresses and the twenty eiderdown beds.
Nobody but a real prince could be as sensitive as that.
So, the princess agreed to take him for her husband, for now she knew that she had a real prince as she wanted; and the pea was put in the museum, where it may still be seen, if no one has stolen it. | 770 | ENGLISH | 1 |
By Dr. Sophie Ambler, University of East Anglia.
Stephen Langton (archbishop of Canterbury 1207-1228) was a famous scholar and leading figure in the Church, and is also one of the most important figures in the history of Magna Carta. He was born around 1150 to an English family in rural Lincolnshire and was probably educated in his local cathedral school. At the age of about fifteen Langton left home for Paris, the site of a burgeoning university. He studied the arts and then theology, for about fifteen years, and became a ‘master’ (the equivalent of a university professor today). He was a prolific and influential scholar, known particularly for his exegisis (that is, detailed analysis) of the Bible. Langton’s biblical scholarship included what we would now call ‘political thought’, because he looked to the Bible for guidance on how society in his own day should he ordered. Langton argued that God had not intended the world to be ruled by kings, who were predisposed to rule oppressively and with disregard for the law. Langton used examples from the Bible, as well as scenarios from his own world, in thought experiments designed to investigate whether subjects were obliged to obey a king who made unjust decisions. If a king condemns a man to death, but the prisoner has not been convicted by a court, is the executioner obliged to carry out the sentence? Although Langton was inclined to think that kings in his own day, like their Biblical predecessors, often behaved badly, he was no radical. He thought that in most circumstances subjects should obey their kings – at the most they could refuse to carry out an unlawful command.
Such questions were not just classroom exercises but real dilemmas for people ruled by kings, especially kings such as John of England, who often made important decisions and inflicted harsh punishments on his subjects without recourse to the law or troubling to obtain the agreement of his bishops and barons. In 1206, these became pressing issues for Langton too, when Pope Innocent III called him to Rome and made him a cardinal, before arranging for him to be appointed archbishop of Canterbury. King John refused to accept the pope’s choice of archbishop; he, like his predecessors, expected to influence the outcome of elections to English bishoprics, so that he could reward his servants and ensure that such important offices were held by men who were faithful to him. Both parties refused to back down and so the pope imposed an interdict on England, meaning that the Church’s sacraments (such as Confession and the Eucharist) were forbidden to everyone in the kingdom. Innocent also excommunicated the king (the Church’s equivalent of outlawry). Almost all of England’s bishops sided with the pope and left England to join Langton in exile in France. Eventually, the threat of rebellion in England and war with France forced King John to accept the pope’s terms, in order to secure the support of the Church. He agreed to become the pope’s vassal and to allow Langton to take up his appointment. The bishops, with Langton at their head, returned to England in the summer of 1213 and began the difficult task of trying to prevent a civil war between the king and his barons.
It might be thought that Langton’s scholarly ideas – his belief that kings were by nature oppressive and likely to act with disregard to the law – would make him King John’s enemy and, indeed, this has been suggested by more than one historian. Langton was keenly aware of the brutal realities of John’s rule. He was also attached to St Thomas Becket, his predecessor as archbishop of Canterbury, who had suffered persecution at the hands of John’s father, Henry II, and had been martyred in the cause of the liberty of the Church. Langton could draw strength – and, indeed, political capital – from Becket’s example when dealing with John. But Langton had never argued that subjects were entitled to rebel against their king – even a king as harsh as John – only that they could refuse to obey illegal orders. Thus, in 1215, Langton refused to give up command of Rochester castle to the king because John’s demand had been made ‘without judgement’. For this act John considered Langton ‘a notorious and barefaced traitor’, and suspected him of complicity with the rebel barons. But it is unlikely that the archbishop ever encouraged rebellion against an anointed king, especially knowing the damage that civil war would inflict upon the kingdom.
Instead, Langton and his fellow bishops worked for a peaceful settlement – a settlement that was to be enshrined in the original issue of Magna Carta in 1215. The archbishop might well have helped to compose the Charter, for he certainly agreed with many of its principles, but if so he was probably was one of several authors working on behalf of king, barons and bishops. When it became clear in the weeks after the agreement at Runnymede that the Charter had failed as a peace treaty, Langton continued in his efforts to bring king and barons to terms, refusing to excommunicate the rebels. The king was furious and had Langton suspended from office. The sentence was read out as Langton and his colleagues were readying to embark on the voyage to Rome, where the pope had summoned a council of the Church (the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215).
Langton was not to return to England until 1218. In his absence, Prince Louis of France invaded England at the request of the rebels, King John died, the nine-year-old Henry III was crowned, and two new issues of Magna Carta were granted, in 1216 and 1217, by the young king’s ministers in an effort to woo the rebel barons away from the French cause. With brilliant military victories at the Battles of Lincoln and Sandwich in 1217, Henry III’s supporters were able to secure the kingdom. But the rebuilding of royal authority and finances after the ravages of war was still a huge and difficult task, and Langton toiled hard in the young king’s cause on his return.
It was during the years of Henry III’s minority that Langton was to become the champion of Magna Carta. In 1225, Henry issued what was to be the definitive version of the Charter. This differed in important ways from the original version of 1215. The first Charter had included the controversial ‘security for peace’ that empowered twenty-five barons to ‘distrain and afflict’ the king (to seize his property) if he broke the Charter’s terms. This clause effectively licensed the barons to rebel against the king, which did not sit well with Langton’s principles. The 1225 version of Magna Carta, like those of 1216 and 1217, was issued without this clause. It was also issued in return for a grant of taxation from the bishops and barons. There could now be no suggestion that the Charter had been extracted from the king by force, or that it licensed civil war. These changes allowed Langton to support the Charter unreservedly. In 1225, he pronounced a broad sentence of excommunication in support of Magna Carta. This meant that anyone – king, royal officer, or baron – would automatically be outlawed from the Church if they violated the Charter. When Magna Carta was confirmed in later years, the bishops renewed Langton’s sentence. Langton and his successors were instrumental in promoting and upholding the Charter and, thus, in ensuring its survival.
Sophie Ambler is a Research Associate on the Magna Carta Project (www.magnacartaresearch.org). To find out more, click here.
Magna Carta, or as it is properly called the Great Charter of Liberty, was born on 15 June 1215 at Runnymede when King John – Bad King John as he is more commonly known – was persuaded to accede to a number of demands made...Read on...
- Magna Carta's American Adventure
- 800th anniversary of Bristol...
- Bristol 800 concert and...
- Emancipation and Magna Carta
- Terrorism and Tolerance -...
- Magna Carta
- Magna Carta Benches mark...
- ABA Magna Carta Memorial...
If you would like to keep informed about the work of the Magna Carta Trust and our partners, please sign up to the newsletter below.
Become a Supporter
There are a number of significant supporter opportunities. Register your interest early to ensure the widest range of options.
Find out more | <urn:uuid:3f7c9e49-eb8e-4e57-bbd8-c600f73c5435> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://magnacarta800th.com/schools/biographies/magna-carta-bishops/stephen-langton/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783621.89/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129010251-20200129040251-00199.warc.gz | en | 0.984987 | 1,829 | 3.578125 | 4 | [
-0.08267714083194733,
0.29339754581451416,
0.0812014788389206,
-0.3098393678665161,
-0.09109146893024445,
-0.13547378778457642,
0.25111812353134155,
-0.028774892911314964,
0.3109065592288971,
0.2133301943540573,
-0.613913357257843,
-0.32206082344055176,
0.1286918818950653,
0.22935944795608... | 1 | By Dr. Sophie Ambler, University of East Anglia.
Stephen Langton (archbishop of Canterbury 1207-1228) was a famous scholar and leading figure in the Church, and is also one of the most important figures in the history of Magna Carta. He was born around 1150 to an English family in rural Lincolnshire and was probably educated in his local cathedral school. At the age of about fifteen Langton left home for Paris, the site of a burgeoning university. He studied the arts and then theology, for about fifteen years, and became a ‘master’ (the equivalent of a university professor today). He was a prolific and influential scholar, known particularly for his exegisis (that is, detailed analysis) of the Bible. Langton’s biblical scholarship included what we would now call ‘political thought’, because he looked to the Bible for guidance on how society in his own day should he ordered. Langton argued that God had not intended the world to be ruled by kings, who were predisposed to rule oppressively and with disregard for the law. Langton used examples from the Bible, as well as scenarios from his own world, in thought experiments designed to investigate whether subjects were obliged to obey a king who made unjust decisions. If a king condemns a man to death, but the prisoner has not been convicted by a court, is the executioner obliged to carry out the sentence? Although Langton was inclined to think that kings in his own day, like their Biblical predecessors, often behaved badly, he was no radical. He thought that in most circumstances subjects should obey their kings – at the most they could refuse to carry out an unlawful command.
Such questions were not just classroom exercises but real dilemmas for people ruled by kings, especially kings such as John of England, who often made important decisions and inflicted harsh punishments on his subjects without recourse to the law or troubling to obtain the agreement of his bishops and barons. In 1206, these became pressing issues for Langton too, when Pope Innocent III called him to Rome and made him a cardinal, before arranging for him to be appointed archbishop of Canterbury. King John refused to accept the pope’s choice of archbishop; he, like his predecessors, expected to influence the outcome of elections to English bishoprics, so that he could reward his servants and ensure that such important offices were held by men who were faithful to him. Both parties refused to back down and so the pope imposed an interdict on England, meaning that the Church’s sacraments (such as Confession and the Eucharist) were forbidden to everyone in the kingdom. Innocent also excommunicated the king (the Church’s equivalent of outlawry). Almost all of England’s bishops sided with the pope and left England to join Langton in exile in France. Eventually, the threat of rebellion in England and war with France forced King John to accept the pope’s terms, in order to secure the support of the Church. He agreed to become the pope’s vassal and to allow Langton to take up his appointment. The bishops, with Langton at their head, returned to England in the summer of 1213 and began the difficult task of trying to prevent a civil war between the king and his barons.
It might be thought that Langton’s scholarly ideas – his belief that kings were by nature oppressive and likely to act with disregard to the law – would make him King John’s enemy and, indeed, this has been suggested by more than one historian. Langton was keenly aware of the brutal realities of John’s rule. He was also attached to St Thomas Becket, his predecessor as archbishop of Canterbury, who had suffered persecution at the hands of John’s father, Henry II, and had been martyred in the cause of the liberty of the Church. Langton could draw strength – and, indeed, political capital – from Becket’s example when dealing with John. But Langton had never argued that subjects were entitled to rebel against their king – even a king as harsh as John – only that they could refuse to obey illegal orders. Thus, in 1215, Langton refused to give up command of Rochester castle to the king because John’s demand had been made ‘without judgement’. For this act John considered Langton ‘a notorious and barefaced traitor’, and suspected him of complicity with the rebel barons. But it is unlikely that the archbishop ever encouraged rebellion against an anointed king, especially knowing the damage that civil war would inflict upon the kingdom.
Instead, Langton and his fellow bishops worked for a peaceful settlement – a settlement that was to be enshrined in the original issue of Magna Carta in 1215. The archbishop might well have helped to compose the Charter, for he certainly agreed with many of its principles, but if so he was probably was one of several authors working on behalf of king, barons and bishops. When it became clear in the weeks after the agreement at Runnymede that the Charter had failed as a peace treaty, Langton continued in his efforts to bring king and barons to terms, refusing to excommunicate the rebels. The king was furious and had Langton suspended from office. The sentence was read out as Langton and his colleagues were readying to embark on the voyage to Rome, where the pope had summoned a council of the Church (the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215).
Langton was not to return to England until 1218. In his absence, Prince Louis of France invaded England at the request of the rebels, King John died, the nine-year-old Henry III was crowned, and two new issues of Magna Carta were granted, in 1216 and 1217, by the young king’s ministers in an effort to woo the rebel barons away from the French cause. With brilliant military victories at the Battles of Lincoln and Sandwich in 1217, Henry III’s supporters were able to secure the kingdom. But the rebuilding of royal authority and finances after the ravages of war was still a huge and difficult task, and Langton toiled hard in the young king’s cause on his return.
It was during the years of Henry III’s minority that Langton was to become the champion of Magna Carta. In 1225, Henry issued what was to be the definitive version of the Charter. This differed in important ways from the original version of 1215. The first Charter had included the controversial ‘security for peace’ that empowered twenty-five barons to ‘distrain and afflict’ the king (to seize his property) if he broke the Charter’s terms. This clause effectively licensed the barons to rebel against the king, which did not sit well with Langton’s principles. The 1225 version of Magna Carta, like those of 1216 and 1217, was issued without this clause. It was also issued in return for a grant of taxation from the bishops and barons. There could now be no suggestion that the Charter had been extracted from the king by force, or that it licensed civil war. These changes allowed Langton to support the Charter unreservedly. In 1225, he pronounced a broad sentence of excommunication in support of Magna Carta. This meant that anyone – king, royal officer, or baron – would automatically be outlawed from the Church if they violated the Charter. When Magna Carta was confirmed in later years, the bishops renewed Langton’s sentence. Langton and his successors were instrumental in promoting and upholding the Charter and, thus, in ensuring its survival.
Sophie Ambler is a Research Associate on the Magna Carta Project (www.magnacartaresearch.org). To find out more, click here.
Magna Carta, or as it is properly called the Great Charter of Liberty, was born on 15 June 1215 at Runnymede when King John – Bad King John as he is more commonly known – was persuaded to accede to a number of demands made...Read on...
- Magna Carta's American Adventure
- 800th anniversary of Bristol...
- Bristol 800 concert and...
- Emancipation and Magna Carta
- Terrorism and Tolerance -...
- Magna Carta
- Magna Carta Benches mark...
- ABA Magna Carta Memorial...
If you would like to keep informed about the work of the Magna Carta Trust and our partners, please sign up to the newsletter below.
Become a Supporter
There are a number of significant supporter opportunities. Register your interest early to ensure the widest range of options.
Find out more | 1,815 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Roman gladiators may have been gluttons for punishment, what with all that heavy combat. But a new analysis of their bones suggests they favored lighter fare in their food, eating mostly vegetables–along with a sort of sports drink made of ashes.
Why eat ashes?
“Plant ashes were evidently consumed to fortify the body after physical exertion and to promote better bone healing,” study leader Dr. Fabian Kanz, a professor in the Department of Forensic Medicine at the Medical University of Vienna in Austria, said in a written statement. “Things were similar then to what we do today–we take magnesium and calcium (in the form of effervescent tablets, for example) following physical exertion.”
For the study, Kanz and his team analyzed the collagen and mineral content in bone samples from the remains of 53 men and women whose graves had been unearthed in the ancient Roman city of Ephesus (now in modern-day Turkey) between 1992 and 1994. Twenty-two of the men were known to have been gladiators because their remains were found in a gladiator cemetery.
The analysis indicated that the gladiators and non-gladiators alike mostly ate vegetables and grains. But the gladiators had an unusually high consumption of minerals — presumably from the ash-containing beverage, which is known from previous research. | <urn:uuid:1e053f69-5b31-49a0-9d38-1e6359e35bac> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.informationng.com/2014/10/ancient-bones-show-roman-gladiators-ate-vegetarian-diet-drank-a-weird-tonic.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00190.warc.gz | en | 0.981467 | 281 | 3.328125 | 3 | [
-0.4829295575618744,
0.5379104614257812,
0.31367820501327515,
-0.006358056329190731,
0.010434044525027275,
-0.18374823033809662,
0.3504917025566101,
0.45418140292167664,
-0.40540826320648193,
-0.11026470363140106,
-0.2032369077205658,
-0.568480908870697,
-0.017214486375451088,
0.4792853295... | 1 | Roman gladiators may have been gluttons for punishment, what with all that heavy combat. But a new analysis of their bones suggests they favored lighter fare in their food, eating mostly vegetables–along with a sort of sports drink made of ashes.
Why eat ashes?
“Plant ashes were evidently consumed to fortify the body after physical exertion and to promote better bone healing,” study leader Dr. Fabian Kanz, a professor in the Department of Forensic Medicine at the Medical University of Vienna in Austria, said in a written statement. “Things were similar then to what we do today–we take magnesium and calcium (in the form of effervescent tablets, for example) following physical exertion.”
For the study, Kanz and his team analyzed the collagen and mineral content in bone samples from the remains of 53 men and women whose graves had been unearthed in the ancient Roman city of Ephesus (now in modern-day Turkey) between 1992 and 1994. Twenty-two of the men were known to have been gladiators because their remains were found in a gladiator cemetery.
The analysis indicated that the gladiators and non-gladiators alike mostly ate vegetables and grains. But the gladiators had an unusually high consumption of minerals — presumably from the ash-containing beverage, which is known from previous research. | 277 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The is a lot of Latin in law and this would be an understatement.
I have been asked in the past, by students mostly but also by others, why there are so many legal terms in Latin, particularly considering that it is already a dead language, meaning that it is not really in widespread use anywhere in the world.
Some would say that this is because lawyers like to be a cut above the rest and terms in Latin would not be readily understood by most which is a long way of saying, you’d need to pay a lawyer to explain it to you.
However convincing this sounds, this is not quite the case. I mean many lawyers do think too highly of themselves but this is not the reason why many legal principles or maxims are stated in Latin.
The simplest explanation I could find which, according to Occam’s razor, is usually the correct one, is the fact that Latin used to be the universal language of scholars which means that when learned men from different places would meet and discuss in the olden times, they would do so in Latin.
Since the evolution of the law, as well as of the Christian Church to which it is closely related, was the purview of scholars and academics, it stands to reason that the language used by them was largely Latin.
I would like to point out that I am referring to the evolution of law in the Western World which has found its way to the legal systems of most countries by way of conquest and imperialism along the centuries. You would certainly not find any Latin maxims in the highly evolved legal system of China during its different Imperial Dynasties.
Our own legal system in the Philippines, as is anything Filipino, is a mixed system, most of which came from the different countries that colonized us. Our criminal law is largely Spanish, while our commercial law is mostly American and our civil law, while mostly Spanish, is really a mix.
Anyway, either way you go, both the Spaniards and the Americans trace their legal roots to Roman law, ERGO, we use many Latin maxims in our legal system.
Many do not realize it but there are indeed many terms in Latin that we use, and misuse, every day. PER SE is Latin for “as it is” or “by itself” and “BONA FIDE” means “good faith” though I have heard people say that their product is “bona fide” when they actually mean genuine. PRO BONO is a term that indigent clients benefit from but which many lawyers try to avoid. (Joke, I hope)
“CORPUS DELICTI” is one of the most misunderstood, sometimes even by lawyers, because of the literal translation as the “BODY OF THE CRIME” when it actually means the “substance or essence of the crime”. For example, in a case for homicide, while you need to prove the “corpus delicti”, there is no need to bring the dead corpse to court as it is NOT the “body of the crime”.
As it is, the people at large do not really need to study up on these Latin terms, that is what you pay your lawyers for. Actually, if at all possible, I do try to avoid using them even in my legal writings and I also advise my students to do likewise.
I have always lived by the principle that you write or speak in order to communicate which means the intention is to get yourself understood as easily as possible. You cannot do that by citing one Latin maxim after another and then spending two or more paragraphs explaining what you mean.
On the other hand, I have also told my students, particularly when I was still teaching Statutory Construction so many years ago, to commit to memory as many Latin maxims as they can.
This is not only in preparation for crazy questions in the Bar Exams, it is also useful in case they do not become lawyers and decide, instead to become faith healers or albularyos and they can wave their hands over a patient’s head while mumbling dura lex sed lex, in loco parentis, ipso facto! | <urn:uuid:5f0b15fb-48ba-4cb9-8552-fb2e1dd17dd2> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://mindanaotimes.com.ph/2020/01/07/brainstorm-the-next-generation-latin-anyone/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598726.39/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120110422-20200120134422-00035.warc.gz | en | 0.983071 | 875 | 3.328125 | 3 | [
-0.7562829256057739,
-0.41138872504234314,
0.13962635397911072,
-0.3147140145301819,
0.29719677567481995,
-0.5748709440231323,
0.019423358142375946,
-0.0035138060338795185,
0.36047470569610596,
0.04009908810257912,
0.01355888694524765,
0.1224634200334549,
-0.526479959487915,
0.051014922559... | 2 | The is a lot of Latin in law and this would be an understatement.
I have been asked in the past, by students mostly but also by others, why there are so many legal terms in Latin, particularly considering that it is already a dead language, meaning that it is not really in widespread use anywhere in the world.
Some would say that this is because lawyers like to be a cut above the rest and terms in Latin would not be readily understood by most which is a long way of saying, you’d need to pay a lawyer to explain it to you.
However convincing this sounds, this is not quite the case. I mean many lawyers do think too highly of themselves but this is not the reason why many legal principles or maxims are stated in Latin.
The simplest explanation I could find which, according to Occam’s razor, is usually the correct one, is the fact that Latin used to be the universal language of scholars which means that when learned men from different places would meet and discuss in the olden times, they would do so in Latin.
Since the evolution of the law, as well as of the Christian Church to which it is closely related, was the purview of scholars and academics, it stands to reason that the language used by them was largely Latin.
I would like to point out that I am referring to the evolution of law in the Western World which has found its way to the legal systems of most countries by way of conquest and imperialism along the centuries. You would certainly not find any Latin maxims in the highly evolved legal system of China during its different Imperial Dynasties.
Our own legal system in the Philippines, as is anything Filipino, is a mixed system, most of which came from the different countries that colonized us. Our criminal law is largely Spanish, while our commercial law is mostly American and our civil law, while mostly Spanish, is really a mix.
Anyway, either way you go, both the Spaniards and the Americans trace their legal roots to Roman law, ERGO, we use many Latin maxims in our legal system.
Many do not realize it but there are indeed many terms in Latin that we use, and misuse, every day. PER SE is Latin for “as it is” or “by itself” and “BONA FIDE” means “good faith” though I have heard people say that their product is “bona fide” when they actually mean genuine. PRO BONO is a term that indigent clients benefit from but which many lawyers try to avoid. (Joke, I hope)
“CORPUS DELICTI” is one of the most misunderstood, sometimes even by lawyers, because of the literal translation as the “BODY OF THE CRIME” when it actually means the “substance or essence of the crime”. For example, in a case for homicide, while you need to prove the “corpus delicti”, there is no need to bring the dead corpse to court as it is NOT the “body of the crime”.
As it is, the people at large do not really need to study up on these Latin terms, that is what you pay your lawyers for. Actually, if at all possible, I do try to avoid using them even in my legal writings and I also advise my students to do likewise.
I have always lived by the principle that you write or speak in order to communicate which means the intention is to get yourself understood as easily as possible. You cannot do that by citing one Latin maxim after another and then spending two or more paragraphs explaining what you mean.
On the other hand, I have also told my students, particularly when I was still teaching Statutory Construction so many years ago, to commit to memory as many Latin maxims as they can.
This is not only in preparation for crazy questions in the Bar Exams, it is also useful in case they do not become lawyers and decide, instead to become faith healers or albularyos and they can wave their hands over a patient’s head while mumbling dura lex sed lex, in loco parentis, ipso facto! | 832 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Standard 9: Assessment.
The teacher understands and uses a variety of informal and formal assessment strategies (both formative and summative) to evaluate and support the development of the learner.
- Communicates clear expectations and provides descriptive feedback to students
- Encourages student goal-setting and self-reflection during informal and formal assessment
- Accurately documents, interprets, and reports assessment results to students, parents, colleagues and the community
- Uses a variety of informal and formal assessments that provide valid evidence of student’s performance of learning goals (objectives, outcomes) and standards
- Interprets assessment results to adjust instruction, and enhance student progress and confidence
- Supports students’ performance in district and state assessment programs
Personal Artifacts: (To view artifact, click on title-words in red are links)
One of the many things I learned at Edward Little was to have a daily assignment board. Not only does it help students understand what is going on and to be expected of them that day, and with the current project, but it helps teachers to stay on track as well.
What I have come to learn while teaching art in an elementray school, was that the majority of students did not realize they were being graded. At one point in particular, I told the students in one class (where none of them realized they were graded in art) that things such as effort, quality work, and attitude in the art room are all parts of being graded, as well as completing certain parts of the projects. For the unit I created with 5th grade, Pop Art Self-Portraits, I had created a hand out to put at each table as they worked. I think this was something new for them, but I feel that it was a good addition to the classroom.
Within my first week of student teaching at Great Falls Elementary, I attended a visual/performance arts meeting for the Gorham district. Each teacher was to bring in examples of student work and assessment tools to make sure all of the teachers were on the same page, as they are leaning towards being all standards based. It was helpful as an incoming student teacher, to see all the grade levels mode of assessment and types of projects that are happening. The biggest thing I took away was to make sure to keep things clear and transparent for students to understand what is being asked of them. | <urn:uuid:7c6cbc8d-9af3-4f94-98a4-1ae84e7d2158> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://usm.digication.com/rachael_gilley/Standard_9 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00241.warc.gz | en | 0.984392 | 486 | 4.0625 | 4 | [
-0.06916758418083191,
-0.09921193867921829,
0.33122116327285767,
-0.2800300717353821,
-0.26043960452079773,
0.0006577890599146485,
0.3081498146057129,
0.31218796968460083,
-0.047400619834661484,
-0.05805147439241409,
0.03754843771457672,
-0.10607342422008514,
0.10912606120109558,
0.3042458... | 2 | Standard 9: Assessment.
The teacher understands and uses a variety of informal and formal assessment strategies (both formative and summative) to evaluate and support the development of the learner.
- Communicates clear expectations and provides descriptive feedback to students
- Encourages student goal-setting and self-reflection during informal and formal assessment
- Accurately documents, interprets, and reports assessment results to students, parents, colleagues and the community
- Uses a variety of informal and formal assessments that provide valid evidence of student’s performance of learning goals (objectives, outcomes) and standards
- Interprets assessment results to adjust instruction, and enhance student progress and confidence
- Supports students’ performance in district and state assessment programs
Personal Artifacts: (To view artifact, click on title-words in red are links)
One of the many things I learned at Edward Little was to have a daily assignment board. Not only does it help students understand what is going on and to be expected of them that day, and with the current project, but it helps teachers to stay on track as well.
What I have come to learn while teaching art in an elementray school, was that the majority of students did not realize they were being graded. At one point in particular, I told the students in one class (where none of them realized they were graded in art) that things such as effort, quality work, and attitude in the art room are all parts of being graded, as well as completing certain parts of the projects. For the unit I created with 5th grade, Pop Art Self-Portraits, I had created a hand out to put at each table as they worked. I think this was something new for them, but I feel that it was a good addition to the classroom.
Within my first week of student teaching at Great Falls Elementary, I attended a visual/performance arts meeting for the Gorham district. Each teacher was to bring in examples of student work and assessment tools to make sure all of the teachers were on the same page, as they are leaning towards being all standards based. It was helpful as an incoming student teacher, to see all the grade levels mode of assessment and types of projects that are happening. The biggest thing I took away was to make sure to keep things clear and transparent for students to understand what is being asked of them. | 477 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Descartes is most generally known these days for being the guy who was sure he existed because he was thinking. But before he devoted himself to metaphysical meditations, he had spent a decade as a soldier-scholar travelling the hotspots of Europe. How might a greater understanding of this period affect our view of the great man? This is a fascinating if dry kind of pre-intellectual biography, which hopes to hint at how the philosophy grew out of the action.
René Descartes was born to a family of minor nobility in 1596, and educated by Jesuits. He studied some mathematics in Paris and then acquired a degree in law, after which he ‘set out to study the art of war’. Over the next decade, he popped up in areas of conflict all over Europe as a ‘gentleman volunteer’, inveigling himself into useful aristocratic networks. At length, he also began to acquire a reputation as a natural philosopher with his mathematics and optics. He always had to tread carefully in order to avoid being denounced as a Rosicrucian or libertine. (At the time, the latter meant basically ‘free thinker’, though the libertines also had rather relaxed attitudes to sex.)
It’s hard to say whether Descartes was soldiering in the front line at any particular engagement or hanging back, observing and advising. Either way, Harold J. Cook wants to connect the experience as a ‘soldier savant’ to the philosophical work. Perhaps Descartes’ early inspiration in mathematics, it is suggested, came from developments in military engineering: compasses designed to help plan the storming of fortifications, and so on. (Mathematics here was quite important: as Cook relates, one such attack was repulsed because the engineers had got their sums wrong and the ladders built to scale the walls were too short.) Descartes certainly used such tools, and devised new mathematical methods with them, but he also studied — and extended — pure mathematics too. (Remember Cartesian co-ordinates.)
The text is a veritable concordance of grammatical forms for speculation. ‘It is possible to imagine the following scenario,’ the author writes; or ‘Let us suppose that’, or ‘perhaps’, or ‘he must have’, or ‘he would have had time to’. Much of the book takes the form of adjudication between sources, which has moments of detective-novel satisfaction. Descartes’ first biographer, Adrien Baillet, claimed that his hero was involved in the siege of La Rochelle in 1627, which subsequent scholars have doubted. But Cook spots in the papers of Cardinal Richelieu relating to that event a reference to a certain captain ‘Descart’, listed as vice-admiral. This might, Cook admits, ‘refer instead to René’s father or one of his brothers’, but he argues persuasively that the clue should make us take Baillet’s claim seriously.
There is also some pleasing local colour. Here is an alchemist who proclaims he has found a way of making drinkable gold, a long-sought panacea. Here is Descartes renting a ship and overhearing the crew plotting to murder him; he waves his sword in their faces and they back down. (We know that Descartes wrote a treatise on fencing, now lost.) One early biographer claims that Descartes even met Galileo. Descartes himself denied this in a letter after Galileo was denounced by the Inquisition in 1633, though at the same time he denied that he was at all interested in Galileo’s work, which seems unlikely.
In 1629, Descartes had left France and settled in Amsterdam to write. But why? He said it was because the Dutch weather was nicer, and he wouldn’t be bothered by people who knew him. But Cook suggests that the philosopher feared for his safety under the régime of Richelieu, who had lately been imprisoning some of his free-thinking friends. The idea, for which Descartes was already becoming known, that nature was a great machine about which one could reason using mathematical laws was still outlandish and potentially heretical.
‘We will probably never know the full range of his actions or intentions,’ Cook concludes — accurately, since that is true of any human being. Still, Cook writes happily in conclusion that he has at least shown that Descartes was ‘engaged in the life around him rather than isolated from it’. This is to pat the great genius on the head for displaying an assumed virtue of our own age. In the 21st century, to be ‘engaged’ is to be authentic, while mere armchair philosophy is derided, and solitude is highly suspicious.
Even so, Descartes did shut himself up in a room to think very hard, and it is for doing so that we still remember him. Indeed, while he still lived in Paris, one of his friends spied on him through a keyhole and saw him lying in bed, occasionally reaching over to his bedside table to jot something down. Now that’s living.
You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10 | <urn:uuid:2aae1566-982e-475d-bdd3-b4b9910fc2e9> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.spectator.com.au/2018/05/the-young-descartes-i-fought-therefore-i-thought/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250628549.43/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125011232-20200125040232-00323.warc.gz | en | 0.983873 | 1,137 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
-0.26139551401138306,
0.32378166913986206,
0.44177883863449097,
-0.1857394129037857,
-0.27086907625198364,
-0.44232702255249023,
0.46164795756340027,
0.45329511165618896,
0.0868629664182663,
-0.22462661564350128,
0.09152427315711975,
-0.03494346886873245,
0.08809167146682739,
0.61408054828... | 1 | Descartes is most generally known these days for being the guy who was sure he existed because he was thinking. But before he devoted himself to metaphysical meditations, he had spent a decade as a soldier-scholar travelling the hotspots of Europe. How might a greater understanding of this period affect our view of the great man? This is a fascinating if dry kind of pre-intellectual biography, which hopes to hint at how the philosophy grew out of the action.
René Descartes was born to a family of minor nobility in 1596, and educated by Jesuits. He studied some mathematics in Paris and then acquired a degree in law, after which he ‘set out to study the art of war’. Over the next decade, he popped up in areas of conflict all over Europe as a ‘gentleman volunteer’, inveigling himself into useful aristocratic networks. At length, he also began to acquire a reputation as a natural philosopher with his mathematics and optics. He always had to tread carefully in order to avoid being denounced as a Rosicrucian or libertine. (At the time, the latter meant basically ‘free thinker’, though the libertines also had rather relaxed attitudes to sex.)
It’s hard to say whether Descartes was soldiering in the front line at any particular engagement or hanging back, observing and advising. Either way, Harold J. Cook wants to connect the experience as a ‘soldier savant’ to the philosophical work. Perhaps Descartes’ early inspiration in mathematics, it is suggested, came from developments in military engineering: compasses designed to help plan the storming of fortifications, and so on. (Mathematics here was quite important: as Cook relates, one such attack was repulsed because the engineers had got their sums wrong and the ladders built to scale the walls were too short.) Descartes certainly used such tools, and devised new mathematical methods with them, but he also studied — and extended — pure mathematics too. (Remember Cartesian co-ordinates.)
The text is a veritable concordance of grammatical forms for speculation. ‘It is possible to imagine the following scenario,’ the author writes; or ‘Let us suppose that’, or ‘perhaps’, or ‘he must have’, or ‘he would have had time to’. Much of the book takes the form of adjudication between sources, which has moments of detective-novel satisfaction. Descartes’ first biographer, Adrien Baillet, claimed that his hero was involved in the siege of La Rochelle in 1627, which subsequent scholars have doubted. But Cook spots in the papers of Cardinal Richelieu relating to that event a reference to a certain captain ‘Descart’, listed as vice-admiral. This might, Cook admits, ‘refer instead to René’s father or one of his brothers’, but he argues persuasively that the clue should make us take Baillet’s claim seriously.
There is also some pleasing local colour. Here is an alchemist who proclaims he has found a way of making drinkable gold, a long-sought panacea. Here is Descartes renting a ship and overhearing the crew plotting to murder him; he waves his sword in their faces and they back down. (We know that Descartes wrote a treatise on fencing, now lost.) One early biographer claims that Descartes even met Galileo. Descartes himself denied this in a letter after Galileo was denounced by the Inquisition in 1633, though at the same time he denied that he was at all interested in Galileo’s work, which seems unlikely.
In 1629, Descartes had left France and settled in Amsterdam to write. But why? He said it was because the Dutch weather was nicer, and he wouldn’t be bothered by people who knew him. But Cook suggests that the philosopher feared for his safety under the régime of Richelieu, who had lately been imprisoning some of his free-thinking friends. The idea, for which Descartes was already becoming known, that nature was a great machine about which one could reason using mathematical laws was still outlandish and potentially heretical.
‘We will probably never know the full range of his actions or intentions,’ Cook concludes — accurately, since that is true of any human being. Still, Cook writes happily in conclusion that he has at least shown that Descartes was ‘engaged in the life around him rather than isolated from it’. This is to pat the great genius on the head for displaying an assumed virtue of our own age. In the 21st century, to be ‘engaged’ is to be authentic, while mere armchair philosophy is derided, and solitude is highly suspicious.
Even so, Descartes did shut himself up in a room to think very hard, and it is for doing so that we still remember him. Indeed, while he still lived in Paris, one of his friends spied on him through a keyhole and saw him lying in bed, occasionally reaching over to his bedside table to jot something down. Now that’s living.
You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10 | 1,079 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Mexican Hat Shape
Plants come in different shapes and sizes. Based on variations in height and width, a lot of variety can be seen in garden plants. Every plant has its own benefits and you can find more information about Mexican Hat Benefits. One important aspect of plant is its leaf. Leaf of a plant is usually joined to the stem of a plant by a stalk; this is called the petiole. We can find different and interesting shapes and sizes of leaves. Mexican Hat information tells you about Mexican Hat shape, leaf color, flower color, etc. It is very obvious that even if two plants look-alike, their leaf shapes are different. Some leaves are linear and some are obovate in shape. Some leaves are globe shaped and some are ovate. Mexican Hat leaf is Subulate shaped.
Mexican Hat Thorns
Thorns in general are spinose structures which are hard in nature with sharp and stiff ends. They are also known as spines or prickles and their main function is to deter the animals from eating plants. Now you might be wondering, if Mexican Hat thorns exist. This plant does not have thorns. Discover the plants which have thorns so that you can select a proper location in your yard to plant them. | <urn:uuid:b6a1463b-d921-4138-89a8-9a6dc2987c49> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://gardenplants.comparespecies.com/en/mexican-hat-information/model-532-4 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687725.76/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126043644-20200126073644-00474.warc.gz | en | 0.982175 | 258 | 3.4375 | 3 | [
0.13448859751224518,
-0.2851118743419647,
0.5570372939109802,
0.19816121459007263,
0.6647182106971741,
0.17141976952552795,
0.7512970566749573,
0.009084406308829784,
-0.5188645124435425,
-0.26632219552993774,
0.15709079802036285,
-0.3650757372379303,
0.23406317830085754,
-0.039649374783039... | 2 | Mexican Hat Shape
Plants come in different shapes and sizes. Based on variations in height and width, a lot of variety can be seen in garden plants. Every plant has its own benefits and you can find more information about Mexican Hat Benefits. One important aspect of plant is its leaf. Leaf of a plant is usually joined to the stem of a plant by a stalk; this is called the petiole. We can find different and interesting shapes and sizes of leaves. Mexican Hat information tells you about Mexican Hat shape, leaf color, flower color, etc. It is very obvious that even if two plants look-alike, their leaf shapes are different. Some leaves are linear and some are obovate in shape. Some leaves are globe shaped and some are ovate. Mexican Hat leaf is Subulate shaped.
Mexican Hat Thorns
Thorns in general are spinose structures which are hard in nature with sharp and stiff ends. They are also known as spines or prickles and their main function is to deter the animals from eating plants. Now you might be wondering, if Mexican Hat thorns exist. This plant does not have thorns. Discover the plants which have thorns so that you can select a proper location in your yard to plant them. | 257 | ENGLISH | 1 |
A fascinating story about property rights and environmental regeneration in Niger:
In this dust-choked region, long seen as an increasingly barren wasteland decaying into desert, millions of trees are flourishing, thanks in part to poor farmers whose simple methods cost little or nothing at all….And this has been achieved largely without relying on the large-scale planting of trees or other expensive methods often advocated by African politicians and aid groups for halting desertification, the process by which soil loses its fertility….
Another change was the way trees were regarded by law. From colonial times, all trees in Niger had been regarded as the property of the state, which gave farmers little incentive to protect them. Trees were chopped for firewood or construction without regard to the environmental costs. Government foresters were supposed to make sure the trees were properly managed, but there were not enough of them to police a country more than twice the size of France.
But over time, farmers began to regard the trees in their fields as their property, and in recent years the government has recognized the benefits of this by allowing individuals to own trees. Farmers make money off the trees by selling branches, pods, fruit and bark. Because these sales are more lucrative over time than simply chopping down the trees for firewood, the farmers preserve them.
Virginia Postrel notes that "the behavioral change came first and was ratified by law–a process that is more likely to succeed than a new property-rights regime imposed from outside." It isn't just ownership that's important. It's how you get there. | <urn:uuid:b6d8877b-9ecc-4599-b61a-8d5d504ed61d> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://reason.com/2007/02/20/greening-the-sahel/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778272.69/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128122813-20200128152813-00530.warc.gz | en | 0.982644 | 312 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
-0.0035814319271594286,
0.3560429811477661,
0.2967756390571594,
-0.20583733916282654,
0.8078502416610718,
-0.07536206394433975,
0.18618300557136536,
-0.11672090739011765,
-0.04371625930070877,
0.4950452446937561,
-0.29125383496284485,
-0.3862442970275879,
-0.09875769168138504,
0.3073035180... | 3 | A fascinating story about property rights and environmental regeneration in Niger:
In this dust-choked region, long seen as an increasingly barren wasteland decaying into desert, millions of trees are flourishing, thanks in part to poor farmers whose simple methods cost little or nothing at all….And this has been achieved largely without relying on the large-scale planting of trees or other expensive methods often advocated by African politicians and aid groups for halting desertification, the process by which soil loses its fertility….
Another change was the way trees were regarded by law. From colonial times, all trees in Niger had been regarded as the property of the state, which gave farmers little incentive to protect them. Trees were chopped for firewood or construction without regard to the environmental costs. Government foresters were supposed to make sure the trees were properly managed, but there were not enough of them to police a country more than twice the size of France.
But over time, farmers began to regard the trees in their fields as their property, and in recent years the government has recognized the benefits of this by allowing individuals to own trees. Farmers make money off the trees by selling branches, pods, fruit and bark. Because these sales are more lucrative over time than simply chopping down the trees for firewood, the farmers preserve them.
Virginia Postrel notes that "the behavioral change came first and was ratified by law–a process that is more likely to succeed than a new property-rights regime imposed from outside." It isn't just ownership that's important. It's how you get there. | 309 | ENGLISH | 1 |
During the Civil War era, most American children played with dolls that were simple and homemade. By the mid-1800s dollmakers in Europe were famous for creating wooden, porcelain, and even wax dolls with very lifelike features, and these dolls were certainly available to some American children—probably more to look at than to play with. Most children, though, played with dolls that were made by family members using supplies that were close at hand. Depending on where in the country they lived, this meant that their dolls were usually made of wood, rags, or corn husks.
Probably the most common doll made for little girls during the mid-1800s was the rag doll. These were popular in both the North and the South, and there were many different ways to make them. In the South, rag dolls were often called hankie dolls or plantation dolls (and sometimes also called church dolls, since they were made of soft cotton and wouldn't make a lot of noise if they fell on the floor during church). Rag dolls were made out of
Rag doll that was in the room where Robert E. Lee surrendered to Ulysses S. Grant.
the "silent witness" doll
One particular rag doll played a famous role in the surrender of General Robert E. Lee to General Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Court House on April 9,1865. The two generals met in a house owned by a man named Wilmer McLean. He had a
surrender, and when Lee left to tell his troops of the surrender, a Union soldier (Lieutenant Colonel Thomas W.C. Moore)picked up the rag doll and took it with him.
McLean house. Appomattox Court House, Virginia.
a soft piece of cotton fabric with cotton stuffing for its head. One variation of the rag doll was called a "sugar baby." Mothers would make a rag doll and put sugar cubes in the head portion for their young kids to suck on.
Another very common doll made by families in the Civil War was the corn husk doll. Corn was a crop grown in many parts of the country, and corn husks were plentiful. Depending on what color hair a girl wanted for her doll, she would take silk off the corn ears in the early, mid, or late season. Early-season corn held yellow silk, mid-season corn silk was reddish brown, and late-season silk was darker brown.
Was this article helpful? | <urn:uuid:44dbcba9-ea5c-4d95-88f5-35748c3e325d> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.minecreek.info/fort-sumter/civil-war-dolls.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700675.78/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127112805-20200127142805-00268.warc.gz | en | 0.991908 | 513 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
-0.22548717260360718,
-0.015218343585729599,
0.5335029363632202,
-0.44227147102355957,
0.03098197467625141,
0.3084794282913208,
0.09772514551877975,
-0.04596243053674698,
-0.29891419410705566,
-0.090455062687397,
0.35360389947891235,
0.11947278678417206,
0.021229911595582962,
0.15562324225... | 2 | During the Civil War era, most American children played with dolls that were simple and homemade. By the mid-1800s dollmakers in Europe were famous for creating wooden, porcelain, and even wax dolls with very lifelike features, and these dolls were certainly available to some American children—probably more to look at than to play with. Most children, though, played with dolls that were made by family members using supplies that were close at hand. Depending on where in the country they lived, this meant that their dolls were usually made of wood, rags, or corn husks.
Probably the most common doll made for little girls during the mid-1800s was the rag doll. These were popular in both the North and the South, and there were many different ways to make them. In the South, rag dolls were often called hankie dolls or plantation dolls (and sometimes also called church dolls, since they were made of soft cotton and wouldn't make a lot of noise if they fell on the floor during church). Rag dolls were made out of
Rag doll that was in the room where Robert E. Lee surrendered to Ulysses S. Grant.
the "silent witness" doll
One particular rag doll played a famous role in the surrender of General Robert E. Lee to General Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Court House on April 9,1865. The two generals met in a house owned by a man named Wilmer McLean. He had a
surrender, and when Lee left to tell his troops of the surrender, a Union soldier (Lieutenant Colonel Thomas W.C. Moore)picked up the rag doll and took it with him.
McLean house. Appomattox Court House, Virginia.
a soft piece of cotton fabric with cotton stuffing for its head. One variation of the rag doll was called a "sugar baby." Mothers would make a rag doll and put sugar cubes in the head portion for their young kids to suck on.
Another very common doll made by families in the Civil War was the corn husk doll. Corn was a crop grown in many parts of the country, and corn husks were plentiful. Depending on what color hair a girl wanted for her doll, she would take silk off the corn ears in the early, mid, or late season. Early-season corn held yellow silk, mid-season corn silk was reddish brown, and late-season silk was darker brown.
Was this article helpful? | 512 | ENGLISH | 1 |
23 September 2014
The Product of Literacy Knowledge is a tool that every human needs to survive, for without it we would not be able to function properly. With the power of knowledge the only limit is that which you put yourself because with the right resources you can uncover whatever is hidden. However, with that power comes a hunger for more and even pain. This knowledge and power all starts with literacy, which is the first step since you must know what the word knowledge is to begin to understand it. In the autobiographies of Frederick Douglas and Malcolm X both struggled to achieve literacy, and in doing so discovered knowledge, pain, and power. Knowledge is comprehension, grasp, and mastery gained through experience and education. You must learn how to read and write, to be literate, to begin seeking knowledge and how intoxicating it can be. Douglas at a young age was punished for trying to further his knowledge, but it was too late for “mistress in teaching [him] the alphabet, had given [him] the inch”(Douglass 119), and that was all he needed to further his knowledge. He had to master literacy and in doing so “was compelled to resort to various stratagems”(Douglass 118), such as making friends with white kids and “as many as [he] could, converted into teachers”(Douglass 119). At a very young age he had grasped that to become literate he must learn from other who are literate. However, for Malcolm X it was different; he was a grown man yet was not educated, but ironically he became literate during his prison sentence. The best thing for him was to “get hold of a dictionary-to study, to learn some new words”(Malcolm X 274). Eventually he and other inmates started to debate over all types of topics. He began to find euphoria “when this new world opened to [him], of being able to read and understand”(Malcolm X 276). With acquiring literacy Douglas and X found joy in further expanding their knowledge. It is true that ignorance is bliss for sometimes the truth is very painful. For Douglas began to understand his predicament and “the thought of being a slave for life”(Douglass 121) was starting to cause much agony on the boy. In these moments he “envied [his] fellow-slaves for their stupidity”(Douglass 121). Even at a young age he “found himself regretting his existence”(Douglass 121); these thoughts would have lead him to his end by his own hands, but pain is yet another tool of knowledge which he used to be the man he is known for. When Malcom X began to seriously read he found many books of the great history of black civilizations, but he then discovered the pain and sorrow caused by the “sin and the blood on the white man’s hand”(Malcolm X 278). As he read the history of many nations he realized “how the whole world’s white men had indeed acted like devils, pillaging and raping and bleeding and draining the whole world’s non-white people”(Malcolm X 278). He noticed that even many nations’ downfall was caused by the usurpation of the white man. Angered by this he took up philosophy to begin to understand himself and others; this agonizing pain led to the leader that he was known for in the civil rights movement.
Not much can be accomplished without power, and being intelligent is one of the greatest powers of all. When you talk and people stop to listen to you because they like what you say then you hold power or influence over them. Frederick Douglas despite… | <urn:uuid:bbccf58b-14fa-4c57-8bf0-c0ae4160d65a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.majortests.com/essay/Knowledge-And-Power-543035.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593937.27/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118193018-20200118221018-00559.warc.gz | en | 0.984305 | 767 | 3.375 | 3 | [
-0.42072921991348267,
0.20931141078472137,
0.31621623039245605,
0.05564908683300018,
-0.42425069212913513,
0.13711129128932953,
0.45043236017227173,
-0.07972946763038635,
0.02061224728822708,
-0.2276134192943573,
0.10082131624221802,
-0.31313037872314453,
0.1948557198047638,
0.185771778225... | 1 | 23 September 2014
The Product of Literacy Knowledge is a tool that every human needs to survive, for without it we would not be able to function properly. With the power of knowledge the only limit is that which you put yourself because with the right resources you can uncover whatever is hidden. However, with that power comes a hunger for more and even pain. This knowledge and power all starts with literacy, which is the first step since you must know what the word knowledge is to begin to understand it. In the autobiographies of Frederick Douglas and Malcolm X both struggled to achieve literacy, and in doing so discovered knowledge, pain, and power. Knowledge is comprehension, grasp, and mastery gained through experience and education. You must learn how to read and write, to be literate, to begin seeking knowledge and how intoxicating it can be. Douglas at a young age was punished for trying to further his knowledge, but it was too late for “mistress in teaching [him] the alphabet, had given [him] the inch”(Douglass 119), and that was all he needed to further his knowledge. He had to master literacy and in doing so “was compelled to resort to various stratagems”(Douglass 118), such as making friends with white kids and “as many as [he] could, converted into teachers”(Douglass 119). At a very young age he had grasped that to become literate he must learn from other who are literate. However, for Malcolm X it was different; he was a grown man yet was not educated, but ironically he became literate during his prison sentence. The best thing for him was to “get hold of a dictionary-to study, to learn some new words”(Malcolm X 274). Eventually he and other inmates started to debate over all types of topics. He began to find euphoria “when this new world opened to [him], of being able to read and understand”(Malcolm X 276). With acquiring literacy Douglas and X found joy in further expanding their knowledge. It is true that ignorance is bliss for sometimes the truth is very painful. For Douglas began to understand his predicament and “the thought of being a slave for life”(Douglass 121) was starting to cause much agony on the boy. In these moments he “envied [his] fellow-slaves for their stupidity”(Douglass 121). Even at a young age he “found himself regretting his existence”(Douglass 121); these thoughts would have lead him to his end by his own hands, but pain is yet another tool of knowledge which he used to be the man he is known for. When Malcom X began to seriously read he found many books of the great history of black civilizations, but he then discovered the pain and sorrow caused by the “sin and the blood on the white man’s hand”(Malcolm X 278). As he read the history of many nations he realized “how the whole world’s white men had indeed acted like devils, pillaging and raping and bleeding and draining the whole world’s non-white people”(Malcolm X 278). He noticed that even many nations’ downfall was caused by the usurpation of the white man. Angered by this he took up philosophy to begin to understand himself and others; this agonizing pain led to the leader that he was known for in the civil rights movement.
Not much can be accomplished without power, and being intelligent is one of the greatest powers of all. When you talk and people stop to listen to you because they like what you say then you hold power or influence over them. Frederick Douglas despite… | 774 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Glossary of school types
The glossary provides definitions of the different school types in operation since 1848.
Download a print version (PDF 53.29KB) of the glossary or view the A-Z list.
Glossary listing of school types
School types are listed in alphabetical order use the letter links to jump to the different letter groups.
An elementary school dating from 1880 in which school enrolment was mainly for Aboriginal children.
Most Aboriginal schools were provisional schools and staffed until the 1940s and 1950s by untrained teachers. In 1968, the few remaining Aboriginal schools were converted into ordinary public schools.
|Central school (1944- )||
A school containing both primary and secondary departments, and seeks to provide secondary education for children both from nearby primary schools as well as from its own primary section.
The term central school has been used since 1944. Whilst such schools were classified as central schools in 1944, many continue to be known by the name of the specific secondary course offered (for example, intermediate high school, junior technical school). Central schools have become characteristic of regional districts where the population is too small to support a single high school.
|College (1989- )||A senior high school or college which caters for a wide range of post-compulsory school-age students. It offers a full range of Higher School Certificate courses appropriate to the locally identified needs.|
|Commercial school or department (1913- 1948)||
Originating in 1913, it was a department designed to offer both a post-primary education and vocational training for boys intent on a business career. From 1925 some girls were also enrolled.
Specific commercial subjects like business principles and book-keeping were taught. Commercial courses were taught in superior public schools, super-primary schools and in evening continuation schools. No separate commercial schools existed. Instead, commercial departments were closer in character to the general and academic streams of secondary education, and many were converted to intermediate high schools or made redundant by the establishment of separate secondary schools. There were no commercial departments after 1948, although a commercial course was available in some schools after that date.
|Community care school (1867- )||A type of School for Specific Purposes (SSP). Community care schools were conducted within government premises and places set aside for children committed to government care, with full control of these schools transferred to the NSW Department of Education in 1981.|
|Community school (1992- )||A school catering for students from Kindergarten through to Year 12. Community schools differ from central schools in that they have been established not because there are too few secondary students to support a high school, but because of a choice to have K-12 education provided by one school.|
| Correspondence school
A school providing primary and secondary education by correspondence lessons. Established in 1916, only students unable to attend school because of distance were enrolled.
From 1923 students were also enrolled on medical grounds. Later, students were also enrolled who wished to study a subject not taught at the school they attended daily. Distance education centres now provide educational programs to students who are isolated or whose special circumstances prevent them from attending regular schools. In 1993 the Open Training and Education Network (OTEN) was formed to provide and develop training and distance education facilities for students.
|Demonstration school (1884- )||A school used to demonstrate educational methods to trainee teachers and provide practice in teaching. From 1928, the term demonstration school replaced the previous term 'practice' school. These schools continue to be ordinary schools with an added demonstration function, and are not specifically designated in the database.|
|Distance education centre (1991- )||
Distance education centres were established in 1991 in strategic locations throughout the state to deliver education to those students who were isolated or whose special circumstances prevent them from attending regular schools.
Some distance education centres operate from within regular government schools and are not identified in this database. See also reference to the Open Training and Education Network (OTEN) under
| District rural school
|Established in 1923, district rural schools combined both primary and secondary departments to provide pre-vocational education for children in regional areas. Students were offered a three year post-primary course, which included subjects such as agriculture, applied farm mechanics and rural economics for boys; and home science and horticulture for girls. From 1926 the Intermediate Certificate was adopted as the final examination. From 1944 all district rural schools were classified as central schools.|
|District school (1906- 1945)||Established in 1906, district schools combined both primary and secondary departments in regional areas as adjuncts of superior public schools. They were designed to provide a two-year course of study for qualified children preparing for entry to teachers colleges, however more generally, they provided higher education for children in regional areas. By 1914 district schools had developed into schools offering literary or academic courses like those taught in high schools and intermediate high schools. Many were promoted to intermediate high schools as their enrolments increased, and others formed the basis for the establishment of separate high schools.|
|Domestic science school||See home science school.|
|Environmental education centre (1971- )||Established in 1971 to provide for the study and observation of the natural environment by primary and secondary pupils. These centres have no regular enrolment, but are visited by pupils with the teachers in the centres working in conjunction with the class teachers. In 1999, all field studies centres were renamed environmental education centres.|
|Evening continuation school
|Established in 1911, evening continuation school provided vocational education for boys and girls who had completed their primary education and were 14 years or older. It consisted of a two-year course conducted for two hours, three nights each week. In 1946 evening continuation schools were converted into evening colleges, and given that their orientation has been towards adult non-vocational or leisure interests, they have not been included in the schools database.|
|Evening public school
|Established in 1880, evening public schools sought to provide an elementary education for persons over 14 years of age who had previously received little to no education. They offered young men (very few females were ever enrolled) two hours of instruction three nights a week. They were usually conducted in the local public school building by the headmaster or other teachers. Most schools were poorly attended and were rapidly replaced from 1911 with evening continuation schools.|
|Field studies centre||See environmental education centre.|
|An elementary school established in 1867 to cater for children in areas of isolated populations. Between 1867 - 1868 teachers were in charge of up to seven 'stations', and from 1869 each teacher visited only two stations, making the schools become truly half-time. The attendance of at least 20 children was required, in two groups of 10 or more. In 1898 the required attendance was reduced to 16, and by 1908 no fixed number was required.|
|High school (1883-)|| First established in 1883, high schools played a very small part in the education system until the reorganisation of secondary education after 1910. It was then that secondary education was officially sub-divided into a variety of types of courses and schools, with high schools offering an academic course to a selected intake of pupils. However, from the 1920s there was a long-term trend was towards comprehensive high schools, and by the 1950s many of the other types of secondary schools were either being transformed into or closing in favour of comprehensive high schools. Since the late 1960s all new high schools have been co-educational, and many older schools have been converted into co-educational schools.
In this database high school includes specialist secondary schools whose title might be, for example: girls high, boys high, technology high, agricultural high, conservatorium high, performing arts high, community high. Also categorised as high schools are schools which currently have an emphasis on a particular area of study, e.g. technology, performing arts, sport, although this emphasis is not included in the title of the school.
|Home science school
A school department or a separate school combining post-primary education with home science and commercial training for girls. The home science course (known as domestic science until 1942) included subjects like cookery, home management and hygiene; but girls could also take a commercial course with subjects like economics, shorthand and typing.
From 1923 separate schools, generally known as central domestic science schools were established. They provided a three-year course for girls who had completed their primary education at schools in the surrounding district. However, changing attitudes to the education of girls in the late 1950s resulted in the rapid abandonment of home science courses and the conversion of home science high schools and central home science schools into comprehensive girls high schools and junior high schools.
|Hospital school||See school for specific purpose.|
| House to house school
|An elementary school which emerged in 1881 to cater for sparsely populated areas unable to be reached by other types of schools. A typical house to house school was composed of two or more teaching stations several miles apart, where children were gathered and visited by the teacher. The teachers were on the whole untrained or of the lowest classification, instruction was confined to basic subjects and no school buildings had to be erected.|
|Infants school (1880-)||A public school enrolling only the youngest children. The first infants schools were opened in Sydney in 1880 to relieve the pressure on nearby public schools.|
|Intermediate high school (1912- 1977)||A school containing both primary and secondary departments, intermediate high schools emerged in 1912 to cater for children that qualified for but were unable to enrol in the NSW's small number of high schools. The intermediate high school offered a basically academic course of instruction to Intermediate Certificate standard and sometimes beyond. In 1944 all intermediate high schools were classified as central schools, however, the numbers of intermediate high schools declined rapidly after 1950 as high schools were established in large numbers.|
|Junior high campus
|A separate secondary school which emerged in 1930 to offer junior secondary education only.|
|Junior technical school or department (1913- 1962)||Established in 1913, junior technical departments or separate schools combined post-primary education with technical training for boys expected to enter a skilled trade. The vocational subjects included drawing, woodwork, metalwork, etc. In accordance with the general educational trend, these were gradually converted to comprehensive high schools, the last ones becoming boys junior high schools in 1962.|
|Multi-campus college (1999- )||A group of (former) high schools who have combined to become a single education provider across a number of sites within a given community. They usually combine to form a number of junior campuses and a senior campus, however there are some variations.|
|National fitness camp||See sport and recreation centre.|
|National school (1848- 1866)||Previously all schools operated by the Board of National Education were called national schools. They were renamed public schools in 1867.|
|Nursery school (1943- )||The first nursery school was opened in 1943 to provide care for children of preschool age. Only a few of the separate nursery schools are entered in the government schools of NSW 1848 database because most nursery schools have been adjuncts of infants or public schools.|
|Practice school||See demonstration school.|
| Provisional school
|Emerging in 1867, provisional schools were elementary schools which were established in areas where at least 15 children (but fewer than the 25 required for a public school) could be expected to attend. Parents had to provide the building and furniture, whilst the Council of Education or the Department of Education paid the teacher and supplied books and equipment. After 1882 there were provisions for the Department to provide all or part of the cost of buildings, but parents often met most of the costs well into the twentieth century. The schools were generally staffed by untrained teachers or by teachers of the lowest classification. Gradually they became in effect small public schools, and in 1957 the remaining ones were converted to public schools.|
| Public school
A basic elementary school known as national schools from 1848 to 1866, and as public schools since 1867. Originally the attendance of 30 children were required for the establishment of a school, but this was reduced to 25 in 1867 and 20 in 1880. In 1957 when provisional schools were converted to public schools, and the minimum figure was reduced to nine.
Until 1875 parents had to pay one-third of the cost of buildings, but the Council of Education and the Department have since met the total costs. Until the 1880s there were no government secondary schools, and no official post-primary courses in public schools. After 1913 many public schools incorporated one or more distinct secondary departments or ‘schools’. The modern development of high schools has meant that, with some exceptions like the central schools, most public schools now offer only primary courses.
|School for specific purposes
Is a school for children with special needs who require hospitalisation or have physical, intellectual or psychological disabilities. Some of these schools do not have regular enrolment, with the children instead being regarded as temporarily absent from their ordinary school.
There have been many variations in the naming and classification of these schools, especially those conducted in centres run by voluntary organisations. Older titles such as 'School for Crippled Children' or 'School for Sub-Normal Children' have not been used in the database with most of the schools being identified simply with SSP or Hospital SSP. Community care schools are also classified 'SSP' by the department. In 1985 the department adopted a policy of integration of children with disabilities into regular schools.
|School of the air (1956- )||Opening in 1956, lessons were initially conducted by radio from Broken Hill for correspondence students (later distance education students). Currently lessons are now conducted via satellite, with an additional campus opened in Hay in 1992.|
|Sport and recreation centre (1947- )||
In 1947 teachers were appointed to certain national fitness camps, which were then renamed sport and recreation centres in the 1970s. There are no regular enrolment at these centres, but they are visited by groups of children with the teachers in the centres working in conjunction with the class teacher concerned.
Until the early 1970s the emphasis was predominantly on physical education and recreational activities, whereas nowadays pupils’ social development and environmental education are the main priorities. In 1971, the administration of sport and recreation centres was taken over by the NSW Department of Sport, Recreation and Racing, although the Department of Education continued to provide teachers up until 1990.
| Subsidised school
|A school designed for localities where the minimum attendance required for even the smallest type of government school could not be obtained. Whilst the Department paid a subsidy for each pupil, parents were totally responsible for providing the school building and the teacher. However, it was often that subsidised schools were permitted to use former government school buildings. Subsidised schools were not government schools, and are not included in the schools database.|
| Superior public school
A public school officially recognised from 1881 as providing both primary and post-primary education. From 1913 superior public schools were re-organised, being restricted to offering two-year vocational courses – commercial, home science or junior technical. An individual school could provide one or more of these.
By 1925 there was a less rigid vocational emphasis, and courses had been extended to three years and students could sit for the Intermediate Certificate examination. After 1931 the term superior public school was abandoned, super-primary schools being known only be the names of the courses offered.
|Similar to a house to house school, travelling schools catered for small, isolated groups of children. There were only three such schools. The first opened in 1908, and the last closed in 1949. In the early years, teachers used horse-drawn vans as school classrooms if necessary, whilst in later years teachers used their vehicles only as their means of transport. Teaching was done in the various houses, exactly as house to house teachers had done.| | <urn:uuid:ea1d2d40-a011-4ad5-bbba-c0e7b9b66cb0> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://education.nsw.gov.au/about-us/our-people-and-structure/history-of-government-schools/school-database-search/glossary | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601241.42/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121014531-20200121043531-00534.warc.gz | en | 0.982032 | 3,321 | 3.28125 | 3 | [
0.08836773037910461,
-0.04318892955780029,
-0.020440224558115005,
0.19473090767860413,
-0.4401722848415375,
0.23118218779563904,
0.3162505030632019,
-0.0022006845101714134,
-0.27419161796569824,
-0.13119351863861084,
0.15519264340400696,
-0.3906519412994385,
0.08456717431545258,
0.22043189... | 15 | Glossary of school types
The glossary provides definitions of the different school types in operation since 1848.
Download a print version (PDF 53.29KB) of the glossary or view the A-Z list.
Glossary listing of school types
School types are listed in alphabetical order use the letter links to jump to the different letter groups.
An elementary school dating from 1880 in which school enrolment was mainly for Aboriginal children.
Most Aboriginal schools were provisional schools and staffed until the 1940s and 1950s by untrained teachers. In 1968, the few remaining Aboriginal schools were converted into ordinary public schools.
|Central school (1944- )||
A school containing both primary and secondary departments, and seeks to provide secondary education for children both from nearby primary schools as well as from its own primary section.
The term central school has been used since 1944. Whilst such schools were classified as central schools in 1944, many continue to be known by the name of the specific secondary course offered (for example, intermediate high school, junior technical school). Central schools have become characteristic of regional districts where the population is too small to support a single high school.
|College (1989- )||A senior high school or college which caters for a wide range of post-compulsory school-age students. It offers a full range of Higher School Certificate courses appropriate to the locally identified needs.|
|Commercial school or department (1913- 1948)||
Originating in 1913, it was a department designed to offer both a post-primary education and vocational training for boys intent on a business career. From 1925 some girls were also enrolled.
Specific commercial subjects like business principles and book-keeping were taught. Commercial courses were taught in superior public schools, super-primary schools and in evening continuation schools. No separate commercial schools existed. Instead, commercial departments were closer in character to the general and academic streams of secondary education, and many were converted to intermediate high schools or made redundant by the establishment of separate secondary schools. There were no commercial departments after 1948, although a commercial course was available in some schools after that date.
|Community care school (1867- )||A type of School for Specific Purposes (SSP). Community care schools were conducted within government premises and places set aside for children committed to government care, with full control of these schools transferred to the NSW Department of Education in 1981.|
|Community school (1992- )||A school catering for students from Kindergarten through to Year 12. Community schools differ from central schools in that they have been established not because there are too few secondary students to support a high school, but because of a choice to have K-12 education provided by one school.|
| Correspondence school
A school providing primary and secondary education by correspondence lessons. Established in 1916, only students unable to attend school because of distance were enrolled.
From 1923 students were also enrolled on medical grounds. Later, students were also enrolled who wished to study a subject not taught at the school they attended daily. Distance education centres now provide educational programs to students who are isolated or whose special circumstances prevent them from attending regular schools. In 1993 the Open Training and Education Network (OTEN) was formed to provide and develop training and distance education facilities for students.
|Demonstration school (1884- )||A school used to demonstrate educational methods to trainee teachers and provide practice in teaching. From 1928, the term demonstration school replaced the previous term 'practice' school. These schools continue to be ordinary schools with an added demonstration function, and are not specifically designated in the database.|
|Distance education centre (1991- )||
Distance education centres were established in 1991 in strategic locations throughout the state to deliver education to those students who were isolated or whose special circumstances prevent them from attending regular schools.
Some distance education centres operate from within regular government schools and are not identified in this database. See also reference to the Open Training and Education Network (OTEN) under
| District rural school
|Established in 1923, district rural schools combined both primary and secondary departments to provide pre-vocational education for children in regional areas. Students were offered a three year post-primary course, which included subjects such as agriculture, applied farm mechanics and rural economics for boys; and home science and horticulture for girls. From 1926 the Intermediate Certificate was adopted as the final examination. From 1944 all district rural schools were classified as central schools.|
|District school (1906- 1945)||Established in 1906, district schools combined both primary and secondary departments in regional areas as adjuncts of superior public schools. They were designed to provide a two-year course of study for qualified children preparing for entry to teachers colleges, however more generally, they provided higher education for children in regional areas. By 1914 district schools had developed into schools offering literary or academic courses like those taught in high schools and intermediate high schools. Many were promoted to intermediate high schools as their enrolments increased, and others formed the basis for the establishment of separate high schools.|
|Domestic science school||See home science school.|
|Environmental education centre (1971- )||Established in 1971 to provide for the study and observation of the natural environment by primary and secondary pupils. These centres have no regular enrolment, but are visited by pupils with the teachers in the centres working in conjunction with the class teachers. In 1999, all field studies centres were renamed environmental education centres.|
|Evening continuation school
|Established in 1911, evening continuation school provided vocational education for boys and girls who had completed their primary education and were 14 years or older. It consisted of a two-year course conducted for two hours, three nights each week. In 1946 evening continuation schools were converted into evening colleges, and given that their orientation has been towards adult non-vocational or leisure interests, they have not been included in the schools database.|
|Evening public school
|Established in 1880, evening public schools sought to provide an elementary education for persons over 14 years of age who had previously received little to no education. They offered young men (very few females were ever enrolled) two hours of instruction three nights a week. They were usually conducted in the local public school building by the headmaster or other teachers. Most schools were poorly attended and were rapidly replaced from 1911 with evening continuation schools.|
|Field studies centre||See environmental education centre.|
|An elementary school established in 1867 to cater for children in areas of isolated populations. Between 1867 - 1868 teachers were in charge of up to seven 'stations', and from 1869 each teacher visited only two stations, making the schools become truly half-time. The attendance of at least 20 children was required, in two groups of 10 or more. In 1898 the required attendance was reduced to 16, and by 1908 no fixed number was required.|
|High school (1883-)|| First established in 1883, high schools played a very small part in the education system until the reorganisation of secondary education after 1910. It was then that secondary education was officially sub-divided into a variety of types of courses and schools, with high schools offering an academic course to a selected intake of pupils. However, from the 1920s there was a long-term trend was towards comprehensive high schools, and by the 1950s many of the other types of secondary schools were either being transformed into or closing in favour of comprehensive high schools. Since the late 1960s all new high schools have been co-educational, and many older schools have been converted into co-educational schools.
In this database high school includes specialist secondary schools whose title might be, for example: girls high, boys high, technology high, agricultural high, conservatorium high, performing arts high, community high. Also categorised as high schools are schools which currently have an emphasis on a particular area of study, e.g. technology, performing arts, sport, although this emphasis is not included in the title of the school.
|Home science school
A school department or a separate school combining post-primary education with home science and commercial training for girls. The home science course (known as domestic science until 1942) included subjects like cookery, home management and hygiene; but girls could also take a commercial course with subjects like economics, shorthand and typing.
From 1923 separate schools, generally known as central domestic science schools were established. They provided a three-year course for girls who had completed their primary education at schools in the surrounding district. However, changing attitudes to the education of girls in the late 1950s resulted in the rapid abandonment of home science courses and the conversion of home science high schools and central home science schools into comprehensive girls high schools and junior high schools.
|Hospital school||See school for specific purpose.|
| House to house school
|An elementary school which emerged in 1881 to cater for sparsely populated areas unable to be reached by other types of schools. A typical house to house school was composed of two or more teaching stations several miles apart, where children were gathered and visited by the teacher. The teachers were on the whole untrained or of the lowest classification, instruction was confined to basic subjects and no school buildings had to be erected.|
|Infants school (1880-)||A public school enrolling only the youngest children. The first infants schools were opened in Sydney in 1880 to relieve the pressure on nearby public schools.|
|Intermediate high school (1912- 1977)||A school containing both primary and secondary departments, intermediate high schools emerged in 1912 to cater for children that qualified for but were unable to enrol in the NSW's small number of high schools. The intermediate high school offered a basically academic course of instruction to Intermediate Certificate standard and sometimes beyond. In 1944 all intermediate high schools were classified as central schools, however, the numbers of intermediate high schools declined rapidly after 1950 as high schools were established in large numbers.|
|Junior high campus
|A separate secondary school which emerged in 1930 to offer junior secondary education only.|
|Junior technical school or department (1913- 1962)||Established in 1913, junior technical departments or separate schools combined post-primary education with technical training for boys expected to enter a skilled trade. The vocational subjects included drawing, woodwork, metalwork, etc. In accordance with the general educational trend, these were gradually converted to comprehensive high schools, the last ones becoming boys junior high schools in 1962.|
|Multi-campus college (1999- )||A group of (former) high schools who have combined to become a single education provider across a number of sites within a given community. They usually combine to form a number of junior campuses and a senior campus, however there are some variations.|
|National fitness camp||See sport and recreation centre.|
|National school (1848- 1866)||Previously all schools operated by the Board of National Education were called national schools. They were renamed public schools in 1867.|
|Nursery school (1943- )||The first nursery school was opened in 1943 to provide care for children of preschool age. Only a few of the separate nursery schools are entered in the government schools of NSW 1848 database because most nursery schools have been adjuncts of infants or public schools.|
|Practice school||See demonstration school.|
| Provisional school
|Emerging in 1867, provisional schools were elementary schools which were established in areas where at least 15 children (but fewer than the 25 required for a public school) could be expected to attend. Parents had to provide the building and furniture, whilst the Council of Education or the Department of Education paid the teacher and supplied books and equipment. After 1882 there were provisions for the Department to provide all or part of the cost of buildings, but parents often met most of the costs well into the twentieth century. The schools were generally staffed by untrained teachers or by teachers of the lowest classification. Gradually they became in effect small public schools, and in 1957 the remaining ones were converted to public schools.|
| Public school
A basic elementary school known as national schools from 1848 to 1866, and as public schools since 1867. Originally the attendance of 30 children were required for the establishment of a school, but this was reduced to 25 in 1867 and 20 in 1880. In 1957 when provisional schools were converted to public schools, and the minimum figure was reduced to nine.
Until 1875 parents had to pay one-third of the cost of buildings, but the Council of Education and the Department have since met the total costs. Until the 1880s there were no government secondary schools, and no official post-primary courses in public schools. After 1913 many public schools incorporated one or more distinct secondary departments or ‘schools’. The modern development of high schools has meant that, with some exceptions like the central schools, most public schools now offer only primary courses.
|School for specific purposes
Is a school for children with special needs who require hospitalisation or have physical, intellectual or psychological disabilities. Some of these schools do not have regular enrolment, with the children instead being regarded as temporarily absent from their ordinary school.
There have been many variations in the naming and classification of these schools, especially those conducted in centres run by voluntary organisations. Older titles such as 'School for Crippled Children' or 'School for Sub-Normal Children' have not been used in the database with most of the schools being identified simply with SSP or Hospital SSP. Community care schools are also classified 'SSP' by the department. In 1985 the department adopted a policy of integration of children with disabilities into regular schools.
|School of the air (1956- )||Opening in 1956, lessons were initially conducted by radio from Broken Hill for correspondence students (later distance education students). Currently lessons are now conducted via satellite, with an additional campus opened in Hay in 1992.|
|Sport and recreation centre (1947- )||
In 1947 teachers were appointed to certain national fitness camps, which were then renamed sport and recreation centres in the 1970s. There are no regular enrolment at these centres, but they are visited by groups of children with the teachers in the centres working in conjunction with the class teacher concerned.
Until the early 1970s the emphasis was predominantly on physical education and recreational activities, whereas nowadays pupils’ social development and environmental education are the main priorities. In 1971, the administration of sport and recreation centres was taken over by the NSW Department of Sport, Recreation and Racing, although the Department of Education continued to provide teachers up until 1990.
| Subsidised school
|A school designed for localities where the minimum attendance required for even the smallest type of government school could not be obtained. Whilst the Department paid a subsidy for each pupil, parents were totally responsible for providing the school building and the teacher. However, it was often that subsidised schools were permitted to use former government school buildings. Subsidised schools were not government schools, and are not included in the schools database.|
| Superior public school
A public school officially recognised from 1881 as providing both primary and post-primary education. From 1913 superior public schools were re-organised, being restricted to offering two-year vocational courses – commercial, home science or junior technical. An individual school could provide one or more of these.
By 1925 there was a less rigid vocational emphasis, and courses had been extended to three years and students could sit for the Intermediate Certificate examination. After 1931 the term superior public school was abandoned, super-primary schools being known only be the names of the courses offered.
|Similar to a house to house school, travelling schools catered for small, isolated groups of children. There were only three such schools. The first opened in 1908, and the last closed in 1949. In the early years, teachers used horse-drawn vans as school classrooms if necessary, whilst in later years teachers used their vehicles only as their means of transport. Teaching was done in the various houses, exactly as house to house teachers had done.| | 3,607 | ENGLISH | 1 |
First-Class Online Research Paper Writing Service
- Your research paper is written by a PhD professor
- Your requirements and targets are always met
- You are able to control the progress of your writing assignment
- You get a chance to become an excellent student!
Yes, indeed the British army was far more superior to the American army in the early war. The British forces were of course more superior to that of the American because they had had a well established system of government that had the backing of its government back home. In addition Britain, since the 1700’s, had practiced a system of Mercantilism and one of the major principles of his system of trade was maintaining a strong army for the purpose of conquering new territories which would as markets for ther raw materials and also the source of cheap raw materials and cheap labor.
On the other hand America was at a disadvantage as they were outnumbered and out maneuvered. The American population was only 2.5 million in which 20% were African slaves. The Native Americans were also united against the Americans.
The British managed to maintain superiority over the Americans because they were well trained and organized and had the backing of their motherland.
Americans were able to sustain the rebelllion when they attacked Washington on a period that Britain had a break. In the winter of 1777, with the help of the Prussian the continental army had been well organized and trained and proved a formidable opponent by cutting off the British of their supplies in Canada. It also gained new allies who financed the much needed supplies.
General Washington’s tactics of delay and decisive attacks while keeping light also enabled the Americans to be swifter in their attacks. The militia created by Washington was least reliable as a fighting force it did a fantastic job at containing loyalists.
Most popular orders | <urn:uuid:86db459a-f83d-470c-b7a2-037f6765390e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://essaysexperts.com/essays/politics/from-colonies-to-country.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700675.78/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127112805-20200127142805-00421.warc.gz | en | 0.988091 | 368 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
-0.6238588690757751,
0.3442019820213318,
0.3532855808734894,
-0.19957908987998962,
0.06321465224027634,
-0.030877266079187393,
-0.23172350227832794,
0.29804399609565735,
-0.17852669954299927,
-0.07329320162534714,
0.01152385026216507,
0.1260758936405182,
0.105443574488163,
0.12755528092384... | 1 | First-Class Online Research Paper Writing Service
- Your research paper is written by a PhD professor
- Your requirements and targets are always met
- You are able to control the progress of your writing assignment
- You get a chance to become an excellent student!
Yes, indeed the British army was far more superior to the American army in the early war. The British forces were of course more superior to that of the American because they had had a well established system of government that had the backing of its government back home. In addition Britain, since the 1700’s, had practiced a system of Mercantilism and one of the major principles of his system of trade was maintaining a strong army for the purpose of conquering new territories which would as markets for ther raw materials and also the source of cheap raw materials and cheap labor.
On the other hand America was at a disadvantage as they were outnumbered and out maneuvered. The American population was only 2.5 million in which 20% were African slaves. The Native Americans were also united against the Americans.
The British managed to maintain superiority over the Americans because they were well trained and organized and had the backing of their motherland.
Americans were able to sustain the rebelllion when they attacked Washington on a period that Britain had a break. In the winter of 1777, with the help of the Prussian the continental army had been well organized and trained and proved a formidable opponent by cutting off the British of their supplies in Canada. It also gained new allies who financed the much needed supplies.
General Washington’s tactics of delay and decisive attacks while keeping light also enabled the Americans to be swifter in their attacks. The militia created by Washington was least reliable as a fighting force it did a fantastic job at containing loyalists.
Most popular orders | 368 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Cedar Hill Prep School Grade 4 traveled to Huber Woods in Middletown to build a longhouse as the early Lenape did.
The early Lenape did not have a written language. Using petroglyphs and pictographs, the early Lenape were able to carve in rock and paint with natural dyes to tell some of their stories. Grade 4 students created pictograph stories by mixing dirt and water to make paint. They painted their stories on brown papers as the Lenape would on animal skins or bark. While the “bark” dried, the students used precut logs and rope to build their longhouse. They learned to tie the ropes using the early techniques of frapping and wrapping. Then they covered the sides and roof of their longhouse with the “bark” they designed. After a couple of hours, the students were finally able to sit inside their longhouse! | <urn:uuid:c59d975c-b633-48b6-b053-34f7c7337a7a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.cedarhillprep.com/grade-4s-experience-with-early-lenape-culture-2/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00548.warc.gz | en | 0.981253 | 192 | 3.953125 | 4 | [
-0.03340008482336998,
-0.1129346713423729,
0.30302199721336365,
-0.021996911615133286,
-0.1804775446653366,
0.03556292504072189,
-0.25065112113952637,
-0.23549498617649078,
-0.3208293318748474,
0.033207718282938004,
0.1413363367319107,
0.09887806326150894,
-0.343304306268692,
0.72854191064... | 2 | Cedar Hill Prep School Grade 4 traveled to Huber Woods in Middletown to build a longhouse as the early Lenape did.
The early Lenape did not have a written language. Using petroglyphs and pictographs, the early Lenape were able to carve in rock and paint with natural dyes to tell some of their stories. Grade 4 students created pictograph stories by mixing dirt and water to make paint. They painted their stories on brown papers as the Lenape would on animal skins or bark. While the “bark” dried, the students used precut logs and rope to build their longhouse. They learned to tie the ropes using the early techniques of frapping and wrapping. Then they covered the sides and roof of their longhouse with the “bark” they designed. After a couple of hours, the students were finally able to sit inside their longhouse! | 184 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The German Communist Party (KPD – Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands) was seen as a major rival by the Nazi Party during the years of Weimar Germany in terms of who might acquire national power. The German Communist Party grew out of the Spartacist Movement led by Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknicht. Street battles between members of the Communist Party and the SA were common especially during the depression that followed the Wall Street Crash of October 1929. For the Nazis the Communists represented a real threat as the KPD appealed to the working class in Weimar. The KPD leadership hoped that the unemployed working class would blame business leaders and those who supported a capitalist society. Numerically there were far more people who could be categorised as working class as opposed to middle/upper class. Therefore a political party that had won over the working class would find itself in a very healthy position when compared to other parties that had not done so. Hitler was ideologically opposed to communism but realised that the KPD did represent a real threat to the Nazis prior to January 1933. The KPD was the largest communist movement outside of the USSR and during the mid to late 1920’s had sort to develop closer ties to the USSR. Probably the most famous leader the KPD had was Ernst Thälmann who was arrested by the Gestapo in 1933 and shot in 1944, after 11 years in solitary confinement, on the direct orders of Hitler.
Election of May 20th 1928: the KPD won 10.6% of the vote and 54 seats in the Reichstag.
Election of September 14th 1930: the KPD won 13.1% of the vote and 77 seats in the Reichstag.
Election of July 31st 1932: the KPD won 14.6% of the vote and 89 seats in the Reichstag.
Election of November 11th 1932: the KPD won 16.9% of the vote and 100 seats in the Reichstag.
Election of March 5th 1933: the KPD won 12.3% of the vote and 81 seats in the Reichstag.
Prior to the March 1933 election, the KPD had made steady gains in the national elections. However, the appointment of Hitler as Chancellor in January 1933 and the Reichstag Fire of February 1933 and the consequences surrounding the fire, spelt the end of any political influence that the KPD might have had. The Reichstag Fire was blamed on the KPD and in the immediate aftermath of the fire, KPD leaders were rounded up and were among the first people to be put into the newly created Dachau concentration camp, which was just outside of Munich. After the Enabling Act was passed in March 1933, it was very dangerous for anyone to openly espouse their support for the KPD and the influence of the party swiftly dwindled. Some KPD members fled to the USSR while others spent years in hiding.
- Weimar elections 1928 to 1932 The elections that were held in Weimar Germany from 1928 to 1932 were invariably held against the shadow of the economic… | <urn:uuid:52b807d1-8573-4e7a-8fae-a2f01db57ed6> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/modern-world-history-1918-to-1980/weimar-germany/the-communist-party-and-weimar-germany/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592261.1/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118052321-20200118080321-00011.warc.gz | en | 0.986067 | 636 | 3.609375 | 4 | [
-0.41790762543678284,
0.5044010877609253,
-0.09111826866865158,
0.0689038634300232,
0.4289611876010895,
0.2534956634044647,
0.03875790536403656,
0.11656567454338074,
-0.4064036011695862,
-0.22393523156642914,
0.4566996097564697,
0.017891597002744675,
0.12321414053440094,
0.1659790575504303... | 1 | The German Communist Party (KPD – Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands) was seen as a major rival by the Nazi Party during the years of Weimar Germany in terms of who might acquire national power. The German Communist Party grew out of the Spartacist Movement led by Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknicht. Street battles between members of the Communist Party and the SA were common especially during the depression that followed the Wall Street Crash of October 1929. For the Nazis the Communists represented a real threat as the KPD appealed to the working class in Weimar. The KPD leadership hoped that the unemployed working class would blame business leaders and those who supported a capitalist society. Numerically there were far more people who could be categorised as working class as opposed to middle/upper class. Therefore a political party that had won over the working class would find itself in a very healthy position when compared to other parties that had not done so. Hitler was ideologically opposed to communism but realised that the KPD did represent a real threat to the Nazis prior to January 1933. The KPD was the largest communist movement outside of the USSR and during the mid to late 1920’s had sort to develop closer ties to the USSR. Probably the most famous leader the KPD had was Ernst Thälmann who was arrested by the Gestapo in 1933 and shot in 1944, after 11 years in solitary confinement, on the direct orders of Hitler.
Election of May 20th 1928: the KPD won 10.6% of the vote and 54 seats in the Reichstag.
Election of September 14th 1930: the KPD won 13.1% of the vote and 77 seats in the Reichstag.
Election of July 31st 1932: the KPD won 14.6% of the vote and 89 seats in the Reichstag.
Election of November 11th 1932: the KPD won 16.9% of the vote and 100 seats in the Reichstag.
Election of March 5th 1933: the KPD won 12.3% of the vote and 81 seats in the Reichstag.
Prior to the March 1933 election, the KPD had made steady gains in the national elections. However, the appointment of Hitler as Chancellor in January 1933 and the Reichstag Fire of February 1933 and the consequences surrounding the fire, spelt the end of any political influence that the KPD might have had. The Reichstag Fire was blamed on the KPD and in the immediate aftermath of the fire, KPD leaders were rounded up and were among the first people to be put into the newly created Dachau concentration camp, which was just outside of Munich. After the Enabling Act was passed in March 1933, it was very dangerous for anyone to openly espouse their support for the KPD and the influence of the party swiftly dwindled. Some KPD members fled to the USSR while others spent years in hiding.
- Weimar elections 1928 to 1932 The elections that were held in Weimar Germany from 1928 to 1932 were invariably held against the shadow of the economic… | 722 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Henry Halleck was a senior commander in the Union army during the American Civil War when he fought in the ‘Western Theatre’. By the end of the American Civil War, Halleck was Chief of Staff for the army.
Halleck was born on January 16th 1815 in Westernville, New York. His father had served in the army during the 1812 War but was working on a farm when Halleck was born. His uncle raised Halleck, as farm life did not appeal to him. He attended the US Military Academy at West Point and developed a great knowledge of military theory. Halleck graduated from West Point in 1839 and joined the army engineers. His knowledge on improving defences was such that in 1844 his superiors rewarded him with a visit to Europe where he further studied ways to improve defences. Halleck broadened his reputation still further by giving a series of lectures on what he had learned in Europe once he had returned to America. It was his intellectual approach to all things military that earned him the nickname “Old Brains”.
Halleck spent time in California developing defences. While in California he worked for the Governor General there, General Riley. Halleck served as Military Secretary of State and it was in this position that he had a major input into California’s state constitution. While in California he also joined a law firm, despite his army commitments. Halleck so enjoyed his legal work that he resigned from the army in 1854. He became a wealthy man who also involved himself in land speculation. Halleck became the owner of a 30,000-acre ranch in Marin County. However, he kept his military contacts as he served as a major general in the California militia.
When the American Civil War broke out in April 1861, Halleck was still involved in his Californian business ventures. He was a strong believer in the whole concept of a nation’s unity and believed the Union to be inviolable. Senior army commander pushed for Halleck to be offered a full time commission and in August 1861, he was appointed a major general in the regular army – the fourth highest-ranking officer in the North’s army. Halleck was given command of the Department of the Missouri.
Halleck proved to be a very good organiser and planner. However, he was a very difficult man to work with. He frequently made decisions off the cuff and failed to discuss issues with his immediate subordinates. Most of the work he did was by himself. However, if anything went wrong with his plans, Halleck was quick to blame his subordinates for failing to fully carry out his orders or failing to fully understand what was required. One of his subordinates was Ulysses Grant, the future overall commander of the Union Army. Grant wanted the armies under Halleck’s command to be more aggressive in their approach. This clashed with Halleck who preferred a more planned and cautious approach so that a victory was more or less guaranteed. His approach was similar to General McClellan’s who tried to persuade President Lincoln that his army, the Army of the Potomac, only had to lose once on a major scale, and Washington would become a threatened capital. Halleck had the same approach. However, Lincoln wanted his generals to be more dynamic and aggressive and supported Grant’s approach. Halleck gave way and it resulted in Grant capturing two Confederate held forts, Henry and Donaldson, and capturing 14,000 Confederate troops. The victories – the first for the Union – were well received by Lincoln who used them to justify his belief in aggressive campaigns. Halleck tried to advance his own position off the back of Grant by requesting the command for the whole of the Western Theatre as opposed to ‘just’ the Department of the Missouri. It was refused, but it was a sign of the way Halleck’s mind worked.
Halleck’s armies continued to perform well in and around Missouri. Halleck provided the Department of the Missouri with clear and concise planning, one of his great strengths, and men such as Grant, Pope and Sherman held him in the highest of regards. Their victories certainly did Halleck’s position a great deal of good and they benefited from his ability to organise his armies and he also had a talent for skilfully using what resources he had.
In March 1862, his achievements were recognised when his command was enlarged to include the states of Ohio and Kansas. His new command was named the Department of Mississippi. Grant’s Army of the Tennessee, part of Halleck’s overall command, suffered heavily at the Battle of Shiloh in April 1862. Halleck effectively removed him from command of his army when he personally took command of an army that stood at 100,000 men. Grant served as second-in-command but complained about his treatment. Halleck proceeded to attack the city of Corinth in Mississippi. But he adopted a cautious approach with daily stops in his advance – the Confederate force there simply abandoned the city and left it for him. It was painted as a major Union victory and Halleck basked in the perceived glory of this.
In July 1862, Lincoln appointed Halleck General-in-Chief of all the Union armies to be based in Washington. Lincoln’s perception was that Halleck would cajole Union generals in the field into being more aggressive in their campaigns. The President was wrong in his assessment. Halleck used his position to continue his campaign against Grant. Halleck had always looked down on Grant because of the latter’s well known drinking issues. Halleck transferred divisions of men in Grant’s army to other generals who called on Halleck for more manpower. By September 1862, Grant commanded an army of 46,000 men. Just six months earlier, Grant had command over 100,000 men.
However, as General-in-Chief, Halleck continued to excel in administrative tasks and maintaining the required resources for his rapidly growing armies. However, he had no overall grand strategy. His generals in the field also failed to carry out his orders and adjusted them to suit themselves. The Union defeat at the Second Battle of Bull Run was blamed on Halleck’s inability to motivate his generals into carrying out his orders.
If Halleck had cultivated a better relationship with the Union’s press, he may have been given a better write-in in Union newspapers. However, he had kept the press at an arm’s length and frequently riled them with what they perceived as his arrogant behaviour. Rather than report on the fact that Union generals in the field had failed to carry out orders from a senior officer, they blamed the defeat at Bull Run on Halleck’s lack of inspirational leadership.
In March 1864, Halleck was effectively demoted to Chief of Staff. His successor as General-in-Chief was Grant. Grant was what Lincoln wanted – a successful and aggressive officer in the field who had the full support of his men. Grant and Halleck had not had the best relationship when Halleck was Grant’s superior. On paper, Grant could have made Halleck’s time as Chief of Staff difficult. However, both worked well together. Halleck was given one sole responsibility, which was his forte – administration. Grant led in the field while Halleck ensured his armies were well supplied and well resourced. It was probably in this position that Halleck showed his true skill. Now he did not have to develop grand strategies or involve himself in politics, he could concentrate all his energies on one issue – logistics.
Halleck remained in the US Army until he died. He was given command of the Division of the Pacific in California and then of the Division of the South. He held this command until his death.
Henry Halleck died on January 9th 1872.
- Ulysses Grant was one of the most famous Union generals of the American Civil War. After the American Civil War Grant went on to become… | <urn:uuid:29653279-84d6-4f85-893d-9b567debb763> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/the-american-civil-war/henry-halleck/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597458.22/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120052454-20200120080454-00015.warc.gz | en | 0.991912 | 1,683 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
-0.08419312536716461,
0.7423412799835205,
0.6952366828918457,
-0.23872432112693787,
-0.22601057589054108,
-0.11907005310058594,
0.45781970024108887,
-0.008509494364261627,
-0.7550475597381592,
-0.22993409633636475,
-0.05703339725732803,
-0.2909358739852905,
0.31102454662323,
0.460023373365... | 10 | Henry Halleck was a senior commander in the Union army during the American Civil War when he fought in the ‘Western Theatre’. By the end of the American Civil War, Halleck was Chief of Staff for the army.
Halleck was born on January 16th 1815 in Westernville, New York. His father had served in the army during the 1812 War but was working on a farm when Halleck was born. His uncle raised Halleck, as farm life did not appeal to him. He attended the US Military Academy at West Point and developed a great knowledge of military theory. Halleck graduated from West Point in 1839 and joined the army engineers. His knowledge on improving defences was such that in 1844 his superiors rewarded him with a visit to Europe where he further studied ways to improve defences. Halleck broadened his reputation still further by giving a series of lectures on what he had learned in Europe once he had returned to America. It was his intellectual approach to all things military that earned him the nickname “Old Brains”.
Halleck spent time in California developing defences. While in California he worked for the Governor General there, General Riley. Halleck served as Military Secretary of State and it was in this position that he had a major input into California’s state constitution. While in California he also joined a law firm, despite his army commitments. Halleck so enjoyed his legal work that he resigned from the army in 1854. He became a wealthy man who also involved himself in land speculation. Halleck became the owner of a 30,000-acre ranch in Marin County. However, he kept his military contacts as he served as a major general in the California militia.
When the American Civil War broke out in April 1861, Halleck was still involved in his Californian business ventures. He was a strong believer in the whole concept of a nation’s unity and believed the Union to be inviolable. Senior army commander pushed for Halleck to be offered a full time commission and in August 1861, he was appointed a major general in the regular army – the fourth highest-ranking officer in the North’s army. Halleck was given command of the Department of the Missouri.
Halleck proved to be a very good organiser and planner. However, he was a very difficult man to work with. He frequently made decisions off the cuff and failed to discuss issues with his immediate subordinates. Most of the work he did was by himself. However, if anything went wrong with his plans, Halleck was quick to blame his subordinates for failing to fully carry out his orders or failing to fully understand what was required. One of his subordinates was Ulysses Grant, the future overall commander of the Union Army. Grant wanted the armies under Halleck’s command to be more aggressive in their approach. This clashed with Halleck who preferred a more planned and cautious approach so that a victory was more or less guaranteed. His approach was similar to General McClellan’s who tried to persuade President Lincoln that his army, the Army of the Potomac, only had to lose once on a major scale, and Washington would become a threatened capital. Halleck had the same approach. However, Lincoln wanted his generals to be more dynamic and aggressive and supported Grant’s approach. Halleck gave way and it resulted in Grant capturing two Confederate held forts, Henry and Donaldson, and capturing 14,000 Confederate troops. The victories – the first for the Union – were well received by Lincoln who used them to justify his belief in aggressive campaigns. Halleck tried to advance his own position off the back of Grant by requesting the command for the whole of the Western Theatre as opposed to ‘just’ the Department of the Missouri. It was refused, but it was a sign of the way Halleck’s mind worked.
Halleck’s armies continued to perform well in and around Missouri. Halleck provided the Department of the Missouri with clear and concise planning, one of his great strengths, and men such as Grant, Pope and Sherman held him in the highest of regards. Their victories certainly did Halleck’s position a great deal of good and they benefited from his ability to organise his armies and he also had a talent for skilfully using what resources he had.
In March 1862, his achievements were recognised when his command was enlarged to include the states of Ohio and Kansas. His new command was named the Department of Mississippi. Grant’s Army of the Tennessee, part of Halleck’s overall command, suffered heavily at the Battle of Shiloh in April 1862. Halleck effectively removed him from command of his army when he personally took command of an army that stood at 100,000 men. Grant served as second-in-command but complained about his treatment. Halleck proceeded to attack the city of Corinth in Mississippi. But he adopted a cautious approach with daily stops in his advance – the Confederate force there simply abandoned the city and left it for him. It was painted as a major Union victory and Halleck basked in the perceived glory of this.
In July 1862, Lincoln appointed Halleck General-in-Chief of all the Union armies to be based in Washington. Lincoln’s perception was that Halleck would cajole Union generals in the field into being more aggressive in their campaigns. The President was wrong in his assessment. Halleck used his position to continue his campaign against Grant. Halleck had always looked down on Grant because of the latter’s well known drinking issues. Halleck transferred divisions of men in Grant’s army to other generals who called on Halleck for more manpower. By September 1862, Grant commanded an army of 46,000 men. Just six months earlier, Grant had command over 100,000 men.
However, as General-in-Chief, Halleck continued to excel in administrative tasks and maintaining the required resources for his rapidly growing armies. However, he had no overall grand strategy. His generals in the field also failed to carry out his orders and adjusted them to suit themselves. The Union defeat at the Second Battle of Bull Run was blamed on Halleck’s inability to motivate his generals into carrying out his orders.
If Halleck had cultivated a better relationship with the Union’s press, he may have been given a better write-in in Union newspapers. However, he had kept the press at an arm’s length and frequently riled them with what they perceived as his arrogant behaviour. Rather than report on the fact that Union generals in the field had failed to carry out orders from a senior officer, they blamed the defeat at Bull Run on Halleck’s lack of inspirational leadership.
In March 1864, Halleck was effectively demoted to Chief of Staff. His successor as General-in-Chief was Grant. Grant was what Lincoln wanted – a successful and aggressive officer in the field who had the full support of his men. Grant and Halleck had not had the best relationship when Halleck was Grant’s superior. On paper, Grant could have made Halleck’s time as Chief of Staff difficult. However, both worked well together. Halleck was given one sole responsibility, which was his forte – administration. Grant led in the field while Halleck ensured his armies were well supplied and well resourced. It was probably in this position that Halleck showed his true skill. Now he did not have to develop grand strategies or involve himself in politics, he could concentrate all his energies on one issue – logistics.
Halleck remained in the US Army until he died. He was given command of the Division of the Pacific in California and then of the Division of the South. He held this command until his death.
Henry Halleck died on January 9th 1872.
- Ulysses Grant was one of the most famous Union generals of the American Civil War. After the American Civil War Grant went on to become… | 1,693 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Many soldiers are granted the right to vote for the first time
The Representation of the People Act, 1918 was given Royal Assent on 6 February 1918. It extended the franchise to all men aged 21 and over and to women aged 30 and over who resided in the constituency or who occupied land or premises with a rateable value above £5, or whose husbands did. The passing of the Act brought millions of people into the franchise for the first time and required a huge expansion of the electoral registers. With so many being away from home on military duty, it also required careful management and the establishment of absent voters lists.
The method of collecting the necessary information within the army was defined in Army Council Instruction 540 of 16 May 1918.
The Representation of the People Act, 1918, makes special provision for the registration of members of the Military Forces. Every officer and man who is a British subject and will have attained the age of 19 years of age on 15 April 1918 is entitled to be registered as a Parliamentary elector for any constituency in which he would have been residing but for his service in the Army. A statement made by him in the “prescribed” form and verified in the “prescribed” manner that he would have had the necessary qualification for being registered but for his service, is to be treated as sufficient proof of qualification if there is no evidence to the contrary. …
The Act having become law, registration officers in all constituencies will immediately commence to prepare the registers and lists of absent voters …
Officers and soldiers serving at home:
a form of postcard (Army Form W.3940) embodying the “prescribed” form has been approved and will be distributed by officers commanding units amongst all officers and soldiers serving under their command. [This also applied to officers commanding hospitals, for men serving with that hospital and also those who were patients at the time][The officers commanding units would be responsible for obtaining a stock of forms] [Attention was drawn to ensuring the accuracy of stating the man’s unit and number and how to ensure the correct voter registration officer’s address was selected and inserted] [The officers commanding units would be responsible for passing the completed cards to the voter registration officers] No further action was required except in the cases of officers of the regular army and the Special Reserve, who would communicate personally with their respective voter registration officer by 30 June and 31 December annually and also inform them of any change of postal address.
Officers and soldiers serving in France and Italy:
the procedure was similar to that applying at home, except that officers commanding units would be automatically supplied wit a stock of forms. A stock would also be made available at all field post offices for men not serving with any recognised unit or being sick in any British military hospital.
Soldiers serving in distant fronts and garrisons (that is, anywhere other than home, France and Italy):
an Army Form W.3941, similar to 3940, would be used but filled in by the officer in charge of records for the man’s unit and not by the man himself. The home address to be given would be that of the wife (if the man was married) or next of kin (if unmarried or widower). “The address may not be the actual address that will qualify for the vote, but will enable the registration officer to get in touch with the soldier’s relatives and obtain information of the correct address. [A supply of Army Form W.3940 would also be sent for distribution under local arrangements so men could fill in the forms themselves if they so desired: the ACI recognised that this approach may be too slow to allow the information to be compiled for the first register of voters]
Officers serving in distant fronts and garrisons (that is, anywhere other than home, France and Italy):
officers of the regular army and Special Reserve would communicate personally with their respective voter registration officer or instruct their representatives at home to do so. [A supply of Army Form W.3940 would also be sent for distribution under local arrangements so officers could fill in the forms themselves][For officers of the Territorial Force the procedure would be the same as for non-commissioned men, above]
Women serving with the forces who, being 30 years of age, acquire a vote under Section 5 of the Act:
(a) Queen Mary’s Auxiliary Army Corps, Mobile Branch: Army Form W.3942 will be distributed or obtainable at home, France and elsewhere, as applicable, similarly to AF W.3940, above. Members of the Mobile Branch who are serving abroad or who are liable to be sent so at short notice will, if they are of the required age and required qualifications, complete this form, which will be counter-signed by an officer or administrator and addressed (to the respective voter registration officer). (b) Matrons, sisters and nurses of the Queen Alexandra’s Imperial Military Nursing Service and Territorial Force Nursing Service serving abroad, also members of Voluntary Aid Detachments employed in British military hospitals abroad, together with any other women serving with the forces overseas who draw pay from Parliamentary or Dominion funds may, if over 30 years and qualified, complete Army Form W.3942 and send it to the voters registration officer of the area in which they claim to be entitled to vote. They may, however, have to communicate personally with the officer from time to time and notify all changes of address.
On receipt of the information from Army Forms W.3940, 3941 and 3942 the voter registration officers will prepare the registers and list of absent voters.
When the registers are near completion the voter registration officers will send to each [Army] Record Office a list of military voters entered under that Record Office on the register of absent voters. The Record Office will verify the names and report all errors … and … inaugurate a card index by constituencies by each Corps which is affiliated to the Record Office. This index will show the present unit of every soldier who is a military voter and will, as a matter of day to day routine, be kept up to date.
The [Army] Record Office would then send to each voter registration officer on a half yearly basis an update on the unit with which each officer of the Territorial Force; each soldier; and each member of the Queen Mary’s Auxiliary Army Corps Mobile Branch was serving. This would include any additions of men and women since last submission. The Record Office would also inform the registration officer whenever the man was affected by a change of Corps which would require the transfer of his documents to a different office.
When an election was called, the [Army] Record Office would then send to each voter registration officer an update on the unit with which each officer of the Territorial Force; each soldier; and each member of the Queen Mary’s Auxiliary Army Corps Mobile Branch was serving. This would also show whether the unit was serving with the British Expeditionary Force, or was in the Home Forces, or was in a Proxy Area.
The voter registration officers would notify each military voter that was on his list, by post, that he was registered and that he or she would be entitled to vote using a form that would be sent to him or her, or, in the event that he or she was serving in a distant garrison, he or she would be entitled to vote by proxy.
When the election was imminent, the voter registration officer, now acting as returning officer, would sent the ballot papers to everyone on his list, unless they were serving in an area where voting by proxy was permitted. The voters were urged to return their ballot papers as soon as possible.
The ACI said that men serving with the 63rd (Royal Naval) Division (whose records were kept at the Admiralty) were not subject to the above and would receive instructions from the Admiralty.
The 1918 General Election
An election was called immediately after the Armistice and held on Saturday 14 December 1918 but not finalised until the soldiers votes had been received.
Ballot papers being sent by soldiers were considered to be in time to be counted if they arrived at their destination by 10am on 28 December 1918 (noon for those going to Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Devon and Cornwall). | <urn:uuid:1c6d1548-398b-48dd-b4bd-ed6a7e34d7cd> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/soldiers/a-soldiers-life-1914-1918/the-registration-of-military-voters/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250609478.50/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123071220-20200123100220-00385.warc.gz | en | 0.980856 | 1,698 | 3.59375 | 4 | [
-0.5245834589004517,
0.10066758841276169,
0.2295404076576233,
-0.5493619441986084,
-0.4131600260734558,
0.38841307163238525,
0.1532973349094391,
-0.13690616190433502,
-0.17493978142738342,
-0.02893892303109169,
0.38096585869789124,
-0.33469828963279724,
0.19160886108875275,
0.1207928359508... | 3 | Many soldiers are granted the right to vote for the first time
The Representation of the People Act, 1918 was given Royal Assent on 6 February 1918. It extended the franchise to all men aged 21 and over and to women aged 30 and over who resided in the constituency or who occupied land or premises with a rateable value above £5, or whose husbands did. The passing of the Act brought millions of people into the franchise for the first time and required a huge expansion of the electoral registers. With so many being away from home on military duty, it also required careful management and the establishment of absent voters lists.
The method of collecting the necessary information within the army was defined in Army Council Instruction 540 of 16 May 1918.
The Representation of the People Act, 1918, makes special provision for the registration of members of the Military Forces. Every officer and man who is a British subject and will have attained the age of 19 years of age on 15 April 1918 is entitled to be registered as a Parliamentary elector for any constituency in which he would have been residing but for his service in the Army. A statement made by him in the “prescribed” form and verified in the “prescribed” manner that he would have had the necessary qualification for being registered but for his service, is to be treated as sufficient proof of qualification if there is no evidence to the contrary. …
The Act having become law, registration officers in all constituencies will immediately commence to prepare the registers and lists of absent voters …
Officers and soldiers serving at home:
a form of postcard (Army Form W.3940) embodying the “prescribed” form has been approved and will be distributed by officers commanding units amongst all officers and soldiers serving under their command. [This also applied to officers commanding hospitals, for men serving with that hospital and also those who were patients at the time][The officers commanding units would be responsible for obtaining a stock of forms] [Attention was drawn to ensuring the accuracy of stating the man’s unit and number and how to ensure the correct voter registration officer’s address was selected and inserted] [The officers commanding units would be responsible for passing the completed cards to the voter registration officers] No further action was required except in the cases of officers of the regular army and the Special Reserve, who would communicate personally with their respective voter registration officer by 30 June and 31 December annually and also inform them of any change of postal address.
Officers and soldiers serving in France and Italy:
the procedure was similar to that applying at home, except that officers commanding units would be automatically supplied wit a stock of forms. A stock would also be made available at all field post offices for men not serving with any recognised unit or being sick in any British military hospital.
Soldiers serving in distant fronts and garrisons (that is, anywhere other than home, France and Italy):
an Army Form W.3941, similar to 3940, would be used but filled in by the officer in charge of records for the man’s unit and not by the man himself. The home address to be given would be that of the wife (if the man was married) or next of kin (if unmarried or widower). “The address may not be the actual address that will qualify for the vote, but will enable the registration officer to get in touch with the soldier’s relatives and obtain information of the correct address. [A supply of Army Form W.3940 would also be sent for distribution under local arrangements so men could fill in the forms themselves if they so desired: the ACI recognised that this approach may be too slow to allow the information to be compiled for the first register of voters]
Officers serving in distant fronts and garrisons (that is, anywhere other than home, France and Italy):
officers of the regular army and Special Reserve would communicate personally with their respective voter registration officer or instruct their representatives at home to do so. [A supply of Army Form W.3940 would also be sent for distribution under local arrangements so officers could fill in the forms themselves][For officers of the Territorial Force the procedure would be the same as for non-commissioned men, above]
Women serving with the forces who, being 30 years of age, acquire a vote under Section 5 of the Act:
(a) Queen Mary’s Auxiliary Army Corps, Mobile Branch: Army Form W.3942 will be distributed or obtainable at home, France and elsewhere, as applicable, similarly to AF W.3940, above. Members of the Mobile Branch who are serving abroad or who are liable to be sent so at short notice will, if they are of the required age and required qualifications, complete this form, which will be counter-signed by an officer or administrator and addressed (to the respective voter registration officer). (b) Matrons, sisters and nurses of the Queen Alexandra’s Imperial Military Nursing Service and Territorial Force Nursing Service serving abroad, also members of Voluntary Aid Detachments employed in British military hospitals abroad, together with any other women serving with the forces overseas who draw pay from Parliamentary or Dominion funds may, if over 30 years and qualified, complete Army Form W.3942 and send it to the voters registration officer of the area in which they claim to be entitled to vote. They may, however, have to communicate personally with the officer from time to time and notify all changes of address.
On receipt of the information from Army Forms W.3940, 3941 and 3942 the voter registration officers will prepare the registers and list of absent voters.
When the registers are near completion the voter registration officers will send to each [Army] Record Office a list of military voters entered under that Record Office on the register of absent voters. The Record Office will verify the names and report all errors … and … inaugurate a card index by constituencies by each Corps which is affiliated to the Record Office. This index will show the present unit of every soldier who is a military voter and will, as a matter of day to day routine, be kept up to date.
The [Army] Record Office would then send to each voter registration officer on a half yearly basis an update on the unit with which each officer of the Territorial Force; each soldier; and each member of the Queen Mary’s Auxiliary Army Corps Mobile Branch was serving. This would include any additions of men and women since last submission. The Record Office would also inform the registration officer whenever the man was affected by a change of Corps which would require the transfer of his documents to a different office.
When an election was called, the [Army] Record Office would then send to each voter registration officer an update on the unit with which each officer of the Territorial Force; each soldier; and each member of the Queen Mary’s Auxiliary Army Corps Mobile Branch was serving. This would also show whether the unit was serving with the British Expeditionary Force, or was in the Home Forces, or was in a Proxy Area.
The voter registration officers would notify each military voter that was on his list, by post, that he was registered and that he or she would be entitled to vote using a form that would be sent to him or her, or, in the event that he or she was serving in a distant garrison, he or she would be entitled to vote by proxy.
When the election was imminent, the voter registration officer, now acting as returning officer, would sent the ballot papers to everyone on his list, unless they were serving in an area where voting by proxy was permitted. The voters were urged to return their ballot papers as soon as possible.
The ACI said that men serving with the 63rd (Royal Naval) Division (whose records were kept at the Admiralty) were not subject to the above and would receive instructions from the Admiralty.
The 1918 General Election
An election was called immediately after the Armistice and held on Saturday 14 December 1918 but not finalised until the soldiers votes had been received.
Ballot papers being sent by soldiers were considered to be in time to be counted if they arrived at their destination by 10am on 28 December 1918 (noon for those going to Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Devon and Cornwall). | 1,743 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Battle of Stirling's Plantation
Following the Siege of Vicksburg, Union Major General Francis J. Herron's Division of the Army of the Frontier was transferred down the Mississippi River to become a part of the 13th Corps. Arriving at Port Hudson on July 25, they remained there until August 13, 1863, when they were moved to Carrollton, above New Orleans.
Union Major General Nathaniel P. Banks had been ordered to invade and “plant the Flag in Texas”, which plans resulted in the Second Battle of Sabine Pass on September 8, 1863. As a part of his overall plan, Herron's division was to be transported to Morganza, Louisiana, below the mouth of the Red River. Both Confederate Brigadier General Tom Green's cavalry and Brigadier General Alfred Mouton’s small infantry division were operating on the upper Atchafalaya River. Herron's movement would distract the Confederates from the invasion of Texas, and they hoped it would prevent the Confederate forces from moving to Texas had the Sabine Pass effort been successful.
On September 5, Herron's division was dispatched up the Mississippi on transports and made a landing below Morganza on the 7th. On the 8th the entire force marched through Morganza, and down the Opelousas road, reaching the Atchafalaya in the late afternoon. They retired to the Fordoche and camped there for the night. The next day the Division marched to Morganza where they went into camp.
On September 11, Herron proposed to send a detachment back to the bridge over the Fordoche to monitor Confederate activity on the west bank of the Atchafalaya, and from Morganza in an attempt to draw out Green's cavalry from the west bank of the Atchafalaya. Lt. Col. Joseph Bloomfield Leake of the 20th Iowa was to be in command. A small provisional brigade was formed consisting of the 19th Iowa under Maj. John Bruce, the 26th Indiana under Col. A.D. Rose, a section of the 1st Mo. Light Artillery, and a battalion of the 6th Missouri Cavalry under Major Samuel Montgomery. To supplement the cavalry, a company of mounted infantry was created by drawing men from every regiment in the division and was led by Lt. Henry Walton of the 34th Iowa. The road from Morganza to the Fordoche crossing followed the east bank of Bayou Fordoche, running west to a point about three miles from Morganza, then following a turn in the bayou, ran south three and a half miles to a loop in the bayou by Norwood's plantation. Just west of Norwoods, the Opelousas Road forked to the northwest, crossed the Fordoche, and ran on to the Atchafalaya across from present day Melville, Louisiana.
Shortly after leaving Morganza, the force encountered Confederate pickets and skirmished with them throughout the day until they reached the Norwood plantation, about six miles from the Archafalaya, where they went into camp. The country was unknown and Leake had no adequate maps. Mouton saw Leake's exposed position as an opportunity to destroy this force around Fordoche Bridge.
Upon scouting the area on the 13th, Leake discovered that the position at Norwoods was not very tenable. There were several old roads and a half completed railbed in the vicinity that would make it easy for Confederates to move and get in his rear. Pickets and posts were set out and Leake requested to withdraw about a mile closer to the Stirling plantation, but this request was refused by Herron.
On the evening of the 15th Leake learned from a citizen and from Negroes that an attack was expected which resulted in his withdrawing north two miles to the Stirling plantation and establishing his camps there. This position, though better than Norwoods, still had defects due to the roads that gave the Confederates easy ability to move around the federal position.
A levee ran along the east side of the road by the Stirling plantation, and Leake had a gap cut in it north of the house so that artillery could be moved through it if necessary. Pickets were maintained constantly, but the force was so small that they were deemed to be inadequate, and the whole brigade was uneasy as to their position.
The Confederates were becoming increasingly visible, and were often observed in small groups between Stirlings and Morganza. Although Herron was apprised of the rebels between him and Leake, he took no efforts to secure their rear. Herron was ill, and on the evening of the 28th turned over the command to Major General Napoleon J.T. Dana, and left for New Orleans.
Mouton had realized the opportunity to gobble up this small force and on the 19th had ordered Green to plan an attack, with the final decision made on the 25th. Green's 3,000 troops were at Centerpoint on the Atchafalaya on the 28th and commenced crossing by ferry at 3:00 p.m. Wallers and Roundtree's cavalry battalions together with Semme's battery were crossed by dark. Next to cross were Speight's and Mouton's infantry brigades, and finally the 4th, 5th and 7th Texas Cavalry, the last crossing by 1:00 a.m. on the 29th. The weather was very rainy.
On the morning of the 29th Mouton's and Speight's brigades were sent by a trail through the woods and swamps that intersected the Opelousas road about two miles north of the Stirling plantation. Mouton was to remain in this position to block any relief force that might be sent from Morganza, and Speight's brigade would launch the primary attack on Leakes right and rear.
The balance of the Confederate cavalry marched via the road toward the Fordoche Bridge near the Norwood house. Arriving there around 11:00 a.m. and commenced skirmishing with the Federal cavalry pickets at the Fordoche bridge. After about a half hour, sounds of firing was heard to the north at the Stirling farm.
Just before noon, a shot was heard from the picket post north of camp at Stirling's, and then a number more shots were heard from the cane fields to the north and east of the house. Mouton had begun his attack. Leake ordered the artillery up the road and in position at the gap in the levee to fire across the cane fields. The 19th Iowa was ordered to a fence running east to west behind the house and commence firing. The 26th Indiana was then posted to the left of the 19th, facing west, and ordered to fire obliquely to the right.
For some reason, the artillery had not made it to the gap in the levee and were being moved by hand among the outbuildings behind the house, where they were totally useless.
Leake had available only 450 infantry, as so many were on picket. Both the 19th and 26th were pushed back from their position through the Stirling buildings, and took up a position on the levee, now facing east, with the levee serving as an excellent breastwork.
The Confederates were in overwhelming force, and initially attempted to turn the right of the 19th. The 26th was pulled out and placed on the 19ths right, with the 26th now facing south. Seeing the change in front, the Confederates now moved to their right and poured though the gap in the levee, attempting to turn the left flank of the 19th. The weather was hot and the men were spent. Leake had been shot in his foot, unhorsed and captured, and due to the confusion, no other officer assumed command.
Meanwhile, the Confederate cavalry had completely routed the federal cavalry to the south near the Norwood farm. The Federal cavalry streamed away toward Morganza with such rapidity that none of them were captured. The routed cavalry passed to the east of the Stirling plantation and the fight raging there. The infantry at Stirling's were so involved with their own fight that they were not aware of what had happened to their cavalry. Most of Green's cavalry were clothed in Union uniforms that had been captured at Brashear City three months before. With the flight of the Union cavalry, Green advanced his column up the road from Norwoods to the Sterling plantation. The Union infantry observed the advancing column and supposed them to be the 6th Missouri. Not until they were fired upon did the Union infantry realize that this was Green's cavalry coming in on their other flank. Vastly outnumbered, leaderless, and assailed from all sides, the Federals surrendered piecemeal.
Only a few Union infantry managed to escape. The Federals lost 16 dead, 45 wounded, and 454 prisoners. Confederate losses were 26 dead, 85 wounded and ten missing. Additionally, the Confederates took two ten pounder parrot rifles with caissons, two new ambulances, one hospital wagon loaded with medical supplies, and all of the arms of the captured men. Green quickly consolidated his prisoners and spoils and moved back to the river, crossing it as quickly as possible. The prisoners were then marched via Alexandria, Natchitoches, Mansfield and Shreveport to the Camp Ford prison camp near Tyler, Texas, where they arrived on October 23, 1863.
- ABPP: Stirling's Plantation
- Leake Diary, entries for September 7, 8 and 9, 1863
- Leake Diary, entries for September 11–12, 1863
- History of the 19th Iowa Infantry, pp 84-103
- Leake Diary, entries from September 29-October 24, 1863
- Bergeron, Arthur W., Guide to Louisiana Confederate Military Units 1861-1865. (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1989)
- Dungan, J. Irvine, History of the 19th Regiment Iowa Volunteer Infantry. (Davenport, Iowa: Publishing House of Luse and Griggs, 1865)
- "The Civil War Diary of Lt. Col J. B. Leake," edited by Randal B. Gilbert. Chronicles of Smith County, Texas. (Tyler, Texas: Smith County Historical Society, Vol. 41, No. 1, 1996)
- Irwin, Richard B. History of the 19th Army Corps [Facsimile reprint of 1892 edition]. (Baton Rouge: Elliot's Book Shop Press, 1985) | <urn:uuid:eabcd7b4-c3e1-4532-849f-a6d55e37c721> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Stirling's_Plantation | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595282.35/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119205448-20200119233448-00292.warc.gz | en | 0.982593 | 2,181 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
-0.22612488269805908,
0.24576301872730255,
0.02242601290345192,
-0.03762906417250633,
-0.1678803563117981,
-0.0756007730960846,
-0.6720401048660278,
-0.11984734237194061,
-0.25420358777046204,
-0.037158988416194916,
0.23701752722263336,
-0.6079380512237549,
0.10189944505691528,
0.237680941... | 1 | Battle of Stirling's Plantation
Following the Siege of Vicksburg, Union Major General Francis J. Herron's Division of the Army of the Frontier was transferred down the Mississippi River to become a part of the 13th Corps. Arriving at Port Hudson on July 25, they remained there until August 13, 1863, when they were moved to Carrollton, above New Orleans.
Union Major General Nathaniel P. Banks had been ordered to invade and “plant the Flag in Texas”, which plans resulted in the Second Battle of Sabine Pass on September 8, 1863. As a part of his overall plan, Herron's division was to be transported to Morganza, Louisiana, below the mouth of the Red River. Both Confederate Brigadier General Tom Green's cavalry and Brigadier General Alfred Mouton’s small infantry division were operating on the upper Atchafalaya River. Herron's movement would distract the Confederates from the invasion of Texas, and they hoped it would prevent the Confederate forces from moving to Texas had the Sabine Pass effort been successful.
On September 5, Herron's division was dispatched up the Mississippi on transports and made a landing below Morganza on the 7th. On the 8th the entire force marched through Morganza, and down the Opelousas road, reaching the Atchafalaya in the late afternoon. They retired to the Fordoche and camped there for the night. The next day the Division marched to Morganza where they went into camp.
On September 11, Herron proposed to send a detachment back to the bridge over the Fordoche to monitor Confederate activity on the west bank of the Atchafalaya, and from Morganza in an attempt to draw out Green's cavalry from the west bank of the Atchafalaya. Lt. Col. Joseph Bloomfield Leake of the 20th Iowa was to be in command. A small provisional brigade was formed consisting of the 19th Iowa under Maj. John Bruce, the 26th Indiana under Col. A.D. Rose, a section of the 1st Mo. Light Artillery, and a battalion of the 6th Missouri Cavalry under Major Samuel Montgomery. To supplement the cavalry, a company of mounted infantry was created by drawing men from every regiment in the division and was led by Lt. Henry Walton of the 34th Iowa. The road from Morganza to the Fordoche crossing followed the east bank of Bayou Fordoche, running west to a point about three miles from Morganza, then following a turn in the bayou, ran south three and a half miles to a loop in the bayou by Norwood's plantation. Just west of Norwoods, the Opelousas Road forked to the northwest, crossed the Fordoche, and ran on to the Atchafalaya across from present day Melville, Louisiana.
Shortly after leaving Morganza, the force encountered Confederate pickets and skirmished with them throughout the day until they reached the Norwood plantation, about six miles from the Archafalaya, where they went into camp. The country was unknown and Leake had no adequate maps. Mouton saw Leake's exposed position as an opportunity to destroy this force around Fordoche Bridge.
Upon scouting the area on the 13th, Leake discovered that the position at Norwoods was not very tenable. There were several old roads and a half completed railbed in the vicinity that would make it easy for Confederates to move and get in his rear. Pickets and posts were set out and Leake requested to withdraw about a mile closer to the Stirling plantation, but this request was refused by Herron.
On the evening of the 15th Leake learned from a citizen and from Negroes that an attack was expected which resulted in his withdrawing north two miles to the Stirling plantation and establishing his camps there. This position, though better than Norwoods, still had defects due to the roads that gave the Confederates easy ability to move around the federal position.
A levee ran along the east side of the road by the Stirling plantation, and Leake had a gap cut in it north of the house so that artillery could be moved through it if necessary. Pickets were maintained constantly, but the force was so small that they were deemed to be inadequate, and the whole brigade was uneasy as to their position.
The Confederates were becoming increasingly visible, and were often observed in small groups between Stirlings and Morganza. Although Herron was apprised of the rebels between him and Leake, he took no efforts to secure their rear. Herron was ill, and on the evening of the 28th turned over the command to Major General Napoleon J.T. Dana, and left for New Orleans.
Mouton had realized the opportunity to gobble up this small force and on the 19th had ordered Green to plan an attack, with the final decision made on the 25th. Green's 3,000 troops were at Centerpoint on the Atchafalaya on the 28th and commenced crossing by ferry at 3:00 p.m. Wallers and Roundtree's cavalry battalions together with Semme's battery were crossed by dark. Next to cross were Speight's and Mouton's infantry brigades, and finally the 4th, 5th and 7th Texas Cavalry, the last crossing by 1:00 a.m. on the 29th. The weather was very rainy.
On the morning of the 29th Mouton's and Speight's brigades were sent by a trail through the woods and swamps that intersected the Opelousas road about two miles north of the Stirling plantation. Mouton was to remain in this position to block any relief force that might be sent from Morganza, and Speight's brigade would launch the primary attack on Leakes right and rear.
The balance of the Confederate cavalry marched via the road toward the Fordoche Bridge near the Norwood house. Arriving there around 11:00 a.m. and commenced skirmishing with the Federal cavalry pickets at the Fordoche bridge. After about a half hour, sounds of firing was heard to the north at the Stirling farm.
Just before noon, a shot was heard from the picket post north of camp at Stirling's, and then a number more shots were heard from the cane fields to the north and east of the house. Mouton had begun his attack. Leake ordered the artillery up the road and in position at the gap in the levee to fire across the cane fields. The 19th Iowa was ordered to a fence running east to west behind the house and commence firing. The 26th Indiana was then posted to the left of the 19th, facing west, and ordered to fire obliquely to the right.
For some reason, the artillery had not made it to the gap in the levee and were being moved by hand among the outbuildings behind the house, where they were totally useless.
Leake had available only 450 infantry, as so many were on picket. Both the 19th and 26th were pushed back from their position through the Stirling buildings, and took up a position on the levee, now facing east, with the levee serving as an excellent breastwork.
The Confederates were in overwhelming force, and initially attempted to turn the right of the 19th. The 26th was pulled out and placed on the 19ths right, with the 26th now facing south. Seeing the change in front, the Confederates now moved to their right and poured though the gap in the levee, attempting to turn the left flank of the 19th. The weather was hot and the men were spent. Leake had been shot in his foot, unhorsed and captured, and due to the confusion, no other officer assumed command.
Meanwhile, the Confederate cavalry had completely routed the federal cavalry to the south near the Norwood farm. The Federal cavalry streamed away toward Morganza with such rapidity that none of them were captured. The routed cavalry passed to the east of the Stirling plantation and the fight raging there. The infantry at Stirling's were so involved with their own fight that they were not aware of what had happened to their cavalry. Most of Green's cavalry were clothed in Union uniforms that had been captured at Brashear City three months before. With the flight of the Union cavalry, Green advanced his column up the road from Norwoods to the Sterling plantation. The Union infantry observed the advancing column and supposed them to be the 6th Missouri. Not until they were fired upon did the Union infantry realize that this was Green's cavalry coming in on their other flank. Vastly outnumbered, leaderless, and assailed from all sides, the Federals surrendered piecemeal.
Only a few Union infantry managed to escape. The Federals lost 16 dead, 45 wounded, and 454 prisoners. Confederate losses were 26 dead, 85 wounded and ten missing. Additionally, the Confederates took two ten pounder parrot rifles with caissons, two new ambulances, one hospital wagon loaded with medical supplies, and all of the arms of the captured men. Green quickly consolidated his prisoners and spoils and moved back to the river, crossing it as quickly as possible. The prisoners were then marched via Alexandria, Natchitoches, Mansfield and Shreveport to the Camp Ford prison camp near Tyler, Texas, where they arrived on October 23, 1863.
- ABPP: Stirling's Plantation
- Leake Diary, entries for September 7, 8 and 9, 1863
- Leake Diary, entries for September 11–12, 1863
- History of the 19th Iowa Infantry, pp 84-103
- Leake Diary, entries from September 29-October 24, 1863
- Bergeron, Arthur W., Guide to Louisiana Confederate Military Units 1861-1865. (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1989)
- Dungan, J. Irvine, History of the 19th Regiment Iowa Volunteer Infantry. (Davenport, Iowa: Publishing House of Luse and Griggs, 1865)
- "The Civil War Diary of Lt. Col J. B. Leake," edited by Randal B. Gilbert. Chronicles of Smith County, Texas. (Tyler, Texas: Smith County Historical Society, Vol. 41, No. 1, 1996)
- Irwin, Richard B. History of the 19th Army Corps [Facsimile reprint of 1892 edition]. (Baton Rouge: Elliot's Book Shop Press, 1985) | 2,323 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Animals in the Great War
Animals in the Great War looks at the use of animals by all sides in the Great War and to what effect. In the main, it focuses greatly on horses, dogs and pigeons but also addresses the war efforts of other animals.
In the early years of the war horses were, to a large extent, the only form of transport that was available to the British Army, ranging from use by cavalry units, artillery units as well others such as the Army Ordnance Corps for the conveying of ammunition supplies to men fighting at the front. Britain sent an estimated one million horses to fight in the war, most of them to France and Belgium, but only 60,000 of them ever returned home, and only then were they returned because of the intervention of Winston Churchill.
Dogs also played a major role in the war, especially in the trenches on the Western Front. They were used as mascots by the different regiments and in some cases, they were companions for homesick soldiers. They were also used for sentry duties in the trenches as well as catching rats, and they were used as messengers and to sniff out wounded soldiers in No Man’s Land.
Besides their immediate handlers who looked after their everyday needs, there was the Royal Army Veterinary Corps to tend to their wounds after they had been injured in the execution of their duties.
Animals in the Great War explores how everyday domestic animals were transformed into remarkable wartime heroes, who more than did their bit for the war effort.
‘Animals in the Great War’ is now available to buy on Amazon. | <urn:uuid:c94a6887-6d29-49b1-86bf-fb77530c07c6> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.stephenwynn.co.uk/my-books/animals-in-the-great-war/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250628549.43/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125011232-20200125040232-00453.warc.gz | en | 0.989134 | 331 | 3.5625 | 4 | [
-0.05500318855047226,
-0.049929745495319366,
0.6479441523551941,
0.21042940020561218,
0.07855675369501114,
-0.30263832211494446,
0.16955310106277466,
0.45376360416412354,
-0.1396048218011856,
0.08814651519060135,
-0.04747813194990158,
-0.4734116196632385,
0.2477436363697052,
0.297992557287... | 6 | Animals in the Great War
Animals in the Great War looks at the use of animals by all sides in the Great War and to what effect. In the main, it focuses greatly on horses, dogs and pigeons but also addresses the war efforts of other animals.
In the early years of the war horses were, to a large extent, the only form of transport that was available to the British Army, ranging from use by cavalry units, artillery units as well others such as the Army Ordnance Corps for the conveying of ammunition supplies to men fighting at the front. Britain sent an estimated one million horses to fight in the war, most of them to France and Belgium, but only 60,000 of them ever returned home, and only then were they returned because of the intervention of Winston Churchill.
Dogs also played a major role in the war, especially in the trenches on the Western Front. They were used as mascots by the different regiments and in some cases, they were companions for homesick soldiers. They were also used for sentry duties in the trenches as well as catching rats, and they were used as messengers and to sniff out wounded soldiers in No Man’s Land.
Besides their immediate handlers who looked after their everyday needs, there was the Royal Army Veterinary Corps to tend to their wounds after they had been injured in the execution of their duties.
Animals in the Great War explores how everyday domestic animals were transformed into remarkable wartime heroes, who more than did their bit for the war effort.
‘Animals in the Great War’ is now available to buy on Amazon. | 326 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The most easily accessible examples of this for us to process can be found in the research of “split-brained” patients, individuals whose brain hemispheres were surgically disconnected. In work done by neuropsychologist Michael Gazzaniga, a patient would have images displayed to his right eye, which confers information to the left hemisphere of the brain, and he could easily identify and verbalize what he saw.
However, because verbal response is strongly reliant on the left-brain hemisphere, when the same patient had images displayed to his left eye, he would verbalize that he saw nothing. And to him, this was the absolute truth. But fascinatingly, when further prompted to draw with his left hand, the patient would sketch accurate pictures of the stimuli with which he had just been presented. So, verbally he would admit that he had seen nothing, when in fact, his right brain hemisphere would be able to communicate honestly what it had seen through a non-verbal medium. When further questioned by researchers about why he was drawing the particular objects he was, the patient again would answer “truthfully” that he had no idea.
How often do we consciously verbalize a truth that just isn’t so? It is likely impossible to know, given that we might interpret our words as objective truths, just as this patient had. | <urn:uuid:32640fce-07fd-4283-85cf-312d36e98c1e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://parentalalienation-pas.com/2019/12/13/how-the-subconscious-mind-controls-our-own-conscious-truths/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251671078.88/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125071430-20200125100430-00034.warc.gz | en | 0.984536 | 277 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
0.12249039858579636,
-0.02743552066385746,
-0.0031201045494526625,
0.03453204408288002,
-0.3090157210826874,
0.3029877543449402,
0.8764532208442688,
0.29077836871147156,
-0.001977909356355667,
0.07789572328329086,
-0.02029125578701496,
-0.15607760846614838,
-0.43043118715286255,
0.43196731... | 2 | The most easily accessible examples of this for us to process can be found in the research of “split-brained” patients, individuals whose brain hemispheres were surgically disconnected. In work done by neuropsychologist Michael Gazzaniga, a patient would have images displayed to his right eye, which confers information to the left hemisphere of the brain, and he could easily identify and verbalize what he saw.
However, because verbal response is strongly reliant on the left-brain hemisphere, when the same patient had images displayed to his left eye, he would verbalize that he saw nothing. And to him, this was the absolute truth. But fascinatingly, when further prompted to draw with his left hand, the patient would sketch accurate pictures of the stimuli with which he had just been presented. So, verbally he would admit that he had seen nothing, when in fact, his right brain hemisphere would be able to communicate honestly what it had seen through a non-verbal medium. When further questioned by researchers about why he was drawing the particular objects he was, the patient again would answer “truthfully” that he had no idea.
How often do we consciously verbalize a truth that just isn’t so? It is likely impossible to know, given that we might interpret our words as objective truths, just as this patient had. | 268 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Slavery is the big theme in The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, since he wrote his book to convince people that slavery was wrong. For Douglass, the important thing was that everything he said about slavery was true.
And since he had plenty to say on the subject, the book remains one of most important historical documents from that period, showing us the kinds of lives that American slaves like Douglass lived.
In his autobiography, Douglass describes two different kinds of freedom: while legal freedom can be given or taken away by the government, personal freedom is something that comes from within.
Douglass argues that slaves aren't the only victims of slavery. Perhaps because he's writing a book for a mostly white audience, he focuses on how slavery corrupts every American who takes part in it.
Frederick Douglass believed that all people are created equal. But he also believed that we weren't just born free: we have to make ourselves into who we are. S
o education and self-improvement are incredibly important to him. The worst thing about slavery, to his mind, is that it prevents people from improving themselves through education. In fact, he argues in The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass that slavery and education are completely opposite things. He works towards making himself free by expanding his horizons though reading. He still has to physically escape, of course, but it's his education that gives him the strength of will to make it happen.
In order to be truly free, Douglass needs an education. He cannot escape until he has learned to read, write, and think for himself about what slavery really is.
Since literacy and education are such an important part of Douglass's growth, the act of writing the Narrative is his final step in becoming free. In a sense, the story he tells in the book doesn't end until he's written the book itself.
In,The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Frederick Douglass doesn't start out with much of a family. His father is probably his white master, or some other white rapist. He barely knows his mother: he only remembers meeting her a handful of times before she died, and he wasn't even allowed to go to her funeral.
So when he talks about family, it's as something that slavery prevented him from ever having. Almost the only time he even mentions his cousins and grandmother, for example, is when he's telling the story about how his grandmother watched all her children and grandchildren get sold away from her, never to be seen again. And though he doesn't say much about his own marriage, he can only get married (and start his own family) after he escapes to freedom.
One of the greatest tragedies of slavery is that the slave has no family, because this loss can never be fixed. Even after Douglass becomes free, he still has no mother or father.
Part Douglass's journey throughout The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass is his discovery of what slavery really is.
When he is young, he doesn't really understand what it means to be a slave; he only starts to get it when he sees his Aunt Hester being whipped by his master. His real introduction to suffering occurs when he goes to work for Covey, and it's here that he learns to overcome suffering. When he vows to die rather than let himself be whipped again, he gains the strength of will he will eventually need for his journey north to freedom.
Before Douglass can become free, he has to learn the truth about slavery. Since the truth can only be found in great pain and loss, he has to survive through tremendous suffering before he can really become free. In other words, the path to freedom is through suffering.
The American constitution was amended after the Civil War, but in the original version, not only was slavery legal, but a slave was counted as precisely three-fifths of a person. So Frederick Douglass puts a lot of time and energy in The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass arguing that slaves are Americans, too.
In fact, when he mentions American hero Patrick Henry, he's even making the case that the slaves who fight for their freedom are at least as American as founding fathers like Henry, since they're just as willing to die for their freedom as he was.
By comparing escaped slaves to Patrick Henry, Douglass suggests that slaves fighting for their freedom are the true patriots.
Since Douglass believes that a slaveholding nation cannot truly live up to the ideals of the Constitution, he believes that the South is unfaithful to the American spirit.
When Frederick Douglass is deciding whether to risk running away to freedom, he finds it hard to leave behind his friends. Many slaves, in fact, preferred to stay enslaved rather than leave their communities for a strange new place.
Even though Douglass values friendship, he also wants to remind us in The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass that leaving friends behind and striking out on our own is sometimes the right decision.
In the South, friends are a problem. When Douglass tries to escape with his friends, one of them betrays the group and prevents the others from escaping. And many slaves never want to escape to the North at all, since they would have to leave their friends behind.
Even though escaped slaves have finally won their independence, ironically they are all the more in need of friends in the North. Without help, they would never be able to hold on to that hard-won freedom.
Frederick Douglass's friends in the abolitionist movement were all extremely faithful Christians, but, in The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Douglass has some really harsh criticisms for slave owners who claim to be Christians. (Douglass believes that a person can't both be a Christian and a slave owner.)
Not only does Douglass hate hypocrites, but he also tells us that religious slave owners are even worse than those who don't pretend to be religious. This sometimes got Douglass in trouble with Christians who thought he was attacking them instead of religious imposters. (That's why he wrote an entire appendix just to explain that he was against religious hypocrisy, not religion itself.)
For Douglass, religion isn't about what you do on Sunday; it's what you do the rest of the week that counts. Slaveholders who go to church, he believes, are not real Christians.
Frederick Douglass makes a big deal of the fact that The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass is true, and so do Wendell Phillips and William Lloyd Garrison in their prefaces.
They all did this because they knew that people rarely argued in favor of slavery as it actually was; instead, people who were pro-slavery imagined a version of slavery where Black people were happy being slaves. Slavery, according to Douglass, was synonymous with deception, so it's no surprise that people like Mr. Covey are master deceivers. But in a way, this makes Douglass's job easier: all he had to do was truthfully describe the things he had seen and experienced as a slave.
Slavery can only exist when people don't know how bad it really is. This is why slave owners tried to prevent Douglass from telling his story.
Slavery can only work when the slaves themselves are tricked into misunderstanding what it really is. This is why slave masters try to prevent slaves from being able to read or learn about freedom any other way. | <urn:uuid:42b1cf63-1c3e-4342-ba8e-574bdb3b20ed> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.shmoop.com/study-guides/literature/life-of-frederick-douglass/themes | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597458.22/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120052454-20200120080454-00167.warc.gz | en | 0.986015 | 1,548 | 4 | 4 | [
-0.0014989636838436127,
0.4414697587490082,
0.2859169542789459,
0.05375988781452179,
-0.01977420784533024,
0.11079315841197968,
-0.048546407371759415,
-0.32772502303123474,
0.11454950273036957,
0.12233796715736389,
0.11871225386857986,
0.1714714765548706,
-0.39726269245147705,
0.2510783970... | 1 | Slavery is the big theme in The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, since he wrote his book to convince people that slavery was wrong. For Douglass, the important thing was that everything he said about slavery was true.
And since he had plenty to say on the subject, the book remains one of most important historical documents from that period, showing us the kinds of lives that American slaves like Douglass lived.
In his autobiography, Douglass describes two different kinds of freedom: while legal freedom can be given or taken away by the government, personal freedom is something that comes from within.
Douglass argues that slaves aren't the only victims of slavery. Perhaps because he's writing a book for a mostly white audience, he focuses on how slavery corrupts every American who takes part in it.
Frederick Douglass believed that all people are created equal. But he also believed that we weren't just born free: we have to make ourselves into who we are. S
o education and self-improvement are incredibly important to him. The worst thing about slavery, to his mind, is that it prevents people from improving themselves through education. In fact, he argues in The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass that slavery and education are completely opposite things. He works towards making himself free by expanding his horizons though reading. He still has to physically escape, of course, but it's his education that gives him the strength of will to make it happen.
In order to be truly free, Douglass needs an education. He cannot escape until he has learned to read, write, and think for himself about what slavery really is.
Since literacy and education are such an important part of Douglass's growth, the act of writing the Narrative is his final step in becoming free. In a sense, the story he tells in the book doesn't end until he's written the book itself.
In,The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Frederick Douglass doesn't start out with much of a family. His father is probably his white master, or some other white rapist. He barely knows his mother: he only remembers meeting her a handful of times before she died, and he wasn't even allowed to go to her funeral.
So when he talks about family, it's as something that slavery prevented him from ever having. Almost the only time he even mentions his cousins and grandmother, for example, is when he's telling the story about how his grandmother watched all her children and grandchildren get sold away from her, never to be seen again. And though he doesn't say much about his own marriage, he can only get married (and start his own family) after he escapes to freedom.
One of the greatest tragedies of slavery is that the slave has no family, because this loss can never be fixed. Even after Douglass becomes free, he still has no mother or father.
Part Douglass's journey throughout The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass is his discovery of what slavery really is.
When he is young, he doesn't really understand what it means to be a slave; he only starts to get it when he sees his Aunt Hester being whipped by his master. His real introduction to suffering occurs when he goes to work for Covey, and it's here that he learns to overcome suffering. When he vows to die rather than let himself be whipped again, he gains the strength of will he will eventually need for his journey north to freedom.
Before Douglass can become free, he has to learn the truth about slavery. Since the truth can only be found in great pain and loss, he has to survive through tremendous suffering before he can really become free. In other words, the path to freedom is through suffering.
The American constitution was amended after the Civil War, but in the original version, not only was slavery legal, but a slave was counted as precisely three-fifths of a person. So Frederick Douglass puts a lot of time and energy in The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass arguing that slaves are Americans, too.
In fact, when he mentions American hero Patrick Henry, he's even making the case that the slaves who fight for their freedom are at least as American as founding fathers like Henry, since they're just as willing to die for their freedom as he was.
By comparing escaped slaves to Patrick Henry, Douglass suggests that slaves fighting for their freedom are the true patriots.
Since Douglass believes that a slaveholding nation cannot truly live up to the ideals of the Constitution, he believes that the South is unfaithful to the American spirit.
When Frederick Douglass is deciding whether to risk running away to freedom, he finds it hard to leave behind his friends. Many slaves, in fact, preferred to stay enslaved rather than leave their communities for a strange new place.
Even though Douglass values friendship, he also wants to remind us in The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass that leaving friends behind and striking out on our own is sometimes the right decision.
In the South, friends are a problem. When Douglass tries to escape with his friends, one of them betrays the group and prevents the others from escaping. And many slaves never want to escape to the North at all, since they would have to leave their friends behind.
Even though escaped slaves have finally won their independence, ironically they are all the more in need of friends in the North. Without help, they would never be able to hold on to that hard-won freedom.
Frederick Douglass's friends in the abolitionist movement were all extremely faithful Christians, but, in The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Douglass has some really harsh criticisms for slave owners who claim to be Christians. (Douglass believes that a person can't both be a Christian and a slave owner.)
Not only does Douglass hate hypocrites, but he also tells us that religious slave owners are even worse than those who don't pretend to be religious. This sometimes got Douglass in trouble with Christians who thought he was attacking them instead of religious imposters. (That's why he wrote an entire appendix just to explain that he was against religious hypocrisy, not religion itself.)
For Douglass, religion isn't about what you do on Sunday; it's what you do the rest of the week that counts. Slaveholders who go to church, he believes, are not real Christians.
Frederick Douglass makes a big deal of the fact that The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass is true, and so do Wendell Phillips and William Lloyd Garrison in their prefaces.
They all did this because they knew that people rarely argued in favor of slavery as it actually was; instead, people who were pro-slavery imagined a version of slavery where Black people were happy being slaves. Slavery, according to Douglass, was synonymous with deception, so it's no surprise that people like Mr. Covey are master deceivers. But in a way, this makes Douglass's job easier: all he had to do was truthfully describe the things he had seen and experienced as a slave.
Slavery can only exist when people don't know how bad it really is. This is why slave owners tried to prevent Douglass from telling his story.
Slavery can only work when the slaves themselves are tricked into misunderstanding what it really is. This is why slave masters try to prevent slaves from being able to read or learn about freedom any other way. | 1,511 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Indian Ramayana epic, a story approximately 2,400 years old, has had a great influence on Balinese arts and culture for centuries. The Ramayana is an extensive epic ascribed to the Sanskrit poet Valmiki. Composed of 24,000 verses in seven books, the core story centers on King Rama and his quest to rescue his wife Sita from the demon king Ravana. However, many other narratives are interwoven with Rama’s story, such as the one in our play Subali-Sugriwa: Battle of the Monkey Kings which is based on Book Four of the epic. It is set in the monkey kingdom of Kiskanda, where Rama and his brother Laksmana encounter Sugriwa, and help him in his fight against his brother Subali. This in turn is a means for Rama to gain the assistance of the monkey king in his own quest to rescue his beloved Sita. | <urn:uuid:9a18b87e-bfaf-4716-90c5-ba484ca77415> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://wayanglistrikhawaii.wordpress.com/the-ramayana/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00018.warc.gz | en | 0.985323 | 197 | 3.46875 | 3 | [
-0.09160543978214264,
0.52967768907547,
-0.27488163113594055,
0.05368221551179886,
-0.3697931468486786,
0.2374279648065567,
0.16496026515960693,
0.1413566768169403,
0.07538673281669617,
-0.08287784457206726,
-0.15357914566993713,
-0.38421356678009033,
0.5189648866653442,
0.5885534882545471... | 2 | The Indian Ramayana epic, a story approximately 2,400 years old, has had a great influence on Balinese arts and culture for centuries. The Ramayana is an extensive epic ascribed to the Sanskrit poet Valmiki. Composed of 24,000 verses in seven books, the core story centers on King Rama and his quest to rescue his wife Sita from the demon king Ravana. However, many other narratives are interwoven with Rama’s story, such as the one in our play Subali-Sugriwa: Battle of the Monkey Kings which is based on Book Four of the epic. It is set in the monkey kingdom of Kiskanda, where Rama and his brother Laksmana encounter Sugriwa, and help him in his fight against his brother Subali. This in turn is a means for Rama to gain the assistance of the monkey king in his own quest to rescue his beloved Sita. | 201 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Cuban Missile Crisis
After receiving this news, President John F. Kennedy started weighing his options. He considered an invasion of Cuba, air strikes of the missile sites, or a blockade of the country, and decided on the latter. The president placed a blockade on Cuba to prevent any more shipments of missiles from the Soviet Union.
On October 22, 1962, President Kennedy announced the quarantine and warned the Soviets that U.S. forces would confiscate all offensive weapons and any materials that went with the weapons. During the days that followed, the Soviet ships that were heading to Cuba had changed course, steering away from the blockades. The two countries, the United States and Russia were on the brink of a full out nuclear war. This would be come to be known as the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Although there was a lot of rigidity on both sides, President Kennedy and Soviet Premier Khrushchev had messages sent between them to try and curb the potential attack against U.S. soil. Finally, on October 28. Nikita Khrushchev and President Kennedy finally came to terms and the Soviet leader said that the work on the missile sites would be stopped and the missiles in Cuba would be returned to the Soviet Union.
President Kennedy told Khrushchev that the United States will never invade Cuba, for his concession. Kennedy also promised to withdraw the nuclear missiles that the United States had stationed in Turkey, several years earlier. At the time, the deal about the missile withdrawal from Turkey was not public knowledge. This deal was made in secret. During the weeks that followed, both sides began fulfilling their promised obligations and Cuba’s communist leader, Fidel Castro was angered that Khrushchev had kowtowed to the demands of the United States, but could do nothing to stop it.
The Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest the United States had come to a nuclear war with the Soviet Union and it is also believed that the backing down of Khrushchev, played a big role in his fall from power in the Soviet Union in 1964.
Editor's Picks Articles
Top Ten Articles
Content copyright © 2019 by Vance Rowe. All rights reserved.
This content was written by Vance Rowe. If you wish to use this content in any manner, you need written permission. Contact Clare Stubbs for details. | <urn:uuid:87dfb13e-4f7e-443c-870f-8ab1a82b0398> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art181870.asp | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00139.warc.gz | en | 0.982183 | 467 | 3.65625 | 4 | [
-0.6236010193824768,
-0.021263249218463898,
-0.007192553021013737,
0.10640306025743484,
0.5633751153945923,
0.12905721366405487,
0.02618200145661831,
-0.14007829129695892,
-0.3053649365901947,
-0.17838020622730255,
0.1930946260690689,
0.3315952718257904,
0.045897409319877625,
0.46181979775... | 1 | The Cuban Missile Crisis
After receiving this news, President John F. Kennedy started weighing his options. He considered an invasion of Cuba, air strikes of the missile sites, or a blockade of the country, and decided on the latter. The president placed a blockade on Cuba to prevent any more shipments of missiles from the Soviet Union.
On October 22, 1962, President Kennedy announced the quarantine and warned the Soviets that U.S. forces would confiscate all offensive weapons and any materials that went with the weapons. During the days that followed, the Soviet ships that were heading to Cuba had changed course, steering away from the blockades. The two countries, the United States and Russia were on the brink of a full out nuclear war. This would be come to be known as the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Although there was a lot of rigidity on both sides, President Kennedy and Soviet Premier Khrushchev had messages sent between them to try and curb the potential attack against U.S. soil. Finally, on October 28. Nikita Khrushchev and President Kennedy finally came to terms and the Soviet leader said that the work on the missile sites would be stopped and the missiles in Cuba would be returned to the Soviet Union.
President Kennedy told Khrushchev that the United States will never invade Cuba, for his concession. Kennedy also promised to withdraw the nuclear missiles that the United States had stationed in Turkey, several years earlier. At the time, the deal about the missile withdrawal from Turkey was not public knowledge. This deal was made in secret. During the weeks that followed, both sides began fulfilling their promised obligations and Cuba’s communist leader, Fidel Castro was angered that Khrushchev had kowtowed to the demands of the United States, but could do nothing to stop it.
The Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest the United States had come to a nuclear war with the Soviet Union and it is also believed that the backing down of Khrushchev, played a big role in his fall from power in the Soviet Union in 1964.
Editor's Picks Articles
Top Ten Articles
Content copyright © 2019 by Vance Rowe. All rights reserved.
This content was written by Vance Rowe. If you wish to use this content in any manner, you need written permission. Contact Clare Stubbs for details. | 484 | ENGLISH | 1 |
William Cullen Bryant is one of the most influential people of his time. He was born on November 3, 1794. He is most well-known for writing his poem “Thanatopsis”, which would roughly translate from Greek to “a meditation upon death” in English. This poem is by far his most popular poem. He spent majority of his life studying law, then died as the editor of the New York Evening Post. He was extremely politically fueled and also did not agree with the commonly accepted view of heaven and religion; this idea is shown in his poem. Overall, William Cullen Bryant is the most important American romantic poet of his time.
Poets such as Bryant have forever been trying to write their thoughts and feelings down on paper. They write their words like a painter lays their brush to a canvas. They express ideas that not only exemplify the beauty of life and nature, but also the darkest side of one’s life; death. This notion of death is what most people see as a sad ending to a life filled with beauty, though William Cullen Bryant does not see death in that way. In his poem “Thanatopsis” he offers an optimistic outlook on death. He views it as nothing more than the moment you become one with nature and venture through its beauty for all eternity. It is truly a work of art. This is shown by the use of his effective writing skills he uses skills such as, alliteration, similes and personification that make the poem come alive, just as a painter strives to make his art come alive. Also, this poem is art due to the deep thinking required to grasp its concept of death, you cannot read it just once you must read in between the lines and analyze what the poet is saying.
I believe this is art because it truly brings out the emotions of the reader throughout the poem. It confronts the feelings of a reader who fears death. The poem expresses the sorrows that a person feels during death, but, it is quick to offer a comforting tone. This idea is shown when Bryant says that when thoughts of death arise go to nature to be comforted (8-15). This Cleary expresses Bryant’s opinion that nature is one of the most powerful forces in the universe. Furthermore, he goes on to say that we should not fear death when he states “…All that breath / will share thy destiny…’’ (60-61). this quote puts death into perspective, Saying that everyone who is living right now will share the same fate as you. Throughout the poem Bryant mentions nature and death multiple times. He sees them as being intertwined, where death is an opportunity to become one with nature and truly explore its beauty. An appropriate theme for this poem is to not be fearful of death, in fact, accept it, because nature and its beauty will be there for all eternity. In normal writing it would be hard to express such deep feelings such as theses but, William Cullen Bryant does an amazing job. This goes to prove further more why this poetry is art.
This poem expresses those thoughts and feelings so vividly, but, it does so... | <urn:uuid:481c78f6-839a-4edd-b91c-6bb79745dd98> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://brightkite.com/essay-on/adversity-4 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00469.warc.gz | en | 0.981541 | 649 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
-0.17752030491828918,
-0.14261525869369507,
0.27825963497161865,
0.0716162621974945,
-0.014008588157594204,
0.13505655527114868,
0.6087178587913513,
0.06047184020280838,
0.05664549767971039,
-0.4081754684448242,
-0.011770198121666908,
-0.06499475240707397,
0.1294536590576172,
0.31915766000... | 1 | William Cullen Bryant is one of the most influential people of his time. He was born on November 3, 1794. He is most well-known for writing his poem “Thanatopsis”, which would roughly translate from Greek to “a meditation upon death” in English. This poem is by far his most popular poem. He spent majority of his life studying law, then died as the editor of the New York Evening Post. He was extremely politically fueled and also did not agree with the commonly accepted view of heaven and religion; this idea is shown in his poem. Overall, William Cullen Bryant is the most important American romantic poet of his time.
Poets such as Bryant have forever been trying to write their thoughts and feelings down on paper. They write their words like a painter lays their brush to a canvas. They express ideas that not only exemplify the beauty of life and nature, but also the darkest side of one’s life; death. This notion of death is what most people see as a sad ending to a life filled with beauty, though William Cullen Bryant does not see death in that way. In his poem “Thanatopsis” he offers an optimistic outlook on death. He views it as nothing more than the moment you become one with nature and venture through its beauty for all eternity. It is truly a work of art. This is shown by the use of his effective writing skills he uses skills such as, alliteration, similes and personification that make the poem come alive, just as a painter strives to make his art come alive. Also, this poem is art due to the deep thinking required to grasp its concept of death, you cannot read it just once you must read in between the lines and analyze what the poet is saying.
I believe this is art because it truly brings out the emotions of the reader throughout the poem. It confronts the feelings of a reader who fears death. The poem expresses the sorrows that a person feels during death, but, it is quick to offer a comforting tone. This idea is shown when Bryant says that when thoughts of death arise go to nature to be comforted (8-15). This Cleary expresses Bryant’s opinion that nature is one of the most powerful forces in the universe. Furthermore, he goes on to say that we should not fear death when he states “…All that breath / will share thy destiny…’’ (60-61). this quote puts death into perspective, Saying that everyone who is living right now will share the same fate as you. Throughout the poem Bryant mentions nature and death multiple times. He sees them as being intertwined, where death is an opportunity to become one with nature and truly explore its beauty. An appropriate theme for this poem is to not be fearful of death, in fact, accept it, because nature and its beauty will be there for all eternity. In normal writing it would be hard to express such deep feelings such as theses but, William Cullen Bryant does an amazing job. This goes to prove further more why this poetry is art.
This poem expresses those thoughts and feelings so vividly, but, it does so... | 640 | ENGLISH | 1 |
About this church
This beautiful atmospheric church dates back to the 12th century, but it was during the reign of Henry VIII that All Saints gained notoriety.
Henry VIII was a formidable king and anyone courageous enough to oppose him knew the likely consequences. Henry was seeking to dismantle much of the traditional church in Lincolnshire. The King’s envoy was sent to Lincoln Cathedral to read out the King’s proclamation. Thomas Retford was present and he noticed that some of the most contentious passages were omitted and so he demanded that the document was read out in full. As a result of his actions he was put to death as a member of the ‘Lincolnshire Rising’.
All Saints contains beautiful carved stone medieval faces and a rare ‘Leper’s window’ that enabled succour to be passed to those with leprosy who had to stay outside the church. There is also an ancient sundial hidden in the stonework outside. | <urn:uuid:25370770-7e2d-43c9-8cc7-9817887456c2> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.explorechurches.org/church/all-saints-snelland | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00428.warc.gz | en | 0.984619 | 198 | 3.40625 | 3 | [
-0.11675337702035904,
0.39339470863342285,
0.09650037437677383,
0.14952293038368225,
0.02167319692671299,
-0.23219715058803558,
0.2640499472618103,
-0.1401498019695282,
-0.009761402383446693,
-0.29867321252822876,
-0.1944035440683365,
-0.3165525794029236,
0.13795998692512512,
0.31003016233... | 4 | About this church
This beautiful atmospheric church dates back to the 12th century, but it was during the reign of Henry VIII that All Saints gained notoriety.
Henry VIII was a formidable king and anyone courageous enough to oppose him knew the likely consequences. Henry was seeking to dismantle much of the traditional church in Lincolnshire. The King’s envoy was sent to Lincoln Cathedral to read out the King’s proclamation. Thomas Retford was present and he noticed that some of the most contentious passages were omitted and so he demanded that the document was read out in full. As a result of his actions he was put to death as a member of the ‘Lincolnshire Rising’.
All Saints contains beautiful carved stone medieval faces and a rare ‘Leper’s window’ that enabled succour to be passed to those with leprosy who had to stay outside the church. There is also an ancient sundial hidden in the stonework outside. | 190 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Making the Bed South African leader Nelson Mandela was known for many things, not the least of which was his humility even after he became famous around the world. Mandela always made his own bed, no matter where he traveled. One time, he was visiting Shanghai, where he stayed in a very fancy hotel. Chinese hospitality requires that you allow the maid to clean your room. Doing it yourself can be regarded as an insult. An aide tried to explain this to Mandela. In response, the leader asked for his maids to be sent up to his room. The aide talked to the hotel manager, and soon Mandela was speaking to the staff. He explained that he always made his own bed wherever he was, and the maids agreed. “He never really cared about what great big people think of him,” the aide wrote later, “but he did care about what small people thought of him.” Act of Forgiveness During World War II, only one Japanese pilot managed to drop a bomb on the U.S. mainland. He was Nobuo Fujita, and he flew a long-range bomber across the Pacific to Oregon, where he dropped his payload over the city of Brookings and then returned successfully home. Years later, Fujita traveled back to Brookings to apologize, giving the city his family’s sword as a way of asking forgiveness. Not only did the town leaders forgive him, they made him an honorary citizen. Punctuation Is Powerful Maria Feodorovna, the wife of Tsar Alexander III of Russia, was known for her charitable works. According to one story, she once saved a condemned man from exile in Siberia by moving a single comma in the warrant signed by her husband. The original document read: “Pardon impossible, to be sent to Siberia.” The Empress moved the comma, so the warrant read: “Pardon, impossible to be sent to Siberia.” The man was saved and released. | <urn:uuid:d382bf57-acaa-4044-9ffe-ae6026053bd5> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://jpblackbelt.blog/2016/11/16/misc-fun-stories/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694908.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127051112-20200127081112-00247.warc.gz | en | 0.987014 | 400 | 3.40625 | 3 | [
-0.3192163109779358,
0.8194935917854309,
-0.16864953935146332,
-0.15575607120990753,
0.06194048374891281,
-0.02463129162788391,
0.6349762678146362,
-0.4850027859210968,
-0.10765846073627472,
0.34157031774520874,
0.5229230523109436,
-0.08111941069364548,
0.041446950286626816,
0.436678737401... | 3 | Making the Bed South African leader Nelson Mandela was known for many things, not the least of which was his humility even after he became famous around the world. Mandela always made his own bed, no matter where he traveled. One time, he was visiting Shanghai, where he stayed in a very fancy hotel. Chinese hospitality requires that you allow the maid to clean your room. Doing it yourself can be regarded as an insult. An aide tried to explain this to Mandela. In response, the leader asked for his maids to be sent up to his room. The aide talked to the hotel manager, and soon Mandela was speaking to the staff. He explained that he always made his own bed wherever he was, and the maids agreed. “He never really cared about what great big people think of him,” the aide wrote later, “but he did care about what small people thought of him.” Act of Forgiveness During World War II, only one Japanese pilot managed to drop a bomb on the U.S. mainland. He was Nobuo Fujita, and he flew a long-range bomber across the Pacific to Oregon, where he dropped his payload over the city of Brookings and then returned successfully home. Years later, Fujita traveled back to Brookings to apologize, giving the city his family’s sword as a way of asking forgiveness. Not only did the town leaders forgive him, they made him an honorary citizen. Punctuation Is Powerful Maria Feodorovna, the wife of Tsar Alexander III of Russia, was known for her charitable works. According to one story, she once saved a condemned man from exile in Siberia by moving a single comma in the warrant signed by her husband. The original document read: “Pardon impossible, to be sent to Siberia.” The Empress moved the comma, so the warrant read: “Pardon, impossible to be sent to Siberia.” The man was saved and released. | 388 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Royal Mail Steamer (RMS) Titanic was built by the White Star Company in the UK and owned by American tycoon J.P Morgan. The Titanic met its fate while on its maiden voyage to New York when it struck an iceberg and sank two hours later in the early morning of April 15, 1912, in the Northern Atlantic Ocean. A total of 2,224 people boarded the ship during its sail and a sum of 1,514 people perished.
The name 'Titanic' is a Greek methodology which means gigantic. It took a total of 3,000 men to build the ship over the span of two years. Construction of the Titanic commenced on March 31, 1909, at Queens Island in Belfast Harbor. The ship was 882 feet long and 92.5 at its widest point with its hull held together by approximately three million steel and iron rivets. This ship had two anchors on the sides and one more in the middle which weighed about 16 tons and was the largest anchor ever made by hand up until that time. Construction was a dangerous task, the workers did not wear safety gear and by the end of construction about 246 people had injuries, and nine died, one of them on the day of the launch. The launch of the RMS Titanic was on May 31, 1911, and its sea trials began on April 2, 1912. Test trials were inclusive of tests of its handling characteristics, its speed, its ability to take turns, and its agility to crash-stop. On April 4, it arrived at port’s Berth to await her passengers and crew for the maiden trip.
The Iceberg, Collision, and Damage
Titanic had been sailing for four days when on April 10, at 11:40pm, the lookout on duty spotted an iceberg directly on the ship’s path. At this time, they only saw the tip of the iceberg but were unaware of its massive size underneath. Unfortunately, in an attempt to reverse the ship, the very motion plunged the ship forward which caused the iceberg to dent the side of the hull causing water to seep into the ship. The ship had received many warnings from other ships about floating ice, however, Titanic continued on at high speed with a schedule to keep. At the time, ships speeding and floating ice was not uncommon. This ship had five watertight compartments, however, these compartments had openings at the top which allowed water to flood in from one to the other. Had only four of the compartments flooded, the ship would have remained afloat, unfortunately, all five flooded.
Casualties and Survivors
As the Titanic began to sink, the ill-prepared crew began attempts to evacuate those on board. There were enough lifeboats for half the people on board. Women and children were the first priority in the evacuation which left the men and crew on board while the people on the lower decks got trapped. In the confusion of the moment, the first boat left with only 28 people although it could have carried 64 people. In total, 472 lifeboat seats not used. As the last of the ship sank, the few remaining people on board died some minutes later as the water temperature at the time was slightly above freezing point. Some people plunged to their deaths while the ship rose to a vertical angle as it sank. At dawn, the rescue team recovered 300 bodies in lifejackets while the rest drifted in the currents at sea. The RMS Carpathia bore the 710 survivors of the ill-fated ship to New York where they arrived April 18, 1912. The the 100th anniversary of the Titanic occurred on April 14th, 2012.
How Many People Died On The Titanic?
Of the 2,224 people aboard the ship, 1,514 people perished during the sinking of the Titanic in the early morning of April 15, 1912. The Titanic met its fate while on its maiden voyage to New York when it struck an iceberg and sank two hours later.
About the Author
Mark is a student at Maseno University and community commentator in Kenya. Mark also has interests in geography, African history, and international development.
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:f33d5dad-5ef4-4a6f-8a12-063ae6e07b2b> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/how-many-people-died-on-the-titanic.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599718.13/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120165335-20200120194335-00391.warc.gz | en | 0.981374 | 873 | 3.640625 | 4 | [
-0.007957302033901215,
0.05353588983416557,
0.13560697436332703,
-0.5653155446052551,
-0.15829212963581085,
0.06035277247428894,
-0.04285609722137451,
0.07167242467403412,
-0.11189647018909454,
-0.34523653984069824,
0.35487034916877747,
-0.258731484413147,
-0.09170052409172058,
-0.07799218... | 2 | The Royal Mail Steamer (RMS) Titanic was built by the White Star Company in the UK and owned by American tycoon J.P Morgan. The Titanic met its fate while on its maiden voyage to New York when it struck an iceberg and sank two hours later in the early morning of April 15, 1912, in the Northern Atlantic Ocean. A total of 2,224 people boarded the ship during its sail and a sum of 1,514 people perished.
The name 'Titanic' is a Greek methodology which means gigantic. It took a total of 3,000 men to build the ship over the span of two years. Construction of the Titanic commenced on March 31, 1909, at Queens Island in Belfast Harbor. The ship was 882 feet long and 92.5 at its widest point with its hull held together by approximately three million steel and iron rivets. This ship had two anchors on the sides and one more in the middle which weighed about 16 tons and was the largest anchor ever made by hand up until that time. Construction was a dangerous task, the workers did not wear safety gear and by the end of construction about 246 people had injuries, and nine died, one of them on the day of the launch. The launch of the RMS Titanic was on May 31, 1911, and its sea trials began on April 2, 1912. Test trials were inclusive of tests of its handling characteristics, its speed, its ability to take turns, and its agility to crash-stop. On April 4, it arrived at port’s Berth to await her passengers and crew for the maiden trip.
The Iceberg, Collision, and Damage
Titanic had been sailing for four days when on April 10, at 11:40pm, the lookout on duty spotted an iceberg directly on the ship’s path. At this time, they only saw the tip of the iceberg but were unaware of its massive size underneath. Unfortunately, in an attempt to reverse the ship, the very motion plunged the ship forward which caused the iceberg to dent the side of the hull causing water to seep into the ship. The ship had received many warnings from other ships about floating ice, however, Titanic continued on at high speed with a schedule to keep. At the time, ships speeding and floating ice was not uncommon. This ship had five watertight compartments, however, these compartments had openings at the top which allowed water to flood in from one to the other. Had only four of the compartments flooded, the ship would have remained afloat, unfortunately, all five flooded.
Casualties and Survivors
As the Titanic began to sink, the ill-prepared crew began attempts to evacuate those on board. There were enough lifeboats for half the people on board. Women and children were the first priority in the evacuation which left the men and crew on board while the people on the lower decks got trapped. In the confusion of the moment, the first boat left with only 28 people although it could have carried 64 people. In total, 472 lifeboat seats not used. As the last of the ship sank, the few remaining people on board died some minutes later as the water temperature at the time was slightly above freezing point. Some people plunged to their deaths while the ship rose to a vertical angle as it sank. At dawn, the rescue team recovered 300 bodies in lifejackets while the rest drifted in the currents at sea. The RMS Carpathia bore the 710 survivors of the ill-fated ship to New York where they arrived April 18, 1912. The the 100th anniversary of the Titanic occurred on April 14th, 2012.
How Many People Died On The Titanic?
Of the 2,224 people aboard the ship, 1,514 people perished during the sinking of the Titanic in the early morning of April 15, 1912. The Titanic met its fate while on its maiden voyage to New York when it struck an iceberg and sank two hours later.
About the Author
Mark is a student at Maseno University and community commentator in Kenya. Mark also has interests in geography, African history, and international development.
Your MLA Citation
Your APA Citation
Your Chicago Citation
Your Harvard CitationRemember to italicize the title of this article in your Harvard citation. | 938 | ENGLISH | 1 |
LOUIS XIV, King of France, born at St. Germain-en-Laye, September 16th 1638, succeeded his father Louis XIII, in 1643. His mother, Anne of Austria, became regent, and Mazarin her minister. During the King's minority, the discontented nobles, encouraged by Spain, sought to shake off the authority of the Crown, and the civil wars of the Fronde arose. Peace was concluded in 1659, and in the following year Louis married the Infanta Marie Theresa, a princess possessing neither beauty nor other attractive qualities. Little was expected from the young King; his education had been neglected and his conduct was dissolute; but on Mazarin's death in 1661, he suddenly assumed the reins of government, and from that time forth carried into effect a political theory of pure despotism. His famous saying, "L'etat c'est moi," (I am the state), expressed the principle to which everything was accommodated. He had a cool and clear head, with much dignity and amenity of manners, great activity and perseverance. The distress caused by the religious wars had created throughout France a longing for repose, which was favorable to his assumption of absolute power. He was ably supported by his ministers. The wonderful talents of Colbert restored prosperity to the ruined finances of the country, and provided the means of war; while Louvois applied these means in raising and sending to the field armies more thoroughly equipped than any others of that age.
On the death of Philip IV of Spain, Louis, as his son-in-law, set up a claim to part of the Spanish Netherlands; and in 1667, accompanied by Turenne, he crossed the frontier with a powerful army, and took many places, and made himself master of that part of Flanders since known as French Flanders, and of the whole of Franche Comte. The triple alliance between England, the States-general and Sweden-arrested his career of conquest. The treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (1668), forced him to surrender Franche Comte. He vowed revenge against the States-general, strengthened himself by German alliances, and purchased with money the friendship of Charles II of England. He seized Lorraine in 1670; and in 1672, again entered the Netherlands with Conde and Turenne, conquered half the country in-six weeks and left the Duke of Luxembourg to lay it waste. The States-general formed an alliance with Spain and the Emperor, but Louis made himself master of ten cities of the Empire in Alsace; and in the spring of 1674, took the field with three great armies, of which he commanded one in person, Conde another, and Turenne a third. Victory attended his arms; and notwithstanding the death of Turenne, and the retirement of the Prince of Conde from active service, he continued in subsequent years, along with the Duke of Orleans, to extend his conquests in the Netherlands, where by his orders the country was fearfully desolated. The peace of Nimeguen, in 1678, left him in possession of many of his conquests.
Louis had now reached the zenith of his career. All Europe feared him; his own nation had been brought by tyranny, skillfully managed, to regard him with humility, admiring and obeying; all remnants of political independence had been swept away; no assemblies of the States or the notables were held; the nobles had lost both the desire and the ability to assert political power. The court was the very heart of the political and national life of France, and there the utmost splendor was maintained, and a system of etiquette was established, which was a sort of perpetual worship of the King.
It was a serious thing for France and the world, when Louis fell under the control of his mistress, the Marquise de Maintenon, whom he married in a half private manner in 1685, and who was herself governed by the Jesuits. One of the first effects of this change was the adoption of severe measures against the Protestants. When it was reported to Louis that his troops had converted all the heretics, he revoked the Edict of Nantes, in 1685, and then ensued a bloody persecution; whilst more than half a million of the best and most industrious inhabitants of France fled, carrying their skill and industry to other lands.
The Elector of the Palatinate having died in 1685, and left his sister, the Duchess of Orleans, heiress of all his movable property, Louis claimed for her also all the allodial lands; and from this and other causes arose a new European war. A French army invaded the Palatinate, Baden, Wurtemburg and Treves in 1688. The war waged for years on a great scale and with various success; and after the French had gained, under Luxembourg, in 1693, the battle of Neerwinden, it was found the means of waging war were very much exhausted, and Louis concluded the peace of Ryswick, on the 20th of September 1697.
When the death of Charles II of Spain took place November 1st 1700, it was found that Louis had obtained his signature to a will, by which he left all his dominions to one of the grandsons of his sister, who had been Louis' queen. Louis supported to the utmost the claims of his grandson (Philip V), whilst the Emperor Leopold supported that of his son, afterwards the Emperor Charles IV. But the power of France was now weakened, and the war had to be maintained both on the side of the Netherlands and of Italy. One bloody defeat followed another; Marlborough was victorious in the Low Couutries, and Prince Eugene in Italy. On the 11th of April 1713, peace was concluded at Utrecht, the French prince obtaining the Spanish throne but France sacrificing valuable colonies. A terrible fermentation now prevailed in France, and the country was almost completely ruined; but the monarch mantained to the last an unbending despotism. He died after a short illness, September 1st 1717. The reign of Louis XIV is regarded as the Augustan age of French literature and art, and it can hardly be doubted that France has never since produced poets like Corneille and Racine in tragedy, or Moliere in comedy; satirists like Boileau, or divines like Bossuet, Fenelon, Bourdaloue and Massillon. | <urn:uuid:f5e12740-f97c-4fc1-af9b-4cc01b4d741e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.sacklunch.net/biography/L/LouisXIV.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681412.74/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125191854-20200125221854-00125.warc.gz | en | 0.984939 | 1,351 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
-0.1239006370306015,
0.6985805034637451,
0.12603694200515747,
-0.3569653630256653,
-0.07463023066520691,
-0.4083314538002014,
0.007568639703094959,
0.32478201389312744,
0.3209165334701538,
-0.0014526526210829616,
0.15124663710594177,
-0.46680495142936707,
0.06822560727596283,
0.47210645675... | 3 | LOUIS XIV, King of France, born at St. Germain-en-Laye, September 16th 1638, succeeded his father Louis XIII, in 1643. His mother, Anne of Austria, became regent, and Mazarin her minister. During the King's minority, the discontented nobles, encouraged by Spain, sought to shake off the authority of the Crown, and the civil wars of the Fronde arose. Peace was concluded in 1659, and in the following year Louis married the Infanta Marie Theresa, a princess possessing neither beauty nor other attractive qualities. Little was expected from the young King; his education had been neglected and his conduct was dissolute; but on Mazarin's death in 1661, he suddenly assumed the reins of government, and from that time forth carried into effect a political theory of pure despotism. His famous saying, "L'etat c'est moi," (I am the state), expressed the principle to which everything was accommodated. He had a cool and clear head, with much dignity and amenity of manners, great activity and perseverance. The distress caused by the religious wars had created throughout France a longing for repose, which was favorable to his assumption of absolute power. He was ably supported by his ministers. The wonderful talents of Colbert restored prosperity to the ruined finances of the country, and provided the means of war; while Louvois applied these means in raising and sending to the field armies more thoroughly equipped than any others of that age.
On the death of Philip IV of Spain, Louis, as his son-in-law, set up a claim to part of the Spanish Netherlands; and in 1667, accompanied by Turenne, he crossed the frontier with a powerful army, and took many places, and made himself master of that part of Flanders since known as French Flanders, and of the whole of Franche Comte. The triple alliance between England, the States-general and Sweden-arrested his career of conquest. The treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (1668), forced him to surrender Franche Comte. He vowed revenge against the States-general, strengthened himself by German alliances, and purchased with money the friendship of Charles II of England. He seized Lorraine in 1670; and in 1672, again entered the Netherlands with Conde and Turenne, conquered half the country in-six weeks and left the Duke of Luxembourg to lay it waste. The States-general formed an alliance with Spain and the Emperor, but Louis made himself master of ten cities of the Empire in Alsace; and in the spring of 1674, took the field with three great armies, of which he commanded one in person, Conde another, and Turenne a third. Victory attended his arms; and notwithstanding the death of Turenne, and the retirement of the Prince of Conde from active service, he continued in subsequent years, along with the Duke of Orleans, to extend his conquests in the Netherlands, where by his orders the country was fearfully desolated. The peace of Nimeguen, in 1678, left him in possession of many of his conquests.
Louis had now reached the zenith of his career. All Europe feared him; his own nation had been brought by tyranny, skillfully managed, to regard him with humility, admiring and obeying; all remnants of political independence had been swept away; no assemblies of the States or the notables were held; the nobles had lost both the desire and the ability to assert political power. The court was the very heart of the political and national life of France, and there the utmost splendor was maintained, and a system of etiquette was established, which was a sort of perpetual worship of the King.
It was a serious thing for France and the world, when Louis fell under the control of his mistress, the Marquise de Maintenon, whom he married in a half private manner in 1685, and who was herself governed by the Jesuits. One of the first effects of this change was the adoption of severe measures against the Protestants. When it was reported to Louis that his troops had converted all the heretics, he revoked the Edict of Nantes, in 1685, and then ensued a bloody persecution; whilst more than half a million of the best and most industrious inhabitants of France fled, carrying their skill and industry to other lands.
The Elector of the Palatinate having died in 1685, and left his sister, the Duchess of Orleans, heiress of all his movable property, Louis claimed for her also all the allodial lands; and from this and other causes arose a new European war. A French army invaded the Palatinate, Baden, Wurtemburg and Treves in 1688. The war waged for years on a great scale and with various success; and after the French had gained, under Luxembourg, in 1693, the battle of Neerwinden, it was found the means of waging war were very much exhausted, and Louis concluded the peace of Ryswick, on the 20th of September 1697.
When the death of Charles II of Spain took place November 1st 1700, it was found that Louis had obtained his signature to a will, by which he left all his dominions to one of the grandsons of his sister, who had been Louis' queen. Louis supported to the utmost the claims of his grandson (Philip V), whilst the Emperor Leopold supported that of his son, afterwards the Emperor Charles IV. But the power of France was now weakened, and the war had to be maintained both on the side of the Netherlands and of Italy. One bloody defeat followed another; Marlborough was victorious in the Low Couutries, and Prince Eugene in Italy. On the 11th of April 1713, peace was concluded at Utrecht, the French prince obtaining the Spanish throne but France sacrificing valuable colonies. A terrible fermentation now prevailed in France, and the country was almost completely ruined; but the monarch mantained to the last an unbending despotism. He died after a short illness, September 1st 1717. The reign of Louis XIV is regarded as the Augustan age of French literature and art, and it can hardly be doubted that France has never since produced poets like Corneille and Racine in tragedy, or Moliere in comedy; satirists like Boileau, or divines like Bossuet, Fenelon, Bourdaloue and Massillon. | 1,393 | ENGLISH | 1 |
- Created by: LibertyX
- Created on: 14-01-19 18:19
Dissolution of the Monasteries - Causes
Why did the Dissolution of the Monasteries take place?
Monastic life was condemned by the Humanists in society as outdated and unnecessary. The abuses of the Church and its poor behaviour was found out and condemned by these Humanists, and the fact it was too close to Papal Authority meant that it went against these new Humanist ideas. The Dissolution of the Monasteries also happened because the Crown needed to fund costly wars with France, and the only way to get that money was to take it from the richest asset in Britain.
How did it come about?
Cromwell declared visitations with a sinister political motive, as it was Protestant agencies that did visitations on Catholic Churches to report back to Cromwell any abuses. Because of this political motive, the Monasteries were quickly dissolved because of 'fake' abuses found. Ultimately, the Comperta Monastica was a book compiled of all the transgressions and abuses admitted by nuns and monks. Many complaints were made of bullying being involved in these visitations, however Cromwell never investigated them. To stop them from reaching Henry, Cromwell quickly reported back all the abuses found, such as sexual misdemeanours and veneration of saints.
The Valor Ecclesiasticus represented Cromwell's most ambitious project, and has been seen as a Tudor Domesday Book. It essentially listed ecclesiastical wealth and property including taxes paid to the Crown from this property and income that had previously been paid to the Pope. The work was undertaken by the local Gentry. Every Parish and Monastery was visited. The net income of the Church was around £320,000.
Both the Comperta and the Valor served as ammunition for the people who wanted to close the Monasteries. Cromwell manipulated the Valor to demonstrate widespread corruption and the oral bankruptcy of monasticism by revealing that only 3% of the wealth was allocated to different charity works. He also amplified the abuses in the Comperta, going into detail about the sexual misdemeanors, and ensured he had attained the signed confessions of the nuns and monks who had admitted breaking these vows of chastity. He had also included much more scandalous stories, of monks performing homosexual acts and nuns giving birth. | <urn:uuid:d4c80894-ee80-4a13-bf6c-543c8010a36b> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://getrevising.co.uk/revision-cards/dissolution-of-the-monasteries-2 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251776516.99/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128060946-20200128090946-00129.warc.gz | en | 0.984137 | 490 | 3.890625 | 4 | [
-0.016759930178523064,
-0.0005430915043689311,
-0.14696748554706573,
-0.1271391361951828,
-0.05649322271347046,
-0.1295694261789322,
-0.14445625245571136,
-0.16866721212863922,
0.32134151458740234,
0.24287466704845428,
0.06726666539907455,
-0.3328820765018463,
0.15748296678066254,
0.360148... | 1 | - Created by: LibertyX
- Created on: 14-01-19 18:19
Dissolution of the Monasteries - Causes
Why did the Dissolution of the Monasteries take place?
Monastic life was condemned by the Humanists in society as outdated and unnecessary. The abuses of the Church and its poor behaviour was found out and condemned by these Humanists, and the fact it was too close to Papal Authority meant that it went against these new Humanist ideas. The Dissolution of the Monasteries also happened because the Crown needed to fund costly wars with France, and the only way to get that money was to take it from the richest asset in Britain.
How did it come about?
Cromwell declared visitations with a sinister political motive, as it was Protestant agencies that did visitations on Catholic Churches to report back to Cromwell any abuses. Because of this political motive, the Monasteries were quickly dissolved because of 'fake' abuses found. Ultimately, the Comperta Monastica was a book compiled of all the transgressions and abuses admitted by nuns and monks. Many complaints were made of bullying being involved in these visitations, however Cromwell never investigated them. To stop them from reaching Henry, Cromwell quickly reported back all the abuses found, such as sexual misdemeanours and veneration of saints.
The Valor Ecclesiasticus represented Cromwell's most ambitious project, and has been seen as a Tudor Domesday Book. It essentially listed ecclesiastical wealth and property including taxes paid to the Crown from this property and income that had previously been paid to the Pope. The work was undertaken by the local Gentry. Every Parish and Monastery was visited. The net income of the Church was around £320,000.
Both the Comperta and the Valor served as ammunition for the people who wanted to close the Monasteries. Cromwell manipulated the Valor to demonstrate widespread corruption and the oral bankruptcy of monasticism by revealing that only 3% of the wealth was allocated to different charity works. He also amplified the abuses in the Comperta, going into detail about the sexual misdemeanors, and ensured he had attained the signed confessions of the nuns and monks who had admitted breaking these vows of chastity. He had also included much more scandalous stories, of monks performing homosexual acts and nuns giving birth. | 496 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The birth of the stairs occurred when people were no longer satisfied with one-story dwellings.
Initially, a notched tree trunk had to be used to reach the upper floor. However, in the long run this solution was too primitive. Consequently, the concept of the stairs was invented, first made of wood, then of stone.
The constructions gradually became more daring, and some even famous, such as the wide staircase of Wells Cathedral, which leads from the choir’s northern side aisle up to the chapter house.
In some monasteries, the so-called “night stairs” connected the Dormitory with the choir, to facilitate the way for the monks to pray for the Hours.
Equestrian stairs had rather flat steps. In the early modern period, these could even lead to the tops of towers, such as in the Round Tower of Copenhagen, but in that case as a riding ramp without steps. A similar system was established in so-called “donkey towers”. In the winding corridor, goods were carried on the backs of these animals. | <urn:uuid:80d99c71-53fd-45f9-b57c-4140c83c69c3> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://wernernolte.de/blog-english | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250619323.41/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124100832-20200124125832-00250.warc.gz | en | 0.98692 | 224 | 3.8125 | 4 | [
-0.13235050439834595,
0.048983629792928696,
0.11326620727777481,
0.0807737484574318,
-0.5984853506088257,
0.33951207995414734,
-0.29079675674438477,
0.004192928783595562,
0.5111967325210571,
0.26426759362220764,
0.07727503776550293,
0.00571592478081584,
0.05273500084877014,
0.1220990568399... | 9 | The birth of the stairs occurred when people were no longer satisfied with one-story dwellings.
Initially, a notched tree trunk had to be used to reach the upper floor. However, in the long run this solution was too primitive. Consequently, the concept of the stairs was invented, first made of wood, then of stone.
The constructions gradually became more daring, and some even famous, such as the wide staircase of Wells Cathedral, which leads from the choir’s northern side aisle up to the chapter house.
In some monasteries, the so-called “night stairs” connected the Dormitory with the choir, to facilitate the way for the monks to pray for the Hours.
Equestrian stairs had rather flat steps. In the early modern period, these could even lead to the tops of towers, such as in the Round Tower of Copenhagen, but in that case as a riding ramp without steps. A similar system was established in so-called “donkey towers”. In the winding corridor, goods were carried on the backs of these animals. | 209 | ENGLISH | 1 |
As Bucharest is continuously expanding its boundaries, there is however a reminder of the city’s 19th century limits in the form of a network of fortifications built by King Carol I after the Independence War, which brought the country the exit from the Ottoman Empire.
In line with the military and strategic thinking of the time, 18 forts, placed at distances of 4 kilometers each, were built. The forts were placed in a 70-kilometers ring around Bucharest and between each fort an artillery battery was set. This defensive ring of Bucharest used to stand about 7 kilometers from the city’s limits, in order to ensure increased protection in case of a siege. They were named after localities which now are very close to the city’s limits: Chitila, Mogosoaia, Otopeni, Tunari, Stefanesti, Afumati. The surface of the constructions totals over 120 hectares and some forts spread on over 11.60 hectares.
Construction works, drafted by Belgian military architect Henri Alexis Brialmont, began in 1884 and ended officially in 1895 but various other works were performed until 1903. The costs of the project also increased to what was estimated at three times the time’s annual budget of the army. The project ended up costing 111.5 million gold lei, compared to a set initial budget of 15 million.
Besides the network of tunnels, all forts were connected by a road and a railway, which today is Bucharest’s ring road DN100. Once air strikes began to be used and other military advances were made with explosives, the use of forts fell into obsolesce. To this day, most the forts continue to be abandoned. The Fort 18 in Chiajna was used as a market for pickled goods during communist times. Fort 13 Jilava (pictured, small) was turned, starting with 1907 into a military prison and was the place were political prisoners were held o executed during Communism. It still is a penitentiary today.
The landmark constructions surrounding Bucharest stand now covered with vegetation and are disintegrating but some initiatives have emerged to make the story known and restore them, perhaps with a different use.
How to get there?
The forts are close to the Bucharest ring road. The car is probably the best option, followed by walking, although it is advisable to go there with someone who knows the area. | <urn:uuid:5ebffc55-32fe-4e3c-ad75-4fcdaafa3634> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.citycompass.ro/weekend-escapade-bucharest-network-of-fortifications/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594662.6/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119151736-20200119175736-00542.warc.gz | en | 0.984253 | 503 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
-0.2775099575519562,
0.2593132257461548,
0.4443874955177307,
0.33479222655296326,
-0.05685848370194435,
-0.10359419882297516,
-0.1481783539056778,
0.2875129282474518,
0.17394708096981049,
-0.07736857980489731,
0.11963354796171188,
-0.4725699722766876,
-0.3539181053638458,
0.606618165969848... | 1 | As Bucharest is continuously expanding its boundaries, there is however a reminder of the city’s 19th century limits in the form of a network of fortifications built by King Carol I after the Independence War, which brought the country the exit from the Ottoman Empire.
In line with the military and strategic thinking of the time, 18 forts, placed at distances of 4 kilometers each, were built. The forts were placed in a 70-kilometers ring around Bucharest and between each fort an artillery battery was set. This defensive ring of Bucharest used to stand about 7 kilometers from the city’s limits, in order to ensure increased protection in case of a siege. They were named after localities which now are very close to the city’s limits: Chitila, Mogosoaia, Otopeni, Tunari, Stefanesti, Afumati. The surface of the constructions totals over 120 hectares and some forts spread on over 11.60 hectares.
Construction works, drafted by Belgian military architect Henri Alexis Brialmont, began in 1884 and ended officially in 1895 but various other works were performed until 1903. The costs of the project also increased to what was estimated at three times the time’s annual budget of the army. The project ended up costing 111.5 million gold lei, compared to a set initial budget of 15 million.
Besides the network of tunnels, all forts were connected by a road and a railway, which today is Bucharest’s ring road DN100. Once air strikes began to be used and other military advances were made with explosives, the use of forts fell into obsolesce. To this day, most the forts continue to be abandoned. The Fort 18 in Chiajna was used as a market for pickled goods during communist times. Fort 13 Jilava (pictured, small) was turned, starting with 1907 into a military prison and was the place were political prisoners were held o executed during Communism. It still is a penitentiary today.
The landmark constructions surrounding Bucharest stand now covered with vegetation and are disintegrating but some initiatives have emerged to make the story known and restore them, perhaps with a different use.
How to get there?
The forts are close to the Bucharest ring road. The car is probably the best option, followed by walking, although it is advisable to go there with someone who knows the area. | 519 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In the poem “First Lesson”, the author Philip Booth utilizes figurative language and literary devices to convey the meaning of the poem that there will always be someone to help you and support you when you need it.With the lines 1-3, the poem opens with a distinct sense of security that a young child has when she is in the presence of her parent. She is shielded and is reassured by her parent: “Let your head be tipped back in the cup of my hand…I’ll hold you.” Essentially, she is being told that she needs not to trouble herself with any worries and should simply rely upon her parents for support. In this poem, the parent is presumably her father and she is taught by him to learn to swim in the “stream” so that eventually she can swim by herself in the “sea”. Interestingly enough, this passage forms the basis of the extended metaphor that runs through the entirety of the poem. Metaphorically, the father’s swim lesson can also be interpreted as introducing his child into the real world and preparing his daughter for survival within it. The poem continues with “Spread your arms wide, lie out on the stream and look high at the gulls. A dead man’s-float is face down.” The act of spreading your arms wide has the connotation carefreeness which suggest that he is trying to reassure and remove any fears or doubts of that his daughter (who is about to take her first steps out of the nest) may have. However, it may also be interpreted that the father is trying to instruct her to keep her mind and heart tolerant, and maintain big ambitions. Additionally, the “gulls” are symbolic of traits like adaptability and resourcefulness as well as opportunity. Therefore, this suggests of virtuous and lofty values the daughter is urged to work towards. Conversely, with the mention of the dead men, the father is demonstrating what becomes of a person who has no ambition nor positivity in life: he drowns. Furthermore, the father is also trying to tell his daughter to keep looking up in life and keep a positive attitude. In the next series of lines (lines 7-10), the father tell his daughter that she must soon make her journey out to the deep and vast ocean/real world. Then, he warns her of the storms and fatigue that may arise in her trek ahead the same way in which she would have to endure trials and adversity in the real world. However, despite this “long thrash”, she will eventually reach her “island,” and survive. Here, the “island” can either be interpreted as symbolic for a place of stability or represent the daughter’s dreams and happiness in life. In the last 5 lines, the father says that whenever you are afraid of drowning in the wide ocean, just lie up and float. This is advise is applicable to real life due to the fact that like learning to flow with the ocean, the daughter needs learn to have trust in the people around her and allow herself to depend on them whenever it is necessary. In the very last line, the father gives his finals remarks of advice: “remember when fear cramps you heart…lie back, and the sea will hold you.” The father offers the reliable advice that when she is met with challenges, she should “lie back”, as in take things slowly and even submit to what comes next. Similarly to having trust in the people around her, she must also believe that sometimes things out of you control happen naturally to you and you must accept them due to the fact that they always have a reason as to why they occured in the first place. In addition, when he tells her “the sea will hold you”, the “sea” is personified and given the identity of a calm and protective entity who guides. The sea also figuratively represent the sea of people around the child who are willing to impart their wisdom upon her and assist her throughout phases of her life. Summatively, the “First Lesson” is a poem provides an uplifting guide to surviving in the face of obstacles, and shares the impactful message that there will always be good and bad things in life. Therefore, it is important to not get caught up in every setback and learn to relax as you will always reach your aspirations eventually. Furthermore, you must also realize that things often happen for a reason and in the end, things will work out for the better so you just have to learn to maintain trust and allow nature to take its course. | <urn:uuid:c8004294-bf93-41d7-8378-297a2f4dff86> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://alpinrunning.org/in-need-it-with-the-lines-1-3-the-poem/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606696.26/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122042145-20200122071145-00532.warc.gz | en | 0.982924 | 957 | 3.3125 | 3 | [
0.04622045159339905,
0.01640944927930832,
0.2876420021057129,
-0.24751952290534973,
-0.4167637228965759,
0.01783261075615883,
0.23614823818206787,
0.09884042292833328,
-0.13771378993988037,
-0.26447921991348267,
0.058002449572086334,
-0.31320273876190186,
-0.10985799878835678,
0.3679057657... | 3 | In the poem “First Lesson”, the author Philip Booth utilizes figurative language and literary devices to convey the meaning of the poem that there will always be someone to help you and support you when you need it.With the lines 1-3, the poem opens with a distinct sense of security that a young child has when she is in the presence of her parent. She is shielded and is reassured by her parent: “Let your head be tipped back in the cup of my hand…I’ll hold you.” Essentially, she is being told that she needs not to trouble herself with any worries and should simply rely upon her parents for support. In this poem, the parent is presumably her father and she is taught by him to learn to swim in the “stream” so that eventually she can swim by herself in the “sea”. Interestingly enough, this passage forms the basis of the extended metaphor that runs through the entirety of the poem. Metaphorically, the father’s swim lesson can also be interpreted as introducing his child into the real world and preparing his daughter for survival within it. The poem continues with “Spread your arms wide, lie out on the stream and look high at the gulls. A dead man’s-float is face down.” The act of spreading your arms wide has the connotation carefreeness which suggest that he is trying to reassure and remove any fears or doubts of that his daughter (who is about to take her first steps out of the nest) may have. However, it may also be interpreted that the father is trying to instruct her to keep her mind and heart tolerant, and maintain big ambitions. Additionally, the “gulls” are symbolic of traits like adaptability and resourcefulness as well as opportunity. Therefore, this suggests of virtuous and lofty values the daughter is urged to work towards. Conversely, with the mention of the dead men, the father is demonstrating what becomes of a person who has no ambition nor positivity in life: he drowns. Furthermore, the father is also trying to tell his daughter to keep looking up in life and keep a positive attitude. In the next series of lines (lines 7-10), the father tell his daughter that she must soon make her journey out to the deep and vast ocean/real world. Then, he warns her of the storms and fatigue that may arise in her trek ahead the same way in which she would have to endure trials and adversity in the real world. However, despite this “long thrash”, she will eventually reach her “island,” and survive. Here, the “island” can either be interpreted as symbolic for a place of stability or represent the daughter’s dreams and happiness in life. In the last 5 lines, the father says that whenever you are afraid of drowning in the wide ocean, just lie up and float. This is advise is applicable to real life due to the fact that like learning to flow with the ocean, the daughter needs learn to have trust in the people around her and allow herself to depend on them whenever it is necessary. In the very last line, the father gives his finals remarks of advice: “remember when fear cramps you heart…lie back, and the sea will hold you.” The father offers the reliable advice that when she is met with challenges, she should “lie back”, as in take things slowly and even submit to what comes next. Similarly to having trust in the people around her, she must also believe that sometimes things out of you control happen naturally to you and you must accept them due to the fact that they always have a reason as to why they occured in the first place. In addition, when he tells her “the sea will hold you”, the “sea” is personified and given the identity of a calm and protective entity who guides. The sea also figuratively represent the sea of people around the child who are willing to impart their wisdom upon her and assist her throughout phases of her life. Summatively, the “First Lesson” is a poem provides an uplifting guide to surviving in the face of obstacles, and shares the impactful message that there will always be good and bad things in life. Therefore, it is important to not get caught up in every setback and learn to relax as you will always reach your aspirations eventually. Furthermore, you must also realize that things often happen for a reason and in the end, things will work out for the better so you just have to learn to maintain trust and allow nature to take its course. | 912 | ENGLISH | 1 |
This section contains 1,526 words
(approx. 4 pages at 400 words per page)
Alexander Hamilton, Revolutionary Summary & Study Guide Description
Alexander Hamilton, Revolutionary Summary & Study Guide includes comprehensive information and analysis to help you understand the book. This study guide contains the following sections:
This detailed literature summary also contains Topics for Discussion on Alexander Hamilton, Revolutionary by Brockenbrough, Martha.
The following version of this book was used to create this study guide: Brockenbrough, Martha. Alexander Hamilton: Revolutionary. Macmillan Publishing Group, 2017. Hardcover.
The biography begins with a short introduction by the author who claims that Alexander Hamilton was a complicated, and commonly misunderstood man. Then, the author moves back in time to a hurricane that a young Alexander survived through. After the devastating storm, Alexander wrote a letter to his missing father. The story then moves back another 17 years to the first marriage of Rachel, Alexander’s mother. Rachel was unhappy in her marriage, and eventually escaped her husband by fleeing to Saint Kitts. There, she met James Hamilton and had two children; Alexander and James. However, Rachel’s first husband had her unfairly tried for adultery so he could officially divorce her and marry his new love. Rachel was banned from marrying again and James left her and the children. After running a grocery store for many years, Rachel died, leaving Alexander and James with nothing thanks to her first husband’s greed. Alexander, determined to make something of himself, pursued his own education, and impressed employers at a trading company, as well as an influential priest named Hugh Knox. Knox had Alexander's letter published anonymously, and set up a fund to send Alexander to the colonies. The public donated, and Alexander made his way to New York.
Once there, Alexander used Knox’ connections to make powerful friends in the political scene. He quickly finished prep school and attended New York City’s King’s College. While he was there, Britain approved the highly controversial Stamp Act. In response, the group called the Sons of Liberty dressed up as Indians, and threw thousands of pounds worth of Tea into the Boston Harbor. Alexander encouraged New Yorkers to support the people of Boston as the British cracked down on any rebellion and closed all their ports. After the Boston Massacre in 1770, Alexander joined the Continental Army, led by George Washington. He became the leader of an artillery company at the age of 21, and trained his men better than most seasoned generals. Congress declared independence and King George declared war. The Continental Army was forced to flee, as many of the soldiers were untrained or too drunk to fight. After victories at Trenton and Princeton months later, Alexander was invited to join Washington's staff. There, he handled all correspondence and became friends with Washington. However, after the British took Fort Ticonderoga, Alexander was proclaimed dead after falling into a river while being fired upon.
Alexander reappeared, alive, and continued his work. He was able to raise funds and gather supplies for the army without angering the citizens. In the middle of October, a British general surrendered around 6,000 troops to General Horatio in New York. However, when pressed to send his men to Washington, both Horatio and a second general refused, forcing Alexander to demand the troops without Washington’s approval (though the commander appreciated his enthusiasm). Then, the army began it's miserable six months at Valley Forge. Here, Alexander studied finance and worked with Washington and Nathanael Greene to improve the supplies and morale of the troops.
Soon after, Baron von Steuben volunteered for the army, and trained all of Washington’s men better than any other general before. On February 6th, France recognized America’s independence and joined as an ally. Washington planned to intercept an English militia force, but many generals disagreed with him. One of these men, Charles Lee, demanded that he be put in charge after it was decided that Washington should attack. This ended in disaster, as Charles Lee fled the fight despite having more men. Lee was court martialed, and suspended from the army. Eventually, Alexander’s friend Laurens challenged Lee to a duel over Washington’s honor. The duel ended with no bloodshed and Lee apologized before being banned from the army entirely.
Later, Alexander asked congress to form a battalion of slaves with the condition that they be freed once they completed five years of military service. Many disagreed, but Alexander and Laurens eventually convinced Congress to approve it. In the army’s second and more successful winter camp Morristown, Alexander met his future wife, Elizabeth (Eliza) Schuyler. They married in December of 1780. However, the Continental Army continued to suffer losses due to poor leadership and a betrayal by Benedict Arnold. Washington, angry at Arnold’s treasonous actions, ordered a British man named Andre to be hanged. Alexander fought against this, believing Andre should die an honorable death, but Alexander was ignored. Months later, Washington accused Alexander of disrespecting him, despite Alexander having shown nothing but respect for the commander since they met. Alexander quit his job and resolved to return home to his wife.
However, Alexander was pulled back into the war when General Clinton assigned Charles Cornwallis to defend Yorktown. Washington and Alexander knew this was their only chance to win the war. Washington gave him one of two infantries and, under Alexander’s leadership, they charged into Yorktown, leading to a British surrender on October 17th. Then, he officially quit the army to return to his family. In New York, Alexander became a respected lawyer who represented the poor and former crown sympathizers that were being persecuted. At this time, Aaron Burr also became a lawyer, but he charged exorbitant prices and cared little for people’s well being. Alexander was asked to serve in Congress, where he pushed to have the Articles of Confederation revised. After months of arguments, compromises, and hundreds of pages written by Alexander and his friend, James Madison, the Constitution was ratified. Alexander encouraged Washington to run for president, and helped secure his victory over John Adams. Washington made Alexander Treasury Secretary, Thomas Jefferson Secretary of State, and Hugh Knox the Secretary of War.
When Alexander revealed his plan to fix the nation’s debt, however, Madison, Jefferson and anti-federalists turned on him. Congress eventually compromised on his debt plan, and allowed him to build a Bank of America, something that angered Jefferson and Madison. The public bought so much stock that Alexander had the government buy some to keep the market from crashing. While Alexander worked tirelessly to fix the nation’s finances, he was enticed by a young woman, Maria Reynolds, who claimed she was being abused by her husband. He entered an affair with her, and was eventually blackmailed by her husband until Alexander stopped paying him and cut off the affair. He continued to be at odds with Jefferson and Madison, who believed Alexander was trying to remove slave labor and replace it with manufacturing. Meanwhile, Maria’s husband was under investigation for fraud, and said he had information on someone in the Treasury. Three congressman approached Alexander, who revealed his affair, but claimed he was innocent of the fraud accusations.
Meanwhile, a rebellion in France was threatening to trickle over to America, when the capital, Philadelphia, was stuck by Yellow Fever. Alexander and Eliza caught the disease themselves, but were saved by an old friend from St. Croix named Ned Stevens. The House of Representatives performed an investigation on Alexander, and found that he had done nothing wrong. However, a violent revolt began after his controversial whisky tax, forcing Alexander and Washington to form a militia and stop the rebellion. Afterwards, Alexander quit his job, but continued to advise Washington. America was forced to create a treaty with the British to avoid a war they could not fight. In 1796, Washington stepped down as president. Alexander tried to sway the public to vote for Thomas Pinckney, but failed as Adams won. It was then Alexander found a book written specifically to criticize all of his ideas, as well as reveal leaked documents about his affair with Maria. He fought against the charges of fraud once again, and learned that one of the congressmen had leaked the files. Eliza, despite public humiliation, remained devoted to her husband.
During a second presidential election, Alexander’s criticism against Adams was leaked, and Jefferson won the presidency with Burr as his vice president. Alexander removed himself from the public eye and created a Federalist Newspaper, which earned much praise. Months later, his son Philip was killed in a duel against George Eacker, who had accused Alexander of secretly building an army to put down anti-federalist opposition. A year later, Alexander and Burr’s rivalry reached its’ climax. Alexander wrote many truthful accusations about Burr’s corrupted and selfish nature, causing Burr to challenge him to a duel. After writing Eliza two farewell letters, Alexander met Burr on July 11th. He never intended to hurt Burr, and purposefully missed his first shot. Burr, however, aimed to kill, and shot Alexander right through the abdomen, paralyzing him and eventually leading to his death. All of New York mourned at his funeral, and Eliza learned that he felt he could not back down from the duel because he wanted to be worthy of her love. She went on to form the first orphanage in New York and serve the people for more than years, while Burr suffered a lonely and miserable life.
This section contains 1,526 words
(approx. 4 pages at 400 words per page) | <urn:uuid:bf609774-530c-45b9-a336-4014dc07d2e5> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.bookrags.com/studyguide-alexander-hamilton-revolutionary/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250603761.28/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121103642-20200121132642-00192.warc.gz | en | 0.980281 | 1,973 | 3.5 | 4 | [
-0.18459171056747437,
0.25202420353889465,
0.35671302676200867,
0.22973988950252533,
-0.837134599685669,
0.1501917839050293,
0.011266229674220085,
0.5538650751113892,
-0.16214531660079956,
0.2138729691505432,
-0.11598527431488037,
0.020620975643396378,
-0.1476639062166214,
0.18146778643131... | 4 | This section contains 1,526 words
(approx. 4 pages at 400 words per page)
Alexander Hamilton, Revolutionary Summary & Study Guide Description
Alexander Hamilton, Revolutionary Summary & Study Guide includes comprehensive information and analysis to help you understand the book. This study guide contains the following sections:
This detailed literature summary also contains Topics for Discussion on Alexander Hamilton, Revolutionary by Brockenbrough, Martha.
The following version of this book was used to create this study guide: Brockenbrough, Martha. Alexander Hamilton: Revolutionary. Macmillan Publishing Group, 2017. Hardcover.
The biography begins with a short introduction by the author who claims that Alexander Hamilton was a complicated, and commonly misunderstood man. Then, the author moves back in time to a hurricane that a young Alexander survived through. After the devastating storm, Alexander wrote a letter to his missing father. The story then moves back another 17 years to the first marriage of Rachel, Alexander’s mother. Rachel was unhappy in her marriage, and eventually escaped her husband by fleeing to Saint Kitts. There, she met James Hamilton and had two children; Alexander and James. However, Rachel’s first husband had her unfairly tried for adultery so he could officially divorce her and marry his new love. Rachel was banned from marrying again and James left her and the children. After running a grocery store for many years, Rachel died, leaving Alexander and James with nothing thanks to her first husband’s greed. Alexander, determined to make something of himself, pursued his own education, and impressed employers at a trading company, as well as an influential priest named Hugh Knox. Knox had Alexander's letter published anonymously, and set up a fund to send Alexander to the colonies. The public donated, and Alexander made his way to New York.
Once there, Alexander used Knox’ connections to make powerful friends in the political scene. He quickly finished prep school and attended New York City’s King’s College. While he was there, Britain approved the highly controversial Stamp Act. In response, the group called the Sons of Liberty dressed up as Indians, and threw thousands of pounds worth of Tea into the Boston Harbor. Alexander encouraged New Yorkers to support the people of Boston as the British cracked down on any rebellion and closed all their ports. After the Boston Massacre in 1770, Alexander joined the Continental Army, led by George Washington. He became the leader of an artillery company at the age of 21, and trained his men better than most seasoned generals. Congress declared independence and King George declared war. The Continental Army was forced to flee, as many of the soldiers were untrained or too drunk to fight. After victories at Trenton and Princeton months later, Alexander was invited to join Washington's staff. There, he handled all correspondence and became friends with Washington. However, after the British took Fort Ticonderoga, Alexander was proclaimed dead after falling into a river while being fired upon.
Alexander reappeared, alive, and continued his work. He was able to raise funds and gather supplies for the army without angering the citizens. In the middle of October, a British general surrendered around 6,000 troops to General Horatio in New York. However, when pressed to send his men to Washington, both Horatio and a second general refused, forcing Alexander to demand the troops without Washington’s approval (though the commander appreciated his enthusiasm). Then, the army began it's miserable six months at Valley Forge. Here, Alexander studied finance and worked with Washington and Nathanael Greene to improve the supplies and morale of the troops.
Soon after, Baron von Steuben volunteered for the army, and trained all of Washington’s men better than any other general before. On February 6th, France recognized America’s independence and joined as an ally. Washington planned to intercept an English militia force, but many generals disagreed with him. One of these men, Charles Lee, demanded that he be put in charge after it was decided that Washington should attack. This ended in disaster, as Charles Lee fled the fight despite having more men. Lee was court martialed, and suspended from the army. Eventually, Alexander’s friend Laurens challenged Lee to a duel over Washington’s honor. The duel ended with no bloodshed and Lee apologized before being banned from the army entirely.
Later, Alexander asked congress to form a battalion of slaves with the condition that they be freed once they completed five years of military service. Many disagreed, but Alexander and Laurens eventually convinced Congress to approve it. In the army’s second and more successful winter camp Morristown, Alexander met his future wife, Elizabeth (Eliza) Schuyler. They married in December of 1780. However, the Continental Army continued to suffer losses due to poor leadership and a betrayal by Benedict Arnold. Washington, angry at Arnold’s treasonous actions, ordered a British man named Andre to be hanged. Alexander fought against this, believing Andre should die an honorable death, but Alexander was ignored. Months later, Washington accused Alexander of disrespecting him, despite Alexander having shown nothing but respect for the commander since they met. Alexander quit his job and resolved to return home to his wife.
However, Alexander was pulled back into the war when General Clinton assigned Charles Cornwallis to defend Yorktown. Washington and Alexander knew this was their only chance to win the war. Washington gave him one of two infantries and, under Alexander’s leadership, they charged into Yorktown, leading to a British surrender on October 17th. Then, he officially quit the army to return to his family. In New York, Alexander became a respected lawyer who represented the poor and former crown sympathizers that were being persecuted. At this time, Aaron Burr also became a lawyer, but he charged exorbitant prices and cared little for people’s well being. Alexander was asked to serve in Congress, where he pushed to have the Articles of Confederation revised. After months of arguments, compromises, and hundreds of pages written by Alexander and his friend, James Madison, the Constitution was ratified. Alexander encouraged Washington to run for president, and helped secure his victory over John Adams. Washington made Alexander Treasury Secretary, Thomas Jefferson Secretary of State, and Hugh Knox the Secretary of War.
When Alexander revealed his plan to fix the nation’s debt, however, Madison, Jefferson and anti-federalists turned on him. Congress eventually compromised on his debt plan, and allowed him to build a Bank of America, something that angered Jefferson and Madison. The public bought so much stock that Alexander had the government buy some to keep the market from crashing. While Alexander worked tirelessly to fix the nation’s finances, he was enticed by a young woman, Maria Reynolds, who claimed she was being abused by her husband. He entered an affair with her, and was eventually blackmailed by her husband until Alexander stopped paying him and cut off the affair. He continued to be at odds with Jefferson and Madison, who believed Alexander was trying to remove slave labor and replace it with manufacturing. Meanwhile, Maria’s husband was under investigation for fraud, and said he had information on someone in the Treasury. Three congressman approached Alexander, who revealed his affair, but claimed he was innocent of the fraud accusations.
Meanwhile, a rebellion in France was threatening to trickle over to America, when the capital, Philadelphia, was stuck by Yellow Fever. Alexander and Eliza caught the disease themselves, but were saved by an old friend from St. Croix named Ned Stevens. The House of Representatives performed an investigation on Alexander, and found that he had done nothing wrong. However, a violent revolt began after his controversial whisky tax, forcing Alexander and Washington to form a militia and stop the rebellion. Afterwards, Alexander quit his job, but continued to advise Washington. America was forced to create a treaty with the British to avoid a war they could not fight. In 1796, Washington stepped down as president. Alexander tried to sway the public to vote for Thomas Pinckney, but failed as Adams won. It was then Alexander found a book written specifically to criticize all of his ideas, as well as reveal leaked documents about his affair with Maria. He fought against the charges of fraud once again, and learned that one of the congressmen had leaked the files. Eliza, despite public humiliation, remained devoted to her husband.
During a second presidential election, Alexander’s criticism against Adams was leaked, and Jefferson won the presidency with Burr as his vice president. Alexander removed himself from the public eye and created a Federalist Newspaper, which earned much praise. Months later, his son Philip was killed in a duel against George Eacker, who had accused Alexander of secretly building an army to put down anti-federalist opposition. A year later, Alexander and Burr’s rivalry reached its’ climax. Alexander wrote many truthful accusations about Burr’s corrupted and selfish nature, causing Burr to challenge him to a duel. After writing Eliza two farewell letters, Alexander met Burr on July 11th. He never intended to hurt Burr, and purposefully missed his first shot. Burr, however, aimed to kill, and shot Alexander right through the abdomen, paralyzing him and eventually leading to his death. All of New York mourned at his funeral, and Eliza learned that he felt he could not back down from the duel because he wanted to be worthy of her love. She went on to form the first orphanage in New York and serve the people for more than years, while Burr suffered a lonely and miserable life.
This section contains 1,526 words
(approx. 4 pages at 400 words per page) | 1,961 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Selma to Montgomery marches were a series of civil rights protests held in Alabama during March 1965. The first of them took place on March 7 of that year, when between a group of 500 and 600 negroes began a march from Selma to Montgomery, the state capitol, with the intention of registering to vote – something legally permitted under the United States Civil Rights Act of 1964, but resisted with every legal means and quite a few extra-legal means in many states, especially in the southern United States.
The march began peacefully, but when the marchers reached the Edmund Pettus Bridge, which spanned both the Alabama river and the Dallas County line, their path was blocked by state troopers and county policemen, some of them deputised specifically for this task. The police attacked the marches with batons, tear gas and mounted charges. 17 marchers were hospitalised and 50 more treated for lesser injuries. A photograph of Amelia Boynton, beaten unconscious and lying on the road of the bridge, became front page news, and the reaction was swift. President Lyndon Johnson and Martin Luther King both condemned the violence, as did many others. A second march was held on Tuesday, March 9, and a third on March 21-25. The third march began with around 8000 people, but that number had swelled to 25000 by its final day. In the end, the voting rights of the protesters were upheld by the courts, but the struggle was long and painful.
By Federal Bureau of Investigation – http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/travel/civilrights/cost.htm, Public Domain, Link
As mentioned in: | <urn:uuid:137c52e8-7c64-4c23-8038-f4e6098bb271> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.thecentrecannothold.net/tag/mar-7/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597230.18/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120023523-20200120051523-00438.warc.gz | en | 0.985743 | 336 | 3.609375 | 4 | [
-0.36999714374542236,
-0.17265185713768005,
-0.09103820472955704,
0.30705612897872925,
-0.26183047890663147,
0.7486058473587036,
-0.1330469399690628,
-0.13411714136600494,
-0.07629697769880295,
0.40616706013679504,
0.28064846992492676,
0.3452065587043762,
-0.16031871736049652,
0.0251789614... | 14 | The Selma to Montgomery marches were a series of civil rights protests held in Alabama during March 1965. The first of them took place on March 7 of that year, when between a group of 500 and 600 negroes began a march from Selma to Montgomery, the state capitol, with the intention of registering to vote – something legally permitted under the United States Civil Rights Act of 1964, but resisted with every legal means and quite a few extra-legal means in many states, especially in the southern United States.
The march began peacefully, but when the marchers reached the Edmund Pettus Bridge, which spanned both the Alabama river and the Dallas County line, their path was blocked by state troopers and county policemen, some of them deputised specifically for this task. The police attacked the marches with batons, tear gas and mounted charges. 17 marchers were hospitalised and 50 more treated for lesser injuries. A photograph of Amelia Boynton, beaten unconscious and lying on the road of the bridge, became front page news, and the reaction was swift. President Lyndon Johnson and Martin Luther King both condemned the violence, as did many others. A second march was held on Tuesday, March 9, and a third on March 21-25. The third march began with around 8000 people, but that number had swelled to 25000 by its final day. In the end, the voting rights of the protesters were upheld by the courts, but the struggle was long and painful.
By Federal Bureau of Investigation – http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/travel/civilrights/cost.htm, Public Domain, Link
As mentioned in: | 363 | ENGLISH | 1 |
HILE Alexander was conquering the world, there lived in Athens a
man whose work survived hundreds of years after the
conqueror's empire fell to pieces. Indeed, it exists
After Alexander became king Aristotle went to Athens and
established a school of philosophy. His fame grew and he
was called "the man of wisdom." He spent much of his time
in writing, and wrote about almost everything that men
thought of in his time. Some of his works are studied in
ARISTOTLE TEACHING ALEXANDER
Like all other great men of Greece, Aristotle had enemies. Some of them accused him of not having respect for the gods. He, therefore, fled from Athens in order, as he said, to keep the Athenians from sinning against philosophy by banishing him. He died in exile.
It is said that for about two hundred years after his death people did not know what had become of his writings. The men to whom they were left had buried them in an underground chamber for fear the king of Pergamos, who was very proud of his library, would get hold of them. When the manuscripts were at last found they could still be read.
For hundreds of years after that Aristotle's writings were more widely studied in Europe than almost any other books.
A NOTHER great philosopher who lived during the time of Alexander was Zeno. He was born in Cyprus, but came to Athens in his youth.
He gave his lectures in a porch, called in Greek a
Stoa, from which he and his followers are called Stoics. He
taught that men should live simply, and learn to be neither
fond of pleasure nor cast down by sorrow.
PHILOSOPHERS OF ATHENS
One of Zeno's rivals was a philosopher named Epicurus. He founded a school in Athens and taught there for thirty-six years. His enemies accused him of teaching that pleasure was the only thing to live for, and many people still have this idea. We call a man an "epicure" who is very fond of high living. Epicurus, however, really used the word pleasure to mean peace of mind, not the mere satisfaction of eating and drinking. Both he and his pupils lived in a very simple way.
One of the oddest of the Greek philosophers was Diogenes. He used to stand in the public places of the city and ridicule the follies of his fellow-citizens. Because of this habit he and his disciples were called cynics, or growlers, from a Greek word which means dog. It is said that he lived in a tub.
DIOGENES IN HIS TUB
Many stories are told of the curious doings and sayings of Diogenes. Once in broad daylight he walked through the streets of Athens carrying a lighted lantern.
"What are you about now, Diogenes?" asked one who met him.
"I am looking for a man," sneered Diogenes.
DIOGENES LOOKING FOR A MAN
Once, when he was on a voyage, the ship in which he was sailing was captured by pirates. The passengers and crew were taken to Crete and sold as slaves. The auctioneer who was selling them asked Diogenes what he could do. "I can rule men," was the answer. "Sell me to some one who wishes a master."
When the great Council of the States of Greece honored Alexander by asking him to lead their forces against Persia, the young conqueror visited Diogenes. The philosopher was then living at Corinth, in the house of the man who had bought him as a slave. He was in the garden basking in the sun when Alexander visited him.
"Can I do anything to help you, Diogenes?" asked Alexander.
"Nothing, but get out of my sunshine," replied Diogenes.
As Alexander was leaving this man of few wants, he said, "If I were not Alexander, I should wish to be Diogenes." It was as though he had said, "If I were not going to conquer the world, I should like to have the power which Diogenes has to conquer self."
A NUMBER of celebrated painters lived during the reign of Alexander. The most famous was Apelles. Alexander would allow no one else to paint his portrait. Apelles had talent, but he became a great artist as much by his patient industry as by his talent. His motto was "Never a day without a line."
Once he painted a horse and exhibited it in a contest with some of his rivals who also had painted pictures of horses. He saw that the judges were not going to give the prize to his picture, so he requested that all the pictures should be shown to some horses. This was done, and the animals paid no more attention to the pictures of Apelles' rivals than they would have paid to blank boards, but when Apelles' horse was shown to them they neighed as though they had seen a friend. | <urn:uuid:110ca3c4-a938-4ae5-aa9d-b6c6a1e5fd00> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.gatewaytotheclassics.com/browse/displayitem.php?item=books/haaren/greece/aristotle | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606975.49/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122101729-20200122130729-00214.warc.gz | en | 0.995042 | 1,044 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
-0.20656658709049225,
0.5927501916885376,
0.4097437858581543,
-0.2685198187828064,
-0.8391509652137756,
-0.6111901998519897,
0.5232516527175903,
0.4246058464050293,
-0.10722582042217255,
0.18407300114631653,
-0.3825593590736389,
-0.35004743933677673,
0.4118371605873108,
0.23975712060928345... | 1 | HILE Alexander was conquering the world, there lived in Athens a
man whose work survived hundreds of years after the
conqueror's empire fell to pieces. Indeed, it exists
After Alexander became king Aristotle went to Athens and
established a school of philosophy. His fame grew and he
was called "the man of wisdom." He spent much of his time
in writing, and wrote about almost everything that men
thought of in his time. Some of his works are studied in
ARISTOTLE TEACHING ALEXANDER
Like all other great men of Greece, Aristotle had enemies. Some of them accused him of not having respect for the gods. He, therefore, fled from Athens in order, as he said, to keep the Athenians from sinning against philosophy by banishing him. He died in exile.
It is said that for about two hundred years after his death people did not know what had become of his writings. The men to whom they were left had buried them in an underground chamber for fear the king of Pergamos, who was very proud of his library, would get hold of them. When the manuscripts were at last found they could still be read.
For hundreds of years after that Aristotle's writings were more widely studied in Europe than almost any other books.
A NOTHER great philosopher who lived during the time of Alexander was Zeno. He was born in Cyprus, but came to Athens in his youth.
He gave his lectures in a porch, called in Greek a
Stoa, from which he and his followers are called Stoics. He
taught that men should live simply, and learn to be neither
fond of pleasure nor cast down by sorrow.
PHILOSOPHERS OF ATHENS
One of Zeno's rivals was a philosopher named Epicurus. He founded a school in Athens and taught there for thirty-six years. His enemies accused him of teaching that pleasure was the only thing to live for, and many people still have this idea. We call a man an "epicure" who is very fond of high living. Epicurus, however, really used the word pleasure to mean peace of mind, not the mere satisfaction of eating and drinking. Both he and his pupils lived in a very simple way.
One of the oddest of the Greek philosophers was Diogenes. He used to stand in the public places of the city and ridicule the follies of his fellow-citizens. Because of this habit he and his disciples were called cynics, or growlers, from a Greek word which means dog. It is said that he lived in a tub.
DIOGENES IN HIS TUB
Many stories are told of the curious doings and sayings of Diogenes. Once in broad daylight he walked through the streets of Athens carrying a lighted lantern.
"What are you about now, Diogenes?" asked one who met him.
"I am looking for a man," sneered Diogenes.
DIOGENES LOOKING FOR A MAN
Once, when he was on a voyage, the ship in which he was sailing was captured by pirates. The passengers and crew were taken to Crete and sold as slaves. The auctioneer who was selling them asked Diogenes what he could do. "I can rule men," was the answer. "Sell me to some one who wishes a master."
When the great Council of the States of Greece honored Alexander by asking him to lead their forces against Persia, the young conqueror visited Diogenes. The philosopher was then living at Corinth, in the house of the man who had bought him as a slave. He was in the garden basking in the sun when Alexander visited him.
"Can I do anything to help you, Diogenes?" asked Alexander.
"Nothing, but get out of my sunshine," replied Diogenes.
As Alexander was leaving this man of few wants, he said, "If I were not Alexander, I should wish to be Diogenes." It was as though he had said, "If I were not going to conquer the world, I should like to have the power which Diogenes has to conquer self."
A NUMBER of celebrated painters lived during the reign of Alexander. The most famous was Apelles. Alexander would allow no one else to paint his portrait. Apelles had talent, but he became a great artist as much by his patient industry as by his talent. His motto was "Never a day without a line."
Once he painted a horse and exhibited it in a contest with some of his rivals who also had painted pictures of horses. He saw that the judges were not going to give the prize to his picture, so he requested that all the pictures should be shown to some horses. This was done, and the animals paid no more attention to the pictures of Apelles' rivals than they would have paid to blank boards, but when Apelles' horse was shown to them they neighed as though they had seen a friend. | 1,021 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Although they had earlier fought against the British and the French, after the Declaration of Independence in 1776 the Indian nations in the Old Northwest (the area to the east of the Mississippi and north of the Ohio River) tended to side with the British against the newly defined Americans. Perhaps the greatest native leader to have arisen since Europeans first arrived in North America was Tecumseh of the Shawnee. Born near Springfield, Ohio, in 1768, Tecumseh eventually died in 1813 at Battle of the Thames, near Detroit, fighting alongside the British with his Indian warriors.
Tecumseh was one of eight children. One of his brothers, ten years younger than he, was named Lauliwasikau, which meant "Loud Mouth." Apparently he was a noisy baby, and one of triplets at that. Unlike Tecumseh who was a renowned warrior and thinker—he read the Bible and also books on world history— Lauliwasikau was a dissolute character. As a child he had been blinded in one eye in a hunting accident, and he fell steadily into alcohol over-consumption as he grew older. In 1805 he drank himself into such a stupor that his family thought he was dead and began preparing a funeral pyre. To considerable surprise Lauliwasikau suddenly awoke, saying that the Great Spirit had shown him wonderful visions. He then foreswore liquor and all other appurtenances of the white man and declared that he was an instrument for the Indian people to lead their way forward. Tecumseh had long realized that for the American Indians to survive against the encroachment of the whites from the east it would be necessary for all the tribes to band together in a common purpose. His efforts in this regard had been stymied by inter-tribe
FIGURE 8-2. Tenskwatawa, the Shawnee Prophet, used foreknowledge of the eclipse of 1806 to stir up unrest among the American Indians of Ohio and Indiana.
rivalry. Now, though, Tecumseh saw in his brother the instrument to unite the Indians to resist the otherwise inevitable, gradual seizure of their lands.
Lauliwasikau's name was changed to become Tenskwatawa, meaning "He Who Opens the Door." He is more often recalled, though, as The Shawnee Prophet (Figure 8-2). He was a shaman, a charismatic religious leader whose influence quickly spread through Ohio and Indiana. He claimed he could cure all types of disease and provide divine protection in battle for his adherents, a popular notion that the people were ready to believe.
Tenskwatawa himself was influenced by the Millennial Church, which had originated in eighteenth-century England, but owing to persecution had migrated across the Atlantic in 1774 to seek a more tolerant horizon. The members are usually known as the Shakers, due to a ritual dance they perform involving a shaking motion of the body. Thus the Prophet was directly affected by an English connection, and he sought to build up anti-American feelings to the benefit of the morale of his own people. He was very clear in differentiating between the different peoples of Eu ropean origin. In 1807 he said: "I am the Father of the English, of the French, of the Spaniards and of the Indians. . . . But the Americans I did not make. They are not my children but the children of the Evil Spirit. . . . They are very numerous but I hate them. They are unjust—they have taken away your lands which were not made for them."
Was this article helpful? | <urn:uuid:05e954de-623b-45ed-b70b-59ed3ab462f1> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.astronomyclub.xyz/solar-eclipse-2/the-shawnee-prophet.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589861.0/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117152059-20200117180059-00419.warc.gz | en | 0.985889 | 748 | 3.8125 | 4 | [
-0.10739064961671829,
0.5667418241500854,
0.08132112771272659,
-0.24002188444137573,
-0.5131101012229919,
-0.40761303901672363,
0.3273060917854309,
0.21739622950553894,
-0.16978394985198975,
-0.03829280659556389,
0.03930364176630974,
-0.40697482228279114,
0.05089866742491722,
0.07542981207... | 2 | Although they had earlier fought against the British and the French, after the Declaration of Independence in 1776 the Indian nations in the Old Northwest (the area to the east of the Mississippi and north of the Ohio River) tended to side with the British against the newly defined Americans. Perhaps the greatest native leader to have arisen since Europeans first arrived in North America was Tecumseh of the Shawnee. Born near Springfield, Ohio, in 1768, Tecumseh eventually died in 1813 at Battle of the Thames, near Detroit, fighting alongside the British with his Indian warriors.
Tecumseh was one of eight children. One of his brothers, ten years younger than he, was named Lauliwasikau, which meant "Loud Mouth." Apparently he was a noisy baby, and one of triplets at that. Unlike Tecumseh who was a renowned warrior and thinker—he read the Bible and also books on world history— Lauliwasikau was a dissolute character. As a child he had been blinded in one eye in a hunting accident, and he fell steadily into alcohol over-consumption as he grew older. In 1805 he drank himself into such a stupor that his family thought he was dead and began preparing a funeral pyre. To considerable surprise Lauliwasikau suddenly awoke, saying that the Great Spirit had shown him wonderful visions. He then foreswore liquor and all other appurtenances of the white man and declared that he was an instrument for the Indian people to lead their way forward. Tecumseh had long realized that for the American Indians to survive against the encroachment of the whites from the east it would be necessary for all the tribes to band together in a common purpose. His efforts in this regard had been stymied by inter-tribe
FIGURE 8-2. Tenskwatawa, the Shawnee Prophet, used foreknowledge of the eclipse of 1806 to stir up unrest among the American Indians of Ohio and Indiana.
rivalry. Now, though, Tecumseh saw in his brother the instrument to unite the Indians to resist the otherwise inevitable, gradual seizure of their lands.
Lauliwasikau's name was changed to become Tenskwatawa, meaning "He Who Opens the Door." He is more often recalled, though, as The Shawnee Prophet (Figure 8-2). He was a shaman, a charismatic religious leader whose influence quickly spread through Ohio and Indiana. He claimed he could cure all types of disease and provide divine protection in battle for his adherents, a popular notion that the people were ready to believe.
Tenskwatawa himself was influenced by the Millennial Church, which had originated in eighteenth-century England, but owing to persecution had migrated across the Atlantic in 1774 to seek a more tolerant horizon. The members are usually known as the Shakers, due to a ritual dance they perform involving a shaking motion of the body. Thus the Prophet was directly affected by an English connection, and he sought to build up anti-American feelings to the benefit of the morale of his own people. He was very clear in differentiating between the different peoples of Eu ropean origin. In 1807 he said: "I am the Father of the English, of the French, of the Spaniards and of the Indians. . . . But the Americans I did not make. They are not my children but the children of the Evil Spirit. . . . They are very numerous but I hate them. They are unjust—they have taken away your lands which were not made for them."
Was this article helpful? | 764 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Herodotus and Homer were impartial in their narratives. Although the two of them were Greeks, they were not prejudiced against their opponents such as the Persians and Trojans. For instance, Herodotus treated the Greeks and Persians without partiality or hatred. Similarly, in his writings, Homer portrayed the Greeks and Trojans equally (Lendering).
Herodotus and Homer were history writers. They wrote about the major accounts of the past. In their writings, most of the content revolved around Greek heroes. Their major theme is war. They wrote about their people including rulers who had participated in major wars. For example, Herodotus wrote about the troops who had participated in the Xerxes expedition to Greece. On the other hand, Homer wrote about the Battle of Thermopylae (Lendering).
The major difference between Homer and Herodotus is their style of writing. Herodotus used continuous prose whereas Homer used a meter. While constructing his narratives, Herodotus ignored compromises. Unlike Homer who manipulated his writings to fit certain stylistic rubric or sound, Herodotus used the natural and common tongue and ignored the common writing styles (Lendering).
The second difference between Homer and Herodotus is their basis of writing. Herodotus based his writings entirely on research. He gathered most of his information by traveling widely. He travelled to several cities so that he could get the information he wanted. On the other hand, Homer depended on his inspiration to compose his work. Unlike his predecessor, Homer did not rely on research (Lendering).
The third difference between Homer and Herodotus is on the historical period of the events they covered. Herodotus focused on events that were verifiable while Homer concentrated on legendary events. Herodotus wrote about recent events that most people could remember. Homer, however, wrote about events in legendary tales that were hard to verify (Lendering).
Lendering, Jona. “Herodotus of Halicarnassus.” Livius.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Sept. 2014. . | <urn:uuid:09092eb7-4c06-460d-9ac2-11f7b61e24ed> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://freebookessay.com/free-essay-examples/homer-and-herodotus-essay-comparison/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606975.49/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122101729-20200122130729-00397.warc.gz | en | 0.986437 | 443 | 3.8125 | 4 | [
0.2916427254676819,
0.08839468657970428,
0.4236409664154053,
-0.02219267748296261,
-0.36697137355804443,
-0.49057650566101074,
-0.1084265485405922,
0.8128669261932373,
-0.07516530156135559,
0.0853782445192337,
-0.0930626317858696,
-0.19706876575946808,
-0.1255747526884079,
0.46872931718826... | 2 | Herodotus and Homer were impartial in their narratives. Although the two of them were Greeks, they were not prejudiced against their opponents such as the Persians and Trojans. For instance, Herodotus treated the Greeks and Persians without partiality or hatred. Similarly, in his writings, Homer portrayed the Greeks and Trojans equally (Lendering).
Herodotus and Homer were history writers. They wrote about the major accounts of the past. In their writings, most of the content revolved around Greek heroes. Their major theme is war. They wrote about their people including rulers who had participated in major wars. For example, Herodotus wrote about the troops who had participated in the Xerxes expedition to Greece. On the other hand, Homer wrote about the Battle of Thermopylae (Lendering).
The major difference between Homer and Herodotus is their style of writing. Herodotus used continuous prose whereas Homer used a meter. While constructing his narratives, Herodotus ignored compromises. Unlike Homer who manipulated his writings to fit certain stylistic rubric or sound, Herodotus used the natural and common tongue and ignored the common writing styles (Lendering).
The second difference between Homer and Herodotus is their basis of writing. Herodotus based his writings entirely on research. He gathered most of his information by traveling widely. He travelled to several cities so that he could get the information he wanted. On the other hand, Homer depended on his inspiration to compose his work. Unlike his predecessor, Homer did not rely on research (Lendering).
The third difference between Homer and Herodotus is on the historical period of the events they covered. Herodotus focused on events that were verifiable while Homer concentrated on legendary events. Herodotus wrote about recent events that most people could remember. Homer, however, wrote about events in legendary tales that were hard to verify (Lendering).
Lendering, Jona. “Herodotus of Halicarnassus.” Livius.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Sept. 2014. . | 450 | ENGLISH | 1 |
West Haven’s Earliest Days
We acknowledge the efforts of Lorraine Wood Rockefeller, who originally set these words down in about 1960.
The laws of social conduct during the 1600s were rigid. Any lack in the written and in the common law was quickly supplied by the strict religious code, the belief that the acts of every individual definitely affected and concerned the whole community. Ordinary gossip was often severely punished. The offenders were publicly rebuked, and if that was not sufficient deterrent, a fine followed.
Controversies between the people concerning personal rights and wrongs were of such a simple character in the period 1639 to 1664 that they could easily be heard and determined by magistrates chosen from year to year from the body of the people. The complicated system of tenure under which real estate was held in England never existed in Connecticut. The land, as it was purchased from the Indians, was allotted to different settlers, passed by inheritance to their children, or was conveyed by a simple form of deed and record.
Intoxication on the Sabbath was considered a more aggravated offense and a heavy fine, a public whipping, or a time in the stocks was punishment. The old Puritan magistrates did on some occasions temper justice with mercy for in one case the accused was acquitted for “being drunk with strong waters” on account of his infirmity and because the excessive intake “was occasioned by the extremity of the cold.”
On June 4, 1639, the free planters assembled and all legislative and judicial powers were vested in a court consisting of 12 Free Burgesses. None but church members were eligible. To this Court was given the power of appointing magistrates.
The Court had no mercy for gossipers and scandal-mongers, and they were whipped severely for slandering, and many times a scold or nag might be gagged with a muzzle-like affair and made to stand in public. Some were placed in the stocks or pillories.
Court business increased so rapidly that in 1643 it became necessary to make a reorganization of the Courts in New Haven and the adjacent towns that were under the same jurisdiction.
To be continued- | <urn:uuid:9768b270-c47f-4e47-b1da-93f0a6d9fbf6> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://westhavenvoice.com/historians-corner-74/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700675.78/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127112805-20200127142805-00404.warc.gz | en | 0.987657 | 448 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
-0.3111950755119324,
-0.049587685614824295,
0.038728903979063034,
-0.35866832733154297,
0.04568449407815933,
0.23846955597400665,
0.0669623389840126,
-0.4187082052230835,
0.19293414056301117,
-0.1520632654428482,
-0.23084819316864014,
0.36425647139549255,
0.2260836511850357,
0.315004080533... | 5 | West Haven’s Earliest Days
We acknowledge the efforts of Lorraine Wood Rockefeller, who originally set these words down in about 1960.
The laws of social conduct during the 1600s were rigid. Any lack in the written and in the common law was quickly supplied by the strict religious code, the belief that the acts of every individual definitely affected and concerned the whole community. Ordinary gossip was often severely punished. The offenders were publicly rebuked, and if that was not sufficient deterrent, a fine followed.
Controversies between the people concerning personal rights and wrongs were of such a simple character in the period 1639 to 1664 that they could easily be heard and determined by magistrates chosen from year to year from the body of the people. The complicated system of tenure under which real estate was held in England never existed in Connecticut. The land, as it was purchased from the Indians, was allotted to different settlers, passed by inheritance to their children, or was conveyed by a simple form of deed and record.
Intoxication on the Sabbath was considered a more aggravated offense and a heavy fine, a public whipping, or a time in the stocks was punishment. The old Puritan magistrates did on some occasions temper justice with mercy for in one case the accused was acquitted for “being drunk with strong waters” on account of his infirmity and because the excessive intake “was occasioned by the extremity of the cold.”
On June 4, 1639, the free planters assembled and all legislative and judicial powers were vested in a court consisting of 12 Free Burgesses. None but church members were eligible. To this Court was given the power of appointing magistrates.
The Court had no mercy for gossipers and scandal-mongers, and they were whipped severely for slandering, and many times a scold or nag might be gagged with a muzzle-like affair and made to stand in public. Some were placed in the stocks or pillories.
Court business increased so rapidly that in 1643 it became necessary to make a reorganization of the Courts in New Haven and the adjacent towns that were under the same jurisdiction.
To be continued- | 456 | ENGLISH | 1 |
7. The Tudor Dynasty -
The Tudor Dynasty of England and Wales lasted from 1485 to 1603. During this time, six monarchs ruled the Kingdom of England, Wales, and Ireland although some individuals claim it was only five. The Tudor reign saw some of the greatest changes in the history of the United Kingdom and dealt with political issues like marriage, divorce, and the rights of women to ascend the throne in succession. The House of Tudor fell when the final monarch died with no legitimate heir.
6. Henry VII -
Henry VII, born Henry Tudor, was the son of Edmund Tudor and Margaret Beaufort, a descendant of King Edward III. He grew up under the rule of King Edward IV, of the House of York. When King Richard III took the throne after the death of Edward IV, Margaret worked on garnering support for the House of Lancaster to which her son had claim. Henry returned to England from Brittany in 1485 to challenge King Richard III. After defeating the king, Henry declared himself King Henry VII.
In order to join the two feuding Houses, referred to as the Wars of the Roses, Henry married Elizabeth of York, the daughter of former King Edward IV. Under his rule, King Henry VII worked to strengthen international relations by joining his family with foreign monarchs through the marriages of his children to the King James IV of Scotland and the Princess Catherine of Aragon (daughter of the King and Queen of Spain). He took the country to war twice and worked toward peace with France. He ruled until his death in April of 1509. Historians believe his greatest contribution was restoring the finances in the Treasury of England.
5. Henry VIII -
Henry VIII became the heir to the throne when his older brother, Arthur, Prince of Wales, died. Henry the VIII married Catherine of Aragon on June 11, 1509. She had previously been married to Arthur, but he died after 4 months of marriage when Catherine was only 14 years old. Only one of their children survived, Princess Mary. Worried that the Tudor line would not continue due to a lack of male heirs, King Henry VIII began to talk to his Chief Minister, Cardinal Wolsey, about the possibility of annulling the marriage. Both the Catholic church and Catherine opposed the divorce. This issue provoked the laws that broke England’s relationship with Rome and began the Protestant Reformation. King Henry VIII became the Head of the Church of England. He married a total of 6 times. His second wife, Queen Anne Boleyn, gave birth to his second daughter, Princess Elizabeth. His third wife, Queen Jane Seymour, gave birth to his first son, Edward VI, and she died shortly after. He died on January 28, 1547.
4. Edward VI -
Edward VI assumed the throne at 9 years of age; his sisters Mary and Elizabeth were not considered legitimate heirs because their mothers’ marriages (Anne and Catherine) had been annulled. Because of his young age, his uncle, Edward Seymour, took control as regent and tried to take the Protestant Reformation to the Church of Scotland. Seymour was eventually removed from power by the council. Both the following regent and King Edward VI were supporters for the Protestant religion. In 1553, Edward became sick and worried that his sister Mary would take the throne and reestablish the Catholic religion, he signed his will and gave Lady Jane Grey, his cousin and granddaughter of King Henry VIII’s sister Mary Tudor, the right to the throne. King Edward VI died on July 6, 1553.
3. Jane -
Lady Jane Grey became Queen of England for only 9 days, from July 10 until July 19 of 1553. Her position and ascension to the throne was disputed by the general public. During this brief rule, she refused to name her husband as King. She was found guilty of treason and beheaded on February 12, 1554.
2. Mary I -
Although Queen Mary I entered the throne in 1554 with a majority of popular support, that soon changed. She announced her planned marriage to Prince Philip of Spain and the public expressed their disdain for an alliance with Spain. A rebellion attempted to overthrow her place as Queen and replace her with her younger sister, Elizabeth I. It was unsuccessful, but Elizabeth was placed in prison. Mary had no children during her rule, which lasted for 5 years. She attempted to restore the Catholic faith to England, persecuting and killing many Protestants from 1555 to 1558. She is now commonly referred to as Bloody Mary. During her reign, she managed to reverse the country’s debt and inflation, reduce poverty, and improve trade. She died on November 17, 1558.
1. Elizabeth I -
Elizabeth I was crowned in January of 1559, which was a difficult ordeal given that the ceremony is performed by Catholic bishops and she was a Protestant. She became Supreme Governor of the Church of England and mandated church attendance every Sunday. The council under her reign tried to pressure the Queen to marry so that a King may assume the duties of governing the kingdom, but she never married. On several occasions rebels attempted to overthrow her and replace her with Mary, Queen of Scots. Queen Elizabeth ordered Queen Mary’s execution, which occurred in 1587. She established a form of welfare for the poor during the years of famine, had no external debts, and had actually loaned money in the name of England. She died in March of 1603 with no heirs and no named successor. She was the last of the line of Tudors.
For How Long Did The Tudor Dynasty Rule In England?
A royal house of Welsh origin, the House of Tudor ruled the Kingdom of England and its realms from 1485 until 1603. They succeeded the House of Plantagenet and were succeeded by the House of Stuart.
The Tudor Dynasty
|1||Henry VII||28 January 1457 Pembroke Castle||22 August 1485 (crowned at Westminster Abbey on 30 October 1485)||21 April 1509 Richmond Palace aged 52|
|2||Henry VIII||28 June 1491 Greenwich Palace||21 April 1509 (crowned at Westminster Abbey on 24 June 1509)||28 January 1547 Palace of Whitehall aged 55|
|3||Edward VI||12 October 1537 Hampton Court Palace||28 January 1547 (crowned at Westminster Abbey on 20 February 1547)||6 July 1553 Greenwich Palace aged 15|
|4||Jane (disputed)||1537 Bradgate Park||10 July 1553 (never crowned)||12 February 1554 executed at the Tower of London aged 16–17|
|5||Mary I||18 February 1516 Palace of Placentia||19 July 1553 (crowned at Westminster Abbey on 1 October 1553)||17 November 1558 St James's Palace aged 42|
|6||Elizabeth I||7 September 1533 Greenwich Palace||17 November 1558 (crowned at Westminster Abbey on 15 January 1559)||24 March 1603 Richmond Palace aged 69|
About the Author
Amber is a freelance writer, English as a foreign language teacher, and Spanish-English translator. She lives with her husband and 3 cats.
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:f56276aa-35fb-4e23-9479-52bdbf0e72c0> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-tudor-dynasty.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601615.66/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121044233-20200121073233-00418.warc.gz | en | 0.982314 | 1,527 | 3.46875 | 3 | [
-0.2681576609611511,
0.4708788990974426,
0.42323216795921326,
-0.07913757860660553,
-0.3240649104118347,
0.11325198411941528,
0.0964936912059784,
-0.006566794589161873,
0.17709481716156006,
-0.09324777126312256,
-0.12375030666589737,
-0.3204353451728821,
0.1545870155096054,
0.2822728753089... | 2 | 7. The Tudor Dynasty -
The Tudor Dynasty of England and Wales lasted from 1485 to 1603. During this time, six monarchs ruled the Kingdom of England, Wales, and Ireland although some individuals claim it was only five. The Tudor reign saw some of the greatest changes in the history of the United Kingdom and dealt with political issues like marriage, divorce, and the rights of women to ascend the throne in succession. The House of Tudor fell when the final monarch died with no legitimate heir.
6. Henry VII -
Henry VII, born Henry Tudor, was the son of Edmund Tudor and Margaret Beaufort, a descendant of King Edward III. He grew up under the rule of King Edward IV, of the House of York. When King Richard III took the throne after the death of Edward IV, Margaret worked on garnering support for the House of Lancaster to which her son had claim. Henry returned to England from Brittany in 1485 to challenge King Richard III. After defeating the king, Henry declared himself King Henry VII.
In order to join the two feuding Houses, referred to as the Wars of the Roses, Henry married Elizabeth of York, the daughter of former King Edward IV. Under his rule, King Henry VII worked to strengthen international relations by joining his family with foreign monarchs through the marriages of his children to the King James IV of Scotland and the Princess Catherine of Aragon (daughter of the King and Queen of Spain). He took the country to war twice and worked toward peace with France. He ruled until his death in April of 1509. Historians believe his greatest contribution was restoring the finances in the Treasury of England.
5. Henry VIII -
Henry VIII became the heir to the throne when his older brother, Arthur, Prince of Wales, died. Henry the VIII married Catherine of Aragon on June 11, 1509. She had previously been married to Arthur, but he died after 4 months of marriage when Catherine was only 14 years old. Only one of their children survived, Princess Mary. Worried that the Tudor line would not continue due to a lack of male heirs, King Henry VIII began to talk to his Chief Minister, Cardinal Wolsey, about the possibility of annulling the marriage. Both the Catholic church and Catherine opposed the divorce. This issue provoked the laws that broke England’s relationship with Rome and began the Protestant Reformation. King Henry VIII became the Head of the Church of England. He married a total of 6 times. His second wife, Queen Anne Boleyn, gave birth to his second daughter, Princess Elizabeth. His third wife, Queen Jane Seymour, gave birth to his first son, Edward VI, and she died shortly after. He died on January 28, 1547.
4. Edward VI -
Edward VI assumed the throne at 9 years of age; his sisters Mary and Elizabeth were not considered legitimate heirs because their mothers’ marriages (Anne and Catherine) had been annulled. Because of his young age, his uncle, Edward Seymour, took control as regent and tried to take the Protestant Reformation to the Church of Scotland. Seymour was eventually removed from power by the council. Both the following regent and King Edward VI were supporters for the Protestant religion. In 1553, Edward became sick and worried that his sister Mary would take the throne and reestablish the Catholic religion, he signed his will and gave Lady Jane Grey, his cousin and granddaughter of King Henry VIII’s sister Mary Tudor, the right to the throne. King Edward VI died on July 6, 1553.
3. Jane -
Lady Jane Grey became Queen of England for only 9 days, from July 10 until July 19 of 1553. Her position and ascension to the throne was disputed by the general public. During this brief rule, she refused to name her husband as King. She was found guilty of treason and beheaded on February 12, 1554.
2. Mary I -
Although Queen Mary I entered the throne in 1554 with a majority of popular support, that soon changed. She announced her planned marriage to Prince Philip of Spain and the public expressed their disdain for an alliance with Spain. A rebellion attempted to overthrow her place as Queen and replace her with her younger sister, Elizabeth I. It was unsuccessful, but Elizabeth was placed in prison. Mary had no children during her rule, which lasted for 5 years. She attempted to restore the Catholic faith to England, persecuting and killing many Protestants from 1555 to 1558. She is now commonly referred to as Bloody Mary. During her reign, she managed to reverse the country’s debt and inflation, reduce poverty, and improve trade. She died on November 17, 1558.
1. Elizabeth I -
Elizabeth I was crowned in January of 1559, which was a difficult ordeal given that the ceremony is performed by Catholic bishops and she was a Protestant. She became Supreme Governor of the Church of England and mandated church attendance every Sunday. The council under her reign tried to pressure the Queen to marry so that a King may assume the duties of governing the kingdom, but she never married. On several occasions rebels attempted to overthrow her and replace her with Mary, Queen of Scots. Queen Elizabeth ordered Queen Mary’s execution, which occurred in 1587. She established a form of welfare for the poor during the years of famine, had no external debts, and had actually loaned money in the name of England. She died in March of 1603 with no heirs and no named successor. She was the last of the line of Tudors.
For How Long Did The Tudor Dynasty Rule In England?
A royal house of Welsh origin, the House of Tudor ruled the Kingdom of England and its realms from 1485 until 1603. They succeeded the House of Plantagenet and were succeeded by the House of Stuart.
The Tudor Dynasty
|1||Henry VII||28 January 1457 Pembroke Castle||22 August 1485 (crowned at Westminster Abbey on 30 October 1485)||21 April 1509 Richmond Palace aged 52|
|2||Henry VIII||28 June 1491 Greenwich Palace||21 April 1509 (crowned at Westminster Abbey on 24 June 1509)||28 January 1547 Palace of Whitehall aged 55|
|3||Edward VI||12 October 1537 Hampton Court Palace||28 January 1547 (crowned at Westminster Abbey on 20 February 1547)||6 July 1553 Greenwich Palace aged 15|
|4||Jane (disputed)||1537 Bradgate Park||10 July 1553 (never crowned)||12 February 1554 executed at the Tower of London aged 16–17|
|5||Mary I||18 February 1516 Palace of Placentia||19 July 1553 (crowned at Westminster Abbey on 1 October 1553)||17 November 1558 St James's Palace aged 42|
|6||Elizabeth I||7 September 1533 Greenwich Palace||17 November 1558 (crowned at Westminster Abbey on 15 January 1559)||24 March 1603 Richmond Palace aged 69|
About the Author
Amber is a freelance writer, English as a foreign language teacher, and Spanish-English translator. She lives with her husband and 3 cats.
Your MLA Citation
Your APA Citation
Your Chicago Citation
Your Harvard CitationRemember to italicize the title of this article in your Harvard citation. | 1,662 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Skara Brae, one of the most perfectly preserved Stone Age villages in Europe, which was covered for hundreds of years by a sand dune on the shore of the Bay of Skaill, Mainland, Orkney Islands, Scotland. Exposed by a great storm in 1850, four buildings were excavated during the 1860s by William Watt. After another storm in 1926, further excavations were undertaken by the Ancient Monuments branch of the British Ministry of Works. During the 1970s radiocarbon dating established that the settlement was inhabited from about 3200 to 2200 bce. In 1999, as part of the Heart of Neolithic Orkney, Skara Brae was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage site, along with Maes Howe, a large chambered tomb, as well as two ceremonial stone circles, the Stones of Stenness and the Ring of Brodgar.
Though the dwellings at Skara Brae are built of undressed slabs of stone from the beach, put together without any mortar, the drift sand that filled them immediately after their evacuation preserved the walls in places to a height of eight feet. Because there were no trees on the island, furniture had to be made of stone and thus also survived. The village consisted of several one-room dwellings, each a rectangle with rounded corners, entered through a low, narrow doorway that could be closed by a stone slab.
When the village was abruptly deserted it consisted of seven or eight huts linked together by paved alleys. Six huts had been put artificially underground by banking around them midden consisting of sand and peat ash stiffened with refuse, and the alleys had become tunnels roofed with stone slabs. The whole residential complex was drained by a sewer into which the drains from individual huts discharged.
The inhabitants of the village lived mainly on the flesh and presumably the milk of their herds of tame cattle and sheep and on limpets and other shellfish. They probably dressed in skins. For their equipment the villagers relied exclusively on local materials—stone, beach pebbles, and animal bones. Vessels were made of pottery; though the technique was poor, most vessels had elaborate decoration. As ornaments the villagers wore pendants and coloured beads made of the marrow bones of sheep, the roots of cows’ teeth, the teeth of killer whales, and boars’ tusks. Games were played with dice of walrus ivory and with knucklebones.
A number of stones in the walls of the huts and alleys bear roughly scratched lozenge and similar rectilinear patterns. Beneath the walls the foundations of older huts were discovered. In plan and furniture these agreed precisely with the material found covering them. The pottery of the lower levels was adorned with incised as well as relief designs. Among these was the true spiral represented on one potsherd—the only example of this pattern in pottery known in prehistoric Britain. | <urn:uuid:0cbc7808-3a8f-4a4e-a100-56a72b4aa641> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.britannica.com/print/article/547291 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681412.74/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125191854-20200125221854-00497.warc.gz | en | 0.982967 | 607 | 3.734375 | 4 | [
-0.07039082050323486,
0.2241455614566803,
0.1419040411710739,
0.1403668373823166,
0.2970302700996399,
-0.19471506774425507,
-0.27987322211265564,
-0.0926828682422638,
-0.3604300320148468,
0.18550187349319458,
0.028570085763931274,
-0.7738598585128784,
0.3443037271499634,
0.3475920855998993... | 1 | Skara Brae, one of the most perfectly preserved Stone Age villages in Europe, which was covered for hundreds of years by a sand dune on the shore of the Bay of Skaill, Mainland, Orkney Islands, Scotland. Exposed by a great storm in 1850, four buildings were excavated during the 1860s by William Watt. After another storm in 1926, further excavations were undertaken by the Ancient Monuments branch of the British Ministry of Works. During the 1970s radiocarbon dating established that the settlement was inhabited from about 3200 to 2200 bce. In 1999, as part of the Heart of Neolithic Orkney, Skara Brae was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage site, along with Maes Howe, a large chambered tomb, as well as two ceremonial stone circles, the Stones of Stenness and the Ring of Brodgar.
Though the dwellings at Skara Brae are built of undressed slabs of stone from the beach, put together without any mortar, the drift sand that filled them immediately after their evacuation preserved the walls in places to a height of eight feet. Because there were no trees on the island, furniture had to be made of stone and thus also survived. The village consisted of several one-room dwellings, each a rectangle with rounded corners, entered through a low, narrow doorway that could be closed by a stone slab.
When the village was abruptly deserted it consisted of seven or eight huts linked together by paved alleys. Six huts had been put artificially underground by banking around them midden consisting of sand and peat ash stiffened with refuse, and the alleys had become tunnels roofed with stone slabs. The whole residential complex was drained by a sewer into which the drains from individual huts discharged.
The inhabitants of the village lived mainly on the flesh and presumably the milk of their herds of tame cattle and sheep and on limpets and other shellfish. They probably dressed in skins. For their equipment the villagers relied exclusively on local materials—stone, beach pebbles, and animal bones. Vessels were made of pottery; though the technique was poor, most vessels had elaborate decoration. As ornaments the villagers wore pendants and coloured beads made of the marrow bones of sheep, the roots of cows’ teeth, the teeth of killer whales, and boars’ tusks. Games were played with dice of walrus ivory and with knucklebones.
A number of stones in the walls of the huts and alleys bear roughly scratched lozenge and similar rectilinear patterns. Beneath the walls the foundations of older huts were discovered. In plan and furniture these agreed precisely with the material found covering them. The pottery of the lower levels was adorned with incised as well as relief designs. Among these was the true spiral represented on one potsherd—the only example of this pattern in pottery known in prehistoric Britain. | 622 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Salvador Dali Research Papers
Salvador Dali (1904-1989) was a leading painter of Surrealism. His most representative and famous work remains The Persistence of Memory, which he painted in 1931. Even causal art students will immediately recognize the painting with the melted clocks. Dali, later known for his exaggerated pencil mustache, was later more famous for his antics and being “Salvador Dali” than much of his actual art.
- Salvador Dai was born in Figueres, Spain
- Dali was the son of a lawyer
- He studied drawing as a teen and attended the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando in Madrid, where he became known as somewhat of a dandy.
- His early experiments with Cubism gained him some notoriety
- In 1926 he traveled to Paris to meet his hero Picasso.
- Dali’s work increasingly gravitated to the avant-garde, morphing into Surrealism.
The Persistence of Memory appeared in 1932, a representation of the rejection of rigid time. Today the work hangs in the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York City. Dali’s work was introduced into the United States in 1934, through an exhibition of his work, including The Persistence of Memory. Two years later his work appeared in the London International Surrealist Exhibition, during which he delivered a lecture in a deep-sea diving suit and helmet.
Much of Dali’s work employs heavy symbolism, including the recurrent use of an elephant in many of his paintings. On his deathbed, King Juan Carlos of Spain visited, confessing to be a lifelong Dali fan. Dali gave the King a drawing, Head of Europa, which turned out to be his last. | <urn:uuid:98bf8a8a-f782-4ce0-9d8e-8a688389d41f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.papermasters.com/salvador-dali.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604397.40/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121132900-20200121161900-00128.warc.gz | en | 0.985938 | 374 | 3.78125 | 4 | [
-0.10782621055841446,
0.526211678981781,
0.3583506941795349,
0.41292545199394226,
0.26332980394363403,
0.18560561537742615,
0.0603792779147625,
0.18295401334762573,
0.05768619105219841,
-0.2118874341249466,
0.4590875804424286,
-0.22750087082386017,
0.18571555614471436,
0.25582411885261536,... | 2 | Salvador Dali Research Papers
Salvador Dali (1904-1989) was a leading painter of Surrealism. His most representative and famous work remains The Persistence of Memory, which he painted in 1931. Even causal art students will immediately recognize the painting with the melted clocks. Dali, later known for his exaggerated pencil mustache, was later more famous for his antics and being “Salvador Dali” than much of his actual art.
- Salvador Dai was born in Figueres, Spain
- Dali was the son of a lawyer
- He studied drawing as a teen and attended the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando in Madrid, where he became known as somewhat of a dandy.
- His early experiments with Cubism gained him some notoriety
- In 1926 he traveled to Paris to meet his hero Picasso.
- Dali’s work increasingly gravitated to the avant-garde, morphing into Surrealism.
The Persistence of Memory appeared in 1932, a representation of the rejection of rigid time. Today the work hangs in the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York City. Dali’s work was introduced into the United States in 1934, through an exhibition of his work, including The Persistence of Memory. Two years later his work appeared in the London International Surrealist Exhibition, during which he delivered a lecture in a deep-sea diving suit and helmet.
Much of Dali’s work employs heavy symbolism, including the recurrent use of an elephant in many of his paintings. On his deathbed, King Juan Carlos of Spain visited, confessing to be a lifelong Dali fan. Dali gave the King a drawing, Head of Europa, which turned out to be his last. | 378 | ENGLISH | 1 |
JRR Tolkien was always unhappy that the native Englisc king, Harold Godwinsson lost against the foreigner and usurper, William of Normandy at Hastings. So what he did, is he took the Anglo-Saxons of yore and equipped them with the weapon that the Normans used to great effect at Hastings; The Horse – Thus creating the Rohirrim of Rohan!
On September 28th 1066, claiming his right to the English throne, William, duke of Normandy, invaded England at Pevensey on Britain’s southeast coast. His subsequent defeat of King Harold II at the Battle of Hastings marked the beginning of a new era in British history.
William was the illegitimate son of Robert I, duke of Normandy, by his concubine Arlette, a tanner’s daughter from the town of Falaise. The duke, who had no other sons, designated William his heir, and with his death in 1035 William became duke of Normandy at age seven.
Rebellions were epidemic during the early years of his reign, and on several occasions the young duke narrowly escaped death. Many of his advisers did not.
By the time he was 20, William had become an able ruler and was backed by King Henry I of France. Henry later turned against him, but William survived…
View original post 361 more words | <urn:uuid:f82e544f-63dc-4553-9d93-83b8beaacb22> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://heathenramblings.wordpress.com/tag/invasion/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592636.25/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118135205-20200118163205-00140.warc.gz | en | 0.98758 | 282 | 3.640625 | 4 | [
-0.15496797859668732,
0.475013792514801,
0.19856472313404083,
-0.05873360484838486,
-0.4931564927101135,
-0.12664905190467834,
0.007227999158203602,
0.1559258997440338,
-0.2703443467617035,
-0.10395391285419464,
-0.1037226989865303,
-0.29067015647888184,
0.2179540991783142,
0.1857317388057... | 1 | JRR Tolkien was always unhappy that the native Englisc king, Harold Godwinsson lost against the foreigner and usurper, William of Normandy at Hastings. So what he did, is he took the Anglo-Saxons of yore and equipped them with the weapon that the Normans used to great effect at Hastings; The Horse – Thus creating the Rohirrim of Rohan!
On September 28th 1066, claiming his right to the English throne, William, duke of Normandy, invaded England at Pevensey on Britain’s southeast coast. His subsequent defeat of King Harold II at the Battle of Hastings marked the beginning of a new era in British history.
William was the illegitimate son of Robert I, duke of Normandy, by his concubine Arlette, a tanner’s daughter from the town of Falaise. The duke, who had no other sons, designated William his heir, and with his death in 1035 William became duke of Normandy at age seven.
Rebellions were epidemic during the early years of his reign, and on several occasions the young duke narrowly escaped death. Many of his advisers did not.
By the time he was 20, William had become an able ruler and was backed by King Henry I of France. Henry later turned against him, but William survived…
View original post 361 more words | 285 | ENGLISH | 1 |
An analysis of the role of women in ancient rome
The reason for this was that, while conducting dissections of human bodies, Roman doctors believed that they had discovered a nerve which ran directly from this finger to the heart.
Ancient rome womens clothing
No ancient journals or personal diaries written by Roman women were uncovered, so it is not known what their hopes and dreams were, or if they had any. The despised Commodus is supposed also to have killed his wife and his sister. In reality, life must have been difficult for the majority of people in Rome considering all the years of war and conquer. Her tunic was white, and she placed a wreath of marjoram on her head. Under early or archaic Roman law , marriages were of three kinds: confarreatio , symbolized by the sharing of bread panis farreus ; coemptio, "by purchase"; and usus, by mutual cohabitation. In family life a husband held absolute authority over his wife and children, women however, had considerable freedom when it came to work and their daily life. The significance of legend and virtues in establishing the morals and essence of the Roman Empire was equally applicable to its significance in dictating the expectations for Roman women. Women also had a role to play in Judaism and Christianity but, once again, it would be men who debated what that role might entail. In direct opposition to the example set by Cloelia, Tarpaeia stood as her antithesis. They married whoever they were told to.
This restriction decreased the visibility and importance of women in public life and thus not many famous Roman women are known. The Sabines are also significant in that they are respected as the mothers of Roman society.
Female slavery in ancient rome
They attended public and private banquets, even though they were excluded from most political and religious ceremonies. Epictetus suggests that at the age of 14, girls were considered to be on the brink of womanhood, and beginning to understand the inevitability of their future role as wives. Women in Roman society were permitted and encouraged to make public appearances at social occasions. Most Roman women would have married in their late teens to early twenties. Julius Caesar , whose father died when he was only a young teen, had a close relationship with his mother, Aurelia , whose political clout was essential in preventing the execution of her year-old son during the proscriptions of Sulla. All women were expected to be married and have had children by the age of twenty and women who had over three children received special privileges from the state. Family-values traditionalists such as Cato appear to have taken an interest: Cato liked to be present when his wife bathed and swaddled their child. It seems as though they regularly attended Roman public baths, since bathing "was a recreational activity enjoyed by people of all ages, sexes, and social classes.
Women in Roman society were permitted and encouraged to make public appearances at social occasions. Elsewhere, however, it is claimed that the first divorce took place only in BCE, at which time Dionysius of Halicarnassus notes that " Spurius Carviliusa man of distinction, was the first to divorce his wife" on grounds of infertility.
In a usus marriage, the man and woman simply began to live together, and on the day after they had lived together continuously for one year, the woman passed under the control of her husband in a manus marriage.
Augustus went so far as to punish and exile his own daughter, Julia, for engaging in extramarital affairs. While wifely advice was never publicly acknowledged, it was often heeded. One notes that women were present for the festivities and that Scintialla arrived with her husband Habinnas, having just left another banquet.
She handled property like a true entrepreneur, was previously divorced and was respected by Augustus despite the fact that she never had his child. The most important role of women in married life in Rome, just like other conventional societies, was to bear children and women who successfully performed this duty were respected.
One of the most powerful women of ancient Rome was Livia Drusilla Augusta who was the wife of Augustus Caesar and acted as a faithful advisor and companion to him. The role of women in the Roman family The head of family in ancient Rome was the eldest male and a newly-wed woman came under his patronage.
The mere possibility of Pompeia committing adultery caused Caesar to divorce her.
based on 106 review | <urn:uuid:e7365f28-a1c1-4264-ab6f-933a369c6832> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://pyhosahevabeb.dellrichards.com/an-analysis-of-the-role-of-women-in-ancient-rome575353676vj.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606269.37/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122012204-20200122041204-00347.warc.gz | en | 0.991014 | 927 | 3.609375 | 4 | [
-0.12824435532093048,
0.6659029722213745,
0.44633305072784424,
0.18480920791625977,
-0.32577383518218994,
0.09907989948987961,
0.15103507041931152,
0.26727885007858276,
0.07620266079902649,
-0.4722176194190979,
-0.0014649939257651567,
-0.3554302155971527,
-0.08299241960048676,
0.2947186827... | 2 | An analysis of the role of women in ancient rome
The reason for this was that, while conducting dissections of human bodies, Roman doctors believed that they had discovered a nerve which ran directly from this finger to the heart.
Ancient rome womens clothing
No ancient journals or personal diaries written by Roman women were uncovered, so it is not known what their hopes and dreams were, or if they had any. The despised Commodus is supposed also to have killed his wife and his sister. In reality, life must have been difficult for the majority of people in Rome considering all the years of war and conquer. Her tunic was white, and she placed a wreath of marjoram on her head. Under early or archaic Roman law , marriages were of three kinds: confarreatio , symbolized by the sharing of bread panis farreus ; coemptio, "by purchase"; and usus, by mutual cohabitation. In family life a husband held absolute authority over his wife and children, women however, had considerable freedom when it came to work and their daily life. The significance of legend and virtues in establishing the morals and essence of the Roman Empire was equally applicable to its significance in dictating the expectations for Roman women. Women also had a role to play in Judaism and Christianity but, once again, it would be men who debated what that role might entail. In direct opposition to the example set by Cloelia, Tarpaeia stood as her antithesis. They married whoever they were told to.
This restriction decreased the visibility and importance of women in public life and thus not many famous Roman women are known. The Sabines are also significant in that they are respected as the mothers of Roman society.
Female slavery in ancient rome
They attended public and private banquets, even though they were excluded from most political and religious ceremonies. Epictetus suggests that at the age of 14, girls were considered to be on the brink of womanhood, and beginning to understand the inevitability of their future role as wives. Women in Roman society were permitted and encouraged to make public appearances at social occasions. Most Roman women would have married in their late teens to early twenties. Julius Caesar , whose father died when he was only a young teen, had a close relationship with his mother, Aurelia , whose political clout was essential in preventing the execution of her year-old son during the proscriptions of Sulla. All women were expected to be married and have had children by the age of twenty and women who had over three children received special privileges from the state. Family-values traditionalists such as Cato appear to have taken an interest: Cato liked to be present when his wife bathed and swaddled their child. It seems as though they regularly attended Roman public baths, since bathing "was a recreational activity enjoyed by people of all ages, sexes, and social classes.
Women in Roman society were permitted and encouraged to make public appearances at social occasions. Elsewhere, however, it is claimed that the first divorce took place only in BCE, at which time Dionysius of Halicarnassus notes that " Spurius Carviliusa man of distinction, was the first to divorce his wife" on grounds of infertility.
In a usus marriage, the man and woman simply began to live together, and on the day after they had lived together continuously for one year, the woman passed under the control of her husband in a manus marriage.
Augustus went so far as to punish and exile his own daughter, Julia, for engaging in extramarital affairs. While wifely advice was never publicly acknowledged, it was often heeded. One notes that women were present for the festivities and that Scintialla arrived with her husband Habinnas, having just left another banquet.
She handled property like a true entrepreneur, was previously divorced and was respected by Augustus despite the fact that she never had his child. The most important role of women in married life in Rome, just like other conventional societies, was to bear children and women who successfully performed this duty were respected.
One of the most powerful women of ancient Rome was Livia Drusilla Augusta who was the wife of Augustus Caesar and acted as a faithful advisor and companion to him. The role of women in the Roman family The head of family in ancient Rome was the eldest male and a newly-wed woman came under his patronage.
The mere possibility of Pompeia committing adultery caused Caesar to divorce her.
based on 106 review | 927 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In Britain in 1967, a man working in a factory was paid about £21 a week, while a woman was paid only £10 a week for doing exactly the same job.
Women’s Liberation became a burning issue in the 1960s, under the leadership of dedicated campaigners such as Betty Friedan. Women took to the streets demanding equality and burning their bra’s along the way – for the first time, men got to see women’s underwear in daylight.
In 1970, a new book by a controversial new author hit the shops. The book was The Female Eunuch and the author was Germaine Greer.
The book examined female stereotyping and women’s sexuality – the press at the time said it was “guaranteed to offend nearly everyone”.
According to Greer, an Australian lecturer at the University of Warwick in England, the book was designed to be an inspiration to women, maintaining that if women realised their true potential as independent people, the world would be a far better place. She argued that traditional marriage was just a legalised form of slavery for women.
1975 was proclaimed “International Women’s Year” | <urn:uuid:787f6e14-b7e1-4fa2-a017-61c8e11c8901> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://nostalgiacentral.com/pop-culture/fads/womens-lib/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251688806.91/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126104828-20200126134828-00275.warc.gz | en | 0.986025 | 244 | 3.640625 | 4 | [
-0.18724538385868073,
0.6345901489257812,
-0.08419796824455261,
0.25328755378723145,
0.08919171243906021,
0.5649604201316833,
-0.21358159184455872,
-0.0308185163885355,
-0.18378238379955292,
-0.0014097241219133139,
0.004786710254848003,
-0.14136303961277008,
-0.27115657925605774,
0.3118403... | 5 | In Britain in 1967, a man working in a factory was paid about £21 a week, while a woman was paid only £10 a week for doing exactly the same job.
Women’s Liberation became a burning issue in the 1960s, under the leadership of dedicated campaigners such as Betty Friedan. Women took to the streets demanding equality and burning their bra’s along the way – for the first time, men got to see women’s underwear in daylight.
In 1970, a new book by a controversial new author hit the shops. The book was The Female Eunuch and the author was Germaine Greer.
The book examined female stereotyping and women’s sexuality – the press at the time said it was “guaranteed to offend nearly everyone”.
According to Greer, an Australian lecturer at the University of Warwick in England, the book was designed to be an inspiration to women, maintaining that if women realised their true potential as independent people, the world would be a far better place. She argued that traditional marriage was just a legalised form of slavery for women.
1975 was proclaimed “International Women’s Year” | 243 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Posted June. 03, 2017 07:07,
Updated June. 03, 2017 07:14
History only remembers as a grotesque accident when Gogh sliced his ear on Dec. 23, 1888. The accident, which was briefly covered on a local paper at that time, further labeled his art career; an image of an insane artist enslaved by schizophrenia and compulsion.
The British author who immigrated to France started to write this book with very simple but unorthodox questions; "How much of his ear covered in dressing on his portrait did Gogh slice?" "Why did Gogh sent his sliced ear to the prostitute?" Until now, these questions remained unanswered despite years of research by art historians.
On the face of it, those questions indeed seem mediocre, but the author approached the questions with surprisingly thorough problem-solving method. To fully understand Gogh's behavior, the writer gathered personal information of 15,000 neighbors living in the 1880s. In addition, the writer interviewed the descendents of the female known as the prostitute and the neighbors. The author even digged through piles of the late-19th century official documents. Furthermore, around 800 letters corresponded between Gogh and his brother and acquaintances were analyzed.
During the research, the author found out that most of Gogh's ear except a small proportion of earlobe was cut. This is quite the opposite to the existing thought argued by several art experts who say that only a piece of Gogh's ear was sliced. Moreover, the writer went on and discovered that the woman previously known as the prostitute was in fact a day laborer who did chores such as cleaning at brothels. The author argues that Gogh cut his ear to resonate his pain in his own peculiar way with a woman was barely making ends meet. The author wrote in the book that "those simplified images of Gogh's madness are no longer valid. Gogh reached the pinnacles of his creativity by overcoming his schizophrenia, rather than leveraging his mental hardship. | <urn:uuid:3ad2baea-0314-4b7e-98ad-5a6df4f8d609> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.donga.com/en/article/all/20170603/942603/1/What-happened-at-the-night-when-Gogh-cut-his-ear | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250615407.46/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124040939-20200124065939-00166.warc.gz | en | 0.988932 | 406 | 3.265625 | 3 | [
-0.10938069224357605,
0.08292622864246368,
0.32375070452690125,
0.007790242787450552,
-0.2665576636791229,
-0.03266051411628723,
0.20310772955417633,
0.1353769153356552,
0.0059080277569592,
-0.17088750004768372,
0.34556180238723755,
-0.22821162641048431,
-0.19515185058116913,
0.41614130139... | 1 | Posted June. 03, 2017 07:07,
Updated June. 03, 2017 07:14
History only remembers as a grotesque accident when Gogh sliced his ear on Dec. 23, 1888. The accident, which was briefly covered on a local paper at that time, further labeled his art career; an image of an insane artist enslaved by schizophrenia and compulsion.
The British author who immigrated to France started to write this book with very simple but unorthodox questions; "How much of his ear covered in dressing on his portrait did Gogh slice?" "Why did Gogh sent his sliced ear to the prostitute?" Until now, these questions remained unanswered despite years of research by art historians.
On the face of it, those questions indeed seem mediocre, but the author approached the questions with surprisingly thorough problem-solving method. To fully understand Gogh's behavior, the writer gathered personal information of 15,000 neighbors living in the 1880s. In addition, the writer interviewed the descendents of the female known as the prostitute and the neighbors. The author even digged through piles of the late-19th century official documents. Furthermore, around 800 letters corresponded between Gogh and his brother and acquaintances were analyzed.
During the research, the author found out that most of Gogh's ear except a small proportion of earlobe was cut. This is quite the opposite to the existing thought argued by several art experts who say that only a piece of Gogh's ear was sliced. Moreover, the writer went on and discovered that the woman previously known as the prostitute was in fact a day laborer who did chores such as cleaning at brothels. The author argues that Gogh cut his ear to resonate his pain in his own peculiar way with a woman was barely making ends meet. The author wrote in the book that "those simplified images of Gogh's madness are no longer valid. Gogh reached the pinnacles of his creativity by overcoming his schizophrenia, rather than leveraging his mental hardship. | 439 | ENGLISH | 1 |
"Down thy valleys, Ireland, Ireland,
Down thy valleys green and sad,
Still thy spirit wanders wailing,
Wanders wailing, wanders mad."
W ILLIAM now turned his attention to Ireland, where James II. was stirring up the country against him. Neither was he the first English ruler to turn his eyes towards that unhappy land—that beautiful "Emerald Isle" across the seas, ever in a state of unrest and misery.
What was the story of this strange, lonely island, which was so close to England and yet so far?
Ireland, or Erin, as the poets love to call her, has been compared to a lovely and lonely bride whom England has wedded but has never won. But the time must come—perhaps is not far distant—when bridegroom and bride shall understand one another and shall go forward hand in hand—
"Strong with a strength that no fate might dissever,
One with a oneness no force could divide."
Oliver Cromwell had ruled the people with a firm hand. Indeed he alone of English rulers stamped his image on the country. For eight weary years the Irish had fought for Charles I., and on his death they proclaimed his son king. This had roused Cromwell to action. In the summer of 1649 he landed in Ireland with a huge army. The following spring he returned to England, leaving Ireland once more crushed and lifeless. Her Parliament had ceased to exist, a few Protestant members were transferred to London. Vast military colonies were established by Cromwell, and the large Roman Catholic landowners were exiled to a corner of the country between the Shannon and the sea, called Connaught.
To all outward appearance England and Ireland were now one. But when the English people rose against James II., and drove him over to France, the people of Ireland, ever true to the Stuart cause and the Roman Catholic religion, resolved to support him. Here is one of the legends of how the king arrived in Ireland.
Erin lay awake in bed. Outside a storm was raging and rain was falling in torrents. The wind was howling and roaring down the chimney. Suddenly there was a tap at the door.
"Who is there?" asked Erin.
"It is I, James, son of Charles. I have been driven forth by robbers from the home of my ancestors. Give me shelter, I pray thee, from the fury of the storm."
Quickly Erin unbarred the door and brought in the hapless stranger. She took off his dripping cloak, gave him dry clothes, put fresh peat upon the fire, supplied him with food and shelter, and promised to help him.
The appearance of James in Ireland was hailed with enthusiasm. As a king, as a Roman Catholic, as a man in deep misfortune, he had a claim on the feelings of a warm-hearted race of people. He had landed at Kinsale on March 12, 1689. From Cork to Dublin people ran before him in crowds to greet him with tears and blessings.
But the Irish, with the hapless exile James at their head, were no match for the great military force now landing in the north, commanded in person by William III. of England.
"The country is worth fighting for," said William to his mixed army of English and Dutch as he marched through Ireland for the first time in his life.
He noted the rich greenness of the land, the bays and rivers so admirably fitted for trade. Where were the forests of masts that lay in every harbour of his native Holland? Where the warehouses that should have lined the quay? Could he not give these people the government and religion that had made Holland the wonder of the world?
He marched on till he came to the green banks of the river Boyne. As the glorious beauties of the valley burst upon him he could not suppress his admiration. Here on the neighbouring hill of Dromore was the camp of James II. Here was to be fought one of the most famous battles of the age.
An old story says, that as the exiled king stood looking over the fair country, his crown fell from his head and rolled down the steep green slope till it plunged into the dark still waters below. On the walls of Drogheda, at the mouth of the Boyne, waved the flags of James and Louis XIV., side by side: every soldier, Irish and French, had a white badge in his hat.
William's keen eye took in the whole situation.
"I am glad to see you, gentlemen," he said; "if you escape me now, the fault will be mine."
"Their army is but small," said one of his Dutch officers.
"They may be stronger than they look," answered William, for he knew that many Irish regiments were hidden from view.
The 1st of July dawned. The sun rose bright and cloudless. With drums beating, William and his army advanced to the banks of the Boyne. Each man had bound a green bough in his hat. Ten abreast, the soldiers then plunged into the stream, until the Boyne seemed to be alive with muskets and waving boughs. It was not till they had reached the middle that they realised their danger. Whole regiments of foot and horse, hidden from their sight, now seemed to start out of the very earth. A wild shout rose from the opposite shore, as the Irish and French together rushed to battle. But the great army led by William was too much for them. The Irish foot-soldiers were untrained, badly armed, and unused to action. True, the cavalry stood firm, but their valour was powerless to win the day. At the first shock of reverse James fled to Dublin. He arrived convulsed with rage.
"Madam," he cried to the wife of one of his brave officers—"Madam, your countrymen have run away."
"If they have, sire," answered the Irish lady with ready wit, "your majesty seems to have won the race."
And the old stories say that James never stopped running till he reached the coast, when he took ship for France! | <urn:uuid:2c01eac4-8171-4269-8a48-6e7d07d97ddc> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.gatewaytotheclassics.com/browse/displayitem.php?item=books/synge/awakening/ireland | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591234.15/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117205732-20200117233732-00141.warc.gz | en | 0.987868 | 1,284 | 3.34375 | 3 | [
-0.2925407290458679,
-0.031329743564128876,
0.09815094619989395,
0.07970233261585236,
-0.27992957830429077,
-0.12342293560504913,
0.3697250783443451,
-0.5120097994804382,
0.05735321342945099,
-0.1932232677936554,
-0.07297269999980927,
-0.4279886782169342,
0.5033107399940491,
0.350920170545... | 2 | "Down thy valleys, Ireland, Ireland,
Down thy valleys green and sad,
Still thy spirit wanders wailing,
Wanders wailing, wanders mad."
W ILLIAM now turned his attention to Ireland, where James II. was stirring up the country against him. Neither was he the first English ruler to turn his eyes towards that unhappy land—that beautiful "Emerald Isle" across the seas, ever in a state of unrest and misery.
What was the story of this strange, lonely island, which was so close to England and yet so far?
Ireland, or Erin, as the poets love to call her, has been compared to a lovely and lonely bride whom England has wedded but has never won. But the time must come—perhaps is not far distant—when bridegroom and bride shall understand one another and shall go forward hand in hand—
"Strong with a strength that no fate might dissever,
One with a oneness no force could divide."
Oliver Cromwell had ruled the people with a firm hand. Indeed he alone of English rulers stamped his image on the country. For eight weary years the Irish had fought for Charles I., and on his death they proclaimed his son king. This had roused Cromwell to action. In the summer of 1649 he landed in Ireland with a huge army. The following spring he returned to England, leaving Ireland once more crushed and lifeless. Her Parliament had ceased to exist, a few Protestant members were transferred to London. Vast military colonies were established by Cromwell, and the large Roman Catholic landowners were exiled to a corner of the country between the Shannon and the sea, called Connaught.
To all outward appearance England and Ireland were now one. But when the English people rose against James II., and drove him over to France, the people of Ireland, ever true to the Stuart cause and the Roman Catholic religion, resolved to support him. Here is one of the legends of how the king arrived in Ireland.
Erin lay awake in bed. Outside a storm was raging and rain was falling in torrents. The wind was howling and roaring down the chimney. Suddenly there was a tap at the door.
"Who is there?" asked Erin.
"It is I, James, son of Charles. I have been driven forth by robbers from the home of my ancestors. Give me shelter, I pray thee, from the fury of the storm."
Quickly Erin unbarred the door and brought in the hapless stranger. She took off his dripping cloak, gave him dry clothes, put fresh peat upon the fire, supplied him with food and shelter, and promised to help him.
The appearance of James in Ireland was hailed with enthusiasm. As a king, as a Roman Catholic, as a man in deep misfortune, he had a claim on the feelings of a warm-hearted race of people. He had landed at Kinsale on March 12, 1689. From Cork to Dublin people ran before him in crowds to greet him with tears and blessings.
But the Irish, with the hapless exile James at their head, were no match for the great military force now landing in the north, commanded in person by William III. of England.
"The country is worth fighting for," said William to his mixed army of English and Dutch as he marched through Ireland for the first time in his life.
He noted the rich greenness of the land, the bays and rivers so admirably fitted for trade. Where were the forests of masts that lay in every harbour of his native Holland? Where the warehouses that should have lined the quay? Could he not give these people the government and religion that had made Holland the wonder of the world?
He marched on till he came to the green banks of the river Boyne. As the glorious beauties of the valley burst upon him he could not suppress his admiration. Here on the neighbouring hill of Dromore was the camp of James II. Here was to be fought one of the most famous battles of the age.
An old story says, that as the exiled king stood looking over the fair country, his crown fell from his head and rolled down the steep green slope till it plunged into the dark still waters below. On the walls of Drogheda, at the mouth of the Boyne, waved the flags of James and Louis XIV., side by side: every soldier, Irish and French, had a white badge in his hat.
William's keen eye took in the whole situation.
"I am glad to see you, gentlemen," he said; "if you escape me now, the fault will be mine."
"Their army is but small," said one of his Dutch officers.
"They may be stronger than they look," answered William, for he knew that many Irish regiments were hidden from view.
The 1st of July dawned. The sun rose bright and cloudless. With drums beating, William and his army advanced to the banks of the Boyne. Each man had bound a green bough in his hat. Ten abreast, the soldiers then plunged into the stream, until the Boyne seemed to be alive with muskets and waving boughs. It was not till they had reached the middle that they realised their danger. Whole regiments of foot and horse, hidden from their sight, now seemed to start out of the very earth. A wild shout rose from the opposite shore, as the Irish and French together rushed to battle. But the great army led by William was too much for them. The Irish foot-soldiers were untrained, badly armed, and unused to action. True, the cavalry stood firm, but their valour was powerless to win the day. At the first shock of reverse James fled to Dublin. He arrived convulsed with rage.
"Madam," he cried to the wife of one of his brave officers—"Madam, your countrymen have run away."
"If they have, sire," answered the Irish lady with ready wit, "your majesty seems to have won the race."
And the old stories say that James never stopped running till he reached the coast, when he took ship for France! | 1,261 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Science - Living Things and Habitats. We talked about some of the different habitats that animals might live in; big or small, hot or cold. We then went and looked more closely at some habitiats in and around our school grounds. We used magnifying glasses to see the things we found more closely.
DT - Baking cakes for Macmillan. We talked about raising money for charity and why it is important. We had so much fun baking and decorating our cakes (we might have tasted a bit too!).
ART - we have been looking at the artist Andy Goldsworthy and creating some land in the style of his work. We made some faces. Look how well we did!
Art - Kandinsky. We looked at some of Kandinsky's work and how it focuses on colours and shapes. We worked really hard on colour mixing and made our own colour wheels.
Art - Kandinsky. We then used our skills of colour mixing to make our own version of Kandinsky's 'Circles'
PSHE - Theraputic Stories. We read a story today that had a very important message. We learnt that some people can be mean and unkind to others which may hurt people's feelings. Bipley in the story explained how his heart was broken when people said mean things. We made some clay models of what our hearts look like when they are happy and what they look like when they are broken.
PSHE - Theraputic stories. We read another story about Mildred the Pea. Even though she looked the same as every other pea, she wanted to be different and wanted to follow her dream which was to open a tea shop. We had a think about what we are like / doing now and what we might want to be when we are older.
PSHE - Friendship. We decided as a class that friendship is really important. We try really hard in our class to be friends with each other. This is what we think a good friend should be.
PSHE - Friendship. We read the story 'Rainbow Fish' thinking about how Rainbow Fish made the fish around him feel before and after he decided to share his scales, then we did some activities around friendship.
PSHE - Friendship. We each chose 1 colour and made a handprint, we then had to shake hands with someone else so our colours mixed together and then make another hand print. Look at all the different colours we made. Our hand prints then went on our friendship tree.
PSHE - Likes and Dislikes. As a class we talked about things we like and things we don't like. We discussed how we have to have tried something first before we can say if we like or dont like something. We decided to be brave and try some some different and unusual fruits. Here is what we thought about them.
Likes and dislikes - what games do we like and why? We had a go at playing some different games as a class but decided that our favourite game was definately Pie Face!
PSHE - Is it ok to be angry? We thought hard about this question and decided it is ok to be angry. It is important to think about what happens in our body when we feel this emotion. These are some of the ideas we came up with.
PSHE - We looked at ways we can stay calm. We talked about how Yoga can help focus our minds and body. Look at some of our Yoga balances.
PSHE - We made sensory bottles as another tool we can use to help keep ourselves calm. We poured the liquid in ourselves and added things we like to make it interesting to look at.
PSHE - in our PSHE lessons we have been experimenting in messy play. We had lots of fun doing these activities | <urn:uuid:7dd35ba7-1805-4bcf-a911-5916894d300c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.willowgroveprimary.org.uk/alder-1/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00118.warc.gz | en | 0.980561 | 772 | 3.484375 | 3 | [
-0.030458705499768257,
-0.2767454981803894,
0.3181203603744507,
0.2150372564792633,
-0.02841281145811081,
-0.022350143641233444,
0.5664955377578735,
0.26662492752075195,
-0.19146694242954254,
0.21989114582538605,
0.2401408553123474,
-0.8184123039245605,
0.2990778088569641,
0.33578512072563... | 5 | Science - Living Things and Habitats. We talked about some of the different habitats that animals might live in; big or small, hot or cold. We then went and looked more closely at some habitiats in and around our school grounds. We used magnifying glasses to see the things we found more closely.
DT - Baking cakes for Macmillan. We talked about raising money for charity and why it is important. We had so much fun baking and decorating our cakes (we might have tasted a bit too!).
ART - we have been looking at the artist Andy Goldsworthy and creating some land in the style of his work. We made some faces. Look how well we did!
Art - Kandinsky. We looked at some of Kandinsky's work and how it focuses on colours and shapes. We worked really hard on colour mixing and made our own colour wheels.
Art - Kandinsky. We then used our skills of colour mixing to make our own version of Kandinsky's 'Circles'
PSHE - Theraputic Stories. We read a story today that had a very important message. We learnt that some people can be mean and unkind to others which may hurt people's feelings. Bipley in the story explained how his heart was broken when people said mean things. We made some clay models of what our hearts look like when they are happy and what they look like when they are broken.
PSHE - Theraputic stories. We read another story about Mildred the Pea. Even though she looked the same as every other pea, she wanted to be different and wanted to follow her dream which was to open a tea shop. We had a think about what we are like / doing now and what we might want to be when we are older.
PSHE - Friendship. We decided as a class that friendship is really important. We try really hard in our class to be friends with each other. This is what we think a good friend should be.
PSHE - Friendship. We read the story 'Rainbow Fish' thinking about how Rainbow Fish made the fish around him feel before and after he decided to share his scales, then we did some activities around friendship.
PSHE - Friendship. We each chose 1 colour and made a handprint, we then had to shake hands with someone else so our colours mixed together and then make another hand print. Look at all the different colours we made. Our hand prints then went on our friendship tree.
PSHE - Likes and Dislikes. As a class we talked about things we like and things we don't like. We discussed how we have to have tried something first before we can say if we like or dont like something. We decided to be brave and try some some different and unusual fruits. Here is what we thought about them.
Likes and dislikes - what games do we like and why? We had a go at playing some different games as a class but decided that our favourite game was definately Pie Face!
PSHE - Is it ok to be angry? We thought hard about this question and decided it is ok to be angry. It is important to think about what happens in our body when we feel this emotion. These are some of the ideas we came up with.
PSHE - We looked at ways we can stay calm. We talked about how Yoga can help focus our minds and body. Look at some of our Yoga balances.
PSHE - We made sensory bottles as another tool we can use to help keep ourselves calm. We poured the liquid in ourselves and added things we like to make it interesting to look at.
PSHE - in our PSHE lessons we have been experimenting in messy play. We had lots of fun doing these activities | 758 | ENGLISH | 1 |
On 12th of December a vegetable activity was conducted in Balmandir with the children. All the vegetables and fruits were formed in cartoon form to make the activity more interesting. Each of these fruits and vegetables characters said some sentences about their properties, their care, and their planting time.
The activity was divided into two phases. In the starting phase the children were provided different vegetables drawings in cartoon form to color or paint it. In this way, the children can learn the shape and color of each fruits and vegetables. The second phase of the activity was to place different phrases in the corresponding vegetable or fruit which relates its properties. The sentences were placed in “bubbles” and behind them, the correct fruit or vegetable number was added. Children had to grab two or three of these bubbles randomly, read what the phrase said and find the correct one which relates with the vegetables or fruits they have chosen and, finally hang it in its place.
Overall the activity was productivity and learnable to the children. The main objective of this activity was to make the children know what kind of fruits and vegetables are grown in the kitchen garden. It also wanted to motivate children and youth to provide support in the kitchen garden and to make them know that Namuna Bari itself is for Balmandir. | <urn:uuid:c3d48b67-c91a-4df9-9d5d-f2ed89407721> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.amicsnepal.org/en/2020/01/cartoon-vegetable-activity-at-balmandir/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251728207.68/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127205148-20200127235148-00300.warc.gz | en | 0.985553 | 261 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
0.0855642780661583,
-0.23142124712467194,
0.16876398026943207,
-0.5171220898628235,
-0.13309815526008606,
0.009842205792665482,
0.17664256691932678,
-0.04770783707499504,
0.038338661193847656,
0.1595492660999298,
0.055926308035850525,
-0.5651690363883972,
0.3295583426952362,
0.222233489155... | 1 | On 12th of December a vegetable activity was conducted in Balmandir with the children. All the vegetables and fruits were formed in cartoon form to make the activity more interesting. Each of these fruits and vegetables characters said some sentences about their properties, their care, and their planting time.
The activity was divided into two phases. In the starting phase the children were provided different vegetables drawings in cartoon form to color or paint it. In this way, the children can learn the shape and color of each fruits and vegetables. The second phase of the activity was to place different phrases in the corresponding vegetable or fruit which relates its properties. The sentences were placed in “bubbles” and behind them, the correct fruit or vegetable number was added. Children had to grab two or three of these bubbles randomly, read what the phrase said and find the correct one which relates with the vegetables or fruits they have chosen and, finally hang it in its place.
Overall the activity was productivity and learnable to the children. The main objective of this activity was to make the children know what kind of fruits and vegetables are grown in the kitchen garden. It also wanted to motivate children and youth to provide support in the kitchen garden and to make them know that Namuna Bari itself is for Balmandir. | 259 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Where did Christmas Carols and Hymns Come From?
Most of us know by heart at least a few Christmas songs, and have heard many others, both secular and religious. From Thanksgiving (and often even earlier) until Christmas we are inundated with them in stores, on the radio, at Christmas concerts, and once the secular world is putting away their Christmas decorations, Catholics get to continue to hear Christmas hymns and carols at Mass for another couple of weeks. Just listening to one of these any time during the year can conjure up visions of Christmas pageants, nativities, red and green decorations, Christmas trees, and stockings hung by the fireplace. But the holiday has not always been so inextricably linked with these songs.
Hymns written specifically for the feast of Christmas have been around, it seems, almost as long as the feast itself. Many of these early hymns were created for and added to the Divine Office, and weren’t widely known. Some of these early hymn-writers included St. Ambrose, Prudentius, and Venantius Fortunatus, Bishop of Poitiers.
Carols, which are more joyful songs associated with dance (the word “carol” comes from either the Old French term for a circle dance, carole, derived from the Latin choraula, or the Greek dance choraulein), seem to have been first introduced in the 12th century by St. Francis of Assisi, who is also credited with creating the first Nativity scene. He wanted to teach people about the birth of Jesus through music, so he added religious lyrics to well-known tunes. The concept of Christmas carols then traveled throughout Europe, including to Germany where many carols were written in the 14th century. Carols today often retain the medieval choral patterns from the tradition of these early carols. As time went on, the popularity of Christmas carols and hymns grew, and from this we have some of the most popular Christmas songs today.
Probably one of the more well-known, mainstream Christmas hymns today is “Silent Night,” which was written in 1818 in Austria. As the story goes, on Christmas Eve Father Joseph Mohr, the pastor of St. Nicholas Church in Oberndorf, ran into a problem when the church organ broke. There would not be time to get it repaired before Christmas Mass, and faced with the prospect of Christmas services with no organ music, Mohr took a poem he had written two years before and asked the church organist, Franz Gruber, to compose a melody and guitar accompaniment to go with the poem. Thus “Silent Night” (“Stille Nacht”) was born and first sung that night at the church’s midnight Mass.
The Latin hymn “O Come All Ye Faithful” (also well-known by its Latin name, “Adeste Fideles”), was composed by John Francis Wade in 1743. The lyrics may have been written as early as the 13th century, but it seems more likely that they were also written by John Francis Wade. The original version, written in Latin, had four verses, but four more were written – three by Etienne Jean Francois Borderies, and a fourth written anonymously.
“God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen” comes from England and was written sometime in the 15th century. It was one of the most popular carols for centuries, finally published around 1833. It is found in a wide variety of versions and with different numbers of verses, depending on the version.
The carol “Hark! The Herald Angels Sing” was written by Charles Wesley, brother of John Wesley who was an early leader of Methodism. It was written in 1739, and originally the first line was “Hark! How all the welkin rings, / Glory to the King of kings” (welkin meaning heaven). It was altered many times until the version we know today became the most popular. It was sung with a variety of tunes at first, but eventually the majority settled on a tune by Felix Mendelssohn written in 1840.
Many of these old hymns and carols that we still know today are entrenched into our associations with Christmas – and there are even more that have been lost through the years. There are also a great many that are not nearly as well-known or mainstream, but are beautiful, reverent, and joyful. Some of these can be found in the CD A Sacred Christmas, Noel: Carols and Chants for Christmas, or Christmas Carols and Motets. For many people today the season would probably seem much emptier, or at least somewhat unnatural, without the sounds of these Christmastime hymns and carols at Mass and in their homes. | <urn:uuid:3e2ee720-34c7-44a6-8b70-2cf58da9a8ab> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.aquinasandmore.com/catholic-articles/history-christmas-carols-hymns/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591431.4/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117234621-20200118022621-00194.warc.gz | en | 0.983571 | 1,012 | 3.65625 | 4 | [
0.19773200154304504,
0.02058308944106102,
0.06134390830993652,
-0.41872817277908325,
0.12214582413434982,
-0.21351993083953857,
-0.46169230341911316,
0.20858639478683472,
0.406460702419281,
-0.11494509875774384,
0.027960121631622314,
0.5433682799339294,
-0.09998777508735657,
-0.03008094243... | 1 | Where did Christmas Carols and Hymns Come From?
Most of us know by heart at least a few Christmas songs, and have heard many others, both secular and religious. From Thanksgiving (and often even earlier) until Christmas we are inundated with them in stores, on the radio, at Christmas concerts, and once the secular world is putting away their Christmas decorations, Catholics get to continue to hear Christmas hymns and carols at Mass for another couple of weeks. Just listening to one of these any time during the year can conjure up visions of Christmas pageants, nativities, red and green decorations, Christmas trees, and stockings hung by the fireplace. But the holiday has not always been so inextricably linked with these songs.
Hymns written specifically for the feast of Christmas have been around, it seems, almost as long as the feast itself. Many of these early hymns were created for and added to the Divine Office, and weren’t widely known. Some of these early hymn-writers included St. Ambrose, Prudentius, and Venantius Fortunatus, Bishop of Poitiers.
Carols, which are more joyful songs associated with dance (the word “carol” comes from either the Old French term for a circle dance, carole, derived from the Latin choraula, or the Greek dance choraulein), seem to have been first introduced in the 12th century by St. Francis of Assisi, who is also credited with creating the first Nativity scene. He wanted to teach people about the birth of Jesus through music, so he added religious lyrics to well-known tunes. The concept of Christmas carols then traveled throughout Europe, including to Germany where many carols were written in the 14th century. Carols today often retain the medieval choral patterns from the tradition of these early carols. As time went on, the popularity of Christmas carols and hymns grew, and from this we have some of the most popular Christmas songs today.
Probably one of the more well-known, mainstream Christmas hymns today is “Silent Night,” which was written in 1818 in Austria. As the story goes, on Christmas Eve Father Joseph Mohr, the pastor of St. Nicholas Church in Oberndorf, ran into a problem when the church organ broke. There would not be time to get it repaired before Christmas Mass, and faced with the prospect of Christmas services with no organ music, Mohr took a poem he had written two years before and asked the church organist, Franz Gruber, to compose a melody and guitar accompaniment to go with the poem. Thus “Silent Night” (“Stille Nacht”) was born and first sung that night at the church’s midnight Mass.
The Latin hymn “O Come All Ye Faithful” (also well-known by its Latin name, “Adeste Fideles”), was composed by John Francis Wade in 1743. The lyrics may have been written as early as the 13th century, but it seems more likely that they were also written by John Francis Wade. The original version, written in Latin, had four verses, but four more were written – three by Etienne Jean Francois Borderies, and a fourth written anonymously.
“God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen” comes from England and was written sometime in the 15th century. It was one of the most popular carols for centuries, finally published around 1833. It is found in a wide variety of versions and with different numbers of verses, depending on the version.
The carol “Hark! The Herald Angels Sing” was written by Charles Wesley, brother of John Wesley who was an early leader of Methodism. It was written in 1739, and originally the first line was “Hark! How all the welkin rings, / Glory to the King of kings” (welkin meaning heaven). It was altered many times until the version we know today became the most popular. It was sung with a variety of tunes at first, but eventually the majority settled on a tune by Felix Mendelssohn written in 1840.
Many of these old hymns and carols that we still know today are entrenched into our associations with Christmas – and there are even more that have been lost through the years. There are also a great many that are not nearly as well-known or mainstream, but are beautiful, reverent, and joyful. Some of these can be found in the CD A Sacred Christmas, Noel: Carols and Chants for Christmas, or Christmas Carols and Motets. For many people today the season would probably seem much emptier, or at least somewhat unnatural, without the sounds of these Christmastime hymns and carols at Mass and in their homes. | 991 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Having been founded in Munich in 1919/20, the National Socialist German Workers' Party maintained its headquarters in the city until 1945. It was here that Adolf Hitler and other key figures in the Nazi regime launched their political careers. Various titles were bestowed on the city. Munich was named "Capital of German Art" in 1933 and "Capital City of the Movement" in 1935. Aggressive racial and military programs were drawn up in the city. It was from here that political opposition groups and unwelcome forms of art were suppressed. One of the first concentration camps was built in nearby Dachau. And the systematic persecution of the Jews was initiated from the city. Anyone daring to resist inevitably faced persecution, torture or execution.
The exhibition presents Munich as the launchpad for the National Socialist movement and the home of Party headquarters. Further themes include the city's art and festivals, and the way they were harnessed to make the Nazi regime more palatable to the public, and the city's role as a media location and a venue for arms manufacturing. Munich as a center of persecution and resistance is another focus (Uhlfelder Department Store). | <urn:uuid:7822e750-b446-4ba3-8bc5-684ce5fb8b33> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.muenchner-stadtmuseum.de/en/exhibitions/permanent-exhibitions/national-socialism-in-munich | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251789055.93/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129071944-20200129101944-00470.warc.gz | en | 0.985328 | 228 | 3.46875 | 3 | [
0.2043849229812622,
0.544726550579071,
-0.26601850986480713,
0.031830526888370514,
-0.09217311441898346,
0.5212439894676208,
0.05509850010275841,
-0.23829683661460876,
-0.2766062319278717,
-0.4109233021736145,
0.3123330771923065,
-0.30474671721458435,
0.2291688174009323,
0.3757802248001098... | 9 | Having been founded in Munich in 1919/20, the National Socialist German Workers' Party maintained its headquarters in the city until 1945. It was here that Adolf Hitler and other key figures in the Nazi regime launched their political careers. Various titles were bestowed on the city. Munich was named "Capital of German Art" in 1933 and "Capital City of the Movement" in 1935. Aggressive racial and military programs were drawn up in the city. It was from here that political opposition groups and unwelcome forms of art were suppressed. One of the first concentration camps was built in nearby Dachau. And the systematic persecution of the Jews was initiated from the city. Anyone daring to resist inevitably faced persecution, torture or execution.
The exhibition presents Munich as the launchpad for the National Socialist movement and the home of Party headquarters. Further themes include the city's art and festivals, and the way they were harnessed to make the Nazi regime more palatable to the public, and the city's role as a media location and a venue for arms manufacturing. Munich as a center of persecution and resistance is another focus (Uhlfelder Department Store). | 245 | ENGLISH | 1 |
July 11th, 2018 in English Learning
The present continuous is the tense form used to talk about actions or situations that are going on at the moment of speaking.
Read the following questions and answers. They are all in the present continuous tense.
- What are the girls doing now? They are dancing.
- What are the birds doing now? They are chirping.
- What is the dog doing now? It is chasing a cat.
- What is the fox doing? The fox is trying to catch the rabbit.
- What are the boys doing? Are they doing their homework? No, they are flying kites.
- What is that boy holding in his hand? Is he holding a bird? No, he is not holding a bird.
- What are the girls doing? The girl playing in the park.
- She is holding a kitten in her hand. The puppy is howling in pain because it has hurt its leg.
- What is the old woman doing?
- Is s sleeping? No, she is not sleeping. She is knitting a sweater.
- What are the dogs doing? Are they chasing the cat? No, they are not chasing the cat. They are fighting for food.
Now you should be able to recognize the present continuous tense form. As you know, it is formed with is / am / are + -ing form of the verb. Use is when the subject is a singular noun or a third person singular pronoun (he, she, it).
- She is jogging.
- Father is playing tennis.
- He is working.
- It is snowing
- The puppies are playing.
- Mother is knitting. | <urn:uuid:dd2a5022-4122-4247-9b96-ed8449c0872a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.englishpractice.com/2018/07/page/7/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00498.warc.gz | en | 0.980959 | 351 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
-0.232308492064476,
-0.502122700214386,
0.32491105794906616,
0.44141510128974915,
-0.1194407194852829,
0.488190621137619,
0.5169982314109802,
0.20690113306045532,
0.15425333380699158,
0.2704884707927704,
0.021545706316828728,
-0.32307368516921997,
0.07751801609992981,
0.2682807743549347,
... | 1 | July 11th, 2018 in English Learning
The present continuous is the tense form used to talk about actions or situations that are going on at the moment of speaking.
Read the following questions and answers. They are all in the present continuous tense.
- What are the girls doing now? They are dancing.
- What are the birds doing now? They are chirping.
- What is the dog doing now? It is chasing a cat.
- What is the fox doing? The fox is trying to catch the rabbit.
- What are the boys doing? Are they doing their homework? No, they are flying kites.
- What is that boy holding in his hand? Is he holding a bird? No, he is not holding a bird.
- What are the girls doing? The girl playing in the park.
- She is holding a kitten in her hand. The puppy is howling in pain because it has hurt its leg.
- What is the old woman doing?
- Is s sleeping? No, she is not sleeping. She is knitting a sweater.
- What are the dogs doing? Are they chasing the cat? No, they are not chasing the cat. They are fighting for food.
Now you should be able to recognize the present continuous tense form. As you know, it is formed with is / am / are + -ing form of the verb. Use is when the subject is a singular noun or a third person singular pronoun (he, she, it).
- She is jogging.
- Father is playing tennis.
- He is working.
- It is snowing
- The puppies are playing.
- Mother is knitting. | 338 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Prisoner punishment during the 19th century took the form of solitary confinement, the treadwheel, the shot-drill, whipping, and stone breaking.
After his visit of September 18th 1866, the Inspector General noted:
“There was no punitive labour in operation at the period of my official visit, but at other times it is carried out by the tread wheel, which is not applied to any remunerative purpose, and by shot-drill.”
Perhaps the most common form of punishment was whipping, or ‘flogging’, as it used to be known. This could be ordered by the Governor in response to misconduct, or by the Magistrate as part of the sentence. It was usually juveniles who were given this punishment and the whipping itself was carried out by other prisoners.
Overcrowding was a concern for the Gaol Governor during the 1850s and 60s. The mines at Avoca and Glendalough, the building of the railway, the harbour improvements in Wicklow and Arklow and the construction of the reservoir at Roundwood all brought migrant workers into the county.
The high wages earned by these workers brought about an increase in drunkenness and disorderly behaviour and more inmates were incarcerated in Wicklow Gaol. However, both the Governor and the Inspector-General remarked that by the late 1850s juvenile crime had decreased. This, they believed, could be attributed “to a wholesome fear of the sentence of whipping”.
The treadwheel was a torture device invented in 1818 by William Cubitt. It was introduced to Wicklow Gaol in 1820.
Known as ‘The Everlasting Staircase’, it was a wide, hollow cylinder, usually composed of wooden steps built around a cylindrical iron frame. As the treadwheel began to rotate, each prisoner was forced to continue stepping along the series of planks. The treadwheel was partitioned with stalls so the prisoners could not speak during punitive exercise. The prisoners were expected to work the wheel for three hours daily in winter, and four in summer.
The device served no purpose other than to punish and torture. It was designed to handle a large number of prisoners, and as many as 40 inmates were punished together in some cases. The use of treadwheels was eventually abolished in Britain by the Prisons Act of 1898.
The Shot Drill
The shot drill was a heavy steel ball resembling a cannonball. Although a harmless inanimate object in its own right; it had the capacity to render a prisoner weak, tired and hungry.
A man sentenced to hard labour stood above the shot or ball and, when instructed by his turnkey, bent his back but not his legs down to the level of the steel orb and lifted it to chest height. He was then instructed to hold it for a few seconds before replacing it, either to his right where another inmate was standing, or back to the same spot where it was first picked up.
This punishment was to be done in complete silence. If a prisoner made a sound replacing the shot, his rations were taken away for a day. With the little amount of food they were already receiving, this was more severe than the punishment itself. | <urn:uuid:ac5a6914-6ccb-4a54-baeb-69698ada0fa5> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.wicklowshistoricgaol.com/history/daily-life/punishment-regimes/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251705142.94/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127174507-20200127204507-00244.warc.gz | en | 0.990265 | 663 | 4.0625 | 4 | [
-0.33587995171546936,
0.112879678606987,
0.3683486878871918,
0.1442754864692688,
-0.2567647695541382,
-0.2197021245956421,
0.20430336892604828,
-0.013245690613985062,
-0.20965930819511414,
-0.23488575220108032,
0.17226779460906982,
-0.16086430847644806,
0.06434686481952667,
0.4731231033802... | 1 | Prisoner punishment during the 19th century took the form of solitary confinement, the treadwheel, the shot-drill, whipping, and stone breaking.
After his visit of September 18th 1866, the Inspector General noted:
“There was no punitive labour in operation at the period of my official visit, but at other times it is carried out by the tread wheel, which is not applied to any remunerative purpose, and by shot-drill.”
Perhaps the most common form of punishment was whipping, or ‘flogging’, as it used to be known. This could be ordered by the Governor in response to misconduct, or by the Magistrate as part of the sentence. It was usually juveniles who were given this punishment and the whipping itself was carried out by other prisoners.
Overcrowding was a concern for the Gaol Governor during the 1850s and 60s. The mines at Avoca and Glendalough, the building of the railway, the harbour improvements in Wicklow and Arklow and the construction of the reservoir at Roundwood all brought migrant workers into the county.
The high wages earned by these workers brought about an increase in drunkenness and disorderly behaviour and more inmates were incarcerated in Wicklow Gaol. However, both the Governor and the Inspector-General remarked that by the late 1850s juvenile crime had decreased. This, they believed, could be attributed “to a wholesome fear of the sentence of whipping”.
The treadwheel was a torture device invented in 1818 by William Cubitt. It was introduced to Wicklow Gaol in 1820.
Known as ‘The Everlasting Staircase’, it was a wide, hollow cylinder, usually composed of wooden steps built around a cylindrical iron frame. As the treadwheel began to rotate, each prisoner was forced to continue stepping along the series of planks. The treadwheel was partitioned with stalls so the prisoners could not speak during punitive exercise. The prisoners were expected to work the wheel for three hours daily in winter, and four in summer.
The device served no purpose other than to punish and torture. It was designed to handle a large number of prisoners, and as many as 40 inmates were punished together in some cases. The use of treadwheels was eventually abolished in Britain by the Prisons Act of 1898.
The Shot Drill
The shot drill was a heavy steel ball resembling a cannonball. Although a harmless inanimate object in its own right; it had the capacity to render a prisoner weak, tired and hungry.
A man sentenced to hard labour stood above the shot or ball and, when instructed by his turnkey, bent his back but not his legs down to the level of the steel orb and lifted it to chest height. He was then instructed to hold it for a few seconds before replacing it, either to his right where another inmate was standing, or back to the same spot where it was first picked up.
This punishment was to be done in complete silence. If a prisoner made a sound replacing the shot, his rations were taken away for a day. With the little amount of food they were already receiving, this was more severe than the punishment itself. | 663 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Born in southwest Washington on January 30, 1835, Shepherd dropped out of school at 13 and took a job as a plumber's assistant. Eventually, he worked his way up to becoming the owner of the plumbing firm. He then invested the profits from that firm in real estate development, which made him a wealthy socialite and influential citizen of the city. (One of his luxurious properties was Shepherd's Row, a set of rowhouses on Connecticut Avenue designed by Adolf Cluss; Cluss would later be the star witness at Shepherd's congressional investigation hearings.)
Two days after the Battle of Fort Sumter that initiated the American Civil War, Shepherd and his brother each enlisted in the 3rd Battalion of the District of Columbia volunteers. The term of enlistment at that time was only three months, after which Shepherd was honorably discharged. Approximately six months afterwards, he was married to Mary Grice Young, with whom he raised seven children.
He was an early member of the Republican Party and a member of the Washington City Councils from 1861 to 1871, during which time he was an important voice for D.C. emancipation, then for suffrage for the freed slaves. Frederick Douglass would later say of him, "I want to thank Governor Shepherd for the fair way in which he treated the colored race when he was in a position to help them."
By 1870, war and mismanagement had caused the finances and infrastructure of the city to deteriorate so badly that the Mayor of Washington, Sayles J. Bowen, had his furniture seized in an attempt to pay the city's debts; Democrats and Republicans were in a rare agreement that a drastic change was needed from Bowen's regime. As a solution, Shepherd and his allies began agitation for the abolition of the elected governments of Washington City and Georgetown, as well as the appointed justices of the peace for Washington County, to be replaced with a unified territorial government that would administer the entire District of Columbia. The Shepherd machine was easily able to sway popular support in favor of the notion.
In the following year, 1871, Shepherd was able to convince Congress to pass a bill that established the territorial government he desired. The Organic Act of 1871 merged the various governments in the District of Columbia into a single eleven-member legislature, including two representatives for Georgetown and two for the County of Washington, to be presided over by a territorial governor; the legislature and governor would all be appointed by the President. The two front-runners for the governorship were initially Shepherd, from Washington, and Colonel Jason A. Magruder, from Georgetown; although popular support was behind Shepherd, President Ulysses S. Grant feared that either appointment would cause a sectional divide that might make governorship of the full district impossible. Thus Grant's inaugural appointment to the governorship was his friend, the financier Henry D. Cooke, "a gentleman of unimpeachable integrity" — and, secretly, a close political ally of Shepherd's.
Shepherd was appointed vice-chair of the city's five-man Board of Public Works. The most powerful public entity in the District of Columbia, the Board of Public Works was actually an independent entity from the territorial government, reporting directly to Congress, but kept within the territory's sphere of influence by making the governor its chairman. Cooke, however, rarely attended the Board's meetings (probably at Shepherd's urging), allowing Vice-Chair Shepherd to preside. He asserted himself as a leader to such an extent that he often did not bother to consult the other members of the Board before making decisions and taking sweeping action. His abilities as a political operator, according to D.C. journalist Sam Smith, were formidable:
The war-worn condition of Washington City in the late 1860s and early 1870s — when it was little more than a hamlet of dirt roads, wooden sidewalks and open sewers, surrounded by farmland and large country estates — was such that Congress had for several years discussed relocating the seat of the Federal government westward to St. Louis — which would have led to ruin for the District of Columbia. Shepherd believed that if the government was to remain in Washington, the city's infrastructure and facilities must be modernized and revitalized. He filled in the long-dormant Washington Canal and placed 157 miles (253 km) of paved roads and sidewalks, 123 miles (198 km) of sewers, 39 miles (63 km) of gas mains, and 30 miles (48 km) of water mains. In 1872, Boss Shepherd was responsible for the demolition of the Northern Liberties Market. Two individuals, a butcher who was still on the premises at the time of the demolition and a young boy who had come with his dog to chase the rats who fled the structure, were killed in the process. Under his direction the city also planted 60,000 trees, built the city's first public transportation system in the form of horse-drawn streetcars, installed street lights, and had the railroad companies refit their tracks to fit new citywide grading standards for the District.
In 1873, Washington writer Mary Clemmer Ames wrote that "the majority of people believe that Governor Cooke would retain his position only until the fusion of irritated factions [i.e., whites and blacks; Washington, Georgetown, and Washington County] was effected, and that in the event of his resignation, Mr. Shepherd would be appointed his successor. Whether Governor Cooke retires before the end of his term or not, it is the universal belief that Mr. Shepherd will be the second governor of the District of Columbia." Sure enough, that September, Cooke resigned as Governor of the District and Shepherd, having befriended Grant, was promoted by the President to the governorship.
Once in office, Governor Shepherd engaged in a series of social reforms and campaigns that were progressive even by Radical Republican standards: he "integrated public schools, supported the vote for women, sought representation for D.C. in Congress and a Federal payment to the city." Generally, however, his gubernatorial term was "principally occupied in avoiding embarrassments in the conduct of the District's official business due to the inadequacy of the revenue which had been entailed by the demands for funds to meet the cost of executing street improvements."
But despite the lack of finances, the massive public works project continued (and intensified) during Shepherd's term as governor of the District of Columbia. Although the Organic Act of 1871 had given the governor power to issue construction bonds in the city, to the consternation of white landowners, Shepherd nonetheless put it to a referendum to demonstrate his widespread popular support in the city thanks to the black voters who backed him.
However, the cost of the modifications was excessive. Initially, Shepherd had estimated them at a $6.25 million budget, but by 1874, costs had ballooned to $9 million, despite a national panic that had befallen the nation the year before. District residents gathered 1,200 signatures to petition an audit from Congress; when the audit was conducted, the legislature discovered that the city was in arrears by $13 million and declared bankruptcy on its behalf. Shepherd was investigated for financial misappropriation and mishandling, during which time it was discovered that the project and its funding had been carried to absurd extremes. Shepherd had raised taxes to such a degree that citizens had to sell their own property to pay them. Street grading, too, had been executed such that some homes' front yards were as much as 15 feet (4.6 m) lower than the front door, while others found their homes standing in trenches with the street at second floor level. In addition, Congress discovered that Shepherd had given preference to neighborhoods and areas of the District in which he or his political cronies held financial interests.
Although none of his actions were found to have violated any laws, the territorial government was abolished in favor of a three-member Board of Commissioners, which remained in charge of the District for nearly a century. Although President Grant nominated Shepherd to the first Board of Commissioners, the appointment was rejected by the Senate on the same day. The appointment of Shepherd became one of the many corruption scandals surrounding Grant's administration.
The civic improvements, however, had sufficiently modernized the city that relocation of the capital was never again discussed as a serious option. It also created a decades-long real estate boom in Washington (until about the turn of the 20th century), with wealthy Americans coming from all over the United States to build large and expensive mansions, some for year-round residency and some for winter vacation only (leading Washington to be called "the winter Newport").
Shepherd remained in Washington for a further two years, still a real-estate magnate and a celebrated and influential member of Washington society In 1876, however, he declared personal bankruptcy and, once his accounts were settled, moved with his family to Batopilas, Mexico, where he made a fortune in silver mining and instituted many of the same reforms he had championed in the District of Columbia.
He died in Batopilas in Mexico on September 12, 1902, from complications of a surgery to remove his appendix. His body was returned to Washington and buried in a large personal (not family) vault in Rock Creek Cemetery.
Shepherd's legacy has been a matter of some debate since his death more than one hundred years ago. He has long been maligned as a corrupt, cronyist political boss, often compared to Boss Tweed, the leader of the Tammany Hall political machine of the same time period.
A statue of Shepherd which currently stands on Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, in front of the John A. Wilson Building (which now houses the offices and chambers of the Council and the Mayor of the District of Columbia,) has served as a symbol of his fluctuating reputation.
In 1979, during the first year of Mayor Marion Barry's administration, the statue was removed from its perch on Pennsylvania Avenue and warehoused in city storage. It reappeared in the mid-1980s near an otherwise-obscure D.C. Public Works building on Shepherd Avenue, S.W., in the District's remote Blue Plains neighborhood.
Near the beginning of the 21st century, Washington historian Nelson Rimensnyder started to argue for a restoration of Shepherd's reputation, calling him an "urban visionary" who singlehandedly transformed Washington into a major American city and championed aggressive social reform.
Largely as a result of Rimensnyder's efforts, and the efforts of those he persuaded, the Shepherd statue was returned in January 2005 to its previous place of honor. The statue now stands on its pedestal next to the sidewalk of Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, close to 14th Street, NW, and the northwest corner of the Wilson Building.
The D.C. neighborhood of Shepherd Park, where Shepherd once lived, is named for him, as is Alexander Shepherd Elementary School in that neighborhood. | <urn:uuid:6f7cc23c-d33e-4668-91ee-6177185b9303> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://alchetron.com/Alexander-Robey-Shepherd | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00132.warc.gz | en | 0.985162 | 2,227 | 3.46875 | 3 | [
-0.1941724717617035,
0.3329780697822571,
0.4143375754356384,
-0.19576112926006317,
-0.05113200843334198,
0.0863223597407341,
-0.29834693670272827,
-0.08078315854072571,
0.12281892448663712,
-0.04547935724258423,
0.35368242859840393,
0.22946029901504517,
0.1495128571987152,
0.13449230790138... | 2 | Born in southwest Washington on January 30, 1835, Shepherd dropped out of school at 13 and took a job as a plumber's assistant. Eventually, he worked his way up to becoming the owner of the plumbing firm. He then invested the profits from that firm in real estate development, which made him a wealthy socialite and influential citizen of the city. (One of his luxurious properties was Shepherd's Row, a set of rowhouses on Connecticut Avenue designed by Adolf Cluss; Cluss would later be the star witness at Shepherd's congressional investigation hearings.)
Two days after the Battle of Fort Sumter that initiated the American Civil War, Shepherd and his brother each enlisted in the 3rd Battalion of the District of Columbia volunteers. The term of enlistment at that time was only three months, after which Shepherd was honorably discharged. Approximately six months afterwards, he was married to Mary Grice Young, with whom he raised seven children.
He was an early member of the Republican Party and a member of the Washington City Councils from 1861 to 1871, during which time he was an important voice for D.C. emancipation, then for suffrage for the freed slaves. Frederick Douglass would later say of him, "I want to thank Governor Shepherd for the fair way in which he treated the colored race when he was in a position to help them."
By 1870, war and mismanagement had caused the finances and infrastructure of the city to deteriorate so badly that the Mayor of Washington, Sayles J. Bowen, had his furniture seized in an attempt to pay the city's debts; Democrats and Republicans were in a rare agreement that a drastic change was needed from Bowen's regime. As a solution, Shepherd and his allies began agitation for the abolition of the elected governments of Washington City and Georgetown, as well as the appointed justices of the peace for Washington County, to be replaced with a unified territorial government that would administer the entire District of Columbia. The Shepherd machine was easily able to sway popular support in favor of the notion.
In the following year, 1871, Shepherd was able to convince Congress to pass a bill that established the territorial government he desired. The Organic Act of 1871 merged the various governments in the District of Columbia into a single eleven-member legislature, including two representatives for Georgetown and two for the County of Washington, to be presided over by a territorial governor; the legislature and governor would all be appointed by the President. The two front-runners for the governorship were initially Shepherd, from Washington, and Colonel Jason A. Magruder, from Georgetown; although popular support was behind Shepherd, President Ulysses S. Grant feared that either appointment would cause a sectional divide that might make governorship of the full district impossible. Thus Grant's inaugural appointment to the governorship was his friend, the financier Henry D. Cooke, "a gentleman of unimpeachable integrity" — and, secretly, a close political ally of Shepherd's.
Shepherd was appointed vice-chair of the city's five-man Board of Public Works. The most powerful public entity in the District of Columbia, the Board of Public Works was actually an independent entity from the territorial government, reporting directly to Congress, but kept within the territory's sphere of influence by making the governor its chairman. Cooke, however, rarely attended the Board's meetings (probably at Shepherd's urging), allowing Vice-Chair Shepherd to preside. He asserted himself as a leader to such an extent that he often did not bother to consult the other members of the Board before making decisions and taking sweeping action. His abilities as a political operator, according to D.C. journalist Sam Smith, were formidable:
The war-worn condition of Washington City in the late 1860s and early 1870s — when it was little more than a hamlet of dirt roads, wooden sidewalks and open sewers, surrounded by farmland and large country estates — was such that Congress had for several years discussed relocating the seat of the Federal government westward to St. Louis — which would have led to ruin for the District of Columbia. Shepherd believed that if the government was to remain in Washington, the city's infrastructure and facilities must be modernized and revitalized. He filled in the long-dormant Washington Canal and placed 157 miles (253 km) of paved roads and sidewalks, 123 miles (198 km) of sewers, 39 miles (63 km) of gas mains, and 30 miles (48 km) of water mains. In 1872, Boss Shepherd was responsible for the demolition of the Northern Liberties Market. Two individuals, a butcher who was still on the premises at the time of the demolition and a young boy who had come with his dog to chase the rats who fled the structure, were killed in the process. Under his direction the city also planted 60,000 trees, built the city's first public transportation system in the form of horse-drawn streetcars, installed street lights, and had the railroad companies refit their tracks to fit new citywide grading standards for the District.
In 1873, Washington writer Mary Clemmer Ames wrote that "the majority of people believe that Governor Cooke would retain his position only until the fusion of irritated factions [i.e., whites and blacks; Washington, Georgetown, and Washington County] was effected, and that in the event of his resignation, Mr. Shepherd would be appointed his successor. Whether Governor Cooke retires before the end of his term or not, it is the universal belief that Mr. Shepherd will be the second governor of the District of Columbia." Sure enough, that September, Cooke resigned as Governor of the District and Shepherd, having befriended Grant, was promoted by the President to the governorship.
Once in office, Governor Shepherd engaged in a series of social reforms and campaigns that were progressive even by Radical Republican standards: he "integrated public schools, supported the vote for women, sought representation for D.C. in Congress and a Federal payment to the city." Generally, however, his gubernatorial term was "principally occupied in avoiding embarrassments in the conduct of the District's official business due to the inadequacy of the revenue which had been entailed by the demands for funds to meet the cost of executing street improvements."
But despite the lack of finances, the massive public works project continued (and intensified) during Shepherd's term as governor of the District of Columbia. Although the Organic Act of 1871 had given the governor power to issue construction bonds in the city, to the consternation of white landowners, Shepherd nonetheless put it to a referendum to demonstrate his widespread popular support in the city thanks to the black voters who backed him.
However, the cost of the modifications was excessive. Initially, Shepherd had estimated them at a $6.25 million budget, but by 1874, costs had ballooned to $9 million, despite a national panic that had befallen the nation the year before. District residents gathered 1,200 signatures to petition an audit from Congress; when the audit was conducted, the legislature discovered that the city was in arrears by $13 million and declared bankruptcy on its behalf. Shepherd was investigated for financial misappropriation and mishandling, during which time it was discovered that the project and its funding had been carried to absurd extremes. Shepherd had raised taxes to such a degree that citizens had to sell their own property to pay them. Street grading, too, had been executed such that some homes' front yards were as much as 15 feet (4.6 m) lower than the front door, while others found their homes standing in trenches with the street at second floor level. In addition, Congress discovered that Shepherd had given preference to neighborhoods and areas of the District in which he or his political cronies held financial interests.
Although none of his actions were found to have violated any laws, the territorial government was abolished in favor of a three-member Board of Commissioners, which remained in charge of the District for nearly a century. Although President Grant nominated Shepherd to the first Board of Commissioners, the appointment was rejected by the Senate on the same day. The appointment of Shepherd became one of the many corruption scandals surrounding Grant's administration.
The civic improvements, however, had sufficiently modernized the city that relocation of the capital was never again discussed as a serious option. It also created a decades-long real estate boom in Washington (until about the turn of the 20th century), with wealthy Americans coming from all over the United States to build large and expensive mansions, some for year-round residency and some for winter vacation only (leading Washington to be called "the winter Newport").
Shepherd remained in Washington for a further two years, still a real-estate magnate and a celebrated and influential member of Washington society In 1876, however, he declared personal bankruptcy and, once his accounts were settled, moved with his family to Batopilas, Mexico, where he made a fortune in silver mining and instituted many of the same reforms he had championed in the District of Columbia.
He died in Batopilas in Mexico on September 12, 1902, from complications of a surgery to remove his appendix. His body was returned to Washington and buried in a large personal (not family) vault in Rock Creek Cemetery.
Shepherd's legacy has been a matter of some debate since his death more than one hundred years ago. He has long been maligned as a corrupt, cronyist political boss, often compared to Boss Tweed, the leader of the Tammany Hall political machine of the same time period.
A statue of Shepherd which currently stands on Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, in front of the John A. Wilson Building (which now houses the offices and chambers of the Council and the Mayor of the District of Columbia,) has served as a symbol of his fluctuating reputation.
In 1979, during the first year of Mayor Marion Barry's administration, the statue was removed from its perch on Pennsylvania Avenue and warehoused in city storage. It reappeared in the mid-1980s near an otherwise-obscure D.C. Public Works building on Shepherd Avenue, S.W., in the District's remote Blue Plains neighborhood.
Near the beginning of the 21st century, Washington historian Nelson Rimensnyder started to argue for a restoration of Shepherd's reputation, calling him an "urban visionary" who singlehandedly transformed Washington into a major American city and championed aggressive social reform.
Largely as a result of Rimensnyder's efforts, and the efforts of those he persuaded, the Shepherd statue was returned in January 2005 to its previous place of honor. The statue now stands on its pedestal next to the sidewalk of Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, close to 14th Street, NW, and the northwest corner of the Wilson Building.
The D.C. neighborhood of Shepherd Park, where Shepherd once lived, is named for him, as is Alexander Shepherd Elementary School in that neighborhood. | 2,294 | ENGLISH | 1 |
AMONG the confederacies of antiquity, the most considerable was that of the Grecian republics, associated under the Amphictyonic council. From the best accounts transmitted of this celebrated institution, it bore a very instructive analogy to the present Confederation of the American States.
The members retained the character of independent and sovereign states, and had equal votes in the federal council. This council had a general authority to propose and resolve whatever it judged necessary for the common welfare of Greece; to declare and carry on war; to decide, in the last resort, all controversies between the members; to fine the aggressing party; to employ the whole force of the confederacy against the disobedient; to admit new members. The Amphictyons were the guardians of religion, and of the immense riches belonging to the temple of Delphos, where they had the right of jurisdiction in controversies between the inhabitants and those who came to consult the oracle. As a further provision for the efficacy of the federal powers, they took an oath mutually to defend and protect the united cities, to punish the violators of this oath, and to inflict vengeance on sacrilegious despoilers of the temple.
In theory, and upon paper, this apparatus of powers seems amply sufficient for all general purposes. In several material instances, they exceed the powers enumerated in the articles of confederation. The Amphictyons had in their hands the superstition of the times, one of the principal engines by which government was then maintained; they had a declared authority to use coercion against refractory cities, and were bound by oath to exert this authority on the necessary occasions.
Very different, nevertheless, was the experiment from the theory. The powers, like those of the present Congress, were administered by deputies appointed wholly by the cities in their political capacities; and exercised over them in the same capacities. Hence the weakness, the disorders, and finally the destruction of the confederacy. The more powerful members, instead of being kept in awe and subordination, tyrannized successively over all the rest. Athens, as we learn from Demosthenes, was the arbiter of Greece seventy-three years. The Lacedaemonians next governed it twenty-nine years; at a subsequent period, after the battle of Leuctra, the Thebans had their turn of domination.
It happened but too often, according to Plutarch, that the deputies of the strongest cities awed and corrupted those of the weaker; and that judgment went in favor of the most powerful party.
Even in the midst of defensive and dangerous wars with Persia and Macedon, the members never acted in concert, and were, more or fewer of them, eternally the dupes or the hirelings of the common enemy. The intervals of foreign war were filled up by domestic vicissitudes convulsions, and carnage.
After the conclusion of the war with Xerxes, it appears that the Lacedaemonians required that a number of the cities should be turned out of the confederacy for the unfaithful part they had acted. The Athenians, finding that the Lacedaemonians would lose fewer partisans by such a measure than themselves, and would become masters of the public deliberations, vigorously opposed and defeated the attempt. This piece of history proves at once the inefficiency of the union, the ambition and jealousy of its most powerful members, and the dependent and degraded condition of the rest. The smaller members, though entitled by the theory of their system to revolve in equal pride and majesty around the common center, had become, in fact, satellites of the orbs of primary magnitude.
Had the Greeks, says the Abbé Milot, been as wise as they were courageous, they would have been admonished by experience of the necessity of a closer union, and would have availed themselves of the peace which followed their success against the Persian arms, to establish such a reformation. Instead of this obvious policy, Athens and Sparta, inflated with the victories and the glory they had acquired, became first rivals and then enemies; and did each other infinitely more mischief than they had suffered from Xerxes. Their mutual jealousies, fears, hatreds, and injuries ended in the celebrated Peloponnesian war; which itself ended in the ruin and slavery of the Athenians who had begun it.
As a weak government, when not at war, is ever agitated by internal dissentions, so these never fail to bring on fresh calamities from abroad. The Phocians having ploughed up some consecrated ground belonging to the temple of Apollo, the Amphictyonic council, according to the superstition of the age, imposed a fine on the sacrilegious offenders. The Phocians, being abetted by Athens and Sparta, refused to submit to the decree. The Thebans, with others of the cities, undertook to maintain the authority of the Amphictyons, and to avenge the violated god. The latter, being the weaker party, invited the assistance of Philip of Macedon, who had secretly fostered the contest. Philip gladly seized the opportunity of executing the designs he had long planned against the liberties of Greece. By his intrigues and bribes he won over to his interests the popular leaders of several cities; by their influence and votes, gained admission into the Amphictyonic council; and by his arts and his arms, made himself master of the confederacy.
Such were the consequences of the fallacious principle on which this interesting establishment was founded. Had Greece, says a judicious observer on her fate, been united by a stricter confederation, and persevered in her union, she would never have worn the chains of Macedon; and might have proved a barrier to the vast projects of Rome.
The Achaean league, as it is called, was another society of Grecian republics, which supplies us with valuable instruction.
The Union here was far more intimate, and its organization much wiser, than in the preceding instance. It will accordingly appear, that though not exempt from a similar catastrophe, it by no means equally deserved it.
The cities composing this league retained their municipal jurisdiction, appointed their own officers, and enjoyed a perfect equality. The senate, in which they were represented, had the sole and exclusive right of peace and war; of sending and receiving ambassadors; of entering into treaties and alliances; of appointing a chief magistrate or praetor, as he was called, who commanded their armies, and who, with the advice and consent of ten of the senators, not only administered the government in the recess of the senate, but had a great share in its deliberations, when assembled. According to the primitive constitution, there were two praetors associated in the administration; but on trial a single one was preferred.
It appears that the cities had all the same laws and customs, the same weights and measures, and the same money. But how far this effect proceeded from the authority of the federal council is left in uncertainty. It is said only that the cities were in a manner compelled to receive the same laws and usages. When Lacedaemon was brought into the league by Philopoemen, it was attended with an abolition of the institutions and laws of Lycurgus, and an adoption of those of the Achaeans. The Amphictyonic confederacy, of which she had been a member, left her in the full exercise of her government and her legislation. This circumstance alone proves a very material difference in the genius of the two systems.
It is much to be regretted that such imperfect monuments remain of this curious political fabric. Could its interior structure and regular operation be ascertained, it is probable that more light would be thrown by it on the science of federal government, than by any of the like experiments with which we are acquainted.
One important fact seems to be witnessed by all the historians who take notice of Achaean affairs. It is, that as well after the renovation of the league by Aratus, as before its dissolution by the arts of Macedon, there was infinitely more of moderation and justice in the administration of its government, and less of violence and sedition in the people, than were to be found in any of the cities exercising singly all the prerogatives of sovereignty. The Abbé Mably, in his observations on Greece, says that the popular government, which was so tempestuous elsewhere, caused no disorders in the members of the Achaean republic, because it was there tempered by the general authority and laws of the confederacy.
We are not to conclude too hastily, however, that faction did not, in a certain degree, agitate the particular cities; much less that a due subordination and harmony reigned in the general system. The contrary is sufficiently displayed in the vicissitudes and fate of the republic.
Whilst the Amphictyonic confederacy remained, that of the Achaeans, which comprehended the less important cities only, made little figure on the theatre of Greece. When the former became a victim to Macedon, the latter was spared by the policy of Philip and Alexander. Under the successors of these princes, however, a different policy prevailed. The arts of division were practiced among the Achaeans. Each city was seduced into a separate interest; the union was dissolved. Some of the cities fell under the tyranny of Macedonian garrisons; others under that of usurpers springing out of their own confusions. Shame and oppression erelong awaken their love of liberty. A few cities reunited. Their example was followed by others, as opportunities were found of cutting off their tyrants. The league soon embraced almost the whole Peloponnesus. Macedon saw its progress; but was hindered by internal dissensions from stopping it. All Greece caught the enthusiasm and seemed ready to unite in one confederacy, when the jealousy and envy in Sparta and Athens, of the rising glory of the Achaeans, threw a fatal damp on the enterprise. The dread of the Macedonian power induced the league to court the alliance of the Kings of Egypt and Syria, who, as successors of Alexander, were rivals of the king of Macedon. This policy was defeated by Cleomenes, king of Sparta, who was led by his ambition to make an unprovoked attack on his neighbors, the Achaeans, and who, as an enemy to Macedon, had interest enough with the Egyptian and Syrian princes to effect a breach of their engagements with the league.
The Achaeans were now reduced to the dilemma of submitting to Cleomenes, or of supplicating the aid of Macedon, its former oppressor. The latter expedient was adopted. The contests of the Greeks always afforded a pleasing opportunity to that powerful neighbor of intermeddling in their affairs. A Macedonian army quickly appeared. Cleomenes was vanquished. The Achaeans soon experienced, as often happens, that a victorious and powerful ally is but another name for a master. All that their most abject compliances could obtain from him was a toleration of the exercise of their laws. Philip, who was now on the throne of Macedon, soon provoked by his tyrannies, fresh combinations among the Greeks. The Achaeans, though weakenened by internal dissensions and by the revolt of Messene, one of its members, being joined by the Ætolians and Athenians, erected the standard of opposition. Finding themselves, though thus supported, unequal to the undertaking, they once more had recourse to the dangerous expedient of introducing the succor of foreign arms. The Romans, to whom the invitation was made, eagerly embraced it. Philip was conquered; Macedon subdued. A new crisis ensued to the league. Dissensions broke out among it members. These the Romans fostered. Callicrates and other popular leaders became mercenary instruments for inveigling their countrymen. The more effectually to nourish discord and disorder the Romans had, to the astonishment of those who confided in their sincerity, already proclaimed universal liberty1 throughout Greece. With the same insidious views, they now seduced the members from the league, by representing to their pride the violation it committed on their sovereignty. By these arts this union, the last hope of Greece, the last hope of ancient liberty, was torn into pieces; and such imbecility and distraction introduced, that the arms of Rome found little difficulty in completing the ruin which their arts had commenced. The Achaeans were cut to pieces, and Achaia loaded with chains, under which it is groaning at this hour.
I have thought it not superfluous to give the outlines of this important portion of history; both because it teaches more than one lesson, and because, as a supplement to the outlines of the Achaean constitution, it emphatically illustrates the tendency of federal bodies rather to anarchy among the members, than to tyranny in the head.
1. This was but another name more specious for the independence of the members on the federal head.
Home Contents Previous Next Index | <urn:uuid:2a39ecdb-7d82-403a-9516-0c330c268c86> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://duskgytldkxiuqc6.darknet.to/fedpapers/federa18.htm | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594209.12/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119035851-20200119063851-00278.warc.gz | en | 0.981609 | 2,699 | 3.328125 | 3 | [
-0.1846761852502823,
0.21218176186084747,
0.5255295038223267,
-0.009798416867852211,
-0.43965327739715576,
-0.15126720070838928,
0.0655253678560257,
0.4331713914871216,
-0.20675736665725708,
-0.12768705189228058,
-0.15222007036209106,
-0.23136840760707855,
0.08054292947053909,
0.2877887487... | 1 | AMONG the confederacies of antiquity, the most considerable was that of the Grecian republics, associated under the Amphictyonic council. From the best accounts transmitted of this celebrated institution, it bore a very instructive analogy to the present Confederation of the American States.
The members retained the character of independent and sovereign states, and had equal votes in the federal council. This council had a general authority to propose and resolve whatever it judged necessary for the common welfare of Greece; to declare and carry on war; to decide, in the last resort, all controversies between the members; to fine the aggressing party; to employ the whole force of the confederacy against the disobedient; to admit new members. The Amphictyons were the guardians of religion, and of the immense riches belonging to the temple of Delphos, where they had the right of jurisdiction in controversies between the inhabitants and those who came to consult the oracle. As a further provision for the efficacy of the federal powers, they took an oath mutually to defend and protect the united cities, to punish the violators of this oath, and to inflict vengeance on sacrilegious despoilers of the temple.
In theory, and upon paper, this apparatus of powers seems amply sufficient for all general purposes. In several material instances, they exceed the powers enumerated in the articles of confederation. The Amphictyons had in their hands the superstition of the times, one of the principal engines by which government was then maintained; they had a declared authority to use coercion against refractory cities, and were bound by oath to exert this authority on the necessary occasions.
Very different, nevertheless, was the experiment from the theory. The powers, like those of the present Congress, were administered by deputies appointed wholly by the cities in their political capacities; and exercised over them in the same capacities. Hence the weakness, the disorders, and finally the destruction of the confederacy. The more powerful members, instead of being kept in awe and subordination, tyrannized successively over all the rest. Athens, as we learn from Demosthenes, was the arbiter of Greece seventy-three years. The Lacedaemonians next governed it twenty-nine years; at a subsequent period, after the battle of Leuctra, the Thebans had their turn of domination.
It happened but too often, according to Plutarch, that the deputies of the strongest cities awed and corrupted those of the weaker; and that judgment went in favor of the most powerful party.
Even in the midst of defensive and dangerous wars with Persia and Macedon, the members never acted in concert, and were, more or fewer of them, eternally the dupes or the hirelings of the common enemy. The intervals of foreign war were filled up by domestic vicissitudes convulsions, and carnage.
After the conclusion of the war with Xerxes, it appears that the Lacedaemonians required that a number of the cities should be turned out of the confederacy for the unfaithful part they had acted. The Athenians, finding that the Lacedaemonians would lose fewer partisans by such a measure than themselves, and would become masters of the public deliberations, vigorously opposed and defeated the attempt. This piece of history proves at once the inefficiency of the union, the ambition and jealousy of its most powerful members, and the dependent and degraded condition of the rest. The smaller members, though entitled by the theory of their system to revolve in equal pride and majesty around the common center, had become, in fact, satellites of the orbs of primary magnitude.
Had the Greeks, says the Abbé Milot, been as wise as they were courageous, they would have been admonished by experience of the necessity of a closer union, and would have availed themselves of the peace which followed their success against the Persian arms, to establish such a reformation. Instead of this obvious policy, Athens and Sparta, inflated with the victories and the glory they had acquired, became first rivals and then enemies; and did each other infinitely more mischief than they had suffered from Xerxes. Their mutual jealousies, fears, hatreds, and injuries ended in the celebrated Peloponnesian war; which itself ended in the ruin and slavery of the Athenians who had begun it.
As a weak government, when not at war, is ever agitated by internal dissentions, so these never fail to bring on fresh calamities from abroad. The Phocians having ploughed up some consecrated ground belonging to the temple of Apollo, the Amphictyonic council, according to the superstition of the age, imposed a fine on the sacrilegious offenders. The Phocians, being abetted by Athens and Sparta, refused to submit to the decree. The Thebans, with others of the cities, undertook to maintain the authority of the Amphictyons, and to avenge the violated god. The latter, being the weaker party, invited the assistance of Philip of Macedon, who had secretly fostered the contest. Philip gladly seized the opportunity of executing the designs he had long planned against the liberties of Greece. By his intrigues and bribes he won over to his interests the popular leaders of several cities; by their influence and votes, gained admission into the Amphictyonic council; and by his arts and his arms, made himself master of the confederacy.
Such were the consequences of the fallacious principle on which this interesting establishment was founded. Had Greece, says a judicious observer on her fate, been united by a stricter confederation, and persevered in her union, she would never have worn the chains of Macedon; and might have proved a barrier to the vast projects of Rome.
The Achaean league, as it is called, was another society of Grecian republics, which supplies us with valuable instruction.
The Union here was far more intimate, and its organization much wiser, than in the preceding instance. It will accordingly appear, that though not exempt from a similar catastrophe, it by no means equally deserved it.
The cities composing this league retained their municipal jurisdiction, appointed their own officers, and enjoyed a perfect equality. The senate, in which they were represented, had the sole and exclusive right of peace and war; of sending and receiving ambassadors; of entering into treaties and alliances; of appointing a chief magistrate or praetor, as he was called, who commanded their armies, and who, with the advice and consent of ten of the senators, not only administered the government in the recess of the senate, but had a great share in its deliberations, when assembled. According to the primitive constitution, there were two praetors associated in the administration; but on trial a single one was preferred.
It appears that the cities had all the same laws and customs, the same weights and measures, and the same money. But how far this effect proceeded from the authority of the federal council is left in uncertainty. It is said only that the cities were in a manner compelled to receive the same laws and usages. When Lacedaemon was brought into the league by Philopoemen, it was attended with an abolition of the institutions and laws of Lycurgus, and an adoption of those of the Achaeans. The Amphictyonic confederacy, of which she had been a member, left her in the full exercise of her government and her legislation. This circumstance alone proves a very material difference in the genius of the two systems.
It is much to be regretted that such imperfect monuments remain of this curious political fabric. Could its interior structure and regular operation be ascertained, it is probable that more light would be thrown by it on the science of federal government, than by any of the like experiments with which we are acquainted.
One important fact seems to be witnessed by all the historians who take notice of Achaean affairs. It is, that as well after the renovation of the league by Aratus, as before its dissolution by the arts of Macedon, there was infinitely more of moderation and justice in the administration of its government, and less of violence and sedition in the people, than were to be found in any of the cities exercising singly all the prerogatives of sovereignty. The Abbé Mably, in his observations on Greece, says that the popular government, which was so tempestuous elsewhere, caused no disorders in the members of the Achaean republic, because it was there tempered by the general authority and laws of the confederacy.
We are not to conclude too hastily, however, that faction did not, in a certain degree, agitate the particular cities; much less that a due subordination and harmony reigned in the general system. The contrary is sufficiently displayed in the vicissitudes and fate of the republic.
Whilst the Amphictyonic confederacy remained, that of the Achaeans, which comprehended the less important cities only, made little figure on the theatre of Greece. When the former became a victim to Macedon, the latter was spared by the policy of Philip and Alexander. Under the successors of these princes, however, a different policy prevailed. The arts of division were practiced among the Achaeans. Each city was seduced into a separate interest; the union was dissolved. Some of the cities fell under the tyranny of Macedonian garrisons; others under that of usurpers springing out of their own confusions. Shame and oppression erelong awaken their love of liberty. A few cities reunited. Their example was followed by others, as opportunities were found of cutting off their tyrants. The league soon embraced almost the whole Peloponnesus. Macedon saw its progress; but was hindered by internal dissensions from stopping it. All Greece caught the enthusiasm and seemed ready to unite in one confederacy, when the jealousy and envy in Sparta and Athens, of the rising glory of the Achaeans, threw a fatal damp on the enterprise. The dread of the Macedonian power induced the league to court the alliance of the Kings of Egypt and Syria, who, as successors of Alexander, were rivals of the king of Macedon. This policy was defeated by Cleomenes, king of Sparta, who was led by his ambition to make an unprovoked attack on his neighbors, the Achaeans, and who, as an enemy to Macedon, had interest enough with the Egyptian and Syrian princes to effect a breach of their engagements with the league.
The Achaeans were now reduced to the dilemma of submitting to Cleomenes, or of supplicating the aid of Macedon, its former oppressor. The latter expedient was adopted. The contests of the Greeks always afforded a pleasing opportunity to that powerful neighbor of intermeddling in their affairs. A Macedonian army quickly appeared. Cleomenes was vanquished. The Achaeans soon experienced, as often happens, that a victorious and powerful ally is but another name for a master. All that their most abject compliances could obtain from him was a toleration of the exercise of their laws. Philip, who was now on the throne of Macedon, soon provoked by his tyrannies, fresh combinations among the Greeks. The Achaeans, though weakenened by internal dissensions and by the revolt of Messene, one of its members, being joined by the Ætolians and Athenians, erected the standard of opposition. Finding themselves, though thus supported, unequal to the undertaking, they once more had recourse to the dangerous expedient of introducing the succor of foreign arms. The Romans, to whom the invitation was made, eagerly embraced it. Philip was conquered; Macedon subdued. A new crisis ensued to the league. Dissensions broke out among it members. These the Romans fostered. Callicrates and other popular leaders became mercenary instruments for inveigling their countrymen. The more effectually to nourish discord and disorder the Romans had, to the astonishment of those who confided in their sincerity, already proclaimed universal liberty1 throughout Greece. With the same insidious views, they now seduced the members from the league, by representing to their pride the violation it committed on their sovereignty. By these arts this union, the last hope of Greece, the last hope of ancient liberty, was torn into pieces; and such imbecility and distraction introduced, that the arms of Rome found little difficulty in completing the ruin which their arts had commenced. The Achaeans were cut to pieces, and Achaia loaded with chains, under which it is groaning at this hour.
I have thought it not superfluous to give the outlines of this important portion of history; both because it teaches more than one lesson, and because, as a supplement to the outlines of the Achaean constitution, it emphatically illustrates the tendency of federal bodies rather to anarchy among the members, than to tyranny in the head.
1. This was but another name more specious for the independence of the members on the federal head.
Home Contents Previous Next Index | 2,690 | ENGLISH | 1 |
A late Bronze Age torque made up of one long spiral of bronze wire doubled up, the rods formed into a hook and loop fastener and so joined together at the top. Small pieces of bronze have been folded over at certain points in order to keep these two strands together. The whole length has a fine deep patination.
Commonly mentioned as spoils of war and made from different metals, torcs were not merely military decorations of men. Quite possibly they served as indications of rank, status and power. They may also have had religious associations as such objects appear on the figures of the Celtic deities. The specific meaning of the torc may have varied across the Celtic world and across time. Designs could vary from very simple to extremely elaborate, in various metals, including gold. Some torcs were probably used as rattles during rituals, or otherwise, because of their great size and weight, put on statues as votive offerings.
Date: c. 1200-800 BC
Period: Central European Bronze Age | <urn:uuid:488221bc-af4c-4983-86b4-7c51f171eefd> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://lapada.org/art-and-antiques/late-bronze-age-torc/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604849.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121162615-20200121191615-00292.warc.gz | en | 0.982648 | 205 | 3.46875 | 3 | [
-0.2678946256637573,
0.27416202425956726,
0.1569555103778839,
0.26785868406295776,
-0.09404772520065308,
-0.022426357492804527,
0.09022865444421768,
0.011299556121230125,
-0.2576049268245697,
0.04465334489941597,
0.29657742381095886,
-0.3086141347885132,
0.13403210043907166,
0.368836015462... | 2 | A late Bronze Age torque made up of one long spiral of bronze wire doubled up, the rods formed into a hook and loop fastener and so joined together at the top. Small pieces of bronze have been folded over at certain points in order to keep these two strands together. The whole length has a fine deep patination.
Commonly mentioned as spoils of war and made from different metals, torcs were not merely military decorations of men. Quite possibly they served as indications of rank, status and power. They may also have had religious associations as such objects appear on the figures of the Celtic deities. The specific meaning of the torc may have varied across the Celtic world and across time. Designs could vary from very simple to extremely elaborate, in various metals, including gold. Some torcs were probably used as rattles during rituals, or otherwise, because of their great size and weight, put on statues as votive offerings.
Date: c. 1200-800 BC
Period: Central European Bronze Age | 209 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Seti provided him with a kingly household and harem, and the young prince accompanied his father on his campaigns, so that when he came to sole rule he already had experience of kingship and of war.
Leonardo might have been a brilliant and talented artist, but many of his biggest achievements were not actually works of art, but were the designs for machines that were way ahead of his time. Not only is Leonardo da Vinci a famed artist, but he is also someone that had a number of inventions that proved to be transformative.
By many people, Leonardo is regarded as one of the most brilliant people to ever live and is much more than just an artistic genius. The accomplishments that he achieved spanned much more than just art. He also made profound contributions to math and science through his inventions.
It is important to have a full grasp on all the major accomplishments that Leonardo achieved. Here are a few of the major accomplishments of Leonardo Da Vinci. Leonardo always seemed to be infatuated with flight and gravity. After his death, it was discovered that he had a sketch for a parachute that would allow a person to drift downward gracefully instead if simply plummeting from the air.
Again, he is not credited for the invention of the parachute, but he is believed by many to be the first person to come up with this idea and to make the first sketch of the design.
Vitruvian Man Many people only see Leonardo as a famed artist and painter, but some of his accomplishments were actually for the field of science.
The Vitruvian Man was a model that Leonardo made of a man that was completely proportionate.
When he created this model he essentially helped to develop the technology of optics and lenses that was used in the creation of telescopes. Even though Leonardo was not given the recognition during his lifetime, he was eventually credited for his contribution to science through his model of the Vitruvian Man and the technology that he discovered.
His other contribution for science involved his writing on the erosion of rocks and how mountains were created. He was one of the first people to have an accurate theory on the sedimentary rock.
He was not seen as a scientist at his time, but many of the things that he wrote about were actually proven to be true and turned out to be big contributions to science. Ball Bearing Leonardo drew a sketch of a ball bearing system well before its time. This is an invention that changed the way that machines operate.
This technology has immense power and it is something that Leonardo actually came up with an idea for way before it was actually invented. He might have not been able to create this system on its own, but he did create a sketch for the design of a ball bearing system.
This idea that he came up with was not made widely known and someone else is credited with developing the first ball bearing system.
However, it is included in his early sketches and shows that he might have been the first to actually come up with the idea for this invention. The reason that Leonardo is often not credited with being an inventor instead of an artist is because many of his inventions did not go beyond just sketches.
He was a famed artist and one of the most well known painters to ever live. He created very many famous paintings during his lifetime, but the one that seems to get the most recognition and is one of his greatest works is the Mona Lisa.
This is considered by many people to not only be his most famous painting, but to be the most famous painting ever created.
Not only has this painting continued to be popular and a part of culture due to the exquisite beauty of the subject, but also due to the mystery that surrounds that painting.
His artwork is something that will live on forever and is one of his biggest accomplishments. Not only was it popularized during his life, but it has kept him a part of history after his death. No Boundaries One of this biggest accomplishments was being able to have recognition in almost every field.
Not only was he an artist and known for inventions, but he also contributed to mathematics, music and was a poet. He even wrote some theories on philosophy that are highly regarded.Buy Leonardo Da Vinci 01 by Walter Isaacson (ISBN: ) from Amazon's Book Store.
Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible leslutinsduphoenix.coms: An Amazon Best Book of October With biographies of Albert Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, and Steve Jobs under his belt, and a reputation as one of our premiere nonfiction writers, Walter Isaacson is the right person to take on a monumental figure like Leonardo da Vinci.
To write this biography Isaacson immersed himself in da Vinci’s 7, pages of notebooks, which these days are spread. Watch video · Leonardo da Vinci (April 15, to May 2, ) was a painter, sculptor, architect, inventor, military engineer and draftsman — the epitome of a “Renaissance man.”.
Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci for the better part of four hundred years his fame rested on his achievements as a painter. A handful of works that are either authenticated or attributed to him have been regarded as among the great masterpieces.
They were made and maintained daily throughout Leonardo's life and travels, as he. The Life and Accomplishments of Leonardo da Vinci Essay Words 4 Pages Leonardo da Vinci was born on April 15, , near the town of Vinci in Italy, which resides next to Florence.
Leonardo was born on 15 April (Old Style) "at the third hour of the night" in the Tuscan hill town of Vinci, in the lower valley of the Arno river in the territory of the Medici-ruled Republic of Florence.
He was the out-of-wedlock son of the wealthy Messer Piero Fruosino di Antonio da Vinci, a Florentine legal notary, and Caterina, a peasant. | <urn:uuid:89762237-d6dc-4d86-bfe1-440c5785f4b9> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://vyqevijilikyda.leslutinsduphoenix.com/the-life-and-achievements-of-leonardo-da-vinci-31182ad.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593937.27/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118193018-20200118221018-00086.warc.gz | en | 0.991508 | 1,234 | 3.59375 | 4 | [
-0.14142069220542908,
0.6739456057548523,
0.243137925863266,
-0.44741201400756836,
-0.6841709017753601,
0.04395411163568497,
0.6213306188583374,
0.34295299649238586,
0.03173179551959038,
-0.021083230152726173,
0.036107126623392105,
-0.22798648476600647,
0.1697586178779602,
0.27987420558929... | 3 | Seti provided him with a kingly household and harem, and the young prince accompanied his father on his campaigns, so that when he came to sole rule he already had experience of kingship and of war.
Leonardo might have been a brilliant and talented artist, but many of his biggest achievements were not actually works of art, but were the designs for machines that were way ahead of his time. Not only is Leonardo da Vinci a famed artist, but he is also someone that had a number of inventions that proved to be transformative.
By many people, Leonardo is regarded as one of the most brilliant people to ever live and is much more than just an artistic genius. The accomplishments that he achieved spanned much more than just art. He also made profound contributions to math and science through his inventions.
It is important to have a full grasp on all the major accomplishments that Leonardo achieved. Here are a few of the major accomplishments of Leonardo Da Vinci. Leonardo always seemed to be infatuated with flight and gravity. After his death, it was discovered that he had a sketch for a parachute that would allow a person to drift downward gracefully instead if simply plummeting from the air.
Again, he is not credited for the invention of the parachute, but he is believed by many to be the first person to come up with this idea and to make the first sketch of the design.
Vitruvian Man Many people only see Leonardo as a famed artist and painter, but some of his accomplishments were actually for the field of science.
The Vitruvian Man was a model that Leonardo made of a man that was completely proportionate.
When he created this model he essentially helped to develop the technology of optics and lenses that was used in the creation of telescopes. Even though Leonardo was not given the recognition during his lifetime, he was eventually credited for his contribution to science through his model of the Vitruvian Man and the technology that he discovered.
His other contribution for science involved his writing on the erosion of rocks and how mountains were created. He was one of the first people to have an accurate theory on the sedimentary rock.
He was not seen as a scientist at his time, but many of the things that he wrote about were actually proven to be true and turned out to be big contributions to science. Ball Bearing Leonardo drew a sketch of a ball bearing system well before its time. This is an invention that changed the way that machines operate.
This technology has immense power and it is something that Leonardo actually came up with an idea for way before it was actually invented. He might have not been able to create this system on its own, but he did create a sketch for the design of a ball bearing system.
This idea that he came up with was not made widely known and someone else is credited with developing the first ball bearing system.
However, it is included in his early sketches and shows that he might have been the first to actually come up with the idea for this invention. The reason that Leonardo is often not credited with being an inventor instead of an artist is because many of his inventions did not go beyond just sketches.
He was a famed artist and one of the most well known painters to ever live. He created very many famous paintings during his lifetime, but the one that seems to get the most recognition and is one of his greatest works is the Mona Lisa.
This is considered by many people to not only be his most famous painting, but to be the most famous painting ever created.
Not only has this painting continued to be popular and a part of culture due to the exquisite beauty of the subject, but also due to the mystery that surrounds that painting.
His artwork is something that will live on forever and is one of his biggest accomplishments. Not only was it popularized during his life, but it has kept him a part of history after his death. No Boundaries One of this biggest accomplishments was being able to have recognition in almost every field.
Not only was he an artist and known for inventions, but he also contributed to mathematics, music and was a poet. He even wrote some theories on philosophy that are highly regarded.Buy Leonardo Da Vinci 01 by Walter Isaacson (ISBN: ) from Amazon's Book Store.
Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible leslutinsduphoenix.coms: An Amazon Best Book of October With biographies of Albert Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, and Steve Jobs under his belt, and a reputation as one of our premiere nonfiction writers, Walter Isaacson is the right person to take on a monumental figure like Leonardo da Vinci.
To write this biography Isaacson immersed himself in da Vinci’s 7, pages of notebooks, which these days are spread. Watch video · Leonardo da Vinci (April 15, to May 2, ) was a painter, sculptor, architect, inventor, military engineer and draftsman — the epitome of a “Renaissance man.”.
Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci for the better part of four hundred years his fame rested on his achievements as a painter. A handful of works that are either authenticated or attributed to him have been regarded as among the great masterpieces.
They were made and maintained daily throughout Leonardo's life and travels, as he. The Life and Accomplishments of Leonardo da Vinci Essay Words 4 Pages Leonardo da Vinci was born on April 15, , near the town of Vinci in Italy, which resides next to Florence.
Leonardo was born on 15 April (Old Style) "at the third hour of the night" in the Tuscan hill town of Vinci, in the lower valley of the Arno river in the territory of the Medici-ruled Republic of Florence.
He was the out-of-wedlock son of the wealthy Messer Piero Fruosino di Antonio da Vinci, a Florentine legal notary, and Caterina, a peasant. | 1,199 | ENGLISH | 1 |
1 He made a the altar of burnt offering of acacia wood; five cubits was its length and five cubits its width - it was square - and its height was three cubits. 2 He made its horns on its four corners; the horns were of one piece with it. And he overlaid it with bronze. 3 He made all the utensils for the altar: the pans, the shovels, the basins, the forks, and the firepans; all its utensils he made of bronze. 4 And he made a grate of bronze network for the altar, under its rim, midway from the bottom. 5 He cast four rings for the four corners of the bronze grating, as holders for the poles. 6 And he made the poles of acacia wood, and overlaid them with bronze. 7 Then he put the poles into the rings on the sides of the altar, with which to bear it. He made the altar hollow with boards.New King James Version (NKJV) Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. | <urn:uuid:2a06f4c8-b373-436b-a488-ea724245e742> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://x.ebible.com/nkjv/section/151 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00051.warc.gz | en | 0.985567 | 216 | 3.265625 | 3 | [
-0.18231670558452606,
0.4217064678668976,
0.07568185776472092,
-0.03203078731894493,
-0.2976088523864746,
0.10029501467943192,
-0.028654376044869423,
-0.016240881755948067,
-0.013498994521796703,
-0.0759928822517395,
0.27866989374160767,
-0.6279346346855164,
0.12832589447498322,
0.09114469... | 2 | 1 He made a the altar of burnt offering of acacia wood; five cubits was its length and five cubits its width - it was square - and its height was three cubits. 2 He made its horns on its four corners; the horns were of one piece with it. And he overlaid it with bronze. 3 He made all the utensils for the altar: the pans, the shovels, the basins, the forks, and the firepans; all its utensils he made of bronze. 4 And he made a grate of bronze network for the altar, under its rim, midway from the bottom. 5 He cast four rings for the four corners of the bronze grating, as holders for the poles. 6 And he made the poles of acacia wood, and overlaid them with bronze. 7 Then he put the poles into the rings on the sides of the altar, with which to bear it. He made the altar hollow with boards.New King James Version (NKJV) Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. | 224 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Since the Grecian times, poems have been a very integral and influential part of every culture. Poems have affected whole countries at a time by expressing emotion, deep feelings, and a sense of what is beautiful about the world. From India to America, people have always drawn important parts of life and history from poems. A couple of the most unforgettable and prominent poets of all time include Homer and William Shakespeare. For my comparison essay, I will analyze the similarities between these two extraordinary poets.
Homer was a legendary author that lived in Ionia, Greece during 850 B.C.. Although he was creating works for most of his life, he didn’t make an appearance until the end of the Dark Age. Throughout his public life, Homer greatly influenced the Grecian culture, and even wrote history, through his Arete poems. Now he didn’t literally write history, but the Greeks loved his poems so much, that they considered them historical facts. Two of Homer’s major Arete poems, that were treasured by the Greeks, were The Illiad and The Odyssey. Overall, you could say Homer was the only poet with as big of an influence as he had on Greece. You could also say Homer was the only famous poet until William Shakespeare.
William Shakespeare was born in April of 1564 in England. The English poet, playwright and actor, was also regarded as the greatest writer in the English language as well as the world’s greatest dramatist by many. Shakespeare influenced many in England through his poems and plays. To this day, Shakespeare is called England’s national poet. Shakespeare’s stories, such as Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, and Othello, have stood the test of time and are internationally recognized as some of the best writings of all time.
Homer’s monumental influence on the Greeks is undeniable. No other poet, novelist, author, or etc. has ever encompassed what Homer achieved. The teachings’, through his writings, defined Greece and Grecian culture. Greeks looked at Homer’s writing as word of thumb for how they wanted to live their lives. His stories contained reason, intelligence, worldliness, secularism, courage, honor, heroism, integrity and strength. These became the pillars of Grecian society. He affected literature for centuries. Called the father of western Literature for impact on almost every author after him. Many playwrights also drew inspiration from his stories. One of these playwrights that drew inspiration from his stories could include William Shakespeare.
Much like Homer’s influence of Grecian culture, William Shakespeare was also a trailblazer in English language and theater. Shakespeare greatly transformed European theatre by expanding expectations and innovating themes in characterization, plot, language and genre. He also created some of the most admired plays in Western literature to this day. All parts of Elizabethan Theatre history played a part in how Shakespeare’s plays changed the culture. From playwrights to politicians, all would travel from far and wide to see the famous play of William Shakespeare. | <urn:uuid:7ce7f934-0020-434d-99e9-153d4f42ad77> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://tooly.io/ancient-greece-modern-comparison-project/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250605075.24/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121192553-20200121221553-00523.warc.gz | en | 0.984434 | 636 | 3.78125 | 4 | [
0.4024848937988281,
0.11955529451370239,
0.5595724582672119,
0.03847060352563858,
-0.2975671887397766,
-0.43904387950897217,
0.30588454008102417,
0.6565110683441162,
-0.07715238630771637,
-0.3938997685909271,
-0.18723811209201813,
0.09983360767364502,
-0.10528402030467987,
0.48938465118408... | 1 | Since the Grecian times, poems have been a very integral and influential part of every culture. Poems have affected whole countries at a time by expressing emotion, deep feelings, and a sense of what is beautiful about the world. From India to America, people have always drawn important parts of life and history from poems. A couple of the most unforgettable and prominent poets of all time include Homer and William Shakespeare. For my comparison essay, I will analyze the similarities between these two extraordinary poets.
Homer was a legendary author that lived in Ionia, Greece during 850 B.C.. Although he was creating works for most of his life, he didn’t make an appearance until the end of the Dark Age. Throughout his public life, Homer greatly influenced the Grecian culture, and even wrote history, through his Arete poems. Now he didn’t literally write history, but the Greeks loved his poems so much, that they considered them historical facts. Two of Homer’s major Arete poems, that were treasured by the Greeks, were The Illiad and The Odyssey. Overall, you could say Homer was the only poet with as big of an influence as he had on Greece. You could also say Homer was the only famous poet until William Shakespeare.
William Shakespeare was born in April of 1564 in England. The English poet, playwright and actor, was also regarded as the greatest writer in the English language as well as the world’s greatest dramatist by many. Shakespeare influenced many in England through his poems and plays. To this day, Shakespeare is called England’s national poet. Shakespeare’s stories, such as Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, and Othello, have stood the test of time and are internationally recognized as some of the best writings of all time.
Homer’s monumental influence on the Greeks is undeniable. No other poet, novelist, author, or etc. has ever encompassed what Homer achieved. The teachings’, through his writings, defined Greece and Grecian culture. Greeks looked at Homer’s writing as word of thumb for how they wanted to live their lives. His stories contained reason, intelligence, worldliness, secularism, courage, honor, heroism, integrity and strength. These became the pillars of Grecian society. He affected literature for centuries. Called the father of western Literature for impact on almost every author after him. Many playwrights also drew inspiration from his stories. One of these playwrights that drew inspiration from his stories could include William Shakespeare.
Much like Homer’s influence of Grecian culture, William Shakespeare was also a trailblazer in English language and theater. Shakespeare greatly transformed European theatre by expanding expectations and innovating themes in characterization, plot, language and genre. He also created some of the most admired plays in Western literature to this day. All parts of Elizabethan Theatre history played a part in how Shakespeare’s plays changed the culture. From playwrights to politicians, all would travel from far and wide to see the famous play of William Shakespeare. | 611 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Chapel was built in 1718 as part of the original Mission San Antonio de Valero. The facade of the rebuilt chapel is what most people picture as the Alamo.
In 1836 the fortification, of which the ruins of the Chapel was only a small part, was known as the Alalmo.
February 23 - March 6, 1836
A small band of Texans held out for thirteen days against the army of General Antonio López de Santa Anna. The Alamo fell in the early morning hours of March 6, 1836, the death of the Alamo Defenders has come to symbolize courage and sacrifice for the cause of Liberty.You can find out much more about the Alamo at their web site http://www.thealamo.org
I made the model so that it could be framed. Information on framing can be found at this link.
Main Gate and Chapel
The main gate, it's defensive "lunette" and the low barracks is on the left, to the right is the chapel. Between the two was the palisades wall made from two rows of verticle wooden posts lashed together with leather strips and dirt packed between them. It was only 4 feet high but did have a ditch in front of it and four cannons behind it. In front of this wall the defenders dragged fallen mesquite trees, which have large dangerous spines. As this was considered to be a weak spot in the defense Col. Davy Crocket and his Tennessee volunteers chose this area to defend in the battle, this area was never breached.
I seem to remember Larry McMurtry killing off one of his characters with a thorn puncture from a mesquite that became infected.
Inside the Gate and fifty feet from it there were two 8 pound cannons loaded with shrapnel behind a short wall to be fired if the front gate were to be breached, the round structure represents a well the defenders were digging, the exact location is unknown. To the right is a ramp built to move the 18 pound cannon up onto the ramparts. At the time it was the largest cannon between New Orleans and Mexico city. The east room of the low barracks was where Col. James Bowie was found slain in his bed. He had been ill and had been quarantined there as they thought he might be contagious. He died with both guns blazing.
The West Wall, at the upper portion of the picture, had a 12 pound cannon at the top of the ramp between two buildings. This was the area where the "Christianized Indians" lived before the war. Travis, Bowie, and other garrison officers had their headquarters in the building just North of the cannon placement. In front of these buildings was a small acequia dug for the Indiansto get water.
On the east side of the Plaza was the long barracks, a two-storied structure which was the original Convento de la Mission San Antonio de Valero. It contained the artillery officer headquartersas well as quarters for some of the garrison and a hospital on the second floor.
The North Wall had two ramps built to the top of the fortifications to move cannons up to the top of the ramparts
There were two eight pound cannons near the center of the north wall directed by the Commander of the Alamo, William B Travis. On the northwest corner, to the right of the picture, were two more eight pound cannons. Travis was killed on the North wall by a musket ball to the forehead shortly before the north wall was breached just before dawn of March 6, 1836.
Col. Cos was in charge of the contingent that first breached the wall. This is interesting because he was the comander of the Alamo when the Texans defeated him and took control of the Alamo shortly before the final battle. As part of the terms Col. Cos agreed to take his men and return to Mexico never to fight again in the war. Of course his brother-in-law was General Santa Anna so I imagine that when he met his brother-in-law down the road a'piece his brother-in-law told him he didn't care what he signed.
This brings us back to the Chapel. There was a ramp from the front door leading up to the back wall where there was a cannon. Beside the Chapel and behind the Long Barracks were the livestock pens, these had been fortified and again had ramps to move cannons up onto the walls. The small structure in the left pen was the latrine.
Jacalitos were the small houses made mostly with sticks and mud by the local people. At night a party of the defenders slipped out and burned them down because soldiers could hide in them and shoot at people on the walls. There were 2 cannons in the lunette guarding the front gate.
ACCURACY OF THE MODEL
I have spent a lot of time going over all of the books, pamphlets and maps of the Alamo that I could get my hands on and have spent a large amount of time actually at the Alamo in the past years. Not all maps and references agree on some of the details but this model accurately depicts those features about which there is no discrepancy As to other feature that there is some question about I have had to go with whom I thought was the most credible or in some cases I have chosen what I think the defenders would most likely do. If you have any corrections or comments please e-mail me. | <urn:uuid:db48130b-3fde-41cb-9c77-84678265d3ef> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://finepots.com/ALAMO/index.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250620381.59/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124130719-20200124155719-00369.warc.gz | en | 0.988349 | 1,112 | 3.484375 | 3 | [
-0.3416299521923065,
0.29504498839378357,
0.3272574543952942,
0.07727405428886414,
0.051165394484996796,
-0.3104429244995117,
-0.08911819010972977,
0.09335829317569733,
-0.35322481393814087,
0.01903156191110611,
0.3868682086467743,
-0.17062214016914368,
0.22467011213302612,
0.1091621071100... | 3 | The Chapel was built in 1718 as part of the original Mission San Antonio de Valero. The facade of the rebuilt chapel is what most people picture as the Alamo.
In 1836 the fortification, of which the ruins of the Chapel was only a small part, was known as the Alalmo.
February 23 - March 6, 1836
A small band of Texans held out for thirteen days against the army of General Antonio López de Santa Anna. The Alamo fell in the early morning hours of March 6, 1836, the death of the Alamo Defenders has come to symbolize courage and sacrifice for the cause of Liberty.You can find out much more about the Alamo at their web site http://www.thealamo.org
I made the model so that it could be framed. Information on framing can be found at this link.
Main Gate and Chapel
The main gate, it's defensive "lunette" and the low barracks is on the left, to the right is the chapel. Between the two was the palisades wall made from two rows of verticle wooden posts lashed together with leather strips and dirt packed between them. It was only 4 feet high but did have a ditch in front of it and four cannons behind it. In front of this wall the defenders dragged fallen mesquite trees, which have large dangerous spines. As this was considered to be a weak spot in the defense Col. Davy Crocket and his Tennessee volunteers chose this area to defend in the battle, this area was never breached.
I seem to remember Larry McMurtry killing off one of his characters with a thorn puncture from a mesquite that became infected.
Inside the Gate and fifty feet from it there were two 8 pound cannons loaded with shrapnel behind a short wall to be fired if the front gate were to be breached, the round structure represents a well the defenders were digging, the exact location is unknown. To the right is a ramp built to move the 18 pound cannon up onto the ramparts. At the time it was the largest cannon between New Orleans and Mexico city. The east room of the low barracks was where Col. James Bowie was found slain in his bed. He had been ill and had been quarantined there as they thought he might be contagious. He died with both guns blazing.
The West Wall, at the upper portion of the picture, had a 12 pound cannon at the top of the ramp between two buildings. This was the area where the "Christianized Indians" lived before the war. Travis, Bowie, and other garrison officers had their headquarters in the building just North of the cannon placement. In front of these buildings was a small acequia dug for the Indiansto get water.
On the east side of the Plaza was the long barracks, a two-storied structure which was the original Convento de la Mission San Antonio de Valero. It contained the artillery officer headquartersas well as quarters for some of the garrison and a hospital on the second floor.
The North Wall had two ramps built to the top of the fortifications to move cannons up to the top of the ramparts
There were two eight pound cannons near the center of the north wall directed by the Commander of the Alamo, William B Travis. On the northwest corner, to the right of the picture, were two more eight pound cannons. Travis was killed on the North wall by a musket ball to the forehead shortly before the north wall was breached just before dawn of March 6, 1836.
Col. Cos was in charge of the contingent that first breached the wall. This is interesting because he was the comander of the Alamo when the Texans defeated him and took control of the Alamo shortly before the final battle. As part of the terms Col. Cos agreed to take his men and return to Mexico never to fight again in the war. Of course his brother-in-law was General Santa Anna so I imagine that when he met his brother-in-law down the road a'piece his brother-in-law told him he didn't care what he signed.
This brings us back to the Chapel. There was a ramp from the front door leading up to the back wall where there was a cannon. Beside the Chapel and behind the Long Barracks were the livestock pens, these had been fortified and again had ramps to move cannons up onto the walls. The small structure in the left pen was the latrine.
Jacalitos were the small houses made mostly with sticks and mud by the local people. At night a party of the defenders slipped out and burned them down because soldiers could hide in them and shoot at people on the walls. There were 2 cannons in the lunette guarding the front gate.
ACCURACY OF THE MODEL
I have spent a lot of time going over all of the books, pamphlets and maps of the Alamo that I could get my hands on and have spent a large amount of time actually at the Alamo in the past years. Not all maps and references agree on some of the details but this model accurately depicts those features about which there is no discrepancy As to other feature that there is some question about I have had to go with whom I thought was the most credible or in some cases I have chosen what I think the defenders would most likely do. If you have any corrections or comments please e-mail me. | 1,116 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Medieval Pole Weapons 1287-1513, by Adrian Waite, subtitled 'The untold story of the medieval billman and his polearm'
Slim booklet published by Stuart Press in 2001, 20 pages. A5 size booklet (N6816)
What were the lethal weapons that were used to such deadly effect by common men on the medieval battlefields of Europe? Often developed from agricultural implements or hunting weapons, medieval polearms were used at close quarters to inflict horrific injuries. Of limited use as weapons in single combat, they achieved their deadly potential when used by men fighting in blocks. In England, such men were called 'billmen', as the most common form of pole arm was the 'billhook'. The survival of such billmen depended not only on the skill and strength of the individual billman, but also on the quality of the 'teamwork' in his block.
The polearm first appeared in European literature in 1287, but its first recorded appearance on a European battlefield was in the hands of the Swiss at Morgarten in 1315. During the two centuries that followed a variety ofpolearrns, each designed to be used in a specific manner, were developed and used in all European countries. These were the weapons that would go on to cause the greatest slaughter ever seen on a British battlefield at Towton in 1461, and to cause the annihilation of the Scottish army and nobility at the Battle ofFlodden in 1513.
And who were the men who wielded these weapons? Some were professional soldiers, but most were peasants pressed into military service. All risked their lives in close and bloody combat. What was it like to be a medieval billman? The medieval polearm and the billman have not received as much attention as the Knight or Archer, either because of their lower status at the time, or because later generations have perceived them to have been less 'romantic'. However, the billman and his polearm have a story to tell that is worth hearing. It is the purpose of this book to introduce that story.
The condition of the booklet is generally very good. The cover has one or two minor scuffs, but the staple spine is intact, and all pages are intact, unblemished and tightly bound. There is a small price sticker on the rear side cover | <urn:uuid:620a854c-3d58-46b9-87b5-680792376f2e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.diandsaulbooks.co.uk/medieval-pole-weapons-1287-1513-by-adrian-waite-5814-p.asp | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783621.89/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129010251-20200129040251-00034.warc.gz | en | 0.984963 | 473 | 3.484375 | 3 | [
-0.6335443258285522,
0.3678146302700043,
0.02142254076898098,
-0.11512994021177292,
0.14902080595493317,
-0.17610424757003784,
0.2123820036649704,
0.14106397330760956,
-0.3301647901535034,
0.006618836894631386,
-0.07587473094463348,
-0.07939967513084412,
0.49704307317733765,
0.116237357258... | 5 | Medieval Pole Weapons 1287-1513, by Adrian Waite, subtitled 'The untold story of the medieval billman and his polearm'
Slim booklet published by Stuart Press in 2001, 20 pages. A5 size booklet (N6816)
What were the lethal weapons that were used to such deadly effect by common men on the medieval battlefields of Europe? Often developed from agricultural implements or hunting weapons, medieval polearms were used at close quarters to inflict horrific injuries. Of limited use as weapons in single combat, they achieved their deadly potential when used by men fighting in blocks. In England, such men were called 'billmen', as the most common form of pole arm was the 'billhook'. The survival of such billmen depended not only on the skill and strength of the individual billman, but also on the quality of the 'teamwork' in his block.
The polearm first appeared in European literature in 1287, but its first recorded appearance on a European battlefield was in the hands of the Swiss at Morgarten in 1315. During the two centuries that followed a variety ofpolearrns, each designed to be used in a specific manner, were developed and used in all European countries. These were the weapons that would go on to cause the greatest slaughter ever seen on a British battlefield at Towton in 1461, and to cause the annihilation of the Scottish army and nobility at the Battle ofFlodden in 1513.
And who were the men who wielded these weapons? Some were professional soldiers, but most were peasants pressed into military service. All risked their lives in close and bloody combat. What was it like to be a medieval billman? The medieval polearm and the billman have not received as much attention as the Knight or Archer, either because of their lower status at the time, or because later generations have perceived them to have been less 'romantic'. However, the billman and his polearm have a story to tell that is worth hearing. It is the purpose of this book to introduce that story.
The condition of the booklet is generally very good. The cover has one or two minor scuffs, but the staple spine is intact, and all pages are intact, unblemished and tightly bound. There is a small price sticker on the rear side cover | 496 | ENGLISH | 1 |
How did Adolf Hitler rise to power? Adolf Hitler rose to power when he was released from jail, becomingthe spokesperson for the poor and nationalistic German.
Adolf Hitler rose to power when he was released from jail, becomingthe spokesperson for the poor and nationalistic German. He thenbecame Chancellor and brought the Nazi Party to power and enforcedhis rules and laws.
Hitler was a brilliant speaker and politician however he wasdisorganized. He was a driven, unstable man, who believed that hehad been called by God to become the dictator of Germany and rulethe world. This kept him going when other people might have givenup. His self-belief persuaded people to believe in him.
The Treaty of Versailles, which was a peace settlement in which theGermans had no choice and were forced to sign after WW1, was animportant reason why the Nazis came to power.
This made the new Weimar government, who signed theTreaty, extremely unpopular and there was a lot of opposition tothe government. Hitler promised to get rid of the Treaty. The Number of unemployedgrew; people starved on the streets. In the crisis, people wantedsomeone to blame, and looked to extreme solutions - Hitler offeredthem both, and Nazi success in the elections grew.
Germans turnedto Nazism because they were desperate. The number of Nazi seats inthe Reichstag rose from 12 in to in July To Hitler,this depression was like a gift because for every problem the NaziParty had come up with an explanation or promise.
These included; promise to get rid of the hated Weimar governmentand replace it with a strong leader-Hitler, a promise to get peopleback to work on road building and public works, and a promise todeal with a communist take-over.
In a time of chaos thedepression people chose to support Hitler because of hisdiscipline and his promises he inflicted on the German generalpublic.
Article 48, the president had too much power and the states couldbe hostile to the national government. Most importantly theproportional representation helped Hitler. Proportionalrepresentation meant that the governments had to be coalitions.
General Von Schleicher stopped supporting Von Papen and decided hehimself should become chancellor.
This triggered off a powerstruggle between Von Schleicher and Von Papen, which ended up withthem handing power to Hitler. In the end I do not think Hitler took power at all- he was mostlygiven it!Hitler was a brilliant speaker, and his eyes had a peculiar power over people. He was a good organiser and politician.
He was a driven, unstable man, who believed that he had been called by God to become dictator of Germany and rule the world.
Nov 23, · Adolf Hitler rose to power when he was released from jail, becoming the spokesperson for the poor and nationalistic German. He then became Chancellor and brought the Nazi Party to power . Hitler countered their attempts to curb him by threatening resignation, and because the future of the party depended on his power to organize publicity and to acquire funds, his opponents relented.
In July he became their leader with almost unlimited powers.
This April 20 marks the th anniversary of the birth of Adolf Hitler, the unremarkable artist who would rise to become the dictator of Germany and the instigator of the Holocaust.
Adolf Hitler rose to power quickly because of the recent first World War's reparations, the Treaty of Versailles, and the worldwide depression. Adolf Hitler's rise to power began in Germany in September when Hitler joined the political party known as the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei – DAP (German Workers' Party).
The name was changed in to the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei – NSDAP (National Socialist German Workers' Party, commonly known as the Nazi Party). | <urn:uuid:04cdb915-d51e-4dcb-9a6b-a6de9e79fe39> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://duwuquxyjiwinew.attheheels.com/hitler-rose-to-power-because-of-60954dm.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251678287.60/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125161753-20200125190753-00214.warc.gz | en | 0.980586 | 799 | 3.40625 | 3 | [
-0.6901622414588928,
0.6715503334999084,
-0.13561347126960754,
0.05637712404131889,
-0.029512500390410423,
0.26690831780433655,
0.17000842094421387,
-0.07092434167861938,
-0.06650194525718689,
0.03462746739387512,
0.24582642316818237,
-0.1334056705236435,
0.10506562888622284,
0.05403823778... | 1 | How did Adolf Hitler rise to power? Adolf Hitler rose to power when he was released from jail, becomingthe spokesperson for the poor and nationalistic German.
Adolf Hitler rose to power when he was released from jail, becomingthe spokesperson for the poor and nationalistic German. He thenbecame Chancellor and brought the Nazi Party to power and enforcedhis rules and laws.
Hitler was a brilliant speaker and politician however he wasdisorganized. He was a driven, unstable man, who believed that hehad been called by God to become the dictator of Germany and rulethe world. This kept him going when other people might have givenup. His self-belief persuaded people to believe in him.
The Treaty of Versailles, which was a peace settlement in which theGermans had no choice and were forced to sign after WW1, was animportant reason why the Nazis came to power.
This made the new Weimar government, who signed theTreaty, extremely unpopular and there was a lot of opposition tothe government. Hitler promised to get rid of the Treaty. The Number of unemployedgrew; people starved on the streets. In the crisis, people wantedsomeone to blame, and looked to extreme solutions - Hitler offeredthem both, and Nazi success in the elections grew.
Germans turnedto Nazism because they were desperate. The number of Nazi seats inthe Reichstag rose from 12 in to in July To Hitler,this depression was like a gift because for every problem the NaziParty had come up with an explanation or promise.
These included; promise to get rid of the hated Weimar governmentand replace it with a strong leader-Hitler, a promise to get peopleback to work on road building and public works, and a promise todeal with a communist take-over.
In a time of chaos thedepression people chose to support Hitler because of hisdiscipline and his promises he inflicted on the German generalpublic.
Article 48, the president had too much power and the states couldbe hostile to the national government. Most importantly theproportional representation helped Hitler. Proportionalrepresentation meant that the governments had to be coalitions.
General Von Schleicher stopped supporting Von Papen and decided hehimself should become chancellor.
This triggered off a powerstruggle between Von Schleicher and Von Papen, which ended up withthem handing power to Hitler. In the end I do not think Hitler took power at all- he was mostlygiven it!Hitler was a brilliant speaker, and his eyes had a peculiar power over people. He was a good organiser and politician.
He was a driven, unstable man, who believed that he had been called by God to become dictator of Germany and rule the world.
Nov 23, · Adolf Hitler rose to power when he was released from jail, becoming the spokesperson for the poor and nationalistic German. He then became Chancellor and brought the Nazi Party to power . Hitler countered their attempts to curb him by threatening resignation, and because the future of the party depended on his power to organize publicity and to acquire funds, his opponents relented.
In July he became their leader with almost unlimited powers.
This April 20 marks the th anniversary of the birth of Adolf Hitler, the unremarkable artist who would rise to become the dictator of Germany and the instigator of the Holocaust.
Adolf Hitler rose to power quickly because of the recent first World War's reparations, the Treaty of Versailles, and the worldwide depression. Adolf Hitler's rise to power began in Germany in September when Hitler joined the political party known as the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei – DAP (German Workers' Party).
The name was changed in to the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei – NSDAP (National Socialist German Workers' Party, commonly known as the Nazi Party). | 780 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Get ready to learn about the mighty Battle of Hastings…
The Kings and Queens of England have a long history of, well, not being very English. Take for instance the current ruling house, the House of Windsor. That sounds like a proper English name, doesn’t it? That’s by design. Until 1917, the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha ruled England. King George V changed the name to the more English-sounding “Windsor” during WWI. He realized it was a bit awkward for the English people to be fighting the Germans when their King sounded like a Kraut.
But while the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha had German roots, at least all the English monarchs from that line have spoken English. For centuries during the Middle Ages, the Kings of England couldn’t even claim that. From 1066 until 1399, the rulers of England all spoke French. Why? Well, just as today’s royal family traces back to Germany, the kings in those days didn’t have roots in the British Isles. Rather, they came from a family of French Vikings.
But how did a line of Vikings from Northern France come to rule England for centuries? The answer lay on the field of one of the most famous clashes in history: The Battle of Hastings.
Let’s back up a little bit: French Vikings? Yes, you read that correctly. While many people know that William the Conqueror, the legendary victor at Hastings, came from Normandy in France, his ancestors came from further north. In 911 AD, the French ruler Charles the Simple allowed a group of Vikings to settle in the French region.
The leader of these Vikings, a man named Rollo, essentially became the first Duke of Normandy—though it would be decades before his descendants actually started using that title.
Despite being from the wild northlands of Scandinavia, the Dukes of Normandy took to their new home quite well. Soon, they learned French and became entrenched in local politics. Then, in 1002 AD, King Æthelred II of England married Emma, the Duke of Normandy’s sister. Suddenly, the Normans became extremely interested in the goings-on at the English court.
Emma gave birth to a son named Edward, the future King Edward the Confessor. A bit of a mamma’s boy, Edward had a certain affinity for his mother’s homeland. He spent years in exile in Normandy, and when he finally gained the throne in 1042, he brought many Normans with him to his court. So while the King was still technically English at this time, things were starting to look a lot more French in the upper levels of the English government.
Though he was king for almost 25 years, Edward the Confessor left no heir when he died shortly after New Year’s Day in 1066. Soon, the council named Harold Godwinson, one of England’s most powerful nobles, king. Easy as that, right? Well, no. Not really. In April that year, Halley’s Comet made one of its oh-so-infrequent appearances in the skies above England, and many thought it was an omen of change. Harold, you see, was King of England, but he was not without rivals.
Harald Hardrada of Norway claimed there was an old treaty between his country and England that stated if either nation’s king died without an heir, the other would inherit both countries. Upon hearing of Edward the Confessor’s heirless passing, Hardrada quickly began amassing his forces and prepared to attack Harold and claim England for himself.
But of course, this isn’t the story of Harald Hardrada’s conquest of England. At the same time, William, the Duke of Normandy, prepared to stake his claim on the island throne. According to William, not only had King Edward promised him England’s throne, but Harold Godwinson had even agreed with it. Whether or not that was true didn’t really matter at this point. Harold was King, Harald and William wanted the crown, and all three prepared to fight for it.
One Threat Down…
Hardrada struck first, landing in Northern England near the city of York, and so King Harold quickly made his way north to meet the invaders head-on. The Norwegian army was not expecting such quick retaliation from the English King, and Harold caught them completely by surprise at the Battle of Stamford Bridge on September 25, 1066.
The English utterly decimated the Norwegians, and Hardrada himself died in the fray. According to the histories, the Vikings sailed to England in 300 ships—but it took only 24 vessels to take the remnants of the army back to Norway. Many modern historians consider this disastrous defeat as the end of the Viking Age in Europe.
King Harold had dealt with one of the major threats to his rule, but it came at a cost. The battle weakened his army, and he still had William to deal with. In fact, he and his men were likely still limping back south when they heard the news that the Conqueror had made landfall near Hastings.
…And One to Go
William, Duke of Normandy, landed at Pevensey in Sussex on September 28, just days after Harold trounced the Norwegians. William quickly set up a base at Hastings, building a wooden castle there. He sent some raids out into the surrounding countryside, but mostly, he just waited. A reckoning was coming, one way or another.
William had spent months planning his invasion, gathering an army from all across Normandy, Brittany, and Flanders. Though his courtier stated that he brought 60,000 men with him, the actual number was more likely around 7,000. That, however, was more than a match for the depleted armies of the English king.
Harold had no choice but to face this new threat. After a grueling march south, in which he and his men trudged up to 30 miles per day, he stopped in London for a short respite before journeying to meet the Normans near Hastings.
The Eve of Battle
On October 14, 1066, the armies of King Harold Godwinson faced off against the Duke of Normandy and his men assembled from across Northern France. The Englishmen fought in the Anglo-Saxon style—on foot, equipped with massive, two-handed Danish Axes. While William’s blood had more Viking in it than Harold, his forces had far more refined tactics. The English army was entirely composed of infantry, but the invaders had distinct regiments of infantry, cavalry, and archers. They were equipped with longswords, maces, javelins, and lances.
The fighting began at 9 AM that morning and would go on until dusk that night. The long day was filled with wild fighting on blood-soaked hillsides. It saw panic, deception, the death of one king, and the creation of another. In the chaos of the battle, it’s unlikely any of the soldiers understood the weight of their actions. Nonetheless, by the time the day was out, history would be forever altered.
The Battle of Battle
At this point, it’s probably worth pointing out that the Battle of Hastings…didn’t actually happen at Hastings. While William had established a base at Hastings, the battle itself occurred a handful of miles to the northwest, at a site that the English have fittingly called “Battle” ever since.
The fighting occurred on marshy and forested terrain between two hills; Caldbec and Telham Hills, to be precise. Though many of the details are lost to history—it was nearly a millennium ago, after all—we still have a good idea what happened between those two knolls. For this, we can thank the writing of several contemporary historians and the famous Bayeux Tapestry, which portrays the events of William’s conquest in surprising detail.
An Uphill Battle
On the morning of the battle, Harold’s forces had set up on top of one of the hills, just at the crest of a steep slope. He kept his forces together in a tight formation, using the terrain to his advantage. The battle began with Norman archers firing up the hill at the English shield-wall, but they were ineffective
The Norman archers also ran out of ammunition quite quickly. Usually, you would simply pick up the arrows your enemy fired back at them. Yet since the English had few archers, there was no stream of counter-fire to replenish the Norman quivers. The Normans needed a change of plans. William ordered his spearman to crest the hill and meet the English axes head-on.This was no easy feat under the best circumstances.
The marshy terrain and steep slope made the advance difficult, but the steady rain of spears, axes, and large stones from the English made it next to impossible. After the spearmen failed to advance, William tried sending his cavalry up the hill—to the same result. At least for the start of the battle, things were not looking good for the Normans. In fact, the English forced them to retreat early on.
Then, to make matters worse, rumors began to spread through the ranks that the English had managed to kill William himself. The Normans began to flee in a panic. But, as you may have guessed, William was not dead. In order to prove he was still alive and kicking, the Conqueror lifted his helmet’s visor and rode through his ranks, screaming at the top of his lungs. With his men freshly inspired, William and his forces turned and began a counter-attack. The tides were beginning to turn.
Once More Unto the Breach
Historians believe there was a lull early in the afternoon, and William took a moment to consider his strategy. Building off the early fighting, William had his men attack the English shield-wall, feign retreat, and then turn on their pursuing enemies as they broke formation. This proved very effective, and the English ranks began wearing thin.
The fighting was absolutely brutal. One history describes that day as a “great slaughter on both sides.” William’s own chronicler, William de Poitiers, wrote that “far and wide, the earth was covered with the flower of the English nobility and youth, drenched in blood.” On the English side, the shield-wall was so tightly packed that dead bodies could barely fall to the ground.
Medieval warfare was nothing short of a nightmare.
The King and the Conqueror
As the battle raged, William the Conqueror frantically rode across the field, barking orders and inspiring his men to fight on. One account says that two of his horses died beneath him before the day was out. Another account said it was three.
Though there are few accounts of Harold’s actions during the battle—after all, the winners get to write history—he allegedly managed to survive most of the day’s fighting. As the day was nearing its end, the last Anglo-Saxon king was finally killed, although we don’t know for sure how he died. The panel in the Bayeux Tapestry that depicts his death shows a fallen soldier with what appears to be an arrow in his eye.
This has led to the often-repeated legend that the king died after an arrow pierced through his eye into his brain. However, any written accounts of this came from long after the battle, so it’s hard to say for sure. Regardless of how it happened, Harold was dead. Many English soldiers started frantically fleeing the battlefield—though several chroniclers reported that the men from the king’s own household surrounded his body and fought bravely until the bitter end.
A King’s Remains
The sun had set on the Battle of Hastings. By the time it rose in the morning, the world was a different place. Anglo-Saxon England was dead, and a French Viking was about to claim the throne, forever altering the history of the British Isles. In the calm of the next morning, the toll of the battle became clear. It’s estimated that around half of the English forces died at the Battle of Hastings, while around one in seven Normans met the same fate. While the Normans collected their fallen comrades, they left the bodies of dead Englishmen to rot.
It’s unknown what exactly came of Harold’s body. At some point, soldiers identified the royal corpse, and they presented William with the deceased king’s standard. One source claims that Harold’s mother offered William her son’s weight in gold to return Harold’s body to her, but William refused. Instead, William ordered his men to throw Harold’s remains into the sea, though no one’s sure whether or not this ever happened.
There are all kinds of legends about Harold’s final resting place. Some believe that Englishmen managed to steal his body away and bury it at Waltham Abbey—a church that Harold himself had founded. Others have claimed that Harold didn’t even die in the Battle of Hastings. Rather, he escaped the fray in secret and lived out the rest of his days in Chester as a hermit.
A New World
Whatever happened to the old king, one thing is certain: William was victorious. At the Battle of Hastings, he finally became William the Conqueror. Though he still faced some scattered resistance, the Anglo-Saxon cause died with Harold. Indeed, the last of the English leaders formally surrendered to him in the final months of 1066.
Ealdred, the Archbishop of York, crowned William the King of England on Christmas day, 1066, in Westminster Abbey. Over the next two centuries, the English kings were now French. | <urn:uuid:8296d26e-6596-4881-a370-1a804c0c3324> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.factinate.com/editorial/battle-of-hastings/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594662.6/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119151736-20200119175736-00425.warc.gz | en | 0.981114 | 2,914 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
-0.3042367100715637,
0.4434708058834076,
0.09188160300254822,
-0.18484696745872498,
-0.2772391140460968,
0.025132326409220695,
0.2686345875263214,
-0.059418536722660065,
0.2639997899532318,
0.05225600674748421,
-0.18985062837600708,
-0.1392650604248047,
0.1068728119134903,
0.24719035625457... | 4 | Get ready to learn about the mighty Battle of Hastings…
The Kings and Queens of England have a long history of, well, not being very English. Take for instance the current ruling house, the House of Windsor. That sounds like a proper English name, doesn’t it? That’s by design. Until 1917, the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha ruled England. King George V changed the name to the more English-sounding “Windsor” during WWI. He realized it was a bit awkward for the English people to be fighting the Germans when their King sounded like a Kraut.
But while the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha had German roots, at least all the English monarchs from that line have spoken English. For centuries during the Middle Ages, the Kings of England couldn’t even claim that. From 1066 until 1399, the rulers of England all spoke French. Why? Well, just as today’s royal family traces back to Germany, the kings in those days didn’t have roots in the British Isles. Rather, they came from a family of French Vikings.
But how did a line of Vikings from Northern France come to rule England for centuries? The answer lay on the field of one of the most famous clashes in history: The Battle of Hastings.
Let’s back up a little bit: French Vikings? Yes, you read that correctly. While many people know that William the Conqueror, the legendary victor at Hastings, came from Normandy in France, his ancestors came from further north. In 911 AD, the French ruler Charles the Simple allowed a group of Vikings to settle in the French region.
The leader of these Vikings, a man named Rollo, essentially became the first Duke of Normandy—though it would be decades before his descendants actually started using that title.
Despite being from the wild northlands of Scandinavia, the Dukes of Normandy took to their new home quite well. Soon, they learned French and became entrenched in local politics. Then, in 1002 AD, King Æthelred II of England married Emma, the Duke of Normandy’s sister. Suddenly, the Normans became extremely interested in the goings-on at the English court.
Emma gave birth to a son named Edward, the future King Edward the Confessor. A bit of a mamma’s boy, Edward had a certain affinity for his mother’s homeland. He spent years in exile in Normandy, and when he finally gained the throne in 1042, he brought many Normans with him to his court. So while the King was still technically English at this time, things were starting to look a lot more French in the upper levels of the English government.
Though he was king for almost 25 years, Edward the Confessor left no heir when he died shortly after New Year’s Day in 1066. Soon, the council named Harold Godwinson, one of England’s most powerful nobles, king. Easy as that, right? Well, no. Not really. In April that year, Halley’s Comet made one of its oh-so-infrequent appearances in the skies above England, and many thought it was an omen of change. Harold, you see, was King of England, but he was not without rivals.
Harald Hardrada of Norway claimed there was an old treaty between his country and England that stated if either nation’s king died without an heir, the other would inherit both countries. Upon hearing of Edward the Confessor’s heirless passing, Hardrada quickly began amassing his forces and prepared to attack Harold and claim England for himself.
But of course, this isn’t the story of Harald Hardrada’s conquest of England. At the same time, William, the Duke of Normandy, prepared to stake his claim on the island throne. According to William, not only had King Edward promised him England’s throne, but Harold Godwinson had even agreed with it. Whether or not that was true didn’t really matter at this point. Harold was King, Harald and William wanted the crown, and all three prepared to fight for it.
One Threat Down…
Hardrada struck first, landing in Northern England near the city of York, and so King Harold quickly made his way north to meet the invaders head-on. The Norwegian army was not expecting such quick retaliation from the English King, and Harold caught them completely by surprise at the Battle of Stamford Bridge on September 25, 1066.
The English utterly decimated the Norwegians, and Hardrada himself died in the fray. According to the histories, the Vikings sailed to England in 300 ships—but it took only 24 vessels to take the remnants of the army back to Norway. Many modern historians consider this disastrous defeat as the end of the Viking Age in Europe.
King Harold had dealt with one of the major threats to his rule, but it came at a cost. The battle weakened his army, and he still had William to deal with. In fact, he and his men were likely still limping back south when they heard the news that the Conqueror had made landfall near Hastings.
…And One to Go
William, Duke of Normandy, landed at Pevensey in Sussex on September 28, just days after Harold trounced the Norwegians. William quickly set up a base at Hastings, building a wooden castle there. He sent some raids out into the surrounding countryside, but mostly, he just waited. A reckoning was coming, one way or another.
William had spent months planning his invasion, gathering an army from all across Normandy, Brittany, and Flanders. Though his courtier stated that he brought 60,000 men with him, the actual number was more likely around 7,000. That, however, was more than a match for the depleted armies of the English king.
Harold had no choice but to face this new threat. After a grueling march south, in which he and his men trudged up to 30 miles per day, he stopped in London for a short respite before journeying to meet the Normans near Hastings.
The Eve of Battle
On October 14, 1066, the armies of King Harold Godwinson faced off against the Duke of Normandy and his men assembled from across Northern France. The Englishmen fought in the Anglo-Saxon style—on foot, equipped with massive, two-handed Danish Axes. While William’s blood had more Viking in it than Harold, his forces had far more refined tactics. The English army was entirely composed of infantry, but the invaders had distinct regiments of infantry, cavalry, and archers. They were equipped with longswords, maces, javelins, and lances.
The fighting began at 9 AM that morning and would go on until dusk that night. The long day was filled with wild fighting on blood-soaked hillsides. It saw panic, deception, the death of one king, and the creation of another. In the chaos of the battle, it’s unlikely any of the soldiers understood the weight of their actions. Nonetheless, by the time the day was out, history would be forever altered.
The Battle of Battle
At this point, it’s probably worth pointing out that the Battle of Hastings…didn’t actually happen at Hastings. While William had established a base at Hastings, the battle itself occurred a handful of miles to the northwest, at a site that the English have fittingly called “Battle” ever since.
The fighting occurred on marshy and forested terrain between two hills; Caldbec and Telham Hills, to be precise. Though many of the details are lost to history—it was nearly a millennium ago, after all—we still have a good idea what happened between those two knolls. For this, we can thank the writing of several contemporary historians and the famous Bayeux Tapestry, which portrays the events of William’s conquest in surprising detail.
An Uphill Battle
On the morning of the battle, Harold’s forces had set up on top of one of the hills, just at the crest of a steep slope. He kept his forces together in a tight formation, using the terrain to his advantage. The battle began with Norman archers firing up the hill at the English shield-wall, but they were ineffective
The Norman archers also ran out of ammunition quite quickly. Usually, you would simply pick up the arrows your enemy fired back at them. Yet since the English had few archers, there was no stream of counter-fire to replenish the Norman quivers. The Normans needed a change of plans. William ordered his spearman to crest the hill and meet the English axes head-on.This was no easy feat under the best circumstances.
The marshy terrain and steep slope made the advance difficult, but the steady rain of spears, axes, and large stones from the English made it next to impossible. After the spearmen failed to advance, William tried sending his cavalry up the hill—to the same result. At least for the start of the battle, things were not looking good for the Normans. In fact, the English forced them to retreat early on.
Then, to make matters worse, rumors began to spread through the ranks that the English had managed to kill William himself. The Normans began to flee in a panic. But, as you may have guessed, William was not dead. In order to prove he was still alive and kicking, the Conqueror lifted his helmet’s visor and rode through his ranks, screaming at the top of his lungs. With his men freshly inspired, William and his forces turned and began a counter-attack. The tides were beginning to turn.
Once More Unto the Breach
Historians believe there was a lull early in the afternoon, and William took a moment to consider his strategy. Building off the early fighting, William had his men attack the English shield-wall, feign retreat, and then turn on their pursuing enemies as they broke formation. This proved very effective, and the English ranks began wearing thin.
The fighting was absolutely brutal. One history describes that day as a “great slaughter on both sides.” William’s own chronicler, William de Poitiers, wrote that “far and wide, the earth was covered with the flower of the English nobility and youth, drenched in blood.” On the English side, the shield-wall was so tightly packed that dead bodies could barely fall to the ground.
Medieval warfare was nothing short of a nightmare.
The King and the Conqueror
As the battle raged, William the Conqueror frantically rode across the field, barking orders and inspiring his men to fight on. One account says that two of his horses died beneath him before the day was out. Another account said it was three.
Though there are few accounts of Harold’s actions during the battle—after all, the winners get to write history—he allegedly managed to survive most of the day’s fighting. As the day was nearing its end, the last Anglo-Saxon king was finally killed, although we don’t know for sure how he died. The panel in the Bayeux Tapestry that depicts his death shows a fallen soldier with what appears to be an arrow in his eye.
This has led to the often-repeated legend that the king died after an arrow pierced through his eye into his brain. However, any written accounts of this came from long after the battle, so it’s hard to say for sure. Regardless of how it happened, Harold was dead. Many English soldiers started frantically fleeing the battlefield—though several chroniclers reported that the men from the king’s own household surrounded his body and fought bravely until the bitter end.
A King’s Remains
The sun had set on the Battle of Hastings. By the time it rose in the morning, the world was a different place. Anglo-Saxon England was dead, and a French Viking was about to claim the throne, forever altering the history of the British Isles. In the calm of the next morning, the toll of the battle became clear. It’s estimated that around half of the English forces died at the Battle of Hastings, while around one in seven Normans met the same fate. While the Normans collected their fallen comrades, they left the bodies of dead Englishmen to rot.
It’s unknown what exactly came of Harold’s body. At some point, soldiers identified the royal corpse, and they presented William with the deceased king’s standard. One source claims that Harold’s mother offered William her son’s weight in gold to return Harold’s body to her, but William refused. Instead, William ordered his men to throw Harold’s remains into the sea, though no one’s sure whether or not this ever happened.
There are all kinds of legends about Harold’s final resting place. Some believe that Englishmen managed to steal his body away and bury it at Waltham Abbey—a church that Harold himself had founded. Others have claimed that Harold didn’t even die in the Battle of Hastings. Rather, he escaped the fray in secret and lived out the rest of his days in Chester as a hermit.
A New World
Whatever happened to the old king, one thing is certain: William was victorious. At the Battle of Hastings, he finally became William the Conqueror. Though he still faced some scattered resistance, the Anglo-Saxon cause died with Harold. Indeed, the last of the English leaders formally surrendered to him in the final months of 1066.
Ealdred, the Archbishop of York, crowned William the King of England on Christmas day, 1066, in Westminster Abbey. Over the next two centuries, the English kings were now French. | 2,833 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Old Testament Law in the New Testament
This chapter attempts the risky and controversial task of giving an historical sketch of how the churches of the New Testament era dealt with the matter of Christian observance of the Old Testament laws. It shows how Jesus is presented in the Gospels with regard to his attitude to the law, as opposed to what can be deduced from the Gospels about the position of the historical Jesus. According to Luz Matthew's community was a Jewish Christian one in Syria, whose retention of the law was based upon the authority of Jesus, who was also seen to have fulfilled it. Mark gives a negative picture of Jesus attitude to the law by emphasizing controversies with Jewish teachers concerning the Sabbath, and the matter of ritual purity. Luz thinks that the question of ritual purity was not one on which Jesus had pronounced, otherwise there would not have been so much disagreement about it in the early church. | <urn:uuid:4806b6d6-cf21-47e7-a573-2d10fab06452> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781315541266/chapters/10.4324/9781315541266-3 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250590107.3/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117180950-20200117204950-00436.warc.gz | en | 0.981293 | 183 | 3.703125 | 4 | [
-0.3830701410770416,
0.3887203335762024,
0.07745178043842316,
-0.3542708158493042,
0.30303406715393066,
-0.04565122723579407,
-0.09840656816959381,
-0.12335318326950073,
0.03334348276257515,
0.002890770323574543,
-0.18083882331848145,
0.19291476905345917,
-0.3682551085948944,
0.25457605719... | 1 | The Old Testament Law in the New Testament
This chapter attempts the risky and controversial task of giving an historical sketch of how the churches of the New Testament era dealt with the matter of Christian observance of the Old Testament laws. It shows how Jesus is presented in the Gospels with regard to his attitude to the law, as opposed to what can be deduced from the Gospels about the position of the historical Jesus. According to Luz Matthew's community was a Jewish Christian one in Syria, whose retention of the law was based upon the authority of Jesus, who was also seen to have fulfilled it. Mark gives a negative picture of Jesus attitude to the law by emphasizing controversies with Jewish teachers concerning the Sabbath, and the matter of ritual purity. Luz thinks that the question of ritual purity was not one on which Jesus had pronounced, otherwise there would not have been so much disagreement about it in the early church. | 181 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Industrial Revolution Essay
There was an increasing demand for new material for clothing. The invention of the spinning jenny and powered loom made this possible.
Steam engines provided power for machines. The cotton gin was another important invention. The Cotton gin made it possible …show more content…
However, they were contributing to economic growth. They came over in search of freedom, which they received. In return, they got jobs and took care of themselves and their families.
There were no laws to protect workers. In general, people thought that the government should not interfere in their business. Unacceptable working environments led to worker illness and death. Children even worked in factories. Children were paid less, therfore more desirable to factory owners. Children as young as 8 years old had to work long hours in terrible conditions. In 1825, workers gained the right to form workers unions. Through struggles such as strikes, workers gained better working conditions.
Without the Industrial Revolution, our world would not be the same. There would be no cars, trains of planes. We would have to pump water ourselves and spend long hours lighting fires and making sure they stayed lit. There would not be a vast variety of clothing like there is today. We would all have clothes that didn’t fit us, because we would have to wear them for long periods in our lives.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Industrial | <urn:uuid:e96dfdb1-d3cf-4c39-b6cf-cf521760de6f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.cram.com/essay/industrial-revolution/P3JTHAL2SJ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00225.warc.gz | en | 0.986101 | 287 | 3.546875 | 4 | [
-0.6391013264656067,
0.15687799453735352,
0.28986841440200806,
0.012960195541381836,
0.14559818804264069,
0.5032640695571899,
-0.12648309767246246,
0.39627358317375183,
-0.5054435729980469,
-0.0702679306268692,
0.05318814888596535,
0.294087678194046,
-0.06412515044212341,
0.069189310073852... | 1 | Industrial Revolution Essay
There was an increasing demand for new material for clothing. The invention of the spinning jenny and powered loom made this possible.
Steam engines provided power for machines. The cotton gin was another important invention. The Cotton gin made it possible …show more content…
However, they were contributing to economic growth. They came over in search of freedom, which they received. In return, they got jobs and took care of themselves and their families.
There were no laws to protect workers. In general, people thought that the government should not interfere in their business. Unacceptable working environments led to worker illness and death. Children even worked in factories. Children were paid less, therfore more desirable to factory owners. Children as young as 8 years old had to work long hours in terrible conditions. In 1825, workers gained the right to form workers unions. Through struggles such as strikes, workers gained better working conditions.
Without the Industrial Revolution, our world would not be the same. There would be no cars, trains of planes. We would have to pump water ourselves and spend long hours lighting fires and making sure they stayed lit. There would not be a vast variety of clothing like there is today. We would all have clothes that didn’t fit us, because we would have to wear them for long periods in our lives.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Industrial | 282 | ENGLISH | 1 |
See Article History Alternative Titles: Life Franco was born at the coastal city and naval centre of El Ferrol in Galicia northwestern Spain. More disciplined and serious than other boys his age, Franco was close to his mother, a pious and conservative upper middle-class Roman Catholic.
The History Learning Site, 25 May General Francisco Franco General Franco was born in and he died in Franco had been born into a military family.
From tohe was educated at Toledo Infantry Academy and he served in Spanish Morocco from to He made a name for himself leading attacks against Moroccan nationalists and in was promoted to full general and made principal of Saragossa Military Academy.
He stayed out of politics until he was ordered to put down a strike by coal miners in the Asturias. Here, the miners had created a soviet — a word that struck fear into many western Europeans.
Franco suppressed the coal strike with efficiency but very ruthlessly. This one incident sealed his reputation for brutality though Franco saw it as he and his army simply carrying out an order to the best of his efficiency.
ByFranco was chief of staff for the military. In JulyFranco lead a revolt against the Popular Front. It started in the Canary Islands, where Franco was governor and spread to Morocco where he had made many contacts in the 17 years he was based there.
In OctoberFranco was appointed generalissimo of Nationalist Spain and head of state. This had the support of all those various factions on the right.
His government was recognised as legitimate by the French and the British in February In AprilAmerica recognised Franco as head of Spain. Why did Britain, France and America recognise a man associated with brutality and right wing politics? Second, the Popular Front was seen for right or wrong, as being associated with communism and the fear of this belief was still rampant in Europe.
Franco was seen as the better bet of the two. From on, Franco was a dictator. His rule was law. In Julya law was passed that made Franco head of state for life.
Students protested about a lack of personal freedom. The leaders of the Roman Catholic Church also complained about his dictatorship and Basque separatists were a constant problem. Despite this, Franco was not a political pariah. During the Cold War, Franco was seen as a safe bet against any spread of communism in western Europe.
When he died in Novemberthe monarchy was restored when Prince Juan Carlos became head of state, as Franco had decreed.Spain under the rule of Francisco Franco, from to , following the Spanish Civil War.
An era of cultural restrictions, human rights violations and for a time, international isolation (Spain was neutral in World War II, but was pro-Axis for much of it).
Francisco Franco, in full Francisco Paulino Hermenegildo Teódulo Franco Bahamonde, byname El Caudillo (“The Leader”) (born December 4, , El Ferrol, Spain—died November 20, , Madrid), general and leader of the Nationalist forces that overthrew the Spanish democratic republic in the Spanish Civil War (–39); thereafter he was .
Francisco Franco, the Spanish dictator and general, was perhaps Europe's most successful fascist leader because he actually managed to survive in power until his natural death.
Profile of Spanish Dictator Francisco Franco Arguably Europe's Most Successful Fascist Leader. Share Flipboard Email Print Franco and Commanders Wikimedia Commons History & Culture.
He came to rule Spain .
The referendum law was used twice during Franco's rule—in , including those of the Fundación Francisco Franco, which as well as other Francoist archives remain as of inaccessible to the public.
Furthermore. The family of Spain’s late fascist dictator Francisco Franco will use all possible legal means to prevent a government plan to move their ancestor’s During Franco’s rule. | <urn:uuid:b5e48331-2c4c-4712-aeeb-d208b9121bd4> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://rosirekykot.attheheels.com/the-rule-of-francisco-franco-34013sd.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607118.51/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122131612-20200122160612-00520.warc.gz | en | 0.986065 | 801 | 3.484375 | 3 | [
-0.0831693708896637,
0.6574537754058838,
0.22542758285999298,
-0.10679125785827637,
-0.0327916257083416,
0.44491708278656006,
0.32041919231414795,
0.3227776288986206,
0.07779198884963989,
-0.1721702516078949,
0.08629116415977478,
-0.0893499031662941,
-0.03353648632764816,
0.387296080589294... | 1 | See Article History Alternative Titles: Life Franco was born at the coastal city and naval centre of El Ferrol in Galicia northwestern Spain. More disciplined and serious than other boys his age, Franco was close to his mother, a pious and conservative upper middle-class Roman Catholic.
The History Learning Site, 25 May General Francisco Franco General Franco was born in and he died in Franco had been born into a military family.
From tohe was educated at Toledo Infantry Academy and he served in Spanish Morocco from to He made a name for himself leading attacks against Moroccan nationalists and in was promoted to full general and made principal of Saragossa Military Academy.
He stayed out of politics until he was ordered to put down a strike by coal miners in the Asturias. Here, the miners had created a soviet — a word that struck fear into many western Europeans.
Franco suppressed the coal strike with efficiency but very ruthlessly. This one incident sealed his reputation for brutality though Franco saw it as he and his army simply carrying out an order to the best of his efficiency.
ByFranco was chief of staff for the military. In JulyFranco lead a revolt against the Popular Front. It started in the Canary Islands, where Franco was governor and spread to Morocco where he had made many contacts in the 17 years he was based there.
In OctoberFranco was appointed generalissimo of Nationalist Spain and head of state. This had the support of all those various factions on the right.
His government was recognised as legitimate by the French and the British in February In AprilAmerica recognised Franco as head of Spain. Why did Britain, France and America recognise a man associated with brutality and right wing politics? Second, the Popular Front was seen for right or wrong, as being associated with communism and the fear of this belief was still rampant in Europe.
Franco was seen as the better bet of the two. From on, Franco was a dictator. His rule was law. In Julya law was passed that made Franco head of state for life.
Students protested about a lack of personal freedom. The leaders of the Roman Catholic Church also complained about his dictatorship and Basque separatists were a constant problem. Despite this, Franco was not a political pariah. During the Cold War, Franco was seen as a safe bet against any spread of communism in western Europe.
When he died in Novemberthe monarchy was restored when Prince Juan Carlos became head of state, as Franco had decreed.Spain under the rule of Francisco Franco, from to , following the Spanish Civil War.
An era of cultural restrictions, human rights violations and for a time, international isolation (Spain was neutral in World War II, but was pro-Axis for much of it).
Francisco Franco, in full Francisco Paulino Hermenegildo Teódulo Franco Bahamonde, byname El Caudillo (“The Leader”) (born December 4, , El Ferrol, Spain—died November 20, , Madrid), general and leader of the Nationalist forces that overthrew the Spanish democratic republic in the Spanish Civil War (–39); thereafter he was .
Francisco Franco, the Spanish dictator and general, was perhaps Europe's most successful fascist leader because he actually managed to survive in power until his natural death.
Profile of Spanish Dictator Francisco Franco Arguably Europe's Most Successful Fascist Leader. Share Flipboard Email Print Franco and Commanders Wikimedia Commons History & Culture.
He came to rule Spain .
The referendum law was used twice during Franco's rule—in , including those of the Fundación Francisco Franco, which as well as other Francoist archives remain as of inaccessible to the public.
Furthermore. The family of Spain’s late fascist dictator Francisco Franco will use all possible legal means to prevent a government plan to move their ancestor’s During Franco’s rule. | 775 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Life of Pablo Neruda
Neftalí Reyes developed a love of poetry at a young age. His talents were fostered by future Nobel Prize winner Gabriela Mistral. A local newspaper published his first work when he was 13. As Pablo Neruda, Neftalí published his first volume of poetry at 19. Despite the success of Crepusculario ("Book of Twilights") and Veinte poemas de amor y una canción desesperada ("Twenty Poems of Love and a Song of Despair") published the following year, Neruda was still quite poor.
In 1927, Neruda began his diplomatic career with an honorary consul appointment to Rangoon, Burma (now Yangon, Myanmar). Over the next sixteen years, he served in Colombo (now Ceylon), Batavia (now Java), Singapore, Buenos Aires, Barcelona, Madrid, Paris and Mexico City.
Although his first volumes of poetry had been popular, it was his 1933 volume of surreal poetry, Resedencia en la tierra (Residence on the Earth), which brought him international attention. In addition to surreal poetry, Neruda was known for love poetry, political works and historical works, including essays, prose and plays.
During his service in Spain, Neruda cultivated friendships with “the literati,” especially Federico García Lorca. During the Spanish Civil War, García Lorca was executed by followers of Francisco Franco. The loss of his friend helped to turn Neruda behind the Republican side of the Spanish Civil War, as well as converting him to communism. Neruda eventually fled Spain for Paris and helped thousands of Spanish refugees relocate to Chile from their temporary home in France.
After over one and a half decades of foreign service, Neruda was happy to return to his homeland in 1943. His political career was far from over. In 1945, he was elected to the Chilean Senate. There, he became part of the newly formed Chilean Socialist Party. Eventually, however, he broke with the ruling party (whom he’d ardently campaigned for) over violent worker repression. Neruda was forced to go into hiding and eventually fled the country.
Three years later, when the hostile government was failing, Neruda returned to Chile. Known around the world, Neruda would spend the remaining twenty years of his life based in Chile. In 1964, he was nominated for the Nobel Prize, but did not win. In 1971, he won the Nobel Prize for Literature. In 1970, his friend Salvador Allende became the first democratically-elected socialist head of state. Allende appointed Neruda ambassador to France. Neruda’s failing health forced him to resign the post two years later. In 1973, Allende was deposed and died in a coup. Less than two weeks later, Neruda, already dying from prostate cancer, had a heart attack and died.
Much of Neruda’s love poetry was influenced by the many loves of his life. He married his first wife in Java. They later separated during his service in Spain during the Spanish Civil War. During his service in Mexico City, Neruda divorced his first wife, after which he married his mistress. Their marriage was strained by separation as well as another affair. Eventually, Neruda divorced his second wife and again married his mistress. His third wife remained with him for the last 18 years of his life, married for the last 7 of those years. His only child, a sickly daughter by his first wife, died at the age of eight, having been estranged from her father for most of her life.
Read Twenty Love Poems and a Song of Despair, Pablo Neruda's most famous volume of poetry. This edition features the original Spanish side by side with an excellent English translation.
For a more comprehensive view of his poetic career, try The Essential Neruda: Selected Poems.
Editor's Picks Articles
Top Ten Articles
Content copyright © 2019 by Jordan McCollum. All rights reserved.
This content was written by Jordan McCollum. If you wish to use this content in any manner, you need written permission. Contact Karena Andrusyshyn for details. | <urn:uuid:53368b3c-07aa-496c-a229-5b7eedfb3a61> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art2388.asp | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00133.warc.gz | en | 0.987471 | 864 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
-0.1299053430557251,
0.3377949893474579,
0.49845090508461,
-0.016040075570344925,
0.014001378789544106,
-0.020900437608361244,
0.07017157971858978,
0.3434615135192871,
-0.16811364889144897,
-0.02693750336766243,
0.21751713752746582,
-0.036988891661167145,
-0.030934639275074005,
0.309006482... | 1 | The Life of Pablo Neruda
Neftalí Reyes developed a love of poetry at a young age. His talents were fostered by future Nobel Prize winner Gabriela Mistral. A local newspaper published his first work when he was 13. As Pablo Neruda, Neftalí published his first volume of poetry at 19. Despite the success of Crepusculario ("Book of Twilights") and Veinte poemas de amor y una canción desesperada ("Twenty Poems of Love and a Song of Despair") published the following year, Neruda was still quite poor.
In 1927, Neruda began his diplomatic career with an honorary consul appointment to Rangoon, Burma (now Yangon, Myanmar). Over the next sixteen years, he served in Colombo (now Ceylon), Batavia (now Java), Singapore, Buenos Aires, Barcelona, Madrid, Paris and Mexico City.
Although his first volumes of poetry had been popular, it was his 1933 volume of surreal poetry, Resedencia en la tierra (Residence on the Earth), which brought him international attention. In addition to surreal poetry, Neruda was known for love poetry, political works and historical works, including essays, prose and plays.
During his service in Spain, Neruda cultivated friendships with “the literati,” especially Federico García Lorca. During the Spanish Civil War, García Lorca was executed by followers of Francisco Franco. The loss of his friend helped to turn Neruda behind the Republican side of the Spanish Civil War, as well as converting him to communism. Neruda eventually fled Spain for Paris and helped thousands of Spanish refugees relocate to Chile from their temporary home in France.
After over one and a half decades of foreign service, Neruda was happy to return to his homeland in 1943. His political career was far from over. In 1945, he was elected to the Chilean Senate. There, he became part of the newly formed Chilean Socialist Party. Eventually, however, he broke with the ruling party (whom he’d ardently campaigned for) over violent worker repression. Neruda was forced to go into hiding and eventually fled the country.
Three years later, when the hostile government was failing, Neruda returned to Chile. Known around the world, Neruda would spend the remaining twenty years of his life based in Chile. In 1964, he was nominated for the Nobel Prize, but did not win. In 1971, he won the Nobel Prize for Literature. In 1970, his friend Salvador Allende became the first democratically-elected socialist head of state. Allende appointed Neruda ambassador to France. Neruda’s failing health forced him to resign the post two years later. In 1973, Allende was deposed and died in a coup. Less than two weeks later, Neruda, already dying from prostate cancer, had a heart attack and died.
Much of Neruda’s love poetry was influenced by the many loves of his life. He married his first wife in Java. They later separated during his service in Spain during the Spanish Civil War. During his service in Mexico City, Neruda divorced his first wife, after which he married his mistress. Their marriage was strained by separation as well as another affair. Eventually, Neruda divorced his second wife and again married his mistress. His third wife remained with him for the last 18 years of his life, married for the last 7 of those years. His only child, a sickly daughter by his first wife, died at the age of eight, having been estranged from her father for most of her life.
Read Twenty Love Poems and a Song of Despair, Pablo Neruda's most famous volume of poetry. This edition features the original Spanish side by side with an excellent English translation.
For a more comprehensive view of his poetic career, try The Essential Neruda: Selected Poems.
Editor's Picks Articles
Top Ten Articles
Content copyright © 2019 by Jordan McCollum. All rights reserved.
This content was written by Jordan McCollum. If you wish to use this content in any manner, you need written permission. Contact Karena Andrusyshyn for details. | 884 | ENGLISH | 1 |
This is a collection of lists of early settlers (before 1700) in the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. Most of the lists are of the earliest inhabitants of a particular town or area.
The Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations was one of the original Thirteen Colonies established on the east coast of America, bordering the Atlantic Ocean. It was an English colony from 1636 until 1707, and then a colony of Great Britain until the American Revolution in 1776, when it became the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.
The following people lived in Rhode Island prior to Colonial settlement:
Wampanoag people lived throughout Plymouth Colony and around Mount Hope Bay in Bristol, Rhode Island
The Wampanoag, also rendered Wôpanâak, are an American Indian tribe. They were a loose confederacy made up of several tribes in the 17th century, but today Wampanoag people are enrolled in two federally recognized tribes: the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe and the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head in Massachusetts. They lived in southeastern Massachusetts and Rhode Island in the beginning of the 17th century, at the time of first contact with the English colonists, a territory that included Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket islands. Their population numbered in the thousands; 3,000 Wampanoag lived on Martha's Vineyard alone.
Plymouth Colony was an English colonial venture in America from 1620 to 1691 at a location that had previously been surveyed and named by Captain John Smith. The settlement served as the capital of the colony and developed as the town of Plymouth, Massachusetts. At its height, Plymouth Colony occupied most of the southeastern portion of Massachusetts.
Mount Hope Bay is a tidal estuary located at the mouth of the Taunton River on the Massachusetts and Rhode Island border. It is an arm of Narragansett Bay. The bay is named after Mount Hope, a small hill located on its western shore in what is now Bristol, Rhode Island. It flows into the East Passage of Narragansett Bay and also the Sakonnet River. Mount Hope Bay has played an important role to the history of the area, from pre-colonial times to the present. While many years of sewage and industrial pollution have severely degraded the quality of the shallow waters of the bay, there are currently major efforts underway to clean up and restore it.
Massasoit Sachem or Ousamequin was the sachem or leader of the Wampanoag tribe. The term Massasoit means Great Sachem.
Wamsutta, also known as Alexander Pokanoket, as he was called by New England colonists, was the eldest son of Massasoit Ousa Mequin of the Pokanoket Tribe and Wampanoag nation, and brother of Metacomet. His sale of Wampanoag lands to colonists other than those of the Plymouth Colony brought the Wampanoag considerable power, but aroused the suspicions of the Plymouth colonists. He was imprisoned for three days at Plymouth; he died shortly after release, causing tribal suspicion of the colonists. His death possibly contributed to King Philip's War of 1675. Wamsutta's name is memorialized in and around New Bedford, Massachusetts in various ways. He was honored in the naming of a United States Navy steamer in commission during the American Civil War between 1863 and 1865.
Metacom, also known as Metacomet and by his adopted English name King Philip, was chief to the Wampanoag people and the second son of the sachem Massasoit. He became a chief in 1662 when his brother Wamsutta died shortly after the death of their father, Massasoit. Wamsutta's widow Weetamoo, sunksqua of the Pocasset, was Metacom's ally and friend for the rest of her life. Metacom married Weetamoo's younger sister Wootonekanuske. No one knows how many children they had or what happened to them. Wootonekanuske and one of their sons were sold to slavery in the West Indies following the defeat of the Native Americans in what became known as King Philip's War.
Narragansett people lived throughout the Rhode Island colony
The Narragansett people are an Algonquian American Indian tribe from Rhode Island. The tribe was nearly landless for most of the 20th century, but it worked to gain federal recognition and attained it in 1983. It is officially the Narragansett Indian Tribe of Rhode Island and is made up of descendants of tribal members who were identified in an 1880 treaty with the state.
Canonicus was a Native American chief of the Narragansett people. Although wary of the European newcomers, he bowed before superior armaments and surrendered a portion of the territory of his people to the immigrants without war. He ultimately proved to be a firm friend of Roger Williams and other English settlers.
Roger Williams was a Puritan minister, theologian, and author who founded the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. He was a staunch advocate for religious freedom, separation of church and state, and fair dealings with American Indians, and he was one of the first abolitionists.
Providence Plantation was the first permanent European American settlement in Rhode Island. It was established by a group of colonists led by Roger Williams who left Massachusetts Bay Colony in order to establish a colony with greater religious freedom. Providence Plantation became the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, which became the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations after the American Revolution.
Niantic people lived around the Pawcatuck River in the southwestern corner of Rhode Island
Nipmuc people wandered within Rhode Island Colony, mostly from the north
Roger Williams was banished from the Massachusetts Bay Colony in October 1635 but was allowed to remain at his home in Salem, Massachusetts until the end of winter, provided that he did not preach. However, his followers visited him at his home in sizable numbers, and the authorities deemed this to be preaching. They planned to apprehend him by force and put him on a ship for England in January 1636, but magistrate John Winthrop warned him privately, and he slipped away from Salem in the dead of winter to find shelter with the Wampanoags. He bought a parcel of land in Seekonk from Wampanoag sachem Massasoit which was at the western edge of the Plymouth Colony (now Rehoboth, Massachusetts). In a 1677 statement, Williams mentioned the four who were with him at Seekonk. The five members of the group were:
In the spring of 1636, Williams and his company planted crops at Seekonk but were informed in a gentle letter from Governor Edward Winslow of Plymouth that they were within Plymouth's jurisdiction, and this fact would cause difficulties with the Massachusetts authorities. Without urgency, Winslow suggested that Williams and his group move across the Seekonk River into the territory of the Narragansetts, where no colony had any claim. By this time, it is likely that the family members of the original settlers had joined the group, and two other families also joined the settlement. Joshua Verin wrote a statement in 1650 mentioning "we six which came first to Providence", suggesting that he was the next to join the original five.Also, Benedict Arnold later wrote, "Memm. We came to Providence to Dwell the 20th of April, 1636". Providence had not yet been established, so he probably was referring to Seekonk where the Arnolds came from Hingham, Massachusetts to join the other settlers. It is likely, therefore, that the following 25 people crossed the river from Seekonk in the Plymouth Colony sometime around June 1636, to a location on the Moshassuck River in Narragansett territory which Williams named Providence Plantations:
Several young men were admitted as inhabitants to Providence before the settlement was a year old, but they were discontented with their position and wanted to be able to vote and otherwise have equality with the older settlers. The following resolution was adopted in a town meeting on August 20, 1637 and is sometimes called the "civil compact." The 1637 date was on the original town records, but when they were transcribed in 1800, the page containing that date was missing. The text of the resolution is as follows:
We, whose names are hereunder, desirous to inhabit in the town of Providence, do promise to subject ourselves in active or passive obedience to all such orders or agreements as shall be made for public good of our body, in an orderly way, by the major assent of the present inhabitants, master of families, incorporated together into a town fellowship, and others whom they shall admit unto them only in civil things.
Those named in a deed from Roger Williams, dated about October 8, 1638:
Those settlers who left Providence to settle on the north side of the Pawtuxet River about 1638, putting themselves under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts Bay Colony from 1642 to 1658:
Those 39 Providence settlers who signed an agreement to form a government on July 27, 1640:
Those early settlers who had trading posts in the area of Wickford in what was then the "Narragansett country" and later a part of North Kingstown, Rhode Island:
Supporters of Anne Hutchinson who signed the Portsmouth Compact, dated March 7, 1638:
The last four names on the list were crossed out, but these men nevertheless came to Portsmouth or Newport.
The following individuals were among the earliest settlers of Aquidneck Island in the Narragansett Bay; the island was officially named Rhode Island by 1644,from which the entire colony eventually took its name. The first group of 58 names appears to be settlers of Pocasset (later Portsmouth), while the second group of 42 appears to be settlers of Newport. These two lists come from Bartlett's Records of the Colony of Rhode Island, and apparently they were compiled and incorporated into the town records of Newport on November 25, 1639. The actual arrival dates of the individuals likely span over several months during 1638; a few individuals have legible dates next to their names, while several others have illegible dates.
A Catalogue of such who, by the Generall consent of the Company were admitted to be Inhabytants of the Island now called Aqueedneck, having submitted themselves to the Government that is or shall be established, according to the word of God therein
"Inhabitants admitted at the Town of Nieu-port since the 20th of the 3:1638" (since 20 May 1638)
Those Portsmouth settlers who remained after the group left to found Newport and who signed an agreement for a government on April 30, 1639:
Those who signed an agreement for a new government on April 28, 1639:
Those who purchased the land from the Indians on January 12, 1642:
Those who purchased the Pettaquamscutt lands (later South Kingstown) from the Indian sachems in 1657:
The original purchasers of Block Island in April 1661, whose names appear on a plaque at the north end of the island:
The early settlers whose names appear on the plaque:
The early Rhode Island inhabitants named in the Rhode Island Royal Charter, dated July 8, 1663 and signed with the royal seal by King Charles II; this charter was the basis for Rhode Island's government for nearly two centuries:
Others named in the document:
Westerly, at first called Misquamicut, was purchased on 27 August 1661 by the following Newport men:
Of these men, only John Crandall appears to have settled in Westerly.
Westerly inhabitants appearing in the town records of 18 May 1669:
During the devastating events of King Philip's War (1675-1676), the Rhode Island General Assembly sought the counsel of 16 prominent citizens of the colony with the resolution, "Voted that in these troublesome times and straites in this Collony, this Assembly desiringe to have the advice and concurrance of the most juditious inhabitants, if it may be had for the good of the whole, doe desire at their next sittinge the Company and Councill of":
At a meeting of the General Assembly in Newport in May 1677, the following 48 individuals were granted 100-acre tracts in East Greenwich "for the services rendered during King Philip's War."
Bristol's early history began as a commercial enterprise when John Gorham was awarded 100 acres of land if it could be "honorably purchased from the indians."Gorham's enterprise succeeded on 18 Sep 1680 when four proprietors were awarded the deed to Mt. Hope Lands:
On 27 Aug 1680, twelve men signed Articles agreeing to purchase lands:
On 1 Sep 1681, more than 60 families were present at the first town meeting and named these lands Bristol after Bristol, England.Bristol was originally part of Massachusetts, but it became part of Rhode Island when disputed lands were awarded to the Colony of Rhode Island in 1747.
French Huguenots settled in what is now East Greenwich in 1687. On 12 October 1686, an agreement was signed between the following, representing the French settlers and the land owners:
Representing Land Owners
Representing Huguenot Settlers
Those who signed the agreement
The following individuals signed the follow-on agreement, usually giving only their surname, and these same names are found on a plat map of the settlement.
Also on the map are two additional lots: "La terre pour L'Eglise" (land for the church) and "La terr pour L'ecolle" (land for the school). Almost all of these people left Rhode Island to settle in Massachusetts and New York following some severe civil clashes with the English settlers. Two families remained on their original land, however:
The Ayrault family moved to Newport.
John Clarke was a physician, Baptist minister, co-founder of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, author of its influential charter, and a leading advocate of religious freedom in America.
Samuel Gorton was an early settler and civic leader of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations and President of the towns of Providence and Warwick. He had strong religious beliefs which differed from Puritan theology and was very outspoken, and he became the leader of a small sect of converts known as Gortonists or Gortonites. As a result, he was frequently in trouble with the civil and church authorities in the New England colonies.
William Coddington was an early magistrate of the Massachusetts Bay Colony and later of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. He served as the judge of Portsmouth and Newport, governor of Portsmouth and Newport, deputy governor of the four-town colony, and then governor of the entire colony. Coddington was born and raised in Lincolnshire, England. He accompanied the Winthrop Fleet on its voyage to New England in 1630, becoming an early leader in Boston. There he built the first brick house and became heavily involved in the local government as an assistant magistrate, treasurer, and deputy.
The Portsmouth Compact was a document signed on March 7, 1638 that established the settlement of Portsmouth, which is now a town in the state of Rhode Island. It was the first document in American history that severed both political and religious ties with England.
Benedict Arnold was president and then governor of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, serving for a total of 11 years in these roles. He was born and raised in the town of Ilchester, Somerset, England, likely attending school in Limington nearby. In 1635 at age 19, he accompanied his parents, siblings, and other family members on a voyage from England to New England where they first settled in Hingham in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. In less than a year, they moved to Providence Plantation at the head of the Narragansett Bay at the request of Roger Williams. In about 1638, they moved once again about five miles (8 km) south to the Pawtuxet River, settling on the north side at a place commonly called Pawtuxet. Here they had serious disputes with their neighbors, particularly Samuel Gorton, and they put themselves and their lands under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts, a situation which lasted for 16 years.
William Arnold was one of the founding settlers of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, and he and his sons were among the wealthiest people in the colony. He was raised and educated in England where he was the warden of St. Mary's, the parish church of Ilchester in southeastern Somerset. He emigrated to New England with family and associates in 1635. He initially settled in Hingham in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, but he soon relocated to the new settlement of Providence Plantation with Roger Williams. He was one of the 13 original proprietors of Providence, appearing on the deed signed by Roger Williams in 1638, and was one of the 12 founding members of the first Baptist church to be established in America.
John Easton (1624–1705) was a political leader in the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, devoting decades to public service before eventually becoming governor of the colony. Born in Hampshire, England, he sailed to New England with his widowed father and older brother, settling in Ipswich and Newbury in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. As a supporter of the dissident ministers John Wheelwright and Anne Hutchinson during the Antinomian Controversy, his father was exiled, and settled in Portsmouth on Aquidneck Island with many other Hutchinson supporters. Here there was discord among the leaders of the settlement, and his father followed William Coddington to the south end of the island where they established the town of Newport. The younger Easton remained in Newport the remainder of his life, where he became involved in civil affairs before the age of 30.
William Brenton was a colonial President, Deputy Governor, and Governor of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, and an early settler of Portsmouth and Newport in the Rhode Island colony. Austin and other historians give his place of origin as Hammersmith in Middlesex, England, but in reviewing the evidence, Anderson concludes that his place of origin is unknown. Brenton named one of his Newport properties "Hammersmith," and this has led some writers to assume that the like-named town in London was his place of origin.
Walter Clarke (1640–1714) was an early governor of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations and the first native-born governor of the colony. The son of colonial President Jeremy Clarke, he was a Quaker like his father. His mother was Frances (Latham) Clarke, who is often called "the Mother of Governors." While in his late 20s, he was elected as a deputy from Newport, and in 1673 was elected to his first of three consecutive terms as assistant. During King Philip's War, he was elected to his first term as governor of the colony. He served for one year in this role, dealing with the devastation of the war, and with the predatory demands of neighboring colonies on Rhode Island territory during the aftermath of the war.
Henry Bull (1610–1694) was an early colonial Governor of Rhode Island, serving for two separate terms, one before and one after the tenure of Edmund Andros under the Dominion of New England. Sailing from England as a young man, Bull first settled in Roxbury in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, but soon became a follower of the dissident ministers John Wheelwright and Anne Hutchinson, and was excommunicated from the Roxbury church. With many other followers of Hutchinson, he signed the Portsmouth Compact, and settled on Aquidneck Island in the Narragansett Bay. Within a year of arriving there, he and others followed William Coddington to the south end of the island where they established the town of Newport.
Stukely Westcott was one of the founding settlers of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations and one of the original members of the first Baptist Church in America, established by Roger Williams in 1638. He came to New England from the town of Yeovil in Somerset, England and first settled in Salem in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, but difficulties with the authorities prompted him to join Roger Williams in settling near the Narragansett Bay in 1638 at Providence Plantations. He remained there for a few years, but he was recorded as an inhabitant of Warwick in 1648, probably having settled there several years earlier. He was most active in colonial affairs from 1650 to 1660 when he was a commissioner, surveyor of highways, and the keeper of a house of entertainment. His highest offices were as an Assistant in 1653 and much later as a deputy to the General Court in 1671 when he was almost 80 years old. He made his will on January 12, 1677 but died the same day with it unsigned, leaving his affairs in limbo for the following two decades.
John Greene Sr. was an early settler of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, one of the 12 original proprietors of Providence, and a co-founder of the town of Warwick in the colony, sailing from England with his family in 1635. He first settled in Salem in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, but he had difficulty with the Puritan authority and soon followed Roger Williams to Providence, becoming one of the original proprietors of that town. In 1643, he joined Samuel Gorton and ten others in purchasing land that became the town of Warwick. Difficulties with Massachusetts ensued, until he accompanied Gorton on a trip to England where they secured royal recognition of their town.
The Rhode Island Royal Charter provided royal recognition to the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, approved by England's King Charles II in July 1663. It outlined many freedoms for the inhabitants of Rhode Island and was the guiding document of the colony's government over a period of 180 years.
Samuel Wilbore was one of the founding settlers of Portsmouth in the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. He emigrated from Essex, England to Boston with his wife and three sons in 1633. He and his wife both joined the Boston church, but a theological controversy began to cause dissension in the church and community in 1636, and Wilbore aligned himself with John Wheelwright and Anne Hutchinson, signing a petition in support of dissident minister Wheelwright. In so doing, he and many others were disarmed and dismissed from the Boston church. In March 1638, he was one of 23 individuals who signed a compact to establish a new government, and this group purchased Rhode Island from the Narragansett Indians at the urging of Roger Williams, establishing the settlement of Portsmouth.
Thomas Angell (c.1616–1694) was one of the four men who wintered with Roger Williams at Seekonk, Plymouth Colony in early 1636, and then joined him in founding the settlement of Providence Plantation in what became the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. He was a minor at the time of his arrival, but his name appears on several of the early documents related to the settlement of Providence. In the early 1650s, he became active in the affairs of the town, serving as commissioner, juryman, and constable. In 1658, he began his service as the Providence Town Clerk and held this position for 17 years. He wrote his will in 1685, dying almost a decade later in 1694, leaving a widow and many grown children. Angell Street on Providence's East Side is named for him.
John Albro was an early settler of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, a magistrate, and a long-time military officer in the Portsmouth Militia in the colony. He immigrated to New England in 1634 as a minor under the care of early Portsmouth settler William Freeborn. He was very active in civil as well as military affairs, and was an Assistant to the Governor for nine one-year terms between 1671 and 1686. During King Philip's War when the colony needed the advice and counsel of "the most judicious inhabitants" in the colony, his was one of 16 in a 1676 list of names, which included Governor Benedict Arnold and former President Gregory Dexter.
Robert Coles was a 17th-century New England colonist who is known for the scarlet-letter punishment he received in the Massachusetts Bay Colony and his role in establishing the Providence Plantations, now the state of Rhode Island. | <urn:uuid:c4d956e4-1009-4605-b627-5a9bbc60d8d6> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://wikimili.com/en/List_of_early_settlers_of_Rhode_Island | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251688806.91/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126104828-20200126134828-00421.warc.gz | en | 0.981098 | 5,104 | 3.671875 | 4 | [
-0.041259340941905975,
-0.32984668016433716,
0.3219769299030304,
-0.2347351312637329,
-0.13564375042915344,
0.13800205290317535,
0.03137843310832977,
-0.08639751374721527,
-0.33665788173675537,
0.27649545669555664,
0.1290525496006012,
-0.47888511419296265,
0.06291984021663666,
0.5984618663... | 1 | This is a collection of lists of early settlers (before 1700) in the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. Most of the lists are of the earliest inhabitants of a particular town or area.
The Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations was one of the original Thirteen Colonies established on the east coast of America, bordering the Atlantic Ocean. It was an English colony from 1636 until 1707, and then a colony of Great Britain until the American Revolution in 1776, when it became the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.
The following people lived in Rhode Island prior to Colonial settlement:
Wampanoag people lived throughout Plymouth Colony and around Mount Hope Bay in Bristol, Rhode Island
The Wampanoag, also rendered Wôpanâak, are an American Indian tribe. They were a loose confederacy made up of several tribes in the 17th century, but today Wampanoag people are enrolled in two federally recognized tribes: the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe and the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head in Massachusetts. They lived in southeastern Massachusetts and Rhode Island in the beginning of the 17th century, at the time of first contact with the English colonists, a territory that included Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket islands. Their population numbered in the thousands; 3,000 Wampanoag lived on Martha's Vineyard alone.
Plymouth Colony was an English colonial venture in America from 1620 to 1691 at a location that had previously been surveyed and named by Captain John Smith. The settlement served as the capital of the colony and developed as the town of Plymouth, Massachusetts. At its height, Plymouth Colony occupied most of the southeastern portion of Massachusetts.
Mount Hope Bay is a tidal estuary located at the mouth of the Taunton River on the Massachusetts and Rhode Island border. It is an arm of Narragansett Bay. The bay is named after Mount Hope, a small hill located on its western shore in what is now Bristol, Rhode Island. It flows into the East Passage of Narragansett Bay and also the Sakonnet River. Mount Hope Bay has played an important role to the history of the area, from pre-colonial times to the present. While many years of sewage and industrial pollution have severely degraded the quality of the shallow waters of the bay, there are currently major efforts underway to clean up and restore it.
Massasoit Sachem or Ousamequin was the sachem or leader of the Wampanoag tribe. The term Massasoit means Great Sachem.
Wamsutta, also known as Alexander Pokanoket, as he was called by New England colonists, was the eldest son of Massasoit Ousa Mequin of the Pokanoket Tribe and Wampanoag nation, and brother of Metacomet. His sale of Wampanoag lands to colonists other than those of the Plymouth Colony brought the Wampanoag considerable power, but aroused the suspicions of the Plymouth colonists. He was imprisoned for three days at Plymouth; he died shortly after release, causing tribal suspicion of the colonists. His death possibly contributed to King Philip's War of 1675. Wamsutta's name is memorialized in and around New Bedford, Massachusetts in various ways. He was honored in the naming of a United States Navy steamer in commission during the American Civil War between 1863 and 1865.
Metacom, also known as Metacomet and by his adopted English name King Philip, was chief to the Wampanoag people and the second son of the sachem Massasoit. He became a chief in 1662 when his brother Wamsutta died shortly after the death of their father, Massasoit. Wamsutta's widow Weetamoo, sunksqua of the Pocasset, was Metacom's ally and friend for the rest of her life. Metacom married Weetamoo's younger sister Wootonekanuske. No one knows how many children they had or what happened to them. Wootonekanuske and one of their sons were sold to slavery in the West Indies following the defeat of the Native Americans in what became known as King Philip's War.
Narragansett people lived throughout the Rhode Island colony
The Narragansett people are an Algonquian American Indian tribe from Rhode Island. The tribe was nearly landless for most of the 20th century, but it worked to gain federal recognition and attained it in 1983. It is officially the Narragansett Indian Tribe of Rhode Island and is made up of descendants of tribal members who were identified in an 1880 treaty with the state.
Canonicus was a Native American chief of the Narragansett people. Although wary of the European newcomers, he bowed before superior armaments and surrendered a portion of the territory of his people to the immigrants without war. He ultimately proved to be a firm friend of Roger Williams and other English settlers.
Roger Williams was a Puritan minister, theologian, and author who founded the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. He was a staunch advocate for religious freedom, separation of church and state, and fair dealings with American Indians, and he was one of the first abolitionists.
Providence Plantation was the first permanent European American settlement in Rhode Island. It was established by a group of colonists led by Roger Williams who left Massachusetts Bay Colony in order to establish a colony with greater religious freedom. Providence Plantation became the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, which became the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations after the American Revolution.
Niantic people lived around the Pawcatuck River in the southwestern corner of Rhode Island
Nipmuc people wandered within Rhode Island Colony, mostly from the north
Roger Williams was banished from the Massachusetts Bay Colony in October 1635 but was allowed to remain at his home in Salem, Massachusetts until the end of winter, provided that he did not preach. However, his followers visited him at his home in sizable numbers, and the authorities deemed this to be preaching. They planned to apprehend him by force and put him on a ship for England in January 1636, but magistrate John Winthrop warned him privately, and he slipped away from Salem in the dead of winter to find shelter with the Wampanoags. He bought a parcel of land in Seekonk from Wampanoag sachem Massasoit which was at the western edge of the Plymouth Colony (now Rehoboth, Massachusetts). In a 1677 statement, Williams mentioned the four who were with him at Seekonk. The five members of the group were:
In the spring of 1636, Williams and his company planted crops at Seekonk but were informed in a gentle letter from Governor Edward Winslow of Plymouth that they were within Plymouth's jurisdiction, and this fact would cause difficulties with the Massachusetts authorities. Without urgency, Winslow suggested that Williams and his group move across the Seekonk River into the territory of the Narragansetts, where no colony had any claim. By this time, it is likely that the family members of the original settlers had joined the group, and two other families also joined the settlement. Joshua Verin wrote a statement in 1650 mentioning "we six which came first to Providence", suggesting that he was the next to join the original five.Also, Benedict Arnold later wrote, "Memm. We came to Providence to Dwell the 20th of April, 1636". Providence had not yet been established, so he probably was referring to Seekonk where the Arnolds came from Hingham, Massachusetts to join the other settlers. It is likely, therefore, that the following 25 people crossed the river from Seekonk in the Plymouth Colony sometime around June 1636, to a location on the Moshassuck River in Narragansett territory which Williams named Providence Plantations:
Several young men were admitted as inhabitants to Providence before the settlement was a year old, but they were discontented with their position and wanted to be able to vote and otherwise have equality with the older settlers. The following resolution was adopted in a town meeting on August 20, 1637 and is sometimes called the "civil compact." The 1637 date was on the original town records, but when they were transcribed in 1800, the page containing that date was missing. The text of the resolution is as follows:
We, whose names are hereunder, desirous to inhabit in the town of Providence, do promise to subject ourselves in active or passive obedience to all such orders or agreements as shall be made for public good of our body, in an orderly way, by the major assent of the present inhabitants, master of families, incorporated together into a town fellowship, and others whom they shall admit unto them only in civil things.
Those named in a deed from Roger Williams, dated about October 8, 1638:
Those settlers who left Providence to settle on the north side of the Pawtuxet River about 1638, putting themselves under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts Bay Colony from 1642 to 1658:
Those 39 Providence settlers who signed an agreement to form a government on July 27, 1640:
Those early settlers who had trading posts in the area of Wickford in what was then the "Narragansett country" and later a part of North Kingstown, Rhode Island:
Supporters of Anne Hutchinson who signed the Portsmouth Compact, dated March 7, 1638:
The last four names on the list were crossed out, but these men nevertheless came to Portsmouth or Newport.
The following individuals were among the earliest settlers of Aquidneck Island in the Narragansett Bay; the island was officially named Rhode Island by 1644,from which the entire colony eventually took its name. The first group of 58 names appears to be settlers of Pocasset (later Portsmouth), while the second group of 42 appears to be settlers of Newport. These two lists come from Bartlett's Records of the Colony of Rhode Island, and apparently they were compiled and incorporated into the town records of Newport on November 25, 1639. The actual arrival dates of the individuals likely span over several months during 1638; a few individuals have legible dates next to their names, while several others have illegible dates.
A Catalogue of such who, by the Generall consent of the Company were admitted to be Inhabytants of the Island now called Aqueedneck, having submitted themselves to the Government that is or shall be established, according to the word of God therein
"Inhabitants admitted at the Town of Nieu-port since the 20th of the 3:1638" (since 20 May 1638)
Those Portsmouth settlers who remained after the group left to found Newport and who signed an agreement for a government on April 30, 1639:
Those who signed an agreement for a new government on April 28, 1639:
Those who purchased the land from the Indians on January 12, 1642:
Those who purchased the Pettaquamscutt lands (later South Kingstown) from the Indian sachems in 1657:
The original purchasers of Block Island in April 1661, whose names appear on a plaque at the north end of the island:
The early settlers whose names appear on the plaque:
The early Rhode Island inhabitants named in the Rhode Island Royal Charter, dated July 8, 1663 and signed with the royal seal by King Charles II; this charter was the basis for Rhode Island's government for nearly two centuries:
Others named in the document:
Westerly, at first called Misquamicut, was purchased on 27 August 1661 by the following Newport men:
Of these men, only John Crandall appears to have settled in Westerly.
Westerly inhabitants appearing in the town records of 18 May 1669:
During the devastating events of King Philip's War (1675-1676), the Rhode Island General Assembly sought the counsel of 16 prominent citizens of the colony with the resolution, "Voted that in these troublesome times and straites in this Collony, this Assembly desiringe to have the advice and concurrance of the most juditious inhabitants, if it may be had for the good of the whole, doe desire at their next sittinge the Company and Councill of":
At a meeting of the General Assembly in Newport in May 1677, the following 48 individuals were granted 100-acre tracts in East Greenwich "for the services rendered during King Philip's War."
Bristol's early history began as a commercial enterprise when John Gorham was awarded 100 acres of land if it could be "honorably purchased from the indians."Gorham's enterprise succeeded on 18 Sep 1680 when four proprietors were awarded the deed to Mt. Hope Lands:
On 27 Aug 1680, twelve men signed Articles agreeing to purchase lands:
On 1 Sep 1681, more than 60 families were present at the first town meeting and named these lands Bristol after Bristol, England.Bristol was originally part of Massachusetts, but it became part of Rhode Island when disputed lands were awarded to the Colony of Rhode Island in 1747.
French Huguenots settled in what is now East Greenwich in 1687. On 12 October 1686, an agreement was signed between the following, representing the French settlers and the land owners:
Representing Land Owners
Representing Huguenot Settlers
Those who signed the agreement
The following individuals signed the follow-on agreement, usually giving only their surname, and these same names are found on a plat map of the settlement.
Also on the map are two additional lots: "La terre pour L'Eglise" (land for the church) and "La terr pour L'ecolle" (land for the school). Almost all of these people left Rhode Island to settle in Massachusetts and New York following some severe civil clashes with the English settlers. Two families remained on their original land, however:
The Ayrault family moved to Newport.
John Clarke was a physician, Baptist minister, co-founder of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, author of its influential charter, and a leading advocate of religious freedom in America.
Samuel Gorton was an early settler and civic leader of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations and President of the towns of Providence and Warwick. He had strong religious beliefs which differed from Puritan theology and was very outspoken, and he became the leader of a small sect of converts known as Gortonists or Gortonites. As a result, he was frequently in trouble with the civil and church authorities in the New England colonies.
William Coddington was an early magistrate of the Massachusetts Bay Colony and later of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. He served as the judge of Portsmouth and Newport, governor of Portsmouth and Newport, deputy governor of the four-town colony, and then governor of the entire colony. Coddington was born and raised in Lincolnshire, England. He accompanied the Winthrop Fleet on its voyage to New England in 1630, becoming an early leader in Boston. There he built the first brick house and became heavily involved in the local government as an assistant magistrate, treasurer, and deputy.
The Portsmouth Compact was a document signed on March 7, 1638 that established the settlement of Portsmouth, which is now a town in the state of Rhode Island. It was the first document in American history that severed both political and religious ties with England.
Benedict Arnold was president and then governor of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, serving for a total of 11 years in these roles. He was born and raised in the town of Ilchester, Somerset, England, likely attending school in Limington nearby. In 1635 at age 19, he accompanied his parents, siblings, and other family members on a voyage from England to New England where they first settled in Hingham in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. In less than a year, they moved to Providence Plantation at the head of the Narragansett Bay at the request of Roger Williams. In about 1638, they moved once again about five miles (8 km) south to the Pawtuxet River, settling on the north side at a place commonly called Pawtuxet. Here they had serious disputes with their neighbors, particularly Samuel Gorton, and they put themselves and their lands under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts, a situation which lasted for 16 years.
William Arnold was one of the founding settlers of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, and he and his sons were among the wealthiest people in the colony. He was raised and educated in England where he was the warden of St. Mary's, the parish church of Ilchester in southeastern Somerset. He emigrated to New England with family and associates in 1635. He initially settled in Hingham in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, but he soon relocated to the new settlement of Providence Plantation with Roger Williams. He was one of the 13 original proprietors of Providence, appearing on the deed signed by Roger Williams in 1638, and was one of the 12 founding members of the first Baptist church to be established in America.
John Easton (1624–1705) was a political leader in the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, devoting decades to public service before eventually becoming governor of the colony. Born in Hampshire, England, he sailed to New England with his widowed father and older brother, settling in Ipswich and Newbury in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. As a supporter of the dissident ministers John Wheelwright and Anne Hutchinson during the Antinomian Controversy, his father was exiled, and settled in Portsmouth on Aquidneck Island with many other Hutchinson supporters. Here there was discord among the leaders of the settlement, and his father followed William Coddington to the south end of the island where they established the town of Newport. The younger Easton remained in Newport the remainder of his life, where he became involved in civil affairs before the age of 30.
William Brenton was a colonial President, Deputy Governor, and Governor of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, and an early settler of Portsmouth and Newport in the Rhode Island colony. Austin and other historians give his place of origin as Hammersmith in Middlesex, England, but in reviewing the evidence, Anderson concludes that his place of origin is unknown. Brenton named one of his Newport properties "Hammersmith," and this has led some writers to assume that the like-named town in London was his place of origin.
Walter Clarke (1640–1714) was an early governor of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations and the first native-born governor of the colony. The son of colonial President Jeremy Clarke, he was a Quaker like his father. His mother was Frances (Latham) Clarke, who is often called "the Mother of Governors." While in his late 20s, he was elected as a deputy from Newport, and in 1673 was elected to his first of three consecutive terms as assistant. During King Philip's War, he was elected to his first term as governor of the colony. He served for one year in this role, dealing with the devastation of the war, and with the predatory demands of neighboring colonies on Rhode Island territory during the aftermath of the war.
Henry Bull (1610–1694) was an early colonial Governor of Rhode Island, serving for two separate terms, one before and one after the tenure of Edmund Andros under the Dominion of New England. Sailing from England as a young man, Bull first settled in Roxbury in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, but soon became a follower of the dissident ministers John Wheelwright and Anne Hutchinson, and was excommunicated from the Roxbury church. With many other followers of Hutchinson, he signed the Portsmouth Compact, and settled on Aquidneck Island in the Narragansett Bay. Within a year of arriving there, he and others followed William Coddington to the south end of the island where they established the town of Newport.
Stukely Westcott was one of the founding settlers of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations and one of the original members of the first Baptist Church in America, established by Roger Williams in 1638. He came to New England from the town of Yeovil in Somerset, England and first settled in Salem in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, but difficulties with the authorities prompted him to join Roger Williams in settling near the Narragansett Bay in 1638 at Providence Plantations. He remained there for a few years, but he was recorded as an inhabitant of Warwick in 1648, probably having settled there several years earlier. He was most active in colonial affairs from 1650 to 1660 when he was a commissioner, surveyor of highways, and the keeper of a house of entertainment. His highest offices were as an Assistant in 1653 and much later as a deputy to the General Court in 1671 when he was almost 80 years old. He made his will on January 12, 1677 but died the same day with it unsigned, leaving his affairs in limbo for the following two decades.
John Greene Sr. was an early settler of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, one of the 12 original proprietors of Providence, and a co-founder of the town of Warwick in the colony, sailing from England with his family in 1635. He first settled in Salem in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, but he had difficulty with the Puritan authority and soon followed Roger Williams to Providence, becoming one of the original proprietors of that town. In 1643, he joined Samuel Gorton and ten others in purchasing land that became the town of Warwick. Difficulties with Massachusetts ensued, until he accompanied Gorton on a trip to England where they secured royal recognition of their town.
The Rhode Island Royal Charter provided royal recognition to the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, approved by England's King Charles II in July 1663. It outlined many freedoms for the inhabitants of Rhode Island and was the guiding document of the colony's government over a period of 180 years.
Samuel Wilbore was one of the founding settlers of Portsmouth in the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. He emigrated from Essex, England to Boston with his wife and three sons in 1633. He and his wife both joined the Boston church, but a theological controversy began to cause dissension in the church and community in 1636, and Wilbore aligned himself with John Wheelwright and Anne Hutchinson, signing a petition in support of dissident minister Wheelwright. In so doing, he and many others were disarmed and dismissed from the Boston church. In March 1638, he was one of 23 individuals who signed a compact to establish a new government, and this group purchased Rhode Island from the Narragansett Indians at the urging of Roger Williams, establishing the settlement of Portsmouth.
Thomas Angell (c.1616–1694) was one of the four men who wintered with Roger Williams at Seekonk, Plymouth Colony in early 1636, and then joined him in founding the settlement of Providence Plantation in what became the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. He was a minor at the time of his arrival, but his name appears on several of the early documents related to the settlement of Providence. In the early 1650s, he became active in the affairs of the town, serving as commissioner, juryman, and constable. In 1658, he began his service as the Providence Town Clerk and held this position for 17 years. He wrote his will in 1685, dying almost a decade later in 1694, leaving a widow and many grown children. Angell Street on Providence's East Side is named for him.
John Albro was an early settler of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, a magistrate, and a long-time military officer in the Portsmouth Militia in the colony. He immigrated to New England in 1634 as a minor under the care of early Portsmouth settler William Freeborn. He was very active in civil as well as military affairs, and was an Assistant to the Governor for nine one-year terms between 1671 and 1686. During King Philip's War when the colony needed the advice and counsel of "the most judicious inhabitants" in the colony, his was one of 16 in a 1676 list of names, which included Governor Benedict Arnold and former President Gregory Dexter.
Robert Coles was a 17th-century New England colonist who is known for the scarlet-letter punishment he received in the Massachusetts Bay Colony and his role in establishing the Providence Plantations, now the state of Rhode Island. | 5,392 | ENGLISH | 1 |
This paper explores the music of the Baroque era and how its unique traits made it diverge from the music that preceded it, as well as pave the way for music styles to come. The Baroque period, which is generally agreed to range from around 1600 to 1750, was a time of great advancement not only in arts and sciences, but in music as well. The overabundance of ornamentation sprinkled throughout the pieces composed in this era is an attribute that was uncommon in the past, and helped distinguish the Baroque style of music. A composer of the Baroque period that this paper will analyze in greater depth is Arcangelo Corelli. Corelli’s contributions to the Baroque music style have impacted how the violin is perceived and played to this day. | <urn:uuid:80525832-a971-4e45-8874-a9bd69057533> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://dspace.sunyconnect.suny.edu/handle/1951/70766 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251684146.65/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126013015-20200126043015-00429.warc.gz | en | 0.981861 | 162 | 3.921875 | 4 | [
-0.1321353316307068,
0.046637725085020065,
0.3375100791454315,
-0.5232413411140442,
-0.3120485246181488,
0.22704462707042694,
-0.32502129673957825,
-0.08251134306192398,
-0.08750266581773758,
-0.45251116156578064,
0.16053278744220734,
0.19099271297454834,
0.31476494669914246,
0.12579658627... | 3 | This paper explores the music of the Baroque era and how its unique traits made it diverge from the music that preceded it, as well as pave the way for music styles to come. The Baroque period, which is generally agreed to range from around 1600 to 1750, was a time of great advancement not only in arts and sciences, but in music as well. The overabundance of ornamentation sprinkled throughout the pieces composed in this era is an attribute that was uncommon in the past, and helped distinguish the Baroque style of music. A composer of the Baroque period that this paper will analyze in greater depth is Arcangelo Corelli. Corelli’s contributions to the Baroque music style have impacted how the violin is perceived and played to this day. | 162 | ENGLISH | 1 |
ELLLO Beginner English Lesson 2-07
Was / Were
Watch these videos to learn how to use the 'be' verb in the past tense.
Past Tense - Be - Was / Were
The past tense refers to actions that happened and ended before the present time.
The be verb has two past tense forms, was and were. First and third person singular use was. We use the contraction wasn't instead of was not in spoken English.
- I was at home yesterday. I wasn't at work.
- It was a fun party. It wasn't boring at all.
- He was sad all day. He wasn't happy.
- She was a good teacher. She wasn't strict.
All plural forms and second person singular use were and were not. We use the contraction weren't instead of were not in spoken English.
- You were right. You weren't wrong.
- They were late. They weren't on time.
- We were happy with the food. We weren't disappointed.
- You were so noisy. You weren't very quiet!
To download the free PDF, view the lesson full-screen and click the link in the top right corner. | <urn:uuid:6418076b-55a5-462f-8609-d0a94d8ec764> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://elllo.org/english/course/L2-07-Was-Were.htm | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598726.39/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120110422-20200120134422-00362.warc.gz | en | 0.994179 | 251 | 3.953125 | 4 | [
-0.4553981125354767,
-0.10264159739017487,
0.5310963988304138,
0.06969650834798813,
-0.7446509003639221,
0.0409870482981205,
0.19788382947444916,
0.062591552734375,
0.33620062470436096,
-0.06104292348027229,
0.03959762677550316,
-0.1808268278837204,
-0.12697522342205048,
0.3750424385070801... | 1 | ELLLO Beginner English Lesson 2-07
Was / Were
Watch these videos to learn how to use the 'be' verb in the past tense.
Past Tense - Be - Was / Were
The past tense refers to actions that happened and ended before the present time.
The be verb has two past tense forms, was and were. First and third person singular use was. We use the contraction wasn't instead of was not in spoken English.
- I was at home yesterday. I wasn't at work.
- It was a fun party. It wasn't boring at all.
- He was sad all day. He wasn't happy.
- She was a good teacher. She wasn't strict.
All plural forms and second person singular use were and were not. We use the contraction weren't instead of were not in spoken English.
- You were right. You weren't wrong.
- They were late. They weren't on time.
- We were happy with the food. We weren't disappointed.
- You were so noisy. You weren't very quiet!
To download the free PDF, view the lesson full-screen and click the link in the top right corner. | 238 | ENGLISH | 1 |
What does "King James Version" mean? (Class attendee: That the translation was made under the authority of King James.) Right! King James was living in the 16th and 17th centuries, the same time as Shakespeare. About that time the Protestants had pretty well won the victory in England and taken over from the Catholics. England had declared its independence from the Catholic Church and had formed the Church of England with the monarch at its head. Until then the people had not had very much in the way of a Bible in their common language. The Bible used by the Catholics at that time was the Latin Vulgate, which literally means vulgar Latin, the Latin of the common people. But by that time, the common people of England, the Anglo-Saxons and Normans and whatnot didn't speak Latin.
Originally in the early days of the Catholic Church, the Latin Vulgate was in the common language of the common people, believe it or not. But as the Roman Empire spread into many other countries with many other languages, instead of translating into those other languages they just kept on having their rituals in the Latin and reading the Bible in Latin, and everything was still done in Latin so that the people in the foreign countries outside of Italy didn't know what was going on. Everything was in Latin whether the people understood or not, and most people didn't. But since the Protestants now had broken away from the Catholic Church, they decided they needed a Bible of their own, in this case in England. There had been several attempted Protestant translations in English. Wycliffe's was the first English Bible, then in the 1500's Tyndale translated a Bible into the common language of the people from the original Greek and Hebrew. John Huss had tried to translate a Bible for the Presbyterians of Scotland, who were a Reformation group, and Martin Luther had already translated a Bible in German, as I recall, in the mid-1500's, for the common people of Germany.
There were several [English] versions in existence, none of them perfect, of course, and a good many of them incomplete as they usually had been done by individual men. So I'm sure it was of the Lord that dear King James was approached by the leaders of the English church, who decided that they needed a standard authorised version to use in all of their churches. Instead of this bunch over here using one version, and this bunch over there another translation, they were going to standardise the English Bible for use throughout the English churches.
So they persuaded King James to authorise a commission of 47 men, outstanding scholars who were really great literary men who knew Greek, Latin and Hebrew fluently, and they decided that a good new translation was needed in English. So they got together this whole group of Biblical scholars.--Hebrew scholars, Greek scholars, Latin scholars, men who really knew what they were doing--and they worked on this new English translation of the Bible for a good many years.
In the front of your Bible is the dedication written by these men, the translators who dedicated it to King James because he authorised it. And of course he had to foot the bill, too, because somebody had to pay for their room and board while they were working and translating. So it was paid for partly by the church and partly by the government, but the church was the government in those days.
They worked on it for five or six years, I've forgotten just how long, until they felt they had it just right, and they went over it and over it. The Hebrew scholars went over the Hebrew of the Old Testament, and the Greek scholars went over the Greek of the New Testament and the translation, and they even compared it with the Latin Vulgate. On your title page it even says, "The Holy Bible containing the Old and New Testaments, translated out of the original tongues: And with the former translations diligently compared and revised."
They not only translated it directly out of the original Greek and Hebrew, but they also compared it with other translations like Tyndale's and Wycliffe's and the Vulgate and Huss' and all these different translations which were in existence. They got all the help they could from as many sources as possible, feeling that they had gotten a Bible which was really a good translation, truly authentic and accurate. And when they finally did, they agreed on it and then they presented it to King James for his final approval and to be authorised by the king.
That's why they call it the Authorised Version, it was authorised by the King to be used throughout the English churches, or what is now known as the Church of England (or Anglican Church), and in other countries called the Episcopal Church. That was the only English Protestant Church, there were no other English denominations at that time. It was throughout all English-speaking churches, England, Scotland, Wales, etc.
Then of course when the church later began to have splits and divisions, they carried the same Bible with them and they used the same Bible just the same. They didn't develop any new translations, and it wasn't necessary because the King James was a good translation. It was accurate, authentic, and it had been agreed upon by a whole slew of excellent scholars and theologians who really knew what they were doing. So I believe the Lord really inspired not only the original, but I'm convinced that the Lord inspired the translators, because it's an excellent translation.
King James actually had little or nothing to do with the writing, but a few controversial points were brought up to him and he made a decision on them, along with the Archbishop of Canterbury, such as what to call the church. The translators wanted to use the word "assembly" or "congregation" each time it talks about the church--"the congregation of believers" or "the assembly of believers," which is what the word really meant, "the called-out ones." But the Archbishop of Canterbury told the king: "If you allow them to put in that kind of an interpretation, that will almost totally destroy my authority as the head of the organised religious organisation, and the authority of the church and its buildings. If you give them the impression that they don't have to have buildings or an organisation, that the church is just a group of believers, any believers, that's going to destroy the authority of the organised English Episcopal Church, and with that, it may destroy you!" So King James agreed with the Archbishop that they would continue to call it the English word "church," which literally came from an old English word "kirk," which meant a chapel, a building, and that is one of the few bad things about the King James Version.
But of course we know what the word "church" means and what it really is. The word that they were translating was "ekklesia." Ekklesia is a Greek word from the Greek New Testament meaning what? (Class attendee: The called-out ones!) The word literally means "called out," and when it's used as a noun it means "the called out," those who are called out. And so it means not a building, but what? (Class attendee: A group of people.)--Right!
The Latin Vulgate was to the Catholics what the King James is to the Protestants, it was a Bible finally put into the language of the people. The common language of the people in those early Catholic and Roman days was Latin, but it was "vulgar," as they call it, meaning a common type of Latin, and so they called it the Latin Vulgate. It was the principal translation of the Bible right up until very recent times, in fact, up until the time of the Reformation in the 1500s. For a thousand years at least, it was the translation read by the common people. And it's a good translation, not bad at all, and you can preach the Gospel out of a Latin Vulgate.
But in competition with the King James Version for the English and other common Bibles that were coming out during the Reformation, the Catholics decided they needed a new Catholic edition, an English translation of the Vulgate for the English Catholics. And so do you know what that translation was and is still in use today? It's called the Douay. It was an English translation by French scholars, and it's very good and still used by Catholics to this very day. The Douay Version is a good translation if you don't read the footnotes, which are all interpretative.
Since then, in modern times, the Paulist Fathers have translated an excellent, new, modern language translation known as the Confraternity. They are a very good association of brothers and priests who really seem to know the Lord. They are missionaries and evangelists who particularly specialise in trying to convert Protestants to Catholicism, and for that reason they have translated an excellent new modern language translation of the Bible, one of the best. I would say it's even superior to some of the other modern language translations in English. It's known as the Confraternity, "Confraternity of Christian Doctrine," if you want the long name. Confraternity simply means "the brothers together." The Paulist Fathers got together and translated this Bible, and it's in modern English, very good, and it really preaches the Gospel, even in the footnotes. They shy away from all those controversial Catholic doctrines, and they're really excellent in Revelation, Daniel and Bible Prophecy. The Confraternity Version is now an authorised English version of the Catholic Church and has been authorised by the Pope, etc. So if you want to witness to a Catholic from a modern translation that is easily understandable by them and has good footnotes, you can use that!
Later on the first major new English translation came out, published in 1881, called the English Revised Version. The American Standard Version was published in 1901, and then a Revised Standard Version in 1946. The American Revised Version was a very modernistic, unbelieving product of the high criticism of the Bible, written by guys who were not even Christians, not even believers. My father had a copy and always went to compare it to the King James to show how bad it was. They didn't call Mary a virgin, and had all kinds of things that belittled and minimised the miraculousness and the supernatural things of the Bible. These revisions are used by the modernists and unbelievers of America and England, written undoubtedly to try to subtly undermine faith in God and the Bible, it's pitiful!
Finally, the King James New Testament, alone of all the English translations, is based on the Greek text known as the Textus Receptus, which is the Greek New Testament used during the spiritual awakenings of the Reformation period. Before the invention of printing, of course, the Scriptures were transmitted by hand copying and circulation. The generally acknowledged and accepted manuscripts were, of course, widely used and so wore out fairly quickly and had to be continuously recopied on fresh papers or parchments.
Great numbers were always current, however, and there was thus a continual self-checking process going on, securing the text against any significant accumulation of copyists' errors. It was from this source that the Greek New Testament known as the Textus Receptus ("Received Text") was compiled. The great majority of the surviving manuscripts agree with this so-called "Byzantine" text, as preserved through the early centuries of Christianity by the Greek-speaking churches themselves.
When a manuscript was prepared which, either through carelessness or deliberate intent, contained significant errors or alterations, it naturally would tend to be discarded when its character was discovered. Unless it was deliberately discarded, however, it would tend to survive longer than others, for the very reason that it was not being used. This is probably the case with the so-called Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts, as well as certain others, which were discovered in the 19th Century and which were older than any of the still-preserved manuscripts of the Received Text.
These manuscripts contain an amazing number of obvious and careless mistakes and probably even some deliberate alterations. Nevertheless, because of their antiquity, they were accepted by the scholars Westcott, Hort, Nestle and others as the basis for their Greek New Testaments, which were published in the 19th Century and which have in turn served as the basis for all the subsequent modern English translations.
Thus there is good reason to believe that the King James Version is still the most accurate and reliable translation we have. In view of the other considerations noted above, there is certainly as yet no good reason to replace it with some ephemeral modern translation.
Also see some specific errors in modern translations.
If you find this website useful, your gifts toward support of my ministry sharing the truth of God's Word are greatly appreciated. The Church, the Elect of God, the Ecclesia, the born again believers of Christ Jesus, have been flooded with false doctrines from Jesuits and the Pope. I hope to correct them with this website. Your support will encourage me to keep this website updated!
My Paypal ID: [email protected]
Or you can click on the icon below: | <urn:uuid:658d1a0e-63bc-4ebf-82aa-6bc338baef5e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://deeptruths.com/excerpts/kjv-best-english-bible-translation.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690379.95/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126195918-20200126225918-00188.warc.gz | en | 0.986895 | 2,715 | 3.375 | 3 | [
-0.26402801275253296,
-0.10960090160369873,
0.3591960072517395,
-0.1269713044166565,
-0.01844240352511406,
-0.6114823818206787,
0.24645394086837769,
-0.2577703595161438,
-0.0070437295362353325,
0.04634943604469299,
0.18882331252098083,
-0.2445700615644455,
0.07561159133911133,
-0.239511102... | 1 | What does "King James Version" mean? (Class attendee: That the translation was made under the authority of King James.) Right! King James was living in the 16th and 17th centuries, the same time as Shakespeare. About that time the Protestants had pretty well won the victory in England and taken over from the Catholics. England had declared its independence from the Catholic Church and had formed the Church of England with the monarch at its head. Until then the people had not had very much in the way of a Bible in their common language. The Bible used by the Catholics at that time was the Latin Vulgate, which literally means vulgar Latin, the Latin of the common people. But by that time, the common people of England, the Anglo-Saxons and Normans and whatnot didn't speak Latin.
Originally in the early days of the Catholic Church, the Latin Vulgate was in the common language of the common people, believe it or not. But as the Roman Empire spread into many other countries with many other languages, instead of translating into those other languages they just kept on having their rituals in the Latin and reading the Bible in Latin, and everything was still done in Latin so that the people in the foreign countries outside of Italy didn't know what was going on. Everything was in Latin whether the people understood or not, and most people didn't. But since the Protestants now had broken away from the Catholic Church, they decided they needed a Bible of their own, in this case in England. There had been several attempted Protestant translations in English. Wycliffe's was the first English Bible, then in the 1500's Tyndale translated a Bible into the common language of the people from the original Greek and Hebrew. John Huss had tried to translate a Bible for the Presbyterians of Scotland, who were a Reformation group, and Martin Luther had already translated a Bible in German, as I recall, in the mid-1500's, for the common people of Germany.
There were several [English] versions in existence, none of them perfect, of course, and a good many of them incomplete as they usually had been done by individual men. So I'm sure it was of the Lord that dear King James was approached by the leaders of the English church, who decided that they needed a standard authorised version to use in all of their churches. Instead of this bunch over here using one version, and this bunch over there another translation, they were going to standardise the English Bible for use throughout the English churches.
So they persuaded King James to authorise a commission of 47 men, outstanding scholars who were really great literary men who knew Greek, Latin and Hebrew fluently, and they decided that a good new translation was needed in English. So they got together this whole group of Biblical scholars.--Hebrew scholars, Greek scholars, Latin scholars, men who really knew what they were doing--and they worked on this new English translation of the Bible for a good many years.
In the front of your Bible is the dedication written by these men, the translators who dedicated it to King James because he authorised it. And of course he had to foot the bill, too, because somebody had to pay for their room and board while they were working and translating. So it was paid for partly by the church and partly by the government, but the church was the government in those days.
They worked on it for five or six years, I've forgotten just how long, until they felt they had it just right, and they went over it and over it. The Hebrew scholars went over the Hebrew of the Old Testament, and the Greek scholars went over the Greek of the New Testament and the translation, and they even compared it with the Latin Vulgate. On your title page it even says, "The Holy Bible containing the Old and New Testaments, translated out of the original tongues: And with the former translations diligently compared and revised."
They not only translated it directly out of the original Greek and Hebrew, but they also compared it with other translations like Tyndale's and Wycliffe's and the Vulgate and Huss' and all these different translations which were in existence. They got all the help they could from as many sources as possible, feeling that they had gotten a Bible which was really a good translation, truly authentic and accurate. And when they finally did, they agreed on it and then they presented it to King James for his final approval and to be authorised by the king.
That's why they call it the Authorised Version, it was authorised by the King to be used throughout the English churches, or what is now known as the Church of England (or Anglican Church), and in other countries called the Episcopal Church. That was the only English Protestant Church, there were no other English denominations at that time. It was throughout all English-speaking churches, England, Scotland, Wales, etc.
Then of course when the church later began to have splits and divisions, they carried the same Bible with them and they used the same Bible just the same. They didn't develop any new translations, and it wasn't necessary because the King James was a good translation. It was accurate, authentic, and it had been agreed upon by a whole slew of excellent scholars and theologians who really knew what they were doing. So I believe the Lord really inspired not only the original, but I'm convinced that the Lord inspired the translators, because it's an excellent translation.
King James actually had little or nothing to do with the writing, but a few controversial points were brought up to him and he made a decision on them, along with the Archbishop of Canterbury, such as what to call the church. The translators wanted to use the word "assembly" or "congregation" each time it talks about the church--"the congregation of believers" or "the assembly of believers," which is what the word really meant, "the called-out ones." But the Archbishop of Canterbury told the king: "If you allow them to put in that kind of an interpretation, that will almost totally destroy my authority as the head of the organised religious organisation, and the authority of the church and its buildings. If you give them the impression that they don't have to have buildings or an organisation, that the church is just a group of believers, any believers, that's going to destroy the authority of the organised English Episcopal Church, and with that, it may destroy you!" So King James agreed with the Archbishop that they would continue to call it the English word "church," which literally came from an old English word "kirk," which meant a chapel, a building, and that is one of the few bad things about the King James Version.
But of course we know what the word "church" means and what it really is. The word that they were translating was "ekklesia." Ekklesia is a Greek word from the Greek New Testament meaning what? (Class attendee: The called-out ones!) The word literally means "called out," and when it's used as a noun it means "the called out," those who are called out. And so it means not a building, but what? (Class attendee: A group of people.)--Right!
The Latin Vulgate was to the Catholics what the King James is to the Protestants, it was a Bible finally put into the language of the people. The common language of the people in those early Catholic and Roman days was Latin, but it was "vulgar," as they call it, meaning a common type of Latin, and so they called it the Latin Vulgate. It was the principal translation of the Bible right up until very recent times, in fact, up until the time of the Reformation in the 1500s. For a thousand years at least, it was the translation read by the common people. And it's a good translation, not bad at all, and you can preach the Gospel out of a Latin Vulgate.
But in competition with the King James Version for the English and other common Bibles that were coming out during the Reformation, the Catholics decided they needed a new Catholic edition, an English translation of the Vulgate for the English Catholics. And so do you know what that translation was and is still in use today? It's called the Douay. It was an English translation by French scholars, and it's very good and still used by Catholics to this very day. The Douay Version is a good translation if you don't read the footnotes, which are all interpretative.
Since then, in modern times, the Paulist Fathers have translated an excellent, new, modern language translation known as the Confraternity. They are a very good association of brothers and priests who really seem to know the Lord. They are missionaries and evangelists who particularly specialise in trying to convert Protestants to Catholicism, and for that reason they have translated an excellent new modern language translation of the Bible, one of the best. I would say it's even superior to some of the other modern language translations in English. It's known as the Confraternity, "Confraternity of Christian Doctrine," if you want the long name. Confraternity simply means "the brothers together." The Paulist Fathers got together and translated this Bible, and it's in modern English, very good, and it really preaches the Gospel, even in the footnotes. They shy away from all those controversial Catholic doctrines, and they're really excellent in Revelation, Daniel and Bible Prophecy. The Confraternity Version is now an authorised English version of the Catholic Church and has been authorised by the Pope, etc. So if you want to witness to a Catholic from a modern translation that is easily understandable by them and has good footnotes, you can use that!
Later on the first major new English translation came out, published in 1881, called the English Revised Version. The American Standard Version was published in 1901, and then a Revised Standard Version in 1946. The American Revised Version was a very modernistic, unbelieving product of the high criticism of the Bible, written by guys who were not even Christians, not even believers. My father had a copy and always went to compare it to the King James to show how bad it was. They didn't call Mary a virgin, and had all kinds of things that belittled and minimised the miraculousness and the supernatural things of the Bible. These revisions are used by the modernists and unbelievers of America and England, written undoubtedly to try to subtly undermine faith in God and the Bible, it's pitiful!
Finally, the King James New Testament, alone of all the English translations, is based on the Greek text known as the Textus Receptus, which is the Greek New Testament used during the spiritual awakenings of the Reformation period. Before the invention of printing, of course, the Scriptures were transmitted by hand copying and circulation. The generally acknowledged and accepted manuscripts were, of course, widely used and so wore out fairly quickly and had to be continuously recopied on fresh papers or parchments.
Great numbers were always current, however, and there was thus a continual self-checking process going on, securing the text against any significant accumulation of copyists' errors. It was from this source that the Greek New Testament known as the Textus Receptus ("Received Text") was compiled. The great majority of the surviving manuscripts agree with this so-called "Byzantine" text, as preserved through the early centuries of Christianity by the Greek-speaking churches themselves.
When a manuscript was prepared which, either through carelessness or deliberate intent, contained significant errors or alterations, it naturally would tend to be discarded when its character was discovered. Unless it was deliberately discarded, however, it would tend to survive longer than others, for the very reason that it was not being used. This is probably the case with the so-called Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts, as well as certain others, which were discovered in the 19th Century and which were older than any of the still-preserved manuscripts of the Received Text.
These manuscripts contain an amazing number of obvious and careless mistakes and probably even some deliberate alterations. Nevertheless, because of their antiquity, they were accepted by the scholars Westcott, Hort, Nestle and others as the basis for their Greek New Testaments, which were published in the 19th Century and which have in turn served as the basis for all the subsequent modern English translations.
Thus there is good reason to believe that the King James Version is still the most accurate and reliable translation we have. In view of the other considerations noted above, there is certainly as yet no good reason to replace it with some ephemeral modern translation.
Also see some specific errors in modern translations.
If you find this website useful, your gifts toward support of my ministry sharing the truth of God's Word are greatly appreciated. The Church, the Elect of God, the Ecclesia, the born again believers of Christ Jesus, have been flooded with false doctrines from Jesuits and the Pope. I hope to correct them with this website. Your support will encourage me to keep this website updated!
My Paypal ID: [email protected]
Or you can click on the icon below: | 2,715 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Our “Today in History” posts are always free, but if you want the full Foreign Exchanges experience you know what you have to do:
The Saffarid Dynasty ruled much of modern Iran and Afghanistan, and part of modern Pakistan, starting in the mid-860s through roughly 901, and then continued to control a small principality in Sistan until the start of the 11th century. They’re not heavily emphasized in Middle Eastern or Iranian history because they were so ephemeral (their peak as a dynasty ran a little over three decades and didn’t really last beyond the death of their founder), but they warrant mention as one of the first truly local dynasties to directly challenge the power of the Abbasid caliphs. Sure, the challenge didn’t go so well for them, but at least they gave it the old college try.
Before we talk more about the Saffarids, it’s worth taking a look at the state of the Abbasid Caliphate in the mid to late-9th century, which…wasn’t good. The younger brother and successor of the caliph al-Maʾmun, named al-Muʿtasim (d. 842), made two decisions that, while understandable in context, turned out to be pretty damaging to the dynasty. First, in an effort to undercut the powerful Iranian faction within the caliphal army, he took steps to increase the number and authority of Turkish slave soldiers who had been brought from Central Asia and whose personal loyalty to the caliph (they were his slaves, after all) was supposed to be unquestioned. You can probably see where this is going. The Turkish slave soldiers replaced the Iranians as the dominant power bloc within the military, only unlike the Iranians (and the Arabs before that), this warrior class didn’t have any ethnic or linguistic ties to the rest of the empire, ties that might have softened their more militant tendencies.
Al-Muʿtasim’s second fateful decision was dictated by the first. The new Turkish military (which could almost be called a ruling caste except that they still served–at least nominally–under the caliph) was based in Baghdad, but had a very hard time getting along with the imperial old guard and the population of the city. That ethnic/linguistic divide between the new military bosses and everybody else in the empire began causing problems fairly early on. So al-Muʿtasim decided to move his military capital to a new city, Samarra, which he had constructed just north of Baghdad. For security reasons he moved the caliphal court there as well. Samarra became the Abbasids’ Versailles, a new royal court separated from the ossified official life in Baghdad. Al-Muʿtasim was able to create a new court that favored people loyal to him via the sale/granting of land in and around the new city, and the tensions caused by the Turkish army in Baghdad were alleviated.
However, the decision to relocate the capital also made the caliph a hostage (or hostage-in-waiting) to his new military elite, though I assume al-Muʿtasim didn’t see it at the time. Isolated from the people of Baghdad and most of the old bureaucracy, the Abbasid rulers were now entirely surrounded by the guys who had all the weapons. In theory, the caliph’s stature as caliph and as their owner (remember that these were slave soldiers) should have protected his authority. In practice, I mean, come on. It didn’t happen overnight, but the assassination, by his Turkish guard, of the Caliph al-Mutawakkil in 861 made it clear who was really in charge in Samarra. The rest of that decade marks a period that some historians refer to as the “Anarchy at Samarra,” as three more caliphs were enthroned and then dethroned (and killed) by various Turkish factions within the army. This period finally ended with the accession of al-Muʿtamid (d. 892) in 870, who was backed by a Turkish faction that remained powerful enough to fend off any other contenders. However, al-Muʿtamid really ruled in name only–it was the caliph’s brother al-Muwaffaq (d. 891) who made the decisions and was the real royal authority.
The Saffarids at roughly their largest extent, c. 885; you can see the course of the Saffarid conquests by following the brown arrows
While all this stuff was going on at the imperial center, governors and other officials outside that core started to a) resent these unruly Turks who suddenly seemed to be running the empire, and b) think that maybe this was a good time to get free of the caliph and establish their own local kingdoms. A Zaydi Shiʿa principality formed in Tabaristan, on the southern coast of the Caspian. The governor of Egypt, a Turk named Ahmad b. Tulun, tried to become the ruler of Egypt. Slaves, many of them East African, who had been brought in to work the fertile Sawad region (the marshy alluvial area of southern Iraq), rebelled in 869. This is known as the Zanj Rebellion, since the Arabic word for East Africans was zanj (this is also where we get the name “Zanzibar,” by the way). And then there were the Saffarids, in the east.
The Saffarid Dynasty was founded by an Iranian fellow named Yaʿqub b. al-Layth al-Saffar (d. 879) in 861. His epithet saffar means “coppersmith,” and it reflects Yaʿqub’s humble origins. He wasn’t some wayward Abbasid governor who decided to break out on his own, and he hadn’t pretended to accept nominal caliphal authority like other regional powers often did. Yaʿqub joined, then rose to lead, an armed movement opposed to the Abbasids that began in the eastern Iranian region known as Sistan (a historical region that comprises the southeastern-most part of modern Iran, southern Afghanistan, and southwestern Pakistan). Not much is known about these guys, as their movement started in an obscure peripheral part of the empire and none of them seem to have kept any written records. So we have to rely for information on later accounts from Abbasid sources, which unsurprisingly don’t offer the most evenhanded descriptions (they’re referred to as “Kharijites,” for example, and that could be true but it also could be meant as a pejorative—we just don’t know).
Yaʿqub took several years consolidating his control in Sistan, but once his army got on the move, his domain expanded relatively quickly. They took Kabul in 865 and conquered several Buddhist-ruled territories to the east, expanding the reach of Islam in the process, before turning their full attention westward. They annexed Khurasan in 873, helping to usher along the downfall of the Tahirid Dynasty, which had thrived for most of the 9th century as governors of Khurasan and close advisers/viziers of the caliphs. The conquest of the southern Iranian province of Fars in 875 was their high water mark, but Yaʿqub had designs on pushing further west and confronting the caliph directly, which ultimately turned out to be a bad idea.
Al-Muwaffaq’s overriding concern was that Yaʿqub’s army would make common cause with the ongoing Zanj rebellion, and that the combined force would simply be too much for the caliphal army to handle. Yaʿqub seems to have considered, then rejected, an offer from the Zanj rebels to do just that (I don’t think you can say for sure that this was racially motivated but it would definitely not be surprising if it was), but even so his army was clearly pretty formidable all on its own. So al-Muwaffaq tried to buy him off, offering him the governorship of virtually the entire eastern half of the empire along with the position of sahib al-shurtah (which is something like “chief of police” but carried a more military connotation in the 9th century) in Baghdad, which would have effectively installed him as the caliph’s chief minder. Yaʿqub, correctly determining that this offer was made from a position of weakness, rejected it and marched his army toward Samarra.
Dayr al-ʿAqul is just downriver from Baghdad and at the time was an important city on the Tigris River. It no longer exists, because the Tigris shifted its course and the area around the city was swallowed up by desert (we can’t exactly say when this process started but it was already under way by the 13th century). The battle turned on three key points: the Abbasid forces outnumbered the Saffarids (the latter were about 10,000 men strong), they knew the ground on which they were fighting, and many of Yaʿqub’s soldiers weren’t entirely sure that fighting the caliph’s army was a good idea. Still, the battle lasted most of the day with the outcome still in doubt, until a caliphal detachment was able to get behind the Saffarids and attack their baggage train (an army that is familiar with the battleground can do that kind of thing). At that point, Yaʿqub’s army began to break and run, and in the process it ran smack into a little trap the Abbasids had laid for it in the form of a flooded plain that hampered their retreat. Many Saffarid casualties were due to drowning during the retreat.
The Battle of Dayr al-ʿAqul ensured that Yaʿqub and the Saffarids truly had reached their apogee, and that they no longer posed a threat to the caliphate. Still, the Saffarids kept their hands on most of their territory, including Fars, and this was now formally recognized by a decree of governorship from al-Muʿtamid. Yaʿqub died in 879 and was succeeded by his brother, ʿAmr b. al-Layth (d. 902), who spent most of his time trying to shore up Saffarid control over Khurasan in the face of opposition from local forces and from al-Muwaffaq, though he and the caliphal court did eventually come to form an uneasy working relationship with one another.
Al-Muʿtadid (d. 902), the son of al-Muwaffaq, who succeeded his uncle al-Muʿtamid as caliph, gave the Saffarids control of the city of Rey and appointed ʿAmr the governor of Transoxiana. In 900, however, as ʿAmr was trying to establish his control over the new province, his army was defeated by a new regional power, the Samanids (you can see them on the map above). ʿAmr was captured and sent to Baghdad, where he was executed in 902, and the Samanids drove the Saffarids back into Sistan. They managed to remain in power there for another century (until 1003) before they were eradicated altogether by the Ghaznavids. | <urn:uuid:67f93b8b-39b4-4a10-a92a-295bcc30ff4f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://fx.substack.com/p/today-in-middle-eastern-history-the-c46 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251773463.72/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128030221-20200128060221-00116.warc.gz | en | 0.986615 | 2,472 | 3.34375 | 3 | [
-0.11627142131328583,
0.5030879378318787,
0.49100881814956665,
-0.024382174015045166,
-0.26576513051986694,
-0.22504976391792297,
0.010380065999925137,
0.025403235107660294,
-0.008704949170351028,
0.09851619601249695,
0.12114781141281128,
-0.021642088890075684,
0.11664268374443054,
0.38748... | 1 | Our “Today in History” posts are always free, but if you want the full Foreign Exchanges experience you know what you have to do:
The Saffarid Dynasty ruled much of modern Iran and Afghanistan, and part of modern Pakistan, starting in the mid-860s through roughly 901, and then continued to control a small principality in Sistan until the start of the 11th century. They’re not heavily emphasized in Middle Eastern or Iranian history because they were so ephemeral (their peak as a dynasty ran a little over three decades and didn’t really last beyond the death of their founder), but they warrant mention as one of the first truly local dynasties to directly challenge the power of the Abbasid caliphs. Sure, the challenge didn’t go so well for them, but at least they gave it the old college try.
Before we talk more about the Saffarids, it’s worth taking a look at the state of the Abbasid Caliphate in the mid to late-9th century, which…wasn’t good. The younger brother and successor of the caliph al-Maʾmun, named al-Muʿtasim (d. 842), made two decisions that, while understandable in context, turned out to be pretty damaging to the dynasty. First, in an effort to undercut the powerful Iranian faction within the caliphal army, he took steps to increase the number and authority of Turkish slave soldiers who had been brought from Central Asia and whose personal loyalty to the caliph (they were his slaves, after all) was supposed to be unquestioned. You can probably see where this is going. The Turkish slave soldiers replaced the Iranians as the dominant power bloc within the military, only unlike the Iranians (and the Arabs before that), this warrior class didn’t have any ethnic or linguistic ties to the rest of the empire, ties that might have softened their more militant tendencies.
Al-Muʿtasim’s second fateful decision was dictated by the first. The new Turkish military (which could almost be called a ruling caste except that they still served–at least nominally–under the caliph) was based in Baghdad, but had a very hard time getting along with the imperial old guard and the population of the city. That ethnic/linguistic divide between the new military bosses and everybody else in the empire began causing problems fairly early on. So al-Muʿtasim decided to move his military capital to a new city, Samarra, which he had constructed just north of Baghdad. For security reasons he moved the caliphal court there as well. Samarra became the Abbasids’ Versailles, a new royal court separated from the ossified official life in Baghdad. Al-Muʿtasim was able to create a new court that favored people loyal to him via the sale/granting of land in and around the new city, and the tensions caused by the Turkish army in Baghdad were alleviated.
However, the decision to relocate the capital also made the caliph a hostage (or hostage-in-waiting) to his new military elite, though I assume al-Muʿtasim didn’t see it at the time. Isolated from the people of Baghdad and most of the old bureaucracy, the Abbasid rulers were now entirely surrounded by the guys who had all the weapons. In theory, the caliph’s stature as caliph and as their owner (remember that these were slave soldiers) should have protected his authority. In practice, I mean, come on. It didn’t happen overnight, but the assassination, by his Turkish guard, of the Caliph al-Mutawakkil in 861 made it clear who was really in charge in Samarra. The rest of that decade marks a period that some historians refer to as the “Anarchy at Samarra,” as three more caliphs were enthroned and then dethroned (and killed) by various Turkish factions within the army. This period finally ended with the accession of al-Muʿtamid (d. 892) in 870, who was backed by a Turkish faction that remained powerful enough to fend off any other contenders. However, al-Muʿtamid really ruled in name only–it was the caliph’s brother al-Muwaffaq (d. 891) who made the decisions and was the real royal authority.
The Saffarids at roughly their largest extent, c. 885; you can see the course of the Saffarid conquests by following the brown arrows
While all this stuff was going on at the imperial center, governors and other officials outside that core started to a) resent these unruly Turks who suddenly seemed to be running the empire, and b) think that maybe this was a good time to get free of the caliph and establish their own local kingdoms. A Zaydi Shiʿa principality formed in Tabaristan, on the southern coast of the Caspian. The governor of Egypt, a Turk named Ahmad b. Tulun, tried to become the ruler of Egypt. Slaves, many of them East African, who had been brought in to work the fertile Sawad region (the marshy alluvial area of southern Iraq), rebelled in 869. This is known as the Zanj Rebellion, since the Arabic word for East Africans was zanj (this is also where we get the name “Zanzibar,” by the way). And then there were the Saffarids, in the east.
The Saffarid Dynasty was founded by an Iranian fellow named Yaʿqub b. al-Layth al-Saffar (d. 879) in 861. His epithet saffar means “coppersmith,” and it reflects Yaʿqub’s humble origins. He wasn’t some wayward Abbasid governor who decided to break out on his own, and he hadn’t pretended to accept nominal caliphal authority like other regional powers often did. Yaʿqub joined, then rose to lead, an armed movement opposed to the Abbasids that began in the eastern Iranian region known as Sistan (a historical region that comprises the southeastern-most part of modern Iran, southern Afghanistan, and southwestern Pakistan). Not much is known about these guys, as their movement started in an obscure peripheral part of the empire and none of them seem to have kept any written records. So we have to rely for information on later accounts from Abbasid sources, which unsurprisingly don’t offer the most evenhanded descriptions (they’re referred to as “Kharijites,” for example, and that could be true but it also could be meant as a pejorative—we just don’t know).
Yaʿqub took several years consolidating his control in Sistan, but once his army got on the move, his domain expanded relatively quickly. They took Kabul in 865 and conquered several Buddhist-ruled territories to the east, expanding the reach of Islam in the process, before turning their full attention westward. They annexed Khurasan in 873, helping to usher along the downfall of the Tahirid Dynasty, which had thrived for most of the 9th century as governors of Khurasan and close advisers/viziers of the caliphs. The conquest of the southern Iranian province of Fars in 875 was their high water mark, but Yaʿqub had designs on pushing further west and confronting the caliph directly, which ultimately turned out to be a bad idea.
Al-Muwaffaq’s overriding concern was that Yaʿqub’s army would make common cause with the ongoing Zanj rebellion, and that the combined force would simply be too much for the caliphal army to handle. Yaʿqub seems to have considered, then rejected, an offer from the Zanj rebels to do just that (I don’t think you can say for sure that this was racially motivated but it would definitely not be surprising if it was), but even so his army was clearly pretty formidable all on its own. So al-Muwaffaq tried to buy him off, offering him the governorship of virtually the entire eastern half of the empire along with the position of sahib al-shurtah (which is something like “chief of police” but carried a more military connotation in the 9th century) in Baghdad, which would have effectively installed him as the caliph’s chief minder. Yaʿqub, correctly determining that this offer was made from a position of weakness, rejected it and marched his army toward Samarra.
Dayr al-ʿAqul is just downriver from Baghdad and at the time was an important city on the Tigris River. It no longer exists, because the Tigris shifted its course and the area around the city was swallowed up by desert (we can’t exactly say when this process started but it was already under way by the 13th century). The battle turned on three key points: the Abbasid forces outnumbered the Saffarids (the latter were about 10,000 men strong), they knew the ground on which they were fighting, and many of Yaʿqub’s soldiers weren’t entirely sure that fighting the caliph’s army was a good idea. Still, the battle lasted most of the day with the outcome still in doubt, until a caliphal detachment was able to get behind the Saffarids and attack their baggage train (an army that is familiar with the battleground can do that kind of thing). At that point, Yaʿqub’s army began to break and run, and in the process it ran smack into a little trap the Abbasids had laid for it in the form of a flooded plain that hampered their retreat. Many Saffarid casualties were due to drowning during the retreat.
The Battle of Dayr al-ʿAqul ensured that Yaʿqub and the Saffarids truly had reached their apogee, and that they no longer posed a threat to the caliphate. Still, the Saffarids kept their hands on most of their territory, including Fars, and this was now formally recognized by a decree of governorship from al-Muʿtamid. Yaʿqub died in 879 and was succeeded by his brother, ʿAmr b. al-Layth (d. 902), who spent most of his time trying to shore up Saffarid control over Khurasan in the face of opposition from local forces and from al-Muwaffaq, though he and the caliphal court did eventually come to form an uneasy working relationship with one another.
Al-Muʿtadid (d. 902), the son of al-Muwaffaq, who succeeded his uncle al-Muʿtamid as caliph, gave the Saffarids control of the city of Rey and appointed ʿAmr the governor of Transoxiana. In 900, however, as ʿAmr was trying to establish his control over the new province, his army was defeated by a new regional power, the Samanids (you can see them on the map above). ʿAmr was captured and sent to Baghdad, where he was executed in 902, and the Samanids drove the Saffarids back into Sistan. They managed to remain in power there for another century (until 1003) before they were eradicated altogether by the Ghaznavids. | 2,398 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Japanese Constitution – PDF and History
History, Personal Comments and PDF version
The Secrets of Japan - 101
Sign up today for our newsletter to learn about upcoming opportunities on how to live, work, visit or go to school in Japan you won't find anywhere else!
When it comes to learning about the Japanese constitution and history one has to truly learn where the Japanese had come from. Through 1889 to 1947 Japan was working under the Meiji Constitution. This document was largely created and implemented because of a man name Ito Hirobumi where he called for a bicameral parliament which in Japan is called the Diet (A bicameral legislature is one in which legislators are divided into two separate assemblies, chambers or houses). In the Meiji constitution the emperor had full control over the Japanese army and navy. During this constitution voting rights vastly increased over 25 years when it was first written in 1889 which guaranteed universal male suffrage in Japan.
As WWII begun the Japanese military was able to assume control without going against the current Meiji constitution, but soon after the defeat by the American allies Japan was soon again looking to change or more so forced to change their current constitution to meet more of what the allies felt was a civilized constitution and government. On May 3, 1947 the new constitution of Japan went into effect. With this new constitution universal suffrage of all those at legal age were able to vote, which immediately gave women of Japan the right to vote for the very first time in their governmental history. The new constitutional document was implemented largely because of Commander Douglas MacArthur with his chosen occupational staff he had brought with him to help prepare the new Japanese constitutional draft in Feb 1946 after the first Japanese attempt to write their new constitution was deemed unacceptable.
Their attempt to draft this new constitution was rejected on the stance that the current Japanese government in charge of writing the draft were being way too conservative. Soon after the rejection MacArthur gave the order to his younger staff to draft their own version in only one week. The new documentation and constitution of Japan was quickly submitted on Feb 13 of 1946. This new constitution protected civil liberties as well as preserving the emperor as a symbol of the state and unity of the people, but in the end he was stripped of his power of being a quasi-divine figure and being able to control the state of Japan with the will and flick of a finger. At the same time the Japanese constitution forbade ever again waging war EVER.
By May 3rd in 1947 it was promulgated by the Diet and it came into full force. So as you can clearly see that Japans constitution was heavily influenced by the current constitution that Americans so fully enjoy. But from further research the Japanese felt like they were being shoved into a box and forced to give up their honor and their international power. Be that as it may, but when you go through the Japanese constitution and see how much more freedom that was passed to the people of Japan after the defeat by the Americans in WWII you’d be hard press to ask any woman in Japan to give up their rights to be a fully present individual in their culture with all the liberties and rights as any man that also lives and breathes in Japan.
I’d personally have to say besides the bloodshed that was spilled during WWII between Japan and the American Allies that a lot of good came about because of the newly drafted constitution, and be it you’re in favor of Article 9 which states that Japan shall not wage war or maintain an army of any sorts or not, you should view this from a purely economic standpoint. By not being allowed to pursue the wars of the world which are constructed by corporate interests and bankers, Japan has clearly dodged a bullet of further economic degradation which has certainly played a part in them becoming an economic powerhouse in the past and still in the present.
I’d say giving the Japanese constitution a quick read would certainly give you an idea that it was truly written to pass along as much freedom as possible to regular citizens of Japan while limiting and auditing the current governmental agents that have been elected to keep them from corruption. But as we all know that’s never %100 going to be stamped out, but the way it’s positioned by limiting government control by the emperor certainly offers to the people of Japan something more then they had before WWII.
I’d certainly say this constitution is very well written in favor of the people in general. Although I dislike seeing attempts to remove or reinterpret Article 9.
About the Author
I've been interested in Japanese as a language and as a culture since I was about 15 years old. In April 2017 my wife and I moved to Fukuoka, Japan to go to school for 2 years. We've since returned to America and now are looking to expand Nihon Scope further for future visitors of Japan to get in touch with the best school they can. We're also here sharing our experiences of Japan and the culture. Get in touch with us on Facebook for the quickest response! | <urn:uuid:e93ef7b5-1ad7-41f6-a9c2-1dfb5b35a30c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://nihonscope.com/history-in-japan/japanese-constitution-pdf-history/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00032.warc.gz | en | 0.984286 | 1,020 | 3.8125 | 4 | [
-0.5306298732757568,
0.002345930552110076,
0.45154112577438354,
-0.22204992175102234,
-0.1877245008945465,
0.6312134265899658,
0.19385436177253723,
0.27094340324401855,
-0.12210538983345032,
0.1671449840068817,
0.06941093504428864,
0.009257931262254715,
0.21318940818309784,
0.5257796049118... | 11 | The Japanese Constitution – PDF and History
History, Personal Comments and PDF version
The Secrets of Japan - 101
Sign up today for our newsletter to learn about upcoming opportunities on how to live, work, visit or go to school in Japan you won't find anywhere else!
When it comes to learning about the Japanese constitution and history one has to truly learn where the Japanese had come from. Through 1889 to 1947 Japan was working under the Meiji Constitution. This document was largely created and implemented because of a man name Ito Hirobumi where he called for a bicameral parliament which in Japan is called the Diet (A bicameral legislature is one in which legislators are divided into two separate assemblies, chambers or houses). In the Meiji constitution the emperor had full control over the Japanese army and navy. During this constitution voting rights vastly increased over 25 years when it was first written in 1889 which guaranteed universal male suffrage in Japan.
As WWII begun the Japanese military was able to assume control without going against the current Meiji constitution, but soon after the defeat by the American allies Japan was soon again looking to change or more so forced to change their current constitution to meet more of what the allies felt was a civilized constitution and government. On May 3, 1947 the new constitution of Japan went into effect. With this new constitution universal suffrage of all those at legal age were able to vote, which immediately gave women of Japan the right to vote for the very first time in their governmental history. The new constitutional document was implemented largely because of Commander Douglas MacArthur with his chosen occupational staff he had brought with him to help prepare the new Japanese constitutional draft in Feb 1946 after the first Japanese attempt to write their new constitution was deemed unacceptable.
Their attempt to draft this new constitution was rejected on the stance that the current Japanese government in charge of writing the draft were being way too conservative. Soon after the rejection MacArthur gave the order to his younger staff to draft their own version in only one week. The new documentation and constitution of Japan was quickly submitted on Feb 13 of 1946. This new constitution protected civil liberties as well as preserving the emperor as a symbol of the state and unity of the people, but in the end he was stripped of his power of being a quasi-divine figure and being able to control the state of Japan with the will and flick of a finger. At the same time the Japanese constitution forbade ever again waging war EVER.
By May 3rd in 1947 it was promulgated by the Diet and it came into full force. So as you can clearly see that Japans constitution was heavily influenced by the current constitution that Americans so fully enjoy. But from further research the Japanese felt like they were being shoved into a box and forced to give up their honor and their international power. Be that as it may, but when you go through the Japanese constitution and see how much more freedom that was passed to the people of Japan after the defeat by the Americans in WWII you’d be hard press to ask any woman in Japan to give up their rights to be a fully present individual in their culture with all the liberties and rights as any man that also lives and breathes in Japan.
I’d personally have to say besides the bloodshed that was spilled during WWII between Japan and the American Allies that a lot of good came about because of the newly drafted constitution, and be it you’re in favor of Article 9 which states that Japan shall not wage war or maintain an army of any sorts or not, you should view this from a purely economic standpoint. By not being allowed to pursue the wars of the world which are constructed by corporate interests and bankers, Japan has clearly dodged a bullet of further economic degradation which has certainly played a part in them becoming an economic powerhouse in the past and still in the present.
I’d say giving the Japanese constitution a quick read would certainly give you an idea that it was truly written to pass along as much freedom as possible to regular citizens of Japan while limiting and auditing the current governmental agents that have been elected to keep them from corruption. But as we all know that’s never %100 going to be stamped out, but the way it’s positioned by limiting government control by the emperor certainly offers to the people of Japan something more then they had before WWII.
I’d certainly say this constitution is very well written in favor of the people in general. Although I dislike seeing attempts to remove or reinterpret Article 9.
About the Author
I've been interested in Japanese as a language and as a culture since I was about 15 years old. In April 2017 my wife and I moved to Fukuoka, Japan to go to school for 2 years. We've since returned to America and now are looking to expand Nihon Scope further for future visitors of Japan to get in touch with the best school they can. We're also here sharing our experiences of Japan and the culture. Get in touch with us on Facebook for the quickest response! | 1,047 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Discovery of The Horse
The tale of the magnificent American Indian horse has been around for decades. The bond between horses and Native Americans is a connection we do not see often. The history of how the Native Americans got the horse is a long and colorful story. (cite) *History credits Spanish conquistadors and other early European explorers with reintroducing the horse to the Americas and to her Indigenous Peoples. However, many Native Nations state that “they always had the horse” and that they had well-established horse cultures long before the arrival of the Spanish. To date, “history” has been written by Western academia to reflect a Eurocentric and colonial paradigm. Although Western academia admits that the horse originated in the Americas, it claims that the horse became extinct in these continents during the Last Glacial Maximum (between roughly 13,000 and 11,000 years ago). This version of The traditional knowledge of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas and any information that is contrary to the accepted Western academic view has been generally disregarded, purposefully excluded, or reconfigured to fit the accepted academic paradigm that the Indigenous horse of the Americas survived the “Ice Age” and the Original Peoples of these continents had a relationship with them from Pleistocene times to the time of “First-Contact.
*The Relationship Between the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas and the Horse: Deconstructing a Eurocentric Myth by Collin, Yvette Running Horse, Ph.D., University of Alaska Fairbanks, 2017, 245; 10266897 Abstract (Summary)
“People of The Horse”
Native Americans have often been coined with the term “people of the horse”. This phrase itself speaks volumes to the relationship between the American Indian horse and the tribes to which they called home. The thing with this phrase is, you come to understand that the people belonged to the horse, not the other way around. Horses are often seen as possessions but not in the case of the American Indian horse. Within this culture, the people belonged to the horse, they were indebted to them for all the horse did for their communities and progression as a whole. They were also referred to as “people of the horse” because they had a greater understanding of the horse that other cultures did not, as they evolved together. The spiritual connection between the Native Americans and their horses is a rarity that not many people have experienced. The Indian horse came to be its own breed of the horse after years of adaptation into the Native American community. The horses brought over by the Spanish to the New World in the 1500s (cite). were predominantly Arabian and Andalusian blood, the most revered breeds in the world. At the time these horses had arrived, due to the original horse’s migration or displacement from North America, many native tribes had not seen horses and were immediately enthralled by the magic of the bond between horse and its rider. They saw this bond as something unbreakable, something godlike. Natives saw the horse differently than others, they respected these creatures as if they were godlike themselves.
The Horse Changed Life For The Native Americans
With the domestication of the American Indian horse, everything changed for the Native American people. The native people were now able to travel faster across land and take more with them. Before the acquisition of the Indian horse, natives used dogs for carrying shelter and other materials. However, the horse was ten times the size of the dogs and allowed them the ability to carry larger and heavier materials. This is not the only aspect of life that was changed through the discovery of the Indian horse for the Native Americans. The entire hunting game was changed because of the Native American horse. Before the horse, natives would run an entire herd over a cliff (cite). With the horse, they could ride horseback and only kill specific targets rather than the entire herd. It was faster, more effective, and preserved the lives of prey that might’ve been killed otherwise.
The Sanctity of The Native Horse
American Indian horses were a primary symbol of wealth and strength. They were sacred to the natives. Whereas in other cultures horses were just seen as a means of transportation or an accessory in battle, the Native Americans viewed the horse as a sanctified blessing that should be protected at all times. Many religious ceremonies would come to be based around the Native horse and all that it did for the life of the Native Americans. They swam across large rivers with men on their backs, they went into battle and fought, and they carried large tipis across the land to help the natives set up shop in new locations. They did everything for their tribes and the tribes recognized their value in society. This culture revered the horse in ways that no other culture has done or will ever do.
A Symbiotic Relationship
These Native American horses not only played a vital role in hunting, travel, and war, but they took care of the land as well. These sacred lands gave to the horses that fed off of them, but the horses gave back to the land as well. Horse grazing plays a very important role in supporting healthy growth in the land. They spent hours grazing freely through the land that belonged to the tribes. They can clean the land in ways that humans cannot. This helps all creatures of life, not just horses. The natives understood that the land needed these horses which is why they were free to roam as they pleased. However, because horses were so important to a tribe, many feuds within tribes would result in horse stealing. Often young warriors would go and steal the horses of another tribe to exhibit their strength and courage. Not to mention, stealing a tribe’s horse, their symbol of wealth, would be detrimental to that entire tribe’s future.
“The Big Dog”
Native Americans often referred to the horse as the “big dog”. That is because that is what they saw the horse as. Dogs have always been seen as companions to us. We treat them as members of the family. That is exactly how the Native Americans treated the horse. They didn’t see them as a means to an end but as family. The Spaniards would kill the horses for meat and destroy their bodies during war. They treated these animals as disposable, the same way they treated different races of people as well. But… the Native American horsemen used to rub themselves with horse sweat in hopes that they would acquire some of the magic of the “big dog” (cite). No other culture has looked at these sentient beings with such reverence, with such awe for their power and respect for the spiritual connection these animals brought to the great creator.
An Unbreakable Bond
The image of the Native American man and his horse preparing for battle is a powerful symbol of the bond between man and the “big dog”. They stand as one unit, both covered in war paint and eagle feathers. I have chills just thinking about the image. You can see in the eyes of the horse that he is prepared for battle. He is willing to die for the man that sits atop him. He feels proud and honored to represent his tribe, the people that treat him as though he is godlike. The people that look at his sweat as if it is magic. There is something to be said about the mutual respect between this human-horse relationship that can apply to how we, humans, should be treating each other in our day to day lives.
Share the Love
With today’s political climate, humans are treating each other more and more unkindly. We don’t look at each other with mutual respect. We are killing each other, we are spewing hate and hurting each other. Our world is in turmoil at the moment. Children don’t feel safe going to school in fear that someone will show up with a gun and change their lives for the worse. We should be mirroring the relationship between the Native Americans and the Indian horse. It was mutual love and respect within these relationships that created such an inseparable and sacred bond between the two. They did need words to understand how powerful their bond is. We, as humans, should be treating each other with the same respect and love in hopes that we can create a world where children aren’t afraid to walk the streets alone.
Learn how you can support The Wild Horses.
Follow our #REWILD journey on instagram.com/canafoundation | <urn:uuid:6ffa188e-ce30-4f3e-894e-3729e5f388fc> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://canafoundation.org/2019/12/09/american-indian-horse/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681412.74/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125191854-20200125221854-00087.warc.gz | en | 0.980181 | 1,740 | 3.65625 | 4 | [
-0.01751098409295082,
0.29935622215270996,
0.442649245262146,
0.6163249611854553,
-0.6125130653381348,
-0.04904564097523689,
0.21829843521118164,
0.10885229706764221,
0.3680632412433624,
0.07548262178897858,
0.19058547914028168,
-0.0475393682718277,
0.13777825236320496,
0.2876296043395996,... | 3 | The Discovery of The Horse
The tale of the magnificent American Indian horse has been around for decades. The bond between horses and Native Americans is a connection we do not see often. The history of how the Native Americans got the horse is a long and colorful story. (cite) *History credits Spanish conquistadors and other early European explorers with reintroducing the horse to the Americas and to her Indigenous Peoples. However, many Native Nations state that “they always had the horse” and that they had well-established horse cultures long before the arrival of the Spanish. To date, “history” has been written by Western academia to reflect a Eurocentric and colonial paradigm. Although Western academia admits that the horse originated in the Americas, it claims that the horse became extinct in these continents during the Last Glacial Maximum (between roughly 13,000 and 11,000 years ago). This version of The traditional knowledge of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas and any information that is contrary to the accepted Western academic view has been generally disregarded, purposefully excluded, or reconfigured to fit the accepted academic paradigm that the Indigenous horse of the Americas survived the “Ice Age” and the Original Peoples of these continents had a relationship with them from Pleistocene times to the time of “First-Contact.
*The Relationship Between the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas and the Horse: Deconstructing a Eurocentric Myth by Collin, Yvette Running Horse, Ph.D., University of Alaska Fairbanks, 2017, 245; 10266897 Abstract (Summary)
“People of The Horse”
Native Americans have often been coined with the term “people of the horse”. This phrase itself speaks volumes to the relationship between the American Indian horse and the tribes to which they called home. The thing with this phrase is, you come to understand that the people belonged to the horse, not the other way around. Horses are often seen as possessions but not in the case of the American Indian horse. Within this culture, the people belonged to the horse, they were indebted to them for all the horse did for their communities and progression as a whole. They were also referred to as “people of the horse” because they had a greater understanding of the horse that other cultures did not, as they evolved together. The spiritual connection between the Native Americans and their horses is a rarity that not many people have experienced. The Indian horse came to be its own breed of the horse after years of adaptation into the Native American community. The horses brought over by the Spanish to the New World in the 1500s (cite). were predominantly Arabian and Andalusian blood, the most revered breeds in the world. At the time these horses had arrived, due to the original horse’s migration or displacement from North America, many native tribes had not seen horses and were immediately enthralled by the magic of the bond between horse and its rider. They saw this bond as something unbreakable, something godlike. Natives saw the horse differently than others, they respected these creatures as if they were godlike themselves.
The Horse Changed Life For The Native Americans
With the domestication of the American Indian horse, everything changed for the Native American people. The native people were now able to travel faster across land and take more with them. Before the acquisition of the Indian horse, natives used dogs for carrying shelter and other materials. However, the horse was ten times the size of the dogs and allowed them the ability to carry larger and heavier materials. This is not the only aspect of life that was changed through the discovery of the Indian horse for the Native Americans. The entire hunting game was changed because of the Native American horse. Before the horse, natives would run an entire herd over a cliff (cite). With the horse, they could ride horseback and only kill specific targets rather than the entire herd. It was faster, more effective, and preserved the lives of prey that might’ve been killed otherwise.
The Sanctity of The Native Horse
American Indian horses were a primary symbol of wealth and strength. They were sacred to the natives. Whereas in other cultures horses were just seen as a means of transportation or an accessory in battle, the Native Americans viewed the horse as a sanctified blessing that should be protected at all times. Many religious ceremonies would come to be based around the Native horse and all that it did for the life of the Native Americans. They swam across large rivers with men on their backs, they went into battle and fought, and they carried large tipis across the land to help the natives set up shop in new locations. They did everything for their tribes and the tribes recognized their value in society. This culture revered the horse in ways that no other culture has done or will ever do.
A Symbiotic Relationship
These Native American horses not only played a vital role in hunting, travel, and war, but they took care of the land as well. These sacred lands gave to the horses that fed off of them, but the horses gave back to the land as well. Horse grazing plays a very important role in supporting healthy growth in the land. They spent hours grazing freely through the land that belonged to the tribes. They can clean the land in ways that humans cannot. This helps all creatures of life, not just horses. The natives understood that the land needed these horses which is why they were free to roam as they pleased. However, because horses were so important to a tribe, many feuds within tribes would result in horse stealing. Often young warriors would go and steal the horses of another tribe to exhibit their strength and courage. Not to mention, stealing a tribe’s horse, their symbol of wealth, would be detrimental to that entire tribe’s future.
“The Big Dog”
Native Americans often referred to the horse as the “big dog”. That is because that is what they saw the horse as. Dogs have always been seen as companions to us. We treat them as members of the family. That is exactly how the Native Americans treated the horse. They didn’t see them as a means to an end but as family. The Spaniards would kill the horses for meat and destroy their bodies during war. They treated these animals as disposable, the same way they treated different races of people as well. But… the Native American horsemen used to rub themselves with horse sweat in hopes that they would acquire some of the magic of the “big dog” (cite). No other culture has looked at these sentient beings with such reverence, with such awe for their power and respect for the spiritual connection these animals brought to the great creator.
An Unbreakable Bond
The image of the Native American man and his horse preparing for battle is a powerful symbol of the bond between man and the “big dog”. They stand as one unit, both covered in war paint and eagle feathers. I have chills just thinking about the image. You can see in the eyes of the horse that he is prepared for battle. He is willing to die for the man that sits atop him. He feels proud and honored to represent his tribe, the people that treat him as though he is godlike. The people that look at his sweat as if it is magic. There is something to be said about the mutual respect between this human-horse relationship that can apply to how we, humans, should be treating each other in our day to day lives.
Share the Love
With today’s political climate, humans are treating each other more and more unkindly. We don’t look at each other with mutual respect. We are killing each other, we are spewing hate and hurting each other. Our world is in turmoil at the moment. Children don’t feel safe going to school in fear that someone will show up with a gun and change their lives for the worse. We should be mirroring the relationship between the Native Americans and the Indian horse. It was mutual love and respect within these relationships that created such an inseparable and sacred bond between the two. They did need words to understand how powerful their bond is. We, as humans, should be treating each other with the same respect and love in hopes that we can create a world where children aren’t afraid to walk the streets alone.
Learn how you can support The Wild Horses.
Follow our #REWILD journey on instagram.com/canafoundation | 1,704 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Washington Irving was an American author, essayist, biographer and historian of the early 19th century. He began his literary career at the age of nineteen by writing newspaper articles under the pseudonym Jonathan Oldstyle. In 1809, he published The History of New York under his most well known public persona, Diedrich Knickerbocker. Irving is best known for his short stories The Legend of Sleepy Hollow and Rip Van Winkle, both of which appear in his book The Sketch Book of Geoffrey Crayon, Gent., which he published in 1819. Irving’s historical works include a five volume biography of George Washington (after whom he was named) as well as biographies of Oliver Goldsmith, Muhammad, and several histories of 15th-century Spain dealing with subjects such as Christopher Columbus, the
Moors, and the Alhambra. Irving felt a strong connection to Spain and was appointed by President John Tyler to serve as the first Spanish speaking U.S. minister to Spain from 1842 to 1846. | <urn:uuid:d78ee82a-db54-4593-973b-acefc02f1e6a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://bookziz.com/a/washington-irving/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694908.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127051112-20200127081112-00277.warc.gz | en | 0.985933 | 209 | 3.53125 | 4 | [
0.1563115417957306,
0.37064000964164734,
0.3705318570137024,
0.26727402210235596,
-0.19476154446601868,
0.3602447807788849,
0.003909379709511995,
0.22125616669654846,
0.0867803618311882,
0.0420331135392189,
0.22113583981990814,
0.4293160140514374,
-0.02327345870435238,
0.44372323155403137,... | 1 | Washington Irving was an American author, essayist, biographer and historian of the early 19th century. He began his literary career at the age of nineteen by writing newspaper articles under the pseudonym Jonathan Oldstyle. In 1809, he published The History of New York under his most well known public persona, Diedrich Knickerbocker. Irving is best known for his short stories The Legend of Sleepy Hollow and Rip Van Winkle, both of which appear in his book The Sketch Book of Geoffrey Crayon, Gent., which he published in 1819. Irving’s historical works include a five volume biography of George Washington (after whom he was named) as well as biographies of Oliver Goldsmith, Muhammad, and several histories of 15th-century Spain dealing with subjects such as Christopher Columbus, the
Moors, and the Alhambra. Irving felt a strong connection to Spain and was appointed by President John Tyler to serve as the first Spanish speaking U.S. minister to Spain from 1842 to 1846. | 223 | ENGLISH | 1 |
used before a statement
In conversation, people sometimes say well when they are about to make a statement. Well can show that someone is hesitating or uncertain, but sometimes it has no meaning at all.
‘Is that right?’ – ‘Well, I think so.’
In conversation, people also use well when they are correcting something they have just said.
We walked along in silence; well, not really silence, because she was humming.
It took me years, well months at least, to realise that he'd lied to me.
used as an adverb
Well is very commonly an adverb.
You use well to say that something is done to a high standard or to a great extent.
He handled it well.
The strategy has worked very well in the past.
You use well to emphasize some -ed participles when they are part of a passive construction.
You seem to be well liked at work.
When well is used with an -ed participle like this to make a compound adjective that comes before a noun, the compound usually has a hyphen.
She was seen having dinner with a well-known actor.
This is a very well-established custom.
When the compound adjective comes after a verb, don't use a hyphen.
The author is well known in his native country of Scotland.
Their routine of a morning walk was well established.
You also use well in front of some prepositions such as ahead of and behind.
The candidate is well ahead of his rivals in the opinion polls.
The border now lay well behind them.
When well is an adverb, its comparative and superlative forms are better and best.
People are better housed than ever before.
What works best is a balanced, sensible diet.
used as an adjective
Well is also an adjective. If you are well, you are healthy and not ill.
She looked well.
‘How are you?’ – ‘I’m very well, thank you.'
Most British speakers do not use well in front of a noun. They don't say, for example, ‘He’s a well man'. They say ‘He’s well'. However, American and Scottish speakers sometimes use well in front of a noun.
When well is an adjective, it does not have a comparative form. However, you can use better to say that the health of a sick person has improved. When better is used like this, it means ‘less ill’.
He seems better today.
Better is more commonly used to say that someone has completely recovered from an illness or injury.
I hope you'll be better soon.
Her cold was better.
➜ See better
You use as well when you are giving more information about something.
Fresh fruit is healthier than tinned fruit. And it tastes nicer as well.
The woman laughed, and Jayah giggled as well.
➜ See also - too - as well | <urn:uuid:6c235421-8e7c-43b3-bd9d-d530815d5ebe> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www2.wordreference.com/EnglishUsage/well | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00158.warc.gz | en | 0.984382 | 636 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
-0.08448592573404312,
-0.08940356969833374,
-0.06209365278482437,
-0.20593518018722534,
0.06590275466442108,
-0.08580315113067627,
0.8794412612915039,
-0.18497884273529053,
0.3876643478870392,
-0.16124363243579865,
0.08521286398172379,
-0.05093901604413986,
0.27956777811050415,
0.167821079... | 1 | used before a statement
In conversation, people sometimes say well when they are about to make a statement. Well can show that someone is hesitating or uncertain, but sometimes it has no meaning at all.
‘Is that right?’ – ‘Well, I think so.’
In conversation, people also use well when they are correcting something they have just said.
We walked along in silence; well, not really silence, because she was humming.
It took me years, well months at least, to realise that he'd lied to me.
used as an adverb
Well is very commonly an adverb.
You use well to say that something is done to a high standard or to a great extent.
He handled it well.
The strategy has worked very well in the past.
You use well to emphasize some -ed participles when they are part of a passive construction.
You seem to be well liked at work.
When well is used with an -ed participle like this to make a compound adjective that comes before a noun, the compound usually has a hyphen.
She was seen having dinner with a well-known actor.
This is a very well-established custom.
When the compound adjective comes after a verb, don't use a hyphen.
The author is well known in his native country of Scotland.
Their routine of a morning walk was well established.
You also use well in front of some prepositions such as ahead of and behind.
The candidate is well ahead of his rivals in the opinion polls.
The border now lay well behind them.
When well is an adverb, its comparative and superlative forms are better and best.
People are better housed than ever before.
What works best is a balanced, sensible diet.
used as an adjective
Well is also an adjective. If you are well, you are healthy and not ill.
She looked well.
‘How are you?’ – ‘I’m very well, thank you.'
Most British speakers do not use well in front of a noun. They don't say, for example, ‘He’s a well man'. They say ‘He’s well'. However, American and Scottish speakers sometimes use well in front of a noun.
When well is an adjective, it does not have a comparative form. However, you can use better to say that the health of a sick person has improved. When better is used like this, it means ‘less ill’.
He seems better today.
Better is more commonly used to say that someone has completely recovered from an illness or injury.
I hope you'll be better soon.
Her cold was better.
➜ See better
You use as well when you are giving more information about something.
Fresh fruit is healthier than tinned fruit. And it tastes nicer as well.
The woman laughed, and Jayah giggled as well.
➜ See also - too - as well | 574 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Popham Colony was a little known English colony that was founded just months after the Jamestown Colony in 1607. Unlike the Jamestown colony, however, the Popham Colony settled in present-day Maine rather than Virginia. The Popham Colony was the first settlement in what would become New England.
On May 31, 1607, 120 settlers left Plymouth, England, on their way to the New World. They were sponsored by the Plymouth Company, which was a rival of the Virginia Company – the company that sent settlers to Jamestown. The colonists headed to New England planned to harvest metals, furs, and spices from the region’s forests to make profits. It was named the Popham Colony because its leader was George Popham. The first boat carrying settlers arrived on August 13, followed three days later by a second ship. The colonists, who were gentleman, artisans, farmers, and traders, began construction on a star-shaped fort they named Fort St. George along the Kennebec River. They also built a chapel, guardhouse, a storehouse, and a cooperage where they could build barrels.
The colony failed to thrive at first. Because the settlers arrived late in the summer, there was no time to farm for food and the colony had not yet established relations with the local Abenaki tribe. Half of the settlers decided to sail back to England, and the other half decided to remain at Fort St. George through the bitter Maine winter. Of the 45 remaining colonists, 44 survived the winter. The single colonist to die was George Popham.
In the spring of 1608, the colonists built a 30-ton ship called a pinnace, to show that the colony could be useful in shipbuilding. The ship, which they named Virginia, was the first European ship to be built in the New World. By this time, the colonists had established trade with the Abenaki, and sent a cargo ship back to England with furs and bundles of wild sarsaparilla. When the cargo ship returned, it brought news that the brother of the colony’s new leader, Raleigh Gilbert, had died and that Gilbert was the heir to a magnificent estate. Gilbert decided to return to England as did the remaining colonists almost a year after they landed. Many of them returned on the Virginia. | <urn:uuid:ca94844f-843c-4e0e-bd25-157788f36552> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://mrnussbaum.com/uploads/activities/13c/popham.htm | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251737572.61/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127235617-20200128025617-00480.warc.gz | en | 0.982778 | 486 | 4.21875 | 4 | [
0.020154288038611412,
0.0799778550863266,
0.6802861094474792,
-0.34396180510520935,
-0.2809942066669464,
-0.2367314249277115,
-0.03442582115530968,
0.026880431920289993,
-0.00844903476536274,
-0.04419269040226936,
-0.024852948263287544,
-0.3749975562095642,
-0.09159965068101883,
0.27656400... | 2 | The Popham Colony was a little known English colony that was founded just months after the Jamestown Colony in 1607. Unlike the Jamestown colony, however, the Popham Colony settled in present-day Maine rather than Virginia. The Popham Colony was the first settlement in what would become New England.
On May 31, 1607, 120 settlers left Plymouth, England, on their way to the New World. They were sponsored by the Plymouth Company, which was a rival of the Virginia Company – the company that sent settlers to Jamestown. The colonists headed to New England planned to harvest metals, furs, and spices from the region’s forests to make profits. It was named the Popham Colony because its leader was George Popham. The first boat carrying settlers arrived on August 13, followed three days later by a second ship. The colonists, who were gentleman, artisans, farmers, and traders, began construction on a star-shaped fort they named Fort St. George along the Kennebec River. They also built a chapel, guardhouse, a storehouse, and a cooperage where they could build barrels.
The colony failed to thrive at first. Because the settlers arrived late in the summer, there was no time to farm for food and the colony had not yet established relations with the local Abenaki tribe. Half of the settlers decided to sail back to England, and the other half decided to remain at Fort St. George through the bitter Maine winter. Of the 45 remaining colonists, 44 survived the winter. The single colonist to die was George Popham.
In the spring of 1608, the colonists built a 30-ton ship called a pinnace, to show that the colony could be useful in shipbuilding. The ship, which they named Virginia, was the first European ship to be built in the New World. By this time, the colonists had established trade with the Abenaki, and sent a cargo ship back to England with furs and bundles of wild sarsaparilla. When the cargo ship returned, it brought news that the brother of the colony’s new leader, Raleigh Gilbert, had died and that Gilbert was the heir to a magnificent estate. Gilbert decided to return to England as did the remaining colonists almost a year after they landed. Many of them returned on the Virginia. | 500 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The use of horses in World War I marked a transitional period in the evolution of armed conflict.
Cavalry units were initially considered essential offensive elements of a military force, but over the course of the war, the vulnerability of horses to modern machine gun and artillery fire reduced their utility on the battlefield.
This paralleled the development of tanks, which would ultimately replace cavalry in shock tactics.
While the perceived value of the horse in war changed dramatically, horses still played a significant role throughout the war.
All of the major combatants in World War I (1914–1918) began the conflict with cavalry forces.
Germany stopped using them on the Western Front soon after the war began, but continued limited use on the Eastern Front well into the war.
The Ottoman Empire used cavalry extensively during the war.
On the Allied side, the United Kingdom used mounted infantry and cavalry charges throughout the war, but the United States used cavalry for only a short time.
Although not particularly successful on the Western Front,
Allied cavalry did have some success in the Middle Eastern theatre, against a weaker and less technologically advanced enemy.
Russia used cavalry forces on the Eastern Front, but with limited success.
The military mainly used horses for logistical support; they were better than mechanized vehicles at traveling through deep mud and over rough terrain.
Horses were used for reconnaissance and for carrying messengers, as well as pulling artillery, ambulances, and supply wagons.
The presence of horses often increased morale among the soldiers at the front, but the animals contributed to disease and poor sanitation in camps, caused by their manure and carcasses.
The value of horses, and the increasing difficulty of replacing them, was such that by 1917 some troops were told that the loss of a horse was of greater tactical concern than the loss of a human soldier.
Ultimately, the blockade of Germany prevented the Central Powers from importing horses to replace those lost, which contributed to Germany's defeat. By the end of the war, even the well-supplied U.S.
Army was short of horses.
Conditions were severe for horses at the front; they were killed by artillery fire, suffered from skin disorders, and were injured by poison gas.
Hundreds of thousands of horses died, and many more were treated at veterinary hospitals and sent back to the front.
Procuring fodder was a major issue, and Germany lost many horses to starvation.
Several memorials have been erected to commemorate the horses that died.
Artists, including Alfred Munnings, extensively documented the work of horses in the war, and horses were featured in war poetry.
Novels, plays and documentaries have also featured the horses of World War I. | <urn:uuid:a47b159b-6294-4626-8733-cf2366fc1f60> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.worldwar-1.co.uk/world-war-one-horses/animals-of-world-war-one/world-war-1-horses | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778272.69/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128122813-20200128152813-00557.warc.gz | en | 0.981231 | 555 | 3.9375 | 4 | [
-0.3393309712409973,
0.18843835592269897,
0.5442556738853455,
0.2871004343032837,
-0.10558530688285828,
0.07632334530353546,
-0.060919806361198425,
0.5481730699539185,
0.21874451637268066,
0.23252810537815094,
-0.07668186724185944,
-0.09550115466117859,
0.2847157120704651,
0.42727211117744... | 1 | The use of horses in World War I marked a transitional period in the evolution of armed conflict.
Cavalry units were initially considered essential offensive elements of a military force, but over the course of the war, the vulnerability of horses to modern machine gun and artillery fire reduced their utility on the battlefield.
This paralleled the development of tanks, which would ultimately replace cavalry in shock tactics.
While the perceived value of the horse in war changed dramatically, horses still played a significant role throughout the war.
All of the major combatants in World War I (1914–1918) began the conflict with cavalry forces.
Germany stopped using them on the Western Front soon after the war began, but continued limited use on the Eastern Front well into the war.
The Ottoman Empire used cavalry extensively during the war.
On the Allied side, the United Kingdom used mounted infantry and cavalry charges throughout the war, but the United States used cavalry for only a short time.
Although not particularly successful on the Western Front,
Allied cavalry did have some success in the Middle Eastern theatre, against a weaker and less technologically advanced enemy.
Russia used cavalry forces on the Eastern Front, but with limited success.
The military mainly used horses for logistical support; they were better than mechanized vehicles at traveling through deep mud and over rough terrain.
Horses were used for reconnaissance and for carrying messengers, as well as pulling artillery, ambulances, and supply wagons.
The presence of horses often increased morale among the soldiers at the front, but the animals contributed to disease and poor sanitation in camps, caused by their manure and carcasses.
The value of horses, and the increasing difficulty of replacing them, was such that by 1917 some troops were told that the loss of a horse was of greater tactical concern than the loss of a human soldier.
Ultimately, the blockade of Germany prevented the Central Powers from importing horses to replace those lost, which contributed to Germany's defeat. By the end of the war, even the well-supplied U.S.
Army was short of horses.
Conditions were severe for horses at the front; they were killed by artillery fire, suffered from skin disorders, and were injured by poison gas.
Hundreds of thousands of horses died, and many more were treated at veterinary hospitals and sent back to the front.
Procuring fodder was a major issue, and Germany lost many horses to starvation.
Several memorials have been erected to commemorate the horses that died.
Artists, including Alfred Munnings, extensively documented the work of horses in the war, and horses were featured in war poetry.
Novels, plays and documentaries have also featured the horses of World War I. | 541 | ENGLISH | 1 |
By Tim Lambert
Stockton began as a small village belonging to the Bishop of Durham. Sometime in the 13th century (the exact date is not known) the Bishop made the village of Stockton into a borough.
In the Middle Ages most peasants were serfs, halfway between slaves and free men. The Bishop freed the serfs of Stockton and craftsmen came to live in the new town. The Bishop had a residence in Stockton called the Castle (although it was really a fortified manor house).
From 1310 Stockton had a market. (In those days there were very few shops and if you wished to buy or sell anything you had to go to a market). Stockton grew into a busy little port exporting wool and importing wine (the drink of the upper class).
However even by the standards of the time Medieval Stockton On Tees was a small town with a population of only around 1,000. Stockton did not grow any larger in the 16th century.
In 1642 came civil war and in 1644-46 Stockton was occupied by the Scottish army. After the civil war, the Bishops Castle was destroyed by parliamentarians to prevent it ever falling into royalist hands.
However in the late 17th century Stockton On Tees began to flourish. There had been a shipbuilding industry in Stockton since the 15th century and in the late 17th century and the 18th century, the industry prospered. There was also a sailmaking industry and a rope making industry. Another industry in 18th century Stockton was brick making.
The port of Stockton also flourished. However much of the trade was coastal. In those days it was much cheaper to transport goods by water than by road and so many goods were taken by ship along the coast of England from one port to another. Goods imported into Stockton included wine and raisins, coal, glass, and household goods. Goods exported included wool, butter, bacon and lead.
In the early 18th century the writer Daniel Defoe said that Stockton On Tees had greatly increased in size lately. It probably had a population of about 2,000. Another writer said that 'Stockton was a few years ago all thatched houses, now of brick with sash windows. It has a spacious, paved High Street, very clean.'
The Town House was built in 1735. About 1760 another writer described Stockton: (I have changed his words slightly to make them easier to read) Stockton is finely situated and most beautifully laid out. The principal street is about 50 yards broad with a townhouse and market in the middle of it and it is a quarter of a mile long. Two streets are parallel with it from the east for about two hundred yards and there are three or four streets, which lead from it to the quays. Beyond the church (handsome and well built) is a bowling green with buildings on three sides of it.'
Yet another writer described Stockton On Tees as 'a neat, well built market town with a considerable trade.' The first theater in Stockton opened in 1766 and the first stone bridge across the Tees was built in 1769.
Then from the end of the 18th century the industrial revolution changed Stockton from a small and quiet market town into a flourishing center of heavy industry.
From the late 18th century there was an iron working industry in Stockton. In the 19th century it boomed. Shipbuilding also prospered. A large engineering industry also grew up in the town. Stockton grew rapidly. By 1851 it had a population of 10,000 and by 1900 of 51,000.
Industry in Stockton On Tees was greatly boosted when the Stockton and Darlington railway opened in 1825. It made it easier to bring coal to factories in Stockton. However the port declined as business now moved down river to Middlesbrough.
Like all 19th century cities Stockton was unhealthy. In 1832 there was an outbreak of cholera and 126 people died. Another outbreak in 1849 killed 20 people.
However conditions in Stockton improved during the 19th century. In 1820 an Act set up a body of men called Commissioners with responsibility for lighting and cleaning the streets. From 1822 Stockton-on-Tees was lit by gas. Preston Hall was built in 1825. Furthermore a hospital opened in Stockton in 1862. A public library opened in 1877.
Steam trams began running in the streets of Stockton On Tees in 1881. In 1897 electric trams replaced them. Ropner Park opened in 1883. Victoria Bridge was built in 1883.
In the 1920s and 1930s the first slum clearance took place in Stockton and the first council houses were built. The trams were replaced by buses in 1931.
In the early and mid 20th century Stockton On Tees was still dominated by the engineering industry. From the 1920s there was also a chemicals industry in the town. However in the late 20th century manufacturing industry contracted severely. Fortunately the service industries grew and today they are the main employers.
Preston Hall Museum started in 1953. Much of Stockton town center was rebuilt in the 1960s. The Green Dragon Museum opened as an art gallery in 1968. It was converted later. Castlegate Shopping Centre opened in 1973.
The University of Teesside was formed in 1992. The Open Technology Centre opened in 1998.
Princess of Wales Bridge was built in 1992. Tees Barrage opened in 1995. Today the population of Stockton On Tees is 191,000.
A timeline of Stockton On Tees
A brief history of Darlington
A brief history of Newcastle
A brief history of Whitby
A brief history of Middlesbrough
A brief history of Durham | <urn:uuid:ff726c95-8168-4f96-bfd1-f276114146ee> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.localhistories.org/stockton.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694071.63/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126230255-20200127020255-00130.warc.gz | en | 0.986317 | 1,207 | 3.390625 | 3 | [
0.41991379857063293,
0.26384875178337097,
-0.0048911841586232185,
-0.03253436088562012,
0.14489051699638367,
-0.20868158340454102,
0.018401477485895157,
0.13134124875068665,
0.17809399962425232,
0.050262995064258575,
-0.14548462629318237,
-0.8609747886657715,
0.24150517582893372,
-0.104667... | 1 | By Tim Lambert
Stockton began as a small village belonging to the Bishop of Durham. Sometime in the 13th century (the exact date is not known) the Bishop made the village of Stockton into a borough.
In the Middle Ages most peasants were serfs, halfway between slaves and free men. The Bishop freed the serfs of Stockton and craftsmen came to live in the new town. The Bishop had a residence in Stockton called the Castle (although it was really a fortified manor house).
From 1310 Stockton had a market. (In those days there were very few shops and if you wished to buy or sell anything you had to go to a market). Stockton grew into a busy little port exporting wool and importing wine (the drink of the upper class).
However even by the standards of the time Medieval Stockton On Tees was a small town with a population of only around 1,000. Stockton did not grow any larger in the 16th century.
In 1642 came civil war and in 1644-46 Stockton was occupied by the Scottish army. After the civil war, the Bishops Castle was destroyed by parliamentarians to prevent it ever falling into royalist hands.
However in the late 17th century Stockton On Tees began to flourish. There had been a shipbuilding industry in Stockton since the 15th century and in the late 17th century and the 18th century, the industry prospered. There was also a sailmaking industry and a rope making industry. Another industry in 18th century Stockton was brick making.
The port of Stockton also flourished. However much of the trade was coastal. In those days it was much cheaper to transport goods by water than by road and so many goods were taken by ship along the coast of England from one port to another. Goods imported into Stockton included wine and raisins, coal, glass, and household goods. Goods exported included wool, butter, bacon and lead.
In the early 18th century the writer Daniel Defoe said that Stockton On Tees had greatly increased in size lately. It probably had a population of about 2,000. Another writer said that 'Stockton was a few years ago all thatched houses, now of brick with sash windows. It has a spacious, paved High Street, very clean.'
The Town House was built in 1735. About 1760 another writer described Stockton: (I have changed his words slightly to make them easier to read) Stockton is finely situated and most beautifully laid out. The principal street is about 50 yards broad with a townhouse and market in the middle of it and it is a quarter of a mile long. Two streets are parallel with it from the east for about two hundred yards and there are three or four streets, which lead from it to the quays. Beyond the church (handsome and well built) is a bowling green with buildings on three sides of it.'
Yet another writer described Stockton On Tees as 'a neat, well built market town with a considerable trade.' The first theater in Stockton opened in 1766 and the first stone bridge across the Tees was built in 1769.
Then from the end of the 18th century the industrial revolution changed Stockton from a small and quiet market town into a flourishing center of heavy industry.
From the late 18th century there was an iron working industry in Stockton. In the 19th century it boomed. Shipbuilding also prospered. A large engineering industry also grew up in the town. Stockton grew rapidly. By 1851 it had a population of 10,000 and by 1900 of 51,000.
Industry in Stockton On Tees was greatly boosted when the Stockton and Darlington railway opened in 1825. It made it easier to bring coal to factories in Stockton. However the port declined as business now moved down river to Middlesbrough.
Like all 19th century cities Stockton was unhealthy. In 1832 there was an outbreak of cholera and 126 people died. Another outbreak in 1849 killed 20 people.
However conditions in Stockton improved during the 19th century. In 1820 an Act set up a body of men called Commissioners with responsibility for lighting and cleaning the streets. From 1822 Stockton-on-Tees was lit by gas. Preston Hall was built in 1825. Furthermore a hospital opened in Stockton in 1862. A public library opened in 1877.
Steam trams began running in the streets of Stockton On Tees in 1881. In 1897 electric trams replaced them. Ropner Park opened in 1883. Victoria Bridge was built in 1883.
In the 1920s and 1930s the first slum clearance took place in Stockton and the first council houses were built. The trams were replaced by buses in 1931.
In the early and mid 20th century Stockton On Tees was still dominated by the engineering industry. From the 1920s there was also a chemicals industry in the town. However in the late 20th century manufacturing industry contracted severely. Fortunately the service industries grew and today they are the main employers.
Preston Hall Museum started in 1953. Much of Stockton town center was rebuilt in the 1960s. The Green Dragon Museum opened as an art gallery in 1968. It was converted later. Castlegate Shopping Centre opened in 1973.
The University of Teesside was formed in 1992. The Open Technology Centre opened in 1998.
Princess of Wales Bridge was built in 1992. Tees Barrage opened in 1995. Today the population of Stockton On Tees is 191,000.
A timeline of Stockton On Tees
A brief history of Darlington
A brief history of Newcastle
A brief history of Whitby
A brief history of Middlesbrough
A brief history of Durham | 1,353 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Scottish National Party was formed in 1934 from the merging of two existing parties -the National Party of Scotland and the Scottish Party.
The NPS had been established in 1928 after the failure of successive Home Rule Bills had led to campaigners becoming disillusioned with all the established mainstream parties -and particularly with Labour.
The Scottish Party (styled the "Moderates") were conceived of in 1932 as an alternative nationalist party for those who saw the NPS as too separatist and left wing.
Despite those differences the two did come together successfully. After all, most political parties are "broad churches" anyway. And, in any case, for the first 14 years it was possible to be a member of both the SNP and another party.
In 1943 however dual membership was banned for office holders. In 1948 this ban was extended to the whole party.
However the Party still retained its key distinguishing features -its decentralist structure and ites emphasis on grassroots participation/activism. It was still almost entirely a voluntary party. Its' leaders often had full time employment outside of politics. What's more those leaders were actually referred to as the "Chairman" or "Convenor" and were kept in check by the Annual Conference, the key decision making body of the party.
Further Reading: Mitchell, Bennie and Johns, THE SNP:Transition to Power (2012). | <urn:uuid:2db9ba66-6894-4387-b1b6-b216701dd01b> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.srsm.scot/forum-1/untitled-category/the-snp-the-early-years | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594333.5/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119064802-20200119092802-00205.warc.gz | en | 0.985984 | 280 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
-0.35813379287719727,
-0.13673946261405945,
-0.1297566443681717,
-0.2029840350151062,
-0.10031978785991669,
0.3784344792366028,
-0.2422720491886139,
0.07608575373888016,
-0.20267847180366516,
0.07178148627281189,
0.23431773483753204,
0.09559175372123718,
0.6502975225448608,
-0.078024528920... | 6 | The Scottish National Party was formed in 1934 from the merging of two existing parties -the National Party of Scotland and the Scottish Party.
The NPS had been established in 1928 after the failure of successive Home Rule Bills had led to campaigners becoming disillusioned with all the established mainstream parties -and particularly with Labour.
The Scottish Party (styled the "Moderates") were conceived of in 1932 as an alternative nationalist party for those who saw the NPS as too separatist and left wing.
Despite those differences the two did come together successfully. After all, most political parties are "broad churches" anyway. And, in any case, for the first 14 years it was possible to be a member of both the SNP and another party.
In 1943 however dual membership was banned for office holders. In 1948 this ban was extended to the whole party.
However the Party still retained its key distinguishing features -its decentralist structure and ites emphasis on grassroots participation/activism. It was still almost entirely a voluntary party. Its' leaders often had full time employment outside of politics. What's more those leaders were actually referred to as the "Chairman" or "Convenor" and were kept in check by the Annual Conference, the key decision making body of the party.
Further Reading: Mitchell, Bennie and Johns, THE SNP:Transition to Power (2012). | 298 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Bible Proficiency Project
Week 9, 2019
I. Monday — Numbers 7
1. What were the carts and oxen given to the Levites to be used for?
2. Why were the sons of Kohath not given carts?
3. From where did God speak to Moses from?
II. Tuesday — Numbers 8-10
1. What was the tribe of Levites to be a substitute for?
2. Why did God consider the first-born as “belonging” to Him?
3. How do the Levites belong to God in a different way from the other tribes?
4. In what way does this concept pertain to the ministers today (see 1Timothy 5:17)?
5. Is there any significance in the eating of the Passover that no bones were to be broken?
6. How did the Israelites know when to travel?
III. Wednesday — Numbers 11-13
1. Do you think God cares about complainers in Church?
2. What does Moses frustration point to as a necessary reality for pastors? What is God’s solution?
3. Numbers 11:16 is the origin of the Sanhedrin. What is it and what was its purpose?
4. It what ways might 11:29 be prophetic?
5. What warning is there in the jealousy of Aaron and Miriam about Church leaders?
6. Who was the voice amongst the spies who said let us go up and take it?
7. Why were the other spies convinced they could not?
IV. Thursday – Numbers 14-15, Psalm 90
1. How did the people respond to the spies report? What was their plan of action?
2. Based on Joshua and Caleb’s words, why should the church never see itself as “victims”?
3. What was God intending to do as a result of the people’s rejection and what was the reason He did not
carry through? How does this point to the work of the Lord Jesus?
How does Psalm 90 come into play in this story?
4. When the people heard that they were to die in the wilderness what did they try to?
5. In chapter 15 the phrase as a sweet aroma to the Lord is repeated six times.
What do you think is meant by the phrase?
6. How should 15:39 shape our thinking, and how does it do away with the excuse I was born this way?
V. Friday —Numbers 16-17
1. What was the mistake in thinking that Korah and his followers made?
2. In their standing against Moses and Aaron who were they really rejecting?
3. What happened the next day and how did Moses and Aaron act as mediators?
4. What sign did God use to settle who was to hold the office of the priesthood?
VI. Saturday — Numbers 18-20
1. Why is Moses being falsely charged in 20:4?
2. What was Moses sin that God judged he would not enter the Promised Land?
3. What happened on top of Mt. Hor?
VII. Sunday — Numbers 21-22
1. In 21:2 the people vow to “utterly destroy” their cities. This is the word devote which holds what idea?
2. Explain why a bronze serpent was needed and what was it that saved them from the snake bites?
3. Balaam functions as God’s prophet. What principle does he rightly understand?
But where does he go wrong? | <urn:uuid:e9629ad4-bf26-4e39-b3e4-e690286ad4de> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.aberdeenreformed.com/copy-of-bpp-wk-8 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250605075.24/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121192553-20200121221553-00447.warc.gz | en | 0.980019 | 748 | 3.390625 | 3 | [
-0.28235360980033875,
0.02071492373943329,
-0.39080268144607544,
-0.5096752643585205,
-0.3081614673137665,
-0.19934409856796265,
0.6531153917312622,
0.06016578897833824,
-0.16885876655578613,
0.19729208946228027,
0.0428299717605114,
-0.21474981307983398,
0.31820225715637207,
0.150722831487... | 4 | Bible Proficiency Project
Week 9, 2019
I. Monday — Numbers 7
1. What were the carts and oxen given to the Levites to be used for?
2. Why were the sons of Kohath not given carts?
3. From where did God speak to Moses from?
II. Tuesday — Numbers 8-10
1. What was the tribe of Levites to be a substitute for?
2. Why did God consider the first-born as “belonging” to Him?
3. How do the Levites belong to God in a different way from the other tribes?
4. In what way does this concept pertain to the ministers today (see 1Timothy 5:17)?
5. Is there any significance in the eating of the Passover that no bones were to be broken?
6. How did the Israelites know when to travel?
III. Wednesday — Numbers 11-13
1. Do you think God cares about complainers in Church?
2. What does Moses frustration point to as a necessary reality for pastors? What is God’s solution?
3. Numbers 11:16 is the origin of the Sanhedrin. What is it and what was its purpose?
4. It what ways might 11:29 be prophetic?
5. What warning is there in the jealousy of Aaron and Miriam about Church leaders?
6. Who was the voice amongst the spies who said let us go up and take it?
7. Why were the other spies convinced they could not?
IV. Thursday – Numbers 14-15, Psalm 90
1. How did the people respond to the spies report? What was their plan of action?
2. Based on Joshua and Caleb’s words, why should the church never see itself as “victims”?
3. What was God intending to do as a result of the people’s rejection and what was the reason He did not
carry through? How does this point to the work of the Lord Jesus?
How does Psalm 90 come into play in this story?
4. When the people heard that they were to die in the wilderness what did they try to?
5. In chapter 15 the phrase as a sweet aroma to the Lord is repeated six times.
What do you think is meant by the phrase?
6. How should 15:39 shape our thinking, and how does it do away with the excuse I was born this way?
V. Friday —Numbers 16-17
1. What was the mistake in thinking that Korah and his followers made?
2. In their standing against Moses and Aaron who were they really rejecting?
3. What happened the next day and how did Moses and Aaron act as mediators?
4. What sign did God use to settle who was to hold the office of the priesthood?
VI. Saturday — Numbers 18-20
1. Why is Moses being falsely charged in 20:4?
2. What was Moses sin that God judged he would not enter the Promised Land?
3. What happened on top of Mt. Hor?
VII. Sunday — Numbers 21-22
1. In 21:2 the people vow to “utterly destroy” their cities. This is the word devote which holds what idea?
2. Explain why a bronze serpent was needed and what was it that saved them from the snake bites?
3. Balaam functions as God’s prophet. What principle does he rightly understand?
But where does he go wrong? | 745 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In the fifth century B.C. Athens formed a system of relationships with a number of other Greek city states which is often spoken of by historians as the Athenian Empire. But all the other city states retained their own governments. One "new fact" added by the Athenian Empire was the complete and effective suppression of piracy; another was the institution of a sort of international law. The law, indeed, was Athenian law; but actions could now be brought and justice administered between citizens of the different states of the League, which of course had not been possible before. The Athenian Empire had really developed out of a league of mutual defence against Persia; its seat had originally been in the island of Delos, and the allies had contributed to a common treasure at Delos; the treasure of Delos was carried off to Athens because it was exposed to a possible Persian raid. Then one city after another offered a monetary contribution instead of military service, with the result that in the end Athens was doing almost all the work and receiving almost all the money. She was supported by one or two of the larger islands. The "League" in this way became gradually an "Empire," but the citizens of the allied states remained, except where there were special treaties of intermarriage and the like, practically foreigners to one another. And it was chiefly the poorer citizens of Athens who sustained this empire by their most vigorous and incessant personal service. Every citizen was liable to military service at home or abroad between the ages of eighteen and sixty, sometimes on purely Athenian affairs and sometimes in defence of the cities of the Empire whose citizens had bought themselves off. There was probably no single man over twenty-five in the Athenian Assembly who had not served in several campaigns in different parts of the Mediterranean or Black Sea, and who did not expect to serve again. Modern imperialism is denounced by its opponents as the exploitation of the world by the rich; Athenian imperialism was the exploitation of the world by the poorer citizens of Athens.
Another difference from modern conditions, due to the small size of the Greek city states, was that in a democracy every citizen had the right to attend and speak and vote in the popular assembly. For most cities this meant a gathering of only a few hundred people; the greatest had no more than some thousands | <urn:uuid:0f5975f9-56dc-4554-9446-4730b3053056> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:The_Outline_of_History_Vol_1.djvu/335 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598217.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120081337-20200120105337-00071.warc.gz | en | 0.989034 | 466 | 3.796875 | 4 | [
-0.4049045145511627,
0.22270017862319946,
0.4587734341621399,
-0.49815189838409424,
-0.575339674949646,
-0.5960152745246887,
0.12458977848291397,
0.326964408159256,
-0.05322394520044327,
-0.1271001547574997,
-0.08903991430997849,
-0.05884481966495514,
-0.0975324809551239,
0.380473136901855... | 1 | In the fifth century B.C. Athens formed a system of relationships with a number of other Greek city states which is often spoken of by historians as the Athenian Empire. But all the other city states retained their own governments. One "new fact" added by the Athenian Empire was the complete and effective suppression of piracy; another was the institution of a sort of international law. The law, indeed, was Athenian law; but actions could now be brought and justice administered between citizens of the different states of the League, which of course had not been possible before. The Athenian Empire had really developed out of a league of mutual defence against Persia; its seat had originally been in the island of Delos, and the allies had contributed to a common treasure at Delos; the treasure of Delos was carried off to Athens because it was exposed to a possible Persian raid. Then one city after another offered a monetary contribution instead of military service, with the result that in the end Athens was doing almost all the work and receiving almost all the money. She was supported by one or two of the larger islands. The "League" in this way became gradually an "Empire," but the citizens of the allied states remained, except where there were special treaties of intermarriage and the like, practically foreigners to one another. And it was chiefly the poorer citizens of Athens who sustained this empire by their most vigorous and incessant personal service. Every citizen was liable to military service at home or abroad between the ages of eighteen and sixty, sometimes on purely Athenian affairs and sometimes in defence of the cities of the Empire whose citizens had bought themselves off. There was probably no single man over twenty-five in the Athenian Assembly who had not served in several campaigns in different parts of the Mediterranean or Black Sea, and who did not expect to serve again. Modern imperialism is denounced by its opponents as the exploitation of the world by the rich; Athenian imperialism was the exploitation of the world by the poorer citizens of Athens.
Another difference from modern conditions, due to the small size of the Greek city states, was that in a democracy every citizen had the right to attend and speak and vote in the popular assembly. For most cities this meant a gathering of only a few hundred people; the greatest had no more than some thousands | 465 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The goal of the Ideal Project was to come up with an idea for the “ideal bee” then create a model showing the modifications we would make. In the past these models were all 3D printed, but we were able to use any of the machines and resources in the 1819 Innovation Hub. The idea for the ideal bee was to be based on our knowledge of the bee, but it didn’t have to be feasible. My team brainstormed several ideas for small changes we could make, but we decided we wanted to create a completely different kind of bee, the medic bee. The role of this bee would be completely different from the other bees. Instead of being a worker bee or queen bee, its only role would be to keep the bees in the hive healthy, ensuring the survival of the hive. We started by creating a low-fidelity prototype of our medic bee. Since we had limited resources, we decided to build it out of clay. The bee’s fur and wings were removed, because they would have no benefit for a bee who never leaves the kid. We replaced the stinger with a syringe that would inject the bees with healing medicine. We also added a tube to the prototype that would spray water on the bees to remove pesticides. The entire class’s prototypes looked nothing like bees, but it was fun to see what everyone had managed to put together and hear the concepts behind the prototypes.
For the actual model, we decided to use 3D modeling. None of us had used Solidworks or done 3D modeling before, so we wanted to be able to learn how to use the 3D printers through this project. Since none of us had any experience with Solidworks, we were advised to use Tinkercad, a free program that is simpler and easy to use. The problem with this program is that it only allows you to put together basic shapes, and we were trying to use complex shapes to build a model of a bee. Unfortunately, most of our time was spent trying to create the shape of a bee on Tinkercad rather than making modifications to the bee. One thing we were able to add was a pre-designed honey comb, which we ended up using to emphasize that the medic bee doesn’t leave the hive (and so you could tell it was a bee and not an ant). Our final model had no wings or fur like our prototype. We were unable to add the syringe to the model, but we removed the tube to spray water and added claws to remove mites.
In our presentation, we went over our model and the idea behind it. I did not expect the array of questions we would receive. We had to come up with several possible explanations for features of a bee that does not actually exist. How does the bee create the medicine for the syringe, and does it change based on the needs of each bee? Is the medic bee bred differently like the queen bee is? This made me start to think past our ideas for what could be improved, and start thinking about how these modifications would affect the hive as a whole. We weren’t actually modifying a bee, but in reality, many genetic modifications have unforeseen consequences. Our idea for a medic bee may have ended up hurting more than it could help. Maybe bees in their current state are already ideal. | <urn:uuid:8c4c42d5-d9e1-4e6d-8102-1d8a6a166cc3> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://jessicabeirl.weebly.com/sticky-innovation-reflections/ideal-bee-project | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00145.warc.gz | en | 0.983724 | 684 | 3.28125 | 3 | [
-0.1097656637430191,
-0.1393643617630005,
0.22578752040863037,
-0.3641447424888611,
-0.14548002183437347,
0.11119545996189117,
-0.42410439252853394,
0.4517616331577301,
-0.33502352237701416,
0.3862811326980591,
0.1390944868326187,
-0.5389400720596313,
-0.04981750249862671,
0.00155082601122... | 2 | The goal of the Ideal Project was to come up with an idea for the “ideal bee” then create a model showing the modifications we would make. In the past these models were all 3D printed, but we were able to use any of the machines and resources in the 1819 Innovation Hub. The idea for the ideal bee was to be based on our knowledge of the bee, but it didn’t have to be feasible. My team brainstormed several ideas for small changes we could make, but we decided we wanted to create a completely different kind of bee, the medic bee. The role of this bee would be completely different from the other bees. Instead of being a worker bee or queen bee, its only role would be to keep the bees in the hive healthy, ensuring the survival of the hive. We started by creating a low-fidelity prototype of our medic bee. Since we had limited resources, we decided to build it out of clay. The bee’s fur and wings were removed, because they would have no benefit for a bee who never leaves the kid. We replaced the stinger with a syringe that would inject the bees with healing medicine. We also added a tube to the prototype that would spray water on the bees to remove pesticides. The entire class’s prototypes looked nothing like bees, but it was fun to see what everyone had managed to put together and hear the concepts behind the prototypes.
For the actual model, we decided to use 3D modeling. None of us had used Solidworks or done 3D modeling before, so we wanted to be able to learn how to use the 3D printers through this project. Since none of us had any experience with Solidworks, we were advised to use Tinkercad, a free program that is simpler and easy to use. The problem with this program is that it only allows you to put together basic shapes, and we were trying to use complex shapes to build a model of a bee. Unfortunately, most of our time was spent trying to create the shape of a bee on Tinkercad rather than making modifications to the bee. One thing we were able to add was a pre-designed honey comb, which we ended up using to emphasize that the medic bee doesn’t leave the hive (and so you could tell it was a bee and not an ant). Our final model had no wings or fur like our prototype. We were unable to add the syringe to the model, but we removed the tube to spray water and added claws to remove mites.
In our presentation, we went over our model and the idea behind it. I did not expect the array of questions we would receive. We had to come up with several possible explanations for features of a bee that does not actually exist. How does the bee create the medicine for the syringe, and does it change based on the needs of each bee? Is the medic bee bred differently like the queen bee is? This made me start to think past our ideas for what could be improved, and start thinking about how these modifications would affect the hive as a whole. We weren’t actually modifying a bee, but in reality, many genetic modifications have unforeseen consequences. Our idea for a medic bee may have ended up hurting more than it could help. Maybe bees in their current state are already ideal. | 675 | ENGLISH | 1 |
A BRIEF HISTORY OF MANCHESTER, ENGLAND
By Tim Lambert
Manchester began when a wooden fort was built by the Roman army on a plateau about 1 mile south of the present cathedral about 80 CE. The Romans called it Mamucium (breast shaped hill) probably because the plateau resembled a breast. The fort was rebuilt in stone about 200 CE. Soon a civilian settlement grew up around the fort. The soldiers provided a market for the goods the civilians sold such as shoes and wine.
However in 407 CE the Roman army left Britain and the civilian settlement disappeared. The stone fort at Manchester fell into ruins.
MANCHESTER IN THE MIDDLE AGES
At the time of the Domesday Book in 1086 a village called Mamecester existed. In time the name changed to Manchester. There is a story that Reddish is called that because there was once a battle there and the blood left 'reddish' stains. It is far more likely that Reddish is a corruption of Reed Ditch.
In 919 the king repaired the old Roman fort as a defense against the Danes. It gave its name to Castlefield.
At the time of the Normans in the 11th century Manchester was a small village but things changed in the 12th century. The population of England grew and trade and commerce grew rapidly. Many new towns were founded. The village of Manchester was made into a town in the early 13th century. The Lord of the Manor, a man named Robert De Grelly built a manor house nearby. He also built the church of St Mary. He divided up some of his land into plots for building and rented them to craftsmen. He may also have started a weekly market. Soon Manchester grew into a town.
In the year 1222 Manchester was granted the right to hold an annual fair. In the Middle Ages a fair was like a market but was held only once a year. It would attract buyers and sellers from all over Lancashire. In the Middle Ages Manchester was, at best, a medium sized town. It was not nationally important. It is not known what its population was. An educated guess is 2,500. It would seem very small to us but settlements were tiny in those days.
In Medieval Manchester there was a wool industry. After wool was woven it was fulled. That means it was beaten in a mixture of water and clay to clean and thicken it. Wooden hammers powered by a watermill beat the wool. When it dried the wool was dyed. There was also a leather tanning industry in the town.
In 1301 Manchester was given a charter (a document granting the townspeople certain rights). Before that date the Lord of the Manor appointed a bailiff who ran the town day to day. Afterwards the merchants of Manchester were allowed to elect an official called a Reeve who did the job.
In the late Middle Ages water from a spring was brought along elm pipes to a conduit in Manchester where the townspeople could fetch water. The spring gave its name to Spring Gardens and Fountain Street.
Life in the Middle Ages
MANCHESTER IN THE 16th CENTURY
A grammar school was founded in Manchester in 1515 by Hugh Oldham, Bishop of Exeter. During the 16th century and the 17th century Manchester grew steadily larger and more important. By the late 16th century it may have had a population of 4,000. By the mid 17th century Manchester probably had about 5,000 inhabitants.
However Tudor Manchester still wasn't a particularly large town. It may have been important locally but it wasn't very important nationally. About 1540 a writer described Manchester: 'Manchester, on the south side of the Irwell is the fairest, best built, busiest and most populous town in Lancashire'.
MANCHESTER IN THE 17th CENTURY
In 1603 Manchester suffered an outbreak of plague, which may have killed one quarter of the population. However the town soon recovered. There were always plenty of poor people in the countryside willing to come and work in the town and replace the dead.
In the 17th century Manchester was famous for wool and also for cotton. From 1637 silk was woven in the town.
Then in 1642 came civil war between king and parliament. Manchester sided with parliament and the people erected wooden posts linked by chains around the town to stop royalist cavalry. They also erected earth ramparts to protect the town. The royalists attacked on 25 September but were repulsed. They made several attempts to take Manchester by storm but each time they were driven back. Eventually, on 1 October they gave up and left. Manchester remained in parliamentary hands for the rest of the war but it suffered from disruption to trade. Manchester also suffered from an outbreak of plague in 1645.
However Chetham's Hospital (a school for poor children) was founded in 1656.
At the end of the 17th century Celia Fiennes, the travel writer described the town: 'Manchester looks exceedingly well as you enter. Very substantial buildings, the houses are not very lofty but mostly of brick and stone. The old houses are timber. There is a very large church, all stone and it stands high (above the town) so that by walking around the churchyard you see the whole town. This is a thriving place. The market is large it takes up 2 streets.'
MANCHESTER IN THE 18th CENTURY
In the early 18th century Manchester probably had a population of around 10,000. It was still a medium sized town. However in the late 18th century the industrial revolution began. The population of Manchester soared and by the end of the century it had reached 70,000.
18th century Manchester continued to be famous for manufacturing wool, cotton, linen and silk. In 1729 a cotton exchange was built where cotton could be bought and sold. In the late 18th century, with the coming of the industrial revolution, the textiles industry boomed.
There were some improvements in Manchester during the 18th century. St Ann's Church was built in 1712. The first newspaper in Manchester appeared in 1719 and a quay was built on the Irwell in 1735. In 1761 the Bridgewater canal was built to bring coal from a coalfield to Manchester.
Meanwhile an infirmary was built in 1752 and the first theatre in Manchester opened in 1753. Heaton Hall was built in 1772.
By 1756 the population of Manchester had risen to over 16,000 (including Salford).
In 1792 an act of parliament formed a body of men to clean and light the streets (with oil lamps). After 1792 night watchmen patrolled the streets of Manchester. (Although it is doubtful if they were very effective!).
Life in the 18th century
MANCHESTER IN THE 19th CENTURY
One of the most notorious episodes in Manchester's history occurred on 16 August 1819. Tens of thousands of people gathered on St Peters field to hear radical speakers including Henry Hunt. The local magistrates sent the Manchester Yeomanry to arrest the speakers. However, when they were harassed by the crowd the yeomanry drew their swords and started slashing. The magistrates sent in the 15th hussars to disperse the crowd. They did so with their swords. Eleven people died and more than 600 were wounded. Bitterly the people called the massacre Peterloo after Waterloo.
During the 19th century Manchester was transformed by the Industrial Revolution. The population of Manchester soared. From 75,000 in 1801 it rose to 126,000 in 1821. It then rose to 142,000 in 1831. (Part of the rise in population was due to very poor Irish immigrants).
In 1816 a water company began supplying piped water through iron pipes (for those who could afford to be connected). In the 1820s Manchester gained gas street lights.
Like all 19th century towns Manchester had dreadful slums. Some streets were unpaved. In some of them, rubbish such as rotting vegetables was piled in heaps. It was only removed at intervals to be sold as fertilizer. People used cesspits, which were only cleaned infrequently. The worst slums were the cellar dwellings. Whole families lived in 1 room cellars. Sometimes they had no furniture and slept on piles of straw. They were damp and poorly ventilated. Because of these horrid conditions, diseases wwere rife. In 1832 a cholera epidemic in Manchester killed 674 people.
However there were some improvements in Manchester in the early 19th century. The Manchester Chamber of Commerce was created in 1820. The Manchester Guardian began publication in 1821. From 1828 horse drawn buses ran in the streets of Manchester. In 1830 a railway to Liverpool opened.
The Royal Institution for the promotion of Literature, Science and the Arts was built in 1829. It was made an art gallery in 1882. A Natural History Museum opened in Manchester in 1835.
A corn exchange where grain could be bought and sold was built in 1837 and in 1838 Manchester was made a borough for the first time.
Life in 19th century Manchester gradually improved.In 1846 the first public parks in Manchester were created, Peel Park, Queens Park and Phillips Park.
After 1845 Manchester council took responsibility for removing refuse. They also removed sewage. In those days some people had cesspits. Others had a bucket with a grid on the bottom. The urine would soak into the soil while the excrement was caught. At night a horse and cart came round and men removed the 'night soil'. (Everyone kept their windows closed when the 'night soil men' came!) In 1851 the council took over the towns water supply.
The Church of St Mary was made a cathedral in 1847. A tower was added in 1868.
In the early 19th century Manchester became world famous as a manufacturing center. Wool, silk, and cotton were manufactured and vast numbers of working people worked 12 hour days in the mills. There was also a papermaking industry and iron foundries.
By 1851 the population of Manchester had reached 186,000. In the late 19th century the population was boosted by the arrival of Jews fleeing persecution in Eastern Europe.
The first public library in Manchester opened in 1852. Then in 1853 Manchester was made a city. The town hall was built in 1877. A technical school was built in 1892.
In 1894 the Manchester Ship Canal opened. This turned Manchester into an inland port.
Life in the 19th century
MANCHESTER IN THE 20th CENTURY
John Rylands library opened in 1900. It merged with the university library in 1972. Manchester University was founded in 1903. Also in 1903, the council purchased Heaton Park. The central library was built in 1934. The Town Hall was extended in 1938.
In the early 20th century there was some diversification of industry in Manchester. New industries included flour milling, biscuits and breakfast cereals. The old industry of cotton went into a steep decline. Engineering also suffered during the depression of the 1930s though it revived during World War II. In the second half of the century manufacturing industry declined and was, to a certain extent, replaced by service industries such as education and finance.
Tourism also became an important industry in Manchester in the late 20th century. A Museum of Science and Industry opened in 1969. A Museum of Transport opened in 1979.
In the 1980s Castlefield was turned into an Urban Heritage Park including a reconstruction of the Roman Fort. In 1984 the Jewish Museum opened. The G-Mex Centre opened in 1986. The People's History Museum opened in 1994.
Meanwhile the Arndale Centre was built in the 1970s. The first section opened in 1976 and it was completed in 1979.
In the early 20th century the council built the first council houses in Manchester. They also set about demolishing the slums. During World War II the center of Manchester was devastated. Many warehouses and business premises were destroyed along with many old buildings. Piccadilly Square was leveled. However Manchester rose again.
During the 20th century more and more people moved out of the city center to live in the mushrooming suburbs. The population of the city center dropped considerably.
From the 1970s a Chinatown grew up in Manchester. A Chinese Arch was erected in 1987. The Chinese Arts Centre opened the same year.
In 1992 the metrolink trams began running. In 1996 IRA bombs devastated the city centre but it was rebuilt. The phoenix rose from the ashes. The Trafford Shopping Centre opened in 1998.
Life in the 20th century
MANCHESTER IN THE 21ST CENTURY
In the 21st century Manchester is a flourishing city. Although the old manufacturing industries have declined service industries are thriving. The Lowry Art Gallery opened in 2000 and the Civil Justice Centre was officially opened by the Queen in 2008. Meanwhile Beetham Tower, the tallest building in Manchester was built in 2006. Today the population of Manchester is 510,000.
A Timeline of Manchester
A Brief History of Bolton
A Brief History of Liverpool
A Brief History of Stockport
A Brief History of Warrington
A Brief history of Wigan
A Brief history of England
Last revised 2019 | <urn:uuid:d9873325-7046-4c53-826b-983e8c905ff5> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.localhistories.org/manchester.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694071.63/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126230255-20200127020255-00538.warc.gz | en | 0.980461 | 2,761 | 3.671875 | 4 | [
0.1687132716178894,
0.4276358485221863,
0.594860851764679,
0.07037083059549332,
-0.0627252385020256,
-0.08635633438825607,
-0.017572911456227303,
-0.014848369173705578,
-0.2057441771030426,
-0.2888057231903076,
-0.00895251240581274,
-0.5383800268173218,
0.03475506231188774,
0.1595391333103... | 1 | A BRIEF HISTORY OF MANCHESTER, ENGLAND
By Tim Lambert
Manchester began when a wooden fort was built by the Roman army on a plateau about 1 mile south of the present cathedral about 80 CE. The Romans called it Mamucium (breast shaped hill) probably because the plateau resembled a breast. The fort was rebuilt in stone about 200 CE. Soon a civilian settlement grew up around the fort. The soldiers provided a market for the goods the civilians sold such as shoes and wine.
However in 407 CE the Roman army left Britain and the civilian settlement disappeared. The stone fort at Manchester fell into ruins.
MANCHESTER IN THE MIDDLE AGES
At the time of the Domesday Book in 1086 a village called Mamecester existed. In time the name changed to Manchester. There is a story that Reddish is called that because there was once a battle there and the blood left 'reddish' stains. It is far more likely that Reddish is a corruption of Reed Ditch.
In 919 the king repaired the old Roman fort as a defense against the Danes. It gave its name to Castlefield.
At the time of the Normans in the 11th century Manchester was a small village but things changed in the 12th century. The population of England grew and trade and commerce grew rapidly. Many new towns were founded. The village of Manchester was made into a town in the early 13th century. The Lord of the Manor, a man named Robert De Grelly built a manor house nearby. He also built the church of St Mary. He divided up some of his land into plots for building and rented them to craftsmen. He may also have started a weekly market. Soon Manchester grew into a town.
In the year 1222 Manchester was granted the right to hold an annual fair. In the Middle Ages a fair was like a market but was held only once a year. It would attract buyers and sellers from all over Lancashire. In the Middle Ages Manchester was, at best, a medium sized town. It was not nationally important. It is not known what its population was. An educated guess is 2,500. It would seem very small to us but settlements were tiny in those days.
In Medieval Manchester there was a wool industry. After wool was woven it was fulled. That means it was beaten in a mixture of water and clay to clean and thicken it. Wooden hammers powered by a watermill beat the wool. When it dried the wool was dyed. There was also a leather tanning industry in the town.
In 1301 Manchester was given a charter (a document granting the townspeople certain rights). Before that date the Lord of the Manor appointed a bailiff who ran the town day to day. Afterwards the merchants of Manchester were allowed to elect an official called a Reeve who did the job.
In the late Middle Ages water from a spring was brought along elm pipes to a conduit in Manchester where the townspeople could fetch water. The spring gave its name to Spring Gardens and Fountain Street.
Life in the Middle Ages
MANCHESTER IN THE 16th CENTURY
A grammar school was founded in Manchester in 1515 by Hugh Oldham, Bishop of Exeter. During the 16th century and the 17th century Manchester grew steadily larger and more important. By the late 16th century it may have had a population of 4,000. By the mid 17th century Manchester probably had about 5,000 inhabitants.
However Tudor Manchester still wasn't a particularly large town. It may have been important locally but it wasn't very important nationally. About 1540 a writer described Manchester: 'Manchester, on the south side of the Irwell is the fairest, best built, busiest and most populous town in Lancashire'.
MANCHESTER IN THE 17th CENTURY
In 1603 Manchester suffered an outbreak of plague, which may have killed one quarter of the population. However the town soon recovered. There were always plenty of poor people in the countryside willing to come and work in the town and replace the dead.
In the 17th century Manchester was famous for wool and also for cotton. From 1637 silk was woven in the town.
Then in 1642 came civil war between king and parliament. Manchester sided with parliament and the people erected wooden posts linked by chains around the town to stop royalist cavalry. They also erected earth ramparts to protect the town. The royalists attacked on 25 September but were repulsed. They made several attempts to take Manchester by storm but each time they were driven back. Eventually, on 1 October they gave up and left. Manchester remained in parliamentary hands for the rest of the war but it suffered from disruption to trade. Manchester also suffered from an outbreak of plague in 1645.
However Chetham's Hospital (a school for poor children) was founded in 1656.
At the end of the 17th century Celia Fiennes, the travel writer described the town: 'Manchester looks exceedingly well as you enter. Very substantial buildings, the houses are not very lofty but mostly of brick and stone. The old houses are timber. There is a very large church, all stone and it stands high (above the town) so that by walking around the churchyard you see the whole town. This is a thriving place. The market is large it takes up 2 streets.'
MANCHESTER IN THE 18th CENTURY
In the early 18th century Manchester probably had a population of around 10,000. It was still a medium sized town. However in the late 18th century the industrial revolution began. The population of Manchester soared and by the end of the century it had reached 70,000.
18th century Manchester continued to be famous for manufacturing wool, cotton, linen and silk. In 1729 a cotton exchange was built where cotton could be bought and sold. In the late 18th century, with the coming of the industrial revolution, the textiles industry boomed.
There were some improvements in Manchester during the 18th century. St Ann's Church was built in 1712. The first newspaper in Manchester appeared in 1719 and a quay was built on the Irwell in 1735. In 1761 the Bridgewater canal was built to bring coal from a coalfield to Manchester.
Meanwhile an infirmary was built in 1752 and the first theatre in Manchester opened in 1753. Heaton Hall was built in 1772.
By 1756 the population of Manchester had risen to over 16,000 (including Salford).
In 1792 an act of parliament formed a body of men to clean and light the streets (with oil lamps). After 1792 night watchmen patrolled the streets of Manchester. (Although it is doubtful if they were very effective!).
Life in the 18th century
MANCHESTER IN THE 19th CENTURY
One of the most notorious episodes in Manchester's history occurred on 16 August 1819. Tens of thousands of people gathered on St Peters field to hear radical speakers including Henry Hunt. The local magistrates sent the Manchester Yeomanry to arrest the speakers. However, when they were harassed by the crowd the yeomanry drew their swords and started slashing. The magistrates sent in the 15th hussars to disperse the crowd. They did so with their swords. Eleven people died and more than 600 were wounded. Bitterly the people called the massacre Peterloo after Waterloo.
During the 19th century Manchester was transformed by the Industrial Revolution. The population of Manchester soared. From 75,000 in 1801 it rose to 126,000 in 1821. It then rose to 142,000 in 1831. (Part of the rise in population was due to very poor Irish immigrants).
In 1816 a water company began supplying piped water through iron pipes (for those who could afford to be connected). In the 1820s Manchester gained gas street lights.
Like all 19th century towns Manchester had dreadful slums. Some streets were unpaved. In some of them, rubbish such as rotting vegetables was piled in heaps. It was only removed at intervals to be sold as fertilizer. People used cesspits, which were only cleaned infrequently. The worst slums were the cellar dwellings. Whole families lived in 1 room cellars. Sometimes they had no furniture and slept on piles of straw. They were damp and poorly ventilated. Because of these horrid conditions, diseases wwere rife. In 1832 a cholera epidemic in Manchester killed 674 people.
However there were some improvements in Manchester in the early 19th century. The Manchester Chamber of Commerce was created in 1820. The Manchester Guardian began publication in 1821. From 1828 horse drawn buses ran in the streets of Manchester. In 1830 a railway to Liverpool opened.
The Royal Institution for the promotion of Literature, Science and the Arts was built in 1829. It was made an art gallery in 1882. A Natural History Museum opened in Manchester in 1835.
A corn exchange where grain could be bought and sold was built in 1837 and in 1838 Manchester was made a borough for the first time.
Life in 19th century Manchester gradually improved.In 1846 the first public parks in Manchester were created, Peel Park, Queens Park and Phillips Park.
After 1845 Manchester council took responsibility for removing refuse. They also removed sewage. In those days some people had cesspits. Others had a bucket with a grid on the bottom. The urine would soak into the soil while the excrement was caught. At night a horse and cart came round and men removed the 'night soil'. (Everyone kept their windows closed when the 'night soil men' came!) In 1851 the council took over the towns water supply.
The Church of St Mary was made a cathedral in 1847. A tower was added in 1868.
In the early 19th century Manchester became world famous as a manufacturing center. Wool, silk, and cotton were manufactured and vast numbers of working people worked 12 hour days in the mills. There was also a papermaking industry and iron foundries.
By 1851 the population of Manchester had reached 186,000. In the late 19th century the population was boosted by the arrival of Jews fleeing persecution in Eastern Europe.
The first public library in Manchester opened in 1852. Then in 1853 Manchester was made a city. The town hall was built in 1877. A technical school was built in 1892.
In 1894 the Manchester Ship Canal opened. This turned Manchester into an inland port.
Life in the 19th century
MANCHESTER IN THE 20th CENTURY
John Rylands library opened in 1900. It merged with the university library in 1972. Manchester University was founded in 1903. Also in 1903, the council purchased Heaton Park. The central library was built in 1934. The Town Hall was extended in 1938.
In the early 20th century there was some diversification of industry in Manchester. New industries included flour milling, biscuits and breakfast cereals. The old industry of cotton went into a steep decline. Engineering also suffered during the depression of the 1930s though it revived during World War II. In the second half of the century manufacturing industry declined and was, to a certain extent, replaced by service industries such as education and finance.
Tourism also became an important industry in Manchester in the late 20th century. A Museum of Science and Industry opened in 1969. A Museum of Transport opened in 1979.
In the 1980s Castlefield was turned into an Urban Heritage Park including a reconstruction of the Roman Fort. In 1984 the Jewish Museum opened. The G-Mex Centre opened in 1986. The People's History Museum opened in 1994.
Meanwhile the Arndale Centre was built in the 1970s. The first section opened in 1976 and it was completed in 1979.
In the early 20th century the council built the first council houses in Manchester. They also set about demolishing the slums. During World War II the center of Manchester was devastated. Many warehouses and business premises were destroyed along with many old buildings. Piccadilly Square was leveled. However Manchester rose again.
During the 20th century more and more people moved out of the city center to live in the mushrooming suburbs. The population of the city center dropped considerably.
From the 1970s a Chinatown grew up in Manchester. A Chinese Arch was erected in 1987. The Chinese Arts Centre opened the same year.
In 1992 the metrolink trams began running. In 1996 IRA bombs devastated the city centre but it was rebuilt. The phoenix rose from the ashes. The Trafford Shopping Centre opened in 1998.
Life in the 20th century
MANCHESTER IN THE 21ST CENTURY
In the 21st century Manchester is a flourishing city. Although the old manufacturing industries have declined service industries are thriving. The Lowry Art Gallery opened in 2000 and the Civil Justice Centre was officially opened by the Queen in 2008. Meanwhile Beetham Tower, the tallest building in Manchester was built in 2006. Today the population of Manchester is 510,000.
A Timeline of Manchester
A Brief History of Bolton
A Brief History of Liverpool
A Brief History of Stockport
A Brief History of Warrington
A Brief history of Wigan
A Brief history of England
Last revised 2019 | 3,081 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Two more buildings at the site of an ancient Egyptian military fortress dating to the reign of Ramses II have been discovered by archaeologists working in the Beheira Governorate, north west of Cairo.
The two units attached to the fortress and residential building are believed to have been used as storage sheds for food, a statement from Egypt’s Ministry of Antiquities said. The fortress dates to the 19th Dynasty, between 1279 and 1213 BC.
What is interesting about the storage sheds, the Ministry said, is the way in which the food had been preserved.
Archaeologists working at the site found animal and fish bones, as well as pottery kilns and vessels, examination of which indicated the ancient Egyptians would dry out food in order to preserve it. The grain had been roasted “to cleanse the insects and rid them of moisture and the effect of the heat before storing them in … silos to ensure their survival, possibly without causing decay,” the statement said.
The ancient Egyptians are known to have preserved food in a number of ways, including fermentation, salting, drying and smoking.
The buildings were both surrounded by a square-shaped mud-brick wall. They were separated by a rectangular courtyard. They were located in the north-west corner of the military fortress.
Previous excavations at the fortress showed that the external walls, which had pillars and towers, had internal and external reinforcements.
Ramses II’s reign has seen many successful military campaigns into the Levant. He established several cities to secure Egypt’s borders.
The pharaoh is believed to be one of the longest-reigning in ancient Egypt—he is thought to have taken the throne in his late teens and lived until his early 90s, ruling for over 60 years. He was buried in a tomb in the Valley of the Kings.
The Sphinx of Ramses II—a 25,000-pound stone carving of a lion with a human head—was excavated by W. M. Flinders Petrie in 1913. It was transported over 6,000 miles to the U.S., arriving in South Philadelphia in October of the same year. It was transported to the Penn Museum via horse-drawn cart through the city and was initially placed in the museum’s courtyard. However, concerns about its preservation meant it was moved inside, eventually finding a home in the Egypt Gallery in 1926, where it has been ever since.
Now, however, it is set to see sunlight for the first time in almost 100 years as it is moved into the Main Entrance Hall. “The Sphinx will serve as the centerpiece to the grand Main Entrance Hall, welcoming visitors to explore our outstanding collections that do much more than illustrate the past; they unlock the wonder of the human story to foster empathy, build connections, and create understanding in a complex world,” Julian Siggers, Williams Director at the Penn Museum, said in a statement.
“The Sphinx has long been our unofficial mascot; this move puts it front and center, as the anchor of our new visitor experience.” | <urn:uuid:687224c6-7986-4b44-b717-97999cb91f0d> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://cairoherald.com/ancient-egypt/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00201.warc.gz | en | 0.983168 | 641 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
-0.142369344830513,
1.081979751586914,
0.357989102602005,
0.34139284491539,
-0.2271026223897934,
-0.3899526000022888,
-0.14315570890903473,
-0.22896748781204224,
-0.22279095649719238,
-0.027798328548669815,
-0.32360178232192993,
-0.8537929654121399,
0.029982302337884903,
0.1836195588111877... | 3 | Two more buildings at the site of an ancient Egyptian military fortress dating to the reign of Ramses II have been discovered by archaeologists working in the Beheira Governorate, north west of Cairo.
The two units attached to the fortress and residential building are believed to have been used as storage sheds for food, a statement from Egypt’s Ministry of Antiquities said. The fortress dates to the 19th Dynasty, between 1279 and 1213 BC.
What is interesting about the storage sheds, the Ministry said, is the way in which the food had been preserved.
Archaeologists working at the site found animal and fish bones, as well as pottery kilns and vessels, examination of which indicated the ancient Egyptians would dry out food in order to preserve it. The grain had been roasted “to cleanse the insects and rid them of moisture and the effect of the heat before storing them in … silos to ensure their survival, possibly without causing decay,” the statement said.
The ancient Egyptians are known to have preserved food in a number of ways, including fermentation, salting, drying and smoking.
The buildings were both surrounded by a square-shaped mud-brick wall. They were separated by a rectangular courtyard. They were located in the north-west corner of the military fortress.
Previous excavations at the fortress showed that the external walls, which had pillars and towers, had internal and external reinforcements.
Ramses II’s reign has seen many successful military campaigns into the Levant. He established several cities to secure Egypt’s borders.
The pharaoh is believed to be one of the longest-reigning in ancient Egypt—he is thought to have taken the throne in his late teens and lived until his early 90s, ruling for over 60 years. He was buried in a tomb in the Valley of the Kings.
The Sphinx of Ramses II—a 25,000-pound stone carving of a lion with a human head—was excavated by W. M. Flinders Petrie in 1913. It was transported over 6,000 miles to the U.S., arriving in South Philadelphia in October of the same year. It was transported to the Penn Museum via horse-drawn cart through the city and was initially placed in the museum’s courtyard. However, concerns about its preservation meant it was moved inside, eventually finding a home in the Egypt Gallery in 1926, where it has been ever since.
Now, however, it is set to see sunlight for the first time in almost 100 years as it is moved into the Main Entrance Hall. “The Sphinx will serve as the centerpiece to the grand Main Entrance Hall, welcoming visitors to explore our outstanding collections that do much more than illustrate the past; they unlock the wonder of the human story to foster empathy, build connections, and create understanding in a complex world,” Julian Siggers, Williams Director at the Penn Museum, said in a statement.
“The Sphinx has long been our unofficial mascot; this move puts it front and center, as the anchor of our new visitor experience.” | 631 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Christmas day WW1
WORLD WAR 1 cHristmas day
By Rose and Aiden
In World War 1 on Christmas day, Germany and England played a game of football for fun because Christmas day is special. The year was 1914. They played on No Mans Land.
As soon as they heard the bombing, they started to fight, again. We watched a video from the Sainsburys Christmas advert a few years ago, to give us an idea of what really happened. We saw England and Germany having fun like in the picture. The soldiers were having lots of fun together and looked sad when the bombing started again.
Have you seen the advert? Use the link to watch Jim and Otto meet and play football!
What Happened on The 25th December 1914?
By Roisin and partner
On Christmas day 1914, a strange thing happened; the two armies played a football match. The Christmas Truce has become one of the most famous and mythologised events of the First World War. Late on Christmas Eve 1914, men of the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) heard German troops in the trenches opposite them singing carols and patriotic songs and saw lanterns and small fir trees along their trenches. Messages began to be shouted between the trenches.
The following day, British and German soldiers met in no man’s land and exchanged gifts, took photos and some played impromptu games of Football. They also buried casualties and repaired trenches and dugouts. After Boxing Day, meetings in no man’s land dwindled out.
The truce was not observed everywhere along the Western Front. Elsewhere the fighting continued and sadly casualties did occur on Christmas day.
Christmas day World War 1 by Mia and Charlie
On Christmas day Germany and England were still fighting. but because it was Christmas they would play a game of football for peace. The reason they didn’t fight was because it was Christmas day and it was a special day. They were. singing so that’s why they stopped and listened to each other.
The two people from different countries stood up and took their hats off and didn’t fight. Their names were Otto and Jim.
This was also Sainsbury’s advert for Christmas and remind people about World War 1 on Christmas day, to remind us of World War 1 and World War 2 how they protected us in the war. In the war, children had to use lots of gas masks when there was a air raids and had to go inside little bunkers to protect them from getting hurt and injured. The kid’s gas masks were also painted red and blue to represent Mickey mouse. | <urn:uuid:4f398572-416d-472c-b5bf-12ff075f9131> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.st-austins.org.uk/christmas-day-ww1/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700675.78/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127112805-20200127142805-00543.warc.gz | en | 0.981012 | 543 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
0.02945849299430847,
0.23433290421962738,
0.29139357805252075,
-0.21452738344669342,
-0.06776560842990875,
-0.04751386493444443,
0.002546871779486537,
0.3008570671081543,
0.07512989640235901,
-0.052753567695617676,
0.20112551748752594,
-0.055111363530159,
0.3101247251033783,
0.547782599925... | 11 | Christmas day WW1
WORLD WAR 1 cHristmas day
By Rose and Aiden
In World War 1 on Christmas day, Germany and England played a game of football for fun because Christmas day is special. The year was 1914. They played on No Mans Land.
As soon as they heard the bombing, they started to fight, again. We watched a video from the Sainsburys Christmas advert a few years ago, to give us an idea of what really happened. We saw England and Germany having fun like in the picture. The soldiers were having lots of fun together and looked sad when the bombing started again.
Have you seen the advert? Use the link to watch Jim and Otto meet and play football!
What Happened on The 25th December 1914?
By Roisin and partner
On Christmas day 1914, a strange thing happened; the two armies played a football match. The Christmas Truce has become one of the most famous and mythologised events of the First World War. Late on Christmas Eve 1914, men of the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) heard German troops in the trenches opposite them singing carols and patriotic songs and saw lanterns and small fir trees along their trenches. Messages began to be shouted between the trenches.
The following day, British and German soldiers met in no man’s land and exchanged gifts, took photos and some played impromptu games of Football. They also buried casualties and repaired trenches and dugouts. After Boxing Day, meetings in no man’s land dwindled out.
The truce was not observed everywhere along the Western Front. Elsewhere the fighting continued and sadly casualties did occur on Christmas day.
Christmas day World War 1 by Mia and Charlie
On Christmas day Germany and England were still fighting. but because it was Christmas they would play a game of football for peace. The reason they didn’t fight was because it was Christmas day and it was a special day. They were. singing so that’s why they stopped and listened to each other.
The two people from different countries stood up and took their hats off and didn’t fight. Their names were Otto and Jim.
This was also Sainsbury’s advert for Christmas and remind people about World War 1 on Christmas day, to remind us of World War 1 and World War 2 how they protected us in the war. In the war, children had to use lots of gas masks when there was a air raids and had to go inside little bunkers to protect them from getting hurt and injured. The kid’s gas masks were also painted red and blue to represent Mickey mouse. | 546 | ENGLISH | 1 |
How does the poet use language to create a vivid portrayal of love?
First Love was written by John Clare (1793-1864) about his true love for a woman called Mary Joyce, who was from an upper class family, differing from his background from lower class.Even though Mary Joyce was the love of his life, he married another woman and had a family with her.In later years, his obsession led to him being admitted in to an asylum.
During his time there, he had been said to think he was Lord Bryon (Mary Joyce’s actual husband). She was the daughter of a wealthy farmer who did not approve of him.
His infatuated love for her drove him to insanity. The poem talks about the first time he laid his eye upon her. In the essay, I will discuss how the poet uses language to create a dramatic portrayal of his love. The first stanza is full of terms with vibrant connotations. The poet uses this to create a jovial atmosphere and help the reader determine his emotions at that time. The very first line informs the reader that love had never ‘struck’ him before that day that he saw her. The word ‘struck’ denotes that it was something unexpected and impulsive.
He links her beauty to a radiant flower, using the words ‘sweet’ and ‘bloomed’. The word ‘bloomed’ may also imply that when he saw her, his world brightened and he felt alive. ‘And it stole my heart away complete’ entails that upon laying his eyes on her, she had his utmost attention. The last four lines of this stanza indicate that he perceived her as goddess; this because his face turned a ‘deadly pale’ – it depicts how nervous she made him. Clare claims his ‘legs refused to walk away’; this symbolises the trance he was in and how hypnotic her beauty was to him. And when she looked what could I ail? ‘ – alludes that when she looked his way, he was left breathless.
‘My life and all seemed turned to clay’; this line conveys how to him, everything else in his world came to a stop in that moment. Although, it is just the first verse, it expresses quite eloquently how he felt. This concludes that what Clare felt upon their first meeting, was something he had never experienced before and the clammy, bewilderment he felt left him breath taken and yearning for her.
He truly believed that it was love at first sight and he could not rest because he didn’t have her. I think that he became a bit too fixated with his love for her and couldn’t let go. This affected his health and wellbeing, eventually leading him to lose his mentality. In my opinion, it may have been love at first, but, thereafter, it became lust where he just longed for her. If he truly loved her, he would have been happy for her even if it meant without him. | <urn:uuid:4c93dc15-ee55-4eae-b5c5-27765292ebab> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://phdessay.com/poet-use-language-create-vivid-portrayal-love/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251705142.94/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127174507-20200127204507-00047.warc.gz | en | 0.99403 | 640 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
0.10849931836128235,
0.08266463875770569,
0.21698597073554993,
0.2184445559978485,
-0.46214836835861206,
0.4248613119125366,
0.3522184491157532,
0.12222114950418472,
0.10504429042339325,
-0.41709184646606445,
-0.10240636765956879,
-0.17306965589523315,
0.1967804729938507,
0.109486356377601... | 1 | How does the poet use language to create a vivid portrayal of love?
First Love was written by John Clare (1793-1864) about his true love for a woman called Mary Joyce, who was from an upper class family, differing from his background from lower class.Even though Mary Joyce was the love of his life, he married another woman and had a family with her.In later years, his obsession led to him being admitted in to an asylum.
During his time there, he had been said to think he was Lord Bryon (Mary Joyce’s actual husband). She was the daughter of a wealthy farmer who did not approve of him.
His infatuated love for her drove him to insanity. The poem talks about the first time he laid his eye upon her. In the essay, I will discuss how the poet uses language to create a dramatic portrayal of his love. The first stanza is full of terms with vibrant connotations. The poet uses this to create a jovial atmosphere and help the reader determine his emotions at that time. The very first line informs the reader that love had never ‘struck’ him before that day that he saw her. The word ‘struck’ denotes that it was something unexpected and impulsive.
He links her beauty to a radiant flower, using the words ‘sweet’ and ‘bloomed’. The word ‘bloomed’ may also imply that when he saw her, his world brightened and he felt alive. ‘And it stole my heart away complete’ entails that upon laying his eyes on her, she had his utmost attention. The last four lines of this stanza indicate that he perceived her as goddess; this because his face turned a ‘deadly pale’ – it depicts how nervous she made him. Clare claims his ‘legs refused to walk away’; this symbolises the trance he was in and how hypnotic her beauty was to him. And when she looked what could I ail? ‘ – alludes that when she looked his way, he was left breathless.
‘My life and all seemed turned to clay’; this line conveys how to him, everything else in his world came to a stop in that moment. Although, it is just the first verse, it expresses quite eloquently how he felt. This concludes that what Clare felt upon their first meeting, was something he had never experienced before and the clammy, bewilderment he felt left him breath taken and yearning for her.
He truly believed that it was love at first sight and he could not rest because he didn’t have her. I think that he became a bit too fixated with his love for her and couldn’t let go. This affected his health and wellbeing, eventually leading him to lose his mentality. In my opinion, it may have been love at first, but, thereafter, it became lust where he just longed for her. If he truly loved her, he would have been happy for her even if it meant without him. | 608 | ENGLISH | 1 |
For ninety-nine years a single family ruled Rome. Five of its members in turn controlled the government and the army. But this was not a monarchy: none ruled by right, and the institutions of the old Roman republic remained in place—the consuls, the Senate, even the elections.
This peculiar regime owed its origins to one remarkable man. Gaius Octavius Thurinus was just a teenager when he abandoned the quiet life of the Roman landed gentry in 44 BCE to take up arms against the assassins of his great-uncle Julius Caesar, who had adopted him in his will. For the next thirteen years he fought Caesar’s enemies and then his own. He took advantage of his adoptive father’s posthumous deification to assume a new name: Imperator Caesar Divi Filius—“General Caesar, son of a god.” And finally, in 31 BCE, when he was thirty-one, he defeated the combined fleet of Mark Antony and Cleopatra at the Battle of Actium to win control of the Roman Empire.
He governed the Roman state for forty-six years through a series of familiar Republican appointments, but outside their traditional restrictions. At first he served continuously as consul, by tradition a one-year post. After eight years he vacated that office but retained the powers of a tribune of the plebs, which allowed him to veto in the interests of the Roman people any legislation, election, or administrative action. At the same time, he transformed Rome’s conscript citizen militia into a standing professional army, which he controlled, since the Senate had granted him military powers throughout the empire greater than those of any other commander. The term he used to describe his anomalous position was Princeps, or “First Man,” and in 27 BCE the Senate awarded him the title Augustus, “consecrated,” the name by which he is known today.
Dictatorship is one thing, dynasty quite another. The Romans had forcibly expelled their monarchy in the sixth century BCE and could not stomach its return. Athough Augustus enthusiastically promoted family members to positions of political and military power, he publicly denied any dynastic ambitions. Perhaps he was telling the truth: succession planning is not the only possible explanation for the preferment of one’s own family. Even on his deathbed in 14 CE, he was said to have been discussing a variety of senators as possible successors. But with his demise, and after a show of great reluctance, his stepson Tiberius took power.
Tiberius was by then an experienced general and politician in his mid-fifties, but he had in the past shown hesitation…
This is exclusive content for subscribers only.
Get unlimited access to The New York Review for just $1 an issue!
Continue reading this article, and thousands more from our archive, for the low introductory rate of just $1 an issue. Choose a Print, Digital, or All Access subscription. | <urn:uuid:fde47a83-376b-471a-90fd-ae8dde87685b> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2020/01/16/imperial-rome-mothers-emperors/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591234.15/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117205732-20200117233732-00192.warc.gz | en | 0.980653 | 617 | 3.5 | 4 | [
-0.37843945622444153,
0.7535684704780579,
0.3558182120323181,
-0.2388298213481903,
-0.49568212032318115,
-0.10889515280723572,
0.0039887819439172745,
0.24127009510993958,
0.01636589504778385,
-0.05606745928525925,
0.14480891823768616,
-0.11605378985404968,
0.0015012291260063648,
0.16280026... | 4 | For ninety-nine years a single family ruled Rome. Five of its members in turn controlled the government and the army. But this was not a monarchy: none ruled by right, and the institutions of the old Roman republic remained in place—the consuls, the Senate, even the elections.
This peculiar regime owed its origins to one remarkable man. Gaius Octavius Thurinus was just a teenager when he abandoned the quiet life of the Roman landed gentry in 44 BCE to take up arms against the assassins of his great-uncle Julius Caesar, who had adopted him in his will. For the next thirteen years he fought Caesar’s enemies and then his own. He took advantage of his adoptive father’s posthumous deification to assume a new name: Imperator Caesar Divi Filius—“General Caesar, son of a god.” And finally, in 31 BCE, when he was thirty-one, he defeated the combined fleet of Mark Antony and Cleopatra at the Battle of Actium to win control of the Roman Empire.
He governed the Roman state for forty-six years through a series of familiar Republican appointments, but outside their traditional restrictions. At first he served continuously as consul, by tradition a one-year post. After eight years he vacated that office but retained the powers of a tribune of the plebs, which allowed him to veto in the interests of the Roman people any legislation, election, or administrative action. At the same time, he transformed Rome’s conscript citizen militia into a standing professional army, which he controlled, since the Senate had granted him military powers throughout the empire greater than those of any other commander. The term he used to describe his anomalous position was Princeps, or “First Man,” and in 27 BCE the Senate awarded him the title Augustus, “consecrated,” the name by which he is known today.
Dictatorship is one thing, dynasty quite another. The Romans had forcibly expelled their monarchy in the sixth century BCE and could not stomach its return. Athough Augustus enthusiastically promoted family members to positions of political and military power, he publicly denied any dynastic ambitions. Perhaps he was telling the truth: succession planning is not the only possible explanation for the preferment of one’s own family. Even on his deathbed in 14 CE, he was said to have been discussing a variety of senators as possible successors. But with his demise, and after a show of great reluctance, his stepson Tiberius took power.
Tiberius was by then an experienced general and politician in his mid-fifties, but he had in the past shown hesitation…
This is exclusive content for subscribers only.
Get unlimited access to The New York Review for just $1 an issue!
Continue reading this article, and thousands more from our archive, for the low introductory rate of just $1 an issue. Choose a Print, Digital, or All Access subscription. | 598 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Harlem Renaissance’s Forgotten History: Black LGBT Leaders Who Were A Major Part Of The Movement
".... many of the artists we celebrate that are associated with the Harlem Renaissance were not only Black, but also queer."
This piece was submitted from a member of our enthusiastic community of readers. If you’re interested in sharing your opinion on any cultural, political or personal topic, create an account here and check out our how-to post to learn more.
The Harlem Renaissance was one of the biggest turning points in Black cultural history. Heavily known for its opulent fashions, remarkable literature and jazzy music. The 1920s were a vibrant time for Black creative expression.
Like what you're reading?
Get more in your inbox.
The Harlem Renaissance was also an era full of innovative ideas, social changes and artistic outlets that truly showcased the many talents of Black people.
When we think of The Harlem Renaissance, we typically think of leaders such as Langston Hughes, Josephine Baker and Bessie Smith. What we don’t know (or rather don’t acknowledge) is that those same leaders were LGBTQ individuals. That’s right, many popular artists during this time were either openly gay or simply queer.
Here are just a few LGBTQ individuals who are notable participants to The Harlem Renaissance:
Gladys Bentley was a lesbian blues singer known for her risqué songs and numerous girlfriends. Dressing in white tuxedos and top hats, Gladys Bentley was labeled as a male impersonator. She headlined at The Clam House (which was a famous gay speakeasy) and had back-up dancers who were drag queens. Around 1930, Bentley married a white woman in Atlantic City, New Jersey. But later, Bentley went back in the closet and claimed to marry a man who denied ever being married to Bentley.
Richard Barthé was a sculptor and portrait artist whose work focused on Black male beauty. He was the first sculptor to achieve critical success. Much of his work illustrated Black men, often in nude, in abstract poses. Richard Barthé did not keep his homosexuality a secret like his closeted contemporaries. The sculptor admitted to being gay in an interview and even had a romantic relationship with Bruce Nugent, who was another famous contributor of the Harlem Renaissance.
Josephine Baker was a well-known singer, dancer and actress during the Jazz Age, and became the first Black international superstar. Josephine Baker identified herself as bisexual. She had four different husbands throughout her lifetime, but carried on affairs with women, including Mexican artist Frida Kahlo and French author Colette.
Poet, novelist and playwright Langston Hughes was a primary contributor to the Harlem Renaissance. Although Hughes didn’t talk much about his sexuality, rumors about him started when he was a young writer. Hughes included gay-related themes in his work like "Blessed Assurance" and “Seven People Dancing.” He also often attended the Harlem drag balls. Langston Hughes was oddly fond of these balls calling them “spectacles of color.” Although there’s no solid evidence that Langston Hughes was homosexual, his work and fascination with queerness show that at the very least he was an ally.
There were many other LGBTQ artist that led the Harlem Renaissance such as Countee Cullen, Ethel Waters, Ma Rainey, Wallace Thruman, Claude Mckay and so many more.
We, as a community, have always considered the Harlem Renaissance as a Black cultural era. The problem is that many of the artists we celebrate that are associated with the Harlem Renaissance were not only Black, but also queer. The LGBT community played a significant part to the growth of the movement. Therefore, the queer identities of these artist should not be erased. | <urn:uuid:88ded709-c254-44e7-aa06-b78bd10d2e4d> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://blavity.com/the-harlem-renaissances-forgotten-history-black-lgbt-leaders-who-were-a-major-part-of-the-movement?category1=opinion&fbclid=IwAR0UEroBh2W2wxPke6GB118YVr855PPDjJiI36kVtDBmoGChdJTKCng_etI | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251802249.87/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129194333-20200129223333-00540.warc.gz | en | 0.982464 | 785 | 3.5625 | 4 | [
-0.18290479481220245,
0.002217634581029415,
0.09768086671829224,
0.18407362699508667,
-0.5599608421325684,
0.5530728101730347,
0.15500113368034363,
0.22884517908096313,
-0.20426562428474426,
0.11326953768730164,
0.20917320251464844,
-0.07658284902572632,
0.14031031727790833,
-0.03900726884... | 1 | The Harlem Renaissance’s Forgotten History: Black LGBT Leaders Who Were A Major Part Of The Movement
".... many of the artists we celebrate that are associated with the Harlem Renaissance were not only Black, but also queer."
This piece was submitted from a member of our enthusiastic community of readers. If you’re interested in sharing your opinion on any cultural, political or personal topic, create an account here and check out our how-to post to learn more.
The Harlem Renaissance was one of the biggest turning points in Black cultural history. Heavily known for its opulent fashions, remarkable literature and jazzy music. The 1920s were a vibrant time for Black creative expression.
Like what you're reading?
Get more in your inbox.
The Harlem Renaissance was also an era full of innovative ideas, social changes and artistic outlets that truly showcased the many talents of Black people.
When we think of The Harlem Renaissance, we typically think of leaders such as Langston Hughes, Josephine Baker and Bessie Smith. What we don’t know (or rather don’t acknowledge) is that those same leaders were LGBTQ individuals. That’s right, many popular artists during this time were either openly gay or simply queer.
Here are just a few LGBTQ individuals who are notable participants to The Harlem Renaissance:
Gladys Bentley was a lesbian blues singer known for her risqué songs and numerous girlfriends. Dressing in white tuxedos and top hats, Gladys Bentley was labeled as a male impersonator. She headlined at The Clam House (which was a famous gay speakeasy) and had back-up dancers who were drag queens. Around 1930, Bentley married a white woman in Atlantic City, New Jersey. But later, Bentley went back in the closet and claimed to marry a man who denied ever being married to Bentley.
Richard Barthé was a sculptor and portrait artist whose work focused on Black male beauty. He was the first sculptor to achieve critical success. Much of his work illustrated Black men, often in nude, in abstract poses. Richard Barthé did not keep his homosexuality a secret like his closeted contemporaries. The sculptor admitted to being gay in an interview and even had a romantic relationship with Bruce Nugent, who was another famous contributor of the Harlem Renaissance.
Josephine Baker was a well-known singer, dancer and actress during the Jazz Age, and became the first Black international superstar. Josephine Baker identified herself as bisexual. She had four different husbands throughout her lifetime, but carried on affairs with women, including Mexican artist Frida Kahlo and French author Colette.
Poet, novelist and playwright Langston Hughes was a primary contributor to the Harlem Renaissance. Although Hughes didn’t talk much about his sexuality, rumors about him started when he was a young writer. Hughes included gay-related themes in his work like "Blessed Assurance" and “Seven People Dancing.” He also often attended the Harlem drag balls. Langston Hughes was oddly fond of these balls calling them “spectacles of color.” Although there’s no solid evidence that Langston Hughes was homosexual, his work and fascination with queerness show that at the very least he was an ally.
There were many other LGBTQ artist that led the Harlem Renaissance such as Countee Cullen, Ethel Waters, Ma Rainey, Wallace Thruman, Claude Mckay and so many more.
We, as a community, have always considered the Harlem Renaissance as a Black cultural era. The problem is that many of the artists we celebrate that are associated with the Harlem Renaissance were not only Black, but also queer. The LGBT community played a significant part to the growth of the movement. Therefore, the queer identities of these artist should not be erased. | 756 | ENGLISH | 1 |
During killed to reach his ‘ideal’ situation for
During WW2 the Nazis had multiple death camps in which Jews were imprisoned, tortured and killed if they were found to be weak or unfit for service. The biggest death camp was Auschwitz otherwise known as Auschwitz-Birkenau. It opened in 1940 and it was abandoned in 1945 as the Soviet Army became closer to Auschwitz it was ordered to be abandoned. Adolf Hitler ordered for Auschwitz to be built along with other death camps to reach to what he called the ‘Final Solution’. The ‘Final Solution’ was that every Jew to be killed to reach his ‘ideal’ situation for Europe. Auschwitz is located in Oswiecim, Poland on what used to be a military base. When the Jews arrived to Auschwitz they were inspected by doctors that deemed them either fit for work or unfit for work. People who were deemed unfit for work included : pregnant women, children and the elderly. They were sent to gas chambers to be killed and were never registered as Auschwitz inmates. (History)It is estimated that 1.1 million people out of 1.3 million people were killed in the death camp of Auschwitz. The second figure is the amount of people who were sent to Auschwitz. This is a rough estimation as a majority of the people killed in Auschwitz were not recorded because they were killed in gas chambers meaning that they were never recorded as inmates of the death camp. This is why it is so difficult to put an exact number to the amount of people who died at Auschwitz. Most of the People who were killed in Auschwitz were Jews and they were civilians. However it is estimated that 15000 Soviet prisoners of war were killed in Auschwitz. In addition when the Nazis ordered the evacuation of Auschwitz many of the records were destroyed before the evacuation of the camp which also adds to the fact that the number of civilian casualties was unable to be specified. (USHMM)The first video is an interview with an Auschwitz Survivor by the name of Henry Oster. He was 15 years old when he was sent to the camp from the Lodz Ghetto. His parents were killed in front of him and he was forced to work in agriculture. On April 11 1945 he was liberated by the US Third Army and was sent to an orphanage home in France. He was later sent to California in the United States to live with his Aunt and Uncle. Henry became an orthodontist and ran a practice for 60 years before his retirement. Henry Oster is now 89 years of age. This video was a short documentary documenting the story of Henry Oster as a Holocaust Survivor.The second video is an interview with an Auschwitz Survivor called Eva Mozes Kor. She was a twin from two sisters and her sister was called Miriam. She was one of the Mengele twins as Josef Mengele performed his experiments on the both of them. In 1945 Eva and her family arrived at Auschwitz. Eva and her sister were used in 2 types of experiments. The first type of experiment was that they would put her and her sister in a room naked and measure every part of their bodies and compare them to one another. The second type of experiment Eva and her sister were involved in was that they would take blood from their left arms and inject them with multiple injections in their right arms. The content of those injections are unknown to this day. In 1945 they were liberated from Auschwitz by the Soviet Army. Miriam died on June 6 1993.Significant Individuals:Josef Mengele was a Nazi Doctor. He was known as the Angel of Death or White DeathHe worked as one of the doctors in Auschwitz.Josef Mengele was one of the most significant individuals in the Auschwitz Camp. He served mostly on ” Selection Duty”. Selection Duty was to select the Jews who were unfit for work and them to be put in gas chambers.He also worked in the experimentation of the genetics of the human body. He was ordered by Hitler to find new ways in developing a larger Aryan Master Race (Blonde, Blue Eyes, Not Jewish). He also was infamous for the experimentation of twins to create a fast developing Aryan Master Race and find new ways to increase the birth rate. He was known for his cruel experiments on humans. He ‘studied’ eye color by injecting serum into the eyes of children. He also would inject chloroform into the hearts of twins to study there deaths.He performed these experiments on Jewish kids and many of them suffered from agonizing pain and dozens of twins would die as a result of his unbearable experiments. | <urn:uuid:7d9b1ea1-6305-43bc-913b-6a29b328433e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://farmersfeastmanitoba.com/during-killed-to-reach-his-ideal-situation-for/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592636.25/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118135205-20200118163205-00016.warc.gz | en | 0.994494 | 933 | 3.46875 | 3 | [
-0.28265485167503357,
0.5628811717033386,
0.02998427301645279,
0.07225647568702698,
0.12156841903924942,
0.5099763870239258,
0.17744790017604828,
0.15399006009101868,
-0.096608966588974,
-0.3826746940612793,
0.4003055989742279,
-0.19694003462791443,
-0.20958448946475983,
0.5367451906204224... | 1 | During killed to reach his ‘ideal’ situation for
During WW2 the Nazis had multiple death camps in which Jews were imprisoned, tortured and killed if they were found to be weak or unfit for service. The biggest death camp was Auschwitz otherwise known as Auschwitz-Birkenau. It opened in 1940 and it was abandoned in 1945 as the Soviet Army became closer to Auschwitz it was ordered to be abandoned. Adolf Hitler ordered for Auschwitz to be built along with other death camps to reach to what he called the ‘Final Solution’. The ‘Final Solution’ was that every Jew to be killed to reach his ‘ideal’ situation for Europe. Auschwitz is located in Oswiecim, Poland on what used to be a military base. When the Jews arrived to Auschwitz they were inspected by doctors that deemed them either fit for work or unfit for work. People who were deemed unfit for work included : pregnant women, children and the elderly. They were sent to gas chambers to be killed and were never registered as Auschwitz inmates. (History)It is estimated that 1.1 million people out of 1.3 million people were killed in the death camp of Auschwitz. The second figure is the amount of people who were sent to Auschwitz. This is a rough estimation as a majority of the people killed in Auschwitz were not recorded because they were killed in gas chambers meaning that they were never recorded as inmates of the death camp. This is why it is so difficult to put an exact number to the amount of people who died at Auschwitz. Most of the People who were killed in Auschwitz were Jews and they were civilians. However it is estimated that 15000 Soviet prisoners of war were killed in Auschwitz. In addition when the Nazis ordered the evacuation of Auschwitz many of the records were destroyed before the evacuation of the camp which also adds to the fact that the number of civilian casualties was unable to be specified. (USHMM)The first video is an interview with an Auschwitz Survivor by the name of Henry Oster. He was 15 years old when he was sent to the camp from the Lodz Ghetto. His parents were killed in front of him and he was forced to work in agriculture. On April 11 1945 he was liberated by the US Third Army and was sent to an orphanage home in France. He was later sent to California in the United States to live with his Aunt and Uncle. Henry became an orthodontist and ran a practice for 60 years before his retirement. Henry Oster is now 89 years of age. This video was a short documentary documenting the story of Henry Oster as a Holocaust Survivor.The second video is an interview with an Auschwitz Survivor called Eva Mozes Kor. She was a twin from two sisters and her sister was called Miriam. She was one of the Mengele twins as Josef Mengele performed his experiments on the both of them. In 1945 Eva and her family arrived at Auschwitz. Eva and her sister were used in 2 types of experiments. The first type of experiment was that they would put her and her sister in a room naked and measure every part of their bodies and compare them to one another. The second type of experiment Eva and her sister were involved in was that they would take blood from their left arms and inject them with multiple injections in their right arms. The content of those injections are unknown to this day. In 1945 they were liberated from Auschwitz by the Soviet Army. Miriam died on June 6 1993.Significant Individuals:Josef Mengele was a Nazi Doctor. He was known as the Angel of Death or White DeathHe worked as one of the doctors in Auschwitz.Josef Mengele was one of the most significant individuals in the Auschwitz Camp. He served mostly on ” Selection Duty”. Selection Duty was to select the Jews who were unfit for work and them to be put in gas chambers.He also worked in the experimentation of the genetics of the human body. He was ordered by Hitler to find new ways in developing a larger Aryan Master Race (Blonde, Blue Eyes, Not Jewish). He also was infamous for the experimentation of twins to create a fast developing Aryan Master Race and find new ways to increase the birth rate. He was known for his cruel experiments on humans. He ‘studied’ eye color by injecting serum into the eyes of children. He also would inject chloroform into the hearts of twins to study there deaths.He performed these experiments on Jewish kids and many of them suffered from agonizing pain and dozens of twins would die as a result of his unbearable experiments. | 950 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Recent archeological findings appear to present the most detailed evidence yet that the warrior women of Greek myths were more than just the stuff of legend and literature. Russian archaeologists last week announced they'd analyzed remains of four female warriors accompanied by spears, arrowheads and horseback riding gear in a tomb in Russia, where ancient stories about the Amazons played out.
A team from the Institute of Archaeology at the Russian Academy of Sciences says the women were Scythian nomads ranging in age from their teens to their late 40s. They were apparently buried around 2,500 years ago near what's known today as Devitsa.
While previous excavations have revealed similar findings that the Amazons may have been real, they haven't always been well preserved, the Washington Post reported. In 2017, researchers found the remains of a woman who died from battle injuries and had an arrowhead in her leg, indicating a relation to Amazon myths.
Researchers say the latest discovery marks the first time several generations of Scythian women were found buried next to each other. The oldest woman was wearing a gold ceremonial headdress known as a calathus, which could be a status symbol. This was also the first time a headdress was found on a warrior woman's head in such good condition, researchers say.
Evidence that these women may in fact have been real refutes the belief by some historians that the Amazons were a propaganda tool used to control women in Athens, as the Post notes. Ancient lore says the warrior women fought Hercules, cut off their breasts so they could shoot arrows better and lived in lesbian matriarchies. | <urn:uuid:6ec6cfa2-c312-48df-89d2-ffd8c0e0a8c3> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.cnet.com/news/spear-wielding-female-amazons-may-not-just-be-ancient-myth-archaeologists-find/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687725.76/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126043644-20200126073644-00128.warc.gz | en | 0.986403 | 331 | 3.328125 | 3 | [
-0.16520646214485168,
0.20756743848323822,
0.4824892282485962,
0.6465093493461609,
-0.28971144556999207,
-0.2328035533428192,
-0.1774156540632248,
0.4296948313713074,
-0.05146591365337372,
0.052841998636722565,
0.10588394105434418,
-0.4039599299430847,
-0.212826669216156,
0.375153332948684... | 5 | Recent archeological findings appear to present the most detailed evidence yet that the warrior women of Greek myths were more than just the stuff of legend and literature. Russian archaeologists last week announced they'd analyzed remains of four female warriors accompanied by spears, arrowheads and horseback riding gear in a tomb in Russia, where ancient stories about the Amazons played out.
A team from the Institute of Archaeology at the Russian Academy of Sciences says the women were Scythian nomads ranging in age from their teens to their late 40s. They were apparently buried around 2,500 years ago near what's known today as Devitsa.
While previous excavations have revealed similar findings that the Amazons may have been real, they haven't always been well preserved, the Washington Post reported. In 2017, researchers found the remains of a woman who died from battle injuries and had an arrowhead in her leg, indicating a relation to Amazon myths.
Researchers say the latest discovery marks the first time several generations of Scythian women were found buried next to each other. The oldest woman was wearing a gold ceremonial headdress known as a calathus, which could be a status symbol. This was also the first time a headdress was found on a warrior woman's head in such good condition, researchers say.
Evidence that these women may in fact have been real refutes the belief by some historians that the Amazons were a propaganda tool used to control women in Athens, as the Post notes. Ancient lore says the warrior women fought Hercules, cut off their breasts so they could shoot arrows better and lived in lesbian matriarchies. | 339 | ENGLISH | 1 |
You could summarize this poem in one word by just saying "stoicism." That's sto-i-ciz-um. Stoicism was originally a philosophical movement that taught that true sages did not experience emotions like fear and anger, that the truly wise man would be impervious to misfortune. "If" is a poem all about this philosophy. The speaker tells his listener not to tell anybody when he loses all his money, not to give in to hate, not to allow his friends or enemies to hurt him, and so on. It is a poem that essentially says that it is only by being stoic (by having a "stiff upper lip") that a boy can become a man, and that a man can master the universe. Okay, so the poem is a little rigid, and maybe a little unrealistic at times, but the basic premise—that success is based on one's ability to master negative emotions and to maintain balance in one's life—rings only too true.
You got this. Stoicism is about being in complete control—of one's emotions, of one's feelings, and of just about anything else that might distract us from the tasks at hand.
Sheesh, stoicism is a difficult philosophy to adhere to. It is almost inhuman to expect people to not experience negative emotions when they lose things or when they're defeated.
Have you ever the heard the term "boy's club"? Yeah, well, this is a boy's poem. No women are in here—anywhere. Not a single one. This is a poem about manhood, about how to become and act like a "man." It is clearly spoken by a father (or father figure) to his son, and it celebrates typically masculine virtues (strength, for example). In this day and age, that might seem odd. Women can be strong, too, that's for sure. In Kipling's day, however, gender roles were, well, a little more segregated let's just say. While the poem does offer some good advice, it is kind of a problem that the advice really only applies to the fellas.
Something just isn't right about this poem. Whatever ideas it expresses are cheapened by the fact that they are limited to only men.
It's sad, but to be manly is to be unemotional. The speaker tells his listener that, to conquer the world and to be a man, he has to be able to "watch" crummy things happen and simply fix them, without "breathing" a word about it.
This poem isn't just how about how to be a stoic, about how to handle misfortune. It is also about misfortune itself, about defeat. Just think about all the different kinds of loss mentioned in this poem: money, the things one has dedicated one's life to, one's character. Defeat, loss—these are part of life, and there's simply no getting around that. The poem makes that very clear. The speaker, for example, doesn't bewail misfortune, or spout lines about how unfair life is, but rather makes us understand that this is just the way things are.
This poem really stresses the importance of not having a defeatist attitude. In fact, a defeatist attitude is the quickest way to not get possession of the earth and everything in it. So, turn that frown upside down, future world dominator dude.
Defeats don't have to be permanent. If this poem says one thing, it says that defeat can be overcome, that losses can be turned back into wins.
In a poem that was inspired by a major political event (the Jameson Raid, an attempt to colonize South Africa further) you'd think there would be more politics in there. Despite the fact that there isn't a lot of obvious political business going on, however, this really is a political poem—just think of that reference to kings, crowds, and common people, or the whole business about taking control of the earth. Whether it seems to be or not, "If" is a poem about all kinds of different political issues (leadership, control of land, gender roles, etc.).
Politics is all about striking out a middle course, being able to talk to kings and commoners and remaining immune to harm from one's friends and enemies.
This stuff is terrible advice for a politician. After all, their first job should be to communicate with their people, not bottle everything up inside in order to portray some invented ideal of how to act. | <urn:uuid:f81560c7-1180-46e3-870e-dea9f2d716af> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.shmoop.com/study-guides/poetry/if-by-rudyard-kipling/themes | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592394.9/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118081234-20200118105234-00268.warc.gz | en | 0.980738 | 931 | 3.328125 | 3 | [
0.26214390993118286,
0.0337793342769146,
-0.1818842589855194,
0.16872479021549225,
-0.30481410026550293,
-0.019401760771870613,
0.3990941643714905,
0.0523703470826149,
-0.05039127171039581,
-0.14710743725299835,
0.20498770475387573,
0.1942160725593567,
0.34438619017601013,
-0.0178404431790... | 2 | You could summarize this poem in one word by just saying "stoicism." That's sto-i-ciz-um. Stoicism was originally a philosophical movement that taught that true sages did not experience emotions like fear and anger, that the truly wise man would be impervious to misfortune. "If" is a poem all about this philosophy. The speaker tells his listener not to tell anybody when he loses all his money, not to give in to hate, not to allow his friends or enemies to hurt him, and so on. It is a poem that essentially says that it is only by being stoic (by having a "stiff upper lip") that a boy can become a man, and that a man can master the universe. Okay, so the poem is a little rigid, and maybe a little unrealistic at times, but the basic premise—that success is based on one's ability to master negative emotions and to maintain balance in one's life—rings only too true.
You got this. Stoicism is about being in complete control—of one's emotions, of one's feelings, and of just about anything else that might distract us from the tasks at hand.
Sheesh, stoicism is a difficult philosophy to adhere to. It is almost inhuman to expect people to not experience negative emotions when they lose things or when they're defeated.
Have you ever the heard the term "boy's club"? Yeah, well, this is a boy's poem. No women are in here—anywhere. Not a single one. This is a poem about manhood, about how to become and act like a "man." It is clearly spoken by a father (or father figure) to his son, and it celebrates typically masculine virtues (strength, for example). In this day and age, that might seem odd. Women can be strong, too, that's for sure. In Kipling's day, however, gender roles were, well, a little more segregated let's just say. While the poem does offer some good advice, it is kind of a problem that the advice really only applies to the fellas.
Something just isn't right about this poem. Whatever ideas it expresses are cheapened by the fact that they are limited to only men.
It's sad, but to be manly is to be unemotional. The speaker tells his listener that, to conquer the world and to be a man, he has to be able to "watch" crummy things happen and simply fix them, without "breathing" a word about it.
This poem isn't just how about how to be a stoic, about how to handle misfortune. It is also about misfortune itself, about defeat. Just think about all the different kinds of loss mentioned in this poem: money, the things one has dedicated one's life to, one's character. Defeat, loss—these are part of life, and there's simply no getting around that. The poem makes that very clear. The speaker, for example, doesn't bewail misfortune, or spout lines about how unfair life is, but rather makes us understand that this is just the way things are.
This poem really stresses the importance of not having a defeatist attitude. In fact, a defeatist attitude is the quickest way to not get possession of the earth and everything in it. So, turn that frown upside down, future world dominator dude.
Defeats don't have to be permanent. If this poem says one thing, it says that defeat can be overcome, that losses can be turned back into wins.
In a poem that was inspired by a major political event (the Jameson Raid, an attempt to colonize South Africa further) you'd think there would be more politics in there. Despite the fact that there isn't a lot of obvious political business going on, however, this really is a political poem—just think of that reference to kings, crowds, and common people, or the whole business about taking control of the earth. Whether it seems to be or not, "If" is a poem about all kinds of different political issues (leadership, control of land, gender roles, etc.).
Politics is all about striking out a middle course, being able to talk to kings and commoners and remaining immune to harm from one's friends and enemies.
This stuff is terrible advice for a politician. After all, their first job should be to communicate with their people, not bottle everything up inside in order to portray some invented ideal of how to act. | 925 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.