Split (1)

train · 729k rows

text string	id string	dump string	url string	file_path string	language string	language_score float64	token_count int64	score float64	int_score int64	embedding list	count int64	Content string	Tokens int64	Top_Lang string	Top_Conf float64
HISTORIC BACKGROUND OF ST JAMES'S PARISH & CHURCH The two adjoining parishes of St Catherine’s was a subsidiary parish to St James’s until sometime during the 13th century when they were separated into two distinct parishes, both remaining under the auspices of the Abbey of St. Thomas. In 1546, following the dissolution of the monasteries, they were united, long with St John’s, Kilmainham, as part of a rationalization of Dublin parishes by Archbishop George Browne. It appears that St James’s Church then became a ruin for some time, perhaps because St Catherine’s occupied the leading position of the three parishes. This was a period of upheaval in the church, as the schism between the Established Church and the Catholic Church took place. St James’s was in the process of being rebuilt by 1630 as a Church of Ireland parish, but the intervening time saw the beginning of a long episode of persecution of Catholics, something that lasted until the 19th century. From this time, a parallel Catholic parish of St Catherine’s and St James’s was in existence, with St James’s being dismembered from St Catherine’s in 1724. This parish worshipped in Dirty Lane Chapel before moving to the corner of Watling Street, and then finally to James’s Street, where it remains today. Image courtesy of Guinness Archives. Taken by A.R. Turner Esquire of Fox Photos Limited. Date: 1948. Despite the persistence of Catholics in maintaining places of worship throughout the years of the Penal Laws, there was nowhere to bury their dead. Thus, St James’s graveyard remained the principal burial ground for both religious affiliations down through the centuries, those interred including the clergy of both churches. Eventually, following the Act of Easement of Burial in 1824 and Catholic Emancipation in 1829, new cemeteries were established in Goldenbridge and Glasnevin where Catholic burial rites could be performed. In 1707, by Act of Parliament, the Church of Ireland parishes were divided again and a new church of St James was constructed. This church is described as being, “...a long, low, narrow building, with six windows in each side, with circular heads. The interior is in a corresponding style: one row of pews on each side, of paneled oak, but not varnished, constitutes the accommodation for the parishioners; there is, beside, a small organ loft, with seats for the parish children, and an organ sufficiently large and well toned. The communion-table is in a shell-formed recess, in the back of which is a glory, in stuccowork.” This church fell down in 1761 and the parishioners attended the chapel at Dr. Steeven’s Hospital while reconstruction work was ongoing. It was reported in 1837 that; “The church is a low and very plain building; owing to the small accommodation it affords to the numerous parishioners, it is the intention of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to erect a new one.” This account also describes the graveyard: “The cemetery is very large and situation on the north side of a hill sloping down towards the river.” Eventually, in 1859-1861 the 1707 church was replaced by the current structure. It was designed by Joseph Welland, who was architect to the Board of First Fruits and subsequently to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and who was, consequently responsible for the design of over 100 new churches throughout the country. Construction took place between 1859 and 1861. The spire was reduced in height in the 1940s, due to it being in dangerously poor condition; the funds that would have been required to rebuild it were not available to the church authorities at that time. It was recommended in 1956 that the parish be once again untied with St Catherine’s and St James’s Church closed; in 1963 the final service was held there. In 1967 the church was sold for commercial use and until recently it was used as a lighting showroom. The graveyard has been closed for burials to all except those with existing burial rights since 1955. In 2013, St James’s church was bought by Dr Pearse Lyons, president and founder of Alltech, whose grandfather John Hubert Lyons, who died in 1948 lays buried in St James’s Graveyard. Alltech have developed the church as a visitor centre and micro distillery, the Pearse Lyons Distillery which opened to the public in 2017. Research and writing extract from DCC Commissioned, St James's Graveyard Feasibility Study, by Bernard Seymour, Landscape Architects, 2010	<urn:uuid:4417fc75-3194-4b6f-a95f-ac1a6f1a86ad>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.stjamesgraveyard.ie/historic-background-of-st-james-s-c	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681412.74/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125191854-20200125221854-00273.warc.gz	en	0.981745	994	3.34375	3	[ 0.1312277913093567, -0.16733472049236298, 0.48058825731277466, -0.22136151790618896, 0.07926008105278015, -0.13694703578948975, -0.3638466000556946, -0.42812779545783997, 0.31130141019821167, 0.10168057680130005, -0.29442790150642395, -0.07432616502046585, 0.10501765459775925, 0.3367469906...	8	HISTORIC BACKGROUND OF ST JAMES'S PARISH & CHURCH The two adjoining parishes of St Catherine’s was a subsidiary parish to St James’s until sometime during the 13th century when they were separated into two distinct parishes, both remaining under the auspices of the Abbey of St. Thomas. In 1546, following the dissolution of the monasteries, they were united, long with St John’s, Kilmainham, as part of a rationalization of Dublin parishes by Archbishop George Browne. It appears that St James’s Church then became a ruin for some time, perhaps because St Catherine’s occupied the leading position of the three parishes. This was a period of upheaval in the church, as the schism between the Established Church and the Catholic Church took place. St James’s was in the process of being rebuilt by 1630 as a Church of Ireland parish, but the intervening time saw the beginning of a long episode of persecution of Catholics, something that lasted until the 19th century. From this time, a parallel Catholic parish of St Catherine’s and St James’s was in existence, with St James’s being dismembered from St Catherine’s in 1724. This parish worshipped in Dirty Lane Chapel before moving to the corner of Watling Street, and then finally to James’s Street, where it remains today. Image courtesy of Guinness Archives. Taken by A.R. Turner Esquire of Fox Photos Limited. Date: 1948. Despite the persistence of Catholics in maintaining places of worship throughout the years of the Penal Laws, there was nowhere to bury their dead. Thus, St James’s graveyard remained the principal burial ground for both religious affiliations down through the centuries, those interred including the clergy of both churches. Eventually, following the Act of Easement of Burial in 1824 and Catholic Emancipation in 1829, new cemeteries were established in Goldenbridge and Glasnevin where Catholic burial rites could be performed. In 1707, by Act of Parliament, the Church of Ireland parishes were divided again and a new church of St James was constructed. This church is described as being, “...a long, low, narrow building, with six windows in each side, with circular heads. The interior is in a corresponding style: one row of pews on each side, of paneled oak, but not varnished, constitutes the accommodation for the parishioners; there is, beside, a small organ loft, with seats for the parish children, and an organ sufficiently large and well toned. The communion-table is in a shell-formed recess, in the back of which is a glory, in stuccowork.” This church fell down in 1761 and the parishioners attended the chapel at Dr. Steeven’s Hospital while reconstruction work was ongoing. It was reported in 1837 that; “The church is a low and very plain building; owing to the small accommodation it affords to the numerous parishioners, it is the intention of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to erect a new one.” This account also describes the graveyard: “The cemetery is very large and situation on the north side of a hill sloping down towards the river.” Eventually, in 1859-1861 the 1707 church was replaced by the current structure. It was designed by Joseph Welland, who was architect to the Board of First Fruits and subsequently to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and who was, consequently responsible for the design of over 100 new churches throughout the country. Construction took place between 1859 and 1861. The spire was reduced in height in the 1940s, due to it being in dangerously poor condition; the funds that would have been required to rebuild it were not available to the church authorities at that time. It was recommended in 1956 that the parish be once again untied with St Catherine’s and St James’s Church closed; in 1963 the final service was held there. In 1967 the church was sold for commercial use and until recently it was used as a lighting showroom. The graveyard has been closed for burials to all except those with existing burial rights since 1955. In 2013, St James’s church was bought by Dr Pearse Lyons, president and founder of Alltech, whose grandfather John Hubert Lyons, who died in 1948 lays buried in St James’s Graveyard. Alltech have developed the church as a visitor centre and micro distillery, the Pearse Lyons Distillery which opened to the public in 2017. Research and writing extract from DCC Commissioned, St James's Graveyard Feasibility Study, by Bernard Seymour, Landscape Architects, 2010	1,028	ENGLISH	1
The Reverend James W.C. Pennington, D.D. had been warmly received in Scotland, had his biography published in England, and was awarded an honorary doctorate from Heidelberg University in Germany. But back home in the United States, James Pennington was a wanted man. Hartford’s Rev. Pennington was actually Maryland’s Jim Pembroke, an enslaved black man who successfully made a daring escape. He was sheltered by a sympathetic Quaker family, and changed his name in honor of Isaac Pennington, a 17th century defender of Quaker beliefs. He attended Yale, studied for the ministry, and made Hartford his home in 1838, preaching from the pulpit of the Talcott Street Congregational Church. That same year, he presided over the marriage of his friend and fellow abolitionist Frederick Douglass to Anna Murray in New York. Pennington’s arrival in Hartford coincided with an explosion of activity in the movement to eliminate slavery. Abolitionists had been buoyed just a few years earlier by a vote of the British Parliament to end slavery in the West Indies. The first of August became the annual date for emancipation celebrations throughout the northern United States. Already an outspoken opponent of slavery, Rev. Pennington received a special invitation to attend and speak at Newark, New Jersey’s commemoration in 1839. A split was brewing within the ranks of abolitionists, however, between “radicals” who favored the efforts to wipe out slavery immediately and the “gradualists” who expected the pressure of moral persuasion to succeed. In May, 1840 Pennington and other African Americans met in Hartford to plan a national convention exclusively for Black abolitionists to plan for the future. Such a meeting was necessary, Pennington said, due to the “division among our friends.” Searching for an effective base to press forward on his life’s work, Rev. Pennington helped found the Union Missionary Society in 1841. The Hartford organizing meeting attracted 43 delegates from five states. Honored guests included members of the Amistad mutiny who had been fighting legal battles in Hartford and New Haven since their capture in 1839. The Society (open to all races) was anti-slavery and it denounced the concept of colonization favored by those who believed the best resolution was to ship black people to Africa. The question of how northern states should treat runaway southern slaves was brought into sharp focus in 1842. George Latimer had escaped bondage from a Virginia plantation and was arrested in Boston under the Fugitive Slave Act. James Pennington spoke out on the case from his pulpit and helped build the campaign to free Latimer and end Massachusetts’ complicity with slavery. Within months, enough pressure was put on the Virginia slave owner to force him to sell Latimer. Soon after, Bay State lawmakers passed the “Latimer Statute,” which forbade the use of public facilities or services to hold or arrest fugitive slaves. The Boston case was a parallel to Pennington’s own plight. Even as he spoke out for George Latimer, Pennington had kept his fugitive status a secret, even from his wife Almira. Rev. James Pennington spent his life serving congregations in New York, Maine, Florida, and Mississippi. He battled alcoholism, the premature death of his wife, and fights within the abolition movement. He finally resolved his own status by having his Hartford friend John Hooker “buy” him and free him the next day. Today, Pennington’s Talcott Street Church is known as Faith Congregational, and it carries on his tradition and history. In 1855, Pennington was arrested in New York City for riding on a segregated street car in support of a longstanding organizing effort. The campaign took the case to the state Supreme Court and won– exactly one hundred years before Rosa Parks broke the Jim Crow barrier on a Montgomery, Alabama bus.	<urn:uuid:b4e50684-9f30-40e1-b654-37a978523d88>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://shoeleatherhistoryproject.com/2014/05/08/aka-jim-pembroke/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594101.10/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119010920-20200119034920-00423.warc.gz	en	0.980691	818	3.59375	4	[ -0.2139987051486969, 0.45133885741233826, 0.1436740905046463, -0.43449169397354126, -0.09124915301799774, 0.10979034006595612, -0.15701326727867126, 0.06992383301258087, -0.39051276445388794, 0.1115412786602974, 0.0866086408495903, 0.19148334860801697, 0.21702930331230164, 0.20526178181171...	14	The Reverend James W.C. Pennington, D.D. had been warmly received in Scotland, had his biography published in England, and was awarded an honorary doctorate from Heidelberg University in Germany. But back home in the United States, James Pennington was a wanted man. Hartford’s Rev. Pennington was actually Maryland’s Jim Pembroke, an enslaved black man who successfully made a daring escape. He was sheltered by a sympathetic Quaker family, and changed his name in honor of Isaac Pennington, a 17th century defender of Quaker beliefs. He attended Yale, studied for the ministry, and made Hartford his home in 1838, preaching from the pulpit of the Talcott Street Congregational Church. That same year, he presided over the marriage of his friend and fellow abolitionist Frederick Douglass to Anna Murray in New York. Pennington’s arrival in Hartford coincided with an explosion of activity in the movement to eliminate slavery. Abolitionists had been buoyed just a few years earlier by a vote of the British Parliament to end slavery in the West Indies. The first of August became the annual date for emancipation celebrations throughout the northern United States. Already an outspoken opponent of slavery, Rev. Pennington received a special invitation to attend and speak at Newark, New Jersey’s commemoration in 1839. A split was brewing within the ranks of abolitionists, however, between “radicals” who favored the efforts to wipe out slavery immediately and the “gradualists” who expected the pressure of moral persuasion to succeed. In May, 1840 Pennington and other African Americans met in Hartford to plan a national convention exclusively for Black abolitionists to plan for the future. Such a meeting was necessary, Pennington said, due to the “division among our friends.” Searching for an effective base to press forward on his life’s work, Rev. Pennington helped found the Union Missionary Society in 1841. The Hartford organizing meeting attracted 43 delegates from five states. Honored guests included members of the Amistad mutiny who had been fighting legal battles in Hartford and New Haven since their capture in 1839. The Society (open to all races) was anti-slavery and it denounced the concept of colonization favored by those who believed the best resolution was to ship black people to Africa. The question of how northern states should treat runaway southern slaves was brought into sharp focus in 1842. George Latimer had escaped bondage from a Virginia plantation and was arrested in Boston under the Fugitive Slave Act. James Pennington spoke out on the case from his pulpit and helped build the campaign to free Latimer and end Massachusetts’ complicity with slavery. Within months, enough pressure was put on the Virginia slave owner to force him to sell Latimer. Soon after, Bay State lawmakers passed the “Latimer Statute,” which forbade the use of public facilities or services to hold or arrest fugitive slaves. The Boston case was a parallel to Pennington’s own plight. Even as he spoke out for George Latimer, Pennington had kept his fugitive status a secret, even from his wife Almira. Rev. James Pennington spent his life serving congregations in New York, Maine, Florida, and Mississippi. He battled alcoholism, the premature death of his wife, and fights within the abolition movement. He finally resolved his own status by having his Hartford friend John Hooker “buy” him and free him the next day. Today, Pennington’s Talcott Street Church is known as Faith Congregational, and it carries on his tradition and history. In 1855, Pennington was arrested in New York City for riding on a segregated street car in support of a longstanding organizing effort. The campaign took the case to the state Supreme Court and won– exactly one hundred years before Rosa Parks broke the Jim Crow barrier on a Montgomery, Alabama bus.	831	ENGLISH	1
The Iron Cross is an order of Prussian Knighthood. It started in 10th March 1813. Thus it was a military decoration in Prussia and Germany. It was initiated by King Friedrich Wilhelm III of Prussia. It was awarded only during times of war. It was lastly awarded in May 1945. It was initially a symbol that belonged to Teutonic Knights, a German Roman Catholic religious order of the 12th century and a military order in the medieval times. It has been adopted as the symbol of German armed forces since 1870. They were awarded for bravery and military contributions. It was usually awarded in different grades like Iron Cross 2nd Class, Iron Cross 1st class and the Grand Cross of the Iron Cross. Many have received the Iron Cross 1st and 2nd grade but the only individual to be awarded the Grand Cross in 1939 was Herman Goring on July 19th, 1940. The Iron Cross (the style of which categorizes it as a Maltese cross) is simply a symbol of Germany. It was before the war, and remains so. For example, the German air force painted the iron cross on its aircraft in World War I. It did so in World War II. The German air force of today still paints the iron cross on its planes as a matter of identification. Here is a simple comparison: The United States Air Force paints a star on its plaines to identify them. It has been doing this, with variations, since the years leading up to World War II (when it was known as the Army Air Force, as it was not an independent branch until circa 1947). This practice continues today. The star is an identifier; an observer can quickly ascertain a given military plane's national affiliation by the symbol it bares. The Iron Cross has had many uses, other than identifying aircraft. It has been used on many types of military vehicles owned my Germany. It has been used as a military decoration; that is to say, it has been used as the centerpiece of medals awarded for meritorious service by German soldiers. I do not know if Germany continues this practice today. Nothing evil has been attributed to the Iron Cross. That is, it is not generally considered an evil symbol or something to be feared. The swatstika, on the other hand, is something entirely different. When seen, the swatstika draws up immediate feelings of disgust and images of the holocaust for many who view it. Never have I personally seen a symbol that invokes such an emotional reaction as the swatstika. Never before or since have I seen a symbol that embodies hatred and pure evil than the swatstika. My grandfather returned from the war in Europe with a few flags in his possession. Each of them bares the swatstika. But most chilling of all, is the Nazi armband in his souvenir collection. I've held the armband in my hand. Though I have read many books on World War II and watched many movies on the subject, nothing has made it seem more real than holding the armband--the real thing--in my hand. Viewing it terrifies me. Though my grandfather left his souvenir collection to me when he died, I've only viewed the armband and the flags two or three times since, for so strong is my reaction to them. In American it has since been adopted as a sign used by Biker gangs, I do not live in the USA, so I don't know any more. I can answer the mini-question brought up by the last answer, the Iron Cross IS still used in Germany today, it has just never been awarded as it is a wartime-only award, and German has never been in any major wars since WW2. The iron Cross originated in Prussia, which at the time was mostly made up of modern Germany, so obviously that is why it moved on to become a German award. It was used in WW1 and was constructed exactly the same as the WW2 variant, only instead of a swaztika and 1939 written on it, it had 1913 and a 'W' - for Wilhelm, the Kaiser. In WW2 Hitler moved on from the first and second class iron crosses to make many more variants, inluding the Knights Cross of the Iron Cross, with a few more that I cannot name, each one being awarded for more prestigious things. For every better variant it was awarded less often and generally to more important people than the lower medal classes. The higher variants of the Iron Cross were awarded to the recipient by Adolf Hitler himself. The iron cross, as I said before, has not been awarded since WW2, but should a major conflict arise involving Germany it will be awarded if it is deserved. For anyone who didn't know, the Iron Cross was only mainly awarded for acts of Bravery in the German armed forces, as there were commonly only 1st and 2nd classes awarded, the 1st cless could only be received if you had already been awarded the 2nd class, however if the recipient carried out an extremely impressive act, then the 1st and 2nd classes could be awarded at the same time to get around this. I am honestly quite impressed by my own knowledge of iron crosses after this! HOPE THIS HELPS	<urn:uuid:dd1a083b-dc34-4dba-bd1d-0ca087fadae8>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://society-politics.blurtit.com/272366/what-does-the-iron-cross-mean-after-world-war-2	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597230.18/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120023523-20200120051523-00151.warc.gz	en	0.987767	1,089	3.78125	4	[ -0.12925751507282257, 0.6636240482330322, -0.2616356909275055, -0.05931619554758072, 0.005284122657030821, 0.19581809639930725, 0.2685970366001129, 0.3120015859603882, -0.11882220208644867, -0.4529256820678711, 0.2789698541164398, -0.5077214241027832, -0.12114317715167999, 0.00399901159107...	2	The Iron Cross is an order of Prussian Knighthood. It started in 10th March 1813. Thus it was a military decoration in Prussia and Germany. It was initiated by King Friedrich Wilhelm III of Prussia. It was awarded only during times of war. It was lastly awarded in May 1945. It was initially a symbol that belonged to Teutonic Knights, a German Roman Catholic religious order of the 12th century and a military order in the medieval times. It has been adopted as the symbol of German armed forces since 1870. They were awarded for bravery and military contributions. It was usually awarded in different grades like Iron Cross 2nd Class, Iron Cross 1st class and the Grand Cross of the Iron Cross. Many have received the Iron Cross 1st and 2nd grade but the only individual to be awarded the Grand Cross in 1939 was Herman Goring on July 19th, 1940. The Iron Cross (the style of which categorizes it as a Maltese cross) is simply a symbol of Germany. It was before the war, and remains so. For example, the German air force painted the iron cross on its aircraft in World War I. It did so in World War II. The German air force of today still paints the iron cross on its planes as a matter of identification. Here is a simple comparison: The United States Air Force paints a star on its plaines to identify them. It has been doing this, with variations, since the years leading up to World War II (when it was known as the Army Air Force, as it was not an independent branch until circa 1947). This practice continues today. The star is an identifier; an observer can quickly ascertain a given military plane's national affiliation by the symbol it bares. The Iron Cross has had many uses, other than identifying aircraft. It has been used on many types of military vehicles owned my Germany. It has been used as a military decoration; that is to say, it has been used as the centerpiece of medals awarded for meritorious service by German soldiers. I do not know if Germany continues this practice today. Nothing evil has been attributed to the Iron Cross. That is, it is not generally considered an evil symbol or something to be feared. The swatstika, on the other hand, is something entirely different. When seen, the swatstika draws up immediate feelings of disgust and images of the holocaust for many who view it. Never have I personally seen a symbol that invokes such an emotional reaction as the swatstika. Never before or since have I seen a symbol that embodies hatred and pure evil than the swatstika. My grandfather returned from the war in Europe with a few flags in his possession. Each of them bares the swatstika. But most chilling of all, is the Nazi armband in his souvenir collection. I've held the armband in my hand. Though I have read many books on World War II and watched many movies on the subject, nothing has made it seem more real than holding the armband--the real thing--in my hand. Viewing it terrifies me. Though my grandfather left his souvenir collection to me when he died, I've only viewed the armband and the flags two or three times since, for so strong is my reaction to them. In American it has since been adopted as a sign used by Biker gangs, I do not live in the USA, so I don't know any more. I can answer the mini-question brought up by the last answer, the Iron Cross IS still used in Germany today, it has just never been awarded as it is a wartime-only award, and German has never been in any major wars since WW2. The iron Cross originated in Prussia, which at the time was mostly made up of modern Germany, so obviously that is why it moved on to become a German award. It was used in WW1 and was constructed exactly the same as the WW2 variant, only instead of a swaztika and 1939 written on it, it had 1913 and a 'W' - for Wilhelm, the Kaiser. In WW2 Hitler moved on from the first and second class iron crosses to make many more variants, inluding the Knights Cross of the Iron Cross, with a few more that I cannot name, each one being awarded for more prestigious things. For every better variant it was awarded less often and generally to more important people than the lower medal classes. The higher variants of the Iron Cross were awarded to the recipient by Adolf Hitler himself. The iron cross, as I said before, has not been awarded since WW2, but should a major conflict arise involving Germany it will be awarded if it is deserved. For anyone who didn't know, the Iron Cross was only mainly awarded for acts of Bravery in the German armed forces, as there were commonly only 1st and 2nd classes awarded, the 1st cless could only be received if you had already been awarded the 2nd class, however if the recipient carried out an extremely impressive act, then the 1st and 2nd classes could be awarded at the same time to get around this. I am honestly quite impressed by my own knowledge of iron crosses after this! HOPE THIS HELPS	1,119	ENGLISH	1
Few churches in Georgia have had the bizarre history of this landmark. Its origins are in 1734, when Austrians emigrating from Salzburg founded the church. Although most of the Salzburgers settled in a community called Ebenezer outside Savannah, not all of them did. The Reverend Johann Bolzius, who had created the Ebenezer New Jerusalem Lutheran Church, came back to Savannah in 1741 to found this church for the Salzburgers who had settled in the historic core. A wooden structure originally stood on this site, until a Greek Revival church replaced it in 1844. Thirty-five years later, architect George B. Clarke added the second floor and the medieval-style turrets. Today it’s a fine example of the Grecian-Doric style that swept eastern America. When General Sherman invaded Savannah in 1864, the church pew cushions were used as beds by his soldiers, and the pews themselves were used as firewood. The church was turned into a hospital for the sick and wounded. Although the building was damaged, it was not destroyed. Today it’s known for its spectacular “Ascension Window” inside the sanctuary behind the pulpit, and for its rose window featuring Martin Luther and his coat of arms in front of the building. - Frommer's Staff	<urn:uuid:a105ff24-31c8-4394-9917-58ce432da8a1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.frommers.com/destinations/savannah/attractions/lutheran-church-of-the-ascension	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250616186.38/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124070934-20200124095934-00071.warc.gz	en	0.98192	275	3.265625	3	[ 0.1429983377456665, 0.08036965131759644, 0.3203015923500061, -0.14092126488685608, -0.12286237627267838, -0.09194478392601013, -0.08132804185152054, -0.14718091487884521, -0.06658801436424255, 0.045242201536893845, -0.23731768131256104, -0.14116445183753967, 0.0531509704887867, 0.132810294...	3	Few churches in Georgia have had the bizarre history of this landmark. Its origins are in 1734, when Austrians emigrating from Salzburg founded the church. Although most of the Salzburgers settled in a community called Ebenezer outside Savannah, not all of them did. The Reverend Johann Bolzius, who had created the Ebenezer New Jerusalem Lutheran Church, came back to Savannah in 1741 to found this church for the Salzburgers who had settled in the historic core. A wooden structure originally stood on this site, until a Greek Revival church replaced it in 1844. Thirty-five years later, architect George B. Clarke added the second floor and the medieval-style turrets. Today it’s a fine example of the Grecian-Doric style that swept eastern America. When General Sherman invaded Savannah in 1864, the church pew cushions were used as beds by his soldiers, and the pews themselves were used as firewood. The church was turned into a hospital for the sick and wounded. Although the building was damaged, it was not destroyed. Today it’s known for its spectacular “Ascension Window” inside the sanctuary behind the pulpit, and for its rose window featuring Martin Luther and his coat of arms in front of the building. - Frommer's Staff	274	ENGLISH	1
Cotton canvas was around for a long time before the creation of the first sneaker-type construction; however, sewing small pieces of canvas into a three-dimensional shape that conforms to the foot is quite tedious by hand. The lockstitch sewing machine was invented and patented in 1845 by Elias Howe, which allowed fabrics of all weights and constructions to be quickly and neatly stitched together. In 1851, Isaac Merrit Singer improved upon Howe's invention (and also infringed on Howe's patent), and started his own sewing machine business that still prospers among home sewers and clothing factories (Bellis 2004). Singer's sewing machine was further evolved for the shoe industry by one of his own employees: Lyman Reed Blake. In 1856, Blake became a partner in a shoemaking company and was dedicated to inventing machines that helped automate the shoe-manufacturing process. In 1858, he received a patent for a machine that could stitch shoe uppers to outsoles. He sold his patent to Gordon McKay in 1859, and worked for McKay from 1861 until his retirement in 1874. The shoes made on this machine were known as "McKays" (United Shoe Machinery Corporation 2004). Was this article helpful?	<urn:uuid:0e6988f5-e738-4a97-946b-d0fca6c05f34>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.martelnyc.com/seventeenth-century/sewing-machine.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00109.warc.gz	en	0.984632	256	3.265625	3	[ -0.5802198648452759, -0.2924465835094452, 0.21569348871707916, -0.011808415874838829, -0.37223678827285767, 0.13493548333644867, 0.10288528352975845, 0.4272911548614502, -0.04705194756388664, 0.21761710941791534, 0.34793761372566223, -0.06238941475749016, 0.06368691474199295, -0.2172842174...	1	Cotton canvas was around for a long time before the creation of the first sneaker-type construction; however, sewing small pieces of canvas into a three-dimensional shape that conforms to the foot is quite tedious by hand. The lockstitch sewing machine was invented and patented in 1845 by Elias Howe, which allowed fabrics of all weights and constructions to be quickly and neatly stitched together. In 1851, Isaac Merrit Singer improved upon Howe's invention (and also infringed on Howe's patent), and started his own sewing machine business that still prospers among home sewers and clothing factories (Bellis 2004). Singer's sewing machine was further evolved for the shoe industry by one of his own employees: Lyman Reed Blake. In 1856, Blake became a partner in a shoemaking company and was dedicated to inventing machines that helped automate the shoe-manufacturing process. In 1858, he received a patent for a machine that could stitch shoe uppers to outsoles. He sold his patent to Gordon McKay in 1859, and worked for McKay from 1861 until his retirement in 1874. The shoes made on this machine were known as "McKays" (United Shoe Machinery Corporation 2004). Was this article helpful?	278	ENGLISH	1
Special Handling Stamps On April 11, 1925, the US Post Office issued its first Special Handling stamp, #QE4. The US Postal Service Act of 1925 clarified what made up the different classes of mail. Everything that did not fall into the first two classes of mail (written matter and periodical publications) was divided by weight. If it weighed less than eight ounces, it was third class, and if it weighed eight ounces or more, it was fourth-class mail. The same Act provided for a special handling stamp of the 25-cent denomination to be produced. The 25-cent special handling stamps were only printed on flat plate presses and used the “wet” method (the paper was damp when the image was transferred). One difference between wet and dry printing was that wet printings weren’t as sharp in detail. They also have a dull, rough surface as compared to a hard, smooth sheen. The gum is thicker and smoother in wet printings, and the stamps are often slightly smaller in flat plate presses. This is because the paper shrinks slightly as it dries. The first Special Handling stamp, #QE4, was issued on April 11, 1925. When added to an item that carried regular fourth-class postage, this stamp allowed the item to be handled as first-class matter. The terms of the Postal Service Act were a little confusing. It was called “special handling,” which was often confused with “special delivery.” But the “delivery” part was used only in regards to the special handling fee, and not for a different delivery schedule than first class mail. Instead, the Act was referring to the different types of items that might be mailed under that classification, such as live animals. It even specifically mentioned baby alligators! The increased speed of delivery these stamps offered was important at the time when America was a rural, agricultural society. Parcels often contained live animals like baby chicks and alligators. With the slower parcel post service, the animals might die before being delivered. Collecting the extra fee in the way of a Special Handling stamp helped the post office pay for the added expense of faster delivery. Three years later, 10¢, 15¢, and 20¢ denominations were issued to cover the revised rates that went into effect in July 1928. The stamps were later given their Scott numbers according to their denominations, which is why the first stamp is designated #QE4. Special Handling stamps were withdrawn from sale in post offices on October 24, 1947. Click here for more neat history behind these stamps from the APS website. Click here to see what else happened on This Day in History.	<urn:uuid:caa46eee-0a5b-4cb3-90b0-2b376fdbedf3>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.mysticstamp.com/info/this-day-in-history-april-11-1925/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687725.76/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126043644-20200126073644-00265.warc.gz	en	0.981679	556	3.484375	3	[ -0.5321733951568604, 0.0928037092089653, 0.34091079235076904, -0.0593416653573513, -0.03740311786532402, -0.44333696365356445, 0.06228112056851387, 0.239765465259552, -0.03903329372406006, 0.07757575064897537, 0.15866991877555847, 0.24930015206336975, 0.1460370421409607, -0.152313530445098...	2	Special Handling Stamps On April 11, 1925, the US Post Office issued its first Special Handling stamp, #QE4. The US Postal Service Act of 1925 clarified what made up the different classes of mail. Everything that did not fall into the first two classes of mail (written matter and periodical publications) was divided by weight. If it weighed less than eight ounces, it was third class, and if it weighed eight ounces or more, it was fourth-class mail. The same Act provided for a special handling stamp of the 25-cent denomination to be produced. The 25-cent special handling stamps were only printed on flat plate presses and used the “wet” method (the paper was damp when the image was transferred). One difference between wet and dry printing was that wet printings weren’t as sharp in detail. They also have a dull, rough surface as compared to a hard, smooth sheen. The gum is thicker and smoother in wet printings, and the stamps are often slightly smaller in flat plate presses. This is because the paper shrinks slightly as it dries. The first Special Handling stamp, #QE4, was issued on April 11, 1925. When added to an item that carried regular fourth-class postage, this stamp allowed the item to be handled as first-class matter. The terms of the Postal Service Act were a little confusing. It was called “special handling,” which was often confused with “special delivery.” But the “delivery” part was used only in regards to the special handling fee, and not for a different delivery schedule than first class mail. Instead, the Act was referring to the different types of items that might be mailed under that classification, such as live animals. It even specifically mentioned baby alligators! The increased speed of delivery these stamps offered was important at the time when America was a rural, agricultural society. Parcels often contained live animals like baby chicks and alligators. With the slower parcel post service, the animals might die before being delivered. Collecting the extra fee in the way of a Special Handling stamp helped the post office pay for the added expense of faster delivery. Three years later, 10¢, 15¢, and 20¢ denominations were issued to cover the revised rates that went into effect in July 1928. The stamps were later given their Scott numbers according to their denominations, which is why the first stamp is designated #QE4. Special Handling stamps were withdrawn from sale in post offices on October 24, 1947. Click here for more neat history behind these stamps from the APS website. Click here to see what else happened on This Day in History.	564	ENGLISH	1
Thus rose the Sumerian city-states. They were replaced by Assyrians who established the world's first empire Persia refers to countries now known as Iran and Iraq. In ancient days, Iraq was called Mesopotamia, the fertile river crescent where one of the first civilisations was built around farming. Because of the repeated flooding, the gods were seen as capricious, making the lives of people difficult. Therefore, a priest was needed to commune with the gods. Priests thus became the first leaders of the community. They built ziggurats or pyramidal structures to reach out to the gods who lived in the sky to establish authority on earth. Gradually, the priest was replaced by the local strongman, the king. The king connected himself with gods by having sexual relations with the priestess. As lover of the goddess, he asserted right to rule over earth. Thus rose the Sumerian city-states. They were replaced by Assyrians who established the world's first empire. Assyrians believed that bloodshed and war ensured the survival of their empire. They used brutality to expand their rule over different kinds of people. But, they did not try to change the culture of the controlled people. They simply imposed a strict bureaucracy to collect taxes, and those who did not obey them were exiled from their homeland. They were responsible for the Babylonian Exile of the Jews, mentioned in the Bible. The Assyrians were replaced by the Achaemenians. They spoke of one God, who was represented by fire. That god was supported by a group of angels, just as the current king was supported by a group, Satraps. They too had a complex bureaucratic system of managing various provinces without destroying local culture. They had learnt this from the Assyrians, but unlike Assyrians were more benevolent and believed that God was good and so the king had to be good, and work hard to keep away bad things—the creations of the Devil known as Angra Manyu. This is why diversity thrived. Achaemenian kings used art as propaganda and created images showing king hunting lions, guarded by angels. They helped the Jews return home and build their Second Temple. From the Persians, the Mauryans understood how to use force. They learned the value of creating highways to reach the frontiers of the kingdom. They controlled the highways and used bureaucracy to tax the traders and business. They understood the value of symbolism and therefore built pillars of polished stone, mounted by symbols of royalty like the lion, the bull, the horse, and the elephant. Unlike Persian pillars, Mauryan pillars were single pieces, and supported no roof. Inspired by Persians, the written word was introduced. For over 2,000 years, the Mesopotamians used a cuneiform script to document taxes, and to use them for accounting purposes. Indians, despite being familiar with them, shunned the written word until the Mauryans introduced the Brahmi script, which was used by Ashoka for administration and propaganda. The Mauryan king was at the centre of his empire. His rule was established to the furthest corner of the kingdom represented by the rim of a wheel (chakra). The highway, in between, is represented by the spoke of the wheel. This made him the Chakravarti, who in no small measure was influenced by the Persian Emperor. The author writes and lectures on the relevance of mythology in modern times. Reach him at devdutt.pattanaik @mid-day.com Sign up for all the latest news, top galleries and trending videos from Mid-day.comSubscribe	<urn:uuid:3cfbaa45-a886-49e7-8f79-1588a0e7d549>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.mid-day.com/articles/persian-chakravarti/22227157?ref=component_relatednews	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606872.19/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122071919-20200122100919-00547.warc.gz	en	0.98333	749	3.75	4	[ 0.11847402900457382, 0.4023627042770386, 0.15575814247131348, -0.16775812208652496, -0.3159210681915283, -0.408764511346817, 0.05425718426704407, 0.20122264325618744, 0.027661748230457306, 0.1778511106967926, -0.3545575737953186, -0.34308093786239624, 0.009247370064258575, 0.05051804333925...	3	Thus rose the Sumerian city-states. They were replaced by Assyrians who established the world's first empire Persia refers to countries now known as Iran and Iraq. In ancient days, Iraq was called Mesopotamia, the fertile river crescent where one of the first civilisations was built around farming. Because of the repeated flooding, the gods were seen as capricious, making the lives of people difficult. Therefore, a priest was needed to commune with the gods. Priests thus became the first leaders of the community. They built ziggurats or pyramidal structures to reach out to the gods who lived in the sky to establish authority on earth. Gradually, the priest was replaced by the local strongman, the king. The king connected himself with gods by having sexual relations with the priestess. As lover of the goddess, he asserted right to rule over earth. Thus rose the Sumerian city-states. They were replaced by Assyrians who established the world's first empire. Assyrians believed that bloodshed and war ensured the survival of their empire. They used brutality to expand their rule over different kinds of people. But, they did not try to change the culture of the controlled people. They simply imposed a strict bureaucracy to collect taxes, and those who did not obey them were exiled from their homeland. They were responsible for the Babylonian Exile of the Jews, mentioned in the Bible. The Assyrians were replaced by the Achaemenians. They spoke of one God, who was represented by fire. That god was supported by a group of angels, just as the current king was supported by a group, Satraps. They too had a complex bureaucratic system of managing various provinces without destroying local culture. They had learnt this from the Assyrians, but unlike Assyrians were more benevolent and believed that God was good and so the king had to be good, and work hard to keep away bad things—the creations of the Devil known as Angra Manyu. This is why diversity thrived. Achaemenian kings used art as propaganda and created images showing king hunting lions, guarded by angels. They helped the Jews return home and build their Second Temple. From the Persians, the Mauryans understood how to use force. They learned the value of creating highways to reach the frontiers of the kingdom. They controlled the highways and used bureaucracy to tax the traders and business. They understood the value of symbolism and therefore built pillars of polished stone, mounted by symbols of royalty like the lion, the bull, the horse, and the elephant. Unlike Persian pillars, Mauryan pillars were single pieces, and supported no roof. Inspired by Persians, the written word was introduced. For over 2,000 years, the Mesopotamians used a cuneiform script to document taxes, and to use them for accounting purposes. Indians, despite being familiar with them, shunned the written word until the Mauryans introduced the Brahmi script, which was used by Ashoka for administration and propaganda. The Mauryan king was at the centre of his empire. His rule was established to the furthest corner of the kingdom represented by the rim of a wheel (chakra). The highway, in between, is represented by the spoke of the wheel. This made him the Chakravarti, who in no small measure was influenced by the Persian Emperor. The author writes and lectures on the relevance of mythology in modern times. Reach him at devdutt.pattanaik @mid-day.com Sign up for all the latest news, top galleries and trending videos from Mid-day.comSubscribe	743	ENGLISH	1
Throughout history, there are millions of people have been unjustly persecuted for being falsely accused. In the 1940s, The Holocaust became one of the most famous genocides known to man, as the millions of Jews during the Holocaust had to face: being unfairly blamed for something they did not do. In The Crucible, by Arthur Miller shows how people of The Salem of Witch Trials had to face the same false accusation and the consequences where many lives had been taken. Although Salem Witch Trials and the Holocaust are roughly 240 years apart, the two circumstances have numerous similarities and the amount of differences that appalling. Yes, power of authority, discrimination towards certain people, accusations had been the main causes and at the end, the one who was “responsible” had it gotten severely uncontrollable. In 1690s, within a small Puritan village, a tragedy was struck where later it became known as The Salem of Witch Trials. The event took place during a difficult and confusing period for Salem village. As part of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, at the time Salem was still under British rule, the hysteria began where the colony was still waiting for a new governor and had no charter to enforce laws (1). The seeds of the hysteria that afflicted Salem Village were when a group of young girls began to display bizarre behavior. The tight-knit community was at a loss to explain the convulsive seizures, blasphemous screaming, and trance-like states that afflicted the youngsters (2). The physicians called in to examine the girls but could find no natural cause of the disturbing behavior. If the source of the affliction was not attributable to a physical malady, the community reasoned that it must be the work of Satan as they were indeed a religious community. Abigail, one of the group of young girls, who falsely accused Tituba for being a witch, had been the major cause for what was happening in The Salem Witch Trials where it had taken many innocent lives. The Holocaust was the systematic, bureaucratic, state-sponsored persecution and murder event that approximately killed six million Jews by the Nazi Germany, led by Adolf Hitler, throughout Nazi-occupied territory (3). The event took place in 1940s, where its ultimate goal must implacably be the total removal of the Jews. Hitler had a deep hatred of Jews and he used the idea of "racial purity" to justify harsh measures and eventually mass murder against them as well as other groups he called "enemies of the state" (4). He accused that the "Jew" who was responsible for all Germany's domestic problems at the time German was in poor condition, saying that once all the Jewish people had been killed, the world would be a better place. As a man who was in power, people eventually believed for every accusation he made. This event had caused millions of innocent people got killed. As the leader of the party, Hitler had an enormous amount of power, control over people, and the decisions they made. Hitler had made people believe that the society, the world, would be a better place once all of the Jewish people had been killed; the Nazis were torturing and killing millions of Jewish people. He falsely accused Jewish people and blamed them for what they didn’t do, and it turned out that people believed for what he said. In the similar situation written about in The Crucible, Abigail Williams convinced the town of Salem that select people throughout the town were practicing witchcraft. A trial was held to determine if the people were actually witches, and Abigail found she had great power when she blamed the people of her town. Despite the fact that Abigail was a child, they were convinced that she was telling the truth, as she said “I never called him! Tituba, Tituba …” Amongst the children is where Abigail’s influence was the greatest. Both Abigail and Hitler have similar characteristics that enable them to have power over people’s ideas and opinions.…	<urn:uuid:0145ea29-1941-4289-9879-0e83ad9249e6>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.majortests.com/essay/Ela-Thecrucible-Holocaust-621006.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608062.57/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123011418-20200123040418-00442.warc.gz	en	0.988561	812	3.46875	3	[ 0.03843134269118309, 0.6469627022743225, 0.03185780346393585, 0.24274834990501404, 0.15366627275943756, 0.10899456590414047, 0.345425546169281, 0.08852075040340424, -0.12642242014408112, 0.043828085064888, 0.13714797794818878, 0.05520280823111534, -0.5372507572174072, 0.2170950472354889, ...	1	Throughout history, there are millions of people have been unjustly persecuted for being falsely accused. In the 1940s, The Holocaust became one of the most famous genocides known to man, as the millions of Jews during the Holocaust had to face: being unfairly blamed for something they did not do. In The Crucible, by Arthur Miller shows how people of The Salem of Witch Trials had to face the same false accusation and the consequences where many lives had been taken. Although Salem Witch Trials and the Holocaust are roughly 240 years apart, the two circumstances have numerous similarities and the amount of differences that appalling. Yes, power of authority, discrimination towards certain people, accusations had been the main causes and at the end, the one who was “responsible” had it gotten severely uncontrollable. In 1690s, within a small Puritan village, a tragedy was struck where later it became known as The Salem of Witch Trials. The event took place during a difficult and confusing period for Salem village. As part of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, at the time Salem was still under British rule, the hysteria began where the colony was still waiting for a new governor and had no charter to enforce laws (1). The seeds of the hysteria that afflicted Salem Village were when a group of young girls began to display bizarre behavior. The tight-knit community was at a loss to explain the convulsive seizures, blasphemous screaming, and trance-like states that afflicted the youngsters (2). The physicians called in to examine the girls but could find no natural cause of the disturbing behavior. If the source of the affliction was not attributable to a physical malady, the community reasoned that it must be the work of Satan as they were indeed a religious community. Abigail, one of the group of young girls, who falsely accused Tituba for being a witch, had been the major cause for what was happening in The Salem Witch Trials where it had taken many innocent lives. The Holocaust was the systematic, bureaucratic, state-sponsored persecution and murder event that approximately killed six million Jews by the Nazi Germany, led by Adolf Hitler, throughout Nazi-occupied territory (3). The event took place in 1940s, where its ultimate goal must implacably be the total removal of the Jews. Hitler had a deep hatred of Jews and he used the idea of "racial purity" to justify harsh measures and eventually mass murder against them as well as other groups he called "enemies of the state" (4). He accused that the "Jew" who was responsible for all Germany's domestic problems at the time German was in poor condition, saying that once all the Jewish people had been killed, the world would be a better place. As a man who was in power, people eventually believed for every accusation he made. This event had caused millions of innocent people got killed. As the leader of the party, Hitler had an enormous amount of power, control over people, and the decisions they made. Hitler had made people believe that the society, the world, would be a better place once all of the Jewish people had been killed; the Nazis were torturing and killing millions of Jewish people. He falsely accused Jewish people and blamed them for what they didn’t do, and it turned out that people believed for what he said. In the similar situation written about in The Crucible, Abigail Williams convinced the town of Salem that select people throughout the town were practicing witchcraft. A trial was held to determine if the people were actually witches, and Abigail found she had great power when she blamed the people of her town. Despite the fact that Abigail was a child, they were convinced that she was telling the truth, as she said “I never called him! Tituba, Tituba …” Amongst the children is where Abigail’s influence was the greatest. Both Abigail and Hitler have similar characteristics that enable them to have power over people’s ideas and opinions.…	807	ENGLISH	1
Saint of the Day – 8 December – Saint Pope Eutychian (Died 283) – Born in Etruria or Tuscany (both in modern Italy) and died on 7 December 283. The Church states his reign as January, 275 to 7 December 283. This was a time of relative quiet in the Roman Church. There was no persecution or outright hostilities. However, the Empire was in deep trouble. This era is called the Crisis of the Third Century. Emperors were assassinated with great frequency. While the Church fought battles over dogma, the Empire, in only 20 years, had to go through many battles over land. Eutychian was thus free to fight internal battles which threatened to divide the Church. The two biggest battles were the Novationist schism and the Trinitarian controversy. Novatian had begun his campaign during the time of Pope Cornelius. The persecutions had scared many into denouncing Christianity to save themselves. After peace came, many wanted to come back to communion with the Church. Could they be given absolution? Novatian said no. He was so adamant and pushed his teaching so convincingly that he was elected pope by some in Rome, claiming primacy from 251 to 258. This led to the question of whether a schismatic presbyter could validly baptise someone, or did that person need to be re-baptised. Although previous popes declared that not to be so, it was still a point of contention during Eutychian’s papacy. Although Novatian left Rome during another series of persecutions, giving up his claim to antipope and no-one hearing from him again, his concepts lasted for several centuries. The other battle waged in Rome was the question of the Trinity. It was obvious that God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit were mentioned individually in the New Testament. Were they three modes of God’s being? Or were they three “persons” in one God? There is no record of Eutychian’s opinion. The established concept was not decided on his watch. Under Eutychian’s papacy and the next few, as well, the Roman Catholic Church became a main cultural institution in the empire. Peaceful acceptance of the religion had begun. This is his legacy. St Eutychian was the last pope buried in the papal crypt at the Catacombs of Callixtus.	<urn:uuid:0422ad16-b1bf-4fd8-a6db-3cf423c36555>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://anastpaul.com/2019/12/08/saint-of-the-day-8-december-saint-pope-eutychian-died-283/comment-page-1/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594705.17/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119180644-20200119204644-00418.warc.gz	en	0.99106	510	3.375	3	[ 0.05211808905005455, 0.21706466376781464, 0.07883589714765549, -0.19945098459720612, -0.3291184604167938, -0.16106083989143372, -0.009106065146625042, 0.09851393103599548, 0.11208885908126831, 0.34856852889060974, -0.125662699341774, -0.21573857963085175, 0.07973805069923401, 0.32094717025...	9	Saint of the Day – 8 December – Saint Pope Eutychian (Died 283) – Born in Etruria or Tuscany (both in modern Italy) and died on 7 December 283. The Church states his reign as January, 275 to 7 December 283. This was a time of relative quiet in the Roman Church. There was no persecution or outright hostilities. However, the Empire was in deep trouble. This era is called the Crisis of the Third Century. Emperors were assassinated with great frequency. While the Church fought battles over dogma, the Empire, in only 20 years, had to go through many battles over land. Eutychian was thus free to fight internal battles which threatened to divide the Church. The two biggest battles were the Novationist schism and the Trinitarian controversy. Novatian had begun his campaign during the time of Pope Cornelius. The persecutions had scared many into denouncing Christianity to save themselves. After peace came, many wanted to come back to communion with the Church. Could they be given absolution? Novatian said no. He was so adamant and pushed his teaching so convincingly that he was elected pope by some in Rome, claiming primacy from 251 to 258. This led to the question of whether a schismatic presbyter could validly baptise someone, or did that person need to be re-baptised. Although previous popes declared that not to be so, it was still a point of contention during Eutychian’s papacy. Although Novatian left Rome during another series of persecutions, giving up his claim to antipope and no-one hearing from him again, his concepts lasted for several centuries. The other battle waged in Rome was the question of the Trinity. It was obvious that God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit were mentioned individually in the New Testament. Were they three modes of God’s being? Or were they three “persons” in one God? There is no record of Eutychian’s opinion. The established concept was not decided on his watch. Under Eutychian’s papacy and the next few, as well, the Roman Catholic Church became a main cultural institution in the empire. Peaceful acceptance of the religion had begun. This is his legacy. St Eutychian was the last pope buried in the papal crypt at the Catacombs of Callixtus.	520	ENGLISH	1
What does reading do for us? Why is there such an emphasis on reading? Reading envelopes us in words, ideas, mental images that build our intelligence and imagination. It is the foundation for knowledge and education. It opens up all possibilities and hope. Math, science, art are all propped up on the foundation of reading. So, what happens if you can’t see? In this high-tech world, does it matter? Charlotte Cushman addresses this very issue in her article Celebrate Braille Literacy Month. Cushman’s answer is quite telling and obvious. “Is it important for a sighted child to learn to read because audible books exist?” Point taken. Everyone deserves an opportunity to read the words for themselves. This allows their minds to wrestle with the tone, voice, and emotions of the characters, which helps build empathy as well as imagination. January is Braille Literacy Month. It is in honor of Louis Braille who was born January 4th, 1809. Who was Louis Braille? He was one of four children of Monique Braille and Simon-Rene Braille. His father was a saddler and Louis would play in his father’s workshop often. When he was three, he had an accident. He was playing with an awl trying to put it through a piece of leather and the tool slipped and hit him in one eye. They couldn’t save the eye. Within a few years, an infection in that eye spread to the good eye and Louis was completely blind. He was five years old. Braille was lucky enough to attend one of the first schools for the blind in Paris. In 1821, Braille learned of a French Army Captain who had developed a system of communication called night writing. It was done on thick paper with dots and dashes. It allowed soldiers to feel the paper to know the message-no light necessary. Braille learned the system but felt it was too complicated. By 15, he condensed Barbier’s 12 dots into 6 and found a way to use a 6-dot cell in a fingertip size area. By 1829, he published his system which included symbols for mathematics and music. Braille was offered a professorship where he taught history, geometry, and algebra. He was an accomplished musician as well. He died young at 43 years of age in 1852. The system wasn’t accepted by academia at first and the blind were forced to learn it on their own. It was a few years after his death that his system was accepted by the Royal Academy and the French government. He became a national hero. (They even exhumed his body to move it to have it buried in the Pantheon in Paris with other national heroes.) Learning sign language is encouraged at most schools, but it is rare to find a public school encouraging students to learn braille unless they are blind. DiscoverBooks.com invites you this month to discover a new skill, a new idea, or even a new way to serve. Discover more about Louis Braille’s story or decide to learn to read Braille. Save 10% off your entire order by using coupon code BRAILLE10 at checkout. This coupon is good until 1/31/2020.	<urn:uuid:ed849cbe-3b41-43e8-bdee-13389f326f55>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://discoverbooks.blog/author/letthestoriesliveon/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607596.34/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122221541-20200123010541-00107.warc.gz	en	0.983903	679	3.359375	3	[ -0.04067138209939003, -0.10674341022968292, 0.18385088443756104, -0.08122357726097107, -0.2614482045173645, 0.24458859860897064, 0.4001937508583069, 0.2104504555463791, -0.19056373834609985, -0.026312638074159622, 0.3190421462059021, 0.10883967578411102, -0.13354113698005676, 0.27497604489...	14	What does reading do for us? Why is there such an emphasis on reading? Reading envelopes us in words, ideas, mental images that build our intelligence and imagination. It is the foundation for knowledge and education. It opens up all possibilities and hope. Math, science, art are all propped up on the foundation of reading. So, what happens if you can’t see? In this high-tech world, does it matter? Charlotte Cushman addresses this very issue in her article Celebrate Braille Literacy Month. Cushman’s answer is quite telling and obvious. “Is it important for a sighted child to learn to read because audible books exist?” Point taken. Everyone deserves an opportunity to read the words for themselves. This allows their minds to wrestle with the tone, voice, and emotions of the characters, which helps build empathy as well as imagination. January is Braille Literacy Month. It is in honor of Louis Braille who was born January 4th, 1809. Who was Louis Braille? He was one of four children of Monique Braille and Simon-Rene Braille. His father was a saddler and Louis would play in his father’s workshop often. When he was three, he had an accident. He was playing with an awl trying to put it through a piece of leather and the tool slipped and hit him in one eye. They couldn’t save the eye. Within a few years, an infection in that eye spread to the good eye and Louis was completely blind. He was five years old. Braille was lucky enough to attend one of the first schools for the blind in Paris. In 1821, Braille learned of a French Army Captain who had developed a system of communication called night writing. It was done on thick paper with dots and dashes. It allowed soldiers to feel the paper to know the message-no light necessary. Braille learned the system but felt it was too complicated. By 15, he condensed Barbier’s 12 dots into 6 and found a way to use a 6-dot cell in a fingertip size area. By 1829, he published his system which included symbols for mathematics and music. Braille was offered a professorship where he taught history, geometry, and algebra. He was an accomplished musician as well. He died young at 43 years of age in 1852. The system wasn’t accepted by academia at first and the blind were forced to learn it on their own. It was a few years after his death that his system was accepted by the Royal Academy and the French government. He became a national hero. (They even exhumed his body to move it to have it buried in the Pantheon in Paris with other national heroes.) Learning sign language is encouraged at most schools, but it is rare to find a public school encouraging students to learn braille unless they are blind. DiscoverBooks.com invites you this month to discover a new skill, a new idea, or even a new way to serve. Discover more about Louis Braille’s story or decide to learn to read Braille. Save 10% off your entire order by using coupon code BRAILLE10 at checkout. This coupon is good until 1/31/2020.	676	ENGLISH	1
In period between 1950s and 1960s, Iraq launched campaigns to rid the Iraqi territory of Kurds, a campaign that led to big fight and excessive torture of the Kurds. Many Kurd people were killed during this period. The solution to this war was obtained when the US intervened and engaged the Iraq government to sign a treaty that would give the Kurd people the liberty and freedom to handle their own affairs as they wished. However, this treaty did not last for long as Saddam Hussein in 1975 started war against the Kurdish people. Saddam Hussein bombed Kurdistan and tested chemical weapons such as cyanide and mustard gas on this region. By the year 1980, the war had killed over 5,000 Kurds and others were injured to a point of permanent disability. There is evidence that the Kurdish people were abused by the various governments during period inter-country war. For instance, during the Iraq-Iran war, the governments of the two countries issued the civilians with weapons to fight against the rival country. This resulted to death of more Kurdish people and the consequent reduction in their population. Kurdistan has experience severe internal conflicts within themselves, hence weakening their national voice. One of the reasons why internal conflicts emerged is due to the difference in interest that was influenced by the country that they lived. For instance, those within the Iraq boundary were different from those who lived in Turkey. As all of them had different governments to deal with, they had different political tastes and preferences. As a result, it became hard for them to arrive into a concession on what strategies to take in their journey towards political freedom. Internal conflicts were manifested as Kurds in different countries fought against each other and against the respective host governments. The internal disunion between the people of Kurdistan served to weaken their political structure as different political parties pursued different political goals. For instance, in 1997, the power sharing treaties between the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan fall apart in and a civil war ensued between the nationalists. This war did not come to an end until in 1998 when the Washington agreement was signed by the two parties. Today, the Kurds are estimated to be about 41 million in population. The current Kurd culture is way different from the traditional culture of the people. The cultural and language alterations have taken place due to the inflow of people from different cultures and refugees who have escaped war from other countries such as Iraq. Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples	<urn:uuid:f82b1f71-d1ae-4085-b044-4d73494500ab>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://freeessayhelp.com/essay-kurdistan-1184445	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694908.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127051112-20200127081112-00381.warc.gz	en	0.984451	503	3.65625	4	[ -0.22268259525299072, 0.38097599148750305, 0.4788091480731964, -0.32617393136024475, 0.14115028083324432, 0.00041857126052491367, -0.11003359407186508, 0.2830160856246948, -0.05455638840794563, 0.15621443092823029, 0.14423906803131104, -0.20588701963424683, 0.23469983041286469, 0.079574301...	1	In period between 1950s and 1960s, Iraq launched campaigns to rid the Iraqi territory of Kurds, a campaign that led to big fight and excessive torture of the Kurds. Many Kurd people were killed during this period. The solution to this war was obtained when the US intervened and engaged the Iraq government to sign a treaty that would give the Kurd people the liberty and freedom to handle their own affairs as they wished. However, this treaty did not last for long as Saddam Hussein in 1975 started war against the Kurdish people. Saddam Hussein bombed Kurdistan and tested chemical weapons such as cyanide and mustard gas on this region. By the year 1980, the war had killed over 5,000 Kurds and others were injured to a point of permanent disability. There is evidence that the Kurdish people were abused by the various governments during period inter-country war. For instance, during the Iraq-Iran war, the governments of the two countries issued the civilians with weapons to fight against the rival country. This resulted to death of more Kurdish people and the consequent reduction in their population. Kurdistan has experience severe internal conflicts within themselves, hence weakening their national voice. One of the reasons why internal conflicts emerged is due to the difference in interest that was influenced by the country that they lived. For instance, those within the Iraq boundary were different from those who lived in Turkey. As all of them had different governments to deal with, they had different political tastes and preferences. As a result, it became hard for them to arrive into a concession on what strategies to take in their journey towards political freedom. Internal conflicts were manifested as Kurds in different countries fought against each other and against the respective host governments. The internal disunion between the people of Kurdistan served to weaken their political structure as different political parties pursued different political goals. For instance, in 1997, the power sharing treaties between the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan fall apart in and a civil war ensued between the nationalists. This war did not come to an end until in 1998 when the Washington agreement was signed by the two parties. Today, the Kurds are estimated to be about 41 million in population. The current Kurd culture is way different from the traditional culture of the people. The cultural and language alterations have taken place due to the inflow of people from different cultures and refugees who have escaped war from other countries such as Iraq. Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples	526	ENGLISH	1
Remembering The Fallen - On this day in 1941 the Imperial Japanese Navy attacked the United States Pacific Fleet at its main base at Pearl Harbour in Hawaii. This action would have far reaching consequences that at that time would not have been realised. For one thing it brought the United States into World War 2 on the side of the Allies. It was the massive economic and military might of the US that would be a major factor in bringing about the defeat of the Axis powers of Germany, Japan, Italy and their allies nearly four years later - the war would not just be decided by what happened on the battlefields and on the seas and oceans but also in the factories and the shipyards. The attack also changed the face of naval warfare and how battles at sea would be fought. It effectively brought to an end the era of battleships in a stately line hurling huge shells at each other. Instead, fleet actions would be fought at the range of the carrier-based planes with hundreds of miles of ocean between the two opposing fleets who would never even see each other. Although the Pearl Harbour air strike was a tactical victory for the Japanese, strategically it was a disaster - they did not get the US aircraft carriers as they were absent from Pearl Harbour on that day. In the months that were to follow this would be a costly mistake for the Japanese. The war winning fast carrier task group concept emerged from the Pearl Harbour disaster as the US Navy was now forced into using its aircraft carriers as the spearhead to take the fight to the Japanese because there was no alternative as the battle fleet was now gone. President Franklin D Roosevelt in his speech to the US Congress the next day described it as "a day that will live in infamy." Those very same carriers the Japanese failed to sink at Pearl Harbour would later haunt them in the decisive battles at Coral Sea and Midway. As for the ships in Pearl Harbour, the one that suffered the most was the USS Arizona, a Pennsylvania class battleship of pre World War 1 design. She'd been hit several times in the early minutes of the attack. The bomb which did the most damage was a 1757lb armour-piercing shell that had been converted into a bomb. It landed on her fo'c's'le near turret 2 and drilled through her armoured deck into her forward magazine where it detonated. It caused a cataclysmic explosion that swept men off her deck and also off other ships nearby. They were the ones who were fortunate enough to survive. Out of her crew of 1512, 1177 perished. She settled upright in the shallow waters although the force of the explosion caused her forward turrets and mast to collapse. Today, a concrete memorial stands over her remains where she settled upright. The remains of at least 1103 of her crew remain entombed in her hull. It commemorates the 2403 naval and civilian personnel lost in the attack, almost half of them were on board the Arizona. Of the other ships that were sunk or damaged, apart from the Arizona, only one other ship, the battleship USS Oklahoma, also became a total loss. All the other ships were either raised, repaired and rebuilt and went on to play vital roles against the Japanese in the Pacific and some would also serve in European waters. Today we remember those who were lost in this attack and also the contribution made by an important ally to ensure peace and freedom would eventually prevail. Oh hear us when we cry to thee, for those in peril on the sea.	<urn:uuid:d1220e96-ddde-44a8-ae7d-cf472eea71ac>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.britisharmedforcesthebest.com/single-post/2019/12/07/USS-Arizona	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251776516.99/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128060946-20200128090946-00461.warc.gz	en	0.987629	712	3.515625	4	[ -0.41469070315361023, 0.16120028495788574, 0.05516251176595688, -0.26161378622055054, 0.06093105301260948, 0.38629433512687683, 0.05342261120676994, 0.6535853743553162, 0.07090519368648529, -0.16385012865066528, 0.36293458938598633, -0.2988129258155823, 0.44752269983291626, 0.7049148082733...	2	Remembering The Fallen - On this day in 1941 the Imperial Japanese Navy attacked the United States Pacific Fleet at its main base at Pearl Harbour in Hawaii. This action would have far reaching consequences that at that time would not have been realised. For one thing it brought the United States into World War 2 on the side of the Allies. It was the massive economic and military might of the US that would be a major factor in bringing about the defeat of the Axis powers of Germany, Japan, Italy and their allies nearly four years later - the war would not just be decided by what happened on the battlefields and on the seas and oceans but also in the factories and the shipyards. The attack also changed the face of naval warfare and how battles at sea would be fought. It effectively brought to an end the era of battleships in a stately line hurling huge shells at each other. Instead, fleet actions would be fought at the range of the carrier-based planes with hundreds of miles of ocean between the two opposing fleets who would never even see each other. Although the Pearl Harbour air strike was a tactical victory for the Japanese, strategically it was a disaster - they did not get the US aircraft carriers as they were absent from Pearl Harbour on that day. In the months that were to follow this would be a costly mistake for the Japanese. The war winning fast carrier task group concept emerged from the Pearl Harbour disaster as the US Navy was now forced into using its aircraft carriers as the spearhead to take the fight to the Japanese because there was no alternative as the battle fleet was now gone. President Franklin D Roosevelt in his speech to the US Congress the next day described it as "a day that will live in infamy." Those very same carriers the Japanese failed to sink at Pearl Harbour would later haunt them in the decisive battles at Coral Sea and Midway. As for the ships in Pearl Harbour, the one that suffered the most was the USS Arizona, a Pennsylvania class battleship of pre World War 1 design. She'd been hit several times in the early minutes of the attack. The bomb which did the most damage was a 1757lb armour-piercing shell that had been converted into a bomb. It landed on her fo'c's'le near turret 2 and drilled through her armoured deck into her forward magazine where it detonated. It caused a cataclysmic explosion that swept men off her deck and also off other ships nearby. They were the ones who were fortunate enough to survive. Out of her crew of 1512, 1177 perished. She settled upright in the shallow waters although the force of the explosion caused her forward turrets and mast to collapse. Today, a concrete memorial stands over her remains where she settled upright. The remains of at least 1103 of her crew remain entombed in her hull. It commemorates the 2403 naval and civilian personnel lost in the attack, almost half of them were on board the Arizona. Of the other ships that were sunk or damaged, apart from the Arizona, only one other ship, the battleship USS Oklahoma, also became a total loss. All the other ships were either raised, repaired and rebuilt and went on to play vital roles against the Japanese in the Pacific and some would also serve in European waters. Today we remember those who were lost in this attack and also the contribution made by an important ally to ensure peace and freedom would eventually prevail. Oh hear us when we cry to thee, for those in peril on the sea.	728	ENGLISH	1
Two years after the death of Mary, at the age of 29, Edison married again. On February 24th 1886, he married a 20 year old Mina Miller, who was the daughter of Lewis Miller who himself was an inventor. The couple too, had three children one daughter Madeleine Edison and two sons, Charles and Theodore William Edison. Mina and Thomas spoke in Morse code in public by tapping on each others hands so that nobody understood their conversation when they were in public. 7. He was 22 when he received his very first patent During that era, there was a need for an upgrade in the telegraph system, which could allow voice transmission, rather than taps. A number of scientists were working on this system, but it was Edison who came up with the idea of recording votes on bills; the plan was a failure, but later Edison started working on the phonograph which was the first and the biggest success of his career. Edison lost millions of dollars, of dollars in a business venture where he tried to remove ore from rock. Not only did this experiment cost him a lot of money, but it is termed as the biggest failure of his life. Nonetheless he never stopped trying. One of the reasons behind Thomas Edison Inventions was the fact that he worked with young people. He liked to work with young graduates who had a passion for technology and invention. He called them “muckers” and paid them nominal wages to work 55 hours a week. The young people never really worked with him for the money, but because they loved working with the great man who also taught them a lot. Success comes to the hardworking; during his most productive years, it is said that Edison worked for more than 18 hours a day! It was his passion for his work that kept him going. He practiced the theory of there is no substitute for success, except for hard work and sound thinking. “Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.”	<urn:uuid:8c546d25-e3ac-44e0-8e84-94bddd1f4994>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.historyly.com/historical-figures/thomas-edison-facts/2/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672440.80/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125101544-20200125130544-00066.warc.gz	en	0.993697	418	3.375	3	[ -0.40682247281074524, 0.24714666604995728, 0.435714453458786, -0.13216161727905273, -0.4550234377384186, 0.17902807891368866, 0.05530920997262001, 0.2616943418979645, 0.020048590376973152, -0.23379956185817719, -0.06840723752975464, 0.5212299823760986, 0.3810555338859558, 0.056857336312532...	2	Two years after the death of Mary, at the age of 29, Edison married again. On February 24th 1886, he married a 20 year old Mina Miller, who was the daughter of Lewis Miller who himself was an inventor. The couple too, had three children one daughter Madeleine Edison and two sons, Charles and Theodore William Edison. Mina and Thomas spoke in Morse code in public by tapping on each others hands so that nobody understood their conversation when they were in public. 7. He was 22 when he received his very first patent During that era, there was a need for an upgrade in the telegraph system, which could allow voice transmission, rather than taps. A number of scientists were working on this system, but it was Edison who came up with the idea of recording votes on bills; the plan was a failure, but later Edison started working on the phonograph which was the first and the biggest success of his career. Edison lost millions of dollars, of dollars in a business venture where he tried to remove ore from rock. Not only did this experiment cost him a lot of money, but it is termed as the biggest failure of his life. Nonetheless he never stopped trying. One of the reasons behind Thomas Edison Inventions was the fact that he worked with young people. He liked to work with young graduates who had a passion for technology and invention. He called them “muckers” and paid them nominal wages to work 55 hours a week. The young people never really worked with him for the money, but because they loved working with the great man who also taught them a lot. Success comes to the hardworking; during his most productive years, it is said that Edison worked for more than 18 hours a day! It was his passion for his work that kept him going. He practiced the theory of there is no substitute for success, except for hard work and sound thinking. “Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.”	424	ENGLISH	1
Early Influences (p.378 – p.390)American design is a result of three different things: Influence, Development and Change Every form of design, no matter what, has had some form of influence from one of the 4 major eras of design. These eras being: Classical Greece, Imperial Rome, The Middle Ages and the Italian Renaissance. Whether they’d like to think or not.The Parthenon was constructed in the 5th Century B.C. in the capital of Greece, Athens.Even though this beautiful structure has endured some disfigurement, it still has yet to lose those that seek inspiration from its structural beauty. A majority of the Greek Parthenon was constructed with solid marble.During the time of construction, no bonding agent was needed.The Roof’s truss was made up of Wood and Terracotta Tiles.Designed by the architects, Ictinus and CallicratesWith the structures beautiful combination of horizontal lines, placement of the different shapes and the placing of the columns, one can see that there is an optical illusion that appears as if the structure is visually perfect. They also received help from the sculptor, Phidias. To which most of the sculptures were taking back to England by an English Collector, Lord ElginAll columns have a very distinctive artistic piece, to which define from which era of design the building was derived from.The Parthenon has many design aspects including a cornice, a colonnade frieze and several other design aspects. There are three main Greeks ordersDoric, Ionic, and CorinthianDoric: The oldest and simplest. This style has a square plate like form on the top and below the plate there is a circle like form as wellIonic: The most recent of the orders. This style is one of the most complex of designs. This style consists of two forward facing scrolls, a form of eggs and darts below that and below that there is a flower like form design. This style of columns is thinner than the doric styleCorinthiansUsed more by the Roman Order rather than the Greek OrderOne of the more complex designs Consists of a bell shaped body for the top of the column Rows of leaves around the bell shaped bodyThe top of the bell shaped body this is a squareEven though the Romans had annexed Greece, Greece still had superiority when it came to design.Although the Romans designs were stunning, they lacked functionality, whereas the Greeks designs had functionality.As the Roman empire expanded, so did the building of Roman buildings.With that, the Romans had adapted the Greeks style and techniques into their buildings, while still bringing their own style and technique.With them building their empire and bringing in their own styles, they had created a couple of design aspects that eventually lead to the dome.The Romans used many types of stone/material to construct their buildings.The Roman building do include the Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian styles as well as their own, Tuscan and Composite.The Roman Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian styles are very similar to the Greek Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian stylesThe Roman temple was different in two main ways.It was built on a raised podium, whereas the Greeks built their Temple was on a stylobateThey made their temple so that the only way to enter was from the frontThey also had expanded the space within the temple, to maximize the space.Classical and classicism are terms to which refer to the use of Roman and Greek forms, motifs and proportions Throughout history color has played a huge part into climate, politics, trade or exposure with other societies and social ambience.ColorsGreece:One of the bigger colors during this time was blueOther colors during this time for accenting other colors were: yellow, pink, pale blue, Roman:Magenta/Imperial Purple, Vivid Gold, Pompeian red, Roman Greens and slight accents of blacks.Throughout this time Christianity started to get accepted in Rome. With that the construction of churches started to spread across the empire.During this time the churches were up kept very well, because the church provide everything to the people. In return they expected to get paid by the people for their services. Later during this time, the terms, Romanesque and Norman came about. Now because of the romanesque style, the Gothic style came to be.It is said that the during the renaissance, there was a group of people that corrected the gothic style to bring it back to the original greek and roman classicismGothic designs included very tall ceiling and high pointed archesIn gothic churches there are many aspects, but there are 2 main points of interest, the nave which is main area of the church, or the bigger body of the church. The other main part is the Arcade, to which these arcades run on the sides of the church to create what we would call in modern day a hallway or pathway. Now usually below these churches there are crypts or burial grounds.These were commonly used to bury people of higher social class There also was a place for the Organ and seats for the people of the Choir, called the Choir. Within these churches there are areas called bays, these bays have objects that are called tall piers or columns, to which hold the weight of the church. In these churches, there is a viewing area, the triforium.In these churches you can see many areas with stained glassThese churches sometimes have braces called Flying Buttresses, which help support the other braces called the ButtressesEvery country had created their own way to defer where the church was, so churches in England had different subtleties than Churches in France. Houses during the middle ages were very simplistic.There were stone, brick and timber. The inside of timber homes, often consisted of wattle (twigs woven together) and then covered in daub or what would be similar to plaster in today’s world. For brickhouses, instead of wattle, they used nogs (blocks of wood.)Roofs during this times were made with bundles of reeds or thinly cut pieces of stone.These homes in the United Kingdom were most commonly referred to as Tudor as the time these homes were built, the Tudor Kings and Queens were in control of the throne.The colors during the Medieval time, were not as prominent as colors were in other eras. Some would call the colors of this time, dark and dingy; as this time itself was a dark and dingy time in history.Eastern cultural influences have been influencing design ever since the late 11th century, or what we would call the Crusades war. More specifically in the area of textiles, rugs and other products that were created by the peoples of the eastern cultures. During this time there was an expression, “The Orient” to which this expression referred to the peoples of the eastern cultures; which included China, India, the Caucasus Mountains. (Which is in Southern Russia between the Black and Caspian Seas.) Oriental goods were very prominent in people’s wishes, as everyone wanted something from the far east. Some of the goods that people wanted most of included: Fine Chinese Porcelain, Lacquer, Coromandel Screens, Chests, Chinese rugs and Chinese furniture. Chinese motifs, fretwork and details are often design into westen works of design.The French are said to have designed a style called the Chinoiserie, which was also known as a fanciful design. Chinese designs have been known to date back to 3000 B.C. Silk was originally was produced in China, then spread to Italy and then the rest of Europe in the beginning of the 17th century.Throughout the 19th century Islamic design was incorporated into western design. Most famously is the Horseshoe arch and the Onion dome. Rugs from Islamic cultures have also been prized since the Crusades in the 11th century. The Term “Asian” wasn’t used until later in time, closer to the 21st century than anything.In the Renaissance time, color was starting to become a huge fad, if you will. People had more freedom when it came to color, the artists weren’t confined to only religious symbols and religious colors. Baroque Period is known as the end of the renaissance periodThis style/period incorporates calums, pediments. Pilasters, rounded arches, domes and entablatures.This styles is however more exaggerated with ornamentation This period was known as the theatrical period. They used a lot of dramatic shadows and lights.The ceilings were painted in a more realistic fashionThe interior spaces were rounded without corners Materials often used during this period included: rich marble, gilded metals, ornately painted plasterThroughout this time, this style spread from Italy to all corners of EuropeThe Louvre found this style too outlandish where as the King found it suitable for the Château de Versailles.This style eventually made its way to the Americas.	<urn:uuid:1c512ee2-7fba-431b-9d26-6092223e421b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://firstnightdanbury.org/early-there-are-three-main-greeks-ordersdoric/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594662.6/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119151736-20200119175736-00250.warc.gz	en	0.981717	1,857	3.78125	4	[ -0.010670369490981102, 0.19649718701839447, 0.6203588247299194, -0.04241253435611725, -0.299672394990921, 0.2039763331413269, -0.24051865935325623, 0.6084686517715454, -0.2714219391345978, -0.08044260740280151, -0.3190579414367676, -0.004662849009037018, -0.06628237664699554, 0.14110539853...	1	Early Influences (p.378 – p.390)American design is a result of three different things: Influence, Development and Change Every form of design, no matter what, has had some form of influence from one of the 4 major eras of design. These eras being: Classical Greece, Imperial Rome, The Middle Ages and the Italian Renaissance. Whether they’d like to think or not.The Parthenon was constructed in the 5th Century B.C. in the capital of Greece, Athens.Even though this beautiful structure has endured some disfigurement, it still has yet to lose those that seek inspiration from its structural beauty. A majority of the Greek Parthenon was constructed with solid marble.During the time of construction, no bonding agent was needed.The Roof’s truss was made up of Wood and Terracotta Tiles.Designed by the architects, Ictinus and CallicratesWith the structures beautiful combination of horizontal lines, placement of the different shapes and the placing of the columns, one can see that there is an optical illusion that appears as if the structure is visually perfect. They also received help from the sculptor, Phidias. To which most of the sculptures were taking back to England by an English Collector, Lord ElginAll columns have a very distinctive artistic piece, to which define from which era of design the building was derived from.The Parthenon has many design aspects including a cornice, a colonnade frieze and several other design aspects. There are three main Greeks ordersDoric, Ionic, and CorinthianDoric: The oldest and simplest. This style has a square plate like form on the top and below the plate there is a circle like form as wellIonic: The most recent of the orders. This style is one of the most complex of designs. This style consists of two forward facing scrolls, a form of eggs and darts below that and below that there is a flower like form design. This style of columns is thinner than the doric styleCorinthiansUsed more by the Roman Order rather than the Greek OrderOne of the more complex designs Consists of a bell shaped body for the top of the column Rows of leaves around the bell shaped bodyThe top of the bell shaped body this is a squareEven though the Romans had annexed Greece, Greece still had superiority when it came to design.Although the Romans designs were stunning, they lacked functionality, whereas the Greeks designs had functionality.As the Roman empire expanded, so did the building of Roman buildings.With that, the Romans had adapted the Greeks style and techniques into their buildings, while still bringing their own style and technique.With them building their empire and bringing in their own styles, they had created a couple of design aspects that eventually lead to the dome.The Romans used many types of stone/material to construct their buildings.The Roman building do include the Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian styles as well as their own, Tuscan and Composite.The Roman Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian styles are very similar to the Greek Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian stylesThe Roman temple was different in two main ways.It was built on a raised podium, whereas the Greeks built their Temple was on a stylobateThey made their temple so that the only way to enter was from the frontThey also had expanded the space within the temple, to maximize the space.Classical and classicism are terms to which refer to the use of Roman and Greek forms, motifs and proportions Throughout history color has played a huge part into climate, politics, trade or exposure with other societies and social ambience.ColorsGreece:One of the bigger colors during this time was blueOther colors during this time for accenting other colors were: yellow, pink, pale blue, Roman:Magenta/Imperial Purple, Vivid Gold, Pompeian red, Roman Greens and slight accents of blacks.Throughout this time Christianity started to get accepted in Rome. With that the construction of churches started to spread across the empire.During this time the churches were up kept very well, because the church provide everything to the people. In return they expected to get paid by the people for their services. Later during this time, the terms, Romanesque and Norman came about. Now because of the romanesque style, the Gothic style came to be.It is said that the during the renaissance, there was a group of people that corrected the gothic style to bring it back to the original greek and roman classicismGothic designs included very tall ceiling and high pointed archesIn gothic churches there are many aspects, but there are 2 main points of interest, the nave which is main area of the church, or the bigger body of the church. The other main part is the Arcade, to which these arcades run on the sides of the church to create what we would call in modern day a hallway or pathway. Now usually below these churches there are crypts or burial grounds.These were commonly used to bury people of higher social class There also was a place for the Organ and seats for the people of the Choir, called the Choir. Within these churches there are areas called bays, these bays have objects that are called tall piers or columns, to which hold the weight of the church. In these churches, there is a viewing area, the triforium.In these churches you can see many areas with stained glassThese churches sometimes have braces called Flying Buttresses, which help support the other braces called the ButtressesEvery country had created their own way to defer where the church was, so churches in England had different subtleties than Churches in France. Houses during the middle ages were very simplistic.There were stone, brick and timber. The inside of timber homes, often consisted of wattle (twigs woven together) and then covered in daub or what would be similar to plaster in today’s world. For brickhouses, instead of wattle, they used nogs (blocks of wood.)Roofs during this times were made with bundles of reeds or thinly cut pieces of stone.These homes in the United Kingdom were most commonly referred to as Tudor as the time these homes were built, the Tudor Kings and Queens were in control of the throne.The colors during the Medieval time, were not as prominent as colors were in other eras. Some would call the colors of this time, dark and dingy; as this time itself was a dark and dingy time in history.Eastern cultural influences have been influencing design ever since the late 11th century, or what we would call the Crusades war. More specifically in the area of textiles, rugs and other products that were created by the peoples of the eastern cultures. During this time there was an expression, “The Orient” to which this expression referred to the peoples of the eastern cultures; which included China, India, the Caucasus Mountains. (Which is in Southern Russia between the Black and Caspian Seas.) Oriental goods were very prominent in people’s wishes, as everyone wanted something from the far east. Some of the goods that people wanted most of included: Fine Chinese Porcelain, Lacquer, Coromandel Screens, Chests, Chinese rugs and Chinese furniture. Chinese motifs, fretwork and details are often design into westen works of design.The French are said to have designed a style called the Chinoiserie, which was also known as a fanciful design. Chinese designs have been known to date back to 3000 B.C. Silk was originally was produced in China, then spread to Italy and then the rest of Europe in the beginning of the 17th century.Throughout the 19th century Islamic design was incorporated into western design. Most famously is the Horseshoe arch and the Onion dome. Rugs from Islamic cultures have also been prized since the Crusades in the 11th century. The Term “Asian” wasn’t used until later in time, closer to the 21st century than anything.In the Renaissance time, color was starting to become a huge fad, if you will. People had more freedom when it came to color, the artists weren’t confined to only religious symbols and religious colors. Baroque Period is known as the end of the renaissance periodThis style/period incorporates calums, pediments. Pilasters, rounded arches, domes and entablatures.This styles is however more exaggerated with ornamentation This period was known as the theatrical period. They used a lot of dramatic shadows and lights.The ceilings were painted in a more realistic fashionThe interior spaces were rounded without corners Materials often used during this period included: rich marble, gilded metals, ornately painted plasterThroughout this time, this style spread from Italy to all corners of EuropeThe Louvre found this style too outlandish where as the King found it suitable for the Château de Versailles.This style eventually made its way to the Americas.	1,823	ENGLISH	1
Charles I.—The Story of How the King and the Parliament Quarrelled and at Last Fought A S Parliament would not do exactly as King Charles wished, he ruled without one for nearly twelve years. During these years he was often in need of money and raised it in many wrong ways. But at last he could get no more money by right or by wrong ways, and he was obliged to call a Parliament. In 1640 A.D., what is known as the Long Parliament began to sit. It was called the Long Parliament because it lasted so long. The people chose the members for this Parliament very carefully, and they were not slow to show the King how strong they were. They beheaded one of the King's advisers because they said he had been guilty of treason. To commit treason means to do anything that is hurtful to the state or government. To commit high treason is to do anything hurtful to the King. The Parliament also imprisoned Archbishop Laud, and three years later he was beheaded. King Charles had quarrelled with every Parliament he had had during his reign. Now the quarrels grew worse and worse. At last, one day, Charles marched to the House, followed by his soldiers, meaning to seize five members, who, he thought, were his worst enemies. Leaving his soldiers at the door of the House, Charles went in and marched up to the Speaker's chair. "Mr. Speaker," he said, "I must borrow your seat for a time." The Speaker rose and fell upon his knee before the King, the members standing bare-headed, while the King sat down in the Speaker's chair. Charles looked keenly round the House, but none of the five members were to be seen. They had been warned and were not there. He called them each by name. Only silence answered. "Mr. Speaker," said Charles at last, "where are those five members whom I have called? Are any of them in the House? Do you see them?" "Your Majesty," said the Speaker, again falling upon his knees, "I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak in this place but as the House may be pleased to direct me." "Ah!" said Charles, "I see the birds are flown." Then, after making a very angry and bitter speech, he left the House. As he passed out the silence was broken by cries of rage, for the people felt that the King was trampling on all their rights. The quarrels grew worse and worse, and at last war broke out, war between Briton and Briton. English, Scots, and Irish, all joined in this war and it was called the Great Rebellion. The King and the lords were on one side, and the Parliament and the people on the other. Those who followed the King were called Cavaliers or Royalists, those who followed the Parliament were called Parliamentarians or Roundheads. Cavalier comes from a word which means "horse," and the Cavaliers were so called because most of them rode upon horses. The Roundheads were so called because they wore their hair short instead of long and curling like the Cavaliers. The Roundheads were for the most part Puritans, while the Cavaliers belonged to the Church of England. At this time there was no regular army in Britain, such as we have now, and a great many of those who fought were quite untrained. The King's army was in some ways better than the army of the Parliament, for it contained many gentlemen who were accustomed to danger and who were able to ride. The Parliamentarians were chiefly working men who knew very little about fighting. But among them there was a brave, strong man called Oliver Cromwell. He knew how hard it would be for these working men to conquer, if they were not taught how to fight, so he drilled them and taught them quickness and obedience. So thoroughly did they learn that they became most splendid soldiers, and were called Oliver Cromwell's Ironsides. Never were such strange soldiers seen. In those days a camp was a wild, rough place, but from the camp of Cromwell's soldiers, instead of the sound of drunkenness and laughter, came the sound of psalm singing and prayer. To many of them the war was a holy war, a battle for the freedom of religion. "Trust in God and keep your powder dry," was Cromwell's advice to his soldiers, as one day they were crossing a river to attack the enemy. For four years the war went on. The Royalist leaders were Lord Lindsey and the King's nephew, Prince Rupert. Prince Rupert was so fiery and eager in battle that he was called "Dashing Prince Rupert." But although he was very brave, he was not a good general and often did rash things. The chief of the Roundhead leaders were Oliver Cromwell, Ireton and Fairfax. Many battles were fought, sometimes one side winning, sometimes the other. But at last, at a battle called Naseby, the Cavaliers were utterly defeated. Then Charles lost all hope. He had no money left and very few friends. He felt that his cause was ruined, and thinking that the Scots would be kinder to him than the English, he gave himself up to them. The Scots and the English were still friends and they agreed that if Charles would grant to England the same kind of religion as Scotland, they would set him on the throne again. But Charles would not promise this, so the Scots gave him up to the Parliamentarians. But when the war was over, it was found that neither King nor Parliament ruled the land, but the army. The King being now a prisoner, the Parliament said there was no longer any need for the army, and told the soldiers to go back to their homes. But the soldiers refused to go. They knew how powerful they had become, and they resolved to become yet more powerful and get possession of the King. One evening a man called Cornet Joyce, with about eight hundred soldiers behind him, rode to the house in which King Charles was kept prisoner. Going into the King's room he told him politely and kindly that he had come to take him away. After some talk Charles said he was willing to go, but as it was now late, Cornet Joyce must come again in the morning. Accordingly at six o'clock next morning the King rose and, going out to the courtyard, found Joyce and all his soldiers waiting there, mounted and ready. "I pray you, Mr. Joyce," said the King, as he looked at the company of stern men in steel armour, "deal honestly with me and show me your commission." By a commission, the King meant a letter to say that Joyce really had orders to take him away. "Here is my commission," said Joyce. "Where?" said the King. "Here," said Joyce. "Where?" again asked the King. "Behind me," said Joyce, pointing to the mounted soldiers. "I hope it will satisfy your Majesty." Then Charles smiled and said, "It is as fair a commission and as well written as ever I have seen a commission in my life. It may be read without spelling. But what if I refuse to go with you? I hope you would not force me. I am your King, and you ought not to lay violent hands upon your King. I acknowledge none to be above me here but God." "We will not hurt you, your Majesty," replied Joyce. "Nay, we will not even force you to come with us against your will." So Charles consented to go with them, and asked, "How far do you intend to ride "As far as your Majesty can conveniently ride," replied Joyce. "I can ride as far as you or as any man here," said Charles, smiling, and so they set out. In this way the King became the prisoner of the army instead of the prisoner of the Parliament.	<urn:uuid:3c869a6b-df01-4b95-bc99-84537cacc0f7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.gatewaytotheclassics.com/browse/display.php?author=marshall&book=island&story=quarreled	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250605075.24/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121192553-20200121221553-00465.warc.gz	en	0.993915	1,653	3.953125	4	[ -0.17912974953651428, 0.5665110349655151, 0.30094200372695923, -0.008924410678446293, -0.1415553092956543, -0.32685840129852295, 0.462238073348999, -0.29213935136795044, 0.11512194573879242, -0.02689499780535698, 0.25079596042633057, 0.13394352793693542, -0.019444461911916733, 0.2148683667...	6	Charles I.—The Story of How the King and the Parliament Quarrelled and at Last Fought A S Parliament would not do exactly as King Charles wished, he ruled without one for nearly twelve years. During these years he was often in need of money and raised it in many wrong ways. But at last he could get no more money by right or by wrong ways, and he was obliged to call a Parliament. In 1640 A.D., what is known as the Long Parliament began to sit. It was called the Long Parliament because it lasted so long. The people chose the members for this Parliament very carefully, and they were not slow to show the King how strong they were. They beheaded one of the King's advisers because they said he had been guilty of treason. To commit treason means to do anything that is hurtful to the state or government. To commit high treason is to do anything hurtful to the King. The Parliament also imprisoned Archbishop Laud, and three years later he was beheaded. King Charles had quarrelled with every Parliament he had had during his reign. Now the quarrels grew worse and worse. At last, one day, Charles marched to the House, followed by his soldiers, meaning to seize five members, who, he thought, were his worst enemies. Leaving his soldiers at the door of the House, Charles went in and marched up to the Speaker's chair. "Mr. Speaker," he said, "I must borrow your seat for a time." The Speaker rose and fell upon his knee before the King, the members standing bare-headed, while the King sat down in the Speaker's chair. Charles looked keenly round the House, but none of the five members were to be seen. They had been warned and were not there. He called them each by name. Only silence answered. "Mr. Speaker," said Charles at last, "where are those five members whom I have called? Are any of them in the House? Do you see them?" "Your Majesty," said the Speaker, again falling upon his knees, "I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak in this place but as the House may be pleased to direct me." "Ah!" said Charles, "I see the birds are flown." Then, after making a very angry and bitter speech, he left the House. As he passed out the silence was broken by cries of rage, for the people felt that the King was trampling on all their rights. The quarrels grew worse and worse, and at last war broke out, war between Briton and Briton. English, Scots, and Irish, all joined in this war and it was called the Great Rebellion. The King and the lords were on one side, and the Parliament and the people on the other. Those who followed the King were called Cavaliers or Royalists, those who followed the Parliament were called Parliamentarians or Roundheads. Cavalier comes from a word which means "horse," and the Cavaliers were so called because most of them rode upon horses. The Roundheads were so called because they wore their hair short instead of long and curling like the Cavaliers. The Roundheads were for the most part Puritans, while the Cavaliers belonged to the Church of England. At this time there was no regular army in Britain, such as we have now, and a great many of those who fought were quite untrained. The King's army was in some ways better than the army of the Parliament, for it contained many gentlemen who were accustomed to danger and who were able to ride. The Parliamentarians were chiefly working men who knew very little about fighting. But among them there was a brave, strong man called Oliver Cromwell. He knew how hard it would be for these working men to conquer, if they were not taught how to fight, so he drilled them and taught them quickness and obedience. So thoroughly did they learn that they became most splendid soldiers, and were called Oliver Cromwell's Ironsides. Never were such strange soldiers seen. In those days a camp was a wild, rough place, but from the camp of Cromwell's soldiers, instead of the sound of drunkenness and laughter, came the sound of psalm singing and prayer. To many of them the war was a holy war, a battle for the freedom of religion. "Trust in God and keep your powder dry," was Cromwell's advice to his soldiers, as one day they were crossing a river to attack the enemy. For four years the war went on. The Royalist leaders were Lord Lindsey and the King's nephew, Prince Rupert. Prince Rupert was so fiery and eager in battle that he was called "Dashing Prince Rupert." But although he was very brave, he was not a good general and often did rash things. The chief of the Roundhead leaders were Oliver Cromwell, Ireton and Fairfax. Many battles were fought, sometimes one side winning, sometimes the other. But at last, at a battle called Naseby, the Cavaliers were utterly defeated. Then Charles lost all hope. He had no money left and very few friends. He felt that his cause was ruined, and thinking that the Scots would be kinder to him than the English, he gave himself up to them. The Scots and the English were still friends and they agreed that if Charles would grant to England the same kind of religion as Scotland, they would set him on the throne again. But Charles would not promise this, so the Scots gave him up to the Parliamentarians. But when the war was over, it was found that neither King nor Parliament ruled the land, but the army. The King being now a prisoner, the Parliament said there was no longer any need for the army, and told the soldiers to go back to their homes. But the soldiers refused to go. They knew how powerful they had become, and they resolved to become yet more powerful and get possession of the King. One evening a man called Cornet Joyce, with about eight hundred soldiers behind him, rode to the house in which King Charles was kept prisoner. Going into the King's room he told him politely and kindly that he had come to take him away. After some talk Charles said he was willing to go, but as it was now late, Cornet Joyce must come again in the morning. Accordingly at six o'clock next morning the King rose and, going out to the courtyard, found Joyce and all his soldiers waiting there, mounted and ready. "I pray you, Mr. Joyce," said the King, as he looked at the company of stern men in steel armour, "deal honestly with me and show me your commission." By a commission, the King meant a letter to say that Joyce really had orders to take him away. "Here is my commission," said Joyce. "Where?" said the King. "Here," said Joyce. "Where?" again asked the King. "Behind me," said Joyce, pointing to the mounted soldiers. "I hope it will satisfy your Majesty." Then Charles smiled and said, "It is as fair a commission and as well written as ever I have seen a commission in my life. It may be read without spelling. But what if I refuse to go with you? I hope you would not force me. I am your King, and you ought not to lay violent hands upon your King. I acknowledge none to be above me here but God." "We will not hurt you, your Majesty," replied Joyce. "Nay, we will not even force you to come with us against your will." So Charles consented to go with them, and asked, "How far do you intend to ride "As far as your Majesty can conveniently ride," replied Joyce. "I can ride as far as you or as any man here," said Charles, smiling, and so they set out. In this way the King became the prisoner of the army instead of the prisoner of the Parliament.	1,614	ENGLISH	1
The Great Wall of China is a wall that covers much of the northern border of China. The length of the Great Wall built by the Ming Dynasty is around 5,500 miles long. If you take the length of all the portions of the wall built by every Chinese Dynasty, plus various branches, the total comes to 13,171 miles long! No wonder they call it the Great Wall. Great Wall of China by Herbert Ponting Why did they build the wall? The wall was built to help keep out northern invaders like the Mongols. Smaller walls had been built over the years, but the first Emperor of China, Qin Shi Huang, decided that he wanted a single giant wall to protect his northern borders. He ordered that a single strong wall be built with thousands of lookout towers where soldiers could guard and protect his empire. Who built it? The original Great Wall was started by the Qin Dynasty and following dynasties continued to work on it. Later the Ming Dynasty rebuilt the wall. Much of the Great Wall that we know today was built by the Ming Dynasty. The wall was built by peasants, slaves, criminals, and other people that the emperor decided to punish. Soldiers were involved in building the wall and in managing the workers as well. It is estimated that millions of people worked on the wall over the course of over 1000 years. Some scientists think that up to 1 million people died while building the wall. People building the wall were not treated very well. Many people were just buried under the wall when they died. What did they build it with? Generally the wall was built with whatever resources were available nearby. The earlier walls were built with compacted dirt surrounded by stone. Much of the later Ming wall was built with bricks. Was it just a wall? The wall was really a fortification to protect the northern border. It was a wall, but also had watchtowers, beacon towers to send signals, and blockhouses to house soldiers. There were soldiers guarding the walls and towers. There were also towns built along the wall to garrison soldiers so they could quickly get to the wall in case of a large attack. It is estimated that over 1 million soldiers guarded the great wall during the height of the Ming Dynasty. A wide road on top of the wall where soldiers could defend Great Wall of China by Mark Grant Fun Facts about the Great Wall of China There are over 7,000 lookout towers that are part of the Great Wall. Today the walls continue to erode, however historians are trying to protect what sections they can. The height and width of the wall varies over its length. The current wall built by the Ming Dynasty averages around 33 feet tall and 15 feet wide. It is the longest man made structure in the world. Wide moats were often dug outside the wall in flat areas to make an enemies approach more difficult. Smoke signals were used to indicate an attack. The more enemies that were attacking, the more smoke signals they would make. It was named one of the New Seven Wonders of the World. Many people say that the Great Wall can be seen from the Moon without aid. However, this is just a myth. The wheelbarrow, which the Chinese invented, no doubt was a great help in building much of the wall. The wall extends through all sorts of terrain, even into the mountains. Its highest point is over 5,000 feet above sea level.	<urn:uuid:8f5fbeb9-2555-4d84-be43-f869c0dd8ceb>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.ducksters.com/history/china/great_wall_of_china.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593994.14/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118221909-20200119005909-00258.warc.gz	en	0.988279	707	3.40625	3	[ -0.15225502848625183, 0.24240387976169586, 0.3269772529602051, 0.22512716054916382, 0.09019584953784943, -0.15055742859840393, 0.138111412525177, -0.1959121823310852, -0.06819792091846466, 0.06379784643650055, 0.3409484028816223, -0.4485698342323303, 0.14301356673240662, 0.2391134202480316...	10	The Great Wall of China is a wall that covers much of the northern border of China. The length of the Great Wall built by the Ming Dynasty is around 5,500 miles long. If you take the length of all the portions of the wall built by every Chinese Dynasty, plus various branches, the total comes to 13,171 miles long! No wonder they call it the Great Wall. Great Wall of China by Herbert Ponting Why did they build the wall? The wall was built to help keep out northern invaders like the Mongols. Smaller walls had been built over the years, but the first Emperor of China, Qin Shi Huang, decided that he wanted a single giant wall to protect his northern borders. He ordered that a single strong wall be built with thousands of lookout towers where soldiers could guard and protect his empire. Who built it? The original Great Wall was started by the Qin Dynasty and following dynasties continued to work on it. Later the Ming Dynasty rebuilt the wall. Much of the Great Wall that we know today was built by the Ming Dynasty. The wall was built by peasants, slaves, criminals, and other people that the emperor decided to punish. Soldiers were involved in building the wall and in managing the workers as well. It is estimated that millions of people worked on the wall over the course of over 1000 years. Some scientists think that up to 1 million people died while building the wall. People building the wall were not treated very well. Many people were just buried under the wall when they died. What did they build it with? Generally the wall was built with whatever resources were available nearby. The earlier walls were built with compacted dirt surrounded by stone. Much of the later Ming wall was built with bricks. Was it just a wall? The wall was really a fortification to protect the northern border. It was a wall, but also had watchtowers, beacon towers to send signals, and blockhouses to house soldiers. There were soldiers guarding the walls and towers. There were also towns built along the wall to garrison soldiers so they could quickly get to the wall in case of a large attack. It is estimated that over 1 million soldiers guarded the great wall during the height of the Ming Dynasty. A wide road on top of the wall where soldiers could defend Great Wall of China by Mark Grant Fun Facts about the Great Wall of China There are over 7,000 lookout towers that are part of the Great Wall. Today the walls continue to erode, however historians are trying to protect what sections they can. The height and width of the wall varies over its length. The current wall built by the Ming Dynasty averages around 33 feet tall and 15 feet wide. It is the longest man made structure in the world. Wide moats were often dug outside the wall in flat areas to make an enemies approach more difficult. Smoke signals were used to indicate an attack. The more enemies that were attacking, the more smoke signals they would make. It was named one of the New Seven Wonders of the World. Many people say that the Great Wall can be seen from the Moon without aid. However, this is just a myth. The wheelbarrow, which the Chinese invented, no doubt was a great help in building much of the wall. The wall extends through all sorts of terrain, even into the mountains. Its highest point is over 5,000 feet above sea level.	711	ENGLISH	1
Stonewall Jackson Biography, Life, Interesting Facts Died On : Birth Place : Early Years And Education Stonewall Jackson was born on 21st January 1824, in Clarksburg, Virginia, in the United States. His father’s name was Jonathan, and his mother’s name was Julia. Jackson's father and one of his sisters died from typhoid fever when Stonewall Jackson was just two years old. His mother was left with three young children to raise, and a lot of debt. Julia sold the family possessions to pay the debt. She moved the family into a one-bedroom rental dwelling, and she did sewing and teaching to support herself and the family for approximately four years. Stonewall Jackson’s mother remarried in 1830. She married an attorney, who, unfortunately, didn’t like the children. She had one more child with her new husband and then died. Although the children had lived away with relatives when their mother became sick, they came home to be with her when she died. Stonewall Jackson and his sister were sent to different relatives to live. Stonewall Jackson was verbally abused for more than 12 months by his uncle. He ran away, and then made his way back to Stonewall Jackson’s Mill where his other family was very happy to see him, and he stayed there for seven years. Jackson’s Mill was where Jackson and his sister had stayed for four years while their mother was sick. Stonewall Jackson was accepted into West Point Military Academy in 1842. As a student with not much schooling, Jackson applied himself with determination. He began at the bottom of the class, but in 1846, he graduated at 17th out of 59. After graduation, Stonewall Jackson’s military career began. He fought in many battles and several wars. His first was the Mexican-American War between 1846 and 1848. He served in several battles during the war, and while in Mexico City, met Robert E. Lee for the first time. During the Mexican-American War, Jackson was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant. He was promoted further until he reached the rank of major. Once the war was finished Jackson served in New York and then in Florida at the Seminole Wars. In 1851, he accepted a position to teach at the Virginia Military Institute in Lexington. His role was that of Professor of Natural and Experimental Philosophy, and he was also the Instructor of Artillery. Unfortunately, Jackson was not a good teacher. He prepared well for classes, but he couldn’t connect with his students. Much to his credit, some of his curriculum is still being taught at the Institute. American Civil War In 1861, Virginia seceded from the Union, and the American Civil War began. Stonewall Jackson joined the Confederate Army, and he became drill master for new recruits. By this time Stonewall Jackson was a Colonel. He assembled and took charge of a unit which consisted of the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 27th, and 33rd Virginia Infantry regiments. They would later become known as Stonewall Brigade. Stonewall Jackson was a hard task-masker, believing drills would help his troops succeed. In May, he was promoted to the rank of brigadier general. It was during the First Battle of Bull Run in July 1861 that Stonewall Jackson received his nickname of “Stonewall”.His brigade stopped the Union Army in the battle and they had many casualties. At the end of the battle, Jackson attained the rank of major general. Stonewall Jackson continued to lead his troops and fight in various battles, including the Valley Campaign, the Peninsula Campaign, the Second Bull Run to Fredericksburg, and the Chancellorsville Campaign. Stonewall Jackson and his troops served under Robert E. Lee during battle. Several battles and campaigns later, Jackson was promoted to lieutenant general. After one of the main battles in the Chancellorsville Campaign, when Stonewall Jackson and his men were returning to camp after dark, they were shot at by fellow Confederate soldiers thinking it was a ploy by the Union. Some of Stonewall Jackson’s men were killed, along with horses, and Stonewall Jackson himself received three shots – two into his left arm, the third into his right hand. He was offered to recover at the property of Thomas C. Chandler. Jackson refused the home, and instead suggested he use the plantation office as a recovery room. On May 10, 1963, Stonewall Jackson died of complications from pneumonia. It was eight days after he had been shot. His body was displayed at the Governor’s Mansion in Richmond, so the public could mourn. He was then buried at the Stonewall Jackson Memorial Cemetery in Lexington, Virginia. In 1853, Stonewall Jackson married Elinor “Ellie” Junkin. While Ellie was giving birth to their stillborn son in October 1854, she died. In 1857, Stonewall Jackson married for a second time. He married Mary Anna Morrison. The couple had a daughter in 1858, but she died in less than a month. They had a second daughter in 1862. Mary Anna Jackson moved to North Carolina with her daughter after the war. She wrote two books about Stonewall Jackson's life. Mary didn’t remarry and was called the “Widow of the Confederacy”. Stonewall Jackson has had statues built in his honor, and a park named after him. His uncle’s grist mill is part of the site at the Stonewall Jackson’s Mill Center for Lifelong Learning and State 4-H Camp. His birthday is honored as part of Lee-Jackson Day, observed as a state public holiday since 1904. It takes place on the Friday that comes before the third Monday in January every year.	<urn:uuid:a607b73d-2eb9-42ac-88f6-eb0511e70dfe>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.sunsigns.org/famousbirthdays/profile/stonewall-jackson/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00252.warc.gz	en	0.991984	1,258	3.484375	3	[ -0.08421128988265991, 0.4758114218711853, 0.7286292910575867, -0.0943470150232315, -0.4073387086391449, 0.5926767587661743, 0.14087486267089844, 0.0872642919421196, -0.005222707986831665, -0.2654770612716675, -0.11006718128919601, -0.05143890529870987, 0.04043459892272949, 0.08485735207796...	7	Stonewall Jackson Biography, Life, Interesting Facts Died On : Birth Place : Early Years And Education Stonewall Jackson was born on 21st January 1824, in Clarksburg, Virginia, in the United States. His father’s name was Jonathan, and his mother’s name was Julia. Jackson's father and one of his sisters died from typhoid fever when Stonewall Jackson was just two years old. His mother was left with three young children to raise, and a lot of debt. Julia sold the family possessions to pay the debt. She moved the family into a one-bedroom rental dwelling, and she did sewing and teaching to support herself and the family for approximately four years. Stonewall Jackson’s mother remarried in 1830. She married an attorney, who, unfortunately, didn’t like the children. She had one more child with her new husband and then died. Although the children had lived away with relatives when their mother became sick, they came home to be with her when she died. Stonewall Jackson and his sister were sent to different relatives to live. Stonewall Jackson was verbally abused for more than 12 months by his uncle. He ran away, and then made his way back to Stonewall Jackson’s Mill where his other family was very happy to see him, and he stayed there for seven years. Jackson’s Mill was where Jackson and his sister had stayed for four years while their mother was sick. Stonewall Jackson was accepted into West Point Military Academy in 1842. As a student with not much schooling, Jackson applied himself with determination. He began at the bottom of the class, but in 1846, he graduated at 17th out of 59. After graduation, Stonewall Jackson’s military career began. He fought in many battles and several wars. His first was the Mexican-American War between 1846 and 1848. He served in several battles during the war, and while in Mexico City, met Robert E. Lee for the first time. During the Mexican-American War, Jackson was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant. He was promoted further until he reached the rank of major. Once the war was finished Jackson served in New York and then in Florida at the Seminole Wars. In 1851, he accepted a position to teach at the Virginia Military Institute in Lexington. His role was that of Professor of Natural and Experimental Philosophy, and he was also the Instructor of Artillery. Unfortunately, Jackson was not a good teacher. He prepared well for classes, but he couldn’t connect with his students. Much to his credit, some of his curriculum is still being taught at the Institute. American Civil War In 1861, Virginia seceded from the Union, and the American Civil War began. Stonewall Jackson joined the Confederate Army, and he became drill master for new recruits. By this time Stonewall Jackson was a Colonel. He assembled and took charge of a unit which consisted of the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 27th, and 33rd Virginia Infantry regiments. They would later become known as Stonewall Brigade. Stonewall Jackson was a hard task-masker, believing drills would help his troops succeed. In May, he was promoted to the rank of brigadier general. It was during the First Battle of Bull Run in July 1861 that Stonewall Jackson received his nickname of “Stonewall”.His brigade stopped the Union Army in the battle and they had many casualties. At the end of the battle, Jackson attained the rank of major general. Stonewall Jackson continued to lead his troops and fight in various battles, including the Valley Campaign, the Peninsula Campaign, the Second Bull Run to Fredericksburg, and the Chancellorsville Campaign. Stonewall Jackson and his troops served under Robert E. Lee during battle. Several battles and campaigns later, Jackson was promoted to lieutenant general. After one of the main battles in the Chancellorsville Campaign, when Stonewall Jackson and his men were returning to camp after dark, they were shot at by fellow Confederate soldiers thinking it was a ploy by the Union. Some of Stonewall Jackson’s men were killed, along with horses, and Stonewall Jackson himself received three shots – two into his left arm, the third into his right hand. He was offered to recover at the property of Thomas C. Chandler. Jackson refused the home, and instead suggested he use the plantation office as a recovery room. On May 10, 1963, Stonewall Jackson died of complications from pneumonia. It was eight days after he had been shot. His body was displayed at the Governor’s Mansion in Richmond, so the public could mourn. He was then buried at the Stonewall Jackson Memorial Cemetery in Lexington, Virginia. In 1853, Stonewall Jackson married Elinor “Ellie” Junkin. While Ellie was giving birth to their stillborn son in October 1854, she died. In 1857, Stonewall Jackson married for a second time. He married Mary Anna Morrison. The couple had a daughter in 1858, but she died in less than a month. They had a second daughter in 1862. Mary Anna Jackson moved to North Carolina with her daughter after the war. She wrote two books about Stonewall Jackson's life. Mary didn’t remarry and was called the “Widow of the Confederacy”. Stonewall Jackson has had statues built in his honor, and a park named after him. His uncle’s grist mill is part of the site at the Stonewall Jackson’s Mill Center for Lifelong Learning and State 4-H Camp. His birthday is honored as part of Lee-Jackson Day, observed as a state public holiday since 1904. It takes place on the Friday that comes before the third Monday in January every year.	1,266	ENGLISH	1
Calgary professor looks into how drinking has changed A new study by a Mount Royal University professor is looking at the history of drinking alcohol throughout human history. Now that the summer season is upon us and many are looking towards spending time outside with a cold brew, one local researcher is looking at all the ways humans use alcohol in society. David Clemis, associate professor at Mount Royal University, says his study is focused on looking at how alcohol is perceived, especially in the wake of marijuana legalization. He says his research has revealed a deep history of alcohol in human society where early humans actually adapted to metabolize the drug before they fully evolved into homo sapiens. These days, drinking can be associated with any number of activities such as celebrating and mourning, Clemis says. "But we also recognize that it can be destructive. Chronic drinking, too much of a good thing, is a problem." Earlier this year, Premier Kenney announced his government had relaxed the rules about drinking in public places in Alberta, saying "the war on fun is over." Clemis says the move is a sort of swing back away from the anxieties and effect of alcohol. "Historically, chronic drinking was thought of as a vice, a moral weakness. Over time, especially in the 18th and 19th centuries, we developed this idea of alcoholism as a disease where the individual doesn't have the capacity to choose not to drink once they have habituated themselves to it," he says. "Modern neuroscience though, and some of the approaches to addiction theory, have taken the view that neither is it strictly a disease nor is it a series of bad choices but, in fact, it's both." When it comes to cannabis, Clemis says human culture doesn't have as long a history with that drug. "In the late 19th century [and] early 20th century, cannabis was seen by authorities as a dangerous thing. It was associated with some ethnic minority groups in the United States. It was associated with radical political thought and was thought to be destructive of mental health." He adds over the past 30 years, those attitudes have changed and the costs of suppressing its use have gotten to be too much. The City of Calgary gathered feedback from residents over the winter about whether or not they would like to see drinking in municipal areas. Officials may test out the idea as a pilot project this summer. (With files from Chris Epp)	<urn:uuid:f0a03869-9d4b-4073-b337-a2ac9e80169f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/calgary-professor-looks-into-how-drinking-has-changed-1.4478906	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607314.32/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122161553-20200122190553-00539.warc.gz	en	0.980457	503	3.328125	3	[ -0.10002969950437546, 0.22101441025733948, 0.513392448425293, -0.0036987895146012306, 0.17204362154006958, 0.24483580887317657, 0.49379801750183105, 0.2896537482738495, 0.03473443165421486, 0.04171057045459747, 0.08565453439950943, 0.153644397854805, -0.23744364082813263, -0.03211911767721...	2	Calgary professor looks into how drinking has changed A new study by a Mount Royal University professor is looking at the history of drinking alcohol throughout human history. Now that the summer season is upon us and many are looking towards spending time outside with a cold brew, one local researcher is looking at all the ways humans use alcohol in society. David Clemis, associate professor at Mount Royal University, says his study is focused on looking at how alcohol is perceived, especially in the wake of marijuana legalization. He says his research has revealed a deep history of alcohol in human society where early humans actually adapted to metabolize the drug before they fully evolved into homo sapiens. These days, drinking can be associated with any number of activities such as celebrating and mourning, Clemis says. "But we also recognize that it can be destructive. Chronic drinking, too much of a good thing, is a problem." Earlier this year, Premier Kenney announced his government had relaxed the rules about drinking in public places in Alberta, saying "the war on fun is over." Clemis says the move is a sort of swing back away from the anxieties and effect of alcohol. "Historically, chronic drinking was thought of as a vice, a moral weakness. Over time, especially in the 18th and 19th centuries, we developed this idea of alcoholism as a disease where the individual doesn't have the capacity to choose not to drink once they have habituated themselves to it," he says. "Modern neuroscience though, and some of the approaches to addiction theory, have taken the view that neither is it strictly a disease nor is it a series of bad choices but, in fact, it's both." When it comes to cannabis, Clemis says human culture doesn't have as long a history with that drug. "In the late 19th century [and] early 20th century, cannabis was seen by authorities as a dangerous thing. It was associated with some ethnic minority groups in the United States. It was associated with radical political thought and was thought to be destructive of mental health." He adds over the past 30 years, those attitudes have changed and the costs of suppressing its use have gotten to be too much. The City of Calgary gathered feedback from residents over the winter about whether or not they would like to see drinking in municipal areas. Officials may test out the idea as a pilot project this summer. (With files from Chris Epp)	496	ENGLISH	1
Educator, scientist. Thomas Cooper was born on October 22, 1759, in Westminster, England. His father was also named Thomas Cooper; his mother’s name is unknown. Little is known about his childhood or family. In 1779 he began studying at Oxford, and although he did not obtain a degree, he went on to work as a lawyer and a chemist. On August 12, 1779, he married Alice Greenwood, with whom he had five children. A philosophical radical, Cooper was discouraged by England’s conservative reaction to the French Revolution. He left the country in 1794 and settled in Pennsylvania. There he worked as a lawyer and a physician and became associated with the Jeffersonian Republican opposition to Federalism. Republican political triumphs eventually lifted him to a state judgeship in 1804. During this time he began to grow more conservative as the result of attacks on the judiciary by radical democrats. He was forced out of office in 1811. After leaving politics, Cooper turned to teaching chemistry and worked at a variety of schools before arriving at South Carolina College (later the University of South Carolina) in 1820. His first wife had died in 1800, and in 1811 he married Elizabeth Pratt Hemming, with whom he had three children. In South Carolina, Cooper completed his philosophical journey and became an ardent proponent of states’ rights. He was appointed the second president of South Carolina College in May 1820 and taught courses in chemistry, mineralogy, and political economy. Cooper also established himself early as an opponent of religious orthodoxy, which led to confrontation with the state’s Presbyterians that played across the pages of pamphlets and newspapers. Whatever political capital Cooper may have lost by arguing against religion he regained among many by his adoption of states’ rights and proslavery views. Although he had authored an antislavery pamphlet while living in England, Cooper purchased two slave families on his arrival in South Carolina. Cooper also opposed tariffs that would injure the southern staple economy. In 1824 he wrote his first major pamphlet that espoused states’ rights philosophy, and he later became a strong supporter of nullification. Although he was not politically active in the movement, his writings led opponents of nullification to recognize him as the intellectual leader of the nullifiers. Cooper resigned from the college presidency on November 27, 1833, effective January 1 of the following year. His resignation stemmed in part from legislative pressure from those who disapproved of his anticlerical stance. Cooper remained active nonetheless in his retirement, authoring works on chemistry and law, including the five-volume Statutes at Large of South Carolina (1836–1839). He died on May 11, 1839, in Columbia and was buried in that city’s Trinity Churchyard. Cooper’s legacy at the University of South Carolina was recognized in 1976 when the undergraduate library was reopened as a research library and renamed the Thomas Cooper Library. Malone, Dumas. The Public Life of Thomas Cooper, 1783–1839. 1926. Reprint, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1961.	<urn:uuid:303060a1-9706-49f7-b001-424fa33a16f7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.scencyclopedia.org/sce/entries/cooper-thomas/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250611127.53/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123160903-20200123185903-00178.warc.gz	en	0.989178	636	3.390625	3	[ -0.13348488509655, 0.3022570013999939, -0.06295949220657349, 0.0090749841183424, -0.10136444121599197, -0.02341441623866558, 0.22614379227161407, 0.2767585217952728, -0.2678816616535187, -0.1321583241224289, 0.37700098752975464, -0.5235192179679871, 0.36137712001800537, 0.14387734234333038...	1	Educator, scientist. Thomas Cooper was born on October 22, 1759, in Westminster, England. His father was also named Thomas Cooper; his mother’s name is unknown. Little is known about his childhood or family. In 1779 he began studying at Oxford, and although he did not obtain a degree, he went on to work as a lawyer and a chemist. On August 12, 1779, he married Alice Greenwood, with whom he had five children. A philosophical radical, Cooper was discouraged by England’s conservative reaction to the French Revolution. He left the country in 1794 and settled in Pennsylvania. There he worked as a lawyer and a physician and became associated with the Jeffersonian Republican opposition to Federalism. Republican political triumphs eventually lifted him to a state judgeship in 1804. During this time he began to grow more conservative as the result of attacks on the judiciary by radical democrats. He was forced out of office in 1811. After leaving politics, Cooper turned to teaching chemistry and worked at a variety of schools before arriving at South Carolina College (later the University of South Carolina) in 1820. His first wife had died in 1800, and in 1811 he married Elizabeth Pratt Hemming, with whom he had three children. In South Carolina, Cooper completed his philosophical journey and became an ardent proponent of states’ rights. He was appointed the second president of South Carolina College in May 1820 and taught courses in chemistry, mineralogy, and political economy. Cooper also established himself early as an opponent of religious orthodoxy, which led to confrontation with the state’s Presbyterians that played across the pages of pamphlets and newspapers. Whatever political capital Cooper may have lost by arguing against religion he regained among many by his adoption of states’ rights and proslavery views. Although he had authored an antislavery pamphlet while living in England, Cooper purchased two slave families on his arrival in South Carolina. Cooper also opposed tariffs that would injure the southern staple economy. In 1824 he wrote his first major pamphlet that espoused states’ rights philosophy, and he later became a strong supporter of nullification. Although he was not politically active in the movement, his writings led opponents of nullification to recognize him as the intellectual leader of the nullifiers. Cooper resigned from the college presidency on November 27, 1833, effective January 1 of the following year. His resignation stemmed in part from legislative pressure from those who disapproved of his anticlerical stance. Cooper remained active nonetheless in his retirement, authoring works on chemistry and law, including the five-volume Statutes at Large of South Carolina (1836–1839). He died on May 11, 1839, in Columbia and was buried in that city’s Trinity Churchyard. Cooper’s legacy at the University of South Carolina was recognized in 1976 when the undergraduate library was reopened as a research library and renamed the Thomas Cooper Library. Malone, Dumas. The Public Life of Thomas Cooper, 1783–1839. 1926. Reprint, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1961.	695	ENGLISH	1
LAWRENCE – The 19th Amendment was just the beginning of women’s struggle to gain equality, and African American women didn’t even gain the right to vote until the 1960s. The 100 years post-ratification is the topic next week of a suffrage lecture, “It Didn’t End with the Vote.” Lisa McLendon, news & information track chair in the William Allen White School of Journalism & Mass Communications and coordinator of the school’s Bremner Editing Center at the University of Kansas, will give the lecture at 12:30 p.m. Monday, Nov. 4, in Watson 3 West as part of the Centennial Celebration of the 19th Amendment series of events. "This is the 100th anniversary of suffrage,” McLendon said, “and I think they may think that, 'Oh well, women have been voting for 100 years, therefore there have been equal rights for 100 years,' and there really haven’t been equal rights for 100 years." Specifically, African Americans were shut out of going to the polls for four more decades. "It wasn't until 1964 with the Civil Rights Act and 1965 with the Voting Rights Act that really things like poll taxes and literacy tests were finally abolished, that were put in place basically to keep all African Americans from voting,” McLendon said. “So even though African American women theoretically had the right to vote, in practice there were other barriers keeping them from the vote for 45 more years." Barriers to equality were addressed with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prevented discrimination based on sex, race, color, national origin and religion, and Title IX, which provided for equal access to education. But many women are still alive today who can recall when they couldn’t even get a credit card on their own, McLendon said. "It was perfectly legal to deny an unmarried woman a credit card. It was perfectly legal to issue a woman a credit card only in her husband's name until 1974," she said. Other measures of equality have been realized only within the last several years. "It's been only until just this decade that women have fully been allowed into every position in the military, including combat," McLendon said. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which abolished the 180-day statute of limitations for filing an equal-pay lawsuit, was passed just 10 years ago. “Post-suffrage, women still had to fight for the right to do things that affected them very, very personally when it came to their health, when it came to their careers, when it came to their finances, when it came to their education,” McLendon said, “and that's a battle that's still going on."	<urn:uuid:10b81e11-f3b9-45e3-a3d0-f4b2c1d28098>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://journalism.ku.edu/post-suffrage-struggle-equality-topic-lecture-nov-4	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250626449.79/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124221147-20200125010147-00063.warc.gz	en	0.98362	580	3.578125	4	[ -0.7643205523490906, 0.14087918400764465, 0.016665833070874214, 0.00342364888638258, -0.4345012307167053, 0.3145045340061188, -0.372982919216156, 0.03644832223653793, -0.2833441495895386, 0.32483652234077454, 0.15774309635162354, 0.2035229504108429, -0.1755228042602539, -0.1973009705543518...	9	LAWRENCE – The 19th Amendment was just the beginning of women’s struggle to gain equality, and African American women didn’t even gain the right to vote until the 1960s. The 100 years post-ratification is the topic next week of a suffrage lecture, “It Didn’t End with the Vote.” Lisa McLendon, news & information track chair in the William Allen White School of Journalism & Mass Communications and coordinator of the school’s Bremner Editing Center at the University of Kansas, will give the lecture at 12:30 p.m. Monday, Nov. 4, in Watson 3 West as part of the Centennial Celebration of the 19th Amendment series of events. "This is the 100th anniversary of suffrage,” McLendon said, “and I think they may think that, 'Oh well, women have been voting for 100 years, therefore there have been equal rights for 100 years,' and there really haven’t been equal rights for 100 years." Specifically, African Americans were shut out of going to the polls for four more decades. "It wasn't until 1964 with the Civil Rights Act and 1965 with the Voting Rights Act that really things like poll taxes and literacy tests were finally abolished, that were put in place basically to keep all African Americans from voting,” McLendon said. “So even though African American women theoretically had the right to vote, in practice there were other barriers keeping them from the vote for 45 more years." Barriers to equality were addressed with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prevented discrimination based on sex, race, color, national origin and religion, and Title IX, which provided for equal access to education. But many women are still alive today who can recall when they couldn’t even get a credit card on their own, McLendon said. "It was perfectly legal to deny an unmarried woman a credit card. It was perfectly legal to issue a woman a credit card only in her husband's name until 1974," she said. Other measures of equality have been realized only within the last several years. "It's been only until just this decade that women have fully been allowed into every position in the military, including combat," McLendon said. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which abolished the 180-day statute of limitations for filing an equal-pay lawsuit, was passed just 10 years ago. “Post-suffrage, women still had to fight for the right to do things that affected them very, very personally when it came to their health, when it came to their careers, when it came to their finances, when it came to their education,” McLendon said, “and that's a battle that's still going on."	585	ENGLISH	1
Nazi Germany, also known as the Third Reich, was formed in 1933 and became powerful almost instantly. It led to the decline of the Weimer Republic and the wiping out of the constitutional governance. The Weimar Republic was a constitutional democracy that was established in Germany towards the end of World War I. Adolf Hitler who was appointed the Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933, and in 1934 became the Führer of Germany. Hitler served as the head of state and head of government of the Third Reich until 1945. During his reign, Hitler and his Nazi Party ruled with absolute dictatorship over his subjects. Meaning of the Third Reich In Germany, Third Reich (Drittes Reich) means the third empire or the third realm. The Nazi government was basically the third in a row. The first Reich was the medieval Holy Roman Empire, which existed between 806 and 1806. The Second Reich was composed of the German Empire and its regime which lasted between 1871 and 1918. The third was Hitler’s Nazi Germany lasting from 1933 to 1945. Hitler’s Ascension to Power The Great Depression was at its climax around 1929, leading to a great decline in the economic power of the Weimer Republic. The Social Democratic and the Coalition Government under the leadership of Chancellor Hermann Muller collapsed during this period. Heinrich Bruning who belonged to the Roman Catholic Center Party was appointed the new chancellor by President Paul Von Hindenburg. He tried to reform the Weimer Republic independent of parliament but faced opposition from most people. Subsequently, the Reichstag was dissolved and elections held on July 31, 1932, with the Nazis and the Communist winning the majority of the votes. On January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was appointed the Chancellor. Establishment of the Third Reich After his appointment, Hitler immediately embarked on clamping down of the opposition and their activities. He wiped out the constitutional governance and seized power, leading to the collapse of the Weimer Republic and transformation of Germany into a totalitarian state. The country underwent the process of “Nazification” with the Nazis taking control of all the aspects of the country’s coordination. The Weimer Republic was transformed into Nazi Germany or the “Third Reich.” The regime was dominated by racism, particularly antisemitism with the Nazis considering the Germanic people as the master race. The Collapse of the Third Reich The Nazi supporters considered themselves as the superior race. They sought to eliminate what they believed to be inferior races such as the Gypsies and the Jews from the region. They planned and waged mass killing of Jews, which was later referred to as the Holocaust. The Nazis considered the Jews as their primary racial enemy and thought the best way to deal with them was to eliminate them from the region. This act received a lot of criticism from international platforms. The government also spent most of its time planning and attacking the Soviet Union. Nazi Germany lost most of its eastern territories following their defeat in the Battle of Kursk in 1943. The final blow on the regime was during World War II when Nazi Germany was defeated by the Allies and forced to surrender and accept defeat on May 8, 1945. Sensing defeat and possible capture, Hitler committed suicide on April 30, 1945, along with his wife of only 40 hours. About the Author John Misachi is a seasoned writer with 5+ years of experience. His favorite topics include finance, history, geography, agriculture, legal, and sports. 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:7723a483-c714-4f55-86f9-ec3cb14901eb>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/what-was-the-third-reich.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783000.84/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128184745-20200128214745-00151.warc.gz	en	0.98061	741	3.796875	4	[ -0.04805690795183182, 0.47402530908584595, -0.052739907056093216, -0.0025283130817115307, 0.0508745014667511, 0.3996759057044983, -0.15898394584655762, 0.030439479276537895, 0.002713787369430065, -0.14030657708644867, 0.4711155295372009, -0.3405191898345947, 0.10154888033866882, -0.1045095...	2	Nazi Germany, also known as the Third Reich, was formed in 1933 and became powerful almost instantly. It led to the decline of the Weimer Republic and the wiping out of the constitutional governance. The Weimar Republic was a constitutional democracy that was established in Germany towards the end of World War I. Adolf Hitler who was appointed the Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933, and in 1934 became the Führer of Germany. Hitler served as the head of state and head of government of the Third Reich until 1945. During his reign, Hitler and his Nazi Party ruled with absolute dictatorship over his subjects. Meaning of the Third Reich In Germany, Third Reich (Drittes Reich) means the third empire or the third realm. The Nazi government was basically the third in a row. The first Reich was the medieval Holy Roman Empire, which existed between 806 and 1806. The Second Reich was composed of the German Empire and its regime which lasted between 1871 and 1918. The third was Hitler’s Nazi Germany lasting from 1933 to 1945. Hitler’s Ascension to Power The Great Depression was at its climax around 1929, leading to a great decline in the economic power of the Weimer Republic. The Social Democratic and the Coalition Government under the leadership of Chancellor Hermann Muller collapsed during this period. Heinrich Bruning who belonged to the Roman Catholic Center Party was appointed the new chancellor by President Paul Von Hindenburg. He tried to reform the Weimer Republic independent of parliament but faced opposition from most people. Subsequently, the Reichstag was dissolved and elections held on July 31, 1932, with the Nazis and the Communist winning the majority of the votes. On January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was appointed the Chancellor. Establishment of the Third Reich After his appointment, Hitler immediately embarked on clamping down of the opposition and their activities. He wiped out the constitutional governance and seized power, leading to the collapse of the Weimer Republic and transformation of Germany into a totalitarian state. The country underwent the process of “Nazification” with the Nazis taking control of all the aspects of the country’s coordination. The Weimer Republic was transformed into Nazi Germany or the “Third Reich.” The regime was dominated by racism, particularly antisemitism with the Nazis considering the Germanic people as the master race. The Collapse of the Third Reich The Nazi supporters considered themselves as the superior race. They sought to eliminate what they believed to be inferior races such as the Gypsies and the Jews from the region. They planned and waged mass killing of Jews, which was later referred to as the Holocaust. The Nazis considered the Jews as their primary racial enemy and thought the best way to deal with them was to eliminate them from the region. This act received a lot of criticism from international platforms. The government also spent most of its time planning and attacking the Soviet Union. Nazi Germany lost most of its eastern territories following their defeat in the Battle of Kursk in 1943. The final blow on the regime was during World War II when Nazi Germany was defeated by the Allies and forced to surrender and accept defeat on May 8, 1945. Sensing defeat and possible capture, Hitler committed suicide on April 30, 1945, along with his wife of only 40 hours. About the Author John Misachi is a seasoned writer with 5+ years of experience. His favorite topics include finance, history, geography, agriculture, legal, and sports. Your MLA Citation Your APA Citation Your Chicago Citation Your Harvard CitationRemember to italicize the title of this article in your Harvard citation.	794	ENGLISH	1
Mite (U10) Drills Mite hockey includes players age 8 and under. In this stage of a player’s development it is very important to focus on the basic and fundamental skills and rules of Ice Hockey that are needed to excel in future age levels. Always make sure to prepare Mite players with basic skating skills, stressing balance and coordination, while straying away from excessive passing. Drills at the mite level should include minimal passing because of the difficulty it can create for young players who are often small in comparison to the ice they are playing on. Focus, instead, on skating and stickhandling skills for these young players. These skills are something they will have to work on their whole hockey career, but starting early with building their stickhandling and skating skills will only benefit them in the long run. It is important that coaches keep the repetitive nature of young kids in mind when deciding the body of practices. To create Mite practice plans remember that young players have shorter attention spans and keeping them interested and alert will be a challenge. With that being said, it is recommended that coaches set up small area games and station drills during practice. Note that kids this young are often full of energy so make sure you, as coaches, constantly keep them active and building their basic skills and most importantly make sure they have fun!	<urn:uuid:2d8df00f-5113-4709-8135-4772b7d8de43>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.icehockeysystems.com/hockey-drills/age-level/mite-431	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251801423.98/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129164403-20200129193403-00199.warc.gz	en	0.980284	272	3.28125	3	[ -0.3533018231391907, -0.42783123254776, 0.29831844568252563, -0.8433985114097595, -0.19230715930461884, 0.8121083378791809, 0.18616141378879547, 0.20550790429115295, -0.2825157344341278, 0.054959800094366074, 0.03203316032886505, -0.21974241733551025, 0.24052263796329498, 0.464619189500808...	2	Mite (U10) Drills Mite hockey includes players age 8 and under. In this stage of a player’s development it is very important to focus on the basic and fundamental skills and rules of Ice Hockey that are needed to excel in future age levels. Always make sure to prepare Mite players with basic skating skills, stressing balance and coordination, while straying away from excessive passing. Drills at the mite level should include minimal passing because of the difficulty it can create for young players who are often small in comparison to the ice they are playing on. Focus, instead, on skating and stickhandling skills for these young players. These skills are something they will have to work on their whole hockey career, but starting early with building their stickhandling and skating skills will only benefit them in the long run. It is important that coaches keep the repetitive nature of young kids in mind when deciding the body of practices. To create Mite practice plans remember that young players have shorter attention spans and keeping them interested and alert will be a challenge. With that being said, it is recommended that coaches set up small area games and station drills during practice. Note that kids this young are often full of energy so make sure you, as coaches, constantly keep them active and building their basic skills and most importantly make sure they have fun!	270	ENGLISH	1
why is John Peter Zenger important? - Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer German newspaper publisher and printer his acquittal of libel charges in new york city established a legal precedent for freedom of the press - 1 decade ago John Peter Zenger was born in 1697 in Germany, and migrated to New York as a child in 1710. He was accepted as an apprentice to New York's only printer, William Bradford, until 1718. Zenger and Bradford became partners in 1725 until Zenger started his own shop the next year. In 1733, former New York Attorney General, James Alexander, gave Zenger the opportunity to print America's first party newspaper, the New York Weekly Journal. Zenger's paper was doing quite well until he wrote something bad in his newspaper about a governor and the governor had him jailed. Zenger claimed in his apology that even though he was in jail without supplies, he could still publish his paper through a hole in the door with the help of his wife and servants. It is unclear just how seriously Zenger personally took the material published in the New York Weekly Journal. It was almost certainly financed by one of the opposition political factions in New York politics, possibly by James Alexander who, along with William Smith was disbarred for objecting to the two-man court William Cosby had hand-picked. Zenger was most likely a convenient target to use in an attempt to end criticism. His trial may have resulted in the addition of the expression "Philadelphia lawyer" to the language. His defense attorney, Andrew Hamilton, was from Philadelphia, and won a case most local attorneys were confident would be unwinnable, and over which prior attorneys had been disbarred. A notable part of the case is that Andrew Hamilton challenged the constitutionality of the crimes in which his client was being prosecuted for. It was one of the first times in American history in which a lawyer challenged the laws rather than the innocence of his clients. The jurors were stunned and didn't know how to, or even if they were allowed to, address whether the law itself was "legal." At the end of the trial on August 5, 1735, the twelve New York jurors returned a verdict of "not guilty" on the charge of publishing "seditious libels," despite the Governor's hand-picked judges presiding. Hamilton had successfully argued that Zenger's articles were not libelous because they were based on fact. Zenger published a verbatim account of the trial as A Brief Narrative of the Case and Trial of John Peter Zenger (1736). “No nation, ancient or modern, ever lost the liberty of speaking freely, writing, or publishing their sentiments, but forthwith lost their liberty in general and became slaves" is a quote by John Peter Zenger. Hamilton had worked for free. In gratitude for what he had done the Common Council of New York awarded Hamilton the freedom of that city and a group of prominent residents contributed to the production of a 5½-ounce gold box that was presented to Hamilton as a lasting mark of their gratitude to him. The box was preserved as a family heirloom for many years and is now in the custody of the Atwater Kent Museum near Independence Hall, Philadelphia. Each year the Philadelphia Bar Association presents a replica of that box to the outgoing Chancellor of the Association. A Latin motto inscribed on the box, identical to one on the original, has the English translation “Acquired not by money, but by character.” John Peter Zenger died in 1746 at 48 years old.	<urn:uuid:c39dd6c7-26bb-44a0-be69-f7abb6d73578>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071028171912AAg9YHl	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251776516.99/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128060946-20200128090946-00464.warc.gz	en	0.987637	731	3.59375	4	[ -0.44448500871658325, 0.5951612591743469, -0.3466777205467224, -0.006871657446026802, 0.03117971494793892, 0.08245372027158737, 0.13839755952358246, 0.260702520608902, -0.1614978164434433, -0.105487160384655, -0.22951005399227142, 0.5804736614227295, -0.2389381378889084, 0.3892151117324829...	1	why is John Peter Zenger important? - Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer German newspaper publisher and printer his acquittal of libel charges in new york city established a legal precedent for freedom of the press - 1 decade ago John Peter Zenger was born in 1697 in Germany, and migrated to New York as a child in 1710. He was accepted as an apprentice to New York's only printer, William Bradford, until 1718. Zenger and Bradford became partners in 1725 until Zenger started his own shop the next year. In 1733, former New York Attorney General, James Alexander, gave Zenger the opportunity to print America's first party newspaper, the New York Weekly Journal. Zenger's paper was doing quite well until he wrote something bad in his newspaper about a governor and the governor had him jailed. Zenger claimed in his apology that even though he was in jail without supplies, he could still publish his paper through a hole in the door with the help of his wife and servants. It is unclear just how seriously Zenger personally took the material published in the New York Weekly Journal. It was almost certainly financed by one of the opposition political factions in New York politics, possibly by James Alexander who, along with William Smith was disbarred for objecting to the two-man court William Cosby had hand-picked. Zenger was most likely a convenient target to use in an attempt to end criticism. His trial may have resulted in the addition of the expression "Philadelphia lawyer" to the language. His defense attorney, Andrew Hamilton, was from Philadelphia, and won a case most local attorneys were confident would be unwinnable, and over which prior attorneys had been disbarred. A notable part of the case is that Andrew Hamilton challenged the constitutionality of the crimes in which his client was being prosecuted for. It was one of the first times in American history in which a lawyer challenged the laws rather than the innocence of his clients. The jurors were stunned and didn't know how to, or even if they were allowed to, address whether the law itself was "legal." At the end of the trial on August 5, 1735, the twelve New York jurors returned a verdict of "not guilty" on the charge of publishing "seditious libels," despite the Governor's hand-picked judges presiding. Hamilton had successfully argued that Zenger's articles were not libelous because they were based on fact. Zenger published a verbatim account of the trial as A Brief Narrative of the Case and Trial of John Peter Zenger (1736). “No nation, ancient or modern, ever lost the liberty of speaking freely, writing, or publishing their sentiments, but forthwith lost their liberty in general and became slaves" is a quote by John Peter Zenger. Hamilton had worked for free. In gratitude for what he had done the Common Council of New York awarded Hamilton the freedom of that city and a group of prominent residents contributed to the production of a 5½-ounce gold box that was presented to Hamilton as a lasting mark of their gratitude to him. The box was preserved as a family heirloom for many years and is now in the custody of the Atwater Kent Museum near Independence Hall, Philadelphia. Each year the Philadelphia Bar Association presents a replica of that box to the outgoing Chancellor of the Association. A Latin motto inscribed on the box, identical to one on the original, has the English translation “Acquired not by money, but by character.” John Peter Zenger died in 1746 at 48 years old.	748	ENGLISH	1
ON JULY 19th 1862 Horace Parnell Tuttle, an assistant at Harvard College Observatory, spotted a comet in the constellation of Camelopardalis. After he announced his discovery, Lewis Swift, an observer from Marathon, New York, piped up to say that he had seen it three days earlier. After a fair amount of to and fro, the comet came to be called Swift-Tuttle. Or now, more fully, 109P Swift-Tuttle. The alphanumeric addition recognises it as the 109th comet to have been shown to be in an orbit that P-for-periodically brings it back into the view of Earth's astronomers. Brian Marsden always liked the alphanumerics. As the head of the Central Bureau for Astronomic Telegrams of the International Astronomical Union (IAU), adjudicating between discoverers on the naming of comets was part of his job, and observers with a shot at immortality could get fractious over the process. The numbers were cleaner. In the case of Swift-Tuttle he might be allowed a particular bent towards the numeric: the eventual return that made it 109P conformed to a prediction in which he took particular pride. The 1862 observations led astronomers to calculate that Swift-Tuttle had the longest period of any so far discovered, and would not return to the Earth's neighbourhood until the 1980s. In the 1970s Mr Marsden, well established as one of the leading calculators of cometary orbits, suggested that they might have been wrong. He had by then developed a “feel” for cometary orbits, and a comet seen in 1737 felt distinctly Swift-Tuttlish to him. If that apparition had indeed marked a “pre-discovery” of Swift-Tuttle, it would return not in the early 1980s but in 1992. And so it came to pass. Precise and puckish in generous and near-equal measure, Mr Marsden dated his fascination with orbits to the afternoon of September 10th 1942, when his mother showed him a partial eclipse of the sun. It was not the dimming of the sun that fired his five-year-old imagination, but the fact that someone had been able to calculate exactly at what time the moon would be in the right place to bring it about. By the time he reached secondary school in Cambridge (the British one), he was already developing the fiddly set of skills needed to turn the necessarily imprecise and error-prone reports of what observers had seen at a given time and place in the sky into the mathematical train tracks that carry celestial bodies through all four dimensions of space and time. In 1965 Mr Marsden arrived at Tuttle's former stamping-ground, the observatory at Harvard, where he remained for the rest of his life. As head of the telegram bureau and its sibling, the Minor Planet Centre, which concerns itself with the discovery and orbits of asteroids, he was a sort of parish clerk of the solar system, recording each new addition to the congregation. As the pace of astronomical discovery grew, so did the job. In the 1960s a few thousand asteroids were known. Today the tally stands at half a million. Of these a very small fraction proved of particular interest to Mr Marsden and the world because they stood a chance, at some point in the future, of hitting the Earth. Twice in his career Mr Marsden provoked headlines, and consternation among his peers, by telling the press that something astronomers were looking at—Swift-Tuttle, on the occasion of its 1992 reappearance, and some years later an asteroid called 1997 XF11—might hit the Earth at a specific date in the future. In both cases his critics, aghast at the embarrassment that might be caused by astronomers predicting the end of the world and then recanting, argued that his analyses were less accurate than others available at the same time. Mr Marsden defended his announcements, and pointed out that the fuss around them had helped unearth records of pre-discoveries which ruled out the impacts he had predicted. The critics seem to have had the better of the technical arguments. But by airing the possibility of such collisions to a wide audience, Mr Marsden helped foster the programmes and processes that have since led to a much better understanding of the risks. He himself set up procedures for alerting observers, including amateurs, for whom he had a great respect and affection, to the discovery of anything in a vaguely worrying orbit, so that follow-up observations could rule out a collision—as, thus far, they always have. Mr Marsden's other somewhat controversial stand was on Pluto, calling on the IAU to downgrade its planetary status. It was not just that Pluto was small; it also had an orbit mathematically very similar to those of a bunch of other things discovered in the 1990s and 2000s. To Mr Marsden orbits, rather than size or history, were the key to the definition. (He also felt that the only reason anyone was fussed about the matter was that Pluto was the only “planet” to have been discovered by an American.) He was tickled by the fact that its eventual demotion to a newly invented category of “dwarf planet” took place at the same 2006 general assembly of the IAU that marked his own retirement. Asteroid 1877 Marsden, discovered in 1971 by his friend Cornelis van Houten, is one memorial. The system he devotedly built up for recording such discoveries serves as another, rather closer to home. This article appeared in the Obituary section of the print edition under the headline "Brian Marsden"	<urn:uuid:04c38015-dd49-493b-ab2c-4226c6ec4d7e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.economist.com/obituary/2010/12/02/brian-marsden	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250619323.41/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124100832-20200124125832-00218.warc.gz	en	0.982304	1,181	3.6875	4	[ -0.3400692045688629, -0.3444191515445709, -0.1423611044883728, 0.0176959577947855, -0.2487937957048416, 0.028824767097830772, 0.22545169293880463, 0.3138543367385864, -0.025623248890042305, -0.2848816514015198, 0.25205254554748535, -0.3994954824447632, 0.19735024869441986, 0.19797921180725...	6	ON JULY 19th 1862 Horace Parnell Tuttle, an assistant at Harvard College Observatory, spotted a comet in the constellation of Camelopardalis. After he announced his discovery, Lewis Swift, an observer from Marathon, New York, piped up to say that he had seen it three days earlier. After a fair amount of to and fro, the comet came to be called Swift-Tuttle. Or now, more fully, 109P Swift-Tuttle. The alphanumeric addition recognises it as the 109th comet to have been shown to be in an orbit that P-for-periodically brings it back into the view of Earth's astronomers. Brian Marsden always liked the alphanumerics. As the head of the Central Bureau for Astronomic Telegrams of the International Astronomical Union (IAU), adjudicating between discoverers on the naming of comets was part of his job, and observers with a shot at immortality could get fractious over the process. The numbers were cleaner. In the case of Swift-Tuttle he might be allowed a particular bent towards the numeric: the eventual return that made it 109P conformed to a prediction in which he took particular pride. The 1862 observations led astronomers to calculate that Swift-Tuttle had the longest period of any so far discovered, and would not return to the Earth's neighbourhood until the 1980s. In the 1970s Mr Marsden, well established as one of the leading calculators of cometary orbits, suggested that they might have been wrong. He had by then developed a “feel” for cometary orbits, and a comet seen in 1737 felt distinctly Swift-Tuttlish to him. If that apparition had indeed marked a “pre-discovery” of Swift-Tuttle, it would return not in the early 1980s but in 1992. And so it came to pass. Precise and puckish in generous and near-equal measure, Mr Marsden dated his fascination with orbits to the afternoon of September 10th 1942, when his mother showed him a partial eclipse of the sun. It was not the dimming of the sun that fired his five-year-old imagination, but the fact that someone had been able to calculate exactly at what time the moon would be in the right place to bring it about. By the time he reached secondary school in Cambridge (the British one), he was already developing the fiddly set of skills needed to turn the necessarily imprecise and error-prone reports of what observers had seen at a given time and place in the sky into the mathematical train tracks that carry celestial bodies through all four dimensions of space and time. In 1965 Mr Marsden arrived at Tuttle's former stamping-ground, the observatory at Harvard, where he remained for the rest of his life. As head of the telegram bureau and its sibling, the Minor Planet Centre, which concerns itself with the discovery and orbits of asteroids, he was a sort of parish clerk of the solar system, recording each new addition to the congregation. As the pace of astronomical discovery grew, so did the job. In the 1960s a few thousand asteroids were known. Today the tally stands at half a million. Of these a very small fraction proved of particular interest to Mr Marsden and the world because they stood a chance, at some point in the future, of hitting the Earth. Twice in his career Mr Marsden provoked headlines, and consternation among his peers, by telling the press that something astronomers were looking at—Swift-Tuttle, on the occasion of its 1992 reappearance, and some years later an asteroid called 1997 XF11—might hit the Earth at a specific date in the future. In both cases his critics, aghast at the embarrassment that might be caused by astronomers predicting the end of the world and then recanting, argued that his analyses were less accurate than others available at the same time. Mr Marsden defended his announcements, and pointed out that the fuss around them had helped unearth records of pre-discoveries which ruled out the impacts he had predicted. The critics seem to have had the better of the technical arguments. But by airing the possibility of such collisions to a wide audience, Mr Marsden helped foster the programmes and processes that have since led to a much better understanding of the risks. He himself set up procedures for alerting observers, including amateurs, for whom he had a great respect and affection, to the discovery of anything in a vaguely worrying orbit, so that follow-up observations could rule out a collision—as, thus far, they always have. Mr Marsden's other somewhat controversial stand was on Pluto, calling on the IAU to downgrade its planetary status. It was not just that Pluto was small; it also had an orbit mathematically very similar to those of a bunch of other things discovered in the 1990s and 2000s. To Mr Marsden orbits, rather than size or history, were the key to the definition. (He also felt that the only reason anyone was fussed about the matter was that Pluto was the only “planet” to have been discovered by an American.) He was tickled by the fact that its eventual demotion to a newly invented category of “dwarf planet” took place at the same 2006 general assembly of the IAU that marked his own retirement. Asteroid 1877 Marsden, discovered in 1971 by his friend Cornelis van Houten, is one memorial. The system he devotedly built up for recording such discoveries serves as another, rather closer to home. This article appeared in the Obituary section of the print edition under the headline "Brian Marsden"	1,216	ENGLISH	1
ORLANDO, Fla. (Ivanhoe Newswire) -- Most parents know that their kids should eat lots of fresh veggies to stay healthy. But that’s often easier said than done. According to one study, about one in five parents of one year olds reported that their toddlers ate no vegetables at all on the days they were surveyed. Now scientists say they have a way to help kids eat more of the good stuff. If you have a picky eater, you know mealtime can be a struggle. Now a new study shows there may be a simple way to help your kids eat more veggies. Researchers in Australia examined 32 families with children between ages four and six who didn’t eat a lot of fresh vegetables. They found that when the families offered the kids a small amount of multiple vegetables repeatedly, the children ate more vegetables. In fact, they went from eating half a serving to more than a full serving. But those who were offered a single vegetable repeatedly, such as broccoli at each meal, did not increase their vegetable consumption. These findings suggest that parents should keep serving a variety of vegetables to their kids, even if they refuse to eat them. Other ways to encourage healthy habits: use positive encouragement and do not force your child. They only need to taste a small amount in order to build up a liking over time. Set a good example by eating veggies yourself. Offer low-fat salad dressings and dips. Authors of the study say while the amount of vegetables increased during the study, it still didn’t meet dietary guidelines. According to the USDA, children who are four to eight years old should have one and a half to two and a half cups of veggies per day.	<urn:uuid:2210e8f8-6067-4d2f-8e5c-b0f29f626763>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.wmcactionnews5.com/2019/11/26/best-life-help-your-kids-eat-more-vegetables/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00117.warc.gz	en	0.981062	352	3.265625	3	[ -0.07114125788211823, -0.14252020418643951, 0.12789282202720642, -0.5205795168876648, -0.15419921278953552, 0.22142212092876434, -0.33684760332107544, -0.08948104083538055, -0.3305506706237793, -0.03839002549648285, 0.13037468492984772, -0.20404136180877686, 0.22510413825511932, 0.03872296...	2	ORLANDO, Fla. (Ivanhoe Newswire) -- Most parents know that their kids should eat lots of fresh veggies to stay healthy. But that’s often easier said than done. According to one study, about one in five parents of one year olds reported that their toddlers ate no vegetables at all on the days they were surveyed. Now scientists say they have a way to help kids eat more of the good stuff. If you have a picky eater, you know mealtime can be a struggle. Now a new study shows there may be a simple way to help your kids eat more veggies. Researchers in Australia examined 32 families with children between ages four and six who didn’t eat a lot of fresh vegetables. They found that when the families offered the kids a small amount of multiple vegetables repeatedly, the children ate more vegetables. In fact, they went from eating half a serving to more than a full serving. But those who were offered a single vegetable repeatedly, such as broccoli at each meal, did not increase their vegetable consumption. These findings suggest that parents should keep serving a variety of vegetables to their kids, even if they refuse to eat them. Other ways to encourage healthy habits: use positive encouragement and do not force your child. They only need to taste a small amount in order to build up a liking over time. Set a good example by eating veggies yourself. Offer low-fat salad dressings and dips. Authors of the study say while the amount of vegetables increased during the study, it still didn’t meet dietary guidelines. According to the USDA, children who are four to eight years old should have one and a half to two and a half cups of veggies per day.	341	ENGLISH	1
One of the most complicated subjects I have taught is English Reformation. It is quite often difficult to explain just what was the English Reformation. Was it solely religious? Or was it caused by Henry’s desire for a divorce? How long did it take? And was Henry VIII really a converted Protestant? In this post, we start to address some of these questions. And we will focus here on the issue of the divorce. What was the English Reformation? The English Reformation was a series of reforms during the 1530s. The aim of the king, government and landed classes in this endeavour was to reduce the political and religious power of the Late Medieval Church. This determination of theirs was given urgency by Henry’s inability to secure an annulment from the Pope for his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. The Reformation in England happened in 2 parts: - A political revolution in government of the Church in England by instituting an autonomous English Church with Henry himself as the Head of the Church. These reforms took place 1533-1534. - A movement of religious reformation makes some headway during Henry’s lifetime but takes root under Edward VI. Henry lays the foundations which Ed builds upon and develops. Most importantly, the English Reformation was not a specific event which can be given a precise date. Rather it was a long process. This process took place over the reigns of the Tudor Monarchs in the 16th century. First of all, let’s consider Henry VIII and his role in the English Reformation. Focusing the issue of his divorce. Henry Viii – a Devoted Catholic At the beginning of his reign which began in 1509, Henry VIII was noted as a particularly pious king. In 1520, a German monk turned Catholic critic, Luther wrote a damning book of Catholicism. The book was entitled De Captivate Babylonica. In this tract, Luther attacked the sacraments and some of the fundamentals of Catholic belief. Henry VIII responded vehemently with his own book entitled Assertio Septem Sacramentorus – A Defence of the 7 Sacraments. This defence of Catholicism was part of Henry’s ploy to persuade the Pope to award him a title befitting a good Christian Prince. In October 1521, Henry’s wish came true and Pope Leo X bestowed upon him the title Defender of the Faith in recognition for his repudiation of Luther. It is interesting that this is a title Henry passed down to his descendants, even today! This is a title that declares them as defenders of a branch of Christianity to which they are arch-opponents. Henry and Catherine of Aragon Henry had been married to Catherine of Aragon since June 1509. At this time, Catherine was the widow of Henry’s elder brother, Arthur who had died in 1502. Catherine was the daughter of Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile. Together, her parents ruled much of modern-day Spain. They ruled the 16th-century superpower. Henry VII, Henry VIII’s father understood the importance of this alliance and thus persuaded his son to marry Arthur’s widow. Catherine vowed her and Arthur did not consummate their marriage during their short 5 months marriage. There could be some truth to her assertion – the pair were, both inexperienced teenagers. Furthermore, Catherine was not pregnant. Indeed, contemporaries expected her to become pregnant if they had consummated the marriage. By the mid-1520s, Henry was becoming tired with his wife who was 6 years his senior. She had produced only a surviving daughter, Mary along with a string of stillbirths, miscarriages and a number of children who lived but a short time. What Henry really needed was a son to continue the dynasty. Perhaps this insistence of having a son had come from his father. Henry VIII was ‘a spare son’, his elder brother Arthur was intended to be king. The example of Arthur’s death illustrated just how fragile a lineage was. Had Henry VIII been born a girl, his father would have been forced to pass his kingdom on to a daughter, married to (perhaps) a foreign prince. The Tudor name would have diminished. In 1525 with his only legitimate child a daughter, Henry VIII had serious reasons for concern. The King’s Great Matter By 1525, Henry begins to lose interest in his marriage. He was convinced his marriage unlawful and that God was punishing him. This was evident because of his lack of a son. His argument was that the Pope unable to give such dispensations for his marriage to Catherine. The couple had to be granted such a dispensation because Catherine had been married to Henry’s brother. Henry pointed to one Biblical passage to support his argument – Leviticus 20:21: If a man marries his brother’s wife, it is an act of impurity; he has dishonored his brother. They will be childless.Leviticus 20:21 In 1527 Henry’s attempts to divorce Catherine begin. Henry appeals to Pope Clement VII. Such an appeal was a perfectly common one and, quite often, such requests were granted by the Papacy. However, his request is denied, undoubtedly because of the sensitive diplomatic situation. Charles V was the Holy Roman Emperor. He was also Catherine’s nephew and had huge political influence, even over the Pope. Charles would not allow the divorce out of family pride. Furthermore, he advocated the sacredness of marriage. Problems worsened for Henry when the Pope was effectively the prisoner of Charles following the Sack of Rome 1527. To try and navigate his way around this problem, Henry asks Catherine to retire to a nunnery, but she refuses. Enter Anne Boleyn Many people suggest Henry wanted a divorce from Catherine so he could marry Anne Boleyn. I would argue that had Anne not been on the scene, Henry would still have wanted a divorce. Henry would not have put his kingdom in jeopardy for the sake of a woman. What Henry really wanted was a son. By the latter years of the 1520s, it was common knowledge that Henry had taken a serious fancy to Anne Boleyn, and it was becoming clear that she was not merely another one of his mistresses. Henry wanted to marry Anne, whom he thought had a good chance of giving him a legitimate son. Yet this was also problematic. Henry was attempting to divorce Catherine on grounds of Leviticus, but then marry the sister of his former mistress! (Henry had been intimate with Anne’s sister Mary). This weakened his moral case at home and abroad. The Break from Rome Henry decided the only way to achieve his desire of divorcing Catherine was by denying the Pope authority in such matters. Henry went so far as to establish his own ecclesiastical council to determine whether or not Henry’s marriage to Catherine was lawful. In doing so, Henry made himself the head of his own Church in England. It seems Henry really was pricked in conscience. There is no reason to believe that he actually believed his marriage was unlawful and that God was punishing him by withholding sons. Catherine however, was not persuaded by Henry’s conviction. In 1533, Henry finally got his way and his marriage to Catherine was declared annulled by his new Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer. Cranmer was a keen reformist and willing to give Henry what he wanted. Henry and Anne were immediately married and their marriage declared legitimate (only 5 days following his divorce) by Cranmer. A pregnancy soon followed. And so we have explored one mere aspect of the English Reformation – Henry’s desire for a legitimate son and heir. Next, we explore the religious aspect of the English Reformation. Suggested academic reading: T. Betteridge and T. Freeman, Henry VIII and History, (Farnham, 2016). J. Guy The Tudor Monarchy, (London, 1997). L. Wooding, Henry VIII, (London, 2009). The History Today website includes a wealth of information on Henry VIII and the English Reformation. Click here for more articles on the English Reformation as well as other history posts.	<urn:uuid:51548ace-e60d-436f-b82e-822455e3d13d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.lellalee.com/the-english-reformation-henry-catherine-and-anne/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00123.warc.gz	en	0.988658	1,710	3.484375	3	[ -0.2030017226934433, 0.010694935917854309, 0.09550927579402924, -0.1467198133468628, -0.11557422578334808, -0.2503633499145508, -0.22051221132278442, -0.07996891438961029, 0.0908336341381073, 0.10846123099327087, -0.2856164574623108, -0.4838937520980835, 0.007935912348330021, 0.03896697238...	10	One of the most complicated subjects I have taught is English Reformation. It is quite often difficult to explain just what was the English Reformation. Was it solely religious? Or was it caused by Henry’s desire for a divorce? How long did it take? And was Henry VIII really a converted Protestant? In this post, we start to address some of these questions. And we will focus here on the issue of the divorce. What was the English Reformation? The English Reformation was a series of reforms during the 1530s. The aim of the king, government and landed classes in this endeavour was to reduce the political and religious power of the Late Medieval Church. This determination of theirs was given urgency by Henry’s inability to secure an annulment from the Pope for his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. The Reformation in England happened in 2 parts: - A political revolution in government of the Church in England by instituting an autonomous English Church with Henry himself as the Head of the Church. These reforms took place 1533-1534. - A movement of religious reformation makes some headway during Henry’s lifetime but takes root under Edward VI. Henry lays the foundations which Ed builds upon and develops. Most importantly, the English Reformation was not a specific event which can be given a precise date. Rather it was a long process. This process took place over the reigns of the Tudor Monarchs in the 16th century. First of all, let’s consider Henry VIII and his role in the English Reformation. Focusing the issue of his divorce. Henry Viii – a Devoted Catholic At the beginning of his reign which began in 1509, Henry VIII was noted as a particularly pious king. In 1520, a German monk turned Catholic critic, Luther wrote a damning book of Catholicism. The book was entitled De Captivate Babylonica. In this tract, Luther attacked the sacraments and some of the fundamentals of Catholic belief. Henry VIII responded vehemently with his own book entitled Assertio Septem Sacramentorus – A Defence of the 7 Sacraments. This defence of Catholicism was part of Henry’s ploy to persuade the Pope to award him a title befitting a good Christian Prince. In October 1521, Henry’s wish came true and Pope Leo X bestowed upon him the title Defender of the Faith in recognition for his repudiation of Luther. It is interesting that this is a title Henry passed down to his descendants, even today! This is a title that declares them as defenders of a branch of Christianity to which they are arch-opponents. Henry and Catherine of Aragon Henry had been married to Catherine of Aragon since June 1509. At this time, Catherine was the widow of Henry’s elder brother, Arthur who had died in 1502. Catherine was the daughter of Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile. Together, her parents ruled much of modern-day Spain. They ruled the 16th-century superpower. Henry VII, Henry VIII’s father understood the importance of this alliance and thus persuaded his son to marry Arthur’s widow. Catherine vowed her and Arthur did not consummate their marriage during their short 5 months marriage. There could be some truth to her assertion – the pair were, both inexperienced teenagers. Furthermore, Catherine was not pregnant. Indeed, contemporaries expected her to become pregnant if they had consummated the marriage. By the mid-1520s, Henry was becoming tired with his wife who was 6 years his senior. She had produced only a surviving daughter, Mary along with a string of stillbirths, miscarriages and a number of children who lived but a short time. What Henry really needed was a son to continue the dynasty. Perhaps this insistence of having a son had come from his father. Henry VIII was ‘a spare son’, his elder brother Arthur was intended to be king. The example of Arthur’s death illustrated just how fragile a lineage was. Had Henry VIII been born a girl, his father would have been forced to pass his kingdom on to a daughter, married to (perhaps) a foreign prince. The Tudor name would have diminished. In 1525 with his only legitimate child a daughter, Henry VIII had serious reasons for concern. The King’s Great Matter By 1525, Henry begins to lose interest in his marriage. He was convinced his marriage unlawful and that God was punishing him. This was evident because of his lack of a son. His argument was that the Pope unable to give such dispensations for his marriage to Catherine. The couple had to be granted such a dispensation because Catherine had been married to Henry’s brother. Henry pointed to one Biblical passage to support his argument – Leviticus 20:21: If a man marries his brother’s wife, it is an act of impurity; he has dishonored his brother. They will be childless.Leviticus 20:21 In 1527 Henry’s attempts to divorce Catherine begin. Henry appeals to Pope Clement VII. Such an appeal was a perfectly common one and, quite often, such requests were granted by the Papacy. However, his request is denied, undoubtedly because of the sensitive diplomatic situation. Charles V was the Holy Roman Emperor. He was also Catherine’s nephew and had huge political influence, even over the Pope. Charles would not allow the divorce out of family pride. Furthermore, he advocated the sacredness of marriage. Problems worsened for Henry when the Pope was effectively the prisoner of Charles following the Sack of Rome 1527. To try and navigate his way around this problem, Henry asks Catherine to retire to a nunnery, but she refuses. Enter Anne Boleyn Many people suggest Henry wanted a divorce from Catherine so he could marry Anne Boleyn. I would argue that had Anne not been on the scene, Henry would still have wanted a divorce. Henry would not have put his kingdom in jeopardy for the sake of a woman. What Henry really wanted was a son. By the latter years of the 1520s, it was common knowledge that Henry had taken a serious fancy to Anne Boleyn, and it was becoming clear that she was not merely another one of his mistresses. Henry wanted to marry Anne, whom he thought had a good chance of giving him a legitimate son. Yet this was also problematic. Henry was attempting to divorce Catherine on grounds of Leviticus, but then marry the sister of his former mistress! (Henry had been intimate with Anne’s sister Mary). This weakened his moral case at home and abroad. The Break from Rome Henry decided the only way to achieve his desire of divorcing Catherine was by denying the Pope authority in such matters. Henry went so far as to establish his own ecclesiastical council to determine whether or not Henry’s marriage to Catherine was lawful. In doing so, Henry made himself the head of his own Church in England. It seems Henry really was pricked in conscience. There is no reason to believe that he actually believed his marriage was unlawful and that God was punishing him by withholding sons. Catherine however, was not persuaded by Henry’s conviction. In 1533, Henry finally got his way and his marriage to Catherine was declared annulled by his new Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer. Cranmer was a keen reformist and willing to give Henry what he wanted. Henry and Anne were immediately married and their marriage declared legitimate (only 5 days following his divorce) by Cranmer. A pregnancy soon followed. And so we have explored one mere aspect of the English Reformation – Henry’s desire for a legitimate son and heir. Next, we explore the religious aspect of the English Reformation. Suggested academic reading: T. Betteridge and T. Freeman, Henry VIII and History, (Farnham, 2016). J. Guy The Tudor Monarchy, (London, 1997). L. Wooding, Henry VIII, (London, 2009). The History Today website includes a wealth of information on Henry VIII and the English Reformation. Click here for more articles on the English Reformation as well as other history posts.	1,716	ENGLISH	1
(Editor’s Note: This is second of a three-part series recounting the heavy price paid by families as a result of Fidel Castro’s successful guerrilla war on the Caribbean Island of Cuba. With the fall of Dictator Fulgencio Batista, Castro and his revolutionary army entered Havana in victory, Jan. 8, 1959.) By Nick Diaz THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY of my arrival on these American shores compelled me to relate some stories of my half-century as an exile of Fidel Castro’s Cuba. My growing nostalgia has brought many personal, family, and political experiences to the surface. My mother, Idania Diaz, and I arrived in November, 1960, which was Presidential Election Day in America – John F. Kennedy vs. Richard M. Nixon. We had little in the way of personal belongings upon arrival in America, except for a little cash and a few pieces of jewelry my mother smuggled on her person. I celebrated my 13th birthday a month later. My father, Nicanor Diaz, arrived exactly one year later. Of the thousands of stories of the Cuban exodus, the effort code-named “Operation Peter Pan” is still largely unknown and must be told. It chronicles the biggest exodus of children ever recorded in the Western Hemisphere. Consider that from Dec. 26, 1960 to Oct. 22, 1962 more than 14,000 unaccompanied children, ages 6 to 18, left Cuba for the U.S.A. Many valiant and dedicated people in Cuba and the United States worked together for the success of “Operation Peter Pan.” In the 1930s, between 7,000 and 8,000 Jewish children were smuggled out of Nazi Germany to England and other countries. In the Communist takeover of Spain, which led to the Spanish Civil War, thousands of children were evacuated to France, Belgium and England. When the Communists in Spain were heading for defeat, some 5,000 children were sent to the Soviet Union. In 1940, during the Battle of Britain, about 1,000 British children were sent to North America for safety. At the end of World War II, some 5,000 orphans were brought from Europe to North America for adoption. Before Castro, people used to immigrate to Cuba. I remember the rich and vibrant Chinese population in Cuba, prominent in retail, banking, and international commerce. Also I remember the Jews from Eastern Europe, people who migrated to Cuba during the early part of the 20th century. Yes, even Americans, most of whom not surnamed “Hemingway,” lived on the island paradise by choice. My parents hired an American to tutor me in the intricacies of the English language. Some readers may doubt the effectiveness of such tutelage. Looking back 50 years, however, I reflect on my parents’ wisdom in this regard. As usual, they got smarter as I got older! THE LARGEST HUMAN EXODUS in this hemisphere began soon after Castro took control of the Cuban government. The first of those particular immigrants arrived in America in January, 1959, immediately following the fall of Fulgencio Batista. They came with money from their savings and belongings they were able to carry. As Castro added more restrictions, people were forced to leave Cuba with nothing. This created a terrible burden on relatives and friends who had arrived earlier and willingly provided support to the newcomers. The responsibility to help later fell to private charities and the U.S. Government. The latter category included my parents and me. By the end of 1960, some 4,000 “refugees” had arrived and by December 1961, 12,000 – with 200 arriving in Miami each day. By 1971, 261,000 were established in Miami and almost as many elsewhere in the U.S. During the 1980 “Mariél exodus,” 125,000 left, but two million more seeking to emigrate were stranded in Cuba when Castro closed the door. In 1997 Cuban exiles numbered two- to three-million all over the world; the numbers would have been greater if leaving Cuba had not been restricted. Belying popular belief — the result of 38 years of Castro’s propaganda echoed by the American press and left-wing establishment– Castro’s revolution affected Cubans from all walks of life. The brutality of his repression has been felt since January 1959. Opposition to the revolutionary government began immediately. Many Cubans realized Castro was moving toward a Communist dictatorship. This included many who had fought by his side against Batista. As the situation worsened from 1959 and 1960, many thought Castro would be overthrown. However, his control grew and his cronies became entrenched in civilian and government positions. Cubans became concerned that unseating Castro would lead to a bloody civil war like the 1930s struggle in Spain. On May 1, 1960, Castro publicly denied he was a Communist, despite launching his slogan, “Cuba sí, Yankees no!” and Communist indoctrination schools. In July, he began to confiscate properties owned by Americans, Spaniards, Chinese and Jews. In October 1960 he adopted a plan similar to that developed in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. It created neighborhood committees to spy on residents and control each city block. THE RADICALISM OF CASTRO’S REVOLUTION spread to education, raising my and other parents concerns. Rumors that Castro was planning to confiscate the more than 1,000 secular and religious private schools (which did materialize) made parents fearful about their children’s future. Some private schools began closing–intially thought to be temporary–because of increasing pressure from Castro’s regime to change to Marxist textbooks to indoctrinate the children. After private schools closed, many parents kept children home instead of sending them to public schools, where Communist indoctrination had already begun. Many Cuban parents remembered accounts about the end of the Spanish Civil War, when 5,000 children were sent to the Soviet Union for indoctrination, while others were held as hostages. They were fearful the same thing would happen in Cuba. Many parents were reluctant to leave Cuba because of the unlikely belief that Castro would be overthrown in a matter of month, or that they could not abandon an old or sick family member, a spouse or a brother who had become a political prisoner, or others because they were involved in the anti-Castro movement. Parents couldn’t leave Cuba, but wanted their children to be saved. In the fall of 1960, rumors circulating in Cuba and among Miami exile circles added to the fears of parents in Cuba. Their main concern was the prospect of losing the “patria potestad,” which meant parents would lose the right to make the decisions about raising their children. Instead, the government would decide such things as where each child would live, each child’s school and curriculum. This did materialize later on. The departure of Castro’s 12-year-old son, Fidelito, from Cuba to be educated in the Soviet Union seemed to confirm this rumor.Creation of the Young Communist Pioneers – replacing the Boy Scouts – and the Association of Young Communists added panic to the situation. Some children already absorbed into these mass organizations began to show the effects of indoctrination – parroting Castro’s slogans and Communist jargon and becoming informants. In some instances, parents became fearful of their own children and self-censored what they said in front of them to avoid being denounced to authorities. THE FUTURE DID NOT LOOK PROMISING for families under Castro. Many parents reluctantly concluded it was time to get their children out of Cuba–even if they had to leave unescorted. In October 1960, the first unaccompanied Cuban child arrived in Miami. He was sent by his parents who thought that relatives and friends would take care of him until Castro was overthrown. They had no way of knowing their relatives in the U. S. were nearly destitute. That 15-year-old boy was passed from family to family on a daily basis because no one was willing or able to take responsibility for his welfare. This had an adverse psychological affect on him. He was scared, hungry and had lost 20 pounds when taken to the Catholic Welfare Bureau in Miami Nov. 15, 1960. The man who brought him pleaded with the bureau for a foster home or a boarding school for him. The boy’s name was Pedro (Peter). The organizers would use his name for the effort to get unaccompanied children safely out of Cuba and proper care in the U.S.: “Operation Peter Pan.” Join me Thursday for my final installment of the series.–©Nick Diaz 2012. # # # This commentary was published in its original form June 8, 2010 at www.thetentacle.com and is used with permission of the author and The Octopus, LLC. You may contact Mr. Diaz at firstname.lastname@example.org (Nick Diaz was born and reared in Havana, Cuba. He is a mathematics teacher at St. John Regional Catholic School in Frederick, Md. A graduate of the University of Dayton (Ohio), Mr. Diaz was retired in 2003 after 30 years with Frederick County (Md.) Public Schools. He is a member of the Board of Trustees of Frederick Community College, for which he served as chairman in 2011. He and his wife Marianne reside near Middletown, Md.)	<urn:uuid:a1c911aa-f79e-4a41-956b-d59ea4a4ffe7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://thecovertletter.com/2012/01/cuba-political-human-nightmare/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00070.warc.gz	en	0.981461	1,966	3.296875	3	[ -0.401739239692688, 0.35963886976242065, 0.1173330619931221, -0.17090895771980286, 0.11938878893852234, 0.2491394281387329, -0.2112390398979187, -0.07397589087486267, -0.2593177556991577, -0.10677698254585266, 0.18496547639369965, 0.2230934500694275, -0.20161518454551697, 0.310246706008911...	1	(Editor’s Note: This is second of a three-part series recounting the heavy price paid by families as a result of Fidel Castro’s successful guerrilla war on the Caribbean Island of Cuba. With the fall of Dictator Fulgencio Batista, Castro and his revolutionary army entered Havana in victory, Jan. 8, 1959.) By Nick Diaz THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY of my arrival on these American shores compelled me to relate some stories of my half-century as an exile of Fidel Castro’s Cuba. My growing nostalgia has brought many personal, family, and political experiences to the surface. My mother, Idania Diaz, and I arrived in November, 1960, which was Presidential Election Day in America – John F. Kennedy vs. Richard M. Nixon. We had little in the way of personal belongings upon arrival in America, except for a little cash and a few pieces of jewelry my mother smuggled on her person. I celebrated my 13th birthday a month later. My father, Nicanor Diaz, arrived exactly one year later. Of the thousands of stories of the Cuban exodus, the effort code-named “Operation Peter Pan” is still largely unknown and must be told. It chronicles the biggest exodus of children ever recorded in the Western Hemisphere. Consider that from Dec. 26, 1960 to Oct. 22, 1962 more than 14,000 unaccompanied children, ages 6 to 18, left Cuba for the U.S.A. Many valiant and dedicated people in Cuba and the United States worked together for the success of “Operation Peter Pan.” In the 1930s, between 7,000 and 8,000 Jewish children were smuggled out of Nazi Germany to England and other countries. In the Communist takeover of Spain, which led to the Spanish Civil War, thousands of children were evacuated to France, Belgium and England. When the Communists in Spain were heading for defeat, some 5,000 children were sent to the Soviet Union. In 1940, during the Battle of Britain, about 1,000 British children were sent to North America for safety. At the end of World War II, some 5,000 orphans were brought from Europe to North America for adoption. Before Castro, people used to immigrate to Cuba. I remember the rich and vibrant Chinese population in Cuba, prominent in retail, banking, and international commerce. Also I remember the Jews from Eastern Europe, people who migrated to Cuba during the early part of the 20th century. Yes, even Americans, most of whom not surnamed “Hemingway,” lived on the island paradise by choice. My parents hired an American to tutor me in the intricacies of the English language. Some readers may doubt the effectiveness of such tutelage. Looking back 50 years, however, I reflect on my parents’ wisdom in this regard. As usual, they got smarter as I got older! THE LARGEST HUMAN EXODUS in this hemisphere began soon after Castro took control of the Cuban government. The first of those particular immigrants arrived in America in January, 1959, immediately following the fall of Fulgencio Batista. They came with money from their savings and belongings they were able to carry. As Castro added more restrictions, people were forced to leave Cuba with nothing. This created a terrible burden on relatives and friends who had arrived earlier and willingly provided support to the newcomers. The responsibility to help later fell to private charities and the U.S. Government. The latter category included my parents and me. By the end of 1960, some 4,000 “refugees” had arrived and by December 1961, 12,000 – with 200 arriving in Miami each day. By 1971, 261,000 were established in Miami and almost as many elsewhere in the U.S. During the 1980 “Mariél exodus,” 125,000 left, but two million more seeking to emigrate were stranded in Cuba when Castro closed the door. In 1997 Cuban exiles numbered two- to three-million all over the world; the numbers would have been greater if leaving Cuba had not been restricted. Belying popular belief — the result of 38 years of Castro’s propaganda echoed by the American press and left-wing establishment– Castro’s revolution affected Cubans from all walks of life. The brutality of his repression has been felt since January 1959. Opposition to the revolutionary government began immediately. Many Cubans realized Castro was moving toward a Communist dictatorship. This included many who had fought by his side against Batista. As the situation worsened from 1959 and 1960, many thought Castro would be overthrown. However, his control grew and his cronies became entrenched in civilian and government positions. Cubans became concerned that unseating Castro would lead to a bloody civil war like the 1930s struggle in Spain. On May 1, 1960, Castro publicly denied he was a Communist, despite launching his slogan, “Cuba sí, Yankees no!” and Communist indoctrination schools. In July, he began to confiscate properties owned by Americans, Spaniards, Chinese and Jews. In October 1960 he adopted a plan similar to that developed in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. It created neighborhood committees to spy on residents and control each city block. THE RADICALISM OF CASTRO’S REVOLUTION spread to education, raising my and other parents concerns. Rumors that Castro was planning to confiscate the more than 1,000 secular and religious private schools (which did materialize) made parents fearful about their children’s future. Some private schools began closing–intially thought to be temporary–because of increasing pressure from Castro’s regime to change to Marxist textbooks to indoctrinate the children. After private schools closed, many parents kept children home instead of sending them to public schools, where Communist indoctrination had already begun. Many Cuban parents remembered accounts about the end of the Spanish Civil War, when 5,000 children were sent to the Soviet Union for indoctrination, while others were held as hostages. They were fearful the same thing would happen in Cuba. Many parents were reluctant to leave Cuba because of the unlikely belief that Castro would be overthrown in a matter of month, or that they could not abandon an old or sick family member, a spouse or a brother who had become a political prisoner, or others because they were involved in the anti-Castro movement. Parents couldn’t leave Cuba, but wanted their children to be saved. In the fall of 1960, rumors circulating in Cuba and among Miami exile circles added to the fears of parents in Cuba. Their main concern was the prospect of losing the “patria potestad,” which meant parents would lose the right to make the decisions about raising their children. Instead, the government would decide such things as where each child would live, each child’s school and curriculum. This did materialize later on. The departure of Castro’s 12-year-old son, Fidelito, from Cuba to be educated in the Soviet Union seemed to confirm this rumor.Creation of the Young Communist Pioneers – replacing the Boy Scouts – and the Association of Young Communists added panic to the situation. Some children already absorbed into these mass organizations began to show the effects of indoctrination – parroting Castro’s slogans and Communist jargon and becoming informants. In some instances, parents became fearful of their own children and self-censored what they said in front of them to avoid being denounced to authorities. THE FUTURE DID NOT LOOK PROMISING for families under Castro. Many parents reluctantly concluded it was time to get their children out of Cuba–even if they had to leave unescorted. In October 1960, the first unaccompanied Cuban child arrived in Miami. He was sent by his parents who thought that relatives and friends would take care of him until Castro was overthrown. They had no way of knowing their relatives in the U. S. were nearly destitute. That 15-year-old boy was passed from family to family on a daily basis because no one was willing or able to take responsibility for his welfare. This had an adverse psychological affect on him. He was scared, hungry and had lost 20 pounds when taken to the Catholic Welfare Bureau in Miami Nov. 15, 1960. The man who brought him pleaded with the bureau for a foster home or a boarding school for him. The boy’s name was Pedro (Peter). The organizers would use his name for the effort to get unaccompanied children safely out of Cuba and proper care in the U.S.: “Operation Peter Pan.” Join me Thursday for my final installment of the series.–©Nick Diaz 2012. # # # This commentary was published in its original form June 8, 2010 at www.thetentacle.com and is used with permission of the author and The Octopus, LLC. You may contact Mr. Diaz at firstname.lastname@example.org (Nick Diaz was born and reared in Havana, Cuba. He is a mathematics teacher at St. John Regional Catholic School in Frederick, Md. A graduate of the University of Dayton (Ohio), Mr. Diaz was retired in 2003 after 30 years with Frederick County (Md.) Public Schools. He is a member of the Board of Trustees of Frederick Community College, for which he served as chairman in 2011. He and his wife Marianne reside near Middletown, Md.)	2,057	ENGLISH	1
The Jews Are Persecuted Because of Their Faith 1Not long after that, the king sent an elderly Athenian#6.1 elderly Athenian; or an elder of Athens, or Athenaios the elder, or Geron an Athenian; some manuscripts have an elderly Antiochean, or an elder of Antioch. to force the Jews to abandon their religion and the customs of their ancestors. 2He was also to defile their Temple by dedicating it to the Olympian god Zeus.#6.2 zeus: The supreme god of the Greeks; Mount Olympus was thought to be his home. The temple on Mount Gerizim was to be officially named “Temple of Zeus the God of Hospitality,” as the people who lived there had requested. 3The oppression was harsh and almost intolerable. 4Gentiles filled the Temple with drinking parties and all sorts of immorality. They even had intercourse with prostitutes there. Forbidden objects were brought into the Temple, 5and the altar was covered with detestable sacrifices prohibited by our Law. 6It was impossible to observe the Sabbath, to celebrate any of the traditional festivals, or even so much as to admit to being a Jew. 7Each month when the king's birthday was celebrated, the Jews were compelled by brute force to eat the intestines of sacrificial animals. Then, during the festival in honour of the wine god Dionysus, they were required to wear ivy wreaths on their heads and march in procession. 8On the advice of Ptolemy,#6.8 Ptolemy (see 4.45); some manuscripts have the people of Ptolemais. the neighbouring Greek cities were also instructed to require Jews to eat the sacrifices; 9they were told to put to death every Jew who refused to adopt the Greek way of life. It was easy to see that hard times were ahead. 10#1 Macc 1.60–61For example, two women were arrested for having their babies circumcised. They were paraded round the city with their babies hung from their breasts; then they were thrown down from the city wall. 11#1 Macc 2.32–38On another occasion, Philip was told that some Jews had gathered in a nearby cave to observe the Sabbath in secret. Philip attacked and burnt them all alive. They had such respect for the Sabbath that they would not fight to defend themselves. The Lord Punishes and Shows Mercy 12I beg you not to become discouraged as you read about the terrible things that happened. Consider that this was the Lord's way of punishing his people, not of destroying them. 13In fact, it is a sign of kindness to punish a person immediately for his sins, rather than to wait a long time. 14The Lord does not treat us as he does other nations; he waits patiently until they have become deeply involved in sin before he punishes them, 15but he punishes us before we have sinned too much. 16So the Lord is always merciful to us, his own people. Although he punishes us with disasters, he never abandons us. 17I have made these few observations by way of reminder. We will now get on with the story. Eleazar Dies for His Faith 18 # Lev 11.7–8; Heb 11.35 There was an elderly and highly respected teacher of the Law by the name of Eleazar, whose mouth was being forced open to make him eat pork. 19-20But he preferred an honourable death rather than a life of disgrace. So he spat out the meat and went willingly to the place of torture, showing how people should have courage to refuse unclean food, even if it costs them their lives. 21-22Those in charge of the sacrifice had been friends of Eleazar for a long time, and because of this friendship they told him privately to bring meat that was lawful for him to eat. He need only pretend to eat the pork, they said, and in this way he would not be put to death. 23But Eleazar made a decision worthy of his grey hair and advanced age. All his life he had lived in perfect obedience to God's holy laws, so he replied, “Kill me, here and now. 24Such deception is not worthy of a man of my years. Many young people would think that I had denied my faith after I was ninety years old. 25If I pretended to eat this meat, just to live a little while longer, it would bring shame and disgrace on me and lead many young people astray. 26For the present I might be able to escape what you could do to me, but whether I live or die, I cannot escape Almighty God. 27If I die bravely now, it will show that I deserved my long life. 28It will also show a good example of the way young people should be willing and glad to die for our sacred and respected laws.” As soon as he said these things, he went#6.28 went; some manuscripts have was dragged. off to be tortured, 29and the very people who had treated him kindly a few minutes before, now turned against him, because they thought he had spoken like a madman. 30When they had beaten him almost to the point of death, he groaned and said, “The Lord possesses all holy knowledge. He knows I could have escaped these terrible sufferings and death, yet he also knows that I gladly suffer these things, because I fear him.” 31So Eleazar died. But his courageous death was remembered as a glorious example, not only by young people, but by the entire nation as well.	<urn:uuid:56350165-01af-4730-9a9c-458c98491381>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.bible.com/bible/431/2MA.6.GNBDK	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594705.17/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119180644-20200119204644-00523.warc.gz	en	0.990656	1,167	3.328125	3	[ 0.007415423635393381, 0.8142029047012329, -0.1854216754436493, -0.14976735413074493, -0.46732449531555176, -0.32191312313079834, 0.24234524369239807, 0.32517391443252563, -0.07400967925786972, 0.17795529961585999, -0.27862268686294556, -0.021090557798743248, -0.2785804271697998, 0.27262514...	1	The Jews Are Persecuted Because of Their Faith 1Not long after that, the king sent an elderly Athenian#6.1 elderly Athenian; or an elder of Athens, or Athenaios the elder, or Geron an Athenian; some manuscripts have an elderly Antiochean, or an elder of Antioch. to force the Jews to abandon their religion and the customs of their ancestors. 2He was also to defile their Temple by dedicating it to the Olympian god Zeus.#6.2 zeus: The supreme god of the Greeks; Mount Olympus was thought to be his home. The temple on Mount Gerizim was to be officially named “Temple of Zeus the God of Hospitality,” as the people who lived there had requested. 3The oppression was harsh and almost intolerable. 4Gentiles filled the Temple with drinking parties and all sorts of immorality. They even had intercourse with prostitutes there. Forbidden objects were brought into the Temple, 5and the altar was covered with detestable sacrifices prohibited by our Law. 6It was impossible to observe the Sabbath, to celebrate any of the traditional festivals, or even so much as to admit to being a Jew. 7Each month when the king's birthday was celebrated, the Jews were compelled by brute force to eat the intestines of sacrificial animals. Then, during the festival in honour of the wine god Dionysus, they were required to wear ivy wreaths on their heads and march in procession. 8On the advice of Ptolemy,#6.8 Ptolemy (see 4.45); some manuscripts have the people of Ptolemais. the neighbouring Greek cities were also instructed to require Jews to eat the sacrifices; 9they were told to put to death every Jew who refused to adopt the Greek way of life. It was easy to see that hard times were ahead. 10#1 Macc 1.60–61For example, two women were arrested for having their babies circumcised. They were paraded round the city with their babies hung from their breasts; then they were thrown down from the city wall. 11#1 Macc 2.32–38On another occasion, Philip was told that some Jews had gathered in a nearby cave to observe the Sabbath in secret. Philip attacked and burnt them all alive. They had such respect for the Sabbath that they would not fight to defend themselves. The Lord Punishes and Shows Mercy 12I beg you not to become discouraged as you read about the terrible things that happened. Consider that this was the Lord's way of punishing his people, not of destroying them. 13In fact, it is a sign of kindness to punish a person immediately for his sins, rather than to wait a long time. 14The Lord does not treat us as he does other nations; he waits patiently until they have become deeply involved in sin before he punishes them, 15but he punishes us before we have sinned too much. 16So the Lord is always merciful to us, his own people. Although he punishes us with disasters, he never abandons us. 17I have made these few observations by way of reminder. We will now get on with the story. Eleazar Dies for His Faith 18 # Lev 11.7–8; Heb 11.35 There was an elderly and highly respected teacher of the Law by the name of Eleazar, whose mouth was being forced open to make him eat pork. 19-20But he preferred an honourable death rather than a life of disgrace. So he spat out the meat and went willingly to the place of torture, showing how people should have courage to refuse unclean food, even if it costs them their lives. 21-22Those in charge of the sacrifice had been friends of Eleazar for a long time, and because of this friendship they told him privately to bring meat that was lawful for him to eat. He need only pretend to eat the pork, they said, and in this way he would not be put to death. 23But Eleazar made a decision worthy of his grey hair and advanced age. All his life he had lived in perfect obedience to God's holy laws, so he replied, “Kill me, here and now. 24Such deception is not worthy of a man of my years. Many young people would think that I had denied my faith after I was ninety years old. 25If I pretended to eat this meat, just to live a little while longer, it would bring shame and disgrace on me and lead many young people astray. 26For the present I might be able to escape what you could do to me, but whether I live or die, I cannot escape Almighty God. 27If I die bravely now, it will show that I deserved my long life. 28It will also show a good example of the way young people should be willing and glad to die for our sacred and respected laws.” As soon as he said these things, he went#6.28 went; some manuscripts have was dragged. off to be tortured, 29and the very people who had treated him kindly a few minutes before, now turned against him, because they thought he had spoken like a madman. 30When they had beaten him almost to the point of death, he groaned and said, “The Lord possesses all holy knowledge. He knows I could have escaped these terrible sufferings and death, yet he also knows that I gladly suffer these things, because I fear him.” 31So Eleazar died. But his courageous death was remembered as a glorious example, not only by young people, but by the entire nation as well.	1,213	ENGLISH	1
Wars have been fought for the expansion of glory, kingdoms, accession, invasion and political domination. One of the major fallouts of war is pestilence affecting the local civilian population. Pestilence is one of the reasons behind the decimation of civilizations and their armies. The end of World War II in 1945 witnessed the outbreak of diseases among the weakened population. One of such dreadful disease that succumbed the mass campaign was yaws about which we’ve discussed below. - Yaws, circulated by a micro-organism, is a painful condition which led to total disability and gross disfigurement. Found in the poor, tropical and rural areas this disease was contracted by broken skin with an incubation period of 9-90 days. About 20 million people were affected by this disease worldwide in the early 1950s, half of which were Asians. Penicillin’s invention cleared the ugly pink lesions and also the disease from the body. The disease mainly affected children who are below 15 years, living in tropical, poor, rural areas. - UNICEF was involved in a campaign against yaws that was based in Indonesia. Teams of health workers located people with the disease and the professionals did the treatment. Over 100,000 yaws cases were treated in a single month in 1955. - In Thailand, about 1 million cases had been treated which eventually led to the possibility of full eradication of yaws in Asia. The miraculous effect of the yaws treatment incited the beginning of other health campaigns. - But the initial success of the mass campaign did not last long. Most likely, overlook of infections and the lagging efforts of health workers were noticed. Their failure to trace the cases and treat them led to the reappearance of yaws in many regions. What made the re-infection possible is the absence of vaccines with no long-term immunization. - Recurrence of yaws occurred with the news of the outbreak of the yaws reported in the rural village of Thailand. With an attack rate of 23% the disease affected people belonging to the age group of 2 to 79 years, most of whom were children under 15 years old. 460,000 new cases were estimated annually since programmes were discontinued in most of the countries. However, the WHO did not give up the war against yaws. In 2007, countries made efforts to reopen campaigns eventually reaching the eradication of yaws in South-East Asia in 2012.	<urn:uuid:a677c3a3-3321-4d36-8d2c-5e112cd05c48>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.newspatrolling.com/world-war-ii-know-about-the-disease-that-took-over-the-era/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250628549.43/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125011232-20200125040232-00287.warc.gz	en	0.983105	500	3.65625	4	[ -0.1280377060174942, 0.23434500396251678, 0.7793166637420654, 0.186893492937088, 0.07390975207090378, 0.07400448620319366, -0.2581733763217926, 0.36984050273895264, -0.43315812945365906, 0.12820066511631012, -0.08108197152614594, -0.4971422851085663, 0.2076958417892456, 0.30378296971321106...	6	Wars have been fought for the expansion of glory, kingdoms, accession, invasion and political domination. One of the major fallouts of war is pestilence affecting the local civilian population. Pestilence is one of the reasons behind the decimation of civilizations and their armies. The end of World War II in 1945 witnessed the outbreak of diseases among the weakened population. One of such dreadful disease that succumbed the mass campaign was yaws about which we’ve discussed below. - Yaws, circulated by a micro-organism, is a painful condition which led to total disability and gross disfigurement. Found in the poor, tropical and rural areas this disease was contracted by broken skin with an incubation period of 9-90 days. About 20 million people were affected by this disease worldwide in the early 1950s, half of which were Asians. Penicillin’s invention cleared the ugly pink lesions and also the disease from the body. The disease mainly affected children who are below 15 years, living in tropical, poor, rural areas. - UNICEF was involved in a campaign against yaws that was based in Indonesia. Teams of health workers located people with the disease and the professionals did the treatment. Over 100,000 yaws cases were treated in a single month in 1955. - In Thailand, about 1 million cases had been treated which eventually led to the possibility of full eradication of yaws in Asia. The miraculous effect of the yaws treatment incited the beginning of other health campaigns. - But the initial success of the mass campaign did not last long. Most likely, overlook of infections and the lagging efforts of health workers were noticed. Their failure to trace the cases and treat them led to the reappearance of yaws in many regions. What made the re-infection possible is the absence of vaccines with no long-term immunization. - Recurrence of yaws occurred with the news of the outbreak of the yaws reported in the rural village of Thailand. With an attack rate of 23% the disease affected people belonging to the age group of 2 to 79 years, most of whom were children under 15 years old. 460,000 new cases were estimated annually since programmes were discontinued in most of the countries. However, the WHO did not give up the war against yaws. In 2007, countries made efforts to reopen campaigns eventually reaching the eradication of yaws in South-East Asia in 2012.	529	ENGLISH	1
Some old men say that the Kingfisher was meant in the beginning to be a water bird, but as he had not been given either web feet or a good bill he could not make a living. The animals held a council over it and decided to make him a bill like a long sharp awl for a fish-gig (fish-spear). So they made him a fish-gig and fastened it on in front of his mouth. He flew to the top of a tree, sailed out and darted down into the water, and came up with a fish on his gig. And he has been the best gigger ever since. Some others say it was this way: A Blacksnake found a Yellow-hammer's nest in a hollow tree, and after swallowing the young birds, coiled up to sleep in the nest, where the mother bird found him when she came home. She went for help to the Little People, who sent her to the Kingfisher. He came, and after flying back and forth past the hole a few times, made one dart at the snake and pulled him out dead. When they looked they found a hole in the snake's head where the Kingfisher had pierced it with a slender tugälû'nä fish, which he carried in his bill like a lance. From this the Little People concluded that he would make a first-class gigger if he only had the right spear, so they gave him his long bill as a reward. A Cherokee Legend Myths of the Cherokee, James Mooney, 1900	<urn:uuid:79358cb6-97e4-475f-952d-923f6bc7c51d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.legendsofnativeamerica.com/region_southeast/legends-cherokee/HowTheKingfisherGotHisBill.php	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601241.42/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121014531-20200121043531-00440.warc.gz	en	0.989326	329	3.421875	3	[ -0.32288995385169983, 0.18055537343025208, 0.14065375924110413, -0.13265399634838104, -0.4613431692123413, -0.43907174468040466, 0.7242624759674072, -0.06539735198020935, -0.4300805628299713, -0.13164089620113373, 0.14567069709300995, -0.11537821590900421, 0.12023372203111649, 0.0325524248...	4	Some old men say that the Kingfisher was meant in the beginning to be a water bird, but as he had not been given either web feet or a good bill he could not make a living. The animals held a council over it and decided to make him a bill like a long sharp awl for a fish-gig (fish-spear). So they made him a fish-gig and fastened it on in front of his mouth. He flew to the top of a tree, sailed out and darted down into the water, and came up with a fish on his gig. And he has been the best gigger ever since. Some others say it was this way: A Blacksnake found a Yellow-hammer's nest in a hollow tree, and after swallowing the young birds, coiled up to sleep in the nest, where the mother bird found him when she came home. She went for help to the Little People, who sent her to the Kingfisher. He came, and after flying back and forth past the hole a few times, made one dart at the snake and pulled him out dead. When they looked they found a hole in the snake's head where the Kingfisher had pierced it with a slender tugälû'nä fish, which he carried in his bill like a lance. From this the Little People concluded that he would make a first-class gigger if he only had the right spear, so they gave him his long bill as a reward. A Cherokee Legend Myths of the Cherokee, James Mooney, 1900	318	ENGLISH	1
In the story, "The Man to Send Rain Clouds," why does the family prepare their grandfather for burial by painting his face and putting a feather in his hair? In “The Man to Send Rain Clouds ,” Teofilio’s family initially prepares him for burial following the traditions of their pueblo. This includes tying a feather in his hair, painting his face, wrapping his body (in this case in a red blanket), and scattering corn meal and pollen on the wind. By following the traditions of the pueblo, they honor their deceased relative and also to honor their culture. They also believe that by following the traditions... (The entire section contains 252 words.) check Approved by eNotes Editorial	<urn:uuid:8caa7276-ccfc-4fd3-9351-49b78f343cef>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/story-man-send-rain-clouds-why-family-prepare-669381?en_action=hh-question_click&en_label=hh-sidebar&en_category=internal_campaign	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251773463.72/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128030221-20200128060221-00414.warc.gz	en	0.98372	151	3.8125	4	[ 0.0747995674610138, 0.42878225445747375, 0.3473854660987854, -0.14584662020206451, -0.05179029330611229, -0.09248507022857666, 0.7259719371795654, -0.24774077534675598, -0.5476614236831665, -0.019425397738814354, -0.26737284660339355, 0.03826379030942917, -0.35614636540412903, -0.033659998...	2	In the story, "The Man to Send Rain Clouds," why does the family prepare their grandfather for burial by painting his face and putting a feather in his hair? In “The Man to Send Rain Clouds ,” Teofilio’s family initially prepares him for burial following the traditions of their pueblo. This includes tying a feather in his hair, painting his face, wrapping his body (in this case in a red blanket), and scattering corn meal and pollen on the wind. By following the traditions of the pueblo, they honor their deceased relative and also to honor their culture. They also believe that by following the traditions... (The entire section contains 252 words.) check Approved by eNotes Editorial	142	ENGLISH	1
What role did Martin Luther Kings play in the Montgomery bus boycott Essay In December Of 1955, a boycott of the bus system in Montgomery, Alabama took place which was to shape the future for black civil rights. As head of the MIA, an organisation formed to lead the Montgomery bus boycott, Martin Luther King played a vital role in this seminal event. But was he a leader or was he lead? Before the protest, king was an unrecognised face in Montgomery and on moving to the town, he had no plans to become involved in the civil rights movement.As a Boy, Martin Luther King Jr, grew up and attended a segregated school in Atlanta, Georgia. This segregated up bringing provided King with a strong driving force for the fight for black rights. He recalled his white friend’s father demanding that he would no longer play with him. ‘For the first time, I was made aware of the existence of a race problem.’ Both King’s parents were NAACP activists who were strongly involved in the church, because of this, King could see how the church and NAACP strengthened the black community.The MIA chose King as their head as he had no record of offences and so nothing for him to be arrested for. It would have been too risky for a member of the NAACP to take on the role as they could easily be arrested or killed. King was at fist reluctant when approached by the MIA as he had just opened a church in Montgomery and was keen to further his career as minister. He had already rejected an offer to lead the local NAACP, he did, however, allow the church to be used as a meeting place and it was here, following the arrest of Rosa Parks, that the boycott was provided with a location, inspiration and some finanicial aid.Robinson and the WPC responded to Parks’ arrest by calling for a one-day protest of the city’s buses on 5 December. They prepared a series of leaflets at Alabama State College and organized groups to distribute them throughout the black community and on the day ninety percent of Montgomery’s black citizens stayed off the buses. Following this initial success, Nixon and Robinson arranged a meeting with the city’s ministers, including Martin Luther King, to discuss the possibility of extending the boycott to a long-term campaign. During this meeting, the MIA (Montgomery Improvement Association) was formed and King was elected its president.The main advantage of having King as the president was the fact that he was new to Montgomery. Rosa Parks recalled, “He hadn’t been there long enough to make any strong friends or enemies.” King’s faith also made him an obvious choice. As a young and popular minister, who felt ‘called by God to serve humanity, his links with the church would provide local support and much needed funding. The help of the church would also attract the right kind of interest and its supporters would be keen to follow King’s wishes for a peaceful protest.King lead a non-violent protest in the Montgomery bus boycott which I feel was his most important role in the event. The most major act of terrorism on the black protesters was the bombing of King’s home on January the 30th 1956. His wife and their baby daughter escaped without injury. However King refused to let anger swallow him and he told and angry crowed of blacks waiting at his home that “We must learn to meet hate with love” This non-violent approach encouraged a peaceful protest which is undoubtedly one the keys to its success. King also encouraged unity and co-operation between the blacks. At the first meeting of the MIA, King said to the black community, “I want to say that in all of our actions we must stick together. Unity is the great need of the hour, and if we are united we can get many of the things that we not only desire but which we justly deserve.”The success of the Boycott caused Martin Luther King to become a national icon and he raised lots of media attention. However, despite his ‘Saint-like’ reputation, King has proved subject to much disagreement between historians, some who claim he wasn’t the great leader he was made out to be. Some even go as far to say that he was jealous of other black leaders. The fact that King had at first been reluctant to take up the post of head of the MIA also strengthens the viewpoint that he was lead, rather than being a leader himself. Another reason for the bad feeling toward King was jealousy from other prominent black leaders. An example of this is Roy Wilkins who was keen to emphasise the NAACP’s importance, and disliked King’s direct, non-violent approaches. Even King’s colleagues felt that he was basking in the victory and not concentrating on the fact that the protest’s success had been the result of collective thought and collective action. He was also accused of poor organisation skills and he was criticised slightly for putting his family in danger.King, by many, was considered to be the focal point of the boycott. He claimed, however, that the movement would have taken place with or without him – “I just happened to be here.. …If M.L King had never been born this movement would have taken place. One oocal activist agreed: it was ‘a protest of the people…..not a one man show. .. the leaders couldn’t stop it if they wanted to.’ Throughout the boycott, King made a number of inspirational speeches, undoubtedly his true talent. King’s speeches ‘mesmerised’ his audiences sparked great admiration and publicity. When first elected as president of the MIA, King had just a few hours to prepare a speech for the mass meeting that was to be held on the evening of December 5th at the Holt street Baptist church. Considering the quality and feeling behind his speeches, I think that Martin Luther King was a strong leader in the Montgomery bus boycott. However, due to h8is slight reluctance to enter the role of president of the MIA and the way he was told what to do (preparing the speech etc), I feel that in some ways he was lead. Despite his criticisms, however, I feel it was vital for the protest to have some form of leader, and as King had the great ability to mesmerise his audiences, along with his connections with the church, he was the obvious choice.	<urn:uuid:a84add6b-e44c-45d9-8381-f8d3bdbc1c33>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://studyhippo.com/what-role-did-martin-luther-kings-play-in-the-montgomery-bus-boycott/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594662.6/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119151736-20200119175736-00498.warc.gz	en	0.98962	1,328	3.328125	3	[ -0.10809072852134705, 0.2589043974876404, 0.1740534007549286, -0.3867199420928955, -0.15579433739185333, 0.1647387146949768, 0.8075684309005737, -0.26446521282196045, -0.16152434051036835, 0.15001752972602844, -0.09956391155719757, 0.28861600160598755, 0.24342939257621765, 0.09739899635314...	3	What role did Martin Luther Kings play in the Montgomery bus boycott Essay In December Of 1955, a boycott of the bus system in Montgomery, Alabama took place which was to shape the future for black civil rights. As head of the MIA, an organisation formed to lead the Montgomery bus boycott, Martin Luther King played a vital role in this seminal event. But was he a leader or was he lead? Before the protest, king was an unrecognised face in Montgomery and on moving to the town, he had no plans to become involved in the civil rights movement.As a Boy, Martin Luther King Jr, grew up and attended a segregated school in Atlanta, Georgia. This segregated up bringing provided King with a strong driving force for the fight for black rights. He recalled his white friend’s father demanding that he would no longer play with him. ‘For the first time, I was made aware of the existence of a race problem.’ Both King’s parents were NAACP activists who were strongly involved in the church, because of this, King could see how the church and NAACP strengthened the black community.The MIA chose King as their head as he had no record of offences and so nothing for him to be arrested for. It would have been too risky for a member of the NAACP to take on the role as they could easily be arrested or killed. King was at fist reluctant when approached by the MIA as he had just opened a church in Montgomery and was keen to further his career as minister. He had already rejected an offer to lead the local NAACP, he did, however, allow the church to be used as a meeting place and it was here, following the arrest of Rosa Parks, that the boycott was provided with a location, inspiration and some finanicial aid.Robinson and the WPC responded to Parks’ arrest by calling for a one-day protest of the city’s buses on 5 December. They prepared a series of leaflets at Alabama State College and organized groups to distribute them throughout the black community and on the day ninety percent of Montgomery’s black citizens stayed off the buses. Following this initial success, Nixon and Robinson arranged a meeting with the city’s ministers, including Martin Luther King, to discuss the possibility of extending the boycott to a long-term campaign. During this meeting, the MIA (Montgomery Improvement Association) was formed and King was elected its president.The main advantage of having King as the president was the fact that he was new to Montgomery. Rosa Parks recalled, “He hadn’t been there long enough to make any strong friends or enemies.” King’s faith also made him an obvious choice. As a young and popular minister, who felt ‘called by God to serve humanity, his links with the church would provide local support and much needed funding. The help of the church would also attract the right kind of interest and its supporters would be keen to follow King’s wishes for a peaceful protest.King lead a non-violent protest in the Montgomery bus boycott which I feel was his most important role in the event. The most major act of terrorism on the black protesters was the bombing of King’s home on January the 30th 1956. His wife and their baby daughter escaped without injury. However King refused to let anger swallow him and he told and angry crowed of blacks waiting at his home that “We must learn to meet hate with love” This non-violent approach encouraged a peaceful protest which is undoubtedly one the keys to its success. King also encouraged unity and co-operation between the blacks. At the first meeting of the MIA, King said to the black community, “I want to say that in all of our actions we must stick together. Unity is the great need of the hour, and if we are united we can get many of the things that we not only desire but which we justly deserve.”The success of the Boycott caused Martin Luther King to become a national icon and he raised lots of media attention. However, despite his ‘Saint-like’ reputation, King has proved subject to much disagreement between historians, some who claim he wasn’t the great leader he was made out to be. Some even go as far to say that he was jealous of other black leaders. The fact that King had at first been reluctant to take up the post of head of the MIA also strengthens the viewpoint that he was lead, rather than being a leader himself. Another reason for the bad feeling toward King was jealousy from other prominent black leaders. An example of this is Roy Wilkins who was keen to emphasise the NAACP’s importance, and disliked King’s direct, non-violent approaches. Even King’s colleagues felt that he was basking in the victory and not concentrating on the fact that the protest’s success had been the result of collective thought and collective action. He was also accused of poor organisation skills and he was criticised slightly for putting his family in danger.King, by many, was considered to be the focal point of the boycott. He claimed, however, that the movement would have taken place with or without him – “I just happened to be here.. …If M.L King had never been born this movement would have taken place. One oocal activist agreed: it was ‘a protest of the people…..not a one man show. .. the leaders couldn’t stop it if they wanted to.’ Throughout the boycott, King made a number of inspirational speeches, undoubtedly his true talent. King’s speeches ‘mesmerised’ his audiences sparked great admiration and publicity. When first elected as president of the MIA, King had just a few hours to prepare a speech for the mass meeting that was to be held on the evening of December 5th at the Holt street Baptist church. Considering the quality and feeling behind his speeches, I think that Martin Luther King was a strong leader in the Montgomery bus boycott. However, due to h8is slight reluctance to enter the role of president of the MIA and the way he was told what to do (preparing the speech etc), I feel that in some ways he was lead. Despite his criticisms, however, I feel it was vital for the protest to have some form of leader, and as King had the great ability to mesmerise his audiences, along with his connections with the church, he was the obvious choice.	1,283	ENGLISH	1
Britain in the 18th Century and early 19th Century was a harsh, brutal and bloody place. There were a massive 225, yes, 225, capital offences in Britain up until the 1850s (compare that to modern day Iran, which has a mere 95). This was known as the Bloody Code. Even children were hanged. 18th and 19th century British society was very unjust and often cruel - poverty, social injustice, child labour, harsh and dirty living conditions and long working hours were prevalent. Dickens' novels perhaps best illustrate this; even some government officials were horrified by what they saw. Only in 1833 and 1844, the first general laws against child labour, the Factory Acts, were passed in England. Thanks to the notorious Bloody Code, life in 18th Century (and early 19th Century) Britain was a hazardous place. By the 1770s, there were a massive 222 crimes in Britain which carried the death penalty, many of which even included petty offences such as the stealing of goods worth over 5 shillings, the cutting down of a tree, stealing an animal or stealing from a rabbit warren. For example, Michael Hammond and his sister, Ann, whose ages were given as 7 and 11, were reportedly hanged at King's Lynn, Norfolk on Wednesday, the 28th of September 1708 for theft. The local press did not, however, consider the executions of two children newsworthy Some of the capital offences in Britain in the eighteenth century and early nineteenth century: stealing horses or sheep destroying turnpike roads cutting down trees pickpocketing goods worth more than one shilling being out at night with a blackened face unmarried mother concealing a stillborn child stealing from a rabbit warren But many people escaped the death penalty and instead were sentenced to one of Britain's penal colonies, such as Australia or one of the American colonies. Britain last sent felons to Australia in 1868. One of the descendant those British felons sent to Australia was Ned Kelly, who later became the country's most famous outlaw... Ned Kelly's home-made armour put on display as archaeologists find his grave in Australian prison 13th March 2008 The home-made armour used by Australia's most notorious outlaw Ned Kelly has been put on display as archaeologists believe they have found his grave. Unmarked coffins containing the remains of 32 executed prisoners have been unearthed at a former jail in Melbourne, Victoria, and old documents suggest Kelly - the son of an Irish convict (in those days, the whole of the island of Ireland was part of Britain) - is among them. The home-made armour in which his made his last stand has now been put on display in the State Library of Victoria in Melbourne. He was hanged in 1880 but mystery has surrounded his exact resting place. It was previously thought his remains had been accidentally dug up and discarded during pipe-laying work 50 years ago. Kelly used home-made armour in a final shoot-out with police Ned Kelly became a folk hero of Australia's colonial past with his gang's daring bank robberies and escapes Forensic tests are to be carried out on the contents of the coffins, although it may not be possible to identify individuals. Jeremy Smith, senior archaeologist at the agency Heritage Victoria, said Kelly's bones were probably mixed up with those of other prisoners. "Identifying the remains of Ned Kelly may prove difficult, as his were not handled with a great degree of care," he said. "We have not found a single body that we can identify as being Kelly. We may never be able to do that." Kelly was hanged at the Melbourne Gaol in 1880 and Australian archaeologists believe they have found his grave of Kelly on the site of an abandoned prison Kelly's head was removed immediately after his execution - various skulls were later touted around Australia as his - but one clue for investigators may be a distinguishing wrist injury he suffered at his last stand, the siege of Glenrowan. He was originally buried in an unmarked grave at the old Melbourne Gaol, but bodies from that site were dug up and taken to the city's Pentridge Prison in 1929. It is at Pentridge, which is now being turned into housing, that the coffins were found, partly thanks to an old map which is understood to bear the names of executed men, including Kelly. Archaeologists, who have been investigating the Pentridge site for two years, found three deep, square pits with the coffins in them. Victoria's planning minister, Justin Madden, said in a statement: "Although it may not be possible to conclusively match remains to individual prisoners, we hope the analysis will provide a better understanding of the history of the burials following the Old Melbourne Gaol closure in the 1920s." Born Edward Kelly to Irish Catholic parents in Beveridge, Victoria, in 1854 or 1855, Kelly was a "bush-worker" in his teens, breaking in horses, mustering cattle and maintaining fences - but graduated from that to cattle-rustling and horse - stealing. Arrested for assault, horse-stealing and bank robbery, a reward was eventually put out for him and his brother Dan for the attempted murder of a policeman. Grave mystery: Ned was the son of an Irish convict and used home-made armour while on his crime spree in the late 1870s Later, the reward was increased to £1,000 for each of the Kelly Gang for the murder of three policemen at the now-infamous Stringybark Creek. Heath Ledger as Ned Kelly in the film of the same name After more bank robberies, the gang made their last stand in the town of Glenrowan, Victoria, where they took 60 hostages in a hotel. In a battle with police, Dan and two other gang members were killed, and Ned was wounded and arrested. He was tried and convicted of the murder of one of the policemen at Stringybark Creek. Numerous books and a number of feature films have since told his story and he remains an icon in Australia. To many, he is a hero who resisted the brutality of the colonial regime and embodied the spirit of Australia. To others, he is a ruthless killer. The image of his last stand in 1880, clad in a home-made suit of armour, including his famous cylindrical helmet with eye-slits, is still instantly recognisable. Plans for the remains have not been finalised, but a publicly-accessible cemetery and rose garden is expected to be created at the Pentridge site. It will feature historical story boards and information about Victoria's penal system and executed prisoners.	<urn:uuid:1384d678-fb45-459b-abec-78c8d31098bd>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://forums.canadiancontent.net/showthread.php?s=db99f5151fa1178fdb3f78be2211fbc1&t=72089	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251779833.86/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128153713-20200128183713-00275.warc.gz	en	0.983301	1,387	3.296875	3	[ -0.07659044861793518, -0.1666247397661209, 0.4170295000076294, -0.015660718083381653, 0.4583059549331665, -0.1057913675904274, -0.014943748712539673, -0.08654371649026871, 0.1114216074347496, 0.060908589512109756, -0.3505493402481079, -0.19491201639175415, 0.02514612302184105, 0.3598748743...	1	Britain in the 18th Century and early 19th Century was a harsh, brutal and bloody place. There were a massive 225, yes, 225, capital offences in Britain up until the 1850s (compare that to modern day Iran, which has a mere 95). This was known as the Bloody Code. Even children were hanged. 18th and 19th century British society was very unjust and often cruel - poverty, social injustice, child labour, harsh and dirty living conditions and long working hours were prevalent. Dickens' novels perhaps best illustrate this; even some government officials were horrified by what they saw. Only in 1833 and 1844, the first general laws against child labour, the Factory Acts, were passed in England. Thanks to the notorious Bloody Code, life in 18th Century (and early 19th Century) Britain was a hazardous place. By the 1770s, there were a massive 222 crimes in Britain which carried the death penalty, many of which even included petty offences such as the stealing of goods worth over 5 shillings, the cutting down of a tree, stealing an animal or stealing from a rabbit warren. For example, Michael Hammond and his sister, Ann, whose ages were given as 7 and 11, were reportedly hanged at King's Lynn, Norfolk on Wednesday, the 28th of September 1708 for theft. The local press did not, however, consider the executions of two children newsworthy Some of the capital offences in Britain in the eighteenth century and early nineteenth century: stealing horses or sheep destroying turnpike roads cutting down trees pickpocketing goods worth more than one shilling being out at night with a blackened face unmarried mother concealing a stillborn child stealing from a rabbit warren But many people escaped the death penalty and instead were sentenced to one of Britain's penal colonies, such as Australia or one of the American colonies. Britain last sent felons to Australia in 1868. One of the descendant those British felons sent to Australia was Ned Kelly, who later became the country's most famous outlaw... Ned Kelly's home-made armour put on display as archaeologists find his grave in Australian prison 13th March 2008 The home-made armour used by Australia's most notorious outlaw Ned Kelly has been put on display as archaeologists believe they have found his grave. Unmarked coffins containing the remains of 32 executed prisoners have been unearthed at a former jail in Melbourne, Victoria, and old documents suggest Kelly - the son of an Irish convict (in those days, the whole of the island of Ireland was part of Britain) - is among them. The home-made armour in which his made his last stand has now been put on display in the State Library of Victoria in Melbourne. He was hanged in 1880 but mystery has surrounded his exact resting place. It was previously thought his remains had been accidentally dug up and discarded during pipe-laying work 50 years ago. Kelly used home-made armour in a final shoot-out with police Ned Kelly became a folk hero of Australia's colonial past with his gang's daring bank robberies and escapes Forensic tests are to be carried out on the contents of the coffins, although it may not be possible to identify individuals. Jeremy Smith, senior archaeologist at the agency Heritage Victoria, said Kelly's bones were probably mixed up with those of other prisoners. "Identifying the remains of Ned Kelly may prove difficult, as his were not handled with a great degree of care," he said. "We have not found a single body that we can identify as being Kelly. We may never be able to do that." Kelly was hanged at the Melbourne Gaol in 1880 and Australian archaeologists believe they have found his grave of Kelly on the site of an abandoned prison Kelly's head was removed immediately after his execution - various skulls were later touted around Australia as his - but one clue for investigators may be a distinguishing wrist injury he suffered at his last stand, the siege of Glenrowan. He was originally buried in an unmarked grave at the old Melbourne Gaol, but bodies from that site were dug up and taken to the city's Pentridge Prison in 1929. It is at Pentridge, which is now being turned into housing, that the coffins were found, partly thanks to an old map which is understood to bear the names of executed men, including Kelly. Archaeologists, who have been investigating the Pentridge site for two years, found three deep, square pits with the coffins in them. Victoria's planning minister, Justin Madden, said in a statement: "Although it may not be possible to conclusively match remains to individual prisoners, we hope the analysis will provide a better understanding of the history of the burials following the Old Melbourne Gaol closure in the 1920s." Born Edward Kelly to Irish Catholic parents in Beveridge, Victoria, in 1854 or 1855, Kelly was a "bush-worker" in his teens, breaking in horses, mustering cattle and maintaining fences - but graduated from that to cattle-rustling and horse - stealing. Arrested for assault, horse-stealing and bank robbery, a reward was eventually put out for him and his brother Dan for the attempted murder of a policeman. Grave mystery: Ned was the son of an Irish convict and used home-made armour while on his crime spree in the late 1870s Later, the reward was increased to £1,000 for each of the Kelly Gang for the murder of three policemen at the now-infamous Stringybark Creek. Heath Ledger as Ned Kelly in the film of the same name After more bank robberies, the gang made their last stand in the town of Glenrowan, Victoria, where they took 60 hostages in a hotel. In a battle with police, Dan and two other gang members were killed, and Ned was wounded and arrested. He was tried and convicted of the murder of one of the policemen at Stringybark Creek. Numerous books and a number of feature films have since told his story and he remains an icon in Australia. To many, he is a hero who resisted the brutality of the colonial regime and embodied the spirit of Australia. To others, he is a ruthless killer. The image of his last stand in 1880, clad in a home-made suit of armour, including his famous cylindrical helmet with eye-slits, is still instantly recognisable. Plans for the remains have not been finalised, but a publicly-accessible cemetery and rose garden is expected to be created at the Pentridge site. It will feature historical story boards and information about Victoria's penal system and executed prisoners.	1,442	ENGLISH	1
After a short climb to a lookout at the end of Hidden Valley in Mirima National Park, a couple of kilometres north of Kununurra, you can enjoy an attractive view of the remarkable rock formations. This pile of sandstone, hundreds of metres thick, has been called Kellys Knob Sandstone, and was washed into place during Noah’s Flood as the waters were rising, a not long before they reached their peak, midway through the year-long Flood. The sediment deposit was eroded as the waters of Noah’s Flood were receding and the eroded sediment was carried out of the area by the water. Not much of the sandstone is being eroded at present, as evidenced by the small amount of debris at the bottom of the steep domes. There are amazing features recorded in this sandstone that point to very rapidly flowing water that was highly energetic, including some large cross beds. When the evidence in sedimentary deposits points to enormous volumes of water, mainstream geologists get nervous about explaining them by deposition from water because that would require a flood of biblical proportions. So, they suddenly switch their interpretation and say that it was deposited from wind in a desert. It is quite amazing how this effort to avoid the obvious leads to ridiculous contradictions that end up on the displays at the parks. The sign in this park says it was deposited by creeks and windblown sand beneath a primordial Devonian sea. I’m not sure how you can have creeks and windblown sand beneath a sea. But anyway, most people don’t think about it when they read the sign and just see the age 360 million years and it makes them go, “Ooooh, amazing!”	<urn:uuid:21ceb5f8-20c4-4c0a-be8e-555d51ff5c91>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://biblicalgeology.net/blog/mirima-national-park-kununurra-western-australia	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606872.19/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122071919-20200122100919-00543.warc.gz	en	0.980544	355	3.328125	3	[ -0.01281026378273964, 0.11067239940166473, 0.08247657120227814, 0.4416111707687378, -0.08712918311357498, 0.3134866952896118, 0.31721147894859314, -0.0016205840511247516, -0.09154709428548813, 0.14645908772945404, 0.036667149513959885, -0.7246555089950562, 0.25081732869148254, 0.0765619128...	6	After a short climb to a lookout at the end of Hidden Valley in Mirima National Park, a couple of kilometres north of Kununurra, you can enjoy an attractive view of the remarkable rock formations. This pile of sandstone, hundreds of metres thick, has been called Kellys Knob Sandstone, and was washed into place during Noah’s Flood as the waters were rising, a not long before they reached their peak, midway through the year-long Flood. The sediment deposit was eroded as the waters of Noah’s Flood were receding and the eroded sediment was carried out of the area by the water. Not much of the sandstone is being eroded at present, as evidenced by the small amount of debris at the bottom of the steep domes. There are amazing features recorded in this sandstone that point to very rapidly flowing water that was highly energetic, including some large cross beds. When the evidence in sedimentary deposits points to enormous volumes of water, mainstream geologists get nervous about explaining them by deposition from water because that would require a flood of biblical proportions. So, they suddenly switch their interpretation and say that it was deposited from wind in a desert. It is quite amazing how this effort to avoid the obvious leads to ridiculous contradictions that end up on the displays at the parks. The sign in this park says it was deposited by creeks and windblown sand beneath a primordial Devonian sea. I’m not sure how you can have creeks and windblown sand beneath a sea. But anyway, most people don’t think about it when they read the sign and just see the age 360 million years and it makes them go, “Ooooh, amazing!”	345	ENGLISH	1
François Auguste René Rodin (12 November 1840 – 17 November 1917) was a French sculptor. Although Rodin is generally considered the progenitor of modern sculpture, he did not set out to rebel against the past. He was schooled traditionally, took a craftsman-like approach to his work, and desired academic recognition, although he was never accepted into Paris’s foremost school of art. Rodin possessed a unique ability to model a complex, turbulent, deeply pocketed surface in clay. Many of his most notable sculptures were criticized during his lifetime. They clashed with predominant figurative sculpture traditions, in which works were decorative, formulaic, or highly thematic. Rodin’s most original work departed from traditional themes of mythology and allegory, modeled the human body with realism, and celebrated individual character and physicality. Rodin was sensitive to the controversy surrounding his work, but refused to change his style. Successive works brought increasing favor from the government and the artistic community. From the unexpected realism of his first major figure – inspired by his 1875 trip to Italy – to the unconventional memorials whose commissions he later sought, Rodin’s reputation grew, and he became the preeminent French sculptor of his time. By 1900, he was a world-renowned artist. Wealthy private clients sought Rodin’s work after his World’s Fair exhibit, and he kept company with a variety of high-profile intellectuals and artists. His students included Antoine Bourdelle, Camille Claudel, Constantin Brâncuși, and Charles Despiau. He married his lifelong companion, Rose Beuret, in the last year of both their lives. His sculptures suffered a decline in popularity after his death in 1917, but within a few decades, his legacy solidified. Rodin remains one of the few sculptors widely known outside the visual arts community.	<urn:uuid:6c6e919d-b29b-46e1-ba52-ad9e3aaa01eb>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://goodquotes.me/authors/auguste-rodin/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681625.83/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125222506-20200126012506-00482.warc.gz	en	0.988986	398	3.546875	4	[ -0.28950998187065125, 0.3429439961910248, 0.05505872145295143, -0.5559024214744568, -0.42268916964530945, 0.20535382628440857, 0.27358391880989075, 0.2678001821041107, 0.09299762547016144, 0.023119240999221802, 0.002910737646743655, -0.35202857851982117, 0.15475523471832275, 0.527342796325...	1	François Auguste René Rodin (12 November 1840 – 17 November 1917) was a French sculptor. Although Rodin is generally considered the progenitor of modern sculpture, he did not set out to rebel against the past. He was schooled traditionally, took a craftsman-like approach to his work, and desired academic recognition, although he was never accepted into Paris’s foremost school of art. Rodin possessed a unique ability to model a complex, turbulent, deeply pocketed surface in clay. Many of his most notable sculptures were criticized during his lifetime. They clashed with predominant figurative sculpture traditions, in which works were decorative, formulaic, or highly thematic. Rodin’s most original work departed from traditional themes of mythology and allegory, modeled the human body with realism, and celebrated individual character and physicality. Rodin was sensitive to the controversy surrounding his work, but refused to change his style. Successive works brought increasing favor from the government and the artistic community. From the unexpected realism of his first major figure – inspired by his 1875 trip to Italy – to the unconventional memorials whose commissions he later sought, Rodin’s reputation grew, and he became the preeminent French sculptor of his time. By 1900, he was a world-renowned artist. Wealthy private clients sought Rodin’s work after his World’s Fair exhibit, and he kept company with a variety of high-profile intellectuals and artists. His students included Antoine Bourdelle, Camille Claudel, Constantin Brâncuși, and Charles Despiau. He married his lifelong companion, Rose Beuret, in the last year of both their lives. His sculptures suffered a decline in popularity after his death in 1917, but within a few decades, his legacy solidified. Rodin remains one of the few sculptors widely known outside the visual arts community.	398	ENGLISH	1
In the 17th century rich women would normally be taught at home by a tutor, they were taught subjects like Latin, French, Needlework, and how to converse, and they were also taught how to look pretty and to play instruments like the piano. When they were older there parents would decide who they were going to marry and the family of the women would pay a dowry to the parents of the husband. They only got married to get more popular and look more important, if the wives husband thought the wives got annoying the husband would put a scolds bridle on her head. If the husband wanted to get divorced the husband could just take the wife to market. A rich women wouldnt normally get a job, they would just stay at home and look after the family and tell the servants what to do. Poor women did not go to school or have an education, they just looked after their home, and span cotton or worked in fields. Poor women had to look after there children and prepare meals, work in the fields and produce cotton, they didnt get paid much and had to work hard. Women In The 19th Century In the 19th century rich women were educated at home by tutors and learned pretty much the same as in the 17th century, learn to play the piano, speak French, entertain quests, look attractive, and entertain guests. After 1870 it was made compulsory for all women to have an education, Girls didnt learn the same subjects as boys, they learnt subjects like laundry, cookery, needlework and housewifery skills. Rich women did work, but ran their home bossing their servants around, after 1870 some women became teachers and after the typewriter was invented some became secretaries or clerks. At this time all women had to retire when they were married. A rich womens servants did all a her domestic tasks at home. So all she needed to do at home was look good and attractive and boss servants about. School wasnt made compulsory until 1870 until then poor people didnt go to school because they couldnt afford it. Poor women had to work as well as bringing up her children, they had to work in coal mines and factories for long hours earning little money, up until 1870 young children would be expected to work too. Women In The 20th Century In the 20th when the 1st world war started women could leave their underpaid jobs and could get jobs at a factory because all the men had gone off to fight for the war so the women worked in the factories making ammo for the war. In 1914 14,000 men worked at the Woolwich Arsenal munitions factory, in 1916 when the war started 100,000 people worked there. After the war had finished the women were a bit disappointed because they had to go back to their old jobs and they didnt earn as much money and they were used to earning more money, but when the typewriter was invented jobs as secretaries were available which women could take and some women became teachers. Women were now aloud to vote and the first female MP came. Girls were taught the same subjects as boys except girls were taught other subjects like Housewifery, laundry and childcare. The women started to wear different clothes, they wouldnt wear corsets any more, the would just wear tight cloths and shorter dresses so they could dance easier because they danced differently, they swung about more and moved there legs more. I think the role of women changed quite a lot, because its all lead to the world how it is today which is nothing like it was then. If the people did half of what we did today then the people wouldnt of found it very polite. I think all the changes that happened in the 20th century were good because women were treated more equally like men.	<urn:uuid:70900394-2dc9-4722-b940-019080878a8c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://gemmarketingsolutions.com/women-in-the-17th-18th-and-19th-century/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00443.warc.gz	en	0.99506	777	3.3125	3	[ 0.02558140456676483, 0.22931604087352753, 0.049349598586559296, -0.3401307463645935, -0.207367941737175, -0.015806810930371284, -0.23893286287784576, 0.10436201095581055, 0.06834752857685089, -0.19145072996616364, 0.2906229794025421, 0.15244577825069427, 0.13201917707920074, 0.244779393076...	3	In the 17th century rich women would normally be taught at home by a tutor, they were taught subjects like Latin, French, Needlework, and how to converse, and they were also taught how to look pretty and to play instruments like the piano. When they were older there parents would decide who they were going to marry and the family of the women would pay a dowry to the parents of the husband. They only got married to get more popular and look more important, if the wives husband thought the wives got annoying the husband would put a scolds bridle on her head. If the husband wanted to get divorced the husband could just take the wife to market. A rich women wouldnt normally get a job, they would just stay at home and look after the family and tell the servants what to do. Poor women did not go to school or have an education, they just looked after their home, and span cotton or worked in fields. Poor women had to look after there children and prepare meals, work in the fields and produce cotton, they didnt get paid much and had to work hard. Women In The 19th Century In the 19th century rich women were educated at home by tutors and learned pretty much the same as in the 17th century, learn to play the piano, speak French, entertain quests, look attractive, and entertain guests. After 1870 it was made compulsory for all women to have an education, Girls didnt learn the same subjects as boys, they learnt subjects like laundry, cookery, needlework and housewifery skills. Rich women did work, but ran their home bossing their servants around, after 1870 some women became teachers and after the typewriter was invented some became secretaries or clerks. At this time all women had to retire when they were married. A rich womens servants did all a her domestic tasks at home. So all she needed to do at home was look good and attractive and boss servants about. School wasnt made compulsory until 1870 until then poor people didnt go to school because they couldnt afford it. Poor women had to work as well as bringing up her children, they had to work in coal mines and factories for long hours earning little money, up until 1870 young children would be expected to work too. Women In The 20th Century In the 20th when the 1st world war started women could leave their underpaid jobs and could get jobs at a factory because all the men had gone off to fight for the war so the women worked in the factories making ammo for the war. In 1914 14,000 men worked at the Woolwich Arsenal munitions factory, in 1916 when the war started 100,000 people worked there. After the war had finished the women were a bit disappointed because they had to go back to their old jobs and they didnt earn as much money and they were used to earning more money, but when the typewriter was invented jobs as secretaries were available which women could take and some women became teachers. Women were now aloud to vote and the first female MP came. Girls were taught the same subjects as boys except girls were taught other subjects like Housewifery, laundry and childcare. The women started to wear different clothes, they wouldnt wear corsets any more, the would just wear tight cloths and shorter dresses so they could dance easier because they danced differently, they swung about more and moved there legs more. I think the role of women changed quite a lot, because its all lead to the world how it is today which is nothing like it was then. If the people did half of what we did today then the people wouldnt of found it very polite. I think all the changes that happened in the 20th century were good because women were treated more equally like men.	810	ENGLISH	1
The history of Pizzica Dance The Tarantula-Possessed Women Who Could Only Be Cured By Dance, the Pizzica ON A HOT DAY IN the summer of 1728, Anna Palazzo was working in the vineyards surrounding her hometown of Campi Salentina when a tarantula bit her on the elbow. The young woman collapsed, and the farmers working beside her rushed to her side as the situation deteriorated: her face and stomach swelled, her breathing became ragged and deep. She was nearly unconscious when they dropped her into her bed and called the only people who could still save her: the musicians. Anna wasn’t suffering from the average spider bite: she had been bitten by the tarantola, a creature of local myth and legend. She had become a tarantata. Soon, the tambourines, mandolins, guitars, and harmonicas crowded into her small room in the center of town and began to play. They played one melody, and then another. But the woman barely stirred. “At the third melody, or maybe the fourth, the young woman in my presence awoke and began to dance with so much force and fury that one might have called her crazy,” writes Caputo, in his 18th century study of the infamous tarantula and its victims. “After two days of dance, she was free and healed.” Salento has long been associated with magic, music, and dance: from the Middle Ages until just a few decades ago, physicians, travelers, ethnomusicologists and anthropologists documented the regional phenomenon of tarantismo, or “tarantism.” Young women, and occasionally men, bitten by tarantulas or other venomous insects like scorpions, would be stricken by an apathetic unresponsiveness, from which they could recover only through hours, and often days, of lively dance. “As she dances, she becomes the spider that bit her,” describes mid-20th century Italian anthropologist Ernesto de Martino in The Land of Remorse, one of the most extensive studies of the phenomenon. After her frenetic dance, the tarantata would eventually collapse, freed from possession by the tarantula and healed. But for many, this freedom was only temporary. Every year, on June 29th, the Feast of St. Paul, the tarantatas would congregate in Galatina, a city in the south of the Salento, to ask St. Paul for mercy from the terrible tarantula. Some scholars argue that the roots of tarantism can be traced to back to ancient Greece, when groups of men and women worshipped Dionysus in ecstatic, trance-like dances, but there are few–if any–documents that attest to such origins. In the late 1700s, a chapel dedicated to St. Paul was built in Galatina, next to a well whose water, as the legend goes, had been blessed by St. Paul during his travels across the Mediterranean. If local musicians were unsuccessful in curing a tarantata in her home, she would be brought to St. Paul’s chapel in Galatina, where she would plead with the saint for mercy from the spider’s venom and often drink the blessed well water. In addition to the suite of musicians, the family would also bring monetary offerings for the saint and the church. For many tarantatas, this trip to Galatina became a yearly pilgrimage: in June of each year, her symptoms would return, and she and her family would work to collect the money to fund the trip and the pay the musicians that would accompany her. In the 17th and 18th centuries, both men and women, rich and poor, fell victim to tarantism. However by 1959, when Ernesto de Martino and his team traveled to Salento to document the “relics” of tarantism, they found that the phenomenon largely affected women–women who had been abused, who had been forced to marry men they didn’t love, who had lost their husbands, or who found themselves at the margins of society in other ways. De Martino, and later researchers like Luigi Chiriatti, argued that tarantism was an expression of this marginality: a way for these women to manifest their social suffering, have that suffering recognized, and relocate themselves within a community, rather than outside of it. When a woman, young or old, was struck with tarantism, it was an opportunity for the community to come together. During our Italian language courses this interesting topic will be treated in a special seminar.	<urn:uuid:c0f08cb7-4aaf-4bbd-97ff-c9fe4da6d232>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.porta-doriente.com/pizzica-dance-salento/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595787.7/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119234426-20200120022426-00306.warc.gz	en	0.980973	973	3.65625	4	[ -0.22836916148662567, -0.10218077898025513, 0.4079468250274658, 0.010225595906376839, -0.27442386746406555, 0.38815414905548096, 0.10832016170024872, 0.30144941806793213, 0.0324774831533432, 0.3726045489311218, 0.25044122338294983, 0.026859235018491745, 0.04679270461201668, 0.3380968868732...	9	The history of Pizzica Dance The Tarantula-Possessed Women Who Could Only Be Cured By Dance, the Pizzica ON A HOT DAY IN the summer of 1728, Anna Palazzo was working in the vineyards surrounding her hometown of Campi Salentina when a tarantula bit her on the elbow. The young woman collapsed, and the farmers working beside her rushed to her side as the situation deteriorated: her face and stomach swelled, her breathing became ragged and deep. She was nearly unconscious when they dropped her into her bed and called the only people who could still save her: the musicians. Anna wasn’t suffering from the average spider bite: she had been bitten by the tarantola, a creature of local myth and legend. She had become a tarantata. Soon, the tambourines, mandolins, guitars, and harmonicas crowded into her small room in the center of town and began to play. They played one melody, and then another. But the woman barely stirred. “At the third melody, or maybe the fourth, the young woman in my presence awoke and began to dance with so much force and fury that one might have called her crazy,” writes Caputo, in his 18th century study of the infamous tarantula and its victims. “After two days of dance, she was free and healed.” Salento has long been associated with magic, music, and dance: from the Middle Ages until just a few decades ago, physicians, travelers, ethnomusicologists and anthropologists documented the regional phenomenon of tarantismo, or “tarantism.” Young women, and occasionally men, bitten by tarantulas or other venomous insects like scorpions, would be stricken by an apathetic unresponsiveness, from which they could recover only through hours, and often days, of lively dance. “As she dances, she becomes the spider that bit her,” describes mid-20th century Italian anthropologist Ernesto de Martino in The Land of Remorse, one of the most extensive studies of the phenomenon. After her frenetic dance, the tarantata would eventually collapse, freed from possession by the tarantula and healed. But for many, this freedom was only temporary. Every year, on June 29th, the Feast of St. Paul, the tarantatas would congregate in Galatina, a city in the south of the Salento, to ask St. Paul for mercy from the terrible tarantula. Some scholars argue that the roots of tarantism can be traced to back to ancient Greece, when groups of men and women worshipped Dionysus in ecstatic, trance-like dances, but there are few–if any–documents that attest to such origins. In the late 1700s, a chapel dedicated to St. Paul was built in Galatina, next to a well whose water, as the legend goes, had been blessed by St. Paul during his travels across the Mediterranean. If local musicians were unsuccessful in curing a tarantata in her home, she would be brought to St. Paul’s chapel in Galatina, where she would plead with the saint for mercy from the spider’s venom and often drink the blessed well water. In addition to the suite of musicians, the family would also bring monetary offerings for the saint and the church. For many tarantatas, this trip to Galatina became a yearly pilgrimage: in June of each year, her symptoms would return, and she and her family would work to collect the money to fund the trip and the pay the musicians that would accompany her. In the 17th and 18th centuries, both men and women, rich and poor, fell victim to tarantism. However by 1959, when Ernesto de Martino and his team traveled to Salento to document the “relics” of tarantism, they found that the phenomenon largely affected women–women who had been abused, who had been forced to marry men they didn’t love, who had lost their husbands, or who found themselves at the margins of society in other ways. De Martino, and later researchers like Luigi Chiriatti, argued that tarantism was an expression of this marginality: a way for these women to manifest their social suffering, have that suffering recognized, and relocate themselves within a community, rather than outside of it. When a woman, young or old, was struck with tarantism, it was an opportunity for the community to come together. During our Italian language courses this interesting topic will be treated in a special seminar.	957	ENGLISH	1
In ancient Roman religion, the Compitalia (Latin: Ludi Compitalicii) was a festival celebrated once a year in honor of the Lares Compitales, household deities of the crossroads, to whom sacrifices were offered at the places where two or more ways meet. The word comes from the Latin compitum, a cross-way. This festival is more ancient than the building of Rome.[clarification needed] It is said by some writers to have been instituted by Tarquinius Priscus in consequence of the miracle attending the birth of Servius Tullius, who was supposed to be the son of a Lar Familiaris, or family guardian deity. Dionysius says that Servius Tullius founded the festival, which he describes as it was celebrated in his time. Dionysius relates that the sacrifices consisted of honey-cakes (?) presented by the inhabitants of each house; and that the people who assisted as ministering servants at the festival were not free men, but slaves, because the Lares took pleasure in the service of slaves. He further adds that the Compitalia were celebrated a few days after the Saturnalia with great splendor, and that the slaves on this occasion had full liberty to do as they pleased. During the celebration of the festival, each family placed the statue of the underworld goddess Mania at the door of their house. They also hung up at their doors figures of wool representing men and women, accompanying them with humble requests that the Lares and Mania would be contented with those figures, and spare the people of the house. Slaves offered balls or fleeces of wool instead of human figures. Macrobius says that the celebration of the Compitalia was restored by the Etruscan king Tarquinius Superbus in response to an oracle that "they should sacrifice heads (capita) for heads." The oracle was taken to mean that in order to maintain the health and prosperity of each family, children should be sacrificed to Mania, identified in this case as the mother of the Lares. But Brutus, after overthrowing the line of Tarquin kings, instead satisfied the oracle by exploiting a verbal loophole, substituting "heads" of garlic and poppies. The people who presided over the festival were magistri vici ("neighborhood officers") and on that occasion were allowed to wear the toga praetexta. Public games were added to the festival during the Republican period, but they were suppressed by command of the senate in 68 BCE. Calpurnius Piso was charged by Cicero with violating the decree by allowing the games to be celebrated during his consulship in 58. The festival itself still continued to be observed, even if the games were abolished. During the civil wars of the 40s, the festival fell into disuse, and was accordingly restored during the program of religious reforms carried out by Augustus. As Augustus was now the pater patriae, the worship of the old Lares was discontinued, and the Lares of the emperor consequently became the Lares of the state. Augustus set up Lares or penates at places where two or more ways met and instituted an order of priests to attend to their worship. These priests were chosen from the libertini, people who had been legally freed from slavery, and were called Augustales. The Compitalia belonged to the feriae conceptivae, that is, festivals which were celebrated on days appointed annually by the magistrates or priests. The exact day on which this festival was celebrated appears to have varied, though it was always in the winter, at least in the time of Varro, as observed by Isaac Casaubon. Dionysius again relates that it was celebrated a few days after the Saturnalia, and Cicero that it fell on the Kalends of January; but in one of his letters to Atticus, he speaks of it as occurring on the fourth before the Nones of January (January 2). The exact words with which the festival was announced are preserved by Macrobius and Aulus Gellius: \|"\|\|Die noni popolo romano quiritibus compitalia erunt.\|\|"\|	<urn:uuid:a11e56a4-848d-4e55-b77c-99e69ee6d1c1>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.popflock.com/learn?s=Compitalia	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250610004.56/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123101110-20200123130110-00054.warc.gz	en	0.983559	872	3.484375	3	[ 0.03680381923913956, 0.33516374230384827, 0.5172260999679565, 0.058404430747032166, -0.29662448167800903, -0.37999987602233887, -0.07827542722225189, -0.14569970965385437, -0.21860629320144653, -0.3250035047531128, -0.3440438508987427, -0.11299340426921844, 0.08250728249549866, 0.188631355...	1	In ancient Roman religion, the Compitalia (Latin: Ludi Compitalicii) was a festival celebrated once a year in honor of the Lares Compitales, household deities of the crossroads, to whom sacrifices were offered at the places where two or more ways meet. The word comes from the Latin compitum, a cross-way. This festival is more ancient than the building of Rome.[clarification needed] It is said by some writers to have been instituted by Tarquinius Priscus in consequence of the miracle attending the birth of Servius Tullius, who was supposed to be the son of a Lar Familiaris, or family guardian deity. Dionysius says that Servius Tullius founded the festival, which he describes as it was celebrated in his time. Dionysius relates that the sacrifices consisted of honey-cakes (?) presented by the inhabitants of each house; and that the people who assisted as ministering servants at the festival were not free men, but slaves, because the Lares took pleasure in the service of slaves. He further adds that the Compitalia were celebrated a few days after the Saturnalia with great splendor, and that the slaves on this occasion had full liberty to do as they pleased. During the celebration of the festival, each family placed the statue of the underworld goddess Mania at the door of their house. They also hung up at their doors figures of wool representing men and women, accompanying them with humble requests that the Lares and Mania would be contented with those figures, and spare the people of the house. Slaves offered balls or fleeces of wool instead of human figures. Macrobius says that the celebration of the Compitalia was restored by the Etruscan king Tarquinius Superbus in response to an oracle that "they should sacrifice heads (capita) for heads." The oracle was taken to mean that in order to maintain the health and prosperity of each family, children should be sacrificed to Mania, identified in this case as the mother of the Lares. But Brutus, after overthrowing the line of Tarquin kings, instead satisfied the oracle by exploiting a verbal loophole, substituting "heads" of garlic and poppies. The people who presided over the festival were magistri vici ("neighborhood officers") and on that occasion were allowed to wear the toga praetexta. Public games were added to the festival during the Republican period, but they were suppressed by command of the senate in 68 BCE. Calpurnius Piso was charged by Cicero with violating the decree by allowing the games to be celebrated during his consulship in 58. The festival itself still continued to be observed, even if the games were abolished. During the civil wars of the 40s, the festival fell into disuse, and was accordingly restored during the program of religious reforms carried out by Augustus. As Augustus was now the pater patriae, the worship of the old Lares was discontinued, and the Lares of the emperor consequently became the Lares of the state. Augustus set up Lares or penates at places where two or more ways met and instituted an order of priests to attend to their worship. These priests were chosen from the libertini, people who had been legally freed from slavery, and were called Augustales. The Compitalia belonged to the feriae conceptivae, that is, festivals which were celebrated on days appointed annually by the magistrates or priests. The exact day on which this festival was celebrated appears to have varied, though it was always in the winter, at least in the time of Varro, as observed by Isaac Casaubon. Dionysius again relates that it was celebrated a few days after the Saturnalia, and Cicero that it fell on the Kalends of January; but in one of his letters to Atticus, he speaks of it as occurring on the fourth before the Nones of January (January 2). The exact words with which the festival was announced are preserved by Macrobius and Aulus Gellius: \|"\|\|Die noni popolo romano quiritibus compitalia erunt.\|\|"\|	865	ENGLISH	1
(Last Updated on : 06/03/2014) The Kurus form one of the most ancient and prominent of Indo-Aryan Kastriya tribes. It is however in the Brahmana literature that the Kurus acquire the greatest prominence among the Kastriya tribes of India. In most of the historical records Kurus are seldom mentioned alone. They are always mentioned with the Panchalas. In fact in most places Kuru-Panchalas are referred to as a united land. The speech is said to have its particular home in the Kuru-Pancala land and the mode of sacrifice of Kuru-Panchalas is proclaimed to be the best. The Puranic treatise Aitareya Brahmana speaks of the country of the Kuru-Panchalas as belonging to the "dhruva madhyama dik" which in later literature came to be known as Madhyadesa or middle country. Some of the records point out that territories occupied by the Kurus extended to the east far beyond the limits of Kurukshetra . It is said that the Kurus must have occupied the northern portion of the Doab or the region between the Jumna and Ganges having North Panchalas as their neighbours in the east and on the south they had South Panchalas as their neighbour who held the rest of the Doab as far as the land of the Vatsas. Manu's account says that the country of the Kurus and other allied people as forming the sacred land of the Brahmaris, ranking immediately after Brahmavarta. He has indirectly praised the prowess of the Kurus. The land of Kurus is called Dharmaksetra or the holy land. In other parts of the Mahabharata has been mentioned as land which was especially holy. The Aranyak parva has said that Kurukshetra was the holy spot of the righteous Kurus. The land of the Kurus have been considered all the more holy because that many divine and royal sages had performed many of the religious ceremonies in the holy land of Kurukshetra. The land of the Kurus has also been a great battle field of India. Besides the Kurus of the Madhyadesa there has also been a reference of another Kurus namely the Uttara Kurus. The northern Kurus it is said were settled in Kashmir. About the Kuru kings it has been said that they enjoyed good health and their mind was always ready to receive instruction in profound religious truths because in the land of the Kurus the climate was bracing at all seasons and the food was always good there. As far as the history of the tribe is concerned it can be said that the Kurus represent a comparatively a late wave of Aryan immigration into India. Various historical records say that the ancient capital of the Kurus was Hastinapur which was situated on the Ganges. Indraprastha was the second capital of the Kurus. Another city of the Kuru country according to the Prakrit legend was Iskura which was a wealthy and famous town beautiful like heaven. About the Kurus it has been said that in the epic period the Kurus became the most powerful Kshatriya tribe in northern India after the downfall of the Magadha Empire. In the war of Kurukshetra the army of the Kurus were led by Bhishma and that of the Pandavas were led by Bhimsena. The battle at Kurukshetra had lasted for a period of ten days and at the end of ten days both the armies had fallen. In fact about the Kurus it can be said that Kurus have both history and legend associated with them. But the historicity of the battle of the Kurus can never be denied. Historical record says that the Kurus had played some part in Indian po	<urn:uuid:35b0c20e-7bf0-4d43-a87e-5256ae1807c7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.indianetzone.com/46/kurus.htm	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251773463.72/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128030221-20200128060221-00495.warc.gz	en	0.980235	816	3.328125	3	[ -0.12087154388427734, 0.17003145813941956, -0.07408403605222702, -0.17052805423736572, -0.050475090742111206, -0.21119678020477295, 0.18372729420661926, -0.17416851222515106, 0.0806579738855362, 0.08394207060337067, -0.38747701048851013, -0.9236832857131958, -0.16677215695381165, 0.1686930...	1	(Last Updated on : 06/03/2014) The Kurus form one of the most ancient and prominent of Indo-Aryan Kastriya tribes. It is however in the Brahmana literature that the Kurus acquire the greatest prominence among the Kastriya tribes of India. In most of the historical records Kurus are seldom mentioned alone. They are always mentioned with the Panchalas. In fact in most places Kuru-Panchalas are referred to as a united land. The speech is said to have its particular home in the Kuru-Pancala land and the mode of sacrifice of Kuru-Panchalas is proclaimed to be the best. The Puranic treatise Aitareya Brahmana speaks of the country of the Kuru-Panchalas as belonging to the "dhruva madhyama dik" which in later literature came to be known as Madhyadesa or middle country. Some of the records point out that territories occupied by the Kurus extended to the east far beyond the limits of Kurukshetra . It is said that the Kurus must have occupied the northern portion of the Doab or the region between the Jumna and Ganges having North Panchalas as their neighbours in the east and on the south they had South Panchalas as their neighbour who held the rest of the Doab as far as the land of the Vatsas. Manu's account says that the country of the Kurus and other allied people as forming the sacred land of the Brahmaris, ranking immediately after Brahmavarta. He has indirectly praised the prowess of the Kurus. The land of Kurus is called Dharmaksetra or the holy land. In other parts of the Mahabharata has been mentioned as land which was especially holy. The Aranyak parva has said that Kurukshetra was the holy spot of the righteous Kurus. The land of the Kurus have been considered all the more holy because that many divine and royal sages had performed many of the religious ceremonies in the holy land of Kurukshetra. The land of the Kurus has also been a great battle field of India. Besides the Kurus of the Madhyadesa there has also been a reference of another Kurus namely the Uttara Kurus. The northern Kurus it is said were settled in Kashmir. About the Kuru kings it has been said that they enjoyed good health and their mind was always ready to receive instruction in profound religious truths because in the land of the Kurus the climate was bracing at all seasons and the food was always good there. As far as the history of the tribe is concerned it can be said that the Kurus represent a comparatively a late wave of Aryan immigration into India. Various historical records say that the ancient capital of the Kurus was Hastinapur which was situated on the Ganges. Indraprastha was the second capital of the Kurus. Another city of the Kuru country according to the Prakrit legend was Iskura which was a wealthy and famous town beautiful like heaven. About the Kurus it has been said that in the epic period the Kurus became the most powerful Kshatriya tribe in northern India after the downfall of the Magadha Empire. In the war of Kurukshetra the army of the Kurus were led by Bhishma and that of the Pandavas were led by Bhimsena. The battle at Kurukshetra had lasted for a period of ten days and at the end of ten days both the armies had fallen. In fact about the Kurus it can be said that Kurus have both history and legend associated with them. But the historicity of the battle of the Kurus can never be denied. Historical record says that the Kurus had played some part in Indian po	804	ENGLISH	1
Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington (28 December 1882 – 22 November 1944) was an English astronomer, physicist, and mathematician. He was also a philosopher of science and a populariser of science. The Eddington limit, the natural limit to the luminosity of stars, or the radiation generated by accretion onto a compact object, is named in his honour. Around 1920, he anticipated the discovery and mechanism of nuclear fusion processes in stars, in his paper “The Internal Constitution of the Stars”. At that time, the source of stellar energy was a complete mystery; Eddington was the first to correctly speculate that the source was fusion of hydrogen into helium. Eddington wrote a number of articles that announced and explained Einstein’s theory of general relativity to the English-speaking world. World War I had severed many lines of scientific communication, and new developments in German science were not well known in England. He also conducted an expedition to observe the solar eclipse of 29 May 1919 that provided one of the earliest confirmations of general relativity, and he became known for his popular expositions and interpretations of the theory.	<urn:uuid:18256c61-89e0-45d8-b144-412b2378d7cb>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://goodquotes.me/authors/arthur-eddington/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00320.warc.gz	en	0.980162	232	3.9375	4	[ -0.27973473072052, 0.10881410539150238, -0.21587204933166504, -0.283421128988266, 0.17288093268871307, -0.27472567558288574, 0.15520767867565155, -0.03172942250967026, -0.012273461557924747, 0.16307492554187775, 0.30303406715393066, -0.8902590870857239, -0.3367735743522644, 0.1227140426635...	2	Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington (28 December 1882 – 22 November 1944) was an English astronomer, physicist, and mathematician. He was also a philosopher of science and a populariser of science. The Eddington limit, the natural limit to the luminosity of stars, or the radiation generated by accretion onto a compact object, is named in his honour. Around 1920, he anticipated the discovery and mechanism of nuclear fusion processes in stars, in his paper “The Internal Constitution of the Stars”. At that time, the source of stellar energy was a complete mystery; Eddington was the first to correctly speculate that the source was fusion of hydrogen into helium. Eddington wrote a number of articles that announced and explained Einstein’s theory of general relativity to the English-speaking world. World War I had severed many lines of scientific communication, and new developments in German science were not well known in England. He also conducted an expedition to observe the solar eclipse of 29 May 1919 that provided one of the earliest confirmations of general relativity, and he became known for his popular expositions and interpretations of the theory.	248	ENGLISH	1
Zubu (Chinese: 术不姑 or 臭泊 or 阻䪁, also referred to as Dada or Tatars) was the common name of Khamag Mongol, Khereid, Naiman and Tatar tribes from the 10th to 12th centuries. Little is known in detail about this group. The name "Zübü" might be derived from Xiongnu's ruling tribe Xubu. Relations with the Khitan Liao emperor Shengzong led an expeditionary force against the Zubu in 983 after the Zubu killed their own khan and began to act in defiance of the Khitan. The Zubu khan was forced to submit to the Liao in 1003. On this occasion, the Liao divided the Zubu into several divisions, each under a Liao ruler. The Zubu once again rebelled against their Khitan masters in 1026, but suffered another defeat. On this occasion, they were forced to pay an annual tribute of horses, camels, and furs. In the 1090s, the Zubu once again defied the Khitan by invading the northeast borders of Liao territory. In 1100, the Zubu were once again defeated, and their khan was taken prisoner and taken to the Liao capital of Shangjing. Once in the Liao capital, he was hacked to pieces.	<urn:uuid:380ddd21-4d45-4dbd-b7f0-4d5079028d60>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zubu	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250626449.79/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124221147-20200125010147-00294.warc.gz	en	0.981417	291	3.390625	3	[ -0.48949143290519714, 0.6612663269042969, -0.002843526192009449, -0.17212383449077606, -0.14596810936927795, -0.11239941418170929, 0.49699652194976807, -0.09199109673500061, -0.4100516438484192, -0.0642017349600792, 0.032416585832834244, -0.7937390208244324, 0.1833977848291397, 0.126414760...	1	Zubu (Chinese: 术不姑 or 臭泊 or 阻䪁, also referred to as Dada or Tatars) was the common name of Khamag Mongol, Khereid, Naiman and Tatar tribes from the 10th to 12th centuries. Little is known in detail about this group. The name "Zübü" might be derived from Xiongnu's ruling tribe Xubu. Relations with the Khitan Liao emperor Shengzong led an expeditionary force against the Zubu in 983 after the Zubu killed their own khan and began to act in defiance of the Khitan. The Zubu khan was forced to submit to the Liao in 1003. On this occasion, the Liao divided the Zubu into several divisions, each under a Liao ruler. The Zubu once again rebelled against their Khitan masters in 1026, but suffered another defeat. On this occasion, they were forced to pay an annual tribute of horses, camels, and furs. In the 1090s, the Zubu once again defied the Khitan by invading the northeast borders of Liao territory. In 1100, the Zubu were once again defeated, and their khan was taken prisoner and taken to the Liao capital of Shangjing. Once in the Liao capital, he was hacked to pieces.	308	ENGLISH	1
\|A possible salt merchant, circa 1900s. Robert Neff Collection\| During the Joseon period, salt was used to ward off malevolent spirits that terrorized the lives of the superstitious. It was also a tool of frustrated Korean mothers who, whenever one of their children wet the bed, would condemn the offending child to go around the neighborhood with an empty container begging for salt. The child was allowed to return home after the container was full. (I remember hearing about the connection of salt and bed-wetting when I first came to Korea but am yet to find anyone who actually experienced it.) Salt was also essential in the preservation of foods. According to one source, a family of six consumed about 70 kilograms of salt a year. If they had cattle, the household's salt consumption increased drastically as it was also used in cattle feed. Much of the salt used in Seoul was produced on the west coast using sea water. An American naval officer visited a salt farm near Jemulpo in April 1884 and wrote: "The method is to obtain the water from wells near the beach, and concentrate it by evaporation in mounds, fashioned so as to form large basins. After sufficient concentration, it is boiled in pots, and brought to the point of crystallization. A broad sandy plain near the beach was covered with these mounds, and a large straw thatched building was devoted to the boiling process." Much of this salt ― packed in big straw bags ― was then sailed up the Han River in large junks where it was sold in the river port markets ― particularly Mapo and Yongsan. It was an expensive but essential commodity (likened to white gold) and the merchants had little difficulty in selling it. But this changed in 1886 with the importation of salt from the Shandong region of China. It had a dramatic impact on the Korean domestic salt industry. Although the Chinese salt was inferior in quality, it was much cheaper than Korean domestic salt and was readily purchased by the public. As a result, salt prices dropped nearly 50 percent. Over the next decades, innovations in salt harvesting and improved transportation methods took further tolls on the price of salt. The white gold of the past is now something the health-conscious of the present trash. Robert Neff is a historian and columnist for The Korea Times. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.	<urn:uuid:76b09bf9-ccdb-494e-bbf5-63437ed3b206>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://mobile.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=280202	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672537.90/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125131641-20200125160641-00462.warc.gz	en	0.981784	498	3.484375	3	[ -0.06417256593704224, 0.13439929485321045, 0.24091650545597076, -0.3995658755302429, 0.5286746621131897, -0.06124037131667137, 0.4999592900276184, 0.03442364186048508, -0.5675159096717834, -0.3229440748691559, 0.376477986574173, -0.016486337408423424, 0.29101797938346863, 0.204491287469863...	2	\|A possible salt merchant, circa 1900s. Robert Neff Collection\| During the Joseon period, salt was used to ward off malevolent spirits that terrorized the lives of the superstitious. It was also a tool of frustrated Korean mothers who, whenever one of their children wet the bed, would condemn the offending child to go around the neighborhood with an empty container begging for salt. The child was allowed to return home after the container was full. (I remember hearing about the connection of salt and bed-wetting when I first came to Korea but am yet to find anyone who actually experienced it.) Salt was also essential in the preservation of foods. According to one source, a family of six consumed about 70 kilograms of salt a year. If they had cattle, the household's salt consumption increased drastically as it was also used in cattle feed. Much of the salt used in Seoul was produced on the west coast using sea water. An American naval officer visited a salt farm near Jemulpo in April 1884 and wrote: "The method is to obtain the water from wells near the beach, and concentrate it by evaporation in mounds, fashioned so as to form large basins. After sufficient concentration, it is boiled in pots, and brought to the point of crystallization. A broad sandy plain near the beach was covered with these mounds, and a large straw thatched building was devoted to the boiling process." Much of this salt ― packed in big straw bags ― was then sailed up the Han River in large junks where it was sold in the river port markets ― particularly Mapo and Yongsan. It was an expensive but essential commodity (likened to white gold) and the merchants had little difficulty in selling it. But this changed in 1886 with the importation of salt from the Shandong region of China. It had a dramatic impact on the Korean domestic salt industry. Although the Chinese salt was inferior in quality, it was much cheaper than Korean domestic salt and was readily purchased by the public. As a result, salt prices dropped nearly 50 percent. Over the next decades, innovations in salt harvesting and improved transportation methods took further tolls on the price of salt. The white gold of the past is now something the health-conscious of the present trash. Robert Neff is a historian and columnist for The Korea Times. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.	498	ENGLISH	1
ABOUT CIVIL SERVICES The Indian Civil Services (ICS) have a long and tenuous history. Also called the Imperial Civil Service or the Covenanted Service, it was created in 1858 to govern the vast territories that England had acquired on the Indian Sub-Continent. Thus, the ICS was the ‘steel frame’ that held the vast flung territory from Aden and Baluchistan in the west to Burma in the east under a single administrative framework. The origins of the Service started in Haileybury in England. where the first recruits were trained. The early recruits were generalists who were young and were sent out to as administrators to govern large tracts of territory that fell to the British. The recruits to the Civil Services were in all areas of governance – administrative, judicial, tax, home and diplomatic. For in the 19th century governance was limited to collection of revenue, policing and judicial functions. The annual Civil Service examinations were held in London in the month of August and the candidates had to be within the ages of 21 to 24 years. For the Civil Services were for young men with a liberal arts background who were trained to be able to act as officers of the Empire. A compulsory test was horse riding test, for it was said that if someone could control a horse, he would not have much difficulty in controlling a crowd of natives. At least till my day at the renamed Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, horse riding was a compulsory exercise. Thus, the Civil Services had an aura of prestige and power and in the days when there were not many choices of jobs, was counted as a coveted service. Around the early part of the 20th century, it was known as the ‘heavenly born services’ and was thrown open for Indians to compete. Examinations were held simultaneously in England and in India, with several Indians joining the Services. The Services were also opened by an upward promotion from the Provincial Services as also a certain lateral induction from the Bar. With the growth and development of law in the country, the posts in the Judiciary came to be separated from those of the Administrative cadre. Those Civil Servants who opted for the Judiciary continued to hold positions as Judges and future recruits to the Judiciary were taken from among the developing fraternity of lawyers and barristers. Subsequently in the growing area of governance, and the development of services in India there was felt the need for different specialised services; thereby bringing into existence several specialised services such as the Indian Revenue Services, the Customs and Excise Service. Likewise, with the growth of the Railways, a group of Railway Services also came into existence. With the growth of Post and telecommunications, there was the Indian Postal Service and the Telecommunication Service. With independence, the Indian Civil Service cadre was divided between India and Pakistan, with officers being given the choice of opting for either of the countries. Many of the British officers opted to go home although a few did continue. The Service was renamed the Indian Administrative Service which together with the Indian Police Service formed the core of the District Administration. Another service that came into existence was the Foreign Service, since with independence there was need for a core of trained personnel to man our diplomatic posts abroad. Over the years there have been several distinguished Christians that have made it to the Civil Services, having served at the top echelons of their respective Services. During the days of the ICS, there was a Noronha in Madhya Pradesh, after whom the Administrative Training Institute is named after. Or in the IAS, there was Michael Pinto, Secretary Shipping, or Anthony D’sa, who recently retired as Chief Secretary Madhya Pradesh. The legend of the Police Service is undoubtedly Julio Ribeiro, the Officer who quelled the agitation in Punjab and went on to become our Ambassador in Romania. Or again Manuel Menezes was the Chairman of the Railway Board and O. V Kuruvilla was the Chairman of the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The term Indian Civil Service is the generic name for all government services where the examination is conducted by the UPSC. The All India Services are the Indian Administrative Service, the Indian Police Service and the Indian Forest Service – since they are recruited centrally but are allotted a state cadre. Then there are the Central services such as the Foreign Service, the Indian Revenue Service, the Customs and Excise Service etc, since these are administered by the Central government. Finally there is the Class B Services where the candidate eventually makes it into the Class A services. Over the decades there is a paradigm change in the Civil Services. The elites of India both caste and class are not the only stream that is entering the services. With a reservation policy in India, several of the scheduled and backward castes and classes, as also tribes are now joining the Civil Services. Today a young person irrespective of his caste creed or community can aim to become a part of the Services. Today the Civil Services are an open competition for the brightest and the best of the country. The examination conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) is a true test of one’s knowledge, ability and skill. After a potential candidate is successful at the written examination, there is a viva-voce that is conducted with the Board of the UPSC. It is a proud moment in the life of every aspirant to join the Civil Services, to have the opportunity of serving the country in the various Services that it offers. Wishing each of you the very best in your dreams. The TAKE CHARGE CIVIL SERVICES TEAM can be reached at UPSC COACHING INSTITUTES IN INDIA Vajiram and Ravi State Institute for Administrative Careers (SIAC)	<urn:uuid:3ea8622b-a944-4ce0-8b7a-bb10df3f4243>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.takecharge.in/about-civil-services	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694908.82/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127051112-20200127081112-00214.warc.gz	en	0.980491	1,186	3.625	4	[ -0.1551736444234848, -0.16273964941501617, 0.3063681721687317, -0.3187929093837738, -0.41561421751976013, 0.086439348757267, 0.28037625551223755, -0.2667180895805359, 0.04707573726773262, 0.13053300976753235, 0.09372541308403015, -0.1690519005060196, -0.01883329451084137, 0.335414648056030...	12	ABOUT CIVIL SERVICES The Indian Civil Services (ICS) have a long and tenuous history. Also called the Imperial Civil Service or the Covenanted Service, it was created in 1858 to govern the vast territories that England had acquired on the Indian Sub-Continent. Thus, the ICS was the ‘steel frame’ that held the vast flung territory from Aden and Baluchistan in the west to Burma in the east under a single administrative framework. The origins of the Service started in Haileybury in England. where the first recruits were trained. The early recruits were generalists who were young and were sent out to as administrators to govern large tracts of territory that fell to the British. The recruits to the Civil Services were in all areas of governance – administrative, judicial, tax, home and diplomatic. For in the 19th century governance was limited to collection of revenue, policing and judicial functions. The annual Civil Service examinations were held in London in the month of August and the candidates had to be within the ages of 21 to 24 years. For the Civil Services were for young men with a liberal arts background who were trained to be able to act as officers of the Empire. A compulsory test was horse riding test, for it was said that if someone could control a horse, he would not have much difficulty in controlling a crowd of natives. At least till my day at the renamed Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, horse riding was a compulsory exercise. Thus, the Civil Services had an aura of prestige and power and in the days when there were not many choices of jobs, was counted as a coveted service. Around the early part of the 20th century, it was known as the ‘heavenly born services’ and was thrown open for Indians to compete. Examinations were held simultaneously in England and in India, with several Indians joining the Services. The Services were also opened by an upward promotion from the Provincial Services as also a certain lateral induction from the Bar. With the growth and development of law in the country, the posts in the Judiciary came to be separated from those of the Administrative cadre. Those Civil Servants who opted for the Judiciary continued to hold positions as Judges and future recruits to the Judiciary were taken from among the developing fraternity of lawyers and barristers. Subsequently in the growing area of governance, and the development of services in India there was felt the need for different specialised services; thereby bringing into existence several specialised services such as the Indian Revenue Services, the Customs and Excise Service. Likewise, with the growth of the Railways, a group of Railway Services also came into existence. With the growth of Post and telecommunications, there was the Indian Postal Service and the Telecommunication Service. With independence, the Indian Civil Service cadre was divided between India and Pakistan, with officers being given the choice of opting for either of the countries. Many of the British officers opted to go home although a few did continue. The Service was renamed the Indian Administrative Service which together with the Indian Police Service formed the core of the District Administration. Another service that came into existence was the Foreign Service, since with independence there was need for a core of trained personnel to man our diplomatic posts abroad. Over the years there have been several distinguished Christians that have made it to the Civil Services, having served at the top echelons of their respective Services. During the days of the ICS, there was a Noronha in Madhya Pradesh, after whom the Administrative Training Institute is named after. Or in the IAS, there was Michael Pinto, Secretary Shipping, or Anthony D’sa, who recently retired as Chief Secretary Madhya Pradesh. The legend of the Police Service is undoubtedly Julio Ribeiro, the Officer who quelled the agitation in Punjab and went on to become our Ambassador in Romania. Or again Manuel Menezes was the Chairman of the Railway Board and O. V Kuruvilla was the Chairman of the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The term Indian Civil Service is the generic name for all government services where the examination is conducted by the UPSC. The All India Services are the Indian Administrative Service, the Indian Police Service and the Indian Forest Service – since they are recruited centrally but are allotted a state cadre. Then there are the Central services such as the Foreign Service, the Indian Revenue Service, the Customs and Excise Service etc, since these are administered by the Central government. Finally there is the Class B Services where the candidate eventually makes it into the Class A services. Over the decades there is a paradigm change in the Civil Services. The elites of India both caste and class are not the only stream that is entering the services. With a reservation policy in India, several of the scheduled and backward castes and classes, as also tribes are now joining the Civil Services. Today a young person irrespective of his caste creed or community can aim to become a part of the Services. Today the Civil Services are an open competition for the brightest and the best of the country. The examination conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) is a true test of one’s knowledge, ability and skill. After a potential candidate is successful at the written examination, there is a viva-voce that is conducted with the Board of the UPSC. It is a proud moment in the life of every aspirant to join the Civil Services, to have the opportunity of serving the country in the various Services that it offers. Wishing each of you the very best in your dreams. The TAKE CHARGE CIVIL SERVICES TEAM can be reached at UPSC COACHING INSTITUTES IN INDIA Vajiram and Ravi State Institute for Administrative Careers (SIAC)	1,169	ENGLISH	1
Glimpsed from the sea Abel Tasman’s first view of New Zealand on 13 December 1642 was from off the West Coast. He described ‘a large land, uplifted high’ – the Southern Alps, or perhaps the Paparoa Range. James Cook had a similar view in 1770. For both explorers the weather was poor, so they stayed well out to sea and were able to do little more than sketch in the coastline and mountain peaks. They could tell that the land was forest-covered and the coastline lacked sheltered anchorages. Appropriately, one of the few West Coast features named by Cook was Cape Foulwind. First European exploration Although most of the North Island and the eastern side of the South Island had been explored by the mid-1840s, the West Coast had hardly been visited by Europeans, apart from a few sealing parties. It was known to be forest-covered and mountainous, with high rainfall, so seemed unattractive for immediate settlement. The search for land suitable for farming close to the Nelson area led to three major exploring expeditions between 1846 and 1848 by Thomas Brunner and Kehu (a Māori guide), accompanied by Charles Heaphy on the first two trips. They traced the Buller River from its source to the sea, traversed the Grey and Īnangahua valleys, and explored and mapped the coastline as far south as the mouth of the Paringa River. Exhausted and unwell at the end of his final trip, Brunner concluded that there was no worthwhile land on the West Coast. Until 1857 there was little European interest in the region. Land purchase and settlement In the late 1850s a shortage of agricultural land in Canterbury and Nelson led to renewed interest in the West Coast. Before Europeans could settle on the land, it was necessary to come to an agreement with the Māori occupants, Poutini Ngāi Tahu. A smudged deed After the Arahura Deed was signed, it was accidentally immersed in the Grey (Māwhera) River when James Mackay upset his canoe. Although the signatures are clear, some of the writing is smudged. Legend has it that Mackay was reprimanded for not taking better care of such an important document. In 1859 James Mackay was instructed by the government to purchase the land. After detailed negotiations, the Arahura Deed was signed by leading Poutini Ngāi Tahu chiefs on 21 May 1860. The whole of the West Coast region, apart from small areas reserved for local Māori, was sold to the Crown for £300 (about $36,000 in 2019 terms). One of the reserved areas was the settlement of Māwhera, part of the present town of Greymouth. The lure of gold In November 1859, surveyor John Rochfort found gold in several places on the West Coast, including the Taramakau valley and lower Buller Gorge. Over the next four years a trickle of prospectors explored parts of the West Coast, but there were no major gold finds. At the end of 1863 the total population (Māori and Pākehā) was probably less than 300. The Otago goldfield (discovered in 1861) seemed more attractive, and as that declined there was a rush to Wakamarina (Marlborough) in early 1864. Geologist Julius Haast was astonished at how quickly Hokitika had expanded when he visited in April 1865. He recorded, ‘The principal street, half a mile long, consisted already of a large numbers of hotels, banks and dwelling-houses, and appeared as a scene of almost indescribable bustle and activity … there was shouting and bell-ringing, deafening to the passers-by; criers at every corner of the principal streets which were filled with people – a scene I had never before witnessed in New Zealand.’ 1 The discovery of payable quantities of alluvial gold in Greenstone Creek near Hokitika in mid-1864 led to a major gold rush. The time was right – floods and poor returns at Wakamarina had left prospectors ready for new fields. By late 1864 further discoveries had been made near Hokitika, and the population had swelled to over 1,000. With a succession of gold discoveries in different parts of the West Coast through 1865 and 1866, the population exploded, peaking at about 28,700 in late 1867. In only three turbulent years the main towns had been laid out.	<urn:uuid:50b143af-1ed3-4bcc-a6cb-f5eb70fdb374>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://admin.teara.govt.nz/en/west-coast-region/page-5	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778272.69/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128122813-20200128152813-00346.warc.gz	en	0.98069	954	3.40625	3	[ -0.1528509259223938, 0.3537653088569641, 0.026572681963443756, -0.11244432628154755, -0.17722462117671967, -0.08774639666080475, 0.0523095540702343, -0.3743034601211548, -0.302717387676239, 0.18416069447994232, 0.0782485157251358, -1.0063996315002441, 0.21973472833633423, 0.537254810333252...	20	Glimpsed from the sea Abel Tasman’s first view of New Zealand on 13 December 1642 was from off the West Coast. He described ‘a large land, uplifted high’ – the Southern Alps, or perhaps the Paparoa Range. James Cook had a similar view in 1770. For both explorers the weather was poor, so they stayed well out to sea and were able to do little more than sketch in the coastline and mountain peaks. They could tell that the land was forest-covered and the coastline lacked sheltered anchorages. Appropriately, one of the few West Coast features named by Cook was Cape Foulwind. First European exploration Although most of the North Island and the eastern side of the South Island had been explored by the mid-1840s, the West Coast had hardly been visited by Europeans, apart from a few sealing parties. It was known to be forest-covered and mountainous, with high rainfall, so seemed unattractive for immediate settlement. The search for land suitable for farming close to the Nelson area led to three major exploring expeditions between 1846 and 1848 by Thomas Brunner and Kehu (a Māori guide), accompanied by Charles Heaphy on the first two trips. They traced the Buller River from its source to the sea, traversed the Grey and Īnangahua valleys, and explored and mapped the coastline as far south as the mouth of the Paringa River. Exhausted and unwell at the end of his final trip, Brunner concluded that there was no worthwhile land on the West Coast. Until 1857 there was little European interest in the region. Land purchase and settlement In the late 1850s a shortage of agricultural land in Canterbury and Nelson led to renewed interest in the West Coast. Before Europeans could settle on the land, it was necessary to come to an agreement with the Māori occupants, Poutini Ngāi Tahu. A smudged deed After the Arahura Deed was signed, it was accidentally immersed in the Grey (Māwhera) River when James Mackay upset his canoe. Although the signatures are clear, some of the writing is smudged. Legend has it that Mackay was reprimanded for not taking better care of such an important document. In 1859 James Mackay was instructed by the government to purchase the land. After detailed negotiations, the Arahura Deed was signed by leading Poutini Ngāi Tahu chiefs on 21 May 1860. The whole of the West Coast region, apart from small areas reserved for local Māori, was sold to the Crown for £300 (about $36,000 in 2019 terms). One of the reserved areas was the settlement of Māwhera, part of the present town of Greymouth. The lure of gold In November 1859, surveyor John Rochfort found gold in several places on the West Coast, including the Taramakau valley and lower Buller Gorge. Over the next four years a trickle of prospectors explored parts of the West Coast, but there were no major gold finds. At the end of 1863 the total population (Māori and Pākehā) was probably less than 300. The Otago goldfield (discovered in 1861) seemed more attractive, and as that declined there was a rush to Wakamarina (Marlborough) in early 1864. Geologist Julius Haast was astonished at how quickly Hokitika had expanded when he visited in April 1865. He recorded, ‘The principal street, half a mile long, consisted already of a large numbers of hotels, banks and dwelling-houses, and appeared as a scene of almost indescribable bustle and activity … there was shouting and bell-ringing, deafening to the passers-by; criers at every corner of the principal streets which were filled with people – a scene I had never before witnessed in New Zealand.’ 1 The discovery of payable quantities of alluvial gold in Greenstone Creek near Hokitika in mid-1864 led to a major gold rush. The time was right – floods and poor returns at Wakamarina had left prospectors ready for new fields. By late 1864 further discoveries had been made near Hokitika, and the population had swelled to over 1,000. With a succession of gold discoveries in different parts of the West Coast through 1865 and 1866, the population exploded, peaking at about 28,700 in late 1867. In only three turbulent years the main towns had been laid out.	1,026	ENGLISH	1
(A Native American “Cinderella”) This Native American version of "Cinderella," "Oochigeaskw—The Rough-Faced Girl" was originally told in the Algonquin language and written by the Mic Mac Indian people of North America. They lived in the Eastern Woodland and in the northern area of present-day Canada. There was once lived a great Native American warrior with extraordinary power. He could make himself invisible to many except to his sister. Any girl in the village who could see him might marry him. His sister has tested many girls if they could really see him. Some will say no, and some will say yes that they actually see him. She asked those that who could see him by quizzing them and keep on failing by giving the wrong answer. One day in the nearby village, lived an old man with three daughters. Their mother had died years ago. One of the older daughters was cruel to her younger sister who was more beautiful than her. For that reason the wicked sister was very jealous of her charms and was mean to her. She always made her younger sister do everything even though she’s weak and often ill. While the other sister was kinder and always on her side. At some point, the wicked sister burnt the younger sister’s face and arms, and she got the name of Oochigaeaskw, the rough faced girl, because of her scars. The two older sisters decided one day to visit the Invisible One and dressed in the finest cloths and jewelry. The two sisters met the Invisible One’s sister and asked the two girls if they could see her Invisible brother. They replied "Yes." Just like the others, the sister asked two questions and the two girls got the answers wrong and they were sent away. One day, Oochigeaskw wanted to give it a try and whether she could see the Invisible One. But she doesn’t have the finest clothes and jewelries. So she begged her sisters for some wampum shells. She got a pair of her father’s old moccasins and made a dress out of sheets of birch bark and started on her way. During her trip, people were mocking her because of her appearance. She finally met the sister and asked her if she had seen the Invisible One. She said, "Yes". Then his sister asked her what his bow and his sled were made of. Oochigeaskw said his bow was made of a rainbow and his sled was made of stars. She was correct and the Invisible One’s sister took Oochigeaskw home. She bathed her and all her scars and burns disappeared and her hair grew back again and was very long and black. The Invisible One saw the inner beauty of Oochigeaskw and married her and they lived happily ever after.	<urn:uuid:b4d14946-f8ed-48e2-9186-7814087ac076>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.studymode.com/essays/Summary-Essay-63691201.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681625.83/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125222506-20200126012506-00382.warc.gz	en	0.994393	589	3.59375	4	[ -0.4220011234283447, -0.030141204595565796, 0.29239049553871155, 0.20186132192611694, -0.17276272177696228, 0.024270620197057724, 0.3567303419113159, 0.04985300451517105, -0.46014201641082764, -0.0002978662960231304, 0.2778201103210449, -0.03629178926348686, 0.21909993886947632, -0.0887486...	1	(A Native American “Cinderella”) This Native American version of "Cinderella," "Oochigeaskw—The Rough-Faced Girl" was originally told in the Algonquin language and written by the Mic Mac Indian people of North America. They lived in the Eastern Woodland and in the northern area of present-day Canada. There was once lived a great Native American warrior with extraordinary power. He could make himself invisible to many except to his sister. Any girl in the village who could see him might marry him. His sister has tested many girls if they could really see him. Some will say no, and some will say yes that they actually see him. She asked those that who could see him by quizzing them and keep on failing by giving the wrong answer. One day in the nearby village, lived an old man with three daughters. Their mother had died years ago. One of the older daughters was cruel to her younger sister who was more beautiful than her. For that reason the wicked sister was very jealous of her charms and was mean to her. She always made her younger sister do everything even though she’s weak and often ill. While the other sister was kinder and always on her side. At some point, the wicked sister burnt the younger sister’s face and arms, and she got the name of Oochigaeaskw, the rough faced girl, because of her scars. The two older sisters decided one day to visit the Invisible One and dressed in the finest cloths and jewelry. The two sisters met the Invisible One’s sister and asked the two girls if they could see her Invisible brother. They replied "Yes." Just like the others, the sister asked two questions and the two girls got the answers wrong and they were sent away. One day, Oochigeaskw wanted to give it a try and whether she could see the Invisible One. But she doesn’t have the finest clothes and jewelries. So she begged her sisters for some wampum shells. She got a pair of her father’s old moccasins and made a dress out of sheets of birch bark and started on her way. During her trip, people were mocking her because of her appearance. She finally met the sister and asked her if she had seen the Invisible One. She said, "Yes". Then his sister asked her what his bow and his sled were made of. Oochigeaskw said his bow was made of a rainbow and his sled was made of stars. She was correct and the Invisible One’s sister took Oochigeaskw home. She bathed her and all her scars and burns disappeared and her hair grew back again and was very long and black. The Invisible One saw the inner beauty of Oochigeaskw and married her and they lived happily ever after.	572	ENGLISH	1
Is Solar Activity Constant? Another fundamental question is the degree to which the 22-year cycle of solar transient activity repeats itself over long stretches of time. In 1893, E. Walter Maunder (1851-1928), a British astronomer, found in European historical records that very few sunspots were seen in the period from 1645 to 1715, now known as the Maunder Minimum. Within the last several years, Maunder’s work has been confirmed and extended by astronomers worldwide. In addition to the absence of sunspots during the Maunder Minimum, very few aurora were observed in Europe, and during eclipses, the corona was also absent or very weak. Virtually no sunspots were reported in Asia during the Maunder Minimum, even though naked-eye sunspot-sighting reports exist there from as early as 28 B.C. Finally, measurements of the amount of carbon 14 (C146), a radioactive isotope of carbon, in tree rings show that during the Maunder Minimum there was an excess of this isotope in the Earth’s atmosphere. We believe that the high-	<urn:uuid:acd219ab-cc37-42ae-bf6e-63e58a0a8b49>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.experts123.com/q/is-solar-activity-constant.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00093.warc.gz	en	0.981493	231	3.375	3	[ -0.6109792590141296, 0.22100792825222015, -0.14815664291381836, 0.03626135364174843, 0.1356172114610672, -0.04762071743607521, 0.1678880751132965, -0.1372416913509369, 0.13376860320568085, -0.00934686977416277, 0.3383227586746216, -0.6701831817626953, 0.10289168357849121, 0.578981339931488...	3	Is Solar Activity Constant? Another fundamental question is the degree to which the 22-year cycle of solar transient activity repeats itself over long stretches of time. In 1893, E. Walter Maunder (1851-1928), a British astronomer, found in European historical records that very few sunspots were seen in the period from 1645 to 1715, now known as the Maunder Minimum. Within the last several years, Maunder’s work has been confirmed and extended by astronomers worldwide. In addition to the absence of sunspots during the Maunder Minimum, very few aurora were observed in Europe, and during eclipses, the corona was also absent or very weak. Virtually no sunspots were reported in Asia during the Maunder Minimum, even though naked-eye sunspot-sighting reports exist there from as early as 28 B.C. Finally, measurements of the amount of carbon 14 (C146), a radioactive isotope of carbon, in tree rings show that during the Maunder Minimum there was an excess of this isotope in the Earth’s atmosphere. We believe that the high-	248	ENGLISH	1
In the archaic Greece, the Muses were simply regarded as goddesses associated with song and dance. Originally, there were only three Muses. However, during the Classical Age, the number of Muses increased to nine. During that period, each of the Muses was also assigned to a literary sphere: Calliope the Muse of epic poetry, Clio the Muse of history, Euterpe the Muse of song and poetry, Erato the Muse of love poetry, Melpomene the Muse of tragedy, Polyhymnia the Muse of hymns and sacred poetry, Thalia the Muse of comedy, Urania the Muse of astronomy, and Terpsichore the Muse of choral music and dance. According to mythology, the Muses are descended from Zeus by Mnemosyne, a Titaness and the goddess of memory. The legend says, Zeus and the Titaness coupled for nine days in a row, and each of these nine days resulted in the conception of one of the Muses. The Muses used to dwell in the land of Pieria in the foothills of Mount Olympus, which was watered by springs from the mountain and they would go up from Pieria to the slopes of Olympus to entertain their father Zeus, ruler of the universe, by their songs. In later mythological stories, the Muses were compared to the Sirens. Both were female figures known for their rendition of beautiful songs. However, there was a basic difference between the two. While the Muses were associated with Olympus and sang to enrich men’s souls, the Sirens were infernal and sang to trap men and destroy them. The Muses are often referred as unmarried, but they are repeatedly attributed as the mothers of famous sons, such as Orpheus, Rhesus, Eumolpus and others connected somehow either with songs and poetry or with Thrace and its neighbourhood or both. In ancient Greece, music was considered as the mark of a civilized person and music also covered dance and poetry, in addition to the instrumental music and singing. These all together were considered to nourish the soul. It was believed by the Greeks that, the Muses were the source of all the sections of arts, including the skills of writing poems, interpreting the stars, and proficiency in singing. Gradually, as the Romans adopted elements of Greek mythology, they also embraced the story of the muses. Calliope, the Muse of epic poetry, was portrayed holding a tablet and stylus or a scroll. In older art forms, she was depicted as holding a lyre or wearing a gold crown. The name is originates from two Greek words ‘Kallos’ and ‘Ops’ and its literal meaning is, ‘having a beautiful voice’. Calliope was the mother of Orpheus. When her son was dismembered by the Bacchantes, she recovered his head and enshrined on the island of Lesbos. Clio was named the Muse of history and was represented holding an open scroll or seated beside a chest of books. She was believed to be the source of inspiration to the poets, dramatists and authors, such as Homer, who lived in Ancient Greece. Euterpe, defined as the Muse of song and poetry, was called as the ‘Giver of delight’ by ancient poets. Her attribute was the double-flute and other wind instrument as well. She is often depicted holding a flute in artistic renditions of her. Erato, the Muse of lyric and love poetry, is most often shown wearing a wreath that is made from myrtle and roses and is also considered to be both passionate and erotic. The meaning of ‘Erato’ is either ‘beloved’ or ‘desired’ and this is evidenced in how she is usually depicted. Like the other Muses, Erato is depicted as being a young and beautiful maiden whose very appearance inspires the love poetry. Melpomene, the Muse of tragedy, was portrayed holding a tragic mask or a sword, and sometimes wearing a wreath of ivy. According to some later traditions, the bird-woman Sirens were born from the union of Melpomene with the river god Achelous. The sirens were the infernal counterparts to the heavenly muses and they also sang their haunting songs in the underworld, just as the muses gathered on the mountain tops to sing for the divine realm. However, the muses sang to tell stories of gods, men, and their deeds, while the sirens used their songs to lure men to destruction. Polyhymnia was named Muse of religious hymns and portrayed as a woman in a pensive or meditative mood. She was also portrait wearing long cloaks or veils, and holding a finger to her mouth. Thalia, the Muse of comedy, was portrayed with the attributes of comic mask, shepherd's staff and wreath of ivy. Her name means, ‘flourishing’, as the praises in her songs flourish through time. Urania, the Muse of astronomy, was obsessed with the sky and the study of the stars. She is depicted as a beautiful woman and generally draped in a flowing cloak. The globe and the compass are used to identify her in ancient art. Terpsichore was the Muse of dance and choral music and her name means ‘delighting in dance’. Usually, she is depicted sitting down, holding a lyre, accompanying the ballerinas' choirs with her music. In ancient Greece, the Muses were regarded as the goddesses of the arts, which often lead to inspiration and today, the term ‘Muse’ has almost become synonymous with inspiration.	<urn:uuid:4e398d58-8d65-427f-ad89-99bc850c5c98>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.tutorialathome.in/passionate-painting/muses-passionate-paintings	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595787.7/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119234426-20200120022426-00173.warc.gz	en	0.987234	1,196	3.6875	4	[ 0.11233142018318176, -0.04305294156074524, 0.10819155722856522, -0.01921832747757435, -0.33165237307548523, -0.022504178807139397, 0.0068366918712854385, 0.16541926562786102, 0.06181494891643524, -0.11615121364593506, -0.2381160706281662, 0.17482247948646545, 0.20227329432964325, 0.2872415...	1	In the archaic Greece, the Muses were simply regarded as goddesses associated with song and dance. Originally, there were only three Muses. However, during the Classical Age, the number of Muses increased to nine. During that period, each of the Muses was also assigned to a literary sphere: Calliope the Muse of epic poetry, Clio the Muse of history, Euterpe the Muse of song and poetry, Erato the Muse of love poetry, Melpomene the Muse of tragedy, Polyhymnia the Muse of hymns and sacred poetry, Thalia the Muse of comedy, Urania the Muse of astronomy, and Terpsichore the Muse of choral music and dance. According to mythology, the Muses are descended from Zeus by Mnemosyne, a Titaness and the goddess of memory. The legend says, Zeus and the Titaness coupled for nine days in a row, and each of these nine days resulted in the conception of one of the Muses. The Muses used to dwell in the land of Pieria in the foothills of Mount Olympus, which was watered by springs from the mountain and they would go up from Pieria to the slopes of Olympus to entertain their father Zeus, ruler of the universe, by their songs. In later mythological stories, the Muses were compared to the Sirens. Both were female figures known for their rendition of beautiful songs. However, there was a basic difference between the two. While the Muses were associated with Olympus and sang to enrich men’s souls, the Sirens were infernal and sang to trap men and destroy them. The Muses are often referred as unmarried, but they are repeatedly attributed as the mothers of famous sons, such as Orpheus, Rhesus, Eumolpus and others connected somehow either with songs and poetry or with Thrace and its neighbourhood or both. In ancient Greece, music was considered as the mark of a civilized person and music also covered dance and poetry, in addition to the instrumental music and singing. These all together were considered to nourish the soul. It was believed by the Greeks that, the Muses were the source of all the sections of arts, including the skills of writing poems, interpreting the stars, and proficiency in singing. Gradually, as the Romans adopted elements of Greek mythology, they also embraced the story of the muses. Calliope, the Muse of epic poetry, was portrayed holding a tablet and stylus or a scroll. In older art forms, she was depicted as holding a lyre or wearing a gold crown. The name is originates from two Greek words ‘Kallos’ and ‘Ops’ and its literal meaning is, ‘having a beautiful voice’. Calliope was the mother of Orpheus. When her son was dismembered by the Bacchantes, she recovered his head and enshrined on the island of Lesbos. Clio was named the Muse of history and was represented holding an open scroll or seated beside a chest of books. She was believed to be the source of inspiration to the poets, dramatists and authors, such as Homer, who lived in Ancient Greece. Euterpe, defined as the Muse of song and poetry, was called as the ‘Giver of delight’ by ancient poets. Her attribute was the double-flute and other wind instrument as well. She is often depicted holding a flute in artistic renditions of her. Erato, the Muse of lyric and love poetry, is most often shown wearing a wreath that is made from myrtle and roses and is also considered to be both passionate and erotic. The meaning of ‘Erato’ is either ‘beloved’ or ‘desired’ and this is evidenced in how she is usually depicted. Like the other Muses, Erato is depicted as being a young and beautiful maiden whose very appearance inspires the love poetry. Melpomene, the Muse of tragedy, was portrayed holding a tragic mask or a sword, and sometimes wearing a wreath of ivy. According to some later traditions, the bird-woman Sirens were born from the union of Melpomene with the river god Achelous. The sirens were the infernal counterparts to the heavenly muses and they also sang their haunting songs in the underworld, just as the muses gathered on the mountain tops to sing for the divine realm. However, the muses sang to tell stories of gods, men, and their deeds, while the sirens used their songs to lure men to destruction. Polyhymnia was named Muse of religious hymns and portrayed as a woman in a pensive or meditative mood. She was also portrait wearing long cloaks or veils, and holding a finger to her mouth. Thalia, the Muse of comedy, was portrayed with the attributes of comic mask, shepherd's staff and wreath of ivy. Her name means, ‘flourishing’, as the praises in her songs flourish through time. Urania, the Muse of astronomy, was obsessed with the sky and the study of the stars. She is depicted as a beautiful woman and generally draped in a flowing cloak. The globe and the compass are used to identify her in ancient art. Terpsichore was the Muse of dance and choral music and her name means ‘delighting in dance’. Usually, she is depicted sitting down, holding a lyre, accompanying the ballerinas' choirs with her music. In ancient Greece, the Muses were regarded as the goddesses of the arts, which often lead to inspiration and today, the term ‘Muse’ has almost become synonymous with inspiration.	1,156	ENGLISH	1
Pottery glazing has been around for almost as long as the human race. It is unknown exactly when people first started glazing their pottery, but most archeologists agree that it was sometime between the 9th and 8th century B.C. Since then glazing has been used to keep many different styles and compositions of pottery waterproof and decorated. Many of the glazing methods used today have their roots in the ancient glazing methods. The earliest discovery of glazed pottery came from the 8th or 9th century B.C. or even earlier. Early glazing was discovered in China, Egypt, Mesopotamia and Greece. Each country seemed to have a particular style of glazing that was preferred. Egyptian glazing was largely alkaline based, as was that used in China and Mesopotamia. Greece and Rome used lead glazing or clay glazing. From these early instances of glazing come the modern glazing practices that are in use today. Alkaline glazing employs some of the earliest forms of pottery glazing. A variety of materials were used to make the glazes. In Mesopotamia, ash was mixed with sand to create the surface glaze over the pottery constructed in that area. Another ancient alkaline glazing method used soda and sand. Greek glazing was created using extra clay particles themselves. Some modern glazes still use alkaline bases for their finishes. Lead glazing was first used by the Romans from around the 1st century B.C. A mixture of lead oxide and sand was placed over the pottery before it was fired. Lead glazing was used for thousands of years after the Romans first used it, but within the last 200 years has fallen out of favor due to the potentially harmful effects of lead, although lead glazing is still practiced in some areas. Tin glazing was introduced around 1100 A.D. in Persia. Tin glazing was used as an alternative to porcelain, and pottery fired with tin glazing took on an opaque, white cast. Mixtures of kaolin and veldspar clays created the tin content necessary to cover the pottery in a coating of white. Tin glazing became very popular during the Renaissance period and fell out of favor with the introduction of enamel glazing in the 1700s, which could be fired at lower temperatures. Modern glazing is created by a mixture of glass particles and colored oxides. Glass powder is brushed onto the surface of the pottery, then heated to extreme temperatures to melt the glass powder over the glaze. Modern glazing has advanced far enough to provide thousands of different glazing combinations and appearances. - pottery image by Artyom Davidov from Fotolia.com	<urn:uuid:b1580541-a168-4924-ac63-565118752fbf>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://ourpastimes.com/the-history-of-glazing-12311173.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687958.71/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126074227-20200126104227-00192.warc.gz	en	0.980246	562	3.3125	3	[ 0.17153042554855347, 0.2232370674610138, 0.5422350168228149, -0.42585593461990356, -0.4279854893684387, -0.029723726212978363, 0.020783018320798874, -0.06257297098636627, -0.45544686913490295, -0.14642620086669922, -0.24914413690567017, -0.3569106459617615, -0.28710055351257324, 0.42905938...	4	Pottery glazing has been around for almost as long as the human race. It is unknown exactly when people first started glazing their pottery, but most archeologists agree that it was sometime between the 9th and 8th century B.C. Since then glazing has been used to keep many different styles and compositions of pottery waterproof and decorated. Many of the glazing methods used today have their roots in the ancient glazing methods. The earliest discovery of glazed pottery came from the 8th or 9th century B.C. or even earlier. Early glazing was discovered in China, Egypt, Mesopotamia and Greece. Each country seemed to have a particular style of glazing that was preferred. Egyptian glazing was largely alkaline based, as was that used in China and Mesopotamia. Greece and Rome used lead glazing or clay glazing. From these early instances of glazing come the modern glazing practices that are in use today. Alkaline glazing employs some of the earliest forms of pottery glazing. A variety of materials were used to make the glazes. In Mesopotamia, ash was mixed with sand to create the surface glaze over the pottery constructed in that area. Another ancient alkaline glazing method used soda and sand. Greek glazing was created using extra clay particles themselves. Some modern glazes still use alkaline bases for their finishes. Lead glazing was first used by the Romans from around the 1st century B.C. A mixture of lead oxide and sand was placed over the pottery before it was fired. Lead glazing was used for thousands of years after the Romans first used it, but within the last 200 years has fallen out of favor due to the potentially harmful effects of lead, although lead glazing is still practiced in some areas. Tin glazing was introduced around 1100 A.D. in Persia. Tin glazing was used as an alternative to porcelain, and pottery fired with tin glazing took on an opaque, white cast. Mixtures of kaolin and veldspar clays created the tin content necessary to cover the pottery in a coating of white. Tin glazing became very popular during the Renaissance period and fell out of favor with the introduction of enamel glazing in the 1700s, which could be fired at lower temperatures. Modern glazing is created by a mixture of glass particles and colored oxides. Glass powder is brushed onto the surface of the pottery, then heated to extreme temperatures to melt the glass powder over the glaze. Modern glazing has advanced far enough to provide thousands of different glazing combinations and appearances. - pottery image by Artyom Davidov from Fotolia.com	556	ENGLISH	1
Based on a chapter of the book American History by Arthur Cecil Perry and Gertrude A. Price, 1914 Despite the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the Americans amazingly still hoped that the king and Parliament would grant them the rights of Englishmen. If so, the colonists would gladly and loyally support the English government. The Second Continental Congress even sent one more petition to George III asking for fair treatment. The king paid no attention to it, but, instead, closed American ports and called the people rebels. Even as they waited, hopeful of a peaceful settlement, the Americans were not neglecting the military features of the struggle. On the very day Congress met they captured Crown British stores and ammunition at Fort Ticonderoga, New York. The attack was made by Ethan Allen and a party of hardy frontiersmen — the Green Mountain Boys. Although the fort was equipped with 200 cannons, the attacking party, striking unexpectedly in the dead of night, easily took the startled garrison prisoners. Two days later, nearby Fort Crown Point also surrendered. The Americans hoped to win over Canada to their side as a fourteenth colony. Whether Canada joined them or not it would be to their advantage to gain control of the region. Two expeditions, therefore, were formed to invade the region. The first one, under Richard Montgomery, succeeded in capturing Montreal. The second, under Benedict Arnold, started in the winter of 1775 to march through the wilderness to Quebec. The soldiers endured unspeakable hardships. Food gave out, and the cold caused dreadful suffering. Many died and others returned home carrying the sick with them. But, Arnold pushed on. By the time he reached Quebec his numbers had been so reduced that an attack was impossible. Finally, Montgomery came to his aid. With joined forces, they stormed the citadel, but without success. In six months the Americans were compelled to leave Canada. For the first few months after George Washington’s appointment as commander in chief, the people watched him to see what he would do. They likewise found fault with him because he seemed to be doing nothing. Yet, Washington was busy drilling his men and watching his chance to seize Dorchester Heights, on the south side of Boston, Massachusetts and thus compel the British to fight or retreat. English General William Howe, neglected to protect this hill. As a result, the English lost Boston, for Washington succeeded in fortifying the Heights. The British dreaded to meet the fighting Americans on a hill. They had learned their lesson at Bunker Hill and were not to be caught again. Therefore they folded their tents, went on board their ships, and sailed out of Boston on March 17, 1776. The fighting did not take place only in the north. In February, at Moore’s Creek, North Carolina, a party of Minute Men had defeated a large force of colonists who were loyal to the king. A British force under General Henry Clinton and Lord Charles Cornwallis, together with a fleet, was sent to subdue the people of North Carolina. But 10,000 armed men were awaiting them, so they went farther south, planning to take Charleston, South Carolina. There, they found that the colonists had fortified an island in the harbor. Fort Moultrie, as it was named, was strongly built of sand and logs and was well armed with large cannon. The British fleet bombarded the fort, while the army tried to reach the island from the rear. But, both fleet and army were badly repulsed, and the British sailed away to the north. All this while, England didn’t want a war any more than did the colonists. Her funds were low and she needed all her strength to drive back the great nations of Europe who were pressing in upon her. France particularly. But, King George was determined to show his authority. He hired 17,000 German soldiers, called Hessians, to help him subdue the colonists. This much angered the Americans who began to seriously consider the matter of independence. Some of the colonies had already driven away from their royal governors and had begun to govern themselves. In May 1776, the Continental Congress agreed that the colonies should no longer consider themselves under the English Crown but, that they should rule themselves. Richard Henry Lee, of Virginia, put his ideas on paper in the form of a resolution. It began: “Resolved: That these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states.” It was not until July 2, 1776, that Congress agreed to this resolution. The next step was to declare to the world that the United States was an independent country. It fell to Thomas Jefferson to write one of the most famous papers of history, our Declaration of Independence. This was adopted on July 4, 1776, and changed the dependent colonies to free and independent states. Proud indeed are the families who can trace their descent from one of its signers. Someone remarked as he put his signature to the great paper, “We must all hang together.” “Yes,” answered Benjamin Franklin, “if we do not hang together we shall hang separately.” Within a few days, copies of the Declaration were printed and sent to each colony. In front of the statehouse at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania where the Declaration had been adopted, a great crowd gathered to hear it read. As the last words died into silence there came a joyful peal from a bell which hung in the statehouse tower, and which bore the words, “Proclaim liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants thereof.” Throughout the land, the Declaration was read to other eager groups, sometimes by the chief magistrate in the public square, sometimes by the minister from the pulpit. Now that war for independence was formally declared, England saw that she must change her plans. All the colonies must be treated as in rebellion. In consequence, England thought out two lines of action. If either failed, she could fall back upon the other. One of these was to begin at the south and, working northward, conquer the states one by one until all should acknowledge Britain’s rule. In the other method, she would first take New York and gain control of the Hudson Valley. For several reasons, the second way seemed better. In the first place, England was the mistress of the seas. The Americans had no navy except small fishing boats whose owners, forsaking their business, armed their boats and went out upon the high seas. Even these made considerable trouble for the English, swooping down upon the English merchant ships and seizing their cargoes. Such private vessels were given permission by Congress to carry on this warfare and were known as privateers. England had another advantage in that Canada was at her command. Here, was a safe and easy base from which to start an attack upon New York. England also felt that the Six Nations in the Mohawk Valley would help her, because of their loyalty to Sir William Johnson, of French and Indian War fame, and to his son. The Johnsons were loyal to the king. For these reasons, it seemed wise to gain immediate possession of New York. That would sever New England from the other states and make intercourse between them almost impossible. Then, the New England states would have no means of getting supplies by land or by sea and might soon be brought to terms. General George Washington guessed what the British would do, so, from Boston, he marched his army to New York. To protect the city, he fortified Brooklyn Heights, which held about the same important relation to New York that York Dorchester Heights did to Boston. On August 22, 1776, General William Howe, with 20,000 men, landed on Long Island. Meeting a smaller body of American troops he worsted them in a short, quick encounter, and forced them to withdraw to Brooklyn Heights.	<urn:uuid:87577886-a165-468d-a5c0-960cded4c599>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.legendsofamerica.com/ah-battlesindependence/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690379.95/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126195918-20200126225918-00346.warc.gz	en	0.983758	1,615	3.703125	4	[ -0.31777212023735046, 0.35370782017707825, 0.3006133437156677, 0.3169935345649719, -0.5508823990821838, -0.06881006807088852, -0.0003529447130858898, 0.15670537948608398, -0.11839623749256134, 0.16844160854816437, 0.07915341854095459, -0.14997097849845886, 0.17013302445411682, 0.2421448528...	2	Based on a chapter of the book American History by Arthur Cecil Perry and Gertrude A. Price, 1914 Despite the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the Americans amazingly still hoped that the king and Parliament would grant them the rights of Englishmen. If so, the colonists would gladly and loyally support the English government. The Second Continental Congress even sent one more petition to George III asking for fair treatment. The king paid no attention to it, but, instead, closed American ports and called the people rebels. Even as they waited, hopeful of a peaceful settlement, the Americans were not neglecting the military features of the struggle. On the very day Congress met they captured Crown British stores and ammunition at Fort Ticonderoga, New York. The attack was made by Ethan Allen and a party of hardy frontiersmen — the Green Mountain Boys. Although the fort was equipped with 200 cannons, the attacking party, striking unexpectedly in the dead of night, easily took the startled garrison prisoners. Two days later, nearby Fort Crown Point also surrendered. The Americans hoped to win over Canada to their side as a fourteenth colony. Whether Canada joined them or not it would be to their advantage to gain control of the region. Two expeditions, therefore, were formed to invade the region. The first one, under Richard Montgomery, succeeded in capturing Montreal. The second, under Benedict Arnold, started in the winter of 1775 to march through the wilderness to Quebec. The soldiers endured unspeakable hardships. Food gave out, and the cold caused dreadful suffering. Many died and others returned home carrying the sick with them. But, Arnold pushed on. By the time he reached Quebec his numbers had been so reduced that an attack was impossible. Finally, Montgomery came to his aid. With joined forces, they stormed the citadel, but without success. In six months the Americans were compelled to leave Canada. For the first few months after George Washington’s appointment as commander in chief, the people watched him to see what he would do. They likewise found fault with him because he seemed to be doing nothing. Yet, Washington was busy drilling his men and watching his chance to seize Dorchester Heights, on the south side of Boston, Massachusetts and thus compel the British to fight or retreat. English General William Howe, neglected to protect this hill. As a result, the English lost Boston, for Washington succeeded in fortifying the Heights. The British dreaded to meet the fighting Americans on a hill. They had learned their lesson at Bunker Hill and were not to be caught again. Therefore they folded their tents, went on board their ships, and sailed out of Boston on March 17, 1776. The fighting did not take place only in the north. In February, at Moore’s Creek, North Carolina, a party of Minute Men had defeated a large force of colonists who were loyal to the king. A British force under General Henry Clinton and Lord Charles Cornwallis, together with a fleet, was sent to subdue the people of North Carolina. But 10,000 armed men were awaiting them, so they went farther south, planning to take Charleston, South Carolina. There, they found that the colonists had fortified an island in the harbor. Fort Moultrie, as it was named, was strongly built of sand and logs and was well armed with large cannon. The British fleet bombarded the fort, while the army tried to reach the island from the rear. But, both fleet and army were badly repulsed, and the British sailed away to the north. All this while, England didn’t want a war any more than did the colonists. Her funds were low and she needed all her strength to drive back the great nations of Europe who were pressing in upon her. France particularly. But, King George was determined to show his authority. He hired 17,000 German soldiers, called Hessians, to help him subdue the colonists. This much angered the Americans who began to seriously consider the matter of independence. Some of the colonies had already driven away from their royal governors and had begun to govern themselves. In May 1776, the Continental Congress agreed that the colonies should no longer consider themselves under the English Crown but, that they should rule themselves. Richard Henry Lee, of Virginia, put his ideas on paper in the form of a resolution. It began: “Resolved: That these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states.” It was not until July 2, 1776, that Congress agreed to this resolution. The next step was to declare to the world that the United States was an independent country. It fell to Thomas Jefferson to write one of the most famous papers of history, our Declaration of Independence. This was adopted on July 4, 1776, and changed the dependent colonies to free and independent states. Proud indeed are the families who can trace their descent from one of its signers. Someone remarked as he put his signature to the great paper, “We must all hang together.” “Yes,” answered Benjamin Franklin, “if we do not hang together we shall hang separately.” Within a few days, copies of the Declaration were printed and sent to each colony. In front of the statehouse at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania where the Declaration had been adopted, a great crowd gathered to hear it read. As the last words died into silence there came a joyful peal from a bell which hung in the statehouse tower, and which bore the words, “Proclaim liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants thereof.” Throughout the land, the Declaration was read to other eager groups, sometimes by the chief magistrate in the public square, sometimes by the minister from the pulpit. Now that war for independence was formally declared, England saw that she must change her plans. All the colonies must be treated as in rebellion. In consequence, England thought out two lines of action. If either failed, she could fall back upon the other. One of these was to begin at the south and, working northward, conquer the states one by one until all should acknowledge Britain’s rule. In the other method, she would first take New York and gain control of the Hudson Valley. For several reasons, the second way seemed better. In the first place, England was the mistress of the seas. The Americans had no navy except small fishing boats whose owners, forsaking their business, armed their boats and went out upon the high seas. Even these made considerable trouble for the English, swooping down upon the English merchant ships and seizing their cargoes. Such private vessels were given permission by Congress to carry on this warfare and were known as privateers. England had another advantage in that Canada was at her command. Here, was a safe and easy base from which to start an attack upon New York. England also felt that the Six Nations in the Mohawk Valley would help her, because of their loyalty to Sir William Johnson, of French and Indian War fame, and to his son. The Johnsons were loyal to the king. For these reasons, it seemed wise to gain immediate possession of New York. That would sever New England from the other states and make intercourse between them almost impossible. Then, the New England states would have no means of getting supplies by land or by sea and might soon be brought to terms. General George Washington guessed what the British would do, so, from Boston, he marched his army to New York. To protect the city, he fortified Brooklyn Heights, which held about the same important relation to New York that York Dorchester Heights did to Boston. On August 22, 1776, General William Howe, with 20,000 men, landed on Long Island. Meeting a smaller body of American troops he worsted them in a short, quick encounter, and forced them to withdraw to Brooklyn Heights.	1,624	ENGLISH	1
Women first organized and collectively fought for suffrage at the national level in July of 1848. Suffragists such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott convened a meeting of over 300 people in Seneca Falls, New York. In the following decades, women marched, protested, lobbied, and even went to jail. By the 1870s, women pressured Congress to vote on an amendment that would recognize their suffrage rights. This amendment was sometimes known as the Susan B. Anthony Amendment and became the 19th Amendment. The amendment reads: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex." The Seneca Falls Women's Rights meeting inspired other women's rights conventions throughout the country. Two of the earliest were held in Ohio. The Ohio Women's Convention held in April 1850 was the first women's rights convention held outside of New York State and the first statewide women's rights convention; it was attended by about 500 people, many of them anti-slavery activists. The next year, at the Ohio Women's Rights Convention in Akron, Ohio, Sojourner Truth powerfully spoke to the audience about Black women and equality. Ohio women formed suffrage and equal rights organizations shortly after the Civil War. They won the vote in board of education elections in 1894, but faced many defeats over the years in their efforts to expand suffrage for women. Harriet Taylor Upton, mentored by Susan B. Anthony, became a leading advocate in Ohio for women's suffrage. She worked in statewide campaigns for the vote as well as national efforts to support an amendment to the Constitution enfranchising women. She served as the treasurer for the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA). After decades of arguments for and against women's suffrage, Congress finally passed of the 19th Amendment in 1919. After Congress approved the 19th Amendment, at least 36 states needed to vote in favor of it for it to become law. This process is called ratification. On June 16, 1919, Ohio voted to ratify the Nineteenth Amendment. In addition, the legislature also passed a bill ensuring Ohio women's right to vote in the upcoming presidential election in November 1920, in case the amendment was not in effect nationally by then. As it turned out, by August of 1920, 36 states (including Ohio) ratified the amendment and it became part of the U.S. Constitution, ensuring that the right to vote could not be denied based on sex. Ohio Places of Women's Suffrage: Harriet Taylor Upton House The states played an essential role in the ratification of the 19th Amendment. One Ohio woman who helped in the fight for suffrage was Harriet Taylor Upton. She was a suffragist from Ohio. The National American Woman Suffrage Association temporarily had its headquarters in her house from 1903 to 1905. The house is a National Historic Landmark and is open for public tours. Last updated: August 9, 2019	<urn:uuid:234fd9ff-0f87-4654-99c5-a56b3a960d7e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.nps.gov/articles/ohio-and-the-19th-amendment.htm	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601615.66/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121044233-20200121073233-00194.warc.gz	en	0.981681	618	4.6875	5	[ -0.5189653635025024, -0.2020796835422516, 0.0821114331483841, 0.1681109219789505, -0.6971021890640259, 0.42127740383148193, 0.020506538450717926, 0.03467494249343872, -0.2544565200805664, -0.03320761024951935, -0.07178831100463867, 0.12834137678146362, -0.14037767052650452, -0.139321908354...	6	Women first organized and collectively fought for suffrage at the national level in July of 1848. Suffragists such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott convened a meeting of over 300 people in Seneca Falls, New York. In the following decades, women marched, protested, lobbied, and even went to jail. By the 1870s, women pressured Congress to vote on an amendment that would recognize their suffrage rights. This amendment was sometimes known as the Susan B. Anthony Amendment and became the 19th Amendment. The amendment reads: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex." The Seneca Falls Women's Rights meeting inspired other women's rights conventions throughout the country. Two of the earliest were held in Ohio. The Ohio Women's Convention held in April 1850 was the first women's rights convention held outside of New York State and the first statewide women's rights convention; it was attended by about 500 people, many of them anti-slavery activists. The next year, at the Ohio Women's Rights Convention in Akron, Ohio, Sojourner Truth powerfully spoke to the audience about Black women and equality. Ohio women formed suffrage and equal rights organizations shortly after the Civil War. They won the vote in board of education elections in 1894, but faced many defeats over the years in their efforts to expand suffrage for women. Harriet Taylor Upton, mentored by Susan B. Anthony, became a leading advocate in Ohio for women's suffrage. She worked in statewide campaigns for the vote as well as national efforts to support an amendment to the Constitution enfranchising women. She served as the treasurer for the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA). After decades of arguments for and against women's suffrage, Congress finally passed of the 19th Amendment in 1919. After Congress approved the 19th Amendment, at least 36 states needed to vote in favor of it for it to become law. This process is called ratification. On June 16, 1919, Ohio voted to ratify the Nineteenth Amendment. In addition, the legislature also passed a bill ensuring Ohio women's right to vote in the upcoming presidential election in November 1920, in case the amendment was not in effect nationally by then. As it turned out, by August of 1920, 36 states (including Ohio) ratified the amendment and it became part of the U.S. Constitution, ensuring that the right to vote could not be denied based on sex. Ohio Places of Women's Suffrage: Harriet Taylor Upton House The states played an essential role in the ratification of the 19th Amendment. One Ohio woman who helped in the fight for suffrage was Harriet Taylor Upton. She was a suffragist from Ohio. The National American Woman Suffrage Association temporarily had its headquarters in her house from 1903 to 1905. The house is a National Historic Landmark and is open for public tours. Last updated: August 9, 2019	679	ENGLISH	1
In Year 6, we have started our new topic of Orienteering as part of our P.E. Lessons. To begin with, we learnt how to read a map, how to look for where the clues had been hidden. On Tuesday, we went out onto the playground to draw our own maps of the playground, to make sure we included everything on the playground. We also learnt how to include a key on our map to help understand what things are on our maps. Here are some of our finished maps of the playground. On Friday, we were given a map of the playground and we were shown where 12 control markers were hidden on main map using the interactive white board. We needed to mark on our maps where the markers were hidden before we went out to search for them. At each control marker there was a letter to record and a mathematical question to solve. We were timed to see how long it took us to complete all 12 markers and we received points for our correct mathematical answers. When we had all 12 letters we were challenged to see how many words we could make using those letters and could we make a word using all the letters?	<urn:uuid:2e029907-879f-40f3-8510-b8ab21e8268c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://y62019.rushallict.co.uk/2019/09/15/orienteering/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251778168.77/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128091916-20200128121916-00246.warc.gz	en	0.985977	233	3.625	4	[ -0.12944957613945007, -0.13188424706459045, 0.22420629858970642, -0.36092299222946167, -0.08282023668289185, 0.5288193821907043, 0.5476529598236084, -0.13430066406726837, -0.10004705935716629, -0.18913742899894714, 0.43082234263420105, -0.3561825454235077, -0.005675196647644043, 0.29430177...	1	In Year 6, we have started our new topic of Orienteering as part of our P.E. Lessons. To begin with, we learnt how to read a map, how to look for where the clues had been hidden. On Tuesday, we went out onto the playground to draw our own maps of the playground, to make sure we included everything on the playground. We also learnt how to include a key on our map to help understand what things are on our maps. Here are some of our finished maps of the playground. On Friday, we were given a map of the playground and we were shown where 12 control markers were hidden on main map using the interactive white board. We needed to mark on our maps where the markers were hidden before we went out to search for them. At each control marker there was a letter to record and a mathematical question to solve. We were timed to see how long it took us to complete all 12 markers and we received points for our correct mathematical answers. When we had all 12 letters we were challenged to see how many words we could make using those letters and could we make a word using all the letters?	237	ENGLISH	1
lives in their graves. They buried. They buried their dead, often with ornaments, weapons, and food; they used a lot of colour in the burial, and evidently painted the body. From that one may infer that they painted their bodies during life. Paint was a big fact in their lives. They were inveterate painters; they used black, brown, red, yellow, and white pigments, and the pigments they used endure to this day in the caves of France and Spain. Of all modern races, none have shown so pictorial a disposition; the nearest approach to it has been among the American Indians. These drawings and paintings of the later Palæolithic people went on through a long period of time, and present wide fluctuations in artistic merit. We give here some early sketches, from which we learn of the interest taken by these early men in the bison, horse, ibex, cave bear, and reindeer. In its early stages the drawing is often primitive like the drawing of clever children; quadrupeds are usually drawn with one hindleg and one	<urn:uuid:374c562c-1a2d-4878-af69-944dec1e14b2>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:The_Outline_of_History_Vol_1.djvu/117	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594603.8/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119122744-20200119150744-00329.warc.gz	en	0.986011	225	3.59375	4	[ -0.05437824875116348, 0.09395474195480347, 0.13714660704135895, 0.1817302405834198, -0.2953869700431824, 0.17963449656963348, 0.2815631330013275, -0.03322788327932358, -0.021612904965877533, 0.07557260245084763, 0.1560472697019577, -0.4002651274204254, 0.009616472758352757, 0.3165129125118...	1	lives in their graves. They buried. They buried their dead, often with ornaments, weapons, and food; they used a lot of colour in the burial, and evidently painted the body. From that one may infer that they painted their bodies during life. Paint was a big fact in their lives. They were inveterate painters; they used black, brown, red, yellow, and white pigments, and the pigments they used endure to this day in the caves of France and Spain. Of all modern races, none have shown so pictorial a disposition; the nearest approach to it has been among the American Indians. These drawings and paintings of the later Palæolithic people went on through a long period of time, and present wide fluctuations in artistic merit. We give here some early sketches, from which we learn of the interest taken by these early men in the bison, horse, ibex, cave bear, and reindeer. In its early stages the drawing is often primitive like the drawing of clever children; quadrupeds are usually drawn with one hindleg and one	219	ENGLISH	1
How does our brain decide what memories are important? How does it determine the information that is worth storing accurately? New neuroscience research shows that memories associated with a higher reward are reinforced and prioritized, while other memories take a back seat. Memories are prioritized based on rewards It has been known for some time that “rewards” help you remember things. It makes sense if you think about the amount of information one might encounter in a day – the brain has to somehow filter what is important so as not to be overloaded. The brain filters the memories that are associated with rewards because these might be important for obtaining rewards in the future. An example of this is seen with rats – if a musical tone is played before they receive a treat, then they will remember that the tone comes before a treat. Even though the tone itself is unimportant, the reward that is associated with it helps to solidify the memory. The research lead by Professor Charan Ranganath at UC Davis looked at memory using human volunteers by first giving them a test while scanning their brains by functional MRI (fMRI). They had to determine whether an object was heavier than another object in a photograph, and each correct answer would win them a certain amount of money. The amount of money varied, however, so that some correct answers were worth much more. Free from Skill Cookbook Rewarding memories are replayed when you are at rest The research group was interested in how these rewarding memories are stored for the long-term in the brain. Specifically, they wanted to know what happens to these memories when the brain is “offline” – not actively engaged in learning or remembering. It turns out, they are replaying in the background – which helps fix the memory in place. After the test, the subjects had their brains scanned by fMRI to look at the offline activity in their brain, while resting. Following this, they were given a surprise memory test about the objects they saw. In line with rewarding memories being stronger, they were able to recall the higher-reward images better (where the answers were worth more money). The important finding in this study was that the ability of the participants to remember could be predicted by the activity detected in the brain during rest. The individuals with the most activity between the hippocampus and substantia nigra/ventral tegmental area complex (an area involved in reward processing) were able to recall images better. The researchers knew that this activity was associated with the images because it was the same activity seen when the volunteers were first being tested specifically on the higher-reward images. How to use this new information for remembering better? My Grandfather told me once that to remember something, you have to want to remember it. Your brain seems to do that part for you. Unconsciously, we decide to keep memories associated with higher rewards when they are learned. So, make sure there is a reward. Perhaps if you have important information to remember, you should associate it with a concrete result– to help your brain know to fix it and store it for later.	<urn:uuid:46524ccb-3caf-45d6-ae6e-012d22c50b34>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://skillcookbook.com/rewarding-memories/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250615407.46/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124040939-20200124065939-00108.warc.gz	en	0.980083	635	4.03125	4	[ -0.0032502440735697746, 0.2881917953491211, -0.08629828691482544, -0.20882190763950348, -0.0947454497218132, 0.5499999523162842, 0.900276780128479, 0.05834555625915527, 0.37773779034614563, -0.14127729833126068, -0.15826129913330078, -0.07125389575958252, 0.30228176712989807, 0.59077703952...	1	How does our brain decide what memories are important? How does it determine the information that is worth storing accurately? New neuroscience research shows that memories associated with a higher reward are reinforced and prioritized, while other memories take a back seat. Memories are prioritized based on rewards It has been known for some time that “rewards” help you remember things. It makes sense if you think about the amount of information one might encounter in a day – the brain has to somehow filter what is important so as not to be overloaded. The brain filters the memories that are associated with rewards because these might be important for obtaining rewards in the future. An example of this is seen with rats – if a musical tone is played before they receive a treat, then they will remember that the tone comes before a treat. Even though the tone itself is unimportant, the reward that is associated with it helps to solidify the memory. The research lead by Professor Charan Ranganath at UC Davis looked at memory using human volunteers by first giving them a test while scanning their brains by functional MRI (fMRI). They had to determine whether an object was heavier than another object in a photograph, and each correct answer would win them a certain amount of money. The amount of money varied, however, so that some correct answers were worth much more. Free from Skill Cookbook Rewarding memories are replayed when you are at rest The research group was interested in how these rewarding memories are stored for the long-term in the brain. Specifically, they wanted to know what happens to these memories when the brain is “offline” – not actively engaged in learning or remembering. It turns out, they are replaying in the background – which helps fix the memory in place. After the test, the subjects had their brains scanned by fMRI to look at the offline activity in their brain, while resting. Following this, they were given a surprise memory test about the objects they saw. In line with rewarding memories being stronger, they were able to recall the higher-reward images better (where the answers were worth more money). The important finding in this study was that the ability of the participants to remember could be predicted by the activity detected in the brain during rest. The individuals with the most activity between the hippocampus and substantia nigra/ventral tegmental area complex (an area involved in reward processing) were able to recall images better. The researchers knew that this activity was associated with the images because it was the same activity seen when the volunteers were first being tested specifically on the higher-reward images. How to use this new information for remembering better? My Grandfather told me once that to remember something, you have to want to remember it. Your brain seems to do that part for you. Unconsciously, we decide to keep memories associated with higher rewards when they are learned. So, make sure there is a reward. Perhaps if you have important information to remember, you should associate it with a concrete result– to help your brain know to fix it and store it for later.	618	ENGLISH	1
In the year following the Famine the seed potatoes were not to be had in this locality. The local fishermen went in their small fishing cots to some County North of County Dublin and procured a supply for themselves and the people of the locality. They landed them along the sea-shore from Blackwater to Cahore.The potatoes were of huge size and in some cases allowed of the "sets" being cut off and the surplus part or centre of the potatoes was used for food. The potatoes were then sown in ridges only. In wet or heavy land ridges about five feet wide were ploughed. A piece about one foot wide being left between each ridge. This piece was sometimes used ploughed also. Farmyard manure was spread on the ridges. The seed "sets" were placed on this about nine or ten inches apart. The bone or piece between each ridge was then turned on to the ridges to cover the potatoes - a spade being used	<urn:uuid:f2573970-7bce-4921-8077-e31aefd8156e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.duchas.ie/en/cbes/5009278/5003965	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690379.95/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126195918-20200126225918-00074.warc.gz	en	0.989186	199	3.359375	3	[ 0.13565261662006378, -0.09644284099340439, -0.13131095468997955, -0.3576161563396454, 0.35143065452575684, -0.12758100032806396, -0.004103121813386679, -0.25118550658226013, -0.25846266746520996, -0.08129874616861343, -0.08363604545593262, -0.5680248737335205, 0.4167790710926056, 0.2557294...	1	In the year following the Famine the seed potatoes were not to be had in this locality. The local fishermen went in their small fishing cots to some County North of County Dublin and procured a supply for themselves and the people of the locality. They landed them along the sea-shore from Blackwater to Cahore.The potatoes were of huge size and in some cases allowed of the "sets" being cut off and the surplus part or centre of the potatoes was used for food. The potatoes were then sown in ridges only. In wet or heavy land ridges about five feet wide were ploughed. A piece about one foot wide being left between each ridge. This piece was sometimes used ploughed also. Farmyard manure was spread on the ridges. The seed "sets" were placed on this about nine or ten inches apart. The bone or piece between each ridge was then turned on to the ridges to cover the potatoes - a spade being used	198	ENGLISH	1
Saint Patrick’s Day, or the Feast of Saint Patrick (Irish: Lá Fhéile Pádraig, “the Day of the Festival of Patrick”), is a cultural and religious celebration held on 17 March, the traditional death date of Saint Patrick (c. AD 385–461), the foremost patron saint of Ireland. Saint Patrick’s Day was made an official Christian feast day in the early 17th century and is observed by the Catholic Church, the Anglican Communion (especially the Church of Ireland), the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Lutheran Church. The day commemorates Saint Patrick and the arrival of Christianity in Ireland, and celebrates the heritage and culture of the Irish in general. Celebrations generally involve public parades and festivals, cèilidhs, and the wearing of green attire or shamrocks. Christians who belong to liturgical denominations also attend church services and historically the Lenten restrictions on eating and drinking alcohol were lifted for the day, which has encouraged and propagated the holiday’s tradition of alcohol consumption. Patrick was a 5th-century Romano-British Christian missionary and bishop in Ireland. Much of what is known about Saint Patrick comes from the Declaration, which was allegedly written by Patrick himself. It is believed that he was born in Roman Britain in the fourth century, into a wealthy Romano-British family. His father was a deacon and his grandfather was a priest in the Christian church. According to the Declaration, at the age of sixteen, he was kidnapped by Irish raiders and taken as a slave to Gaelic Ireland. It says that he spent six years there working as a shepherd and that during this time he “found God”. The Declaration says that God told Patrick to flee to the coast, where a ship would be waiting to take him home. After making his way home, Patrick went on to become a priest. According to tradition, Patrick returned to Ireland to convert the pagan Irish to Christianity. The Declaration says that he spent many years evangelising in the northern half of Ireland and converted “thousands”. Patrick’s efforts against the druids were eventually turned into an allegory in which he drove “snakes” out of Ireland (Ireland never had any snakes). Tradition holds that he died on 17 March and was buried at Downpatrick. Over the following centuries, many legends grew up around Patrick and he became Ireland’s foremost saint.	<urn:uuid:b096fab4-efd0-4bb1-a05c-60d70b1157f7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.nippersnursery.com/saint-patricks-day/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594391.21/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119093733-20200119121733-00167.warc.gz	en	0.985038	508	3.375	3	[ 0.27966228127479553, 0.39473819732666016, 0.0852118656039238, -0.4622883200645447, -0.11144223064184189, -0.3272322416305542, 0.22425085306167603, -0.145279198884964, 0.3298572599887848, -0.1540500372648239, -0.10814410448074341, -0.059100933372974396, -0.0053725214675068855, 0.06967183947...	4	Saint Patrick’s Day, or the Feast of Saint Patrick (Irish: Lá Fhéile Pádraig, “the Day of the Festival of Patrick”), is a cultural and religious celebration held on 17 March, the traditional death date of Saint Patrick (c. AD 385–461), the foremost patron saint of Ireland. Saint Patrick’s Day was made an official Christian feast day in the early 17th century and is observed by the Catholic Church, the Anglican Communion (especially the Church of Ireland), the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Lutheran Church. The day commemorates Saint Patrick and the arrival of Christianity in Ireland, and celebrates the heritage and culture of the Irish in general. Celebrations generally involve public parades and festivals, cèilidhs, and the wearing of green attire or shamrocks. Christians who belong to liturgical denominations also attend church services and historically the Lenten restrictions on eating and drinking alcohol were lifted for the day, which has encouraged and propagated the holiday’s tradition of alcohol consumption. Patrick was a 5th-century Romano-British Christian missionary and bishop in Ireland. Much of what is known about Saint Patrick comes from the Declaration, which was allegedly written by Patrick himself. It is believed that he was born in Roman Britain in the fourth century, into a wealthy Romano-British family. His father was a deacon and his grandfather was a priest in the Christian church. According to the Declaration, at the age of sixteen, he was kidnapped by Irish raiders and taken as a slave to Gaelic Ireland. It says that he spent six years there working as a shepherd and that during this time he “found God”. The Declaration says that God told Patrick to flee to the coast, where a ship would be waiting to take him home. After making his way home, Patrick went on to become a priest. According to tradition, Patrick returned to Ireland to convert the pagan Irish to Christianity. The Declaration says that he spent many years evangelising in the northern half of Ireland and converted “thousands”. Patrick’s efforts against the druids were eventually turned into an allegory in which he drove “snakes” out of Ireland (Ireland never had any snakes). Tradition holds that he died on 17 March and was buried at Downpatrick. Over the following centuries, many legends grew up around Patrick and he became Ireland’s foremost saint.	496	ENGLISH	1
The beginning and ending of the story was framed in such a way that the author was able to show the reader the timeline for the story and enhance the impact of the imagery used later on. The significance of the rose garden for instance was made clear because of how it has changed the events in the lives of the people involved. It is also important to point out that the beginning scene focused on the garden and the ending scene also focused on the garden. 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! Writers follow a pattern when they make a story. They have a beginning where they usually describe the characters or the setting. In this case the characters and settings were made known in the few paragraphs that comprised the initial phase of the story. The second part is the point of no return. When the story breaches the point of no return there is usually a conflict within the main character. In this case the point of no return happened quickly and introduced even in the early part of the story. The point of no return was when Sarah discovered the missing roses. It is also interesting to point out that the point of no return was enhanced by the image of a plot of ground that was destroyed or abused by someone who acted like an intruder, one who stole the flowers. But at the resolution or at the end of the story the same plot of ground no longer symbolized death but life because the flowers were blooming once again. One of the most interesting writing techniques utilized for the short story, “To Resurrect a Rose was the technique called ekphrasis. I want to relate the story of the rose to the life of the grandmother. There was a death in the family and the people were grieving and there has to be a way to present the internal struggle using metaphors and other literary schemes in order to communicate the depth of the conflict that the protagonist felt within her. The rose garden was used to present an example of an ekphrasis and therefore I was able to show in a more graphical manner the interaction between different members of the family. It has to be pinted out that the rose garden symbolized the grandmother’s contribution to their lives and most especially to Sarah who spent a great deal of time with the old woman to tend to tend to her flowers. The rose garden also served as a reminder of her presence. Every time any member of the family strays towards the patch of land where the rose garden was planted, it reminded them of her. The rose garden was used not only as a backdrop to the story, but it was also used as a way to gauge the feelings of the characters. In other words, the author developed a mechanism that could help express ideas in a subtler manner. In addition, the rose garden provides a dramatic way to tell the story of Sarah and her roses. In the final encounter between Sarah and John, the latter took great pains in procuring a hundred roses. The sight of the roses in his hand demonstrated his sincere desire to make amends for the way he hurt his sister. The roses that he gave to his sister also shows that the finally understood why Sarah was upset. However, when he presented the roses to Sarah, he realized that he was not completely aware of the internal conflict within Sarah. He assumed that it was the roses but in reality, Sarah was not in distress simply because the garden no longer has any rose flowers. She was unhappy because she felt that the members of her family was not as serious as her when it comes to honoring the memory of her dead grandmother. The story was made alive by dialogue. The author used a technique wherein sentences were not completed and therefore the reader is left hanging. The significance of this technique is to enhance the dramatic side of the story. For example, “‘Suddenly she yelled in terror. “My ro...rooses…’’’. The statement was not completed, it was merely a phrase. There is another reason for the incomplete sentences and why the characters settled only in the use of phrases rather than complete sentences. The significance of this particular technique is to show immediacy. In other words the people are in a frenetic pace so that they do not have the time to deal with specifics. For example, ‘“No John!” Mr. Smith ran after him.’” The emotions are heightened and the reader feels the impact even deeper. Finally, the use of phrase and hurried speech was also employed to show that these are real people talking. If the sentences were formal and grammatically correct all the time then, it would feel as if the characters were reading a script. For instance in the scene wherein Sarah and John were fighting it makes sense to use short sentences and not lengthy statements. The story was effective when it comes to delivering a message of the challenges felt by people when they grieve after the death of a loved one. The author was able to illustrate the conflict between the characters of the story because of the use of the rose garden as a focal point. The description of the garden, the roses that were planted there, and the reaction of the characters with regards to the missing flowers provide readers a mechanism to understand what the characters are feeling without the need to provide extensive details. The story was also effective because of the use of dialogue. The conversation between siblings and parent and child was made more vivid because of the use of dialogue. It has to be pointed out that the flow of the story was enhanced even further by the use of transitions. The author was able to direct the readers to different scenes without effort. For example, the story did not commence with the discovery of the missing flowers and instead the opening scene was an event that transpired a month after the confrontation in the garden. By adjusting the timeline the author was able to convey the impact of ending of the story. If the author decided to go the traditional route, then, the ending may not have the same impact because the story would end with John storming out of the house. But when the timeline was adjusted the reader felt Sarah’s remorse with the way she treated her brother. Most popular orders	<urn:uuid:ba6b79d7-8887-4fba-889e-f4aa84b7e003>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://essays-experts.com/essays/literature/reflective-contextualization-to-resurrect-a-rose.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606975.49/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122101729-20200122130729-00189.warc.gz	en	0.980774	1,296	3.3125	3	[ -0.2666127383708954, 0.14864295721054077, 0.46727797389030457, 0.004974451847374439, 0.011171197518706322, -0.11094361543655396, 0.21702197194099426, 0.068790502846241, 0.1723276674747467, 0.09783385694026947, -0.0756613165140152, 0.34926414489746094, 0.17855654656887054, 0.380154788494110...	1	The beginning and ending of the story was framed in such a way that the author was able to show the reader the timeline for the story and enhance the impact of the imagery used later on. The significance of the rose garden for instance was made clear because of how it has changed the events in the lives of the people involved. It is also important to point out that the beginning scene focused on the garden and the ending scene also focused on the garden. 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! Writers follow a pattern when they make a story. They have a beginning where they usually describe the characters or the setting. In this case the characters and settings were made known in the few paragraphs that comprised the initial phase of the story. The second part is the point of no return. When the story breaches the point of no return there is usually a conflict within the main character. In this case the point of no return happened quickly and introduced even in the early part of the story. The point of no return was when Sarah discovered the missing roses. It is also interesting to point out that the point of no return was enhanced by the image of a plot of ground that was destroyed or abused by someone who acted like an intruder, one who stole the flowers. But at the resolution or at the end of the story the same plot of ground no longer symbolized death but life because the flowers were blooming once again. One of the most interesting writing techniques utilized for the short story, “To Resurrect a Rose was the technique called ekphrasis. I want to relate the story of the rose to the life of the grandmother. There was a death in the family and the people were grieving and there has to be a way to present the internal struggle using metaphors and other literary schemes in order to communicate the depth of the conflict that the protagonist felt within her. The rose garden was used to present an example of an ekphrasis and therefore I was able to show in a more graphical manner the interaction between different members of the family. It has to be pinted out that the rose garden symbolized the grandmother’s contribution to their lives and most especially to Sarah who spent a great deal of time with the old woman to tend to tend to her flowers. The rose garden also served as a reminder of her presence. Every time any member of the family strays towards the patch of land where the rose garden was planted, it reminded them of her. The rose garden was used not only as a backdrop to the story, but it was also used as a way to gauge the feelings of the characters. In other words, the author developed a mechanism that could help express ideas in a subtler manner. In addition, the rose garden provides a dramatic way to tell the story of Sarah and her roses. In the final encounter between Sarah and John, the latter took great pains in procuring a hundred roses. The sight of the roses in his hand demonstrated his sincere desire to make amends for the way he hurt his sister. The roses that he gave to his sister also shows that the finally understood why Sarah was upset. However, when he presented the roses to Sarah, he realized that he was not completely aware of the internal conflict within Sarah. He assumed that it was the roses but in reality, Sarah was not in distress simply because the garden no longer has any rose flowers. She was unhappy because she felt that the members of her family was not as serious as her when it comes to honoring the memory of her dead grandmother. The story was made alive by dialogue. The author used a technique wherein sentences were not completed and therefore the reader is left hanging. The significance of this technique is to enhance the dramatic side of the story. For example, “‘Suddenly she yelled in terror. “My ro...rooses…’’’. The statement was not completed, it was merely a phrase. There is another reason for the incomplete sentences and why the characters settled only in the use of phrases rather than complete sentences. The significance of this particular technique is to show immediacy. In other words the people are in a frenetic pace so that they do not have the time to deal with specifics. For example, ‘“No John!” Mr. Smith ran after him.’” The emotions are heightened and the reader feels the impact even deeper. Finally, the use of phrase and hurried speech was also employed to show that these are real people talking. If the sentences were formal and grammatically correct all the time then, it would feel as if the characters were reading a script. For instance in the scene wherein Sarah and John were fighting it makes sense to use short sentences and not lengthy statements. The story was effective when it comes to delivering a message of the challenges felt by people when they grieve after the death of a loved one. The author was able to illustrate the conflict between the characters of the story because of the use of the rose garden as a focal point. The description of the garden, the roses that were planted there, and the reaction of the characters with regards to the missing flowers provide readers a mechanism to understand what the characters are feeling without the need to provide extensive details. The story was also effective because of the use of dialogue. The conversation between siblings and parent and child was made more vivid because of the use of dialogue. It has to be pointed out that the flow of the story was enhanced even further by the use of transitions. The author was able to direct the readers to different scenes without effort. For example, the story did not commence with the discovery of the missing flowers and instead the opening scene was an event that transpired a month after the confrontation in the garden. By adjusting the timeline the author was able to convey the impact of ending of the story. If the author decided to go the traditional route, then, the ending may not have the same impact because the story would end with John storming out of the house. But when the timeline was adjusted the reader felt Sarah’s remorse with the way she treated her brother. Most popular orders	1,264	ENGLISH	1
Capoeira: The Dance Of Death Source: (YASUYOSHI CHIBA/AFP via Getty Images) Two capoeiristas square off in a circle called a roda. Music is played on percussion instruments and songs are sung. The two move fluidly, bobbing and weaving in a rhythmic ritual. They spring on their hands and cartwheel as feet fly through the air in low kicks then high. They flip to the music as each evades the other. It seems like a dance. It seems like a game. It also seems like a fight. The truth is capoeira is all of these at once and has one of the most curious histories of any martial art. More than 3.5 million Africans were forced into slavery to Portugal’s colony of Brazil mainly from the west and central coastal regions of Africa. In Brazil, these slaves were set to a variety of tasks including mining, sugar cane cultivation, and construction. Because the enslaved Africans were generally from the same regions, they had elements of a shared culture. This included religious dances which in the 16th century became merged with traditional fighting techniques. Much of the early days of capoeira are shrouded in mystery, but there are compelling and logical theories as to its origins. Without weapons, the slaves tried to carry on what traditions they had as best they could which included forms of ritualized fighting. In Brazil, this evolved into a form of combat that was set to music (typically drums, clapping, and singing) so that it had the appearance of dance. It was a form of cultural expression and disguised resistance — slaves had transformed into warriors. During the era of slavery in Brazil, oftentimes escaped slaves would form their own settlements in remote regions. The quilombos or maroon colonies were fiercely independent. Capoeira, therefore, took on new meaning as a practical means to prevent re-enslavement. By the early 19th century, capoeira was seen by the Portuguese as a threat to their power. It was therefore suppressed. When Brazil abolished slavery in 1888 under the so-called Golden Law, the former slaves found themselves in a marginal position in society since they were still viewed as second class. Capoeiristas, especially in Rio de Janeiro, soon began to employ their skills for illicit activities. Gangs were founded and used as cudgels by various factions to exert political power. In other areas, capoeira continued its existence as a fight-dance-game though all capoeiristas became painted with the same criminal brush. However, by the 1930s this attitude toward capoeira began to shift as it became embraced as a national sport and pastime. This was mainly achieved through the efforts of Manuel dos Reis Machado (Mestre Bimba) and Vincente Ferreira Pastinha (Mestre Pastinha) who opened capoeira academies with the support of the government. These two did much to codify the martial art to the form that is known today. By the 1970s and 1980s, capoeira entered a period of tremendous growth. It was during this period that capoeira began to be exported to countries around the world. Capoeiristas come now from all walks of life and revere it as an art and discipline. At the same time, much of the grittiness of the fighting portion of the ritual has given way to more performance. Yet, all the same, it is impressive at how enduring this tradition is. In 2014, capoeira was added to UNESCO’s Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. The citation noted that capoeira “...functions as an affirmation of mutual respect between communities, groups and individuals and promotes social integration and the memory of resistance to historical oppression.” Like it? Share with your friends!	<urn:uuid:2cb27b6f-17fb-4ccb-a75e-90cd7a998691>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://curioushistorian.com/capoeira-the-dance-of-death	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251728207.68/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127205148-20200127235148-00179.warc.gz	en	0.986371	800	3.71875	4	[ -0.1214200034737587, 0.05330223590135574, 0.37932443618774414, -0.2611332833766937, -0.049926258623600006, 0.07609552145004272, 0.14288869500160217, -0.4027342200279236, 0.5635520219802856, 0.2899150550365448, 0.1937343180179596, -0.2723051607608795, -0.3948805332183838, -0.068909175693988...	17	Capoeira: The Dance Of Death Source: (YASUYOSHI CHIBA/AFP via Getty Images) Two capoeiristas square off in a circle called a roda. Music is played on percussion instruments and songs are sung. The two move fluidly, bobbing and weaving in a rhythmic ritual. They spring on their hands and cartwheel as feet fly through the air in low kicks then high. They flip to the music as each evades the other. It seems like a dance. It seems like a game. It also seems like a fight. The truth is capoeira is all of these at once and has one of the most curious histories of any martial art. More than 3.5 million Africans were forced into slavery to Portugal’s colony of Brazil mainly from the west and central coastal regions of Africa. In Brazil, these slaves were set to a variety of tasks including mining, sugar cane cultivation, and construction. Because the enslaved Africans were generally from the same regions, they had elements of a shared culture. This included religious dances which in the 16th century became merged with traditional fighting techniques. Much of the early days of capoeira are shrouded in mystery, but there are compelling and logical theories as to its origins. Without weapons, the slaves tried to carry on what traditions they had as best they could which included forms of ritualized fighting. In Brazil, this evolved into a form of combat that was set to music (typically drums, clapping, and singing) so that it had the appearance of dance. It was a form of cultural expression and disguised resistance — slaves had transformed into warriors. During the era of slavery in Brazil, oftentimes escaped slaves would form their own settlements in remote regions. The quilombos or maroon colonies were fiercely independent. Capoeira, therefore, took on new meaning as a practical means to prevent re-enslavement. By the early 19th century, capoeira was seen by the Portuguese as a threat to their power. It was therefore suppressed. When Brazil abolished slavery in 1888 under the so-called Golden Law, the former slaves found themselves in a marginal position in society since they were still viewed as second class. Capoeiristas, especially in Rio de Janeiro, soon began to employ their skills for illicit activities. Gangs were founded and used as cudgels by various factions to exert political power. In other areas, capoeira continued its existence as a fight-dance-game though all capoeiristas became painted with the same criminal brush. However, by the 1930s this attitude toward capoeira began to shift as it became embraced as a national sport and pastime. This was mainly achieved through the efforts of Manuel dos Reis Machado (Mestre Bimba) and Vincente Ferreira Pastinha (Mestre Pastinha) who opened capoeira academies with the support of the government. These two did much to codify the martial art to the form that is known today. By the 1970s and 1980s, capoeira entered a period of tremendous growth. It was during this period that capoeira began to be exported to countries around the world. Capoeiristas come now from all walks of life and revere it as an art and discipline. At the same time, much of the grittiness of the fighting portion of the ritual has given way to more performance. Yet, all the same, it is impressive at how enduring this tradition is. In 2014, capoeira was added to UNESCO’s Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. The citation noted that capoeira “...functions as an affirmation of mutual respect between communities, groups and individuals and promotes social integration and the memory of resistance to historical oppression.” Like it? Share with your friends!	799	ENGLISH	1
Arthur Miller's The Crucible came in 1953, three years prior to his McCarthy hearing for being accused as a communist supporter. Parallels of McCarthyism and The Crucible led people to introspect on the McCarthy hearings and the Salem witch trials. We help you compare the phenomenon and the play. Between February 1692 to May 1693, America witnessed something that can purely be described as a massacre. Around 200 people were accused of witchcraft, and 20 were put to death in colonial Massachusetts. The trials and convictions of the accused were solely based on the allegations of victims and no solid proofs. This history becomes a theme for Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. In 1953, celebrated American playwright Arthur Miller wrote a play The Crucible, which presented the true horror of the Salem witch trials. However, the play wasn’t only written to account the history. It was written as an allegory for something that reminded the Salem witch trials more than 200 years later. That something can be described as McCarthyism. Miller found some common threads between McCarthyism and The Crucible that he presented in the play. What is McCarthyism? McCarthyism was a phenomenon that had gripped the United States after the World War II. In the shadow of the Cold War, several anti-communist investigating bodies like Loyalty Reviews program, The House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, etc., came into existence. US senate Joseph McCarthy claimed to have a list of communist followers working in the State departments. People were accused of being either communists or communist supporters. Once found guilty, the suspect would serve a period in jail and would be blacklisted from working. To save himself from being blacklisted, the suspect would be encouraged to give out the names. Arthur Miller was on the list of the HUAC. As he did not name anyone, Miller had to serve 30 days in prison and was fined 500 dollars. Miller had written The Crucible, three years prior to his hearing. The play is the fictionalized presentation of the Salem witch trials that took place in Massachusetts. The play opens in Reverend Parris’s home where his daughter is in a coma-like state. Parris’s daughter and some other girls were caught dancing by Reverend that resulted in his daughter’s state. However, as Betty, Parris’s daughter, wakes up screaming, everyone believes it to be a witchcraft. Betty, the servant Tituba, and Parris’s niece Abigail who has feelings for John Proctor confess about demonic activities and name a few people from the village to be witches. Proctor’s wife is arrested as a suspect as well. Though Proctor takes their servant Mary Warren to expose the girls’ lie, Mary is accused by the girls as a witch. Mary, in return, accuses Proctor of practicing witchcraft. The cycle of accusations and hearings goes on. To end the matter, the accused are asked to confess falsely. After doing so, Proctor is asked to make a public announcement. He reacts violently to this and pleads for his innocence. However, despite being innocent, Proctor and the others are given the death sentence. This brings us to the burning question―How are McCarthyism and The Crucible related? It is common knowledge that Arthur Miller wrote The Crucible as a metaphor of McCarthyism. ▶ Both McCarthyism and the accusations in The Crucible prevailed because of mass hysteria. During the Cold War, people were scared of communism spearing through the veins of the American government. In The Crucible, people were scared as they could not find an answer to their children’s unusual behavior. ▶ In both McCarthyism and The Crucible, innocents were punished. In The Crucible, the first suspects were accused by underage girls. There is a possibility that the accused haven’t committed the crime, but were victims of girls’ fancies. In the McCarthy hearings period, the innocent were named based on little suspicion. Here as well, there is a possibility that the suspects were completely innocent. ▶ The phenomenon McCarthyism can be defined as accusations made with little or no support of solid evidences. People were named, arrested, and trialed. Many times, the accused would not know who has named him/her or for what crime he/she was arrested. In The Crucible, the claim of victims are served as proofs to arrest the suspects. As victims supposedly get affected by the supernatural, there were no other ways to prove the crimes than believing the victims. ▶ During the trial, McCarthyism wouldn’t offer a lawyer to the accused. The suspect had to face the questions and defend his side without any help. In The Crucible, like in McCarthyism, the suspects had no help. Once accused of witchcraft, the suspect could not escape the trial. ▶ McCarthyism encouraged the accused to name the other communist supporters. It would pardon them from the punishment. In The Crucible as well, the accused named others to save themselves from execution. There are a few differences in McCarthyism and The Crucible, too. ▶ The only purpose of the McCarthy hearings was to uproot the communist sympathizers. In the Salem witch trials as shown in The Crucible, the fight was against the evil forces like witches. However, these trials seemed to have the undercurrents of politics, religion, and family feuds. ▶ During the Salem witch trials, the accused were hung to death. On the other hand, in McCarthyism, no communist or communist supporter was killed. ▶ In the Crucible, people first pointed fingers at “outsiders” for practicing witchcraft, whereas in McCarthyism, the communists who were insiders, i.e., part of the entertainment industry and had an exposure to a large number of people, were accused. Differences or not, The Crucible had shown a mirror to McCarthyism when the story was published. McCarthyism can be taken as an example of how history repeats itself. The Crucible shows us the power of literature, saying so much in a few words.	<urn:uuid:c2b7ed29-8d65-49f7-9c6a-1d4dac4b8667>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://entertainism.com/mccarthyism-crucible-comparison	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607596.34/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122221541-20200123010541-00099.warc.gz	en	0.982005	1,279	3.4375	3	[ -0.1780969798564911, 0.03238006681203842, -0.03324992209672928, 0.23447918891906738, -0.0019546435214579105, 0.38640129566192627, 0.47819948196411133, 0.09878535568714142, -0.65300452709198, -0.18488378822803497, -0.16346248984336853, 0.25657016038894653, -0.41030430793762207, 0.2190886735...	8	Arthur Miller's The Crucible came in 1953, three years prior to his McCarthy hearing for being accused as a communist supporter. Parallels of McCarthyism and The Crucible led people to introspect on the McCarthy hearings and the Salem witch trials. We help you compare the phenomenon and the play. Between February 1692 to May 1693, America witnessed something that can purely be described as a massacre. Around 200 people were accused of witchcraft, and 20 were put to death in colonial Massachusetts. The trials and convictions of the accused were solely based on the allegations of victims and no solid proofs. This history becomes a theme for Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. In 1953, celebrated American playwright Arthur Miller wrote a play The Crucible, which presented the true horror of the Salem witch trials. However, the play wasn’t only written to account the history. It was written as an allegory for something that reminded the Salem witch trials more than 200 years later. That something can be described as McCarthyism. Miller found some common threads between McCarthyism and The Crucible that he presented in the play. What is McCarthyism? McCarthyism was a phenomenon that had gripped the United States after the World War II. In the shadow of the Cold War, several anti-communist investigating bodies like Loyalty Reviews program, The House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, etc., came into existence. US senate Joseph McCarthy claimed to have a list of communist followers working in the State departments. People were accused of being either communists or communist supporters. Once found guilty, the suspect would serve a period in jail and would be blacklisted from working. To save himself from being blacklisted, the suspect would be encouraged to give out the names. Arthur Miller was on the list of the HUAC. As he did not name anyone, Miller had to serve 30 days in prison and was fined 500 dollars. Miller had written The Crucible, three years prior to his hearing. The play is the fictionalized presentation of the Salem witch trials that took place in Massachusetts. The play opens in Reverend Parris’s home where his daughter is in a coma-like state. Parris’s daughter and some other girls were caught dancing by Reverend that resulted in his daughter’s state. However, as Betty, Parris’s daughter, wakes up screaming, everyone believes it to be a witchcraft. Betty, the servant Tituba, and Parris’s niece Abigail who has feelings for John Proctor confess about demonic activities and name a few people from the village to be witches. Proctor’s wife is arrested as a suspect as well. Though Proctor takes their servant Mary Warren to expose the girls’ lie, Mary is accused by the girls as a witch. Mary, in return, accuses Proctor of practicing witchcraft. The cycle of accusations and hearings goes on. To end the matter, the accused are asked to confess falsely. After doing so, Proctor is asked to make a public announcement. He reacts violently to this and pleads for his innocence. However, despite being innocent, Proctor and the others are given the death sentence. This brings us to the burning question―How are McCarthyism and The Crucible related? It is common knowledge that Arthur Miller wrote The Crucible as a metaphor of McCarthyism. ▶ Both McCarthyism and the accusations in The Crucible prevailed because of mass hysteria. During the Cold War, people were scared of communism spearing through the veins of the American government. In The Crucible, people were scared as they could not find an answer to their children’s unusual behavior. ▶ In both McCarthyism and The Crucible, innocents were punished. In The Crucible, the first suspects were accused by underage girls. There is a possibility that the accused haven’t committed the crime, but were victims of girls’ fancies. In the McCarthy hearings period, the innocent were named based on little suspicion. Here as well, there is a possibility that the suspects were completely innocent. ▶ The phenomenon McCarthyism can be defined as accusations made with little or no support of solid evidences. People were named, arrested, and trialed. Many times, the accused would not know who has named him/her or for what crime he/she was arrested. In The Crucible, the claim of victims are served as proofs to arrest the suspects. As victims supposedly get affected by the supernatural, there were no other ways to prove the crimes than believing the victims. ▶ During the trial, McCarthyism wouldn’t offer a lawyer to the accused. The suspect had to face the questions and defend his side without any help. In The Crucible, like in McCarthyism, the suspects had no help. Once accused of witchcraft, the suspect could not escape the trial. ▶ McCarthyism encouraged the accused to name the other communist supporters. It would pardon them from the punishment. In The Crucible as well, the accused named others to save themselves from execution. There are a few differences in McCarthyism and The Crucible, too. ▶ The only purpose of the McCarthy hearings was to uproot the communist sympathizers. In the Salem witch trials as shown in The Crucible, the fight was against the evil forces like witches. However, these trials seemed to have the undercurrents of politics, religion, and family feuds. ▶ During the Salem witch trials, the accused were hung to death. On the other hand, in McCarthyism, no communist or communist supporter was killed. ▶ In the Crucible, people first pointed fingers at “outsiders” for practicing witchcraft, whereas in McCarthyism, the communists who were insiders, i.e., part of the entertainment industry and had an exposure to a large number of people, were accused. Differences or not, The Crucible had shown a mirror to McCarthyism when the story was published. McCarthyism can be taken as an example of how history repeats itself. The Crucible shows us the power of literature, saying so much in a few words.	1,246	ENGLISH	1
To understand someone, meet their mother – and so it was with the Tudor princesses. Mary, the daughter of Katherine of Aragon, was straightforward, pious, brave in a crisis, not especially bright. Her whole life was shaped by her mother’s straightforwardness and bravery in a crisis: when Henry VIII wanted Katherine to accept that she had never been married to him, she refused to do so, and by her unchanging refusal, gave her daughter an example of how to behave. Mary spent her life trying to undo the wrong done to her mother and her mother’s world which Henry’s first annulment crisis represented. Elizabeth’s mother, Anne Boleyn, was equal to Katherine in stubbornness and her definite superior in intelligence: the only one of Henry’s six wives whose marriage to the king was regularly called her ‘reign’ by contemporaries. That she had a mind of her own and was not afraid to use it is the most plausible explanation of her eventual downfall in 1536. Eric Ives’s biography of Anne, published in 2004, revealed her as a major player in the early English Reformation, the beginning of a Reformation unique in Europe in having two women among its leading architects: Anne Boleyn and her daughter. The uncharitable (a category that includes most English historians since John Foxe) would probably add Elizabeth’s half-sister to make up a formative trio. Bloody Mary inadvertently brought back heroism to English Protestantism after some unfortunate hiccups during and after the reign of Edward VI. Mary spent her early years as the centre of attention, the heir apparent to the English throne. In 1525, at the age of nine, she was sent off to be the figurehead of Cardinal Wolsey’s revived experiment in government, the Council in the Marches. The Princess of Wales had her own court at Ludlow Castle, and went on her own mini-royal progresses. She was a young teenager before she became aware of the threat to her mother’s marriage and to her own position; but after 1533, aged 17, she could not avoid isolation and humiliation. In 1536 she was declared illegitimate since Katherine’s marriage was declared never to have taken place; after her mother’s death, she was forced to acknowledge her position and was then an outcast for almost a decade. Catherine Parr improved the situation when from 1543 she brought together her three royal stepchildren, and Mary’s position in the succession was regularised by an Act of Parliament in 1544. Mary’s experience was of a childhood of privilege and honour, followed by total loss and humiliation. Elizabeth’s was the other way round: she would have been too young to remember her three years as heir to the throne; she went through the next seven in a highly ambiguous and probably uncomfortable position as a bastard daughter of the king. Just at the age when Mary’s world had begun collapsing, things started to get better for Elizabeth: when Catherine Parr rebuilt the king’s family, she saw to Elizabeth’s education. So Mary’s youth was one of bitter disappointment: a feeling that all there was in life was to hang on and be true to oneself. For Elizabeth, it was the opposite: if you kept quiet, played your cards right, or let other people play a convenient hand on your behalf, things might get better. There is much to be gained by keeping this contrast in mind when considering their successive reigns. The main point of royal daughters was as saleable breeding stock. From an early age, Mary would have been conscious that she was a prime piece of property. At the age of two she was already signed up for a marriage to the king of France’s son; at four, diplomacy changed, and she was down to marry her cousin Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor, who at the time was 20 years old. Unlikely as it would seem in 1521, this was one of the most important relationships in Mary’s life, though she and Charles met only once. When Mary was swept into her mother’s marriage crisis, the emperor was their chief friend. More than any other English monarch between Henry II and Charles II, Mary was preoccupied with a country beyond the sea, or rather a dynasty beyond the sea. She married Charles’s son Philip, and once she was married she was desperate to secure a Catholic future by having his child. That child might with the right quirks of genealogy have ruled half the known world, and a good deal of it not then known: an empire combining Spanish and Portuguese territories and the old British empire, nearly the whole of north and south America, and much more besides. This is one of the great might-have-beens of history. Mary’s failure to have a child is perhaps the saddest and most pitiable aspect of her life; certainly she would have thought so, and that is clearly the point in the mock-Tudor subtitle of David Loades’s biography. Mary’s failure dealt a permanent blow to England’s long-standing alignment with the Habsburgs and their Burgundian predecessors. Both Mary and Elizabeth had a capacity for inspiring loyalty from close friends, who formed their households. Both profited from using this household circle when they came to power; their reigns both had a strong start. Mary’s arrival was indeed much more spectacular than Elizabeth’s: she replaced Queen Jane Grey; and because Queen Jane lost, we forget what an astonishing achievement that was. Jane had a good claim to the throne, not just because Edward VI had ordered that she should succeed him, but because her royal blood was convincing, as the granddaughter of a sister of Henry VIII. In other words, she had the sort of claim that brought James VI to the throne of England in 1603 (he was a great-grandson of a sister of Henry VIII). By contrast, both Mary and Elizabeth had been officially declared bastards by their father; that had not changed by 1553. So it was perfectly plausible for Protestants to see Jane as the best legitimate heir. Both the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, and the Bishop of London, Nicholas Ridley, openly and precisely said that both Mary and Elizabeth were bastards. Mary’s remarkable initial success came from single-mindedly stressing the one asset she possessed: bastard or no bastard, she was flesh of Henry VIII’s flesh. What she did not say, and in fact deliberately avoided saying all through her coup, was that she intended fully to restore the Catholic faith: she made no official statement about religion until she was safely in control of London. By keeping quiet, she managed to unite virtually the whole East Anglian political establishment, Catholic and Protestant alike, creating a critical mass to overthrow the government in Westminster. It was the only time after 1485 that the provinces brought the Westminster government to military defeat: one of very few successful rebellions in the Tudor age. Her early silence on religion is so unlike Mary’s normal no-nonsense Catholicism that she must have been under strong advice to keep her mouth shut. That advice must have come from the tight little group of household officers steering her coup – Catholics to a man, but they had political sense. Mary and Elizabeth, once on the throne, differed in their capacity to reach beyond the people they trusted; Mary was not nearly as adroit as Elizabeth proved to be. Both women started out with the same problem: how to combine the close friends who had helped to put them in place with a set of politicians who were there simply because they had been around for a long time. Particularly difficult for Mary was the task of uniting her real friends with those who had been part of the governments of Henry VIII and Edward VI and had made her life miserable since the 1530s. In this she was not wholly successful. Recently some historians have tended to play down the divisions in her Privy Council, pointing out that much of the evidence about these divisions came from foreign ambassadors who were often fed lines by councillors for their own purposes, or who wanted to emphasise that they had their own special access to Mary’s inner circle. But even if this is right, it cannot disguise real problems in Mary’s government. Bishop Stephen Gardiner and William Lord Paget hated each other, all the more because Paget had been Gardiner’s favourite student at Cambridge, and then for years on end during Henry’s reign Gardiner had not noticed that Paget had been working against him. Even though Paget was on the Privy Council, in 1554 he wrecked two pieces of government legislation in the House of Lords, bringing about the destruction of a bill against heresy and a bill extending the treason laws to protect Prince Philip. There was, furthermore, a curious incoherence in Mary’s government: one of her most trusted advisers and a major sponsor of religious change, Cardinal Reginald Pole, was not even a member of her Privy Council. For exactly half a century from 1553, for the first time in English history, England was ruled by two women in succession. Women rulers were not at all unusual in 16th-century Europe: they were familiar from contemporary Scotland and the Low Countries, and would be seen later in France. But such women were not expected to take initiatives. They acted as caretakers for their dominions, usually literally: successive sisters of the ruling male Habsburg monarch were in charge in the Low Countries; in both Scotland and France, it was the widowed mother of the young monarch. Stability in the situation came from the status of the women – sister, widow – that automatically limited their role in relation to their brother or young son or daughter. For Mary and Elizabeth, however, there was uncertainty as to what would happen when normality was restored, and these queens regnant married: the expectation was that their regimes would cease to be in the hands of caretakers, and would be taken over by their husbands. English politicians tried to avoid that eventuality with Mary’s marriage to Philip of Spain, first by opposing it, then by seeking to tie Philip down with as many conditions as possible. They were quite successful in this second aim, but only at the cost of permanent ill-will between themselves and Philip and his Spanish politicians. Elizabeth addressed the same problem by refusing to get married. Female caretakers did not take initiatives, but they could react to situations that they inherited, playing their role as mother of the realm in seeking to reconcile or solve problems. Both Mary and Elizabeth came to the throne after a period of creativity in government and immense upheaval in the Church. The two women had diametrically opposed reactions to what Henry and Edward had done. If anything, Marian Catholicism was more creative than Elizabethan Protestantism, in both religion and other policies. Loades remains firmly fixed on biography, giving only a few side-glances at much recent fascinating reassessment of Mary’s religious policies: where A.G. Dickens half a century ago described a Marian ‘reaction’, a posse of historians led by Eamon Duffy, Christopher Haigh, John Edwards and Loades himself have found a reformation as full of potential as anything that Protestants did, indeed the largest-scale attempt to restore Catholicism up till then in all Europe. We ought to forget Dickens’s uncharacteristically obtuse remark that Mary ‘failed to discover the Counter-Reformation’. She could hardly succeed in finding something that had not yet happened: many of the most important decisions of the Council of Trent, which put the Counter-Reformation into practice, came after her death, while decisions in Mary’s England anticipated the outcome of Trent. As papal legate, her Archbishop of Canterbury, Cardinal Pole, drew up proposals for clergy training schools in every English diocese before Trent had got round to this most important of initiatives to transform the Catholic Church worldwide. Pole ordered that the consecrated bread of the Mass be placed for veneration in a tabernacle on a church’s principal altar: a new devotional arrangement that soon became standard in Counter-Reformation churches throughout Europe. Moreover, the Marian Church and clergy produced as much imaginative instructional literature as their later Counter-Reformation colleagues, before Mary’s death transformed the situation. If Mary had had 45 years on the throne instead of five, England could have become a bastion of the Counter-Reformation. The Jesuits would have arrived in force, as they could not in Mary’s reign. What would have been the point that early? There were as yet no Jesuits who spoke English, and there was little point in sending Jesuits who could communicate only in Latin, Spanish or French to an audience at court or one of the universities, when King Philip had already imported top-class Spanish Dominicans to do the job. Jesuits might consider hacking through the jungles of the Americas or encountering the great civilisations of the Far East rather more glamorous than anything they could do in a country with a tediously reliable Catholic queen. Not surprisingly, therefore, only two ever arrived, and they hardly had time to unpack and repack their bags before Queen Mary died. An essential skill of a successful 16th-century monarch was image-building and public relations. Once more, contrast the two mothers. Katherine was conscientious, correct, aware of the importance of proper splendour, but not notable for any apparent initiatives or innovation; Anne Boleyn was fond of modish French-style magnificence, high-spirited, extrovert. Neither queen lacked personal courage. Mary was clearly splendid in moments of acute crisis: she rallied and enthused the gentlemen of East Anglia in 1553; she steadied the nerve of her government and won London to her side in Wyatt’s rebellion in 1554. These were the equivalents of Elizabeth’s Tilbury Speech of 1588. Mary enjoyed a good laugh: one of her closest and most valued companions was Jane the Fool, a rare example of a female court jester. But she was Broody Mary in more senses than one: frequently ill in adult life, and after her marriage, miserably preoccupied with her failure to have children, believing in her false pregnancies with an intensity that thoroughly embarrassed those around her. She seems to have had little idea of making a show. One of the few buildings still standing to proclaim her patronage is the chapel of Trinity College, Cambridge: one of the dullest major religious buildings put up in England during the 16th century. Her court equally had the reputation of being the dullest in Europe, middle-aged to elderly, full of earnestly pious Catholic admirers who tended to be figures of her own generation or older. Mary never went on any major nationwide progress, partly because of her health, partly because the government was worried about the unrest that had affected the country each summer since 1548. That contrasts with Elizabeth, who from early in her reign used the progress as one of her chief methods of self-publicity, and went further afield to show herself to her subjects than her father had normally done. Monarchs who went on regular progress were usually successful. It is Elizabeth that we remember as the Virgin Queen, but this was not an unusual image – in fact it was essential for an unmarried female monarch, for obvious reasons. All the Tudors came to the throne officially as virgins, and, to begin with, Mary could and did play on the image of the Virgin Queen just as much as Elizabeth. An example all the more telling for its pedestrian clumsiness is an extended poem by one of her Catholic admirers, George Cavendish, which celebrated Mary’s succession to Edward VI: ‘For the loss of a king which was a virgin clean,/[God] hath restored us a maiden queen.’ Cavendish even tried drastically to rewrite history with regard to the Spanish marriage: To a virgin life, which liked the best, Profest was thine heart: when, moved with zeal And tears of subjects expressing request For no lust, but love of the common weal Virginity’s vow thou diddest repel. Elizabeth’s triumph was to take up an image of permanent virginity foisted on her in mid-reign by politicians who opposed her prospective marriage to a Catholic, then turn it to her own use. She was always likely to be more successful than Mary, even if they had been granted an equal number of regnal years, because she knew how to make the best of a situation: how to give way, how to transform events to her best advantage. She could be stubborn and tactless, but also superb in her efforts to repair the damage. This will always be the case, however much we try to write her down and to be revisionist about Mary. Elizabeth seized opportunities offered, whereas Mary grimly continued burning Protestants long after the policy had become a public relations disaster. Both women started well; in Mary’s case, extraordinarily well. But Elizabeth, from the outset of her reign, steadily built on advantage; Mary did not. Forty-five years of her religious policies, even if successful, would probably have caused as much division and disaster in the realm as did the French monarchy’s efforts to contain France’s Reformation. Loades gives plenty of reasons why we should see Mary’s lost opportunity as England’s long-term gain. Send Letters To: London Review of Books, 28 Little Russell Street London, WC1A 2HN Please include name, address, and a telephone number.	<urn:uuid:eafe7e21-09c4-458f-b4dd-0e2fe5f6b078>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v29/n20/diarmaid-macculloch/something-about-mary	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694071.63/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126230255-20200127020255-00054.warc.gz	en	0.983822	3,675	3.265625	3	[ -0.4328805208206177, 0.25580278038978577, 0.23671843111515045, 0.079095259308815, -0.2721477150917053, -0.3104793429374695, 0.12146759033203125, -0.10818291455507278, 0.1705385148525238, -0.10096827894449234, -0.3101864755153656, -0.5390641689300537, -0.050147026777267456, 0.17494742572307...	4	To understand someone, meet their mother – and so it was with the Tudor princesses. Mary, the daughter of Katherine of Aragon, was straightforward, pious, brave in a crisis, not especially bright. Her whole life was shaped by her mother’s straightforwardness and bravery in a crisis: when Henry VIII wanted Katherine to accept that she had never been married to him, she refused to do so, and by her unchanging refusal, gave her daughter an example of how to behave. Mary spent her life trying to undo the wrong done to her mother and her mother’s world which Henry’s first annulment crisis represented. Elizabeth’s mother, Anne Boleyn, was equal to Katherine in stubbornness and her definite superior in intelligence: the only one of Henry’s six wives whose marriage to the king was regularly called her ‘reign’ by contemporaries. That she had a mind of her own and was not afraid to use it is the most plausible explanation of her eventual downfall in 1536. Eric Ives’s biography of Anne, published in 2004, revealed her as a major player in the early English Reformation, the beginning of a Reformation unique in Europe in having two women among its leading architects: Anne Boleyn and her daughter. The uncharitable (a category that includes most English historians since John Foxe) would probably add Elizabeth’s half-sister to make up a formative trio. Bloody Mary inadvertently brought back heroism to English Protestantism after some unfortunate hiccups during and after the reign of Edward VI. Mary spent her early years as the centre of attention, the heir apparent to the English throne. In 1525, at the age of nine, she was sent off to be the figurehead of Cardinal Wolsey’s revived experiment in government, the Council in the Marches. The Princess of Wales had her own court at Ludlow Castle, and went on her own mini-royal progresses. She was a young teenager before she became aware of the threat to her mother’s marriage and to her own position; but after 1533, aged 17, she could not avoid isolation and humiliation. In 1536 she was declared illegitimate since Katherine’s marriage was declared never to have taken place; after her mother’s death, she was forced to acknowledge her position and was then an outcast for almost a decade. Catherine Parr improved the situation when from 1543 she brought together her three royal stepchildren, and Mary’s position in the succession was regularised by an Act of Parliament in 1544. Mary’s experience was of a childhood of privilege and honour, followed by total loss and humiliation. Elizabeth’s was the other way round: she would have been too young to remember her three years as heir to the throne; she went through the next seven in a highly ambiguous and probably uncomfortable position as a bastard daughter of the king. Just at the age when Mary’s world had begun collapsing, things started to get better for Elizabeth: when Catherine Parr rebuilt the king’s family, she saw to Elizabeth’s education. So Mary’s youth was one of bitter disappointment: a feeling that all there was in life was to hang on and be true to oneself. For Elizabeth, it was the opposite: if you kept quiet, played your cards right, or let other people play a convenient hand on your behalf, things might get better. There is much to be gained by keeping this contrast in mind when considering their successive reigns. The main point of royal daughters was as saleable breeding stock. From an early age, Mary would have been conscious that she was a prime piece of property. At the age of two she was already signed up for a marriage to the king of France’s son; at four, diplomacy changed, and she was down to marry her cousin Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor, who at the time was 20 years old. Unlikely as it would seem in 1521, this was one of the most important relationships in Mary’s life, though she and Charles met only once. When Mary was swept into her mother’s marriage crisis, the emperor was their chief friend. More than any other English monarch between Henry II and Charles II, Mary was preoccupied with a country beyond the sea, or rather a dynasty beyond the sea. She married Charles’s son Philip, and once she was married she was desperate to secure a Catholic future by having his child. That child might with the right quirks of genealogy have ruled half the known world, and a good deal of it not then known: an empire combining Spanish and Portuguese territories and the old British empire, nearly the whole of north and south America, and much more besides. This is one of the great might-have-beens of history. Mary’s failure to have a child is perhaps the saddest and most pitiable aspect of her life; certainly she would have thought so, and that is clearly the point in the mock-Tudor subtitle of David Loades’s biography. Mary’s failure dealt a permanent blow to England’s long-standing alignment with the Habsburgs and their Burgundian predecessors. Both Mary and Elizabeth had a capacity for inspiring loyalty from close friends, who formed their households. Both profited from using this household circle when they came to power; their reigns both had a strong start. Mary’s arrival was indeed much more spectacular than Elizabeth’s: she replaced Queen Jane Grey; and because Queen Jane lost, we forget what an astonishing achievement that was. Jane had a good claim to the throne, not just because Edward VI had ordered that she should succeed him, but because her royal blood was convincing, as the granddaughter of a sister of Henry VIII. In other words, she had the sort of claim that brought James VI to the throne of England in 1603 (he was a great-grandson of a sister of Henry VIII). By contrast, both Mary and Elizabeth had been officially declared bastards by their father; that had not changed by 1553. So it was perfectly plausible for Protestants to see Jane as the best legitimate heir. Both the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, and the Bishop of London, Nicholas Ridley, openly and precisely said that both Mary and Elizabeth were bastards. Mary’s remarkable initial success came from single-mindedly stressing the one asset she possessed: bastard or no bastard, she was flesh of Henry VIII’s flesh. What she did not say, and in fact deliberately avoided saying all through her coup, was that she intended fully to restore the Catholic faith: she made no official statement about religion until she was safely in control of London. By keeping quiet, she managed to unite virtually the whole East Anglian political establishment, Catholic and Protestant alike, creating a critical mass to overthrow the government in Westminster. It was the only time after 1485 that the provinces brought the Westminster government to military defeat: one of very few successful rebellions in the Tudor age. Her early silence on religion is so unlike Mary’s normal no-nonsense Catholicism that she must have been under strong advice to keep her mouth shut. That advice must have come from the tight little group of household officers steering her coup – Catholics to a man, but they had political sense. Mary and Elizabeth, once on the throne, differed in their capacity to reach beyond the people they trusted; Mary was not nearly as adroit as Elizabeth proved to be. Both women started out with the same problem: how to combine the close friends who had helped to put them in place with a set of politicians who were there simply because they had been around for a long time. Particularly difficult for Mary was the task of uniting her real friends with those who had been part of the governments of Henry VIII and Edward VI and had made her life miserable since the 1530s. In this she was not wholly successful. Recently some historians have tended to play down the divisions in her Privy Council, pointing out that much of the evidence about these divisions came from foreign ambassadors who were often fed lines by councillors for their own purposes, or who wanted to emphasise that they had their own special access to Mary’s inner circle. But even if this is right, it cannot disguise real problems in Mary’s government. Bishop Stephen Gardiner and William Lord Paget hated each other, all the more because Paget had been Gardiner’s favourite student at Cambridge, and then for years on end during Henry’s reign Gardiner had not noticed that Paget had been working against him. Even though Paget was on the Privy Council, in 1554 he wrecked two pieces of government legislation in the House of Lords, bringing about the destruction of a bill against heresy and a bill extending the treason laws to protect Prince Philip. There was, furthermore, a curious incoherence in Mary’s government: one of her most trusted advisers and a major sponsor of religious change, Cardinal Reginald Pole, was not even a member of her Privy Council. For exactly half a century from 1553, for the first time in English history, England was ruled by two women in succession. Women rulers were not at all unusual in 16th-century Europe: they were familiar from contemporary Scotland and the Low Countries, and would be seen later in France. But such women were not expected to take initiatives. They acted as caretakers for their dominions, usually literally: successive sisters of the ruling male Habsburg monarch were in charge in the Low Countries; in both Scotland and France, it was the widowed mother of the young monarch. Stability in the situation came from the status of the women – sister, widow – that automatically limited their role in relation to their brother or young son or daughter. For Mary and Elizabeth, however, there was uncertainty as to what would happen when normality was restored, and these queens regnant married: the expectation was that their regimes would cease to be in the hands of caretakers, and would be taken over by their husbands. English politicians tried to avoid that eventuality with Mary’s marriage to Philip of Spain, first by opposing it, then by seeking to tie Philip down with as many conditions as possible. They were quite successful in this second aim, but only at the cost of permanent ill-will between themselves and Philip and his Spanish politicians. Elizabeth addressed the same problem by refusing to get married. Female caretakers did not take initiatives, but they could react to situations that they inherited, playing their role as mother of the realm in seeking to reconcile or solve problems. Both Mary and Elizabeth came to the throne after a period of creativity in government and immense upheaval in the Church. The two women had diametrically opposed reactions to what Henry and Edward had done. If anything, Marian Catholicism was more creative than Elizabethan Protestantism, in both religion and other policies. Loades remains firmly fixed on biography, giving only a few side-glances at much recent fascinating reassessment of Mary’s religious policies: where A.G. Dickens half a century ago described a Marian ‘reaction’, a posse of historians led by Eamon Duffy, Christopher Haigh, John Edwards and Loades himself have found a reformation as full of potential as anything that Protestants did, indeed the largest-scale attempt to restore Catholicism up till then in all Europe. We ought to forget Dickens’s uncharacteristically obtuse remark that Mary ‘failed to discover the Counter-Reformation’. She could hardly succeed in finding something that had not yet happened: many of the most important decisions of the Council of Trent, which put the Counter-Reformation into practice, came after her death, while decisions in Mary’s England anticipated the outcome of Trent. As papal legate, her Archbishop of Canterbury, Cardinal Pole, drew up proposals for clergy training schools in every English diocese before Trent had got round to this most important of initiatives to transform the Catholic Church worldwide. Pole ordered that the consecrated bread of the Mass be placed for veneration in a tabernacle on a church’s principal altar: a new devotional arrangement that soon became standard in Counter-Reformation churches throughout Europe. Moreover, the Marian Church and clergy produced as much imaginative instructional literature as their later Counter-Reformation colleagues, before Mary’s death transformed the situation. If Mary had had 45 years on the throne instead of five, England could have become a bastion of the Counter-Reformation. The Jesuits would have arrived in force, as they could not in Mary’s reign. What would have been the point that early? There were as yet no Jesuits who spoke English, and there was little point in sending Jesuits who could communicate only in Latin, Spanish or French to an audience at court or one of the universities, when King Philip had already imported top-class Spanish Dominicans to do the job. Jesuits might consider hacking through the jungles of the Americas or encountering the great civilisations of the Far East rather more glamorous than anything they could do in a country with a tediously reliable Catholic queen. Not surprisingly, therefore, only two ever arrived, and they hardly had time to unpack and repack their bags before Queen Mary died. An essential skill of a successful 16th-century monarch was image-building and public relations. Once more, contrast the two mothers. Katherine was conscientious, correct, aware of the importance of proper splendour, but not notable for any apparent initiatives or innovation; Anne Boleyn was fond of modish French-style magnificence, high-spirited, extrovert. Neither queen lacked personal courage. Mary was clearly splendid in moments of acute crisis: she rallied and enthused the gentlemen of East Anglia in 1553; she steadied the nerve of her government and won London to her side in Wyatt’s rebellion in 1554. These were the equivalents of Elizabeth’s Tilbury Speech of 1588. Mary enjoyed a good laugh: one of her closest and most valued companions was Jane the Fool, a rare example of a female court jester. But she was Broody Mary in more senses than one: frequently ill in adult life, and after her marriage, miserably preoccupied with her failure to have children, believing in her false pregnancies with an intensity that thoroughly embarrassed those around her. She seems to have had little idea of making a show. One of the few buildings still standing to proclaim her patronage is the chapel of Trinity College, Cambridge: one of the dullest major religious buildings put up in England during the 16th century. Her court equally had the reputation of being the dullest in Europe, middle-aged to elderly, full of earnestly pious Catholic admirers who tended to be figures of her own generation or older. Mary never went on any major nationwide progress, partly because of her health, partly because the government was worried about the unrest that had affected the country each summer since 1548. That contrasts with Elizabeth, who from early in her reign used the progress as one of her chief methods of self-publicity, and went further afield to show herself to her subjects than her father had normally done. Monarchs who went on regular progress were usually successful. It is Elizabeth that we remember as the Virgin Queen, but this was not an unusual image – in fact it was essential for an unmarried female monarch, for obvious reasons. All the Tudors came to the throne officially as virgins, and, to begin with, Mary could and did play on the image of the Virgin Queen just as much as Elizabeth. An example all the more telling for its pedestrian clumsiness is an extended poem by one of her Catholic admirers, George Cavendish, which celebrated Mary’s succession to Edward VI: ‘For the loss of a king which was a virgin clean,/[God] hath restored us a maiden queen.’ Cavendish even tried drastically to rewrite history with regard to the Spanish marriage: To a virgin life, which liked the best, Profest was thine heart: when, moved with zeal And tears of subjects expressing request For no lust, but love of the common weal Virginity’s vow thou diddest repel. Elizabeth’s triumph was to take up an image of permanent virginity foisted on her in mid-reign by politicians who opposed her prospective marriage to a Catholic, then turn it to her own use. She was always likely to be more successful than Mary, even if they had been granted an equal number of regnal years, because she knew how to make the best of a situation: how to give way, how to transform events to her best advantage. She could be stubborn and tactless, but also superb in her efforts to repair the damage. This will always be the case, however much we try to write her down and to be revisionist about Mary. Elizabeth seized opportunities offered, whereas Mary grimly continued burning Protestants long after the policy had become a public relations disaster. Both women started well; in Mary’s case, extraordinarily well. But Elizabeth, from the outset of her reign, steadily built on advantage; Mary did not. Forty-five years of her religious policies, even if successful, would probably have caused as much division and disaster in the realm as did the French monarchy’s efforts to contain France’s Reformation. Loades gives plenty of reasons why we should see Mary’s lost opportunity as England’s long-term gain. Send Letters To: London Review of Books, 28 Little Russell Street London, WC1A 2HN Please include name, address, and a telephone number.	3,593	ENGLISH	1
Romance and revolution: the poetry of Pablo Neruda - Ilan Stavans - 168,197 Views - 1,658 Questions Answered - TEDEd Animation Pablo Neruda (1904-1973) is arguably Latin America’s most famous poet. He lived during a period of intense political turmoil, with dictators taking over control of governments from Argentina to Brazil and Chile. He believed poetry was the best, most hopeful weapon in the struggle against tyranny. He witnessed the Spanish Civil War and wrote eloquently about it, as in his poem “I Explain a Few Things.” His poetry is universal, such as all his odes, is universal in that it speaks to his immediate reality while also transcending it. Among the most vivid examples is his “Ode to the Watermelon,” in which he invites us to see a fruit like the watermelon anew. His love for Spanish allowed him to turn the language into a simple, direct tool of expression that could reach audiences of all kinds. He also wrote about its beauty and complexity, as in his “Ode to the Dictionary.” Neruda traveled across the world denouncing corruption and celebrating human empathy. But he also made tacit mistakes, such as championing Cuba and the Soviet Union in spite of their record against individual freedom. His influence on contemporary life is infinite, his work having been turned into films, operas, theater, music, dance, and much more. Create and share a new lesson based on this one.	<urn:uuid:6a21ac37-4dc6-489c-b2eb-118a308b4bc6>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://ed.ted.com/lessons/romance-and-revolution-the-poetry-of-pablo-neruda-ilan-stavans	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783342.96/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128215526-20200129005526-00546.warc.gz	en	0.983355	313	3.3125	3	[ -0.2211889922618866, 0.20366482436656952, 0.41017529368400574, 0.16591128706932068, 0.12454509735107422, 0.01778395101428032, 0.107492595911026, 0.3793846666812897, -0.30640819668769836, -0.061622679233551025, -0.1559375673532486, 0.33717164397239685, 0.09487675130367279, 0.242341205477714...	1	Romance and revolution: the poetry of Pablo Neruda - Ilan Stavans - 168,197 Views - 1,658 Questions Answered - TEDEd Animation Pablo Neruda (1904-1973) is arguably Latin America’s most famous poet. He lived during a period of intense political turmoil, with dictators taking over control of governments from Argentina to Brazil and Chile. He believed poetry was the best, most hopeful weapon in the struggle against tyranny. He witnessed the Spanish Civil War and wrote eloquently about it, as in his poem “I Explain a Few Things.” His poetry is universal, such as all his odes, is universal in that it speaks to his immediate reality while also transcending it. Among the most vivid examples is his “Ode to the Watermelon,” in which he invites us to see a fruit like the watermelon anew. His love for Spanish allowed him to turn the language into a simple, direct tool of expression that could reach audiences of all kinds. He also wrote about its beauty and complexity, as in his “Ode to the Dictionary.” Neruda traveled across the world denouncing corruption and celebrating human empathy. But he also made tacit mistakes, such as championing Cuba and the Soviet Union in spite of their record against individual freedom. His influence on contemporary life is infinite, his work having been turned into films, operas, theater, music, dance, and much more. Create and share a new lesson based on this one.	319	ENGLISH	1
Flavius Claudius Constantinus is known in English as Constantine II was the eldest son of Constantine the Great and Fausta. On March 1, 317, Constantine was made Caesar, and at the age of seven, in 323, took part in his father's campaign against the Sarmatians. At the age of ten he became commander of Gaul, after the death of his half-brother Crispus. An inscription dating to 330 records the title of Alamannicus, so it is probable that his generals won a victory over Alamanni. His military career continued when Constantine I elected his son field commander during the 332 campaign against the Goths. Following the death of his father in 337, Constantine II became emperor jointly with his brothers Constantius II and Constans. After the division of the empire, made by the three brothers in September of the same year in Pannonia, he ruled over Gaul, Britannia and Hispania. He was involved in the struggle between the different Christian streams. The Western portion of the empire leaned towards Trinitarism and against Arianism, and Constantine freed Athanasius and allowed him to return to Alexandria. This action also put some burden on Constantius II, who was a supporter of Arianism. At first, he was the guardian of his younger brother Constans, whose portion was Italia, Africa and Illyricum. As Constans came of age, Constantine would not relinquish the guardianship and in 340 he marched against Constans in Italy, but was defeated at Aquileia and died in battle. Constans came to control his deceased brother's realm.	<urn:uuid:07ac3419-9b02-463e-96cb-6978c286de1e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://teskeys.com/products/constantine-ii-coin-necklace-charm	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250625097.75/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124191133-20200124220133-00229.warc.gz	en	0.989895	330	3.453125	3	[ -0.07607261091470718, 0.5807550549507141, 0.21907608211040497, -0.08920663595199585, -0.2991197407245636, -0.24724180996418, -0.08515540510416031, 0.42200326919555664, 0.18074233829975128, -0.24376603960990906, -0.03177057206630707, -0.6867231130599976, -0.12835843861103058, 0.582377374172...	2	Flavius Claudius Constantinus is known in English as Constantine II was the eldest son of Constantine the Great and Fausta. On March 1, 317, Constantine was made Caesar, and at the age of seven, in 323, took part in his father's campaign against the Sarmatians. At the age of ten he became commander of Gaul, after the death of his half-brother Crispus. An inscription dating to 330 records the title of Alamannicus, so it is probable that his generals won a victory over Alamanni. His military career continued when Constantine I elected his son field commander during the 332 campaign against the Goths. Following the death of his father in 337, Constantine II became emperor jointly with his brothers Constantius II and Constans. After the division of the empire, made by the three brothers in September of the same year in Pannonia, he ruled over Gaul, Britannia and Hispania. He was involved in the struggle between the different Christian streams. The Western portion of the empire leaned towards Trinitarism and against Arianism, and Constantine freed Athanasius and allowed him to return to Alexandria. This action also put some burden on Constantius II, who was a supporter of Arianism. At first, he was the guardian of his younger brother Constans, whose portion was Italia, Africa and Illyricum. As Constans came of age, Constantine would not relinquish the guardianship and in 340 he marched against Constans in Italy, but was defeated at Aquileia and died in battle. Constans came to control his deceased brother's realm.	356	ENGLISH	1
Rembrandt is widely regarded as one of the finest visual artists of all time and his broad range of styles and subject matters mean he is considered to be the most important artist in Dutch art history. His works portray many themes such as allegorical and history scenes, portraits and self-portraits, biblical and mythological matter, and animal studies and his ability to represent such different visual themes set him apart from many other Dutch artists from the 17th century. Rembrandt was born on 15 July 1606 and his input into art throughout his career came during the period labelled by historians as the ‘Dutch Golden Age’ because it had such a cultural achievement. This period was regarded as highly innovative, characterised by huge amounts of wealth and paved the way for many other significant new genres. Rembrandt himself never studied abroad, however his works drew significant influence from Italian masters and Dutch artists who had spent time in Italy. His self-portraits and paintings of bible scenes are often considered to be his ultimate creative achievements and although the latter part of Rembrandt’s career was tainted by personal tragedy and financial difficulty, his legacy continues to impact the lives of people today.	<urn:uuid:56327731-7988-4c20-b09d-05072a6b2e3b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.printed-editions.com/artist/harmensz-van-rijn-rembrandt/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250611127.53/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123160903-20200123185903-00544.warc.gz	en	0.992315	241	3.546875	4	[ 0.013620826415717602, 0.5476621985435486, 0.2739098370075226, -0.27054640650749207, 0.1627071648836136, 0.21638472378253937, 0.02977137826383114, 0.1890748143196106, -0.0711565613746643, -0.09901298582553864, -0.3043808043003082, -0.2441137135028839, -0.030272699892520905, 0.58071976900100...	13	Rembrandt is widely regarded as one of the finest visual artists of all time and his broad range of styles and subject matters mean he is considered to be the most important artist in Dutch art history. His works portray many themes such as allegorical and history scenes, portraits and self-portraits, biblical and mythological matter, and animal studies and his ability to represent such different visual themes set him apart from many other Dutch artists from the 17th century. Rembrandt was born on 15 July 1606 and his input into art throughout his career came during the period labelled by historians as the ‘Dutch Golden Age’ because it had such a cultural achievement. This period was regarded as highly innovative, characterised by huge amounts of wealth and paved the way for many other significant new genres. Rembrandt himself never studied abroad, however his works drew significant influence from Italian masters and Dutch artists who had spent time in Italy. His self-portraits and paintings of bible scenes are often considered to be his ultimate creative achievements and although the latter part of Rembrandt’s career was tainted by personal tragedy and financial difficulty, his legacy continues to impact the lives of people today.	241	ENGLISH	1
Colonies - Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia Climate/Geography -The Southern Colonies enjoyed warm climate with hot summers and mild winters. Geography ranged from coastal plains in the east to piedmont farther inland. The westernmost regions were mountainous. The soil was perfect for farming and the growing season was longer than in any other region. Hot summers, however, propagated diseases such as malaria and yellow fever. Religion - Most people in the Southern Colonies were Anglican (Baptist or Presbyterian), though most of the original settlers from the Maryland colony were Catholic, as Lord Baltimore founded it as a refuge for English Catholics. Religion did not have the same impact on communities as in the New England colonies or the Mid-Atlantic colonies because people lived on plantations that were often distant and spread out from one another. Economy - The Southern economy was almost entirely based on farming. Rice, indigo, tobacco, sugarcane, and cotton were cash crops. Crops were grown on large plantations where slaves and indentured servants worked the land. In fact, Charleston, South Carolina became one of the centers of the American slave trade in the 1700’s.	<urn:uuid:f1628d79-1abf-4f12-be41-bb25fa5af6bb>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://mrnussbaum.com/13-colonies-regions-southern-colonies	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601628.36/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121074002-20200121103002-00240.warc.gz	en	0.981704	245	4.0625	4	[ 0.12738263607025146, 0.3113256096839905, 0.38975754380226135, -0.1029919981956482, 0.5235933661460876, -0.014584194868803024, -0.0363411046564579, -0.30715417861938477, -0.1944129914045334, 0.008690307848155499, 0.022152051329612732, -0.2193625569343567, 0.2041819840669632, 0.0234867129474...	1	Colonies - Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia Climate/Geography -The Southern Colonies enjoyed warm climate with hot summers and mild winters. Geography ranged from coastal plains in the east to piedmont farther inland. The westernmost regions were mountainous. The soil was perfect for farming and the growing season was longer than in any other region. Hot summers, however, propagated diseases such as malaria and yellow fever. Religion - Most people in the Southern Colonies were Anglican (Baptist or Presbyterian), though most of the original settlers from the Maryland colony were Catholic, as Lord Baltimore founded it as a refuge for English Catholics. Religion did not have the same impact on communities as in the New England colonies or the Mid-Atlantic colonies because people lived on plantations that were often distant and spread out from one another. Economy - The Southern economy was almost entirely based on farming. Rice, indigo, tobacco, sugarcane, and cotton were cash crops. Crops were grown on large plantations where slaves and indentured servants worked the land. In fact, Charleston, South Carolina became one of the centers of the American slave trade in the 1700’s.	245	ENGLISH	1
Home - This Community Portal - Written by Mister Ed - Category: AgoraCart Misc - Hits: 383 The Agora was the heart of ancient Athens, the focus of political, commercial, administrative and social activity, the religious and cultural centre, and the seat of justice. The site was occupied without interruption in all periods of the city's history. It was used as a residential and burial area as early as the Late Neolithic period (3000 B.C.). Early in the 6th century, in the time of Solon, the Agora became a public area. After a series of repairs and remodellings, it reached its final rectangular form in the 2nd century B.C. Extensive building activity occured after the serious damage made by the Persians in 480/79 B.C., by the Romans in 89 B.C. and by the Herulae in A.D. 267 while, after the Slavic invasion in A.D. 580, It was gradually abandoned. From the Byzantine period until after 1834, when Athens became the capital of the independent Greek state, the Agora was again developed as a residential area. The first excavation campaigns were carried out by the Greek Archaeological Society in 1859-1912, and by the German Archaeological Institute in 1896-97. In 1890-91, a deep trench cut for the Athens-Peiraeus Railway brought to light extensive remains of ancient buildings. In 1931 the American School of Classical Studies started the systematic excavations with the financial support of J. Rockefeller and continued until 1941. Work was resumed in 1945 and is still continuing. In order to uncover the whole area of the Agora it was necessary to demolish around 400 modern buildings covering a total area of ca. 12 hectares. In the 19th century the four colossal figures of Giants and Tritons at the facade of the Gymnasium were restored by the Greek Archaeological Society. In the years 1953-56, the Stoa of Attalos was reconstructed to become a museum and in the same period the Byzantine church of Aghioi Apostoloi, built around A.D. 1000, was restored by the American School. Between 1972 and 1975, restoration and preservation work was carried out at the Hephaisteion; the area was cleared of the vegetation, and the roof of the temple was repaired in 1978 by the Archaeological Service. The most important monuments of the site are: Temple of Hephaistos. The temple, known as the "Theseion", is Doric, peripteral, with a pronaos and opisthodomos. It crowns the hill of Kolonos Agoraios and is the most prominent and better preserved monument of the Agora. The temple was dedicated to two gods, Hephaistos and Athena, whose bronze cult statues stood in the interior. The construction of the Hephaisteion started in 449 B.C. (click on image to see larger view) Stoa of Zeus Eleutherios. The stoa was erected at the end of the 5th century B.C. in honor of those who fought for the freedom and security of the city. Socrates is said to have met his friends in this stoa. Temple of Apollo Patroos. Small Ionic temple, erected in ca. 340-320 B.C., identified as the temple of Apollo who was worshipped as the "Father" (Pater), the founder of the Ionian race. Inside the cella stood the cult statue of the god, made by the famous sculptor Euphranor. (click on image to see larger view) Bouleuterion. The Council of 500 (Boule) held its regular meetings here. The building was erected at the end of the 5th century B.C. replacing the Old Bouleuterion, the ruins of which were found beneath the Metroon. Metroon. The building has an Ionic propylon and was erected in the 2nd century B.C. It accomodated both the sanctuary of the Mother of the Gods and the state archives, including the proceedings of the meetings of the Council of 500 and various official documents, protected by the goddess. (click on image to see larger view) Monument of the Eponymous Heroes. Remains of an oblong pedestal enclosed by a fence. It supported the bronze statues of the legendary heroes who gave their names to the ten tribes of Attica. In addition to its honorary function, the monument served as the official notice board of the city. It is dated to the second half of the 4th century B.C. (click on image to see larger view) Altar of the Twelve Gods. Fenced area with an altar at the centre, onstructed in 522/21 B.C. The sanctuary was a popular place of asylum and was considered to be the heart of the city, the central milestone from which distances to other places were measured. (click on image to see larger view) The Royal Stoa (Stoa Basileios). Built around 460 B.C., it was the seat of the Royal Archon (Archon Basileus). In this stoa the laws of Solon were displayed, and the Council of the Aeropagus held its meetings. Tholos. Circular building erected in ca. 460 B.C. The chairmen (prytaneis) of the Council of 500 (Boule) dined and spent the night in the Tholos so as to be available if necessary. A set of standard weights and measures was also kept in the building. - Written by Mister Ed - Category: Payment Processing - Hits: 96 Officially Pulling the Plug on 2Checkout AgoraCart has had a long standing partnership with 2Checkout ( 2CO ) since roughly 2002. 2Checkout was one of the first 5 payment processing solutions integrated into AgoraCart. 2Checkout has also been listed on our payment gateway partners page or similar lists for over 15 years. However as of October 24, 2019, 2Checkout will no longer be supported, endorsed, nor recommended. In fact if we had an official black-list of payment processing services, they might find themselves on it. This is a sad announcement for us here at AgoraCart, but after using their control panel interface, doing some research of on what happened to the 2Ccheckout we once knew, and an extremely frustrating set of encounters with their support and underwriting/risk departments, we decided to pull the plug officially on our end. Why We No Longer Want to Deal with 2Checkout: While updating the payment gateways pages for the updated Agoracart.com site design that emphasizes the new Route 66 version, we were confirming our referral links to 2Checkout and found they seemed to be ignored and routed to their homepage instead of where we remembered the link going. So logins into their partner and merchant portals were attempted, but no record of us existed. In fact the last email we got from them was in late 2014. So it was assumed the account had been purged or deactivated. More on this later. A new account was created. In haste we just picked a type of account so we could get a new partner ID not realizing they had a specific account for that purpose. It was also found that we could not change the account type nor move forward in any fashion without submitting a full application including copies of drivers licenses (or other photo ID), company documents that proved existence, SSNs or TINs, etc on every single owner and the company itself. So contact was made with their support department asking to become a partner, or switch our account to one that would handle that function. A few hours later, we received a polite email saying that Agoracart was not on their supported software list and did not have any documentation on how to setup AgoraCart. This was puzzling since was had indicated we were AgoraCart and the response totally missed the issue about partnership updates. It was suggested that their application and all of our personal info be provided so they could review and activate our account and then they could help with the issue further. That threw up a lot of red flags. Our response back to them indicated that again we were AgoraCart, not someone looking to use it, and just looking to make sure our partner IDs and links were going to get some sort of "credit" for referring people to their services. The response back indicated that the support agent could not help us further but could escalate the support ticket to the the folks that handle partners. That course of action was then agreed to by us. Shortly afterwards, the ticket status was updated and noted that it would be escalated to the proper department. Then it got interesting, a few minutes after that update, we got notice that the support ticket had been closed and noted as solved. One minute after the closed ticket notice, we got another email asking us to review the exchange with tech support. Needless to say, a bad review and a bit of frustration was expressed. While waiting to see if anything came of our inquiry or feedback, the application was updated but not completed except the most sensitive portions), and a fake product added and then saved for later. After reflecting on the security issues and the need to send over all the personal information, we felt it best to just delete the account and maybe try directly with their partner team. The request was then made via their tech support tickets to delete our newly created account. This is when it went sideways real fast. The underwriting and risk team contacted us shortly after our deletion request and said our account application was rejected, along with a link to a list of the types of businesses they prohibit. The list includes things like hate groups, illegal activities and along with discouraged businesses in gambling, travel, gift cards, etc. Totally frustrated with that notice, a response was sent asking why they would claim we are some nefarious business and not suitable to have an account just minutes after asking for the account and data to be deleted. The deletion was asked for again. A little while later, we got yet another notice that they are entitled by the GDPR (EU privacy regulations) to keep our data for 5 years as they have a legitimate interest in our data. That was the last straw. The deletion was asked for again, and indicated that the account was not even activated nor completely filled out. Shortly there after, the new support ticket was closed. Overall, the experience was awful. So some mor investigation was performed. It was found out that 2Checkout was no longer a US company but a brand under AvanGate, who provides the tech support behind 2Checkout, who also acquired 2Checkout in April 2017. AvanGate was then swallowed up by an very large investment firm with some impressive exits/holdings in 2018. Both of these events served as an indicator as to why our partnership and accounts had mysteriously disappeared on their end: We were small potatoes in the scheme of their exit strategies and was cut out somewhere in the shuffle. We also found other small companies that had their accounts mysteriously closed for unexplained reasons as well. After finding many others struggling with 2Checkout, it cemented the decision to pull the plug on our end as well and not attempt any further relations with 2Checkout. After all is said and done, we can no longer recommend 2Checkout to AgoraCart users based on our experiences with them the past few days. They require you to enter very specific product data that is a hassle to provide, making it not very ideal as a payment solution when you have more than a handful of products. But the biggest red flag is that you have to provide copies of government issued photo IDs, and copies of documents proving your business existence to a firm now located in the EU area with no recourse nor certainty that all that sensitive data is protected (Sorry but the GDPR is crap), at least if you are based in the US because you are not protected by the GDPR. The best practice is to provide that info after you are sure you want to do business with another company, but in this case their processes insist they be provided beforehand, which we find suspect or not well thought out. It could be careless to engage a company that insists on having your ID info upfront before thy will assist you. PayPal, Stripe, iTransact, Authorize.Net, eWay, NMI, and a lot of others are much easier to work with even on their worst days compared to the recent 2Checkout experience we had. So maybe it is for the best we had to pull the plug on our end as well. It just sucks to see a good company turn into a beast that is very hard to work with, including the apathy shown to those they deal with. You should treat your visitors, users, customers, partners etc as the valuable assets they are or can be, even when you find it may not be a fit for the both of you. Something we must improve on as well.	<urn:uuid:fe599501-1c7a-455f-be62-c6b5b8de9966>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://agoracart.com/community/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593994.14/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118221909-20200119005909-00298.warc.gz	en	0.980989	2,696	3.359375	3	[ 0.05768333375453949, 0.23799918591976166, 0.39883434772491455, -0.09603316336870193, -0.37451881170272827, -0.5126364231109619, -0.5687752962112427, 0.19392886757850647, -0.46272751688957214, -0.028000880032777786, -0.3164430856704712, -0.5293088555335999, -0.06595766544342041, 0.525095880...	1	Home - This Community Portal - Written by Mister Ed - Category: AgoraCart Misc - Hits: 383 The Agora was the heart of ancient Athens, the focus of political, commercial, administrative and social activity, the religious and cultural centre, and the seat of justice. The site was occupied without interruption in all periods of the city's history. It was used as a residential and burial area as early as the Late Neolithic period (3000 B.C.). Early in the 6th century, in the time of Solon, the Agora became a public area. After a series of repairs and remodellings, it reached its final rectangular form in the 2nd century B.C. Extensive building activity occured after the serious damage made by the Persians in 480/79 B.C., by the Romans in 89 B.C. and by the Herulae in A.D. 267 while, after the Slavic invasion in A.D. 580, It was gradually abandoned. From the Byzantine period until after 1834, when Athens became the capital of the independent Greek state, the Agora was again developed as a residential area. The first excavation campaigns were carried out by the Greek Archaeological Society in 1859-1912, and by the German Archaeological Institute in 1896-97. In 1890-91, a deep trench cut for the Athens-Peiraeus Railway brought to light extensive remains of ancient buildings. In 1931 the American School of Classical Studies started the systematic excavations with the financial support of J. Rockefeller and continued until 1941. Work was resumed in 1945 and is still continuing. In order to uncover the whole area of the Agora it was necessary to demolish around 400 modern buildings covering a total area of ca. 12 hectares. In the 19th century the four colossal figures of Giants and Tritons at the facade of the Gymnasium were restored by the Greek Archaeological Society. In the years 1953-56, the Stoa of Attalos was reconstructed to become a museum and in the same period the Byzantine church of Aghioi Apostoloi, built around A.D. 1000, was restored by the American School. Between 1972 and 1975, restoration and preservation work was carried out at the Hephaisteion; the area was cleared of the vegetation, and the roof of the temple was repaired in 1978 by the Archaeological Service. The most important monuments of the site are: Temple of Hephaistos. The temple, known as the "Theseion", is Doric, peripteral, with a pronaos and opisthodomos. It crowns the hill of Kolonos Agoraios and is the most prominent and better preserved monument of the Agora. The temple was dedicated to two gods, Hephaistos and Athena, whose bronze cult statues stood in the interior. The construction of the Hephaisteion started in 449 B.C. (click on image to see larger view) Stoa of Zeus Eleutherios. The stoa was erected at the end of the 5th century B.C. in honor of those who fought for the freedom and security of the city. Socrates is said to have met his friends in this stoa. Temple of Apollo Patroos. Small Ionic temple, erected in ca. 340-320 B.C., identified as the temple of Apollo who was worshipped as the "Father" (Pater), the founder of the Ionian race. Inside the cella stood the cult statue of the god, made by the famous sculptor Euphranor. (click on image to see larger view) Bouleuterion. The Council of 500 (Boule) held its regular meetings here. The building was erected at the end of the 5th century B.C. replacing the Old Bouleuterion, the ruins of which were found beneath the Metroon. Metroon. The building has an Ionic propylon and was erected in the 2nd century B.C. It accomodated both the sanctuary of the Mother of the Gods and the state archives, including the proceedings of the meetings of the Council of 500 and various official documents, protected by the goddess. (click on image to see larger view) Monument of the Eponymous Heroes. Remains of an oblong pedestal enclosed by a fence. It supported the bronze statues of the legendary heroes who gave their names to the ten tribes of Attica. In addition to its honorary function, the monument served as the official notice board of the city. It is dated to the second half of the 4th century B.C. (click on image to see larger view) Altar of the Twelve Gods. Fenced area with an altar at the centre, onstructed in 522/21 B.C. The sanctuary was a popular place of asylum and was considered to be the heart of the city, the central milestone from which distances to other places were measured. (click on image to see larger view) The Royal Stoa (Stoa Basileios). Built around 460 B.C., it was the seat of the Royal Archon (Archon Basileus). In this stoa the laws of Solon were displayed, and the Council of the Aeropagus held its meetings. Tholos. Circular building erected in ca. 460 B.C. The chairmen (prytaneis) of the Council of 500 (Boule) dined and spent the night in the Tholos so as to be available if necessary. A set of standard weights and measures was also kept in the building. - Written by Mister Ed - Category: Payment Processing - Hits: 96 Officially Pulling the Plug on 2Checkout AgoraCart has had a long standing partnership with 2Checkout ( 2CO ) since roughly 2002. 2Checkout was one of the first 5 payment processing solutions integrated into AgoraCart. 2Checkout has also been listed on our payment gateway partners page or similar lists for over 15 years. However as of October 24, 2019, 2Checkout will no longer be supported, endorsed, nor recommended. In fact if we had an official black-list of payment processing services, they might find themselves on it. This is a sad announcement for us here at AgoraCart, but after using their control panel interface, doing some research of on what happened to the 2Ccheckout we once knew, and an extremely frustrating set of encounters with their support and underwriting/risk departments, we decided to pull the plug officially on our end. Why We No Longer Want to Deal with 2Checkout: While updating the payment gateways pages for the updated Agoracart.com site design that emphasizes the new Route 66 version, we were confirming our referral links to 2Checkout and found they seemed to be ignored and routed to their homepage instead of where we remembered the link going. So logins into their partner and merchant portals were attempted, but no record of us existed. In fact the last email we got from them was in late 2014. So it was assumed the account had been purged or deactivated. More on this later. A new account was created. In haste we just picked a type of account so we could get a new partner ID not realizing they had a specific account for that purpose. It was also found that we could not change the account type nor move forward in any fashion without submitting a full application including copies of drivers licenses (or other photo ID), company documents that proved existence, SSNs or TINs, etc on every single owner and the company itself. So contact was made with their support department asking to become a partner, or switch our account to one that would handle that function. A few hours later, we received a polite email saying that Agoracart was not on their supported software list and did not have any documentation on how to setup AgoraCart. This was puzzling since was had indicated we were AgoraCart and the response totally missed the issue about partnership updates. It was suggested that their application and all of our personal info be provided so they could review and activate our account and then they could help with the issue further. That threw up a lot of red flags. Our response back to them indicated that again we were AgoraCart, not someone looking to use it, and just looking to make sure our partner IDs and links were going to get some sort of "credit" for referring people to their services. The response back indicated that the support agent could not help us further but could escalate the support ticket to the the folks that handle partners. That course of action was then agreed to by us. Shortly afterwards, the ticket status was updated and noted that it would be escalated to the proper department. Then it got interesting, a few minutes after that update, we got notice that the support ticket had been closed and noted as solved. One minute after the closed ticket notice, we got another email asking us to review the exchange with tech support. Needless to say, a bad review and a bit of frustration was expressed. While waiting to see if anything came of our inquiry or feedback, the application was updated but not completed except the most sensitive portions), and a fake product added and then saved for later. After reflecting on the security issues and the need to send over all the personal information, we felt it best to just delete the account and maybe try directly with their partner team. The request was then made via their tech support tickets to delete our newly created account. This is when it went sideways real fast. The underwriting and risk team contacted us shortly after our deletion request and said our account application was rejected, along with a link to a list of the types of businesses they prohibit. The list includes things like hate groups, illegal activities and along with discouraged businesses in gambling, travel, gift cards, etc. Totally frustrated with that notice, a response was sent asking why they would claim we are some nefarious business and not suitable to have an account just minutes after asking for the account and data to be deleted. The deletion was asked for again. A little while later, we got yet another notice that they are entitled by the GDPR (EU privacy regulations) to keep our data for 5 years as they have a legitimate interest in our data. That was the last straw. The deletion was asked for again, and indicated that the account was not even activated nor completely filled out. Shortly there after, the new support ticket was closed. Overall, the experience was awful. So some mor investigation was performed. It was found out that 2Checkout was no longer a US company but a brand under AvanGate, who provides the tech support behind 2Checkout, who also acquired 2Checkout in April 2017. AvanGate was then swallowed up by an very large investment firm with some impressive exits/holdings in 2018. Both of these events served as an indicator as to why our partnership and accounts had mysteriously disappeared on their end: We were small potatoes in the scheme of their exit strategies and was cut out somewhere in the shuffle. We also found other small companies that had their accounts mysteriously closed for unexplained reasons as well. After finding many others struggling with 2Checkout, it cemented the decision to pull the plug on our end as well and not attempt any further relations with 2Checkout. After all is said and done, we can no longer recommend 2Checkout to AgoraCart users based on our experiences with them the past few days. They require you to enter very specific product data that is a hassle to provide, making it not very ideal as a payment solution when you have more than a handful of products. But the biggest red flag is that you have to provide copies of government issued photo IDs, and copies of documents proving your business existence to a firm now located in the EU area with no recourse nor certainty that all that sensitive data is protected (Sorry but the GDPR is crap), at least if you are based in the US because you are not protected by the GDPR. The best practice is to provide that info after you are sure you want to do business with another company, but in this case their processes insist they be provided beforehand, which we find suspect or not well thought out. It could be careless to engage a company that insists on having your ID info upfront before thy will assist you. PayPal, Stripe, iTransact, Authorize.Net, eWay, NMI, and a lot of others are much easier to work with even on their worst days compared to the recent 2Checkout experience we had. So maybe it is for the best we had to pull the plug on our end as well. It just sucks to see a good company turn into a beast that is very hard to work with, including the apathy shown to those they deal with. You should treat your visitors, users, customers, partners etc as the valuable assets they are or can be, even when you find it may not be a fit for the both of you. Something we must improve on as well.	2,793	ENGLISH	1
I think of seven year olds as fun and carefree because they are beyond the challenge they faced at six, when they transitioned from the early to middle childhood years. At this age, the child has developed many foundational skills and will now work on refinement of them. The child has learned basic academic skills, such as reading and writing, has become involved in social activities, friendships, sports, dance, or scouts. As they work towards increasing accomplishment, children can now have fun with friends with a sense of confidence. Socially, sevens enjoy their friendships at a deeper level. They like to develop games with rules, and can better understand and are respectful of their friends’ feelings. They may enjoy making up scenarios for play, such as setting up a bakery or bike races. They also enjoy playing group games with friends from the neighborhood who are younger and older, such as wiffle ball. Physical development may happen in spurts. Children suddenly seem to have sprouted longer arms, legs, and feet. They still need about 10-12 hours of sleep, although they often resist going to bed because so many other things hold their interest. They begin or continue to lose baby teeth, and are often proud of the signs that they are growing up. Children who were physically active in dance or sports continue to develop and refine their skills and become increasingly competent. Typically, skill levels are based on children’s activity levels. Active children mature more quickly than those who are less active. Parenting of sevens is very different from parenting of younger children. Now children benefit from guidance, support, and discussions to make decisions as opposed to the ongoing oversight needed in the younger years. At seven, children often want to choose the clothing they wear, books they read, and extra-curricular activities they participate in. It is now better for them to choose a few activities, than to have too many, which can be stressful. With parental guidance, sevens can choose which activities they prefer. At this age, children like their independence and are creative problem solvers. Nutrition is another area where it is good practice for children to make appropriate choices for lunches and snacks. Rather than showing concern for each vegetable a child does or doesn’t eat, if children are provided with a variety of healthful options over a week’s time, they will get the nutrition their bodies need. If they help make out grocery lists, shop for food, and help prepare meals, their learning will have long-term benefits. In school students show greater skills with writing and reading as their vocabulary grows. Reading becomes more fluid, and young readers can now read more sight words. Writing becomes more complex, and increasing comprehension skills allow for more reading options. Children now have a strong sense of number and, with repetition, can memorize simple addition and subtraction facts. They enjoy word problems and studies of money, time, and measurement. While children at seven are more flexible with small changes, they prefer a routine. However, they love adventures like traveling, camping, hiking, and picnics. And adventures are even more fun when other families or friends are invited to join in!	<urn:uuid:7ae9d7ee-9450-4641-b4db-699a83ff004b>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.chestnutmontessori.com/single-post/2015/12/16/The-Fun-and-Friendly-Seven-Year-Old	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607118.51/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122131612-20200122160612-00474.warc.gz	en	0.980473	650	3.390625	3	[ -0.2546907067298889, -0.21919387578964233, 0.3571706712245941, -0.42452216148376465, -0.3791448175907135, 0.49631309509277344, -0.05353628844022751, -0.05739038437604904, -0.09125234186649323, -0.016805045306682587, 0.1935114860534668, -0.09381427615880966, 0.24041157960891724, 0.265035986...	6	I think of seven year olds as fun and carefree because they are beyond the challenge they faced at six, when they transitioned from the early to middle childhood years. At this age, the child has developed many foundational skills and will now work on refinement of them. The child has learned basic academic skills, such as reading and writing, has become involved in social activities, friendships, sports, dance, or scouts. As they work towards increasing accomplishment, children can now have fun with friends with a sense of confidence. Socially, sevens enjoy their friendships at a deeper level. They like to develop games with rules, and can better understand and are respectful of their friends’ feelings. They may enjoy making up scenarios for play, such as setting up a bakery or bike races. They also enjoy playing group games with friends from the neighborhood who are younger and older, such as wiffle ball. Physical development may happen in spurts. Children suddenly seem to have sprouted longer arms, legs, and feet. They still need about 10-12 hours of sleep, although they often resist going to bed because so many other things hold their interest. They begin or continue to lose baby teeth, and are often proud of the signs that they are growing up. Children who were physically active in dance or sports continue to develop and refine their skills and become increasingly competent. Typically, skill levels are based on children’s activity levels. Active children mature more quickly than those who are less active. Parenting of sevens is very different from parenting of younger children. Now children benefit from guidance, support, and discussions to make decisions as opposed to the ongoing oversight needed in the younger years. At seven, children often want to choose the clothing they wear, books they read, and extra-curricular activities they participate in. It is now better for them to choose a few activities, than to have too many, which can be stressful. With parental guidance, sevens can choose which activities they prefer. At this age, children like their independence and are creative problem solvers. Nutrition is another area where it is good practice for children to make appropriate choices for lunches and snacks. Rather than showing concern for each vegetable a child does or doesn’t eat, if children are provided with a variety of healthful options over a week’s time, they will get the nutrition their bodies need. If they help make out grocery lists, shop for food, and help prepare meals, their learning will have long-term benefits. In school students show greater skills with writing and reading as their vocabulary grows. Reading becomes more fluid, and young readers can now read more sight words. Writing becomes more complex, and increasing comprehension skills allow for more reading options. Children now have a strong sense of number and, with repetition, can memorize simple addition and subtraction facts. They enjoy word problems and studies of money, time, and measurement. While children at seven are more flexible with small changes, they prefer a routine. However, they love adventures like traveling, camping, hiking, and picnics. And adventures are even more fun when other families or friends are invited to join in!	635	ENGLISH	1
Most history books will describe how the Touch-Tone dial was introduced in 1962 at the Seattle World’s Fair. But they are a little wrong. In 1958 the Bell System already had trials running with pushbutton telephones. Morris, Illinois was the site of the world’s first electronic telephone system that was actually in service. It was a one-of-a-kind central office that pioneered so many things that it deserves great recognition. I’ll write about it sometime. It had two interesting ideas: The rotary dials spun at twice the normal rate. That is, they spun at 20 PPS. Almost all of the phones were this type. They had a small number of push-button phones, precursors to Touch-Tone phones. These push-button phones used tuned springs to make tones. Pressing a button would turn on a microphone inside the keypad and then the button would pluck the tuned spring. It would resonate at a particular frequency much like a tuning fork. The tone could then be detected and be used for dialing. It was very mechanical and, as you would expect, results were spotty. But they did have it up and running. Morris was also completely electronic, with no relays or switches. It was computer controlled. It had precise tones. It had an amazing variety of custom calling features. It used tone ringers inside the phones. All of this was very innovative. Oh, and it was based on tubes. It was pre-transistor.	<urn:uuid:7f6e0e11-7ff0-4204-8008-d3f92efbaf82>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://talkingpointz.com/the-early-history-of-the-touch-tone-dial/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606269.37/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122012204-20200122041204-00025.warc.gz	en	0.983619	319	3.4375	3	[ -0.7187209129333496, 0.15981867909431458, 0.3442458510398865, -0.09073809534311295, -0.9734366536140442, 0.11932092159986496, 0.3593440055847168, 0.21248337626457214, 0.1332034170627594, 0.24129770696163177, -0.0349268801510334, 0.5124885439872742, 0.2554422914981842, 0.14078019559383392, ...	1	Most history books will describe how the Touch-Tone dial was introduced in 1962 at the Seattle World’s Fair. But they are a little wrong. In 1958 the Bell System already had trials running with pushbutton telephones. Morris, Illinois was the site of the world’s first electronic telephone system that was actually in service. It was a one-of-a-kind central office that pioneered so many things that it deserves great recognition. I’ll write about it sometime. It had two interesting ideas: The rotary dials spun at twice the normal rate. That is, they spun at 20 PPS. Almost all of the phones were this type. They had a small number of push-button phones, precursors to Touch-Tone phones. These push-button phones used tuned springs to make tones. Pressing a button would turn on a microphone inside the keypad and then the button would pluck the tuned spring. It would resonate at a particular frequency much like a tuning fork. The tone could then be detected and be used for dialing. It was very mechanical and, as you would expect, results were spotty. But they did have it up and running. Morris was also completely electronic, with no relays or switches. It was computer controlled. It had precise tones. It had an amazing variety of custom calling features. It used tone ringers inside the phones. All of this was very innovative. Oh, and it was based on tubes. It was pre-transistor.	306	ENGLISH	1
Ancient Greek Horse with Bowed Head A horse sculpture, with elegant geometrical figures on its body and with bowed head. Hand-Made Bronze Sculpture with Quality Guarantee. Traditionally made with the method of casting bronze and with a museum-like oxidization. Horses have been an important, if not vital, part of most great societies. This fact was no less true in Ancient Greek society where horses were held on a level just below the gods. According to I. Menegatos, a lecturer from the Agricultural University of Athens, there were eight different breeds of Greek horses. All eight breeds were valued equally as “majestic or awe-inspiring beasts.” This was especially true in scenes of battle. In Greek society, horses were highly valued for several reasons. The main reason rested with the fact that horses represented wealth. With good pasture so expensive, horses remained a symbol of wealth throughout all of Greek history. They were used mainly for the “essentially upper-class pastimes of hunting and racing in peacetime and for cavalry service during wartime.” Although horses were generally purchased for use in the Greek cavalry, very little money came from the government for their upkeep. What did come was in the form of a loan, to be paid back upon the horse’s death or loss of usefulness. Tremendous amounts of money went into the purchase and upkeep of these treasured animals. Money was spent to purchase the horse, to buy its armor, to buy a groom, and to maintain a stable or pay to board the horse at someone else’s stable. All this, plus the everyday cost of food. In addition, money would need to be spent by the owner if ever the horse were to get sick or injured. Researchers have tried to estimate the costs incurred by these horse owners, but have managed only to come up with approximate prices for the grain ration fed daily. The figures they arrived at constituted a goodly sum back then. This was money that only a select few in the fourth century B.C. possessed. Breeding of these horses was an even more expensive venture than simply owning them, and was undertaken only by the extremely affluent. Eight breeds were cultivated in Ancient Greece: Thessaly, Skyros, Pindos, Pineias, Andravidas, Crete (Messara), Ainou, and Zakynthos. Due to the poor vegetation and harsh living conditions in most of Greece at the time, all eight of these breeds developed into sturdy but comparatively small horses. Read more here	<urn:uuid:3510c2cf-0b70-414a-8639-0e9bc38a6d43>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.artgreka.gr/ancient-greek-horse-bowed-head	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00112.warc.gz	en	0.982571	529	3.4375	3	[ -0.0027271632570773363, -0.14758366346359253, 0.7302597761154175, 0.11003443598747253, -0.5083674192428589, -0.36426660418510437, -0.2336684614419937, 0.46377384662628174, 0.051542799919843674, 0.3250240385532379, -0.38412606716156006, -0.3215549886226654, 0.039891187101602554, 0.471911638...	6	Ancient Greek Horse with Bowed Head A horse sculpture, with elegant geometrical figures on its body and with bowed head. Hand-Made Bronze Sculpture with Quality Guarantee. Traditionally made with the method of casting bronze and with a museum-like oxidization. Horses have been an important, if not vital, part of most great societies. This fact was no less true in Ancient Greek society where horses were held on a level just below the gods. According to I. Menegatos, a lecturer from the Agricultural University of Athens, there were eight different breeds of Greek horses. All eight breeds were valued equally as “majestic or awe-inspiring beasts.” This was especially true in scenes of battle. In Greek society, horses were highly valued for several reasons. The main reason rested with the fact that horses represented wealth. With good pasture so expensive, horses remained a symbol of wealth throughout all of Greek history. They were used mainly for the “essentially upper-class pastimes of hunting and racing in peacetime and for cavalry service during wartime.” Although horses were generally purchased for use in the Greek cavalry, very little money came from the government for their upkeep. What did come was in the form of a loan, to be paid back upon the horse’s death or loss of usefulness. Tremendous amounts of money went into the purchase and upkeep of these treasured animals. Money was spent to purchase the horse, to buy its armor, to buy a groom, and to maintain a stable or pay to board the horse at someone else’s stable. All this, plus the everyday cost of food. In addition, money would need to be spent by the owner if ever the horse were to get sick or injured. Researchers have tried to estimate the costs incurred by these horse owners, but have managed only to come up with approximate prices for the grain ration fed daily. The figures they arrived at constituted a goodly sum back then. This was money that only a select few in the fourth century B.C. possessed. Breeding of these horses was an even more expensive venture than simply owning them, and was undertaken only by the extremely affluent. Eight breeds were cultivated in Ancient Greece: Thessaly, Skyros, Pindos, Pineias, Andravidas, Crete (Messara), Ainou, and Zakynthos. Due to the poor vegetation and harsh living conditions in most of Greece at the time, all eight of these breeds developed into sturdy but comparatively small horses. Read more here	506	ENGLISH	1
Francis of Assisi was a poor man who astounded and inspired the Church by taking the gospel literally—not in a narrow fundamentalist sense, but by actually following all that Jesus said and did, joyfully, without limit and without a mite of self-importance. Francis was famous for his love of all creation. He called for simplicity of life, poverty, and humility before God. He worked to care for the poor. Thousands were drawn to his sincerity, piety, and joy. In all his actions, Francis sought to follow fully and literally the way of life demonstrated by Christ in the Gospels. My report is going to discuss the life and contributions of St. Francis of Assisi. Francis of Assisi lived about eight hundred years ago. He was born in the city of Assisi, Italy, in 1182. He was the son of Peter Bernardone (A wealthy merchant) and Madonna Pica. His father sold spices and fabrics and was often out of town on business. While Peter Bernardone was traveling in Provence on business, Madonna Pica gave birth to his son. Far from being excited or apologetic because he'd been gone, Pietro was furious because she'd had his new son baptized Giovanni after John the Baptist. The last thing Pietro wanted in his son was a man of God -- he wanted a man of business, a cloth merchant like he was, and he especially wanted a son Francesco -- which is the equivalent of calling him Frenchman. Francis spent a happy childhood under the watchful eye of Madonna Pica and the attention heaped on him by his father, who was certain that Francis would follow him in the merchant business. His strict education and healthy moral upbringing gave everything he did a sense of balance. Francis enjoyed a very rich easy life growing up because of his father's wealth and the permissiveness of the times. From the beginning everyone loved Francis. He was constantly happy, charming, and a born leader. If he was picky, people excused him. If he was ill, people took care of him. If he was so much of a dreamer he did poorly in school, no one minded. In many ways he was too easy to like for his own good. No one tried to control him or teach him. As he grew up, Francis became the leader of a crowd of young people who spent their nights in wild parties. Francis himself said, "I lived in sin" during that time. Francis fulfilled every hope of Pietro's, and despite his dreaming, Francis was also good at business. But Francis wanted more than wealth. But not holiness. Francis wanted to be a noble, a knight. Battle was the best place to win the glory and prestige he longed for. He got his first chance when Assisi declared war on their longtime enemy, the nearby town of Perugia. When Francis was just barely twenty years old, he fought in the war between Assisi and Perugia and was taken prisoner. Most of the troops from Assisi were butchered in the fight. Only those wealthy enough to expect to be ransomed were taken prisoner. At last Francis was among the nobility like he always wanted to be, but...	<urn:uuid:14444159-5279-46e1-83e1-02877779d735>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://brightkite.com/essay-on/francis-of-assisi	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597230.18/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120023523-20200120051523-00270.warc.gz	en	0.992078	660	3.3125	3	[ 0.22087562084197998, 0.3525438904762268, 0.07615731656551361, -0.1978304386138916, 0.08870306611061096, 0.16291886568069458, 0.3307706415653229, 0.13224247097969055, 0.5672376155853271, -0.2556977868080139, -0.2794424891471863, -0.5122275352478027, 0.21792584657669067, 0.08252333849668503,...	1	Francis of Assisi was a poor man who astounded and inspired the Church by taking the gospel literally—not in a narrow fundamentalist sense, but by actually following all that Jesus said and did, joyfully, without limit and without a mite of self-importance. Francis was famous for his love of all creation. He called for simplicity of life, poverty, and humility before God. He worked to care for the poor. Thousands were drawn to his sincerity, piety, and joy. In all his actions, Francis sought to follow fully and literally the way of life demonstrated by Christ in the Gospels. My report is going to discuss the life and contributions of St. Francis of Assisi. Francis of Assisi lived about eight hundred years ago. He was born in the city of Assisi, Italy, in 1182. He was the son of Peter Bernardone (A wealthy merchant) and Madonna Pica. His father sold spices and fabrics and was often out of town on business. While Peter Bernardone was traveling in Provence on business, Madonna Pica gave birth to his son. Far from being excited or apologetic because he'd been gone, Pietro was furious because she'd had his new son baptized Giovanni after John the Baptist. The last thing Pietro wanted in his son was a man of God -- he wanted a man of business, a cloth merchant like he was, and he especially wanted a son Francesco -- which is the equivalent of calling him Frenchman. Francis spent a happy childhood under the watchful eye of Madonna Pica and the attention heaped on him by his father, who was certain that Francis would follow him in the merchant business. His strict education and healthy moral upbringing gave everything he did a sense of balance. Francis enjoyed a very rich easy life growing up because of his father's wealth and the permissiveness of the times. From the beginning everyone loved Francis. He was constantly happy, charming, and a born leader. If he was picky, people excused him. If he was ill, people took care of him. If he was so much of a dreamer he did poorly in school, no one minded. In many ways he was too easy to like for his own good. No one tried to control him or teach him. As he grew up, Francis became the leader of a crowd of young people who spent their nights in wild parties. Francis himself said, "I lived in sin" during that time. Francis fulfilled every hope of Pietro's, and despite his dreaming, Francis was also good at business. But Francis wanted more than wealth. But not holiness. Francis wanted to be a noble, a knight. Battle was the best place to win the glory and prestige he longed for. He got his first chance when Assisi declared war on their longtime enemy, the nearby town of Perugia. When Francis was just barely twenty years old, he fought in the war between Assisi and Perugia and was taken prisoner. Most of the troops from Assisi were butchered in the fight. Only those wealthy enough to expect to be ransomed were taken prisoner. At last Francis was among the nobility like he always wanted to be, but...	660	ENGLISH	1
But this isn't the first time as unmanned aircraft has taken off from a naval ship. Pictured above, the RAE Larynx was hardly the first drone, but it was still in the first generation. World War I saw several attempts at unmanned flying machines, the most successful of which was the Kittering Bug, a bomb-carrying biplane designed to fly a set distance and then crash to the ground. The RAE Larynx was made later, in the interwar years. It had the body of a single-wing fighter, and a powerful engine gave it a top speed of 200 mph, making it faster than contemporary fighters. Carrying an explosive payload and flying toward a target, it was less like a modern warplane and more like a cruise missile.	<urn:uuid:82ba3efe-fabd-4aa1-833e-7c45d9cb99e7>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2013-05/exciting-remote-controlled-aircraft-makes-naval-historyin-1927/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672537.90/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125131641-20200125160641-00130.warc.gz	en	0.985288	159	3.28125	3	[ -0.011758875101804733, 0.16696733236312866, 0.07768293470144272, -0.4890894591808319, 0.051506880670785904, 0.20025749504566193, 0.3134099543094635, 0.5587875843048096, 0.03370165452361107, 0.03831305354833603, 0.23321321606636047, 0.24002990126609802, 0.30932366847991943, 0.34317639470100...	1	But this isn't the first time as unmanned aircraft has taken off from a naval ship. Pictured above, the RAE Larynx was hardly the first drone, but it was still in the first generation. World War I saw several attempts at unmanned flying machines, the most successful of which was the Kittering Bug, a bomb-carrying biplane designed to fly a set distance and then crash to the ground. The RAE Larynx was made later, in the interwar years. It had the body of a single-wing fighter, and a powerful engine gave it a top speed of 200 mph, making it faster than contemporary fighters. Carrying an explosive payload and flying toward a target, it was less like a modern warplane and more like a cruise missile.	161	ENGLISH	1
William F. Cody (1846-1917), better known as “Buffalo Bill,” was born near Le Claire, Iowa, in Scott County, just north of Davenport. By the end of his life, he had become what some have called “the most famous American in the world.” He was a Pony Express rider, an Army scout, a buffalo hunter for the railroad, and the founder and central attraction of Buffalo Bill’s Wild West show, which traveled throughout the U.S. and Europe for thirty years. This talk is an overview of Cody’s life, both tragic and heroic. It was tragic because of the role that he played in the near extinction of the American Bison (he himself is said to have shot nearly 3,000 buffalo in eight months), and, even more deplorable, in the subjugation of Native Americans. If his life was heroic, it was because of his later support of the rights of Native Americans, his friendship with many of them (most notably with Sitting Bull), and his link with colorful characters like Annie Oakley and Wild Bill Hickok. As a Wild West performer, it is thought that Cody probably played to a collective audience of more than 50 million, including at various Iowa towns. This is a face-paced and entertaining 45-minute talk, illustrated by projected vintage photographs, film clips and animated graphics. Free and open to the public thanks to the support of West Des Moines Historical Society Members, the West Des Moines Library Friends Foundation and the Iowa Arts Council.	<urn:uuid:97573dd6-0dbe-4286-ae96-2766c349a004>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.catchdesmoines.com/event/buffalo-bill-cody/23815/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593295.11/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118164132-20200118192132-00406.warc.gz	en	0.984866	317	3.3125	3	[ -0.2804938554763794, -0.027533037588000298, 0.2801794111728668, 0.23727118968963623, -0.4064892530441284, -0.0951801985502243, 0.20829704403877258, 0.17587043344974518, -0.27060726284980774, -0.07747910916805267, -0.10967966169118881, -0.09324327856302261, 0.21451346576213837, 0.1734128296...	2	William F. Cody (1846-1917), better known as “Buffalo Bill,” was born near Le Claire, Iowa, in Scott County, just north of Davenport. By the end of his life, he had become what some have called “the most famous American in the world.” He was a Pony Express rider, an Army scout, a buffalo hunter for the railroad, and the founder and central attraction of Buffalo Bill’s Wild West show, which traveled throughout the U.S. and Europe for thirty years. This talk is an overview of Cody’s life, both tragic and heroic. It was tragic because of the role that he played in the near extinction of the American Bison (he himself is said to have shot nearly 3,000 buffalo in eight months), and, even more deplorable, in the subjugation of Native Americans. If his life was heroic, it was because of his later support of the rights of Native Americans, his friendship with many of them (most notably with Sitting Bull), and his link with colorful characters like Annie Oakley and Wild Bill Hickok. As a Wild West performer, it is thought that Cody probably played to a collective audience of more than 50 million, including at various Iowa towns. This is a face-paced and entertaining 45-minute talk, illustrated by projected vintage photographs, film clips and animated graphics. Free and open to the public thanks to the support of West Des Moines Historical Society Members, the West Des Moines Library Friends Foundation and the Iowa Arts Council.	315	ENGLISH	1
Maeshowe facts for kids Maeshowe, also known as Orkhaugr, a burial mound in Orkney, Scotland, with underground passage graves. It was built during the Neolithic period, about 3000 years ago. It has been included in the World Heritage Site, Heart of Neolithic Orkney. The mound used to be taller, with a depression in the top, looking like a small volcano. It measured 11 meters in height and had a diameter of 30 meters. This was changed in 1861 when the mound was dug into by archaeologist James Farrer. It was built on a raised level area and surrounded by a ditch and a raised bank. It may have been built on top of an earlier structure. Research shows that the ditch used to be filled with water, and there was a large stone circle around the mound. The grave itself is a long narrow entrance opening into a large chamber. There are three smaller rooms which open into the main chamber. It has been built to line up with the sun at the Winter Solstice. Images for kids Maeshowe Facts for Kids. Kiddle Encyclopedia.	<urn:uuid:d3da55d7-6fd0-4aff-9622-73f0ecac151d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://kids.kiddle.co/Maeshowe	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594209.12/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119035851-20200119063851-00100.warc.gz	en	0.981312	234	4	4	[ -0.0921114832162857, 0.24626843631267548, 0.20863988995552063, 0.4393632411956787, 0.2099883258342743, 0.07036533206701279, -0.06696287542581558, -0.0035630117636173964, -0.5549622774124146, 0.19461414217948914, 0.214742973446846, -0.5127853155136108, 0.06080583482980728, 0.661571919918060...	2	Maeshowe facts for kids Maeshowe, also known as Orkhaugr, a burial mound in Orkney, Scotland, with underground passage graves. It was built during the Neolithic period, about 3000 years ago. It has been included in the World Heritage Site, Heart of Neolithic Orkney. The mound used to be taller, with a depression in the top, looking like a small volcano. It measured 11 meters in height and had a diameter of 30 meters. This was changed in 1861 when the mound was dug into by archaeologist James Farrer. It was built on a raised level area and surrounded by a ditch and a raised bank. It may have been built on top of an earlier structure. Research shows that the ditch used to be filled with water, and there was a large stone circle around the mound. The grave itself is a long narrow entrance opening into a large chamber. There are three smaller rooms which open into the main chamber. It has been built to line up with the sun at the Winter Solstice. Images for kids Maeshowe Facts for Kids. Kiddle Encyclopedia.	241	ENGLISH	1
Why Saint Andrew? St. Andrew is fairly well known as being the patron saint of Scotland, but the question is why? Andrew is said to have been a fisherman from a village on the Sea of Galilee. He and his brother Simon Peter were called to become “fishers of men” as disciples of Jesus and thus he spent about the first half of his life in Palestine. From there he is said to have to traveled to Scythia. The “Chronicle of Nestor” says that he preached along the Black Sea and the Dnieper river as far as Kiev, and from there he traveled to Novgorod. He founded the See of Byzantium (later Constantinople and Istanbul) in AD 38, and became a patron saint of Ukraine, Romania and Russia. So the question is why should a saint who seemingly has no connection to Scotland become it’s patron? One story claimed that the 9th century Scottish King Oengus II was facing defeat in an upcoming battle against a larger army. St. Andrew appeared to the Oengus and told him if he fought in the name of the saint the battle would go in his favor despite the odds. About the same time a monk named Rule who had been inspired by a dream was sailing from Greece and making his way to Scotland with relics of St. Andrew. Rule just happened to arrive in Fife at the same time that the triumphant Oengus was returning home. In thanks, and celebration Oegnus dedicated a church to the saint where the monk Rule had landed -founding the modern city of St Andrews. But… this story is often seen as merely a re-working of a similar tale about the Roman Emperor Constantine who had a vision and conversion on the eve of battle. The fact that Andrew preached in the area known as Scythia at the time may actually be the connection. Early legends in Gaelic claim that Scythia was the original home of the Gaels. For example the Book of Invasions describes the first Gaels as migrating from Asia, stopping in Egypt, Spain and finally settling in Britain and Ireland. In The Ecclesiastical History of the English People (circa AD 731) by the Medieval historian Bede claims that the Picts were descended from the Scythians. Even though these legends don’t seem to be true if it was commonly believed at the time, it would make sense that a saint who preached in Scythia might be adopted by a people who thought themselves to be sons and daughters of Scythians. The “Declaration of Arbroath” seems to add some credence to this idea: ‘[The Scots] true nobility and merits have been made plain, if not by other considerations, then by the fact that… the Lord Jesus Christ… brought them, the first of all, to his holy faith, though they lived in the furthest parts of the world. And he chose that they be converted to the faith by none other than the brother of the blessed Peter, the gentle Andrew… whom he wished always to be over us as our patron.’ It is not hard to read that, in context of the legends above, as a reference to St. Andrew’s work with the Scythians — a people who lived at ‘the furthest parts of the world’ — before they set out on their voyage to Ireland and Britain.	<urn:uuid:966675be-5062-4b16-bf75-560e150a761c>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.kilts-n-stuff.com/Blog/why-saint-andrew/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00082.warc.gz	en	0.983276	701	3.28125	3	[ 0.2079450637102127, 0.11257317662239075, 0.18722039461135864, -0.14033842086791992, 0.00523734837770462, -0.5898786783218384, 0.3299645185470581, 0.34430694580078125, 0.1474675089120865, 0.2719671130180359, -0.23236483335494995, -0.2161172330379486, 0.09163667261600494, -0.0179501287639141...	2	Why Saint Andrew? St. Andrew is fairly well known as being the patron saint of Scotland, but the question is why? Andrew is said to have been a fisherman from a village on the Sea of Galilee. He and his brother Simon Peter were called to become “fishers of men” as disciples of Jesus and thus he spent about the first half of his life in Palestine. From there he is said to have to traveled to Scythia. The “Chronicle of Nestor” says that he preached along the Black Sea and the Dnieper river as far as Kiev, and from there he traveled to Novgorod. He founded the See of Byzantium (later Constantinople and Istanbul) in AD 38, and became a patron saint of Ukraine, Romania and Russia. So the question is why should a saint who seemingly has no connection to Scotland become it’s patron? One story claimed that the 9th century Scottish King Oengus II was facing defeat in an upcoming battle against a larger army. St. Andrew appeared to the Oengus and told him if he fought in the name of the saint the battle would go in his favor despite the odds. About the same time a monk named Rule who had been inspired by a dream was sailing from Greece and making his way to Scotland with relics of St. Andrew. Rule just happened to arrive in Fife at the same time that the triumphant Oengus was returning home. In thanks, and celebration Oegnus dedicated a church to the saint where the monk Rule had landed -founding the modern city of St Andrews. But… this story is often seen as merely a re-working of a similar tale about the Roman Emperor Constantine who had a vision and conversion on the eve of battle. The fact that Andrew preached in the area known as Scythia at the time may actually be the connection. Early legends in Gaelic claim that Scythia was the original home of the Gaels. For example the Book of Invasions describes the first Gaels as migrating from Asia, stopping in Egypt, Spain and finally settling in Britain and Ireland. In The Ecclesiastical History of the English People (circa AD 731) by the Medieval historian Bede claims that the Picts were descended from the Scythians. Even though these legends don’t seem to be true if it was commonly believed at the time, it would make sense that a saint who preached in Scythia might be adopted by a people who thought themselves to be sons and daughters of Scythians. The “Declaration of Arbroath” seems to add some credence to this idea: ‘[The Scots] true nobility and merits have been made plain, if not by other considerations, then by the fact that… the Lord Jesus Christ… brought them, the first of all, to his holy faith, though they lived in the furthest parts of the world. And he chose that they be converted to the faith by none other than the brother of the blessed Peter, the gentle Andrew… whom he wished always to be over us as our patron.’ It is not hard to read that, in context of the legends above, as a reference to St. Andrew’s work with the Scythians — a people who lived at ‘the furthest parts of the world’ — before they set out on their voyage to Ireland and Britain.	692	ENGLISH	1
In this section To make an end-of-life decision for their child parents think about a number of things that are important for their child and themselves. Some of these can be hard to explain to other people. Parents know their child in ways that doctors and other healthcare professionals may not understand even if they have known the child for a long time. (See Who decides?) Parents think about the enjoyment that their child has in life - what makes them happy. They think too about whether their child is experiencing physical pain or discomfort and whether particular medical procedures may hurt the child or be distressing for the child. Parents look at whether their child is in emotional distress or is upset. They think about the kind of relationships the child shares with their family and friends and how they relate to their world. Parents may see that their child's experiences have changed over time. (See Quality of Life) Often in reaching a decision, parents work out what they believe is the right, best or fair thing to do for their child in their circumstances. Fair can be hard to judge. Usually a fair decision means not prolonging the child's suffering or maintaining their life when it does not benefit the child. Sometimes parents feel that their child has gone through enough difficulties in their life rather than one event being too challenging for them. In making a decision parents think about the past and also imagine what the future will hold for their child. (See Doing 'what is best' for a child) "I suppose that I had decided it was going to be quantity over quality. That a good life didn't necessarily have to be a long one….And I wanted it to be filled with a lot more joy… But I had seen him back in the hospital even on the BiPAP mask he was just miserable. And it was a really distressing experience." Parents have talked about their decision as being about the child not the parent. Many parents view an end-of-life decision as their responsibility as a parent. Although parents and their child's lives are interconnected, a decision to forego life-sustaining medical treatment is primarily a decision about the child's wellbeing. Parents, however, need to feel that they can live with the decision they have made. See 'Did I make the right decision?' Will I be able to live with myself? "as his mother I have to make the decision for him and what's best for him" "so I could clearly see then, that it was no longer for him. And I think that was our line in the sand- if we were doing it for us rather than for him." "For us it doesn't feel right, but for him I'm truly at peace about making that decision" To make their decision parents seek out information from various sources such as healthcare and community professionals, other parents, support groups for particular conditions and the internet. Some parents talk with trusted family and friends, elders or members of their community or with religious advisors. No parent wants to feel pressured or rushed into such an important decision. It is usually important for parents to have as much time as possible to think about their child's situation. (See Is there a rush to make a decision? Do I need to decide now?)	<urn:uuid:a6caac38-f15e-42f0-b0bc-e1914e0b69e6>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.rch.org.au/caringdecisions/chapters/How_do_parents_think_about_end_of_life_decisions/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606872.19/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122071919-20200122100919-00289.warc.gz	en	0.988519	660	3.421875	3	[ -0.16713222861289978, 0.05313963443040848, 0.2524005174636841, -0.46126067638397217, -0.2359398752450943, 0.4239150881767273, 0.603424608707428, -0.03896655887365341, 0.08068415522575378, 0.09730938076972961, 0.10642220824956894, 0.17814655601978302, -0.04710760712623596, 0.293047130107879...	12	In this section To make an end-of-life decision for their child parents think about a number of things that are important for their child and themselves. Some of these can be hard to explain to other people. Parents know their child in ways that doctors and other healthcare professionals may not understand even if they have known the child for a long time. (See Who decides?) Parents think about the enjoyment that their child has in life - what makes them happy. They think too about whether their child is experiencing physical pain or discomfort and whether particular medical procedures may hurt the child or be distressing for the child. Parents look at whether their child is in emotional distress or is upset. They think about the kind of relationships the child shares with their family and friends and how they relate to their world. Parents may see that their child's experiences have changed over time. (See Quality of Life) Often in reaching a decision, parents work out what they believe is the right, best or fair thing to do for their child in their circumstances. Fair can be hard to judge. Usually a fair decision means not prolonging the child's suffering or maintaining their life when it does not benefit the child. Sometimes parents feel that their child has gone through enough difficulties in their life rather than one event being too challenging for them. In making a decision parents think about the past and also imagine what the future will hold for their child. (See Doing 'what is best' for a child) "I suppose that I had decided it was going to be quantity over quality. That a good life didn't necessarily have to be a long one….And I wanted it to be filled with a lot more joy… But I had seen him back in the hospital even on the BiPAP mask he was just miserable. And it was a really distressing experience." Parents have talked about their decision as being about the child not the parent. Many parents view an end-of-life decision as their responsibility as a parent. Although parents and their child's lives are interconnected, a decision to forego life-sustaining medical treatment is primarily a decision about the child's wellbeing. Parents, however, need to feel that they can live with the decision they have made. See 'Did I make the right decision?' Will I be able to live with myself? "as his mother I have to make the decision for him and what's best for him" "so I could clearly see then, that it was no longer for him. And I think that was our line in the sand- if we were doing it for us rather than for him." "For us it doesn't feel right, but for him I'm truly at peace about making that decision" To make their decision parents seek out information from various sources such as healthcare and community professionals, other parents, support groups for particular conditions and the internet. Some parents talk with trusted family and friends, elders or members of their community or with religious advisors. No parent wants to feel pressured or rushed into such an important decision. It is usually important for parents to have as much time as possible to think about their child's situation. (See Is there a rush to make a decision? Do I need to decide now?)	645	ENGLISH	1
Anyone on the losing side of a major conflict has experienced the end of the world; or at least the end of the world as they knew it. This has been true for as long as man has fought wars, and the list of those gone forever is a lengthy one, indeed. There may be Hittite and Carthaginian art today to admire, but their civilizations have been otherwise completely wiped from the face of the Earth. The same is true of the Mayan, Aztec and the Khmer empires, each of which has left behind some cool pyramids but whose culture today is little more than a tourist attraction. However, some soldiers, as well as armed civilians, have refused to give up, even after the cause was lost and the war was over. One of the earliest “survivor tales” could be those Trojan refugees led by Aeneas who escaped the wrath of the gift-bearing Greeks and, after a series of adventures around the Mediterranean, reached the Italian coast and founded Alba Longa. The Alban kings may not be so memorable, but their descendants certainly are: They founded Rome. And while it took some 800 years, it does appear those Trojans got their revenge, because Rome eventually conquered the Greeks. One other irony of this tale is that Aeneas had reportedly been the guest of Queen Dido, who ruled over Carthage, a city later destroyed by Rome. Just as Rome could be seen to be one of the ultimate testaments to surviving against all odds, some of the peoples it subjugated did the same—namely, the Israelites. After a few uprisings, the Romans got serious, and this included the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in the year 70. Nevertheless, the Jews tried again, but Bar Kokhba’s revolt (132–135), was the last straw for Rome. Judaea, the name of the Roman province, was literally washed away, and the name of the land was changed to Syria Palaestina, from which we get the name, Palestine, today. The Emperor Hadrian wanted to erase the historical ties of the Jewish people to the region, and it wouldn’t become the center of Jewish culture until the modern era. However, in 1948, Israel declared itself an independent state, and this was recognized by most nations of the world a year later. It might have taken a very long time, but this is, indeed, a story of survival.Confederate Holdouts Not every survivor tale happened on such a grand scale. Wars have always involved those who have opted to hold out when hope seemed lost. Individual soldiers and even small units have decided that their war wasn’t over. This was certainly the case at the end of the American Civil War, and more than a few Southerners couldn’t, wouldn’t accept that the Confederate States of America had been defeated and dissolved. The sailors of the raiding vessel, CSS Shenandoah, were on a mission to “seek out and utterly destroy” Union commerce, and under the command of Captain James Waddell, the ship had the dubious distinction of firing the final shots of the war. However, in this case, it turned out it was by accident as much as by design. The ship, which had sailed from England in late 1864 to the Pacific, was at sea when General Robert E. Lee surrendered in April 1865, and the Shenandoah spent the summer months raiding American whaling ships in the Bering Sea. Finally, on August 2, Waddell learned the war was over, but fearing he and his crew might be tried as pirates, he opted to sail to England. The only problem was they were off the west coast of Mexico at the time and had to sail around South America and then to England, thus becoming the only Confederate vessel to circumnavigate the globe. The captain and crew were found to have not infringed on the rules of war, and most eventually returned home. As for the ship, it did not survive for long. It was sold to the Sultan of Zanzibar, after which it was seriously damaged in a storm in 1872 and subsequently scrapped. Another Confederate opted to continue the fight, even when he knew the war was over. This was General Joseph O. Shelby, who has earned the nickname, “The Undefeated.” Having spent the war as a bushwhacker, he and his roughly 600 men opted for exile over surrender and headed to Mexico, where they offered their services to Emperor Maximilian I, the brother of Austro-Hungarian Emperor Franz Josef. The irony was that Maximilian, who was put in power by France’s Emperor Napoleon III, didn’t actually want a ragtag band of rebels in his army. Even so, he allowed them to found Carlota Colony, a settlement of Confederate expats. Perhaps Maximilian should have accepted Shelby into his forces, because less than two years later, the Austrian would-be ruler of Mexico proved to be not much of a survivor. Maximilian I was overthrown and executed by firing squad, while Shelby and his comrades finally returned to the United States to resume civilian life as survivors. Cut Off but Holding On “As preppers and survivalists know so well, attitude and aptitude, paired with a strong commitment to carry on, comprise the base upon which survival stories are built.” When a war ends, most soldiers, especially those in far-off stations and postings, are likely to throw down their weapons as soon as they hear the war is over. This was not the case for the Spanish defenders at Baler in the Philippines. However, in the fog of war, soldiers sometimes don’t actually believe the war is over. That was true of the 57 Spanish infantrymen who held out for six months against some 800 Filipino insurgents. The Spanish didn’t believe the conflict was over, despite the Filipino attempts to provide newspapers and other documents. It was only when a Spanish soldier read a wedding announcement for a person he knew that the soldiers believed the war had really ended and finally surrendered. During World War I, German General Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck earned the distinction of not being defeated in the field while leading a long campaign of retreat and guerrilla operations in East Africa. With just 14,000 men, including 3,000 Germans and 11,000 Africans, he held in check a force of 300,000 British, Belgian and Portuguese troops. But he was not the only German soldier to fight against the odds. Less known than von Lettow-Vorbeck is Hermann Detzner, who kept up the fight in Germany’s New Guinea colony after it was overrun in late 1914. Detzner was a colonial officer in the Schutztruppe and was on a surveying mission when the war broke out. When he heard that the German colony was overrun by the Australians, Detzner and his force of just 70 men headed into the interior and fought a guerilla campaign for the next four years—while trying to escape to neutral territory. He finally surrendered in January 1919 after learning the war had ended.Japan’s Ultimate Holdouts The most famous—or possibly infamous—holdouts were those Japanese stragglers who continued the fight for years, even decades, after the emperor officially offered his surrender. A number of circumstances can be attributed to the resolve of the Japanese. The first and foremost is that many of the soldiers were ordered to hold their ground until relieved of duty but were then cut off. This included Corporal Shoichi Yokoi, who was captured on Guam in 1972, and Private Teruo Nakamura, a Taiwan-born Japanese soldier, who was the last confirmed holdout when he finally surrendered to a patrol in December 1974. For others, it was a matter of going to fight for another cause. This was the case of soldiers Shigeyuki Hashimoto and Kiyoaki Tanaka, who, after the Japanese surrender, joined the Malayan Communist Party’s guerrilla forces as a way to continue to fight the British. They finally laid down their arms in January 1990 after the group surrendered. “A couple of common threads throughout all these impressive survival stories are the desire and internal strength to stay committed to a belief or cause and the ability to live off the land with limited supplies.” Perhaps no other nation has seen its fortune change as much as China. Over the centuries, dynasties that seemed built in stone as strong as its Great Wall fell to invaders. In fact, the final Imperial Chinese dynasty, the Great Qing (also known as the Manchu dynasty) was actually made up of Ming vassals from Manchuria. When the Qing dynasty fell in 1912, China became a republic but, instead of enjoying stability, it was plagued by decades of civil war. The Chinese communists were on the verge of complete defeat in 1934, when they undertook a 6,000-mile historic trek known as the Long March. This was the relocation of communist revolutionary forces from the southeast to northwest China. From this retreat, Mao Zedong began his ascent to power. “Modern Chinese history has plenty of examples of political and military actors holding out for an unlikely victory,” said Rana Mitter, professor of history and politics of modern China at the University of Oxford. “The Chinese Communists retreated to the remote Chinese interior on the Long March in 1935–36, and yet a dozen or so years later, they ruled the country. The Chinese government, under Nationalist leader Chiang Kai-shek, retreated inland to Chongqing (Chungking) during the war against Japan (1937–45). Few outsiders thought they could survive; yet after eight years of war, it was China, not Japan, on the winning side.” Ironically, just as the Red Army of the Communist Party of China endured from its retreat, so did the Nationalists in their flight to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War in 1949. Today, there are two nations that claim to be the real China as a result of their survivor determination. The Japanese were far from the only soldiers to hold out during and after World War II. In many ways, it could be argued that the French and other resistance fighters in Western Europe, as well as the Yugoslavian, Greek and Soviet partisans, were essentially holdouts. In all these cases, the fighters’ homelands had been overrun. While we know now that liberation of these countries would be just years away, it certainly would have been very different for those resistance members and partisans at the time. The people they were fighting comprised the mightiest military power of the day. Even so, it should be noted that their efforts actually shortened the war and drove the German occupiers from their lands. This can explain why Germany considered its own resistance efforts—dubbed “the National Redoubt”—which was rumored to include massive underground facilities in the Bavarian Alps. This turned out to be little more than propaganda and wishful thinking, much like Germany’s “super weapons.” There were limited efforts by the “Werwolf” groups, which included Radio Werwolf, that ordered every German to stand their ground and do what they could. In the end, this Werwolf proved to have no real teeth, and the Germans were as happy as anyone that the war was over. “The big question in these modern holdout stories is, What drives the individual soldier to refuse to surrender?” One of the final holdouts in Europe after World War II was ironically not aimed at Germany, nor was it even directed by Germany. Rather, it was the Forest Brothers, a group of Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonian partisans who waged a guerrilla war against the Soviet rule of the Baltic states. This group formed in 1940 and then again in 1944 to fight Stalinist repression. It continued to no real effect until 1956. The last known Forest Brother was Jānis Pīnups, who only came out of hiding in 1995. Having been part of the partisan group, he remained until the Soviet’s Red Army finally departed Latvia. Originally thought to have died in a 1944 battle, he was a survivor. One of the most bizarre stories of holdouts could be that of Hirō Onoda, who spent 29 years as a renegade of sorts in the Philippines until he was found by Japanese explorer and adventurer Norio Suzuki in 1974. Suzuki had vowed to travel the world and wanted to find “Lieutenant Onoda, a Panda and the Abominable Snowman, in that order.” Onoda proved not too hard to find. Holding the rank of second lieutenant in the Imperial Japanese Army, Onoda was most certainly duty bound, and when a leaflet was dropped that announced the war was over, he and his three fellow soldiers concluded it was Allied propaganda. One of the four opted to surrender in 1949, while one of Onoda’s men was killed in 1954. Onoda continued the fight, along with Kinshichi Kozuka, who was killed in 1972 while conducting guerrilla activities that included the burning of rice collected by Filipino farmers. Two years later, Suzuki made contact, and the two became friends. However, Onoda refused to surrender and maintained he needed to be relieved of duty from a superior officer. Suzuki shared photos of himself with Onoda and the Japanese government sent Onoda’s wartime commanding officer Major Yoshimi Taniguchi to the Philippines, where the holdout finally surrendered. Although Onoda had killed people, he considered the war to be ongoing, and this fact was considered in his case. President Ferdinand Marcos issued Onoda a pardon, and the soldier finally returned home to Japan. The Boers of South Africa held out as no other group. After the two Boer nations, the South African Republic (or Republic of Transvaal) and the Orange Free State were under nominal control of the British, the war continued. The Boer commanders adopted guerrilla warfare tactics and made it nearly impossible for 250,000 British soldiers to effectively control all South Africa. These holdouts were known as the Bittereinders (“bitter-enders”), who truly held out until the bitter end. Their culture played a huge part in motivating these individuals. “The Boers were fiercely independent,” said Dr. Spencer Jones, senior lecturer in armed forces and war studies at University of Wolverhampton. “They had emigrated—the Great Trek—from [the] British-ruled Cape into the wilderness of eastern South Africa in the 1830s. Along the way, they had battled for survival against the Zulu, and later, they … battled and defeated the British to win their independence. The Boers lived with something of a siege mentality and were wary of any effort to take their hard-won independence away from them.” Another large element of this independence was frontier living, and even as small cities and mining towns developed, the majority of the population lived in the countryside. “The living was tough, and it produced tough people,” added Jones. “All the risks you would associate with frontier living in the American West were present in South Africa: There were range disputes, outlaws, cattle rustlers and native raids.” In addition, for the Boers on the frontier, the gun and horse acquired a remarkable symbolism as both a means and a metaphor for independence. “To lose one’s rifle was an intolerable shame for a Boer; and furthermore, a Boer living on the frontier would be terribly vulnerable without one,” explained Jones. “The British attempts to create a ‘gun amnesty’ in 1900 were doomed from the start. Canny Boers handed in broken or obsolete rifles whilst keeping their modern magazine loaders.” While British soldiers could march and make camp, the Boers possessed a variety of advantages in this regard. “These men were frontiersmen,” said Jones. “They were physically and mentally tough and possessed vast local knowledge. Boers [who] came from urban backgrounds learned from their hardy comrades. In the early stages of the guerrilla war, they could call upon friendly farms and homesteads in Boer territory and purchase—or even be gifted—supplies. Incidents of looting farms were rare, although British farmers living in Boer territory risked being robbed and even killed.” As the British began a policy of scorched earth, the Boers became adept at raiding British food supplies. They found that passing into British territory was an effective way to live off the land, because the British Army was reluctant to burn farms that, theoretically at least, belonged to British subjects. They also simply did more with less. “To Boer eyes, the average British soldier always traveled ‘heavy,’ being overburdened with kit and supplies,” explained Jones. “A daily ration for a British soldier might last a Boer several days, and a successful attack against a British patrol could produce enough food to feed the hardy Boers for a week.” Equipment was a trickier matter, but the Boers had gone to war in civilian clothes. “The stresses of campaigning swiftly shredded these garments, and the guerrilla war prevented easy replacement,” said Jones. “The Boers survived through ‘making do and mending’ and by capturing British uniforms. British boots were especially prized, as were well-made British officer’s jackets, but the taking of British uniforms was a source of controversy.” What eventually drove these holdouts to the negotiating table included improved British counterinsurgency tactics, the creation of the blockhouse line that reduced freedom of movement and sheer exhaustion after three years of warfare. “Some testament to their toughness can be gained from the fact that in 1940, Winston Churchill (who had had many adventures in the Boer War) chose to name Britain’s special forces after the word the Boers used for their own military units: ‘commando,'” said Jones. “Churchill called for ‘men of the hunter class,’ and he undoubtedly had the Boers in mind as an example.” Editor’s note: A version of this article first appeared in the July 2017 print issue of American Survival Guide.	<urn:uuid:f6579804-0b33-4dd2-9e35-6a7c80cf02f5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.asgmag.com/features/holding-out-against-all-odds-a-history-of-survivors/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598800.30/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120135447-20200120164447-00134.warc.gz	en	0.983073	3,842	3.296875	3	[ -0.24734622240066528, 0.658113956451416, 0.48108378052711487, 0.304362952709198, -0.36936724185943604, -0.05170892924070358, 0.07295143604278564, 0.28299787640571594, 0.22423256933689117, 0.11018439382314682, 0.0029600397683680058, -0.14653632044792175, 0.2534202039241791, 0.48286604881286...	1	Anyone on the losing side of a major conflict has experienced the end of the world; or at least the end of the world as they knew it. This has been true for as long as man has fought wars, and the list of those gone forever is a lengthy one, indeed. There may be Hittite and Carthaginian art today to admire, but their civilizations have been otherwise completely wiped from the face of the Earth. The same is true of the Mayan, Aztec and the Khmer empires, each of which has left behind some cool pyramids but whose culture today is little more than a tourist attraction. However, some soldiers, as well as armed civilians, have refused to give up, even after the cause was lost and the war was over. One of the earliest “survivor tales” could be those Trojan refugees led by Aeneas who escaped the wrath of the gift-bearing Greeks and, after a series of adventures around the Mediterranean, reached the Italian coast and founded Alba Longa. The Alban kings may not be so memorable, but their descendants certainly are: They founded Rome. And while it took some 800 years, it does appear those Trojans got their revenge, because Rome eventually conquered the Greeks. One other irony of this tale is that Aeneas had reportedly been the guest of Queen Dido, who ruled over Carthage, a city later destroyed by Rome. Just as Rome could be seen to be one of the ultimate testaments to surviving against all odds, some of the peoples it subjugated did the same—namely, the Israelites. After a few uprisings, the Romans got serious, and this included the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in the year 70. Nevertheless, the Jews tried again, but Bar Kokhba’s revolt (132–135), was the last straw for Rome. Judaea, the name of the Roman province, was literally washed away, and the name of the land was changed to Syria Palaestina, from which we get the name, Palestine, today. The Emperor Hadrian wanted to erase the historical ties of the Jewish people to the region, and it wouldn’t become the center of Jewish culture until the modern era. However, in 1948, Israel declared itself an independent state, and this was recognized by most nations of the world a year later. It might have taken a very long time, but this is, indeed, a story of survival.Confederate Holdouts Not every survivor tale happened on such a grand scale. Wars have always involved those who have opted to hold out when hope seemed lost. Individual soldiers and even small units have decided that their war wasn’t over. This was certainly the case at the end of the American Civil War, and more than a few Southerners couldn’t, wouldn’t accept that the Confederate States of America had been defeated and dissolved. The sailors of the raiding vessel, CSS Shenandoah, were on a mission to “seek out and utterly destroy” Union commerce, and under the command of Captain James Waddell, the ship had the dubious distinction of firing the final shots of the war. However, in this case, it turned out it was by accident as much as by design. The ship, which had sailed from England in late 1864 to the Pacific, was at sea when General Robert E. Lee surrendered in April 1865, and the Shenandoah spent the summer months raiding American whaling ships in the Bering Sea. Finally, on August 2, Waddell learned the war was over, but fearing he and his crew might be tried as pirates, he opted to sail to England. The only problem was they were off the west coast of Mexico at the time and had to sail around South America and then to England, thus becoming the only Confederate vessel to circumnavigate the globe. The captain and crew were found to have not infringed on the rules of war, and most eventually returned home. As for the ship, it did not survive for long. It was sold to the Sultan of Zanzibar, after which it was seriously damaged in a storm in 1872 and subsequently scrapped. Another Confederate opted to continue the fight, even when he knew the war was over. This was General Joseph O. Shelby, who has earned the nickname, “The Undefeated.” Having spent the war as a bushwhacker, he and his roughly 600 men opted for exile over surrender and headed to Mexico, where they offered their services to Emperor Maximilian I, the brother of Austro-Hungarian Emperor Franz Josef. The irony was that Maximilian, who was put in power by France’s Emperor Napoleon III, didn’t actually want a ragtag band of rebels in his army. Even so, he allowed them to found Carlota Colony, a settlement of Confederate expats. Perhaps Maximilian should have accepted Shelby into his forces, because less than two years later, the Austrian would-be ruler of Mexico proved to be not much of a survivor. Maximilian I was overthrown and executed by firing squad, while Shelby and his comrades finally returned to the United States to resume civilian life as survivors. Cut Off but Holding On “As preppers and survivalists know so well, attitude and aptitude, paired with a strong commitment to carry on, comprise the base upon which survival stories are built.” When a war ends, most soldiers, especially those in far-off stations and postings, are likely to throw down their weapons as soon as they hear the war is over. This was not the case for the Spanish defenders at Baler in the Philippines. However, in the fog of war, soldiers sometimes don’t actually believe the war is over. That was true of the 57 Spanish infantrymen who held out for six months against some 800 Filipino insurgents. The Spanish didn’t believe the conflict was over, despite the Filipino attempts to provide newspapers and other documents. It was only when a Spanish soldier read a wedding announcement for a person he knew that the soldiers believed the war had really ended and finally surrendered. During World War I, German General Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck earned the distinction of not being defeated in the field while leading a long campaign of retreat and guerrilla operations in East Africa. With just 14,000 men, including 3,000 Germans and 11,000 Africans, he held in check a force of 300,000 British, Belgian and Portuguese troops. But he was not the only German soldier to fight against the odds. Less known than von Lettow-Vorbeck is Hermann Detzner, who kept up the fight in Germany’s New Guinea colony after it was overrun in late 1914. Detzner was a colonial officer in the Schutztruppe and was on a surveying mission when the war broke out. When he heard that the German colony was overrun by the Australians, Detzner and his force of just 70 men headed into the interior and fought a guerilla campaign for the next four years—while trying to escape to neutral territory. He finally surrendered in January 1919 after learning the war had ended.Japan’s Ultimate Holdouts The most famous—or possibly infamous—holdouts were those Japanese stragglers who continued the fight for years, even decades, after the emperor officially offered his surrender. A number of circumstances can be attributed to the resolve of the Japanese. The first and foremost is that many of the soldiers were ordered to hold their ground until relieved of duty but were then cut off. This included Corporal Shoichi Yokoi, who was captured on Guam in 1972, and Private Teruo Nakamura, a Taiwan-born Japanese soldier, who was the last confirmed holdout when he finally surrendered to a patrol in December 1974. For others, it was a matter of going to fight for another cause. This was the case of soldiers Shigeyuki Hashimoto and Kiyoaki Tanaka, who, after the Japanese surrender, joined the Malayan Communist Party’s guerrilla forces as a way to continue to fight the British. They finally laid down their arms in January 1990 after the group surrendered. “A couple of common threads throughout all these impressive survival stories are the desire and internal strength to stay committed to a belief or cause and the ability to live off the land with limited supplies.” Perhaps no other nation has seen its fortune change as much as China. Over the centuries, dynasties that seemed built in stone as strong as its Great Wall fell to invaders. In fact, the final Imperial Chinese dynasty, the Great Qing (also known as the Manchu dynasty) was actually made up of Ming vassals from Manchuria. When the Qing dynasty fell in 1912, China became a republic but, instead of enjoying stability, it was plagued by decades of civil war. The Chinese communists were on the verge of complete defeat in 1934, when they undertook a 6,000-mile historic trek known as the Long March. This was the relocation of communist revolutionary forces from the southeast to northwest China. From this retreat, Mao Zedong began his ascent to power. “Modern Chinese history has plenty of examples of political and military actors holding out for an unlikely victory,” said Rana Mitter, professor of history and politics of modern China at the University of Oxford. “The Chinese Communists retreated to the remote Chinese interior on the Long March in 1935–36, and yet a dozen or so years later, they ruled the country. The Chinese government, under Nationalist leader Chiang Kai-shek, retreated inland to Chongqing (Chungking) during the war against Japan (1937–45). Few outsiders thought they could survive; yet after eight years of war, it was China, not Japan, on the winning side.” Ironically, just as the Red Army of the Communist Party of China endured from its retreat, so did the Nationalists in their flight to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War in 1949. Today, there are two nations that claim to be the real China as a result of their survivor determination. The Japanese were far from the only soldiers to hold out during and after World War II. In many ways, it could be argued that the French and other resistance fighters in Western Europe, as well as the Yugoslavian, Greek and Soviet partisans, were essentially holdouts. In all these cases, the fighters’ homelands had been overrun. While we know now that liberation of these countries would be just years away, it certainly would have been very different for those resistance members and partisans at the time. The people they were fighting comprised the mightiest military power of the day. Even so, it should be noted that their efforts actually shortened the war and drove the German occupiers from their lands. This can explain why Germany considered its own resistance efforts—dubbed “the National Redoubt”—which was rumored to include massive underground facilities in the Bavarian Alps. This turned out to be little more than propaganda and wishful thinking, much like Germany’s “super weapons.” There were limited efforts by the “Werwolf” groups, which included Radio Werwolf, that ordered every German to stand their ground and do what they could. In the end, this Werwolf proved to have no real teeth, and the Germans were as happy as anyone that the war was over. “The big question in these modern holdout stories is, What drives the individual soldier to refuse to surrender?” One of the final holdouts in Europe after World War II was ironically not aimed at Germany, nor was it even directed by Germany. Rather, it was the Forest Brothers, a group of Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonian partisans who waged a guerrilla war against the Soviet rule of the Baltic states. This group formed in 1940 and then again in 1944 to fight Stalinist repression. It continued to no real effect until 1956. The last known Forest Brother was Jānis Pīnups, who only came out of hiding in 1995. Having been part of the partisan group, he remained until the Soviet’s Red Army finally departed Latvia. Originally thought to have died in a 1944 battle, he was a survivor. One of the most bizarre stories of holdouts could be that of Hirō Onoda, who spent 29 years as a renegade of sorts in the Philippines until he was found by Japanese explorer and adventurer Norio Suzuki in 1974. Suzuki had vowed to travel the world and wanted to find “Lieutenant Onoda, a Panda and the Abominable Snowman, in that order.” Onoda proved not too hard to find. Holding the rank of second lieutenant in the Imperial Japanese Army, Onoda was most certainly duty bound, and when a leaflet was dropped that announced the war was over, he and his three fellow soldiers concluded it was Allied propaganda. One of the four opted to surrender in 1949, while one of Onoda’s men was killed in 1954. Onoda continued the fight, along with Kinshichi Kozuka, who was killed in 1972 while conducting guerrilla activities that included the burning of rice collected by Filipino farmers. Two years later, Suzuki made contact, and the two became friends. However, Onoda refused to surrender and maintained he needed to be relieved of duty from a superior officer. Suzuki shared photos of himself with Onoda and the Japanese government sent Onoda’s wartime commanding officer Major Yoshimi Taniguchi to the Philippines, where the holdout finally surrendered. Although Onoda had killed people, he considered the war to be ongoing, and this fact was considered in his case. President Ferdinand Marcos issued Onoda a pardon, and the soldier finally returned home to Japan. The Boers of South Africa held out as no other group. After the two Boer nations, the South African Republic (or Republic of Transvaal) and the Orange Free State were under nominal control of the British, the war continued. The Boer commanders adopted guerrilla warfare tactics and made it nearly impossible for 250,000 British soldiers to effectively control all South Africa. These holdouts were known as the Bittereinders (“bitter-enders”), who truly held out until the bitter end. Their culture played a huge part in motivating these individuals. “The Boers were fiercely independent,” said Dr. Spencer Jones, senior lecturer in armed forces and war studies at University of Wolverhampton. “They had emigrated—the Great Trek—from [the] British-ruled Cape into the wilderness of eastern South Africa in the 1830s. Along the way, they had battled for survival against the Zulu, and later, they … battled and defeated the British to win their independence. The Boers lived with something of a siege mentality and were wary of any effort to take their hard-won independence away from them.” Another large element of this independence was frontier living, and even as small cities and mining towns developed, the majority of the population lived in the countryside. “The living was tough, and it produced tough people,” added Jones. “All the risks you would associate with frontier living in the American West were present in South Africa: There were range disputes, outlaws, cattle rustlers and native raids.” In addition, for the Boers on the frontier, the gun and horse acquired a remarkable symbolism as both a means and a metaphor for independence. “To lose one’s rifle was an intolerable shame for a Boer; and furthermore, a Boer living on the frontier would be terribly vulnerable without one,” explained Jones. “The British attempts to create a ‘gun amnesty’ in 1900 were doomed from the start. Canny Boers handed in broken or obsolete rifles whilst keeping their modern magazine loaders.” While British soldiers could march and make camp, the Boers possessed a variety of advantages in this regard. “These men were frontiersmen,” said Jones. “They were physically and mentally tough and possessed vast local knowledge. Boers [who] came from urban backgrounds learned from their hardy comrades. In the early stages of the guerrilla war, they could call upon friendly farms and homesteads in Boer territory and purchase—or even be gifted—supplies. Incidents of looting farms were rare, although British farmers living in Boer territory risked being robbed and even killed.” As the British began a policy of scorched earth, the Boers became adept at raiding British food supplies. They found that passing into British territory was an effective way to live off the land, because the British Army was reluctant to burn farms that, theoretically at least, belonged to British subjects. They also simply did more with less. “To Boer eyes, the average British soldier always traveled ‘heavy,’ being overburdened with kit and supplies,” explained Jones. “A daily ration for a British soldier might last a Boer several days, and a successful attack against a British patrol could produce enough food to feed the hardy Boers for a week.” Equipment was a trickier matter, but the Boers had gone to war in civilian clothes. “The stresses of campaigning swiftly shredded these garments, and the guerrilla war prevented easy replacement,” said Jones. “The Boers survived through ‘making do and mending’ and by capturing British uniforms. British boots were especially prized, as were well-made British officer’s jackets, but the taking of British uniforms was a source of controversy.” What eventually drove these holdouts to the negotiating table included improved British counterinsurgency tactics, the creation of the blockhouse line that reduced freedom of movement and sheer exhaustion after three years of warfare. “Some testament to their toughness can be gained from the fact that in 1940, Winston Churchill (who had had many adventures in the Boer War) chose to name Britain’s special forces after the word the Boers used for their own military units: ‘commando,'” said Jones. “Churchill called for ‘men of the hunter class,’ and he undoubtedly had the Boers in mind as an example.” Editor’s note: A version of this article first appeared in the July 2017 print issue of American Survival Guide.	3,813	ENGLISH	1
The Bible contains many stories of prophets who shared God’s word to the people. One of those many prophets is a man named Amos. Amos is a biblical book about a sheep-breeder from Tekoa, Judah, a town “ten miles south of Jerusalem” (Lucas 131). The book was written during the reign of Jeroboam ii of Israel and of Uzziah of Judah. Amos did receive messages from the Lord, but didn’t think of himself as a professional prophet and distanced himself from the ones that did. His ministry extended from about 760 to around 750 BC. Amos received his first vision about two years before the massive earthquake that destroyed many towns. In fact, in chapter nine of the book, Amos even speaks of God destroying the temple at Bethel being struck and collapsing. The first verse of the book of Amos tells about how Amos received messages from God in visions. Amos, being the writer of the book, is able to explain exactly what he saw and heard. Amos prophesized to the Israelites of the northern kingdom. He revealed to them God’s judgement of them for their idolatry and their oppression of the poor. At the time that Amos was given these messages, Israel had “fallen short of God’s standards” (Lucas 131). God criticized, through Amos, the Israelites for their uncontrolled materialism, social inequality, corrupted justice system, sexual immorality, and their hypocritical worship (Lucas 131). The Lord warned His people of justice that was coming. They had lost sight of God’s love for them. The rich were care free and comfortable, but they refused to help those who were in need. They observed their religious rituals in hopes of pleasing the Lord, yet they didn’t truly love Him. Amos announced God’s warnings of destruction in 5:24 by saying, “I want to see a mighty flood of justice, an endless river of righteous living” (Amos 5). God wanted them to not just show that they are Jewish by sacrificing and worshiping Him, He wanted them to penetrate all areas of their lives with their belief in Him.	<urn:uuid:4c72445e-9af9-4ff8-b0f0-56bc9a2787f6>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://alpinrunning.org/the-of-the-book-is-able-to-explain/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595787.7/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119234426-20200120022426-00008.warc.gz	en	0.983686	450	3.75	4	[ 0.0806257575750351, 0.5865241885185242, -0.2597597539424896, -0.15806171298027039, -0.3981959819793701, 0.05124179646372795, 0.07063911855220795, 0.1540398746728897, -0.030618736520409584, 0.5021396279335022, -0.20293085277080536, -0.05923973768949509, 0.2531709372997284, -0.15249690413475...	3	The Bible contains many stories of prophets who shared God’s word to the people. One of those many prophets is a man named Amos. Amos is a biblical book about a sheep-breeder from Tekoa, Judah, a town “ten miles south of Jerusalem” (Lucas 131). The book was written during the reign of Jeroboam ii of Israel and of Uzziah of Judah. Amos did receive messages from the Lord, but didn’t think of himself as a professional prophet and distanced himself from the ones that did. His ministry extended from about 760 to around 750 BC. Amos received his first vision about two years before the massive earthquake that destroyed many towns. In fact, in chapter nine of the book, Amos even speaks of God destroying the temple at Bethel being struck and collapsing. The first verse of the book of Amos tells about how Amos received messages from God in visions. Amos, being the writer of the book, is able to explain exactly what he saw and heard. Amos prophesized to the Israelites of the northern kingdom. He revealed to them God’s judgement of them for their idolatry and their oppression of the poor. At the time that Amos was given these messages, Israel had “fallen short of God’s standards” (Lucas 131). God criticized, through Amos, the Israelites for their uncontrolled materialism, social inequality, corrupted justice system, sexual immorality, and their hypocritical worship (Lucas 131). The Lord warned His people of justice that was coming. They had lost sight of God’s love for them. The rich were care free and comfortable, but they refused to help those who were in need. They observed their religious rituals in hopes of pleasing the Lord, yet they didn’t truly love Him. Amos announced God’s warnings of destruction in 5:24 by saying, “I want to see a mighty flood of justice, an endless river of righteous living” (Amos 5). God wanted them to not just show that they are Jewish by sacrificing and worshiping Him, He wanted them to penetrate all areas of their lives with their belief in Him.	462	ENGLISH	1
Elizabeth Blackwell (February 3, 1821 – May 31, 1910) was a British physician, notable as the first woman to receive a medical degree in the United States, and the first woman on the Medical Register of the General Medical Council. Blackwell played an important role in both the United States and the United Kingdom as a social and moral reformer, and pioneered in promoting education for women in medicine. Her contributions remain celebrated with the Elizabeth Blackwell Medal, awarded annually to a woman who has made significant contribution to the promotion of women in medicine.Blackwell was initially uninterested in a career in medicine especially after her schoolteacher brought in a bull’s eye to use as a teaching tool. Therefore, she became a schoolteacher in order to support her family. This occupation was seen as suitable for women during the 1800s, however, she soon found it unsuitable for her. Blackwell’s interest in medicine was sparked after a friend fell ill and remarked that, had a female doctor cared for her, she might not have suffered so much. Blackwell began applying to medical schools, and immediately began to endure the prejudice against her sex that would persist throughout her career. She was rejected from each medical school she applied to, except Geneva Medical College, in which the male students voted on Blackwell’s acceptance. In 1847, Blackwell became the first woman to attend medical school in the United States.Blackwell’s inaugural thesis on typhoid fever, published in 1849 the Buffalo Medical Journal, shortly after she graduated, was the first medical article published by a female student from the United States. It portrayed a strong sense of empathy and sensitivity to human suffering, as well as strong advocacy for economic and social justice. This perspective was deemed by the medical community as ”feminine”.Blackwell also founded the New York Infirmary for Women and Children with her sister Emily in 1857, and began giving lectures to female audiences on the importance of educating girls. She also played a significant role during the American Civil War organizing nurses.	<urn:uuid:57d9dc31-9d92-447c-84b9-1d7470b7043d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://goodquotes.me/authors/elizabeth-blackwell/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250624328.55/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124161014-20200124190014-00387.warc.gz	en	0.986881	415	4.03125	4	[ 0.10082624107599258, -0.058701831847429276, 0.3161217272281647, -0.10689444094896317, -0.14788900315761566, 0.19232764840126038, 0.3879760503768921, 0.05793005973100662, -0.3542359173297882, 0.09955238550901413, -0.20711947977542877, -0.22967658936977386, -0.10369691252708435, 0.2363738119...	2	Elizabeth Blackwell (February 3, 1821 – May 31, 1910) was a British physician, notable as the first woman to receive a medical degree in the United States, and the first woman on the Medical Register of the General Medical Council. Blackwell played an important role in both the United States and the United Kingdom as a social and moral reformer, and pioneered in promoting education for women in medicine. Her contributions remain celebrated with the Elizabeth Blackwell Medal, awarded annually to a woman who has made significant contribution to the promotion of women in medicine.Blackwell was initially uninterested in a career in medicine especially after her schoolteacher brought in a bull’s eye to use as a teaching tool. Therefore, she became a schoolteacher in order to support her family. This occupation was seen as suitable for women during the 1800s, however, she soon found it unsuitable for her. Blackwell’s interest in medicine was sparked after a friend fell ill and remarked that, had a female doctor cared for her, she might not have suffered so much. Blackwell began applying to medical schools, and immediately began to endure the prejudice against her sex that would persist throughout her career. She was rejected from each medical school she applied to, except Geneva Medical College, in which the male students voted on Blackwell’s acceptance. In 1847, Blackwell became the first woman to attend medical school in the United States.Blackwell’s inaugural thesis on typhoid fever, published in 1849 the Buffalo Medical Journal, shortly after she graduated, was the first medical article published by a female student from the United States. It portrayed a strong sense of empathy and sensitivity to human suffering, as well as strong advocacy for economic and social justice. This perspective was deemed by the medical community as ”feminine”.Blackwell also founded the New York Infirmary for Women and Children with her sister Emily in 1857, and began giving lectures to female audiences on the importance of educating girls. She also played a significant role during the American Civil War organizing nurses.	432	ENGLISH	1
Lewis and Clark Expedition “I think we might be the greatest people that have ever lived. Ever.” “Why don't I get top billing?” The Lewis and Clark Expedition (1804–1806) was the first overland expedition undertaken by the United States to the Pacific coast and back. The expedition team was headed by C.S. "Meriwether" Lewis and William "Dick" Clark and assisted by Sacajawea and Toussaint Charbonneau. The expedition's goal was to gain an accurate sense of the resources being exchanged in the Louisiana Purchase. The expedition laid much of the groundwork for the westward expansion of the United States. C.S. "Meriwether" Lewis was born on January 32, 1092 in Dublin, Ireland. He met his mother's sister's daughter's half-brother's Priest's lover's son William Clark when he was just a fetus. For some reason, the two boys hit it off because they were both, at the time, infatuated with Hello KittyTM. By the time they were 14, they had both dropped out of Dictator School. However, despite their deep relationship with one another, they were broken up and sent to America. William "Dick" Clark was a secret agent, and a governor of a state that was not yet a state. A virgin, he cruised a low-rider in Kentucky before later hanging out in Missouri night clubs trying to get laid. Before the expedition he served in a para military group and the United States Army in Operation Prairie Storm. From 1822 until his death, he held the position of Superintendent of Marital Affairs. Both men were broken up and sent to facilities where they would be injected with a serum that would wipe out their entire memory bank. Once injected, both men were told that they had a different past then they really did. Meriwether was told he grew up in a small town in Virgina and told he was friends with the president (at that time: Thomas Jefferson). William was told that he had an older brother (George), that he grew up in Caroline County, Virgina, and that as a small boy, he aspired to be a cartographer (map maker). The scientists at both facilities would start laughing every time that one of the two men would walk past and were therefore killed. A New Beginning Because both of the men's pasts were erased, they both got a new beginning. Lewis was a trainer of the Pittsburgh Steelers and Clark became a foot massager. In 1803, TJ (Thomas Jefferson) rang Lewis up on his cell. TJ was all like: "I want you to like, like, like, explore, like, the West, like like like." And Mari was all like: "No." So then TJ said: "I'll give you money". So then Mari was all like: "Yeah." After that Thomas Jefferson told Lewis that he could take along a friend. So after much consideration he picked George Clark (Williams faux brother) and Mariwether went to Jefferson. However, despite the coolness of George, Jefferson said they needed a map maker, so they could make a map of New York City. What a coincidence thought George. So he referred them to his mother: Betty Clark. Then she told them that she wasn't the cartographer, William was. George has added a s to he. The Corpse Of Discovery After Thomas Jefferson had decided to send them into the old west (which at that time was called the current west), they needed a guide and an interpreter. So, the two of them drove to Pittsburgh and picked up Sacajawea. After they picked up Sacajawea, they bought a canoe in Pittsburgh and headed back to St. Louis. After that, they were on their way (why they didn't just drive still confuses me). A while into the journey the met up with the ManAndDan tribe. This tribe consisted of three people: Man, And, and Dan (hence the name). They told them that beyond this checkpoint there were many dangerous things. So just to safe, Lewis and Clark built a fort called Fort Mandan (they forgot And (he was pissed)). They continued on their way until they hit Little Rock and had a party with the Pilgrims. They left and they went through Montana. When they reached Idaho they bought some potatoes. Finally after 2 and a half years, they reached the Indian Ocean in 1987. Also an important event in 1987, Aretha Franklin became the first woman inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. That same year, Lewis, Clark, and Aretha, wrote a song about the adventure. This song is known as "Real Niggaz Don't Die", and was later covered by NWA. The Journey Home Once they reached the Indian Ocean in 1987, they decided to vote on whether they should stay there for the winter or go back right then. They all voted, Clark, Lewis, Sacajawea, and a random black person that came out of nowhere. This was the first time a woman and a random black person (or any black person for that matter) would vote. The voting went like this: Lewis: Stay, Clark: Stay, Sacajawea: Stay, Random Black Guy: Leave. "Man...", Thought the random black guy, "...I lost." So they stayed there for the winter and made a camp. That camp grew into a city. That city grew into a country. That country floated off into the ocean and hooked up with Great Britain and became Ireland. After the winter they took a plane back to St. Louis and inspired many other explorers. Take for example: Pike, Michael Jackson, and Bugs Bunny. - Meriwether Lewis changed his name later in life to Steve Jobs due to the constant taunting of "Mari, mari, what a fairy!" - The expedition lasted 18 years, starting in 1776 and ending in 2005. - Math is, of course, not our best subject. - When traveling through Montana, William Clark stated on numerous occasions "Is anyone else here? Hello?" - The pair was going to be a trio until Lewis's twin, Howard Hughes, became big in show business.	<urn:uuid:87322821-554d-4ed0-942d-9cf152ae7196>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://mirror.uncyc.org/wiki/Lewis_and_Clark	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694176.67/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127020458-20200127050458-00247.warc.gz	en	0.984101	1,297	3.328125	3	[ -0.6405021548271179, 0.415501207113266, 0.33556580543518066, -0.08659648150205612, -0.2760586738586426, -0.43653151392936707, -0.19324330985546112, 0.2354547679424286, -0.13371549546718597, 0.10852017998695374, 0.2603820562362671, -0.06548081338405609, 0.14691263437271118, -0.0091763436794...	4	Lewis and Clark Expedition “I think we might be the greatest people that have ever lived. Ever.” “Why don't I get top billing?” The Lewis and Clark Expedition (1804–1806) was the first overland expedition undertaken by the United States to the Pacific coast and back. The expedition team was headed by C.S. "Meriwether" Lewis and William "Dick" Clark and assisted by Sacajawea and Toussaint Charbonneau. The expedition's goal was to gain an accurate sense of the resources being exchanged in the Louisiana Purchase. The expedition laid much of the groundwork for the westward expansion of the United States. C.S. "Meriwether" Lewis was born on January 32, 1092 in Dublin, Ireland. He met his mother's sister's daughter's half-brother's Priest's lover's son William Clark when he was just a fetus. For some reason, the two boys hit it off because they were both, at the time, infatuated with Hello KittyTM. By the time they were 14, they had both dropped out of Dictator School. However, despite their deep relationship with one another, they were broken up and sent to America. William "Dick" Clark was a secret agent, and a governor of a state that was not yet a state. A virgin, he cruised a low-rider in Kentucky before later hanging out in Missouri night clubs trying to get laid. Before the expedition he served in a para military group and the United States Army in Operation Prairie Storm. From 1822 until his death, he held the position of Superintendent of Marital Affairs. Both men were broken up and sent to facilities where they would be injected with a serum that would wipe out their entire memory bank. Once injected, both men were told that they had a different past then they really did. Meriwether was told he grew up in a small town in Virgina and told he was friends with the president (at that time: Thomas Jefferson). William was told that he had an older brother (George), that he grew up in Caroline County, Virgina, and that as a small boy, he aspired to be a cartographer (map maker). The scientists at both facilities would start laughing every time that one of the two men would walk past and were therefore killed. A New Beginning Because both of the men's pasts were erased, they both got a new beginning. Lewis was a trainer of the Pittsburgh Steelers and Clark became a foot massager. In 1803, TJ (Thomas Jefferson) rang Lewis up on his cell. TJ was all like: "I want you to like, like, like, explore, like, the West, like like like." And Mari was all like: "No." So then TJ said: "I'll give you money". So then Mari was all like: "Yeah." After that Thomas Jefferson told Lewis that he could take along a friend. So after much consideration he picked George Clark (Williams faux brother) and Mariwether went to Jefferson. However, despite the coolness of George, Jefferson said they needed a map maker, so they could make a map of New York City. What a coincidence thought George. So he referred them to his mother: Betty Clark. Then she told them that she wasn't the cartographer, William was. George has added a s to he. The Corpse Of Discovery After Thomas Jefferson had decided to send them into the old west (which at that time was called the current west), they needed a guide and an interpreter. So, the two of them drove to Pittsburgh and picked up Sacajawea. After they picked up Sacajawea, they bought a canoe in Pittsburgh and headed back to St. Louis. After that, they were on their way (why they didn't just drive still confuses me). A while into the journey the met up with the ManAndDan tribe. This tribe consisted of three people: Man, And, and Dan (hence the name). They told them that beyond this checkpoint there were many dangerous things. So just to safe, Lewis and Clark built a fort called Fort Mandan (they forgot And (he was pissed)). They continued on their way until they hit Little Rock and had a party with the Pilgrims. They left and they went through Montana. When they reached Idaho they bought some potatoes. Finally after 2 and a half years, they reached the Indian Ocean in 1987. Also an important event in 1987, Aretha Franklin became the first woman inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. That same year, Lewis, Clark, and Aretha, wrote a song about the adventure. This song is known as "Real Niggaz Don't Die", and was later covered by NWA. The Journey Home Once they reached the Indian Ocean in 1987, they decided to vote on whether they should stay there for the winter or go back right then. They all voted, Clark, Lewis, Sacajawea, and a random black person that came out of nowhere. This was the first time a woman and a random black person (or any black person for that matter) would vote. The voting went like this: Lewis: Stay, Clark: Stay, Sacajawea: Stay, Random Black Guy: Leave. "Man...", Thought the random black guy, "...I lost." So they stayed there for the winter and made a camp. That camp grew into a city. That city grew into a country. That country floated off into the ocean and hooked up with Great Britain and became Ireland. After the winter they took a plane back to St. Louis and inspired many other explorers. Take for example: Pike, Michael Jackson, and Bugs Bunny. - Meriwether Lewis changed his name later in life to Steve Jobs due to the constant taunting of "Mari, mari, what a fairy!" - The expedition lasted 18 years, starting in 1776 and ending in 2005. - Math is, of course, not our best subject. - When traveling through Montana, William Clark stated on numerous occasions "Is anyone else here? Hello?" - The pair was going to be a trio until Lewis's twin, Howard Hughes, became big in show business.	1,312	ENGLISH	1
A conflict has arisen between the United States and the Cherokee Nation that gradually lead to what is known as the ‘Trail of Tears’. The original migration of Cherokees was known as the Old Settlers, voluntarily moved to lands in Arkansas where they established their own government. However, they were again forced to move away from their homeland, following the discovery of gold on their native lands. The thirst for expansion from white settlers caused them to turn on the land’s original residents and decided the entire Cherokee Nation should be removed. The encroachment of the white settlers into the Cherokees’ homeland ultimately lead to the Trail of Tears.At first, the Cherokee was wary of white encroachment, where they then present themselves to resettle in Arkansas and established their nation. “Possessed by “gold fever” and a thirst for expansion, many white communities turned on their Cherokee neighbors.”(par.2) As the white settlers migrate and build in the area, it was followed by a discovery of gold in northern Georgia, which is known as the “gold fever”. The desire for wealth along with an expansion of America land caused the white to turn on the Cherokees, and ultimately decided the removal act of the entire Cherokee Nation.Next, the decision of America was unfair to many of people. As protests begin, the U.S. thought of a resolution to this problem. “The U.S. government used the Treaty of New Echota..to justify the removal.”(par.6) The Treaty of Echota was to legalize the forcible removal of the Cherokee Nation from Georgia. It stated that if the Cherokees agreed to give up their land, they will be provided with multiple benefits such as food and tools. In response, Cherokees were tempted to signed the treaty and agreed to give up their land for the promised benefits. Although for the United States side, there may have other reasonings such as “The U.S. had the privilege to take the land, ” but in truth, the land was first owned by the Cherokees and not the Americans. Therefore, it is not able to be justified. Also, people were deceived by the fact that the entire Cherokees nation in truth, actually accepted the request from the U.S. to leave in exchange for benefits. “Signed by 100 Cherokees,” (par.6) the population of the Cherokee tribe has more than a few thousands of people, which proved the fact that only a small percentage of the tribe agreed on the exchange, and the rest most likely does not. In conclusion, the Cherokee Nation was forced to move out of their homeland for multiple reasons. At most part, the Trail of Tears was caused by conflicts and opposing opinions between the two opponent sides that gradually lead to the incident.	<urn:uuid:b3219f86-e60f-482a-9eb4-2bd1b0d4efe2>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://chrisstory.net/a-the-cherokee-nation-that-gradually-lead-to-what/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250604849.31/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121162615-20200121191615-00407.warc.gz	en	0.984023	584	4.25	4	[ -0.5760855078697205, -0.001479133847169578, 0.4539366662502289, 0.3411625027656555, -0.11071231961250305, -0.22761936485767365, 0.21224170923233032, -0.3181280493736267, -0.3416862487792969, 0.2150110900402069, 0.3288286328315735, 0.11316443234682083, 0.09359104931354523, 0.249181076884269...	1	A conflict has arisen between the United States and the Cherokee Nation that gradually lead to what is known as the ‘Trail of Tears’. The original migration of Cherokees was known as the Old Settlers, voluntarily moved to lands in Arkansas where they established their own government. However, they were again forced to move away from their homeland, following the discovery of gold on their native lands. The thirst for expansion from white settlers caused them to turn on the land’s original residents and decided the entire Cherokee Nation should be removed. The encroachment of the white settlers into the Cherokees’ homeland ultimately lead to the Trail of Tears.At first, the Cherokee was wary of white encroachment, where they then present themselves to resettle in Arkansas and established their nation. “Possessed by “gold fever” and a thirst for expansion, many white communities turned on their Cherokee neighbors.”(par.2) As the white settlers migrate and build in the area, it was followed by a discovery of gold in northern Georgia, which is known as the “gold fever”. The desire for wealth along with an expansion of America land caused the white to turn on the Cherokees, and ultimately decided the removal act of the entire Cherokee Nation.Next, the decision of America was unfair to many of people. As protests begin, the U.S. thought of a resolution to this problem. “The U.S. government used the Treaty of New Echota..to justify the removal.”(par.6) The Treaty of Echota was to legalize the forcible removal of the Cherokee Nation from Georgia. It stated that if the Cherokees agreed to give up their land, they will be provided with multiple benefits such as food and tools. In response, Cherokees were tempted to signed the treaty and agreed to give up their land for the promised benefits. Although for the United States side, there may have other reasonings such as “The U.S. had the privilege to take the land, ” but in truth, the land was first owned by the Cherokees and not the Americans. Therefore, it is not able to be justified. Also, people were deceived by the fact that the entire Cherokees nation in truth, actually accepted the request from the U.S. to leave in exchange for benefits. “Signed by 100 Cherokees,” (par.6) the population of the Cherokee tribe has more than a few thousands of people, which proved the fact that only a small percentage of the tribe agreed on the exchange, and the rest most likely does not. In conclusion, the Cherokee Nation was forced to move out of their homeland for multiple reasons. At most part, the Trail of Tears was caused by conflicts and opposing opinions between the two opponent sides that gradually lead to the incident.	567	ENGLISH	1
A new study has found that those who have a dog under the age of 13 are less at risk of schizophrenia. They appear to be up to 24% less likely to develop the mental disorder. Scientists believe that not only do dogs decrease our stress levels but they also have bugs which could help boost our immune systems. While there is no clear cause for schizophrenia, both stress and a poor immune system have been thought to play a role in it. Professor Robert Yolken and his team at Johns Hopkins Children’s Centre in Baltimore have published their findings in the journal PLOS ONE. ‘Serious psychiatric disorders have been associated with alterations in the immune system linked to environmental exposures in early life’, says Professor Yolken. ‘And since household pets are often among the first things with which children have close contact, it was logical for us to explore the possibilities of a connection between the two.’ 1,371 men and women were included in the study. Yolken has since estimated that 840,000 cases of schizophrenia could have been prevented by having a childhood dog. He says the biggest apparently protective effect is for children who are exposed to dogs after birth before the age of 3.	<urn:uuid:3f6fc5b8-aeeb-4cdf-8036-c537eea065bf>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.chelseadogs.com/blog/having-a-childhood-dog-could-cut-schizophrenia-by-24/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592636.25/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118135205-20200118163205-00012.warc.gz	en	0.982145	253	3.421875	3	[ -0.27687111496925354, 0.11077721416950226, 0.3853205740451813, 0.22636665403842926, 0.021670592948794365, 0.3685978651046753, 0.29273781180381775, 0.5120357275009155, -0.044128406792879105, -0.13820978999137878, -0.03513079136610031, -0.3958243429660797, 0.3843926787376404, 0.4437523186206...	9	A new study has found that those who have a dog under the age of 13 are less at risk of schizophrenia. They appear to be up to 24% less likely to develop the mental disorder. Scientists believe that not only do dogs decrease our stress levels but they also have bugs which could help boost our immune systems. While there is no clear cause for schizophrenia, both stress and a poor immune system have been thought to play a role in it. Professor Robert Yolken and his team at Johns Hopkins Children’s Centre in Baltimore have published their findings in the journal PLOS ONE. ‘Serious psychiatric disorders have been associated with alterations in the immune system linked to environmental exposures in early life’, says Professor Yolken. ‘And since household pets are often among the first things with which children have close contact, it was logical for us to explore the possibilities of a connection between the two.’ 1,371 men and women were included in the study. Yolken has since estimated that 840,000 cases of schizophrenia could have been prevented by having a childhood dog. He says the biggest apparently protective effect is for children who are exposed to dogs after birth before the age of 3.	249	ENGLISH	1
Listen to part of a lecture in an art history class. OK, as art historians, one of our fundamental tasks is to assign authorship to works of art, right? We're presented with a work of art, and we have to figure out who made it. But this task becomes particularly difficult when we're dealing with works produced in Italy during the Renaissance-the sixteenth, seventeenth centuries. Now why is this the case? Anyone? Emily. Um, is it 'cause artists didn't sign their work? I mean, didn't the whole concept of the artist as an individual develop later, in like the nineteenth century? Well, you're sort of on the right track. The concept of the individual artist-especially the concept of the artist as an artistic genius, bleh, struggling alone with a vision...as opposed to, say, a mere artisan-well the idea of the artist as a lone genius didn't develop until later. But artists, individual artists, did sign their work during the Renaissance. In fact, you could say that's part of the problem... Paintings were signed by the artist, and that used to be understood to be a mark of Renaissance individualism. If a piece had Raphael's signature on it, we assumed it was done by the great artist himself-Raphael, in the singular. But you see, art in Renaissance Italy was very much a collaborative business. Painters and sculptors worked in a workshop. It was almost like a small business run by...a master artist. You see, to deal with the wide variety of commissions they received-orders, basically, for specific types of art, specific projects-to handle these, master artists often employed assistants, as apprentices. An-and this was especially so if they worked on a large scale, huge paintings or sculptures, or if they were much in demand, like Raphael for instance. He worked on some large paintings: He painted frescoes for the Vatican. He also received a great many commissions. There's no way he could have completed every part of every project all by himself! Now these assistants might work for the master artist on a temporary or a permanent basis, and they might also specialize. For example, in Raphael's workshop, which might be called "Raphael Incorporated," one of the assistants specialized in animals. He actually painted a good number of the animals in Raphael's art. It may be that a master signing a work was simply making a declaration that the work met the standards of the shop. And it wasn't just painters. Sculptors also worked together; in fact, assistants were even more necessary if you were a master sculptor, because statues take longer to make than paintings. And the master had to arrange for marble to be quarried, things like that. And perhaps the most collaborative of all was architecture. There we see a real division of labor, what with carpenters, masons, unskilled labor just to carry materials to and fro, and so on. Plus, of course, your skilled artisans,who carried out the master architect's design. Think of it like, uh, a ballet, you know? All the dancers work together. There's a division of labor, people have different roles, and in order for the thing to come together, everyone needs to be aware of what others are doing, and coordinate their work, and have good timing. So for architecture, it's almost impossible to know who was responsible for any given detail. Was it the master architect? The mason? An assistant mason? Maybe it was even the patron, the client who was paying for the art. Remember, it wasn't yet customary for architects to give their assistants measured drawings to work from. Instructions were given orally, not in writing, so we don't have those documents to tell us what, exactly, the master architect's plans were. The only time we have written records is when the architect wasn't actually there-perhaps the architect was away on business, and had to write out instructions and send them to the shop. And another thing to think about: what effect do you suppose this approach would have had on innovation? I mean, since the hired artisans had been trained by other artisans, they tended to be trained to use traditional styles and techniques. So if you're a master architect, um, and you've developed your own style-say you're calling for a certain detail in a building you're designing, right? And say this detail is different-purposely different-from the established tradition, the established style. Well, most likely, when the hired artisans would execute the design, rather than follow the intended design, they'd stick with the more traditional style that they were familiar with. Workers would have to be supervised very closely to prevent this from happening. [disappointed] Otherwise, as often happened, there goes the designer's style and creativity.	<urn:uuid:fb1dfa95-626f-425c-9d99-121886c11cd6>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://toefl.kmf.com/listening/newdrilling/61f7dj	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251728207.68/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127205148-20200127235148-00100.warc.gz	en	0.980324	1,044	3.5	4	[ -0.22764411568641663, -0.0343414731323719, 0.2364731729030609, -0.1293790638446808, -0.6960106492042542, 0.10051087290048599, 0.13699036836624146, 0.1724759340286255, 0.004075310193002224, 0.05407171696424484, 0.033206500113010406, -0.00145020242780447, -0.06892872601747513, 0.191738307476...	4	Listen to part of a lecture in an art history class. OK, as art historians, one of our fundamental tasks is to assign authorship to works of art, right? We're presented with a work of art, and we have to figure out who made it. But this task becomes particularly difficult when we're dealing with works produced in Italy during the Renaissance-the sixteenth, seventeenth centuries. Now why is this the case? Anyone? Emily. Um, is it 'cause artists didn't sign their work? I mean, didn't the whole concept of the artist as an individual develop later, in like the nineteenth century? Well, you're sort of on the right track. The concept of the individual artist-especially the concept of the artist as an artistic genius, bleh, struggling alone with a vision...as opposed to, say, a mere artisan-well the idea of the artist as a lone genius didn't develop until later. But artists, individual artists, did sign their work during the Renaissance. In fact, you could say that's part of the problem... Paintings were signed by the artist, and that used to be understood to be a mark of Renaissance individualism. If a piece had Raphael's signature on it, we assumed it was done by the great artist himself-Raphael, in the singular. But you see, art in Renaissance Italy was very much a collaborative business. Painters and sculptors worked in a workshop. It was almost like a small business run by...a master artist. You see, to deal with the wide variety of commissions they received-orders, basically, for specific types of art, specific projects-to handle these, master artists often employed assistants, as apprentices. An-and this was especially so if they worked on a large scale, huge paintings or sculptures, or if they were much in demand, like Raphael for instance. He worked on some large paintings: He painted frescoes for the Vatican. He also received a great many commissions. There's no way he could have completed every part of every project all by himself! Now these assistants might work for the master artist on a temporary or a permanent basis, and they might also specialize. For example, in Raphael's workshop, which might be called "Raphael Incorporated," one of the assistants specialized in animals. He actually painted a good number of the animals in Raphael's art. It may be that a master signing a work was simply making a declaration that the work met the standards of the shop. And it wasn't just painters. Sculptors also worked together; in fact, assistants were even more necessary if you were a master sculptor, because statues take longer to make than paintings. And the master had to arrange for marble to be quarried, things like that. And perhaps the most collaborative of all was architecture. There we see a real division of labor, what with carpenters, masons, unskilled labor just to carry materials to and fro, and so on. Plus, of course, your skilled artisans,who carried out the master architect's design. Think of it like, uh, a ballet, you know? All the dancers work together. There's a division of labor, people have different roles, and in order for the thing to come together, everyone needs to be aware of what others are doing, and coordinate their work, and have good timing. So for architecture, it's almost impossible to know who was responsible for any given detail. Was it the master architect? The mason? An assistant mason? Maybe it was even the patron, the client who was paying for the art. Remember, it wasn't yet customary for architects to give their assistants measured drawings to work from. Instructions were given orally, not in writing, so we don't have those documents to tell us what, exactly, the master architect's plans were. The only time we have written records is when the architect wasn't actually there-perhaps the architect was away on business, and had to write out instructions and send them to the shop. And another thing to think about: what effect do you suppose this approach would have had on innovation? I mean, since the hired artisans had been trained by other artisans, they tended to be trained to use traditional styles and techniques. So if you're a master architect, um, and you've developed your own style-say you're calling for a certain detail in a building you're designing, right? And say this detail is different-purposely different-from the established tradition, the established style. Well, most likely, when the hired artisans would execute the design, rather than follow the intended design, they'd stick with the more traditional style that they were familiar with. Workers would have to be supervised very closely to prevent this from happening. [disappointed] Otherwise, as often happened, there goes the designer's style and creativity.	986	ENGLISH	1
The zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha, is a small species of freshwater bivalve mollusc. Its shell has a striped pattern, hence its name. The overall shape of these attractive shells is not dissimilar to that of the more familiar marine mussels found along Britain’s coasts and they live in a similar way, attaching themselves in clumps to stones, weed, or other shells. Zebra mussels were originally native to southern Russian lakes, but were accidentally introduced to other countries and are now considered an invasive species. In Britain, they were first reported in the 1820s. Today, they are widespread in many Warwickshire waterways and have been known to clog pipes and water treatment plants. Look out for their unusually shaped and patterned shells amongst material dredged from canals and rivers.	<urn:uuid:a35fae1b-5f6e-44be-b045-2ebfbe5d63ff>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.ourwarwickshire.org.uk/content/article/zebra-mussels-underwater-invaders-warwickshire	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599718.13/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120165335-20200120194335-00076.warc.gz	en	0.980609	172	3.484375	3	[ -0.022283732891082764, -0.32630491256713867, 0.12466160207986832, -0.1456558257341385, -0.2519962191581726, -0.313052237033844, 0.3017181158065796, 0.0606209971010685, -0.36438417434692383, 0.2570672333240509, 0.282421350479126, -1.2206616401672363, -0.1683102399110794, -0.2960583567619324...	6	The zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha, is a small species of freshwater bivalve mollusc. Its shell has a striped pattern, hence its name. The overall shape of these attractive shells is not dissimilar to that of the more familiar marine mussels found along Britain’s coasts and they live in a similar way, attaching themselves in clumps to stones, weed, or other shells. Zebra mussels were originally native to southern Russian lakes, but were accidentally introduced to other countries and are now considered an invasive species. In Britain, they were first reported in the 1820s. Today, they are widespread in many Warwickshire waterways and have been known to clog pipes and water treatment plants. Look out for their unusually shaped and patterned shells amongst material dredged from canals and rivers.	171	ENGLISH	1
In Room 13 we were discussing how we, today, know so much about history. How do we know what has happened thousands of years ago? The boys and girls suggested that books, stories passed from person to person and also objects can give us an insight into the past. We discussed whose job it is to uncover objects and artefacts from the past. Max correctly told us, they are called archaeologists! The children were then asked to head outside and take on the role of an archaeologist, by searching in the sand for artefacts. They were told, this is how they will find out what our next topic will be! The children loved searching for the artefacts and were thrilled when the first ones were found. Once they had had a good look at the objects, the boys and girls all said “We are doing the Egyptians!” The pupils loved taking on the role of an archaeologist and were able to share some facts from some of their previous learning on the Ancient Egyptians. The boys and girls are all so excited to get started on our new topic. Also a little shout out to our Head Boy and Head Girl, Jayden Gilmour and Aiza Kazmi for helping to prepare these artefacts for the boys and girls. Thank you!	<urn:uuid:11ba7a90-9642-40af-937f-36ee6dfb2042>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://blogs.glowscotland.org.uk/glowblogs/newtonfarm/2019/09/20/room-13s-archaeologists/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597458.22/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120052454-20200120080454-00477.warc.gz	en	0.986748	256	3.46875	3	[ 0.16663578152656555, 0.5210378766059875, 0.4240868389606476, -0.2519056499004364, -0.3271406888961792, -0.08573838323354721, 0.19752395153045654, -0.062422264367341995, -0.24346528947353363, 0.1845894753932953, 0.261880099773407, -0.43449389934539795, -0.04089576005935669, 0.43424299359321...	1	In Room 13 we were discussing how we, today, know so much about history. How do we know what has happened thousands of years ago? The boys and girls suggested that books, stories passed from person to person and also objects can give us an insight into the past. We discussed whose job it is to uncover objects and artefacts from the past. Max correctly told us, they are called archaeologists! The children were then asked to head outside and take on the role of an archaeologist, by searching in the sand for artefacts. They were told, this is how they will find out what our next topic will be! The children loved searching for the artefacts and were thrilled when the first ones were found. Once they had had a good look at the objects, the boys and girls all said “We are doing the Egyptians!” The pupils loved taking on the role of an archaeologist and were able to share some facts from some of their previous learning on the Ancient Egyptians. The boys and girls are all so excited to get started on our new topic. Also a little shout out to our Head Boy and Head Girl, Jayden Gilmour and Aiza Kazmi for helping to prepare these artefacts for the boys and girls. Thank you!	255	ENGLISH	1
This sculpture represents a Christian martyr who died in the 3rd century AD. His skull had been obtained by monks who commissioned the work to house it as a holy relic in their church. Their church is translated as 'Church of All Saints', and it housed a number of important relics. The first impression of the sculpture appears be of piety; a pious man with his head bowed. Interpreting St Rossore Rossore was a Roman soldier who converted to Christianity. He was beheaded in Sardinia because of his beliefs and became posthumously a saint. Donatello's interpretation of this man is sculpted in the style of ancient Roman busts. It is a lifelike figure with the only movement being a slight bow to the head and the eyes looking down. Why did Donatello choose this interpretation of the man? Donatello's decisions regarding his interpretation not only dictate the physical stance of the figure but also the materials used and the techniques to achieve the effect. The main impression of the work is one of piety. St Rossore appears to be in a submissive pose by bowing his head. Bowing with his head, could be interpreted as bowing to his chosen religion and god in prayer and also in acquiescence of his fate. The figure mainly displays piety. Most people would see this sculpture as a pious man praying to his god. Donatello wanted to give the saint a Roman-style sculpture to house his holy relic, and probably to show St Rossore was a Roman who became a Christian. The Materials and Techniques Chosen for this Sculpture Donatello's workmanship of this piece is very intricate and detailed from the hair on his subject's head and beard to every line on the armour on one shoulder. He chose to use bronze to create this reliquary bust; metal to accentuate the impression of the soldier that St Rossore was, and to emphasise strength. He used bronze to indicate a soldier and not a nobleman. There is no ornate colouring or designs within the main clothing, only the armour on the right-hand shoulder has intricate designs to highlight the armour worn by a soldier. Donatello attempted to describe his subject not only in the way the figure is positioned but by using materials that give an impression of the man. Donatello wanted this man to have recognition as a soldier. This had an overall effect on the whole bust. This pious man was not a weak man and he had strength, like the bronze metal used to depict him. Why this Sculpture is Different This work by Donatello is set apart from other works he had produced, as there is a definite restriction of movement with this sculpture. Whether Donatello felt that St Rossore was a prisoner or that he was very restricted in his life and ostracised for his religion by his peers, or whether this effect of stillness accentuates the piety in the sculpture is not absolutely sure. Both effects appear in this reliquary bust of St Rossore. St Rossore would not have been able to practise Christianity with any freedom and he may have been a prisoner for some time before his demise. The effect of this still figure is very pious and fitting for where the bust would be placed by the monks. Did the Reason for the Sculpture Affect its Creation? The monks wanted the holy relic in their church and Donatello would have made this a religious sculpture for the church. This does affect the position of the figure and the overall impression of the sculpture. The figure appears pious and an obedient servant from the bowing of the head, and he appears to be thinking deeply and maybe praying, with his eyes looking downward. The reasoning behind this sculpture takes in the soldier St Rossore was, and the converted Christian he became. He stayed true to his beliefs and was martyred for these beliefs. This soldier was a strong man physically and mentally. The reason for the sculpture was to house St Rossore's holy relic, and this bust displays the man very well. Where the Sculpture is Now This bust is now displayed in the National Museum in Pisa. The sculpture arrived in Pisa in 1591 and still remains there. Modern day art lovers and tourists can visit the museum to see this sculpture amongst many others. So many centuries have passed since this sculpture was created and it is still a masterpiece of religious art.	<urn:uuid:d8166f0e-7184-4a89-ad5a-17cc036788c5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.donatellosculptures.com/reliquary-bust-of-saint-rossore/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601241.42/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121014531-20200121043531-00346.warc.gz	en	0.984758	904	3.46875	3	[ -0.06459973752498627, 0.3449106514453888, 0.3201598823070526, -0.18210232257843018, -0.41625863313674927, 0.10977692902088165, 0.39849090576171875, 0.19352062046527863, 0.3175065219402313, -0.1995517611503601, 0.1537739634513855, -0.4310030937194824, 0.03160904720425606, 0.1720524877309799...	9	This sculpture represents a Christian martyr who died in the 3rd century AD. His skull had been obtained by monks who commissioned the work to house it as a holy relic in their church. Their church is translated as 'Church of All Saints', and it housed a number of important relics. The first impression of the sculpture appears be of piety; a pious man with his head bowed. Interpreting St Rossore Rossore was a Roman soldier who converted to Christianity. He was beheaded in Sardinia because of his beliefs and became posthumously a saint. Donatello's interpretation of this man is sculpted in the style of ancient Roman busts. It is a lifelike figure with the only movement being a slight bow to the head and the eyes looking down. Why did Donatello choose this interpretation of the man? Donatello's decisions regarding his interpretation not only dictate the physical stance of the figure but also the materials used and the techniques to achieve the effect. The main impression of the work is one of piety. St Rossore appears to be in a submissive pose by bowing his head. Bowing with his head, could be interpreted as bowing to his chosen religion and god in prayer and also in acquiescence of his fate. The figure mainly displays piety. Most people would see this sculpture as a pious man praying to his god. Donatello wanted to give the saint a Roman-style sculpture to house his holy relic, and probably to show St Rossore was a Roman who became a Christian. The Materials and Techniques Chosen for this Sculpture Donatello's workmanship of this piece is very intricate and detailed from the hair on his subject's head and beard to every line on the armour on one shoulder. He chose to use bronze to create this reliquary bust; metal to accentuate the impression of the soldier that St Rossore was, and to emphasise strength. He used bronze to indicate a soldier and not a nobleman. There is no ornate colouring or designs within the main clothing, only the armour on the right-hand shoulder has intricate designs to highlight the armour worn by a soldier. Donatello attempted to describe his subject not only in the way the figure is positioned but by using materials that give an impression of the man. Donatello wanted this man to have recognition as a soldier. This had an overall effect on the whole bust. This pious man was not a weak man and he had strength, like the bronze metal used to depict him. Why this Sculpture is Different This work by Donatello is set apart from other works he had produced, as there is a definite restriction of movement with this sculpture. Whether Donatello felt that St Rossore was a prisoner or that he was very restricted in his life and ostracised for his religion by his peers, or whether this effect of stillness accentuates the piety in the sculpture is not absolutely sure. Both effects appear in this reliquary bust of St Rossore. St Rossore would not have been able to practise Christianity with any freedom and he may have been a prisoner for some time before his demise. The effect of this still figure is very pious and fitting for where the bust would be placed by the monks. Did the Reason for the Sculpture Affect its Creation? The monks wanted the holy relic in their church and Donatello would have made this a religious sculpture for the church. This does affect the position of the figure and the overall impression of the sculpture. The figure appears pious and an obedient servant from the bowing of the head, and he appears to be thinking deeply and maybe praying, with his eyes looking downward. The reasoning behind this sculpture takes in the soldier St Rossore was, and the converted Christian he became. He stayed true to his beliefs and was martyred for these beliefs. This soldier was a strong man physically and mentally. The reason for the sculpture was to house St Rossore's holy relic, and this bust displays the man very well. Where the Sculpture is Now This bust is now displayed in the National Museum in Pisa. The sculpture arrived in Pisa in 1591 and still remains there. Modern day art lovers and tourists can visit the museum to see this sculpture amongst many others. So many centuries have passed since this sculpture was created and it is still a masterpiece of religious art.	900	ENGLISH	1
Monday, June 3, 2019 "What About Us" An urgent call for changing the world of married adolescent girls Vikalp Sansthan in collaboration with Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) and American Jewish World Service (AJWS) conducted a landmark research. The research explores the experiences and perceptions of early marriage among young married girls, older married women and young boys. The study helps to understand factors and consequences of early marriages. We are happy to share executive summary of "What About Us"- a study on the situation of young married girls.https://drive.google.com/drive/search?q=type:pdf Sunday, July 13, 2014 Marriage is a common practice across the globe, however in India many girls are forced into marriage at a young age, and their lives eventually come to a stand still. Child marriage is a huge issue here in India, especially in the state of Rajasthan. Girls are forced into marriage at the ages of 12 or 13 sometimes even less, and are forced to give up their education and their childhood and learn how to handle a household, how to cook, and how to care for her new family members. Anarmi was born and raised in the village of Shiyani, which is located approximately thirty kilometers outside the district of Barmer. Anarmi has passed the 10th grade and is pushing to study further. Anarmi’s story takes the definition of bravery to another level. When children are young most of them never think that it would be upon their shoulders to fight for themselves and their younger siblings at the tender age of 16. Most 16 year olds have no care in the world; they enjoy their childhoods, and grow up without the pressure of having to defend themselves and their siblings from their parent’s decisions. Anarmi was to be wed on Akha Teej, along with her younger sister and five other girls from their village. Akha Teej also known as Akshaya Tritiya, which occurs on the Third Lunar Day of the Month Vaishaka, which is during the month of April and May. Since Lunar Days are considered auspicious, especially for marriages, many parents arrange to get their children married on these days. Anarmi already had prior knowledge about 18 being the legal age for marriage, so she mustered up the courage and approached her parents and told them that it was illegal to get her and her sister married. When her parents didn’t listen she threatened to call the police and report her parents because what they were doing was illegal. After her parents realized that this was no empty threat, they backed out of the wedding plans however, the other five girls wedding was still to take place on Akha Teej. Anarmi then decided that she was not going to let these girls get married without putting up a fight. She called the police and gave in a report about the details of the weddings, where they were to take place, and who was getting married, etc. The police then arrived in the village where the marriages were to take place and sent the baarat’s (groom’s procession) home empty handed. The police then waited in the village for the crowds to disperse and left the village.	<urn:uuid:9a4f9d6b-5665-4b66-8ad7-0718898276c0>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://vikalpsansthan.blogspot.com/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251737572.61/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127235617-20200128025617-00011.warc.gz	en	0.98777	672	3.28125	3	[ -0.012347082607448101, 0.1949997991323471, -0.1439686119556427, -0.32596009969711304, -0.06405560672283173, 0.5310387015342712, -0.12506458163261414, 0.06608997285366058, 0.11671344935894012, -0.31199371814727783, 0.05785365775227547, 0.1480260193347931, 0.43505024909973145, 0.139997079968...	3	Monday, June 3, 2019 "What About Us" An urgent call for changing the world of married adolescent girls Vikalp Sansthan in collaboration with Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) and American Jewish World Service (AJWS) conducted a landmark research. The research explores the experiences and perceptions of early marriage among young married girls, older married women and young boys. The study helps to understand factors and consequences of early marriages. We are happy to share executive summary of "What About Us"- a study on the situation of young married girls.https://drive.google.com/drive/search?q=type:pdf Sunday, July 13, 2014 Marriage is a common practice across the globe, however in India many girls are forced into marriage at a young age, and their lives eventually come to a stand still. Child marriage is a huge issue here in India, especially in the state of Rajasthan. Girls are forced into marriage at the ages of 12 or 13 sometimes even less, and are forced to give up their education and their childhood and learn how to handle a household, how to cook, and how to care for her new family members. Anarmi was born and raised in the village of Shiyani, which is located approximately thirty kilometers outside the district of Barmer. Anarmi has passed the 10th grade and is pushing to study further. Anarmi’s story takes the definition of bravery to another level. When children are young most of them never think that it would be upon their shoulders to fight for themselves and their younger siblings at the tender age of 16. Most 16 year olds have no care in the world; they enjoy their childhoods, and grow up without the pressure of having to defend themselves and their siblings from their parent’s decisions. Anarmi was to be wed on Akha Teej, along with her younger sister and five other girls from their village. Akha Teej also known as Akshaya Tritiya, which occurs on the Third Lunar Day of the Month Vaishaka, which is during the month of April and May. Since Lunar Days are considered auspicious, especially for marriages, many parents arrange to get their children married on these days. Anarmi already had prior knowledge about 18 being the legal age for marriage, so she mustered up the courage and approached her parents and told them that it was illegal to get her and her sister married. When her parents didn’t listen she threatened to call the police and report her parents because what they were doing was illegal. After her parents realized that this was no empty threat, they backed out of the wedding plans however, the other five girls wedding was still to take place on Akha Teej. Anarmi then decided that she was not going to let these girls get married without putting up a fight. She called the police and gave in a report about the details of the weddings, where they were to take place, and who was getting married, etc. The police then arrived in the village where the marriages were to take place and sent the baarat’s (groom’s procession) home empty handed. The police then waited in the village for the crowds to disperse and left the village.	672	ENGLISH	1
The Battle of Fort Sumter not only plays a major role in the history of Charleston, SC, but in the history of the United States. The commencement of this battle was the beginning of one of the most significant pieces of American history, and it changed the country forever. Read on to learn the significance of the Battle of Fort Sumter! Setting the Scene When Abraham Lincoln was elected president in 1860, many states were in an uproar because they believed he was going to abolish slavery. In response to his presidency, South Carolina seceded from the Union, followed shortly by six other states. They then named themselves the Confederate States of America. Tensions Running High Before South Carolina seceded, Union Major Robert Anderson had his troop of 85 soldiers positioned at Fort Moultrie, which is just by the mouth of the Charleston Harbor. When South Carolina seceded, Maj. Anderson was afraid for the safety of his troops, so they moved to Fort Sumter. Fort Sumter is located at the entrance of the harbor, so whoever occupies it essentially has the power to control who can enter and exit. It was a bold move that outraged the Confederates. While Anderson and his troops were stationed at Fort Sumter, supplies were running dangerously low, and the tension between his force and the Confederates was at an all-time high. The Confederates demanded that he surrender the fort. Anderson refused, and still requested from the Union that supplies be sent so that he and his troops could survive. A Union ship called Star of the West was then sent to restock Fort Sumter. However, Confederates released fire on the ship, and the supplies were unable to be delivered, leaving Anderson and his troops struggling. The Battle Commences Lincoln then notified South Carolina Governor Francis W. Pickens that he was going to send more supplies to the soldiers in Fort Sumter, to which he received an ultimatum—evacuate the fort, or else. Anderson refused to surrender the fort once again. So, from their artillery batteries completely surrounding the harbor, the Confederacy released fire on the fort at 4:30 a.m. on April 12, 1861. This signified the beginning of the American Civil War. While Anderson and his troops fired back, they were weak from their lack of supplies and knew they were outmatched. After 34 hours, Anderson finally agreed to surrender the fort. Upon the close of the Battle of Fort Sumter, there was a call for more military action from both the North and the South. Lincoln requested that 75,000 volunteers help squander the Confederacy, which actually caused four more states to secede. From here, the American Civil War raged on for three more years. If you enjoyed learning about the significance of the Battle of Fort Sumter, you have to take a tour with Classic Carriage Works. Our knowledgeable guides would love to tell you more about the many other historic sites in Charleston, SC, as you enjoy a ride on a shaded, horse-drawn carriage. Book a tour with us today!	<urn:uuid:dfd301f4-a3dc-4c60-b2d7-4fb551cc3e5f>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://classiccarriage.com/blog/significance-battle-fort-sumter/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250624328.55/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124161014-20200124190014-00233.warc.gz	en	0.980952	630	4.09375	4	[ -0.1755419373512268, 0.247880220413208, 0.638297438621521, -0.10297536849975586, -0.2905491888523102, -0.15658649802207947, 0.4633234143257141, -0.012810179963707924, -0.1198115348815918, -0.09941069781780243, 0.2280236780643463, -0.07967513054609299, -0.017997056245803833, 0.3748888373374...	5	The Battle of Fort Sumter not only plays a major role in the history of Charleston, SC, but in the history of the United States. The commencement of this battle was the beginning of one of the most significant pieces of American history, and it changed the country forever. Read on to learn the significance of the Battle of Fort Sumter! Setting the Scene When Abraham Lincoln was elected president in 1860, many states were in an uproar because they believed he was going to abolish slavery. In response to his presidency, South Carolina seceded from the Union, followed shortly by six other states. They then named themselves the Confederate States of America. Tensions Running High Before South Carolina seceded, Union Major Robert Anderson had his troop of 85 soldiers positioned at Fort Moultrie, which is just by the mouth of the Charleston Harbor. When South Carolina seceded, Maj. Anderson was afraid for the safety of his troops, so they moved to Fort Sumter. Fort Sumter is located at the entrance of the harbor, so whoever occupies it essentially has the power to control who can enter and exit. It was a bold move that outraged the Confederates. While Anderson and his troops were stationed at Fort Sumter, supplies were running dangerously low, and the tension between his force and the Confederates was at an all-time high. The Confederates demanded that he surrender the fort. Anderson refused, and still requested from the Union that supplies be sent so that he and his troops could survive. A Union ship called Star of the West was then sent to restock Fort Sumter. However, Confederates released fire on the ship, and the supplies were unable to be delivered, leaving Anderson and his troops struggling. The Battle Commences Lincoln then notified South Carolina Governor Francis W. Pickens that he was going to send more supplies to the soldiers in Fort Sumter, to which he received an ultimatum—evacuate the fort, or else. Anderson refused to surrender the fort once again. So, from their artillery batteries completely surrounding the harbor, the Confederacy released fire on the fort at 4:30 a.m. on April 12, 1861. This signified the beginning of the American Civil War. While Anderson and his troops fired back, they were weak from their lack of supplies and knew they were outmatched. After 34 hours, Anderson finally agreed to surrender the fort. Upon the close of the Battle of Fort Sumter, there was a call for more military action from both the North and the South. Lincoln requested that 75,000 volunteers help squander the Confederacy, which actually caused four more states to secede. From here, the American Civil War raged on for three more years. If you enjoyed learning about the significance of the Battle of Fort Sumter, you have to take a tour with Classic Carriage Works. Our knowledgeable guides would love to tell you more about the many other historic sites in Charleston, SC, as you enjoy a ride on a shaded, horse-drawn carriage. Book a tour with us today!	640	ENGLISH	1
Thomas Jefferson was a politician, educator, farmer and a visionary architect ahead of his time. Jefferson studied Palladio and Roman classicism architecture and used these ideal models in his designs while adding his own modifications and technical innovations. Jefferson enjoyed designing private and public buildings and said, "Architecture is my delight, and putting up and pulling down one of my favorite amusements."" Jefferson's drawings symbolized his Republican stance, his respect for agriculture, his role as a politician in society, and his Americanism views. While planning buildings that are both aesthetically pleasing and that perform a definite function, Jefferson's architectural style and political beliefs influenced the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. His home, Monticello displays his passion for architecture and his desire to continuously improve and transform his surroundings as he further defined his architectural ideas. (Figure 1) Jefferson's Poplar Forest was his retreat from politics and from the constant visitors at Monticello. It was a place where he relaxed, read, and spent time with his grandchildren. (figure 2) One of his many architectural achievements was the home he designed for friend and fellow politician, James Barbour in 1817. (Figure 3) "James Barbour and Thomas Jefferson were good friends- and held the same political beliefs for the power of the states, the rights of man and the rights of Americans against foreign rule. James Barbour, farmer and politician, was elected and served in the Virginia House of Delegates for twelve years, as governor of Virginia, on the United States Senate for ten years and as the minister to Great Britain under President John Adams. Since both men came from similar backgrounds and possessed like political careers and values, it is fitting that Barboursville was Jeffersonian in design and function. Case in point, "Designed by Jefferson on the model of Monticello, and completed about 1821, Barboursville was one of Jefferson's most successful creations and one of the most beautiful homes in the Virginia Piedmont.	<urn:uuid:86f3fc17-828b-4e6d-bb61-f27ca2615833>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.exampleessays.com/viewpaper/5472.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606696.26/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122042145-20200122071145-00228.warc.gz	en	0.984805	399	3.375	3	[ -0.3313372731208801, 0.2241368442773819, 0.4057312309741974, -0.21773439645767212, -0.32886242866516113, 0.09288608282804489, 0.127068430185318, 0.26633739471435547, 0.14210541546344757, 0.3209199905395508, -0.24335837364196777, -0.10572270303964615, -0.3329464793205261, 0.0802891254425048...	7	Thomas Jefferson was a politician, educator, farmer and a visionary architect ahead of his time. Jefferson studied Palladio and Roman classicism architecture and used these ideal models in his designs while adding his own modifications and technical innovations. Jefferson enjoyed designing private and public buildings and said, "Architecture is my delight, and putting up and pulling down one of my favorite amusements."" Jefferson's drawings symbolized his Republican stance, his respect for agriculture, his role as a politician in society, and his Americanism views. While planning buildings that are both aesthetically pleasing and that perform a definite function, Jefferson's architectural style and political beliefs influenced the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. His home, Monticello displays his passion for architecture and his desire to continuously improve and transform his surroundings as he further defined his architectural ideas. (Figure 1) Jefferson's Poplar Forest was his retreat from politics and from the constant visitors at Monticello. It was a place where he relaxed, read, and spent time with his grandchildren. (figure 2) One of his many architectural achievements was the home he designed for friend and fellow politician, James Barbour in 1817. (Figure 3) "James Barbour and Thomas Jefferson were good friends- and held the same political beliefs for the power of the states, the rights of man and the rights of Americans against foreign rule. James Barbour, farmer and politician, was elected and served in the Virginia House of Delegates for twelve years, as governor of Virginia, on the United States Senate for ten years and as the minister to Great Britain under President John Adams. Since both men came from similar backgrounds and possessed like political careers and values, it is fitting that Barboursville was Jeffersonian in design and function. Case in point, "Designed by Jefferson on the model of Monticello, and completed about 1821, Barboursville was one of Jefferson's most successful creations and one of the most beautiful homes in the Virginia Piedmont.	406	ENGLISH	1
Richard Henry Lee Biography, Life, Interesting Facts Known for the Lee Resolution, Richard Henry Lee was an American statesman. He made the motion in the Second Continental Congress for getting independence from Great Britain. From the very beginning, Lee was inclined into serving country in one way or another as a number of his family members were doing the same by serving in the military or as legislators and diplomats. His bold moves pushed America to get independence. Initially, he opposed the constitution but later he himself helped in the passing of the bill of rights. Richard Henry Lee was born in the Westmoreland County of Virginia on 20th of January in the year 1732 to father, Col. Thomas Lee and mother, Hannah Harrison Lee. Lee was born in an eminent Virginia family. As stated earlier as well that he had a legacy of family members serving into the military or were either diplomats or legislators. Though Richard received his initial education at home but later on he was sent to for higher education to England’s Wakefield Academy in. After graduating from the academy, he traveled to Europe and then, in the year 1752 returned to Virginia. He was taught the integrities of politics by his father and was also taught how to manage people and their efforts. Richard Henry Lee was married to Anne Aylett in the year 1757 and the couple also had 4 children from the wedlock. His career began on a high and a promising note where he began as a Justice of Peace and thereby entering the House of Burgesses. As the time passes, Lee gained power and position which also showed a positive impact on his oratory skills improving leaps and bounds. This, in turn, gave an opportunity to young and brilliant men to shape the conviction of the nation. He also played a major role in objecting the Stamp Act where a series of taxes were imposed by the British Parliament to enforce control over colonies. Lee not only objected to the same but he is also credited with the publically authoring of Westmoreland Resolutions. As a result of which things remained very peaceful between the British Parliament and the American colonies for several years. Richard Henry Lee’s role in moving people towards independence is impeccable. A series of stringent laws had been passed by The British in the year 1774 by the name of “Intolerable Acts” which were specially designed for irate colonies. On being appointed as a member to the Continental Congress, he moved the thinking of American masses from subservience to independence because of his oratory skills in August for the year 1774. Following the same, at the Second Continental Congress Richard resolution of independence was offered to the Committee of the Whole declaring the need for independence and snatching the same from the British. This also shattered all the political connections between the America and the State of Great Britain. Moving on the same path, the Congress even voted for independence by July 1776. While the war of independence was on for America, Richard Henry Lee served in the Virginia House of Delegates but had to miss it due to his poor health. After the end of the war of independence in the year 1983, under the Articles of Confederation, Richard served in Congress and later was also elected as the president of Congress unanimously. Richard supported the 1787 Federal Convention in Philadelphia but was worried that the new Constitution lacked a bill of rights and had too much power over the states. On the ratification of the Constitution in 1789, Richard served as a senator from Virginia. This helped shepherd the passage of the Bill of Rights. Due to health issues, Richard retired from the Senate. On June 19, 1794, Lee died at the age of 62. Salmon P. Chase Adolfo Rodríguez Saá Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini	<urn:uuid:dfcdc635-fbbe-4045-b357-ea74a2ad1bf3>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.sunsigns.org/famousbirthdays/d/profile/richard-henry-lee/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606269.37/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122012204-20200122041204-00251.warc.gz	en	0.985723	775	3.484375	3	[ -0.5414210557937622, 0.2569301724433899, 0.09204483777284622, -0.2956213355064392, -0.009914832189679146, 0.17401748895645142, 0.4978381395339966, -0.4000777006149292, -0.48478206992149353, -0.21505266427993774, 0.18625925481319427, 0.029290810227394104, 0.335365355014801, 0.05982009321451...	1	Richard Henry Lee Biography, Life, Interesting Facts Known for the Lee Resolution, Richard Henry Lee was an American statesman. He made the motion in the Second Continental Congress for getting independence from Great Britain. From the very beginning, Lee was inclined into serving country in one way or another as a number of his family members were doing the same by serving in the military or as legislators and diplomats. His bold moves pushed America to get independence. Initially, he opposed the constitution but later he himself helped in the passing of the bill of rights. Richard Henry Lee was born in the Westmoreland County of Virginia on 20th of January in the year 1732 to father, Col. Thomas Lee and mother, Hannah Harrison Lee. Lee was born in an eminent Virginia family. As stated earlier as well that he had a legacy of family members serving into the military or were either diplomats or legislators. Though Richard received his initial education at home but later on he was sent to for higher education to England’s Wakefield Academy in. After graduating from the academy, he traveled to Europe and then, in the year 1752 returned to Virginia. He was taught the integrities of politics by his father and was also taught how to manage people and their efforts. Richard Henry Lee was married to Anne Aylett in the year 1757 and the couple also had 4 children from the wedlock. His career began on a high and a promising note where he began as a Justice of Peace and thereby entering the House of Burgesses. As the time passes, Lee gained power and position which also showed a positive impact on his oratory skills improving leaps and bounds. This, in turn, gave an opportunity to young and brilliant men to shape the conviction of the nation. He also played a major role in objecting the Stamp Act where a series of taxes were imposed by the British Parliament to enforce control over colonies. Lee not only objected to the same but he is also credited with the publically authoring of Westmoreland Resolutions. As a result of which things remained very peaceful between the British Parliament and the American colonies for several years. Richard Henry Lee’s role in moving people towards independence is impeccable. A series of stringent laws had been passed by The British in the year 1774 by the name of “Intolerable Acts” which were specially designed for irate colonies. On being appointed as a member to the Continental Congress, he moved the thinking of American masses from subservience to independence because of his oratory skills in August for the year 1774. Following the same, at the Second Continental Congress Richard resolution of independence was offered to the Committee of the Whole declaring the need for independence and snatching the same from the British. This also shattered all the political connections between the America and the State of Great Britain. Moving on the same path, the Congress even voted for independence by July 1776. While the war of independence was on for America, Richard Henry Lee served in the Virginia House of Delegates but had to miss it due to his poor health. After the end of the war of independence in the year 1983, under the Articles of Confederation, Richard served in Congress and later was also elected as the president of Congress unanimously. Richard supported the 1787 Federal Convention in Philadelphia but was worried that the new Constitution lacked a bill of rights and had too much power over the states. On the ratification of the Constitution in 1789, Richard served as a senator from Virginia. This helped shepherd the passage of the Bill of Rights. Due to health issues, Richard retired from the Senate. On June 19, 1794, Lee died at the age of 62. Salmon P. Chase Adolfo Rodríguez Saá Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini	797	ENGLISH	1
African American Genealogy and Oldham County Court Records The Ohio River borders the state of Kentucky for 664 miles. When the Northwest Ordinance was chartered in 1787 the Ohio River became the line of demarcation between free soil and slave soil. Oldham County was established in 1824 primarily from handed-down land grants of American soldiers from the Revolutionary War. Most of these large grants were from more wealthy families from Virginia whose sons served as officers and officials. Commodore Richard Taylor, is such an example. Taylor and his wife, children and close to 100 enslaved laborers settled on one of the high ridges overlooking the Ohio River in Oldham County. Slavery accounted for 1/3 of Oldham County's population in 1860. Kentucky was very split on the issue of slavery and there were many who opposed slavery but, there were also many who benefited from the labor and profited from the sales of human enslavement. The resistance of enslaved people was very high. One of the first court cases (1825) in Oldham County is when Lucy, enslaved by Elizabeth Smith, ground glass and put it in Smith's stew. It took Elizabeth Smith three days to die and Lucy was sentenced to death. But this case is just one example of people who resisted slavery and would rather sacrifice their life then be enslaved. Oldham County had many people who resisted slavery and there are many throughout the state of Kentucky but often their stories were buried with their attempt of escape or resistance. Slave holders did not want stories of resistance to be popularized and spread throughout the community- there was a grave concern for slave revolt. People like John Brown and Nat Turner; their stories were troublesome and frightening for those who participated in the slave trade. There were also slave insurrections on steamboats where slaves rebelled. If you were a slave holder, you were profiting from the slave trade. You were a part of the system of buying, trading, and profiting from human trafficking. There was no such thing as a "good" slave owner. In 1807 the United States passed a federal law, The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves from other countries, but it did not restrict slave trading within the borders of the United States. Kentucky became a place where slave trading became a popular business to supply the labor force in the Southern states growing cotton, sugar cane, etc. As a result, the court systems in each county became involved in the capture, holding and auctioning of slaves. Slaves were property and slaves were taxed, just like livestock. Slaves were part of wills and estates and disposition of property. It was the responsibility of court officials such as Justice of Peace, Sheriffs, Jailers and Judges to oversee every aspect of the slave system within their county. Many of these officials received payment for capturing slaves, holding them and in some instance, purchasing slaves before they were auctioned and then working with local slave traders for the slave market. Slave trading and slave escape became more numerous between the 1830s up through the Civil War because of cotton. Great Britain was the mercantile capital of the world and the United States supplied 75% of the cotton for Great Britain. As the demand for slaves grew, the frequency of resistance grew and national leaders rose to organize and protest slavery in the United States. These leaders had been slaves themselves and they told their stories through narratives and newspapers. Henry Bibb was a native of our area and he became a prominent spokesperson for abolition. He spoke with other leaders such as Frederic Douglas, Harriet Tubman, Josiah Henson, Lewis Hayden and many more- over 100 slave narratives were published prior to the Civil War. Free blacks also provided support and money to the abolitionist cause. People like George DeBaptist and John Parker along with the "free black communities" within slave states (of which were numerous). Their leadership and influence garnered support of politicians and activist such as Laura Haviland, Delia Webster, Levi and Catherine Coffin, Salmon Chase, John Rankin and his family, Calvin Fairbank, Richard Oglesby, William Lloyd Garrison and many more. In Oldham County were honor the contribution of our people from our history. Today we have volunteers that are researching our court documents and family papers to "pull-out" the slave records and try to identify where they lived, who were the slave holders, try to locate burial sites, etc. Even if we cannot give some of these people a complete history, we are pulling their names from records and giving them identity. One of our volunteers is Diane Booker who has been researching African American heritage at the history center for many years. Diane's family goes back pre-Civil War. Currently she is pulling names of people from wills and court records including estate dispersal and looking at marriage records shortly after the Civil War. The following are entries from current research: 1. Jess Wright (b. 1848 in Trimble County) Contributed by Diane Booker note: Trimble County was a part of Oldham County prior to 1836. Many of the descendants in our area came from the surrounding region: Trimble, Henry, Shelby and Carroll Counties). Jess Wright was a custodian for the Bedford Trimble County High School in 1918. Born in 1848 into slavery, he and his family lived on the Dr. Wesley Wright farm on Barbone Road near Bedford. He married Lucy (no maiden name given) in 1900 and they had three children: Emma Lula Wright, Henry Wright and Thomas Wright. Thomas died at an early age. They moved to Oldham County after Lucy's mother passed away in 1920. Emma Lula married Samuel Johnson. They had four children: Leslie Johnson, Beulah Johnson Whitaker, Lenie Johnson and Lewis Johnson. Lenie and Lewis were twins. 2. Squire Shipman (1843-?) Squire Shipman was born in Shelby County. On Feb. 22, 1866 he purchased land from H. L. Givens for $380.00. He paid in two payments. A down payment of $180 and final payment $180 on Dec. 25, 1876. The property was located on the corner of South Street and West Street in LaGrange, Ky. The fron side of the property was called Monroe Street today and the South Street is South Second Street today. The property today runs between Washington Street and Adams Street and the lots are 6, 12, 18, and 24. Shipman and his family moved to Oldham County . The 1870 census states Squire lived in LaGrange. He was 21 years of age in dwelling no. 99 listed as a farm laborer. His spouse was Mary Shipman, age 20 and born in 1850. She was listed as a house keeper. 1880 Census: Squire Shipman age 34 was single and lived in LaGrange. Squire had two sisters, Bettie Shipman (b. 1885) and Katie Shipman (b. 1892) and a brother named Frank Shipman (b. 1852). 1900 Census: Squire Shipman lived with his wife Mandy Shipman on Worth Street in LaGrange, dwelling no. 108. Mandy Shipman was born in Aprilo 1858, age 42. 1910 Census: Squire Shipman still lived in LaGrange. He was 67, Mandy was 52. The three siblings of Ships lived at his home. Katie had a son named Ray Fred Jacobs who was born 1906. Alexander Beaumont was born into slavery in 1839 in Garrard County. He was enslaved by Susan Beaumont who signed for him to enlist in the Union Army on June 16, 1864 at Camp Nelson in Company E, 116 Infantry. He was listed at 5'8" and age 25 when he enlisted. His rank was private and he became a cook. He mustered out on January 17, 1867 at New Orleans. He was due $15.15 for his last pay. He went to Oldham County and married Lucy Fible. They had six sons and one daughter. 1880 Census Records for Alex Beaumont state: George, age 10; Jerry O., age 9; Kate B., age 8; John H., age 6; Claude A., age 4; Charles L. age 2 and James O., age 1. The Beaumont Family lived on the Fible farm in Ballardsville in Oldham County. Lucy's family also lived on the farm. The 1900 census indicated Lucy passed away. Alexander moved to LaGrange to live with his son, John H. Beaumont. They lived on Monroe Street which was renamed Second Avenue. Alexander Beaumont is buried in the Northwestern Colored Cemetery which is today has been renamed as the Historic African American Cemetery in LaGrange.	<urn:uuid:b4db59fc-f369-465b-a36d-0df673686d0e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.oldhamcountyhistoricalsociety.org/african-american-geneaology	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608062.57/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123011418-20200123040418-00003.warc.gz	en	0.98568	1,810	4.15625	4	[ -0.3754217326641083, -0.10793900489807129, -0.0696648359298706, 0.18868455290794373, -0.21092671155929565, -0.3298482894897461, 0.29947131872177124, -0.5547288656234741, -0.23914536833763123, 0.2540213167667389, 0.18770435452461243, -0.2329220175743103, 0.10262583196163177, -0.070704035460...	2	African American Genealogy and Oldham County Court Records The Ohio River borders the state of Kentucky for 664 miles. When the Northwest Ordinance was chartered in 1787 the Ohio River became the line of demarcation between free soil and slave soil. Oldham County was established in 1824 primarily from handed-down land grants of American soldiers from the Revolutionary War. Most of these large grants were from more wealthy families from Virginia whose sons served as officers and officials. Commodore Richard Taylor, is such an example. Taylor and his wife, children and close to 100 enslaved laborers settled on one of the high ridges overlooking the Ohio River in Oldham County. Slavery accounted for 1/3 of Oldham County's population in 1860. Kentucky was very split on the issue of slavery and there were many who opposed slavery but, there were also many who benefited from the labor and profited from the sales of human enslavement. The resistance of enslaved people was very high. One of the first court cases (1825) in Oldham County is when Lucy, enslaved by Elizabeth Smith, ground glass and put it in Smith's stew. It took Elizabeth Smith three days to die and Lucy was sentenced to death. But this case is just one example of people who resisted slavery and would rather sacrifice their life then be enslaved. Oldham County had many people who resisted slavery and there are many throughout the state of Kentucky but often their stories were buried with their attempt of escape or resistance. Slave holders did not want stories of resistance to be popularized and spread throughout the community- there was a grave concern for slave revolt. People like John Brown and Nat Turner; their stories were troublesome and frightening for those who participated in the slave trade. There were also slave insurrections on steamboats where slaves rebelled. If you were a slave holder, you were profiting from the slave trade. You were a part of the system of buying, trading, and profiting from human trafficking. There was no such thing as a "good" slave owner. In 1807 the United States passed a federal law, The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves from other countries, but it did not restrict slave trading within the borders of the United States. Kentucky became a place where slave trading became a popular business to supply the labor force in the Southern states growing cotton, sugar cane, etc. As a result, the court systems in each county became involved in the capture, holding and auctioning of slaves. Slaves were property and slaves were taxed, just like livestock. Slaves were part of wills and estates and disposition of property. It was the responsibility of court officials such as Justice of Peace, Sheriffs, Jailers and Judges to oversee every aspect of the slave system within their county. Many of these officials received payment for capturing slaves, holding them and in some instance, purchasing slaves before they were auctioned and then working with local slave traders for the slave market. Slave trading and slave escape became more numerous between the 1830s up through the Civil War because of cotton. Great Britain was the mercantile capital of the world and the United States supplied 75% of the cotton for Great Britain. As the demand for slaves grew, the frequency of resistance grew and national leaders rose to organize and protest slavery in the United States. These leaders had been slaves themselves and they told their stories through narratives and newspapers. Henry Bibb was a native of our area and he became a prominent spokesperson for abolition. He spoke with other leaders such as Frederic Douglas, Harriet Tubman, Josiah Henson, Lewis Hayden and many more- over 100 slave narratives were published prior to the Civil War. Free blacks also provided support and money to the abolitionist cause. People like George DeBaptist and John Parker along with the "free black communities" within slave states (of which were numerous). Their leadership and influence garnered support of politicians and activist such as Laura Haviland, Delia Webster, Levi and Catherine Coffin, Salmon Chase, John Rankin and his family, Calvin Fairbank, Richard Oglesby, William Lloyd Garrison and many more. In Oldham County were honor the contribution of our people from our history. Today we have volunteers that are researching our court documents and family papers to "pull-out" the slave records and try to identify where they lived, who were the slave holders, try to locate burial sites, etc. Even if we cannot give some of these people a complete history, we are pulling their names from records and giving them identity. One of our volunteers is Diane Booker who has been researching African American heritage at the history center for many years. Diane's family goes back pre-Civil War. Currently she is pulling names of people from wills and court records including estate dispersal and looking at marriage records shortly after the Civil War. The following are entries from current research: 1. Jess Wright (b. 1848 in Trimble County) Contributed by Diane Booker note: Trimble County was a part of Oldham County prior to 1836. Many of the descendants in our area came from the surrounding region: Trimble, Henry, Shelby and Carroll Counties). Jess Wright was a custodian for the Bedford Trimble County High School in 1918. Born in 1848 into slavery, he and his family lived on the Dr. Wesley Wright farm on Barbone Road near Bedford. He married Lucy (no maiden name given) in 1900 and they had three children: Emma Lula Wright, Henry Wright and Thomas Wright. Thomas died at an early age. They moved to Oldham County after Lucy's mother passed away in 1920. Emma Lula married Samuel Johnson. They had four children: Leslie Johnson, Beulah Johnson Whitaker, Lenie Johnson and Lewis Johnson. Lenie and Lewis were twins. 2. Squire Shipman (1843-?) Squire Shipman was born in Shelby County. On Feb. 22, 1866 he purchased land from H. L. Givens for $380.00. He paid in two payments. A down payment of $180 and final payment $180 on Dec. 25, 1876. The property was located on the corner of South Street and West Street in LaGrange, Ky. The fron side of the property was called Monroe Street today and the South Street is South Second Street today. The property today runs between Washington Street and Adams Street and the lots are 6, 12, 18, and 24. Shipman and his family moved to Oldham County . The 1870 census states Squire lived in LaGrange. He was 21 years of age in dwelling no. 99 listed as a farm laborer. His spouse was Mary Shipman, age 20 and born in 1850. She was listed as a house keeper. 1880 Census: Squire Shipman age 34 was single and lived in LaGrange. Squire had two sisters, Bettie Shipman (b. 1885) and Katie Shipman (b. 1892) and a brother named Frank Shipman (b. 1852). 1900 Census: Squire Shipman lived with his wife Mandy Shipman on Worth Street in LaGrange, dwelling no. 108. Mandy Shipman was born in Aprilo 1858, age 42. 1910 Census: Squire Shipman still lived in LaGrange. He was 67, Mandy was 52. The three siblings of Ships lived at his home. Katie had a son named Ray Fred Jacobs who was born 1906. Alexander Beaumont was born into slavery in 1839 in Garrard County. He was enslaved by Susan Beaumont who signed for him to enlist in the Union Army on June 16, 1864 at Camp Nelson in Company E, 116 Infantry. He was listed at 5'8" and age 25 when he enlisted. His rank was private and he became a cook. He mustered out on January 17, 1867 at New Orleans. He was due $15.15 for his last pay. He went to Oldham County and married Lucy Fible. They had six sons and one daughter. 1880 Census Records for Alex Beaumont state: George, age 10; Jerry O., age 9; Kate B., age 8; John H., age 6; Claude A., age 4; Charles L. age 2 and James O., age 1. The Beaumont Family lived on the Fible farm in Ballardsville in Oldham County. Lucy's family also lived on the farm. The 1900 census indicated Lucy passed away. Alexander moved to LaGrange to live with his son, John H. Beaumont. They lived on Monroe Street which was renamed Second Avenue. Alexander Beaumont is buried in the Northwestern Colored Cemetery which is today has been renamed as the Historic African American Cemetery in LaGrange.	1,946	ENGLISH	1
In 1868, three years after the end of the American Civil War, there began a time of restoration and opening up of the American West. Convertibles full of pioneers and their families kicked up the dust en route to the central and western areas of North America. The men were fully armed, ready to do battle with any bandits they met along the way, or any Native Americans who would fight to protect their land. A railway runs through it The construction of the Pacific Railway, a transcontinental railroad linking America’s east and west coasts, also attracted many labourers from China. The Burlingame Treaty between China and America meant that both sides could benefit in terms of labour and trade. It was then that 17-year-old Seid Back (薛柏, Xue Bai) packed his few belongings and crossed the sea, landing in Portland, Oregon, on the American West Coast. Born in San Wai, Hong Kong, and losing his father at a young age, Seid Back was prepared to take a gamble as a railroad worker, dreaming of fulfilling his own American Dream with a shovel and pickaxe. He and his Chinese compatriots didn’t know what the future held. Still, compared to being stuck in their homeland full of war and poverty, now they could at least hope for some opportunities. In those early days, China was dealing with internal conflicts like the Taiping Rebellion as well as external threats like the Opium Wars. Many immigrants from Guangdong did not want to put up with the poverty in their homeland, and signed contracts to work long-term in America. They came to America to work on the railways, and sent all their money back home. But with the explosion in Chinese immigrants came xenophobia from the locals. In 1882, the US Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, while several western states also passed some racist laws, ending the first wave of Chinese immigrants. Those who were already there made the best of it. In a strange land, faced with a harsh natural environment, tough work, the possibility of dying at any time due to accidents or disease, and having to deal with lawbreakers and racism, Seid had serious second thoughts about his railway job. Fortunately, he could cook. And so he left the Union Pacific Railway Company and started as a butler and cook in an ordinary household. Chinese immigrants in America were usually frugal; Seid worked tirelessly and managed to save some money. He invested US$3,000 in a small general store, and became a businessman. Initially, Seid imported uniquely Chinese products such as carpets, silk, and china, which the Americans loved. His business grew to become a contractor for a salmon cannery, and Seid became an important member of the Chinese community. At one point, he employed some 1,600 Chinese railroad workers throughout Oregon, and arranged for seasonal work for 150 to 200 Chinese men at the salmon cannery. Jack of all trades Another prominent businessman and influential member of Portland’s early Chinese community was Moy Back Hin (梅伯显, Mei Boxian), also known as Charley Twin Wo. He stepped on American soil with scant resources at the age of 20, becoming part of the first batch of Chinese immigrants of 1868. He also came from a humble background, and also succeeded through business. Moy was first a labourer, then hired by a judge, who suggested he go into trading in order to succeed in America. Over the years, they became good friends, and the judge often provided sound business suggestions. Moy set up a company importing tea, rice, clothing, and firecrackers, and also exported a lot of wood and flour to China. Subsequently, Moy opened a branch office providing labour for the Pacific Railway and Southern Pacific Railway, as well as the Oregon Railway and Navigation Company. He also provided workers for the salmon canneries along the Columbia River. With these businesses, Moy became one of the wealthiest Chinese in the American northwest, and the local newspaper called him the “Chinese millionaire of Portland”. In 1906, he was officially appointed Consul for the states of Oregon, Idaho, Washington, and Montana by the Chinese government. Given Portland’s large Chinese community and trade ties with China, the Consul headquarters was located in Portland. Seid and Moy both became naturalised Americans before the Chinese Exclusion Act came into effect, which gave their businesses the legal status and rights of local enterprises, which in turn meant the future of their descendants was more assured. As Asia and the West began to meet, there followed in-depth cultural exchange, as shown in fashion, food, and religion. Influenced by Western missionaries, some Chinese began attending church and listening to priests and pastors speak, and praying for God’s blessings. While there were occasional religious frictions, a growing number of Chinese accepted Christianity and began observing Christian festivals such as Easter and Christmas, along with religious activities like carolling and spreading the word of God. In mostly Buddhist and Taoist China, the Chinese were very slow to adopt the ways of Christianity. In contrast, those who immigrated to the US found themselves immersed in a Christian society. Try as they might to hold on to their own culture, it was difficult for them to avoid the influence of US society. For example, Christmas is a time when American families get together, and a season for shopping and giving gifts. And so, even though Chinese people have their own customs such as the Spring Festival (or Chinese New Year), the immigrants integrated with the locals and joined their American neighbours and friends in celebrating Christmas. (All photos courtesy of Hsu Chung-mao, digital colouring by Xu Danyu.)	<urn:uuid:6b965f38-6356-46f7-9c07-f695f6f122f6>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.thinkchina.sg/early-chinese-immigrants-embracing-american-way-life	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783621.89/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129010251-20200129040251-00543.warc.gz	en	0.982247	1,186	3.703125	4	[ -0.2788282632827759, 0.1106451079249382, 0.2597682476043701, 0.12463123351335526, 0.034011367708444595, 0.10118579864501953, -0.21611912548542023, 0.009904498234391212, -0.4729372262954712, 0.11788429319858551, 0.31010928750038147, -0.018328014761209488, 0.15090425312519073, 0.136850625276...	9	In 1868, three years after the end of the American Civil War, there began a time of restoration and opening up of the American West. Convertibles full of pioneers and their families kicked up the dust en route to the central and western areas of North America. The men were fully armed, ready to do battle with any bandits they met along the way, or any Native Americans who would fight to protect their land. A railway runs through it The construction of the Pacific Railway, a transcontinental railroad linking America’s east and west coasts, also attracted many labourers from China. The Burlingame Treaty between China and America meant that both sides could benefit in terms of labour and trade. It was then that 17-year-old Seid Back (薛柏, Xue Bai) packed his few belongings and crossed the sea, landing in Portland, Oregon, on the American West Coast. Born in San Wai, Hong Kong, and losing his father at a young age, Seid Back was prepared to take a gamble as a railroad worker, dreaming of fulfilling his own American Dream with a shovel and pickaxe. He and his Chinese compatriots didn’t know what the future held. Still, compared to being stuck in their homeland full of war and poverty, now they could at least hope for some opportunities. In those early days, China was dealing with internal conflicts like the Taiping Rebellion as well as external threats like the Opium Wars. Many immigrants from Guangdong did not want to put up with the poverty in their homeland, and signed contracts to work long-term in America. They came to America to work on the railways, and sent all their money back home. But with the explosion in Chinese immigrants came xenophobia from the locals. In 1882, the US Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, while several western states also passed some racist laws, ending the first wave of Chinese immigrants. Those who were already there made the best of it. In a strange land, faced with a harsh natural environment, tough work, the possibility of dying at any time due to accidents or disease, and having to deal with lawbreakers and racism, Seid had serious second thoughts about his railway job. Fortunately, he could cook. And so he left the Union Pacific Railway Company and started as a butler and cook in an ordinary household. Chinese immigrants in America were usually frugal; Seid worked tirelessly and managed to save some money. He invested US$3,000 in a small general store, and became a businessman. Initially, Seid imported uniquely Chinese products such as carpets, silk, and china, which the Americans loved. His business grew to become a contractor for a salmon cannery, and Seid became an important member of the Chinese community. At one point, he employed some 1,600 Chinese railroad workers throughout Oregon, and arranged for seasonal work for 150 to 200 Chinese men at the salmon cannery. Jack of all trades Another prominent businessman and influential member of Portland’s early Chinese community was Moy Back Hin (梅伯显, Mei Boxian), also known as Charley Twin Wo. He stepped on American soil with scant resources at the age of 20, becoming part of the first batch of Chinese immigrants of 1868. He also came from a humble background, and also succeeded through business. Moy was first a labourer, then hired by a judge, who suggested he go into trading in order to succeed in America. Over the years, they became good friends, and the judge often provided sound business suggestions. Moy set up a company importing tea, rice, clothing, and firecrackers, and also exported a lot of wood and flour to China. Subsequently, Moy opened a branch office providing labour for the Pacific Railway and Southern Pacific Railway, as well as the Oregon Railway and Navigation Company. He also provided workers for the salmon canneries along the Columbia River. With these businesses, Moy became one of the wealthiest Chinese in the American northwest, and the local newspaper called him the “Chinese millionaire of Portland”. In 1906, he was officially appointed Consul for the states of Oregon, Idaho, Washington, and Montana by the Chinese government. Given Portland’s large Chinese community and trade ties with China, the Consul headquarters was located in Portland. Seid and Moy both became naturalised Americans before the Chinese Exclusion Act came into effect, which gave their businesses the legal status and rights of local enterprises, which in turn meant the future of their descendants was more assured. As Asia and the West began to meet, there followed in-depth cultural exchange, as shown in fashion, food, and religion. Influenced by Western missionaries, some Chinese began attending church and listening to priests and pastors speak, and praying for God’s blessings. While there were occasional religious frictions, a growing number of Chinese accepted Christianity and began observing Christian festivals such as Easter and Christmas, along with religious activities like carolling and spreading the word of God. In mostly Buddhist and Taoist China, the Chinese were very slow to adopt the ways of Christianity. In contrast, those who immigrated to the US found themselves immersed in a Christian society. Try as they might to hold on to their own culture, it was difficult for them to avoid the influence of US society. For example, Christmas is a time when American families get together, and a season for shopping and giving gifts. And so, even though Chinese people have their own customs such as the Spring Festival (or Chinese New Year), the immigrants integrated with the locals and joined their American neighbours and friends in celebrating Christmas. (All photos courtesy of Hsu Chung-mao, digital colouring by Xu Danyu.)	1,175	ENGLISH	1
0826 GMT January 25, 2020 Revealed on Monday, the project maps an archeological dig the size of a family swimming pool, where approximately 5,500 stone tools were uncovered in 2009, Xinhua wrote. "We've tried to create a 3D representation of the dig at Newcastle West by placing the scanned artefacts back into their original positions as they were found when the dig was underway," university archivist, Gionni Di Gravio explained. "Archeologists are very similar to forensic scientists and archivists in that we like original order. The scene tells a story as well as what's found in it, so you have to preserve where things are found." The study is giving archeologists a better understanding of the cultures which existed amongst Australia's earliest inhabitants. "This project has revealed that aboriginal people existed here six-and-a-half thousand years ago and has brought new knowledge that it was a place of industry," Living Histories Coordinator, Dr. Ann Hardy said. "It's not a site where just a few random stone tools were located, it was an actual site where stone tools were made and traded. The stone tools were digitized using a handheld scanner which takes only minutes to work, they were then uploaded and texture and fine grain was added for realism. By creating virtual images of the tools and the location, the researchers hope to share and disperse, much more broadly than ever before, the knowledge of what was occurring in Australia prior to European settlement and to help understand the world's oldest surviving culture. "These are not just stones and rocks, they are the living and breathing products of a culture and a people that was changing and evolving all the time," Senior lecturer and Indigenous historian at the University's Wollotuka Institute, Dr. Greg Blyton said. "I think people and technology have got to work together to try and realize that this country's history of human occupation is a long one and every Australian has a right to share that history."	<urn:uuid:8801f599-904d-420b-8968-fd93d480ea63>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://www.iran-daily.com/News/251438.html?catid=3&title=Ancient-Australian-indigenous-site-recreated-with-VR-technology	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251671078.88/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125071430-20200125100430-00457.warc.gz	en	0.984945	413	3.375	3	[ -0.14866934716701508, 0.2668943405151367, 0.17879393696784973, 0.1444050818681717, -0.3137072026729584, 0.19167645275592804, -0.3026251792907715, 0.0707378014922142, -0.40729910135269165, 0.21229955554008484, 0.20016241073608398, -0.6225786209106445, 0.01438627578318119, 0.4652473628520965...	1	0826 GMT January 25, 2020 Revealed on Monday, the project maps an archeological dig the size of a family swimming pool, where approximately 5,500 stone tools were uncovered in 2009, Xinhua wrote. "We've tried to create a 3D representation of the dig at Newcastle West by placing the scanned artefacts back into their original positions as they were found when the dig was underway," university archivist, Gionni Di Gravio explained. "Archeologists are very similar to forensic scientists and archivists in that we like original order. The scene tells a story as well as what's found in it, so you have to preserve where things are found." The study is giving archeologists a better understanding of the cultures which existed amongst Australia's earliest inhabitants. "This project has revealed that aboriginal people existed here six-and-a-half thousand years ago and has brought new knowledge that it was a place of industry," Living Histories Coordinator, Dr. Ann Hardy said. "It's not a site where just a few random stone tools were located, it was an actual site where stone tools were made and traded. The stone tools were digitized using a handheld scanner which takes only minutes to work, they were then uploaded and texture and fine grain was added for realism. By creating virtual images of the tools and the location, the researchers hope to share and disperse, much more broadly than ever before, the knowledge of what was occurring in Australia prior to European settlement and to help understand the world's oldest surviving culture. "These are not just stones and rocks, they are the living and breathing products of a culture and a people that was changing and evolving all the time," Senior lecturer and Indigenous historian at the University's Wollotuka Institute, Dr. Greg Blyton said. "I think people and technology have got to work together to try and realize that this country's history of human occupation is a long one and every Australian has a right to share that history."	418	ENGLISH	1
Edit The Aztecs should be on the offensive as soon as the game starts. The Aztecs are also known as Mexica or Tenochca. It is possible that their migration southward was part of a general movement of peoples that followed, or perhaps helped trigger, the collapse of the Toltec civilization. The basis of Aztec success in creating a great state and ultimately an empire was their remarkable system of agriculturewhich featured intensive cultivation of all available land, as well as elaborate systems of irrigation and reclamation of swampland. The high productivity gained by those Aztec civivization made for a rich and populous state. The Aztec state was a despotism in which the military arm played a dominant role. Valour in war was, in fact, the surest path to advancement in Aztec society, which was caste- and class-divided but nonetheless vertically fluid. The priestly and bureaucratic classes were involved in the administration of the empire, while at the bottom of society were classes of serfs, indentured servants, and outright slaves. TlatelolcoAztec ruins of the former city-state of Tlatelolco foreground and the Church of Santiago de Tlatelolco backgroundMexico City. At base, it shared many of the cosmological beliefs of earlier peoples, notably the Mayasuch as that the present earth was the last in a series of creations and that it occupied a position between systems of 13 heavens and 9 underworlds. Closely entwined with Aztec religion was the calendar, on which the elaborate round of rituals and ceremonies that occupied the priests was based. The Aztec calendar was the one common to much of Mesoamerica, and it comprised a solar year of days and a sacred year of days; the two yearly cycles running in parallel produced a larger cycle of 52 years. The Aztec empire was still expanding, and its society still evolving, when its progress was halted in by the appearance of Spanish explorers. The writings preserve a record of the Aztec culture and Nahuatl language. Ayer, Learn More in these related Britannica articles:Civilization® VI – The Official Site \| News \| Civilization. May 20, · Find essays and research papers on Aztec at pfmlures.com We've helped millions of students since Join the world's largest study community. Early Aztec History The exact origins of the Aztec people are uncertain, but they are believed to have begun as a northern tribe of hunter-gatherers whose name came from that of their homeland, Aztlan (or "White Land"). The Aztecs were also known as the Tenochca (from which the name for their capital city, Tenochtitlan, was derived) or the Mexica (the origin of the name of the city that. Aztec Civilization - The Aztec Economy The early Aztec economy consisted of a type of barter system as this was a pre-capitalist society. Minor purchases were made with cacao beans imported from lowlands. Aztec, self name Culhua-Mexica, Nahuatl-speaking people who in the 15th and early 16th centuries ruled a large empire in what is now central and southern Mexico. The Aztecs are so called from Aztlán (“White Land”), an allusion to . During the 8th century, Mesoamerica was a region known for the rich resources encountered in it, which were eventually used for the creation of multiple technologies and weapons, and led to multitudinous discoveries in the areas of agriculture and trade which have impacted the world until present day.	<urn:uuid:cd393262-19b0-4dde-b34c-3157ed01105d>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://puwiwureto.pfmlures.com/aztec-civivization-18498ij.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250628549.43/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125011232-20200125040232-00301.warc.gz	en	0.980048	749	3.3125	3	[ -0.35666346549987793, 0.6317033171653748, 0.3688560128211975, 0.09452047944068909, -0.1674249917268753, -0.2936164140701294, -0.12116634845733643, 0.3179721236228943, -0.2057291567325592, -0.19029831886291504, 0.128774031996727, -0.5100780129432678, -0.053499072790145874, 0.088416814804077...	1	Edit The Aztecs should be on the offensive as soon as the game starts. The Aztecs are also known as Mexica or Tenochca. It is possible that their migration southward was part of a general movement of peoples that followed, or perhaps helped trigger, the collapse of the Toltec civilization. The basis of Aztec success in creating a great state and ultimately an empire was their remarkable system of agriculturewhich featured intensive cultivation of all available land, as well as elaborate systems of irrigation and reclamation of swampland. The high productivity gained by those Aztec civivization made for a rich and populous state. The Aztec state was a despotism in which the military arm played a dominant role. Valour in war was, in fact, the surest path to advancement in Aztec society, which was caste- and class-divided but nonetheless vertically fluid. The priestly and bureaucratic classes were involved in the administration of the empire, while at the bottom of society were classes of serfs, indentured servants, and outright slaves. TlatelolcoAztec ruins of the former city-state of Tlatelolco foreground and the Church of Santiago de Tlatelolco backgroundMexico City. At base, it shared many of the cosmological beliefs of earlier peoples, notably the Mayasuch as that the present earth was the last in a series of creations and that it occupied a position between systems of 13 heavens and 9 underworlds. Closely entwined with Aztec religion was the calendar, on which the elaborate round of rituals and ceremonies that occupied the priests was based. The Aztec calendar was the one common to much of Mesoamerica, and it comprised a solar year of days and a sacred year of days; the two yearly cycles running in parallel produced a larger cycle of 52 years. The Aztec empire was still expanding, and its society still evolving, when its progress was halted in by the appearance of Spanish explorers. The writings preserve a record of the Aztec culture and Nahuatl language. Ayer, Learn More in these related Britannica articles:Civilization® VI – The Official Site \| News \| Civilization. May 20, · Find essays and research papers on Aztec at pfmlures.com We've helped millions of students since Join the world's largest study community. Early Aztec History The exact origins of the Aztec people are uncertain, but they are believed to have begun as a northern tribe of hunter-gatherers whose name came from that of their homeland, Aztlan (or "White Land"). The Aztecs were also known as the Tenochca (from which the name for their capital city, Tenochtitlan, was derived) or the Mexica (the origin of the name of the city that. Aztec Civilization - The Aztec Economy The early Aztec economy consisted of a type of barter system as this was a pre-capitalist society. Minor purchases were made with cacao beans imported from lowlands. Aztec, self name Culhua-Mexica, Nahuatl-speaking people who in the 15th and early 16th centuries ruled a large empire in what is now central and southern Mexico. The Aztecs are so called from Aztlán (“White Land”), an allusion to . During the 8th century, Mesoamerica was a region known for the rich resources encountered in it, which were eventually used for the creation of multiple technologies and weapons, and led to multitudinous discoveries in the areas of agriculture and trade which have impacted the world until present day.	743	ENGLISH	1
At the very beginning,how was the Coulomb's law found experimentally? From experiments using two charged balls it can be shown that the force varies with the inverse of square of the distance between them keeping them on different distances times and again but how was the dependence of the force on the product of charges at first found experimentally? i.e Force is proportional with the product of charges Because at the very beginning when people didn't actually know about the charges very much it should have been quite difficult to tell about what the charge was. When we can't measure charge we can't simply tell that when force is doubled keeping distance fixed how much times the charge on a particular ball has been increased or decreased. At present we can easily argue that we can send the same current for two different time periods to calculate the charge on the ball but at the time of the discovery of Coulomb's law current was also not precisely known to people. So,what was the trick?	<urn:uuid:2b2be5cb-024c-4091-89bd-d0f945839568>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/356454/coulombs-law-origin	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251687958.71/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126074227-20200126104227-00006.warc.gz	en	0.982474	197	3.9375	4	[ -0.9817878603935242, -0.040140796452760696, -0.13062696158885956, 0.07584378123283386, 0.3248122036457062, -0.1721578985452652, 0.5388792753219604, -0.2760410010814667, 0.2522162199020386, -0.22888679802417755, 0.15504460036754608, -0.21289460361003876, -0.08766639232635498, 0.411630511283...	5	At the very beginning,how was the Coulomb's law found experimentally? From experiments using two charged balls it can be shown that the force varies with the inverse of square of the distance between them keeping them on different distances times and again but how was the dependence of the force on the product of charges at first found experimentally? i.e Force is proportional with the product of charges Because at the very beginning when people didn't actually know about the charges very much it should have been quite difficult to tell about what the charge was. When we can't measure charge we can't simply tell that when force is doubled keeping distance fixed how much times the charge on a particular ball has been increased or decreased. At present we can easily argue that we can send the same current for two different time periods to calculate the charge on the ball but at the time of the discovery of Coulomb's law current was also not precisely known to people. So,what was the trick?	196	ENGLISH	1
This article is part of the This Day in History series. A Long-Lasting Reputation When John Owen died on August 24, 1683, his reputation as “the Calvin of England,” as he has been called, was firmly established—a reputation that is still recognized three hundred and thirty-five years after his death. “Bred Up . . . Under . . . a Nonconformist” John Owen was born in 1616, the same year that William Shakespeare died. He grew up in a Christian home in a small village now known as Stadhampton, about five miles south-east of Oxford. His father, Henry Owen, was the minister of the parish church there and a Puritan. Of Owen’s childhood years only one reference has been recorded. “I was bred up from my infancy,” he remarked in 1657, “under the care of my father, who was a nonconformist all his days, and a painful laborer [that is, diligent worker] in the vineyard of the Lord.” At twelve years of age, Owen was sent by his father to Queen’s College, the University of Oxford. Here he obtained his B. A. on June 11, 1632, when he was 16. He went on to study for the M. A., which he was awarded on April 27, 1635. Everything seemed to be set for Owen to pursue an academic career. It was not, however, a good time to launch out into the world of academia. The Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud (1573-1645), had set out to suppress the Puritan movement, and to that end had begun a purge of the churches and universities. By 1637 Owen had no alternative but to leave Oxford and to become, along with many other Puritans who refused to conform to the Established Church, a private chaplain. He eventually found employment in the house of Lord Lovelace, a nobleman sympathetic to the Puritan cause. However, when the English Civil War broke out in 1642 and Lord Lovelace decided to support the King, Owen left his service and moved to London. A “Clear Shining from God” The move to London was providential in a couple of ways. First of all, it brought him into contact with the some of the leading defenders of the Parliamentary cause, Puritan preachers who viewed the struggle between the King and Parliament in terms of the struggle between Christ and anti-Christian forces. Moreover, it was during these initial days in London that he had an experience he would never forget. By 1642 Owen was convinced that the final source of authority in religion was the Holy Scriptures and moreover, that the doctrines of orthodox Calvinism were biblical Christianity. But he had yet to personally experience the Holy Spirit bearing witness to his spirit and giving him the assurance that he was a child of God. Owen found this assurance one Sunday when he decided to go with a cousin to hear Edmund Calamy the Elder (1600-1666), a famous Presbyterian preacher, at St. Mary’s Church, Aldermanbury. On arriving at this church, they were informed that the well-known Presbyterian was not going to preach that morning. Instead, a country preacher (whose name Owen never did discover) was going to fill in for the Presbyterian divine. His cousin urged him to go with him to hear Arthur Jackson (c.1593-1666), another notable Puritan preacher, at nearby St. Michael’s. But Owen decided to remain at St. Mary’s. The preacher took as his text that morning Matthew 8:26: “Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith?” It proved to be a message that Owen needed to hear and embrace. Through the words of a preacher whose identity is unknown, God spoke to Owen and removed once and for all his doubts and fears as to whether he was truly regenerate or not. He now knew himself to be born of the Spirit. The impact of this spiritual experience cannot be over-estimated. It gave to Owen the deep, inner conviction that he was indeed a child of God and chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, that God loved him and had a loving purpose for his life, and that this God was the true and living God. In practical terms, it meant a life-long interest in the work of God the Holy Spirit that would issue thirty years later in his monumental study of the Holy Spirit, A Discourse Concerning the Holy Spirit, which in many ways is the finest study of the work of the Holy Spirit ever written in English. As he later wrote: “Clear shining from God must be at the bottom of deep laboring with God.” “Deep Labouring with God” In 1643 Owen was offered the pastorate in the village of Fordham, six miles or so north-west of Colchester in Essex. Owen was here till 1646 when he became the minister of the church at the market town of Coggeshall, some five miles to the south. Here, as many as two thousand people would crowd into the church each Lord’s Day to hear Owen preach. It is noteworthy that this change in pastorates was also accompanied by an ecclesiological shift to Congregationalism. Up until this point Owen had been decidedly Presbyterian in his understanding of church government. His reading of The Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven by John Cotton (1584-1652) which had been published in 1644, was decisive in changing his mind in this area of theology. It was also at Coggeshall that he wrote the classic work on particular redemption, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (1647). During these tumultuous days, Owen clearly identified himself with the Parliamentary cause. He developed a friendship with the rising military figure Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658) and accompanied Cromwell on the latter’s 1649 campaign in Ireland. Though ill much of this time in Ireland, Owen stayed there from August 1649 to February 1650. He preached frequently to “a numerous multitude of as thirsting a people after the gospel as ever yet I conversed withal.” When he returned to England the following year, he confessed that “the tears and cries of the inhabitants of Dublin after the manifestations of Christ are ever in my view.” Accordingly, he sought to convince Parliament of the spiritual need of this land and asked the members of Parliament in a 1650 sermon, The Steadfastness of Promises, and the Sinfulness of Staggering : How is it that Jesus Christ is in Ireland only as a lion staining all his garments with the blood of his enemies; and none to hold him out as a lamb sprinkled with his own blood to his friends? Is it the sovereignty and interest of England that is alone to be there transacted? For my part, …I could heartily rejoice, that … the Irish might enjoy Ireland so long as the moon endureth, so that Jesus Christ might possess the Irish. He drives not, but gently leads into all truth, and persuades men to dwell in the tents of like precious faith; which would lose of its preciousness and value, if that sparkle of freeness shone not in it. By the early 1650s, Owen had become one of Cromwell’s leading advisors, especially in national affairs to do with the church. There is little doubt that Owen was a firm supporter of Cromwell in this period. When Cromwell was urged to become the monarch of England in 1656, however, Owen was among those who opposed this move. As it turned out, Cromwell did not accept the crown. But Owen’s friendship with Crowmell had been damaged and the two men were nowhere near as close as they had been. “The Great Beautifier of Souls” Cromwell had appointed Owen to the oversight of Oxford University in 1652 as its Vice-Chancellor. From this position, Owen helped to re-assemble the faculty, who had been dispersed by the war, and to put the university back on its feet. He also had numerous opportunities to preach to the students at Oxford. An important work on holiness came out of his preaching during this period, The Mortification of Sin in Believers (1656), which is in some ways the richest of all of Owen’s treatises on this subject. It is based on Romans 8:13 and lays out a strategy for fighting indwelling sin and warding off temptation. Owen emphasizes that in the fight against sin the Holy Spirit employs all of our human powers. Not without reason does Owen lovingly describe the Spirit in another place as “the great beautifier of souls.” Oliver Cromwell died in September of 1658 and the “rule of the saints,” as some called it, began to fall apart. In the autumn of that year, Owen, now a key leader among the Congregationalists, played a vital role in drawing up what is known as the Savoy Declaration, which would give the Congregationalist churches ballast for the difficult days ahead. Only a few days after Cromwell’s death, Owen met with around 200 other Congregationalist leaders, including men like Thomas Goodwin (1600-1680), Philip Nye (c.1596-1672), and William Bridge (c.1600-1671), in the chapel of the old Savoy Palace in London. One of the outcomes of this synod was a recommendation to revise the Westminster Confession of Faith for the Congregationalist churches. Traditionally Owen has been credited with writing the lengthy preface that came before the Savoy Declaration. In it he argued, anticipating a key issue over the rest of his life: The Spirit of Christ is in himself too free, great and generous a Spirit, to suffer himself to be used by any human arm, to whip men into belief; he drives not, but gently leads into all truth, and persuades men to dwell in the tents of like precious faith; which would lose of its preciousness and value, if that sparkle of freeness shone not in it. “The Church in a Storm” In 1660 a number of Cromwell’s fellow Puritan leaders, fearful that Britain was slipping into full-fledged anarchy, asked Charles II, then living in exile on the continent, to return to England as her monarch. Those who came to power with Charles were determined that the Puritans would never again hold the reins of political authority. During Charles’ reign and that of his brother James II (r.1685-1688), the Puritan cause was thus savagely persecuted. After the Act of Uniformity in 1662, which required all religious worship to be according to the letter of The Book of Common Prayer, and other legislation enacted during the 1660s all other forms of worship were illegal. A number of Owen’s close friends, including John Bunyan, suffered fines and imprisonment for not heeding these laws. Although Owen was shielded from actual imprisonment by some powerful friends, he led at best a precarious existence till his death. He was once nearly attacked by a mob, who surrounded his carriage. At one point he was tempted to accept the offer of a safe haven in America when the Puritan leaders in Massachusetts offered him the presidency of Harvard. Owen, though, recognized where he was needed most. But these years were also ones of great literary fruitfulness. His exhaustive commentary on Hebrews appeared between 1668 and 1684. A Discourse Concerning the Holy Spirit came out in 1674 and an influential work on justification, The Doctrine of Justification by Faith, in 1677. Owen’s Meditations and Discourses on The Glory of Christ (1st ed. 1684; 2nd ed. 1696), what Robert Oliver has rightly termed “incomparable,” was written under the shadow of death in 1683 and represents Owen’s dying testimony to the unsurpassable value and joy of living a life for the glory of Christ. Popular Articles in This Series When Edwards came to preach in Enfield, God blessed the preaching of his Word in an extraordinary manner. At the break of dawn on April 9, 1945, Dietrich Bonhoeffer was hanged. As they prepared him for his death, he preached a final sermon. The struggles of his Calvin’s life tested his faith. At the heart of his faith was the confidence that for the sake of Jesus, God was his loving heavenly Father. It was January 31, 1892, and after twenty-four years of ill health, the ‘Prince of Preachers’ went to be with the Lord, aged just fifty-seven.	<urn:uuid:d8b2d45e-ddb9-4638-89c9-ddb87db2729a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.crossway.org/articles/this-day-in-history-the-death-of-john-owen/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00013.warc.gz	en	0.984137	2,673	3.4375	3	[ -0.3133190870285034, 0.24868977069854736, 0.24058179557323456, -0.20590825378894806, -0.09580573439598083, -0.1045532375574112, -0.0962517112493515, -0.12763363122940063, -0.00098466407507658, 0.019523553550243378, -0.2822384834289551, -0.10830582678318024, 0.26297885179519653, 0.007682444...	11	This article is part of the This Day in History series. A Long-Lasting Reputation When John Owen died on August 24, 1683, his reputation as “the Calvin of England,” as he has been called, was firmly established—a reputation that is still recognized three hundred and thirty-five years after his death. “Bred Up . . . Under . . . a Nonconformist” John Owen was born in 1616, the same year that William Shakespeare died. He grew up in a Christian home in a small village now known as Stadhampton, about five miles south-east of Oxford. His father, Henry Owen, was the minister of the parish church there and a Puritan. Of Owen’s childhood years only one reference has been recorded. “I was bred up from my infancy,” he remarked in 1657, “under the care of my father, who was a nonconformist all his days, and a painful laborer [that is, diligent worker] in the vineyard of the Lord.” At twelve years of age, Owen was sent by his father to Queen’s College, the University of Oxford. Here he obtained his B. A. on June 11, 1632, when he was 16. He went on to study for the M. A., which he was awarded on April 27, 1635. Everything seemed to be set for Owen to pursue an academic career. It was not, however, a good time to launch out into the world of academia. The Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud (1573-1645), had set out to suppress the Puritan movement, and to that end had begun a purge of the churches and universities. By 1637 Owen had no alternative but to leave Oxford and to become, along with many other Puritans who refused to conform to the Established Church, a private chaplain. He eventually found employment in the house of Lord Lovelace, a nobleman sympathetic to the Puritan cause. However, when the English Civil War broke out in 1642 and Lord Lovelace decided to support the King, Owen left his service and moved to London. A “Clear Shining from God” The move to London was providential in a couple of ways. First of all, it brought him into contact with the some of the leading defenders of the Parliamentary cause, Puritan preachers who viewed the struggle between the King and Parliament in terms of the struggle between Christ and anti-Christian forces. Moreover, it was during these initial days in London that he had an experience he would never forget. By 1642 Owen was convinced that the final source of authority in religion was the Holy Scriptures and moreover, that the doctrines of orthodox Calvinism were biblical Christianity. But he had yet to personally experience the Holy Spirit bearing witness to his spirit and giving him the assurance that he was a child of God. Owen found this assurance one Sunday when he decided to go with a cousin to hear Edmund Calamy the Elder (1600-1666), a famous Presbyterian preacher, at St. Mary’s Church, Aldermanbury. On arriving at this church, they were informed that the well-known Presbyterian was not going to preach that morning. Instead, a country preacher (whose name Owen never did discover) was going to fill in for the Presbyterian divine. His cousin urged him to go with him to hear Arthur Jackson (c.1593-1666), another notable Puritan preacher, at nearby St. Michael’s. But Owen decided to remain at St. Mary’s. The preacher took as his text that morning Matthew 8:26: “Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith?” It proved to be a message that Owen needed to hear and embrace. Through the words of a preacher whose identity is unknown, God spoke to Owen and removed once and for all his doubts and fears as to whether he was truly regenerate or not. He now knew himself to be born of the Spirit. The impact of this spiritual experience cannot be over-estimated. It gave to Owen the deep, inner conviction that he was indeed a child of God and chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, that God loved him and had a loving purpose for his life, and that this God was the true and living God. In practical terms, it meant a life-long interest in the work of God the Holy Spirit that would issue thirty years later in his monumental study of the Holy Spirit, A Discourse Concerning the Holy Spirit, which in many ways is the finest study of the work of the Holy Spirit ever written in English. As he later wrote: “Clear shining from God must be at the bottom of deep laboring with God.” “Deep Labouring with God” In 1643 Owen was offered the pastorate in the village of Fordham, six miles or so north-west of Colchester in Essex. Owen was here till 1646 when he became the minister of the church at the market town of Coggeshall, some five miles to the south. Here, as many as two thousand people would crowd into the church each Lord’s Day to hear Owen preach. It is noteworthy that this change in pastorates was also accompanied by an ecclesiological shift to Congregationalism. Up until this point Owen had been decidedly Presbyterian in his understanding of church government. His reading of The Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven by John Cotton (1584-1652) which had been published in 1644, was decisive in changing his mind in this area of theology. It was also at Coggeshall that he wrote the classic work on particular redemption, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (1647). During these tumultuous days, Owen clearly identified himself with the Parliamentary cause. He developed a friendship with the rising military figure Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658) and accompanied Cromwell on the latter’s 1649 campaign in Ireland. Though ill much of this time in Ireland, Owen stayed there from August 1649 to February 1650. He preached frequently to “a numerous multitude of as thirsting a people after the gospel as ever yet I conversed withal.” When he returned to England the following year, he confessed that “the tears and cries of the inhabitants of Dublin after the manifestations of Christ are ever in my view.” Accordingly, he sought to convince Parliament of the spiritual need of this land and asked the members of Parliament in a 1650 sermon, The Steadfastness of Promises, and the Sinfulness of Staggering : How is it that Jesus Christ is in Ireland only as a lion staining all his garments with the blood of his enemies; and none to hold him out as a lamb sprinkled with his own blood to his friends? Is it the sovereignty and interest of England that is alone to be there transacted? For my part, …I could heartily rejoice, that … the Irish might enjoy Ireland so long as the moon endureth, so that Jesus Christ might possess the Irish. He drives not, but gently leads into all truth, and persuades men to dwell in the tents of like precious faith; which would lose of its preciousness and value, if that sparkle of freeness shone not in it. By the early 1650s, Owen had become one of Cromwell’s leading advisors, especially in national affairs to do with the church. There is little doubt that Owen was a firm supporter of Cromwell in this period. When Cromwell was urged to become the monarch of England in 1656, however, Owen was among those who opposed this move. As it turned out, Cromwell did not accept the crown. But Owen’s friendship with Crowmell had been damaged and the two men were nowhere near as close as they had been. “The Great Beautifier of Souls” Cromwell had appointed Owen to the oversight of Oxford University in 1652 as its Vice-Chancellor. From this position, Owen helped to re-assemble the faculty, who had been dispersed by the war, and to put the university back on its feet. He also had numerous opportunities to preach to the students at Oxford. An important work on holiness came out of his preaching during this period, The Mortification of Sin in Believers (1656), which is in some ways the richest of all of Owen’s treatises on this subject. It is based on Romans 8:13 and lays out a strategy for fighting indwelling sin and warding off temptation. Owen emphasizes that in the fight against sin the Holy Spirit employs all of our human powers. Not without reason does Owen lovingly describe the Spirit in another place as “the great beautifier of souls.” Oliver Cromwell died in September of 1658 and the “rule of the saints,” as some called it, began to fall apart. In the autumn of that year, Owen, now a key leader among the Congregationalists, played a vital role in drawing up what is known as the Savoy Declaration, which would give the Congregationalist churches ballast for the difficult days ahead. Only a few days after Cromwell’s death, Owen met with around 200 other Congregationalist leaders, including men like Thomas Goodwin (1600-1680), Philip Nye (c.1596-1672), and William Bridge (c.1600-1671), in the chapel of the old Savoy Palace in London. One of the outcomes of this synod was a recommendation to revise the Westminster Confession of Faith for the Congregationalist churches. Traditionally Owen has been credited with writing the lengthy preface that came before the Savoy Declaration. In it he argued, anticipating a key issue over the rest of his life: The Spirit of Christ is in himself too free, great and generous a Spirit, to suffer himself to be used by any human arm, to whip men into belief; he drives not, but gently leads into all truth, and persuades men to dwell in the tents of like precious faith; which would lose of its preciousness and value, if that sparkle of freeness shone not in it. “The Church in a Storm” In 1660 a number of Cromwell’s fellow Puritan leaders, fearful that Britain was slipping into full-fledged anarchy, asked Charles II, then living in exile on the continent, to return to England as her monarch. Those who came to power with Charles were determined that the Puritans would never again hold the reins of political authority. During Charles’ reign and that of his brother James II (r.1685-1688), the Puritan cause was thus savagely persecuted. After the Act of Uniformity in 1662, which required all religious worship to be according to the letter of The Book of Common Prayer, and other legislation enacted during the 1660s all other forms of worship were illegal. A number of Owen’s close friends, including John Bunyan, suffered fines and imprisonment for not heeding these laws. Although Owen was shielded from actual imprisonment by some powerful friends, he led at best a precarious existence till his death. He was once nearly attacked by a mob, who surrounded his carriage. At one point he was tempted to accept the offer of a safe haven in America when the Puritan leaders in Massachusetts offered him the presidency of Harvard. Owen, though, recognized where he was needed most. But these years were also ones of great literary fruitfulness. His exhaustive commentary on Hebrews appeared between 1668 and 1684. A Discourse Concerning the Holy Spirit came out in 1674 and an influential work on justification, The Doctrine of Justification by Faith, in 1677. Owen’s Meditations and Discourses on The Glory of Christ (1st ed. 1684; 2nd ed. 1696), what Robert Oliver has rightly termed “incomparable,” was written under the shadow of death in 1683 and represents Owen’s dying testimony to the unsurpassable value and joy of living a life for the glory of Christ. Popular Articles in This Series When Edwards came to preach in Enfield, God blessed the preaching of his Word in an extraordinary manner. At the break of dawn on April 9, 1945, Dietrich Bonhoeffer was hanged. As they prepared him for his death, he preached a final sermon. The struggles of his Calvin’s life tested his faith. At the heart of his faith was the confidence that for the sake of Jesus, God was his loving heavenly Father. It was January 31, 1892, and after twenty-four years of ill health, the ‘Prince of Preachers’ went to be with the Lord, aged just fifty-seven.	2,718	ENGLISH	1
Christian-History.org does not receive any personally identifiable information from the search bar below. by John Dempsey Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) became the primary theologian for the Roman Catholic Church, and greatly influenced the theology and thought of many other groups, including Lutheran and Reformed, as well as others. In response to the increasing influence of Aristotelianism, Muslim and Jewish thought, along with scientific information that had been lost by, or was new to, the west being put forth at the University of Paris at the time, Aquinas sought to use what he called "science" to systematically answer teachings that were circulating in his day in regard to the "Christian" perspective (largely defending the current traditions and practices of Rome) using reason and "natural law," along with scripture and other writings. Born around 1225 in Roccasecca Castle, 8 kilometers north of Aquino (from which "Aquinas," meaning "of Aquino," comes), in southern Italy, to aristocratic parents in an area disputed by the emperor and the Pope, Thomas Aquinas was tutored from a young child to be a cleric in the Roman Catholic Church. His parents wanted him to join the ancient Benedictine Order, probably in hopes of him becoming a powerful abbot (like his uncle) to their political advantage, a practice that was common among "noble" families of the times. (They often would stop at nothing to get their relatives in high church positions because of the power of the Roman Church in affairs of money and political intrigue.) When Thomas Aquinas later wanted to join the more recently formed Dominican Order, who were preachers, his parents had him kidnapped by his brothers for over a year in order to dissuade him. His brothers, reportedly, went so far to control him as to bring him a prostitute. The story goes, that he chased her away with a flaming stick. Eventually, his family gave up and arranged for his "escape" through a window in order to save face at having lost the battle for his future. In 1245 Thomas Aquinas went on to study at the University of Paris, where he met and was influenced by Albertus Magnus, a Dominican who was the head of the department of theology. Three years later, when Magnus left for Cologne, Aquinas also went there, where he became a Bible teacher and writer. Returning to Paris in 1252, where he stayed until 1259, he studied to be, and eventually became, a master in theology and full professor, continuing to write extensively (including writing his famous, Summa contra Gentiles) and teach. Around 1259, he was appointed theological advisor to the papal court spending some time with the pope and his court and also sent out to teach friars who could not attend the university, at communal living facilities in Naples and Orvieto. Then in 1265, Aquinas founded a university at the Dominican priory at Rome. While there, he began writing Summa Theologica, his most famous work, as well as other writings. By 1269, he was back teaching at the University of Paris, where he confronted radical Averroism—philosophies derived from an Arab philosopher that covered Aristotle—and other subjects, from philosophy and theology to math, psychology, medicine, physics, and law. Aquinas' writings, including the Summa Theologica, on which he continued to work until shortly before his death, largely are a response to Averroism and radical Aristotelianism. In 1272, Thomas Aquinas left Paris to establish a university in Naples, as requested by the Dominican Order to which he belonged. He reportedly had an experience with God there that led him to stop writing and devote his energy to reconciling the Roman and Orthodox churches. He was apparently was trying to do that when, on his journey, he suffered a series of accidents and illnesses that resulted in his death in 1274. In his lifetime and shortly after, Thomas Aquinas received support from Popes Innocent IV and Urban IV and opposition from the bishop of Paris, Etienne Tempier, who excommunicated some of those who followed Thomas Aquinas' teachings. But, since then, his writings have become so influential among Roman Catholics that, in the early 20th century, Pope Benedict XV said that the Roman Catholic Church had adopted Thomas Aquinas' doctrines as their own. Pope John XXII, in the early 14th century, declared him a saint. In the 15th century Pope Pius V declared him a "Doctor of the Church." Anglicans, Roman Catholics, and Lutherans remember him every year on January 28. There seems to be evidence that he cared about the truth and about God, as shown in his dedication to preaching and teaching over political gain for himself. He also is reported to have said, when asked by Christ in a vision what he desired, "Only you, Lord." On his death bed, he said, "I receive thee, ransom of my soul. For the love of thee have I studied and kept vigil, toiled, preached and taught..." And the fact that his heart turned toward unity with the eastern churches also seems to point that way. Unfortunately, he was drawn into the pattern of arguing doctrine and leaning on human understanding, instead of God's commands, that had become the common method of teaching centuries before, instead of spending his time insisting that disciples demonstrate the life of Christ, as the apostolic churches had. Thomas Aquinas also took the view (Summa Theologica, second part of the second part, question eleven, article three), that anyone branded a "heretic" by the Church should be put to death if they failed to repent, in opposition to both the teachings and the example of Jesus and the Apostles. Maybe one of the most widely known and lasting legacies of Thomas Aquinas is his contribution to the dialogue on what God accomplished by the sacrifice of Jesus, a subject referred to as, "the atonement." Aquinas' theory is intrinsically important to modern Catholics and important to evangelicals and other Christians, especially in the west, because of its influence on the writings of John Calvin and his followers. Calvin's version of the satisfaction theory, penal substitution, deeply pervades protestant theology to the point that tradition has made some version of it largely a test of orthodoxy in western thought, though it never was for the 1500 years of church history before Calvin. More than 100 years before Thomas Aquinas, Anselm of Canterbury, dissatisfied by the Early Church Fathers' explanation (often called the ransom, or Christus Victor, theory of atonement), finding it "irrational" that Christ's death could be paid by God as a ransom to Satan in order to secure our freedom, came up with what was the beginning of a succession of "satisfaction theories of atonement." His thoughts were that we all owe God a debt of honor to live without sin, and that, when we sin, we create a blemish on God's honor, which has to be rectified. Since God's honor is divine, it can only be rectified by the divine Son paying the debt to his Father with his life. This seems to portray God the Father as being full of pride, worrying about his honor, placing it over the life and torture of his Son, when the truth is that—if the Father is accurately represented by Jesus as we believe—the Father makes himself of no reputation for our sakes, preferring to show his love and give honor to the Son, who, in turn, seeks no glory for himself, but gives all glory and honor to the Father. Thomas Aquinas, not satisfied with Anselm's arguments, decided to answer him in his Summa Theologica in a long, involved discussion that is hard to condense. Aquinas' take seems to be that sin requires punishment in order to set it right and that Jesus was sent to be tortured and die in order to balance the account for men or to return "order" to his "justice." Does this mean that the Father was forced to promote the torture and death of his son in order to balance some sort of math problem? He went on to include his thought that we could pay the moral debt of our own sin by purposely experiencing pain equal to our pleasure derived from sin (penance), but that Christ had to pay the debt for our "original sin" that we inherited from Adam and Eve, which resulted in a loss of a divine empowerment or "supernature" that had previously allowed humans to overcome their natural ways. According to Aquinas, it seems that the way we partake of Christ's merits and receive salvation is through the "sacraments" of the Roman Catholic Church (like infant baptism, confession, communion, confirmation, marriage, and last rites). Then along came Calvin. A couple centuries later, reformer John Calvin and his followers, influenced by Thomas Aquinas, also tried to explain the mechanics of the atonement, changing moral imbalance to crimes, cutting away penance, and substituting predestination for free will. The result is the doctrine of penal substitution, where mankind is totally evil, has no ability to choose God, and are cosmic criminals, sentenced to death at birth. That is, except for a few God has chosen to save by sending his Son to die in their place, which placates God's wrath and gets them to Heaven. This seems to effectively relegate the Father to the role of a mean, angry legal functionary who either can't or won't forgive men without carrying out his wrath on his kind, innocent Son, and that he is randomly exclusive in choosing who to torture in a fire pit forever. If we have to accept one of these models, exclusively, for understanding in what way Jesus' death "atoned" for us, I suggest the early church model, since they were closest to Jesus and the Apostles and because they had the fruit of of love and unity. If you would like to read some of Aquinas' writings for yourself, you can find the Summa Theologica and other writings of Thomas Aquinas online at Christian Classics Ethereal Library. Reading original writings, rather than depending solely on evaluations from others is a good practice, especially if the subject of inquiry seems important enough to need to accurately determine the truth. My newest book, Rome's Audacious Claim, was released December 1!	<urn:uuid:875291f3-48a7-4fd7-9e56-ca1c42d98f6a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.christian-history.org/thomas-aquinas.html	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251678287.60/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125161753-20200125190753-00310.warc.gz	en	0.984045	2,152	3.484375	3	[ 0.019681531935930252, 0.3784089684486389, 0.08385177701711655, -0.15734031796455383, -0.032932475209236145, 0.10358329862356186, -0.31616300344467163, 0.17519883811473846, 0.19060830771923065, 0.1947053223848343, -0.050612062215805054, 0.2152838110923767, 0.09782658517360687, 0.25835448503...	1	Christian-History.org does not receive any personally identifiable information from the search bar below. by John Dempsey Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) became the primary theologian for the Roman Catholic Church, and greatly influenced the theology and thought of many other groups, including Lutheran and Reformed, as well as others. In response to the increasing influence of Aristotelianism, Muslim and Jewish thought, along with scientific information that had been lost by, or was new to, the west being put forth at the University of Paris at the time, Aquinas sought to use what he called "science" to systematically answer teachings that were circulating in his day in regard to the "Christian" perspective (largely defending the current traditions and practices of Rome) using reason and "natural law," along with scripture and other writings. Born around 1225 in Roccasecca Castle, 8 kilometers north of Aquino (from which "Aquinas," meaning "of Aquino," comes), in southern Italy, to aristocratic parents in an area disputed by the emperor and the Pope, Thomas Aquinas was tutored from a young child to be a cleric in the Roman Catholic Church. His parents wanted him to join the ancient Benedictine Order, probably in hopes of him becoming a powerful abbot (like his uncle) to their political advantage, a practice that was common among "noble" families of the times. (They often would stop at nothing to get their relatives in high church positions because of the power of the Roman Church in affairs of money and political intrigue.) When Thomas Aquinas later wanted to join the more recently formed Dominican Order, who were preachers, his parents had him kidnapped by his brothers for over a year in order to dissuade him. His brothers, reportedly, went so far to control him as to bring him a prostitute. The story goes, that he chased her away with a flaming stick. Eventually, his family gave up and arranged for his "escape" through a window in order to save face at having lost the battle for his future. In 1245 Thomas Aquinas went on to study at the University of Paris, where he met and was influenced by Albertus Magnus, a Dominican who was the head of the department of theology. Three years later, when Magnus left for Cologne, Aquinas also went there, where he became a Bible teacher and writer. Returning to Paris in 1252, where he stayed until 1259, he studied to be, and eventually became, a master in theology and full professor, continuing to write extensively (including writing his famous, Summa contra Gentiles) and teach. Around 1259, he was appointed theological advisor to the papal court spending some time with the pope and his court and also sent out to teach friars who could not attend the university, at communal living facilities in Naples and Orvieto. Then in 1265, Aquinas founded a university at the Dominican priory at Rome. While there, he began writing Summa Theologica, his most famous work, as well as other writings. By 1269, he was back teaching at the University of Paris, where he confronted radical Averroism—philosophies derived from an Arab philosopher that covered Aristotle—and other subjects, from philosophy and theology to math, psychology, medicine, physics, and law. Aquinas' writings, including the Summa Theologica, on which he continued to work until shortly before his death, largely are a response to Averroism and radical Aristotelianism. In 1272, Thomas Aquinas left Paris to establish a university in Naples, as requested by the Dominican Order to which he belonged. He reportedly had an experience with God there that led him to stop writing and devote his energy to reconciling the Roman and Orthodox churches. He was apparently was trying to do that when, on his journey, he suffered a series of accidents and illnesses that resulted in his death in 1274. In his lifetime and shortly after, Thomas Aquinas received support from Popes Innocent IV and Urban IV and opposition from the bishop of Paris, Etienne Tempier, who excommunicated some of those who followed Thomas Aquinas' teachings. But, since then, his writings have become so influential among Roman Catholics that, in the early 20th century, Pope Benedict XV said that the Roman Catholic Church had adopted Thomas Aquinas' doctrines as their own. Pope John XXII, in the early 14th century, declared him a saint. In the 15th century Pope Pius V declared him a "Doctor of the Church." Anglicans, Roman Catholics, and Lutherans remember him every year on January 28. There seems to be evidence that he cared about the truth and about God, as shown in his dedication to preaching and teaching over political gain for himself. He also is reported to have said, when asked by Christ in a vision what he desired, "Only you, Lord." On his death bed, he said, "I receive thee, ransom of my soul. For the love of thee have I studied and kept vigil, toiled, preached and taught..." And the fact that his heart turned toward unity with the eastern churches also seems to point that way. Unfortunately, he was drawn into the pattern of arguing doctrine and leaning on human understanding, instead of God's commands, that had become the common method of teaching centuries before, instead of spending his time insisting that disciples demonstrate the life of Christ, as the apostolic churches had. Thomas Aquinas also took the view (Summa Theologica, second part of the second part, question eleven, article three), that anyone branded a "heretic" by the Church should be put to death if they failed to repent, in opposition to both the teachings and the example of Jesus and the Apostles. Maybe one of the most widely known and lasting legacies of Thomas Aquinas is his contribution to the dialogue on what God accomplished by the sacrifice of Jesus, a subject referred to as, "the atonement." Aquinas' theory is intrinsically important to modern Catholics and important to evangelicals and other Christians, especially in the west, because of its influence on the writings of John Calvin and his followers. Calvin's version of the satisfaction theory, penal substitution, deeply pervades protestant theology to the point that tradition has made some version of it largely a test of orthodoxy in western thought, though it never was for the 1500 years of church history before Calvin. More than 100 years before Thomas Aquinas, Anselm of Canterbury, dissatisfied by the Early Church Fathers' explanation (often called the ransom, or Christus Victor, theory of atonement), finding it "irrational" that Christ's death could be paid by God as a ransom to Satan in order to secure our freedom, came up with what was the beginning of a succession of "satisfaction theories of atonement." His thoughts were that we all owe God a debt of honor to live without sin, and that, when we sin, we create a blemish on God's honor, which has to be rectified. Since God's honor is divine, it can only be rectified by the divine Son paying the debt to his Father with his life. This seems to portray God the Father as being full of pride, worrying about his honor, placing it over the life and torture of his Son, when the truth is that—if the Father is accurately represented by Jesus as we believe—the Father makes himself of no reputation for our sakes, preferring to show his love and give honor to the Son, who, in turn, seeks no glory for himself, but gives all glory and honor to the Father. Thomas Aquinas, not satisfied with Anselm's arguments, decided to answer him in his Summa Theologica in a long, involved discussion that is hard to condense. Aquinas' take seems to be that sin requires punishment in order to set it right and that Jesus was sent to be tortured and die in order to balance the account for men or to return "order" to his "justice." Does this mean that the Father was forced to promote the torture and death of his son in order to balance some sort of math problem? He went on to include his thought that we could pay the moral debt of our own sin by purposely experiencing pain equal to our pleasure derived from sin (penance), but that Christ had to pay the debt for our "original sin" that we inherited from Adam and Eve, which resulted in a loss of a divine empowerment or "supernature" that had previously allowed humans to overcome their natural ways. According to Aquinas, it seems that the way we partake of Christ's merits and receive salvation is through the "sacraments" of the Roman Catholic Church (like infant baptism, confession, communion, confirmation, marriage, and last rites). Then along came Calvin. A couple centuries later, reformer John Calvin and his followers, influenced by Thomas Aquinas, also tried to explain the mechanics of the atonement, changing moral imbalance to crimes, cutting away penance, and substituting predestination for free will. The result is the doctrine of penal substitution, where mankind is totally evil, has no ability to choose God, and are cosmic criminals, sentenced to death at birth. That is, except for a few God has chosen to save by sending his Son to die in their place, which placates God's wrath and gets them to Heaven. This seems to effectively relegate the Father to the role of a mean, angry legal functionary who either can't or won't forgive men without carrying out his wrath on his kind, innocent Son, and that he is randomly exclusive in choosing who to torture in a fire pit forever. If we have to accept one of these models, exclusively, for understanding in what way Jesus' death "atoned" for us, I suggest the early church model, since they were closest to Jesus and the Apostles and because they had the fruit of of love and unity. If you would like to read some of Aquinas' writings for yourself, you can find the Summa Theologica and other writings of Thomas Aquinas online at Christian Classics Ethereal Library. Reading original writings, rather than depending solely on evaluations from others is a good practice, especially if the subject of inquiry seems important enough to need to accurately determine the truth. My newest book, Rome's Audacious Claim, was released December 1!	2,177	ENGLISH	1
Previous research has demonstrated a strong link between learning difficulties and ADHD. For example some studies have found that up to 70% of children with ADHD also have co-existing learning difficulties (Mayes & Calhoun, 2006). It has been suggested that the presence of both ADHD and a specific learning difficulty results in significantly poorer academic achievement than ADHD alone. Results and Conclusions Researchers found that having ADHD, or having ADHD and a specific learning difficulty predicted school grades and performance. These individuals had much lower average school grades, and were also significantly more likely to repeat a grade compared to individuals without ADHD, or co-exisitng ADHD and specific learning difficulties. Further to this, adolescents with co-existing ADHD and specific learning difficulties had less ambitious educational aspirations than their peers, for example many did not plan on completing higher education. The conclusions from the study were that ADHD and co-existing learning difficulties should be identified as early as possible, and in addition these children should receive extensive educational support. Similarly, other factors such as the negative feedback children with ADHD often receive due to behavioral problems should be examined as this may cause these children to dislike school and as a result, underachieve. Read the full article here	<urn:uuid:0e729b1a-3c5b-4bc9-b416-3983950f72aa>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.adhdwa.org/adhd-learning-difficulties-and-school-performance/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601241.42/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121014531-20200121043531-00216.warc.gz	en	0.98376	245	3.296875	3	[ -0.02296394854784012, -0.2232956737279892, 0.35069331526756287, 0.04079853743314743, -0.28581082820892334, 0.44090667366981506, -0.24627180397510529, 0.1047976016998291, 0.11863041669130325, -0.4529188275337219, 0.38851556181907654, -0.07784075289964676, 0.4471116364002228, 0.4359176158905...	8	Previous research has demonstrated a strong link between learning difficulties and ADHD. For example some studies have found that up to 70% of children with ADHD also have co-existing learning difficulties (Mayes & Calhoun, 2006). It has been suggested that the presence of both ADHD and a specific learning difficulty results in significantly poorer academic achievement than ADHD alone. Results and Conclusions Researchers found that having ADHD, or having ADHD and a specific learning difficulty predicted school grades and performance. These individuals had much lower average school grades, and were also significantly more likely to repeat a grade compared to individuals without ADHD, or co-exisitng ADHD and specific learning difficulties. Further to this, adolescents with co-existing ADHD and specific learning difficulties had less ambitious educational aspirations than their peers, for example many did not plan on completing higher education. The conclusions from the study were that ADHD and co-existing learning difficulties should be identified as early as possible, and in addition these children should receive extensive educational support. Similarly, other factors such as the negative feedback children with ADHD often receive due to behavioral problems should be examined as this may cause these children to dislike school and as a result, underachieve. Read the full article here	246	ENGLISH	1
The Long Parliament was an English Parliament which lasted from 1640 until 1660. It followed the fiasco of the Short Parliament which had convened for only three weeks during the spring of 1640, and which in turn had followed an 11-year parliamentary absence. In September 1640,King Charles I issued writs summoning a parliament to convene on 3 November 1640.[a] He intended it to pass financial bills, a step made necessary by the costs of the Bishops' Wars in Scotland. The Long Parliament received its name from the fact that, by Act of Parliament, it stipulated it could be dissolved only with agreement of the members; and, those members did not agree to its dissolution until 16 March 1660, after the English Civil War and near the close of the Interregnum. The parliament sat from 1640 until 1648, when it was purged by the New Model Army. After this point, the remaining members of the House of Commons became known as the Rump Parliament. In the chaos following the death of Oliver Cromwell in 1658, General George Monck allowed the members barred in 1648 to retake their seats, so that they could pass the necessary legislation to allow the Restoration and dissolve the Long Parliament. This cleared the way for a new parliament to be elected, which was known as the Convention Parliament. Some key members of the Long Parliament, such as Sir Henry Vane the Younger and General Edmond Ludlow were barred from the final acts of the Long Parliament. They claimed the parliament was not legally dissolved, its final votes a procedural irregularity (words used contemporaneously "device" and "conspiracy") by General George Monck to ensure the restoration of King Charles II of England. On the restoration the general was awarded with a dukedom. The Long Parliament later became a key moment in Whig histories of the seventeenth century. American Whig historian Charles Wentworth Upham believed the Long Parliament comprised "a set of the greatest geniuses for government that the world ever saw embarked together in one common cause" and whose actions produced an effect, which, at the time, made their country the wonder and admiration of the world, and is still felt and exhibited far beyond the borders of that country, in the progress of reform, and the advancement of popular liberty. He believed its republican principles made it a precursor to the American Revolutionary War. The sole reason Charles I assembled Parliament in November, 1640 was to ask it to pass finance bills, since the controverted taxation of ship money was unpopular, and since the Bishops' Wars had bankrupted him. Instead, Parliament quickly proceeded to impeach William Laud, the Archbishop of Canterbury, of high treason, on 18 December.John Finch was impeached the following day, and he consequently fled to the Netherlands with Charles's permission on 21 December. The parliament was initially influenced by John Pym (1584-1643) and his supporters. Pym rose in his place and entered into a particular enumeration of the troubles of the kingdom. Early in the Long Parliament's proceedings, the house also unanimously accused the Earl of Strafford of high treason, and other high crimes and misdemeanors. This marked a new unanimity in Irish politics, whereby Old English, Gaelic Irish and New English settlers joined together in a legal body to present evidence against governor Strafford. However, the evidence was supplied indirectly by Henry Vane the Younger through the acquisition of notes of his father Henry Vane the Elder. Vane the Elder, on the King's Privy Council, remained completely loyal to his king and was aghast when he learned in public hearings of the theft of his notes of the Privy Council meetings by his son. On 10 April, Pym's case against Strafford collapsed, but Pym made a direct appeal to the Younger Vane to produce a copy of the notes from the Privy Council, which the Younger Vane had discovered and secretly turned over to Pym, to his father's great anguish. These handwritten notes of the elder Vane obtained by Henry Vane the Younger were confirmed by independent testimony. Lord Strafford had told the King: Sir, you have done your duty, and your subjects have failed in theirs; and therefore you are absolved from the rules of government, and may supply yourself by extraordinary ways; you have an army in Ireland, with which you may reduce the kingdom. Parliament, as representatives of the people, felt betrayed, and accused Strafford of raising an Irish army for the purpose of subduing England, abolishing English freedoms, and collecting revenues for the King. Pym immediately moved a Bill of Attainder, asserting Strafford's guilt and ordering that he be put to death. Charles, however, promised Strafford that he would not sign the attainder, so it could not be passed. The Lords opposed the severity of the death sentence imposed upon Strafford, but increased tensions and an attempted army coup in support of Strafford began to sway the issue. On 21 April, the bill went virtually unopposed in the Commons (204 in favour, 59 opposed, and 250 abstained), and the Lords then acquiesced. Charles, fearing for his family's safety, signed the death warrant on 10 May. Strafford was beheaded two days later. With the king having been implicated, the Long Parliament passed the Triennial Act, also known as the Dissolution Act, in May 1641, to which the Royal Assent was readily granted. In the meantime both Parliament and the King agreed to an independent investigation of royal involvement in Strafford's plot. This Triennial Act required Parliament to be summoned at least once every three years, and stipulated that when the King failed to issue proper summons, the members could assemble on their own. This act also forbade ship money without Parliament's consent, declared unlawful both fines in destraint of knighthood and forced loans, severely cut back monopolies, and abolished the courts of Star Chamber and High Commission by the Habeas Corpus Act 1640 and the Triennial Act 1641. The very doctrine of modern freedoms has, to some degree, its origins in these acts. All remaining forms of taxation were legalised and regulated by the Tonnage and Poundage Act, the billetting of soldiers was funded, whereas it had not been under Charles; and the Ship Money Act 1640 vacated the contentious ship money issue. On 3 May, Parliament issued the Protestation of 1641, attacking the 'wicked counsels' of Charles's government. Those who signed the petition undertook to defend 'the true reformed religion', Parliament, and the king's person, honour, and estate. Throughout May, the House of Commons passed several bills attacking bishops and episcopalianism in general, but each time the Lords refused to acquiesce. Charles made several important concessions to Parliament, but improved his own military position by securing the favour of the Scots that summer. He promised the official establishment of Presbyterianism in Scotland; in return, he enlisted considerable Scottish support. But "The Incident", an attempted royalist coup in Scotland, significantly undermined Charles's credibility there. The Irish Rebellion, which started in October 1641, brought the control of the army back into the discussions between King and Parliament. Led by John Pym, Parliament presented the King with the Grand Remonstrance, which the House of Commons passed by 11 votes (159-148) on 22 November 1641. It listed over 150 perceived "misdeeds" of Charles' reign, including putting the Church under the influence of foreign papists, and royal advisers also "have[ing] engaged themselves to further the interests of some foreign powers". The second half of the Remonstrance proposed solutions to the "misdeeds," including church reform and Parliamentary influence over the appointment of royal ministers. In December 1641, Parliament asserted control over appointment of Army and Navy commanders in the Militia Ordinance. The king rejected the Grand Remonstrance and refused to give royal assent to the Militia Ordinance. Charles believed that Puritans (or Dissenters) had encouraged the Scots to invade England in the recent Bishops' Wars. He thought the Puritans had been stirred up by the Five Members, the vociferous MPs John Pym, John Hampden, Denzil Holles, Arthur Haselrig, and William Strode; also Viscount Mandeville (the future Earl of Manchester) who sat in the House of Lords, and that the Five intended to turn the London mob against him. When rumours reached the court that they were also planning to impeach the Queen for alleged involvement in Catholic plots, Charles decided to arrest them for treason. On Tuesday, 4 January 1642,[a] the King entered the House with armed men to arrest the Five Members. They had been warned and fled. Charles sat in the chair of the Speaker of the House, William Lenthall. Looking around in vain for the Five Members, he commented, "I see the birds have flown." He then turned to Lenthall, who stood below, and demanded of him whether any of those persons were in the House, whether he saw any of them and where they were. Lenthall fell on his knees and replied: "May it please your Majesty, I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak in this place but as the House is pleased to direct me, whose servant I am here."[b] After failing to arrest the Five Members and fearing for his safety, Charles left London on 10 January. Most royalist MPs also departed. However, because of the Dissolution Act, the Long Parliament continued to sit during and beyond the Civil War, without its royalist members. In March 1642, with the King absent from London and war clouds gathering, Parliament decreed that its own Parliamentary Ordinances were valid laws, even without royal assent. The Militia Ordinance was passed on 5 March by Parliament and gave Parliament control of the local militia called Trained Bands. Control of the Trained Bands of London was the most strategically critical, because they could protect Parliament from armed intervention by any soldiers which Charles had near the capital. In response to the Militia Ordinance, Charles revived the Commissions of Array as a means of summoning an army instead. In 1645 Parliament reaffirmed its determination to fight the war to a finish. It passed the Self-denying Ordinance, by which all members of either House of Parliament resigned any military commands, and formed the New Model Army under the command of Fairfax and Cromwell. The New Model Army soon destroyed Charles' armies. Charles tried to rally support in the Midlands, but by May 1646 he sought shelter with a Presbyterian Scottish army at Southwell, Nottinghamshire. The Scots later handed over Charles to Parliament and he was imprisoned. This marked the end of the First English Civil War. While Charles negotiated with Parliament, the House of Commons investigated his policies. A political stalemate resulted. Charles briefly escaped captivity in 1647, made a secret alliance with the Scots, and incited fresh Royalist rebellions. This resulted in the Second English Civil War of 1648, which the New Model Army again quickly won. Nonetheless, in 1648, Parliament determined that it was not to abjure the King's person; that is, depose him from the throne. "During the negotiations with the King, he manifested a fixed resolution to do all that could be done to make the best of the opportunity the country then enjoyed, of securing to itself the blessings of liberty." Parliament was by this time deeply suspicious of the Army, and vice versa. On 1 December 1648, the House voted 129 to 83 to continue negotiations with Charles for reforming the government on terms they had proposed and he had accepted. This would allow for the King's restoration and the end of the stalemate between Parliament and the King. Legally, this should have ended the Civil War and restored the King with limited powers. Divisions emerged between various factions, culminating in Pride's Purge on 7 December 1648, when, under the orders of Oliver Cromwell's son-in-law Henry Ireton, Colonel Pride physically barred and arrested 41 of the members of Parliament. Many of the excluded members were Presbyterians. Henry Vane the Younger removed himself from Parliament in protest of this unlawful action by Ireton. He was not party to the execution of Charles I, although Cromwell was. In the wake of the ejections, the remnant, the Rump Parliament, arranged for the trial and execution of Charles I on 30 January 1649. It was also responsible for the setting up of the Commonwealth of England in 1649. Henry Vane the Younger was persuaded to rejoin Parliament on 17 February 1649 and a Council of state was installed, into whose hands the executive government of the nation was committed. Sir Henry Vane was appointed a member of the Council. Cromwell used great pains to induce Vane to accept the appointment, and after many consultations, he so far prevailed in satisfying Vane of the purity of his principles in reference to the Commonwealth, as to overcome his reluctance again to enter the public service. Sir Henry Vane was for some time President of the Council, and, as Treasurer and Commissioner for the Navy, he had almost the exclusive direction of that branch of public service. Cromwell "well knew that while the Long Parliament, that noble company, who had fought the great battle of liberty from the beginning, remained in session, and such men as Vane were enabled to mingle in its deliberations, it would be utterly useless for him to think of executing his purposes" (to set up a Protectorate or Dictatorship). Henry Vane was working on a Reform Bill. Cromwell knew "that if the Reform Bill should be suffered to pass, and a House of Commons be convened, freely elected on popular principles, and constituting a full and fair and equal representation, it would be impossible ever after to overthrow the liberties of the people, or break down the government of the country". According to General Edmund Ludlow (an unapologetic supporter of the Good Old Cause who lived in exile after the Restoration), this reform bill provided for an equal representation of the people, disfranchised several boroughs which had ceased to have a population in proportion to representation, fixed the number of the House at four hundred". It would have "secured to England and to the rest of the world the blessings of republican institutions, two centuries earlier than can now be expected". "Harrison, who was in Cromwell's confidence on this occasion, rose to debate the motion, merely in order to gain time. Word was carried to Cromwell, that the House were on the point of putting the final motion; and Colonel Ingoldby hastened to Whitehall to tell him, that, if he intended to do anything decisive, he had no time to lose". Once the troops were in place Cromwell entered the assembly. He was dressed in a suit of plain black; with grey worsted stockings. He took his seat; and appeared to be listening to the debate. As the Speaker was about to rise to put the question, Cromwell whispered to Harrison, "Now is the time; I must do it". As he rose, his countenance became flushed and blacked by the terrific passions which the crisis awakened. With the most reckless violence of manner and language, he abused the character of the House; and, after the first burst of his denunciations had passed, suddenly changing his tone, he exclaimed, "You think, perhaps, this is not parliamentary language; I know it; nor are you to expect such from me". He then advanced out into the middle of the hall, and walked to and fro, like a man beside himself. In a few moments he stamped upon the floor, the doors flew open and a file of musketeers entered. As they advanced, Cromwell exclaimed, looking over the House, "You are no Parliament; I say you are no Parliament; begone, and give place to honester men". "While this extraordinary scene was transacting, the members, hardly believing their own ears and eyes, sat in mute amazement, horror, and pity of the maniac traitor who was storming and raving before them. At length Vane rose to remonstrate, and call him to his senses; but Cromwell, instead of listening to him, drowned his voice, repeating with great vehemence, and as though with the desperate excitement of the moment, "Sir Harry Vane! Sir Harry Vane! Good Lord deliver me from Sir Harry Vane!" He then seized the records, snatched the bill from the hands of the clerk, drove the members out at the point of the bayonet, locked the doors, put the key in his pocket, and returned to Whitehall. Oliver Cromwell forcibly disbanded the Rump in 1653 when it seemed to be planning to perpetuate itself rather than call new elections as had been agreed. It was followed by Barebone's Parliament and then the First, Second and Third Protectorate Parliament. After Richard Cromwell, who had succeeded his father Oliver as Lord Protector in 1658, was effectively deposed by an officers' coup in April 1659, the officers re-summoned the Rump Parliament to sit. It convened on 7 May 1659, but after five months in power it again clashed with the army (led by John Lambert) and was again forcibly dissolved on 13 October 1659. Once again, Sir Henry Vane was the leading catalyst for the republican cause in opposition to force by the military. The persons connected with the administration as it existed at the death of Oliver were, of course, interested in keeping things as they were. Also, it was necessary for someone to assume the reins of government until the public will could be ascertained and brought into exercise. Henry Vane was elected to Parliament at Kingston upon Hull, but the certificate was given to another. Vane proceeded to Bristol, entered the canvass, and received the majority. Again the certificate was given to another. Finally Vane proceeded to Whitechurch in Hampshire and was elected a third time and was this time seated in Parliament. Vane managed the debates on behalf of the House of Commons. One of Vane's speeches effectively ended Richard Cromwell's career: Mr. Speaker, among all the people of the universe, I know none who have shown so much zeal for the liberty of their country, as the English, at this time, have done. They have, by the help of Divine Providence, overcome all obstacles, and have made themselves free ... I know not by what misfortune, we are fallen into the error of those, who poised the Emperor Titus to make room for Domitian, who made away Augustus that they might have Tiberius, and changed Claudius for Nero ... whereas the people of England are now renowned, all over the world, for their great virtue and discipline; and yet suffer an idiot, without courage, without sense, nay, without ambition, to have dominion in a country of liberty. One could bear a little with Oliver Cromwell, though, contrary to his oath of fidelity to Parliament, contrary to his duty to the public, ... But as for Richard Cromwell, his son, who is he? Where are his titles ... For my part, I declare, Sir, it shall never be said that I made such a man my master. This speech swept everything before it. The Rump Parliament which Oliver Cromwell had dispersed in 1653 was once more summoned to assemble, by a declaration from the Council of Officers dated on 6 May 1659. Edmond Ludlow made several attempts to reconcile the army and parliament in this time period but was ultimately unsuccessful. Parliament ordered the regiments of Colonel Morley and Colonel Moss to march to Westminster for their security, and sent for the rest of the troops that were about London to draw down to them also with all speed. In October 1659, Colonel Lambert and various subordinate members of the army, acting in the military interest, resisted Colonel Morley and others who were defending the rump Parliament. Colonel Lambert, Major Grimes, and Colonel Sydenham eventually gained their points, and placed guards both by land and water, to hinder the members of Parliament from approaching the House. Colonel Lambert subsequently acquitted himself to Henry Vane the Younger, Edmond Ludlow and the "Committee on Safety," an instrument of the Wallingford House party acting under their misdirection. Nevertheless, Parliament was closed once again by military force until such time that the army and leaders of Parliament could effect a resolution. Rule then passed to an unelected Committee of Safety, including Lambert and Vane; pending a resolution or compromise with the Army. During these disorders, the Council of State still assembled at the usual place, and: the Lord President Bradshaw, who was present, though by long sickness very weak and much extenuated, yet animated by his ardent zeal and constant affection to the common cause, upon hearing Col Syndenham's justifications of the proceedings of the army in again disrupting parliament, stood up and interrupted him, declaring his abhorrence of that detestable action, and telling the council, that being now going to his God, he had not patience to sit there to hear his great name so openly blasphemed; and thereupon departed to his lodgings, and withdrew himself from public employment. The Council of Officers at first attempted to come to some agreement with the leaders of Parliament. On 15 October 1659, the Council of Officers appointed ten persons to "consider of fit ways and means to carry on the affairs and government of the Commonwealth". On 26 October 1659 the Council of Officers appointed a new Committee of Safety of twenty-three members. On 1 November 1659, the Committee of Safety nominated a committee "to consider of and prepare a form of government to be settled over the three nations in the way of a free state and Commonwealth, and afterwards to present it to the Committee of Safety for their further considerations". The Wallingford House party, as if infatuated by a superior power to procure their own destruction, continued obstinately to oppose the Parliament, and fixed in their resolution to call another (that is a reformed Parliament more agreeable to their interests). On the other side, I was sorry to find most of the Parliament men as stiff, in requiring an absolute submission to their authority as if no differences had happened among us, nor the privileges of Parliament ever been violated, peremptorily insisting upon the entire subjection of the army, and refusing to hearken to any terms of accommodation, though the necessity of affairs seemed to demand it, if we would preserve our cause from ruin. Edmond Ludlow warned both the Army and key members of Parliament that unless a compromise could be made it would "render all the blood and treasure that had been spent in asserting our liberties of no use to us, but also force us under such a yoke of servitude, that neither we nor our posterity should be able to bear". Starting on 17 December 1659, Henry Vane representing the Parliament, Major Saloway and Colonel Salmon with powers from the officers of the army to treat with the fleet, and Vice-Admiral Lawson met in negotiating a compromise. The navy was very adverse to any proposal of terms to be made with the Parliament before Parliament's readmission, insisting upon the absolute submission of the army to the authority of Parliament. A plan was then put in place declaring a resolution to join with the Generals at Portsmouth, Colonel Monck, and Vice-Admiral Lawson, but it was still unknown to the republican party that Colonel Monck was in league with King Charles II. Colonel Monck, though a hero to the restoration of King Charles II, was also treacherously disloyal to the Long Parliament, to his oath to the present Parliament, and to the Good Old Cause. Ludlow stated in early January 1660 when in conversation with several key officers of the army: "Then", said Capt. Lucas, "you do not think us to be for the Parliament?" "No indeed", said I; "and it is most manifest to me, that the design of those who now govern the Council of Officers, though at present it be covered with pretences for the Parliament, is to destroy both them and their friends, and to bring in the son of the late King". This statement may be verified by the many executions of key Parliament members and Generals after the restoration of King Charles II. Therefore, the restoration of King Charles II could not be an act of the Long Parliament acting freely under its own authority, but only under the influence of the sword by Colonel Monck, who traded his loyalties for the present Long Parliament, in preference to a reformed Long Parliament and to the restoration of King Charles II. General George Monck, who had been Cromwell's viceroy in Scotland, feared that the military stood to lose power and secretly shifted his loyalty to the Crown. As he began to march south, Lambert, who had ridden out to face him, lost support in London. However, the Navy declared for Parliament, and on 26 December 1659 the Rump was restored to power. On 9 January 1660, Monck arrived in London and his plans were communicated. Whereupon Henry Vane the Younger was discharged from being a member of the Long Parliament; and Major Saloway was reproved for his role and committed to the Tower during the pleasure of the house. Lieutenant-General Fleetwood, Col. Sydenham, Lord Commissioner Whitlock, Cornelius Holland, and Mr. Strickland were required to clear themselves touching their deportment in that affair. High treason was also declared against Miles Corbet, Cor. John Jones, Col. Thomlinson, and Edmond Ludlow on 19 January 1660. 1,500 other officers were removed from their command and "scarce one of ten of the old officers of the army were continued". Any known Anabaptists in the army were specifically discharged. So tame had Parliament become, that though it was most visible that Monk's letters and Arthur Haslerig's instructions were designed for the dissolution of the Long Parliament, they were obeyed by the remainder of the members and all these designs were to be put into execution. Though named by Parliament for treason, Miles Corbet and Edmond Ludlow were for a while were permitted to continue to sit with Parliament, and for a time the charges against these men were dropped. After his initial show of deference to the Rump, Monck quickly found them unwilling to continue in cooperation with his plan for an election of a new parliament (the Rump Parliament believed Monck was accountable to them and had its own plan for free elections); so on 21 February 1660 he forcibly reinstated the members 'secluded' by Pride's purge in 1648, so that they could prepare legislation for the Convention Parliament. Some of the Rump Parliament were opposed and refused to sit with the Secluded Members. On 27 February 1660, "the new Council of State being informed of some designs against the usurped power, issued out warrants for apprehending divers officers of the army; and having some jealousy of others that were members of Parliament, they procured an order of their House to authorize them to seize any member who had not sat since the coming in of the Secluded Members, if there should be occasion. When the house was ready to pass the act for dissolution, Crew who had been as forward as any man in beginning and carrying on the war against the last King, moved, that before they dissolved themselves, they would bear their witness against the horrid murder, as he called it, of the King. According to Ludlow: Mr. Thomas Scott, who had been so much deluded by the hypocrisy of Monk ... said: 'That though he knew not where to hide his head at that time, yet he durst not refuse to own, that not only his hand, but his heart also was in it' and after he had produced divers reasons to prove the justice of it, he concluded, 'that he should desire no greater honor in this world, than that the following inscription might be engraved on his tomb; "Here lies one who had a hand and a heart in the execution of Charles Stuart late King of England.' Having said this, he and most of the members who had a right to sit in Parliament, withdrew from the House; so that there was not the fourth part of a quorum of lawful members present in the House when the Secluded Members, who had been voted out of the Parliament by those that had an undisputed authority over their own members, undertook to dissolve the Parliament, which was not to be done, unless by their own consent; and whether that consent was ever given, is submitted to the judgement of all impartial men. Having called for elections for a new Parliament to meet on 25 April, the Long Parliament was dissolved on 16 March 1660. Finally, on 22 April 1660, "Major-General Lambert's party was dispersed" and General Lambert taken prisoner by Colonel Ingoldsby. "Hitherto Monk had continued to make solemn protestations of his affection and fidelity to the Commonwealth interest, against a King and House of Lords; but the new militia being settled, and a Convention, calling themselves a Parliament and fit for his purpose, being met at Westminster, he sent to such lords as had sat with the Parliament till 1648, to return to the place where they used to sit, which they did, upon assurance from him, that no others should be permitted to sit with them; which promise he also broke, and let in not only such as had deserted to Oxford, but the late created lords. And Charles Stuart, eldest son of the late King, being informed of these transactions, left the Spanish territories where he then resided, and by the advice of Monk went to Breda, a town belonging to the States of Holland: from when he sent his letters and a declaration to the two House by Sir John Greenvil; whereupon the nominal House of Commons, though called by a Commonwealth writ in the name of the Keepers of the Liberties of England, passed a vote [on about April 25, 1660], 'That the government of the nation should be by a King, Lords and Commons, and that Charles Stuart should be proclaimed King of England'". "The Lord Mayor, Sheriffs and Aldermen of the City, treated their King with a collation under a tent, placed in St. George's Fields; and five or six hundred citizens cloathed in coats of black velvet, and (not improperly) wearing chains about their necks, by an order of the Common Council, attended on the triumph of that day; ... and those who had been so often defeated in the field, and had contributed nothing either of bravery or policy to this change, in ordering the souldiery to ride with swords drawn through the city of London to White Hall, the Duke of York and Monk leading the way; and intimating (as was supposed) a resolution to maintain that by force which had been obtained by fraud". Initially seven, and later 'twenty persons were put to death for life and estate.' These included: Chief Justice Coke, who had been Solicitor to the High Court of Justice, Major-General Harrison, Col. John Jones (also a member of the High Court of Justice), Mr. Thomas Scot, Sir. Henry Vane, Sir. Arthur Haslerig, Sir. Henry Mildmay, Mr. Robert Wallop, the Lord Mounson, Sir. James Harrington, Mr. James Challoner, Mr. John Phelps, Mr. John Carew, Mr. Hugh Peters, Mr. Gregory Clement, Colonel Adrian Scroop, Col. Francis Hacker, Col. Daniel Axtel. Among those who appeared the most basely subservient to these 'exorbitancies' of the Court, 'Mr. William Prynn was singularly remarkable' and attempted to add to these all who 'abjured the family of the Stuarts' previously, though this motion failed. "John Finch who had been accused of high treason twenty years before, by a full Parliament, and who by flying from their justice had saved his life, was appointed to judge some of those who should have been his judges; and Sir. Orlando Bridgman, who upon his submission to Cromwell had been permitted to practice the law in a private manner, and under that colour had served both as spy and agent for his master, was entrusted with the principal management of this tragic scene; and in his charge to the Grand Jury, had the assurance to tell them 'That no authority, no single person, or community of men; not the people collectively or representatively, had any coercive power over the King of England'". In framing the Act of Indemnity and Oblivion, the House of Commons were unwilling to except Sir Henry Vane, Sir. Arthur Haslerig, and Major-General Lambert as they had no immediate hand in the death of the King, and there was as much reason to except them as most of the members of Parliament from its benefits. In Henry Vane's case the House of Lords were desirous of having him specifically excepted, so as to leave him at the mercy of the government and thus restrain him from the exercise of his great talents in promoting his favourite republican principles at any time during the remainder of his life. At a conference between the two Houses, it was concluded that the Commons should consent to except him from the act of indemnity, the Lords agreeing, on their part, to concur with the other House in petitioning the King, in case of the condemnation of Vane, not to carry the sentence into execution. General Edmond Ludlow, still loyal to the Rump Parliament was also excepted. According to contemporary royalist legal theory, the Long Parliament was regarded as having been automatically dissolved from the moment of Charles I's execution on 30 January 1649. This view was confirmed by a court ruling during the treason trial of Henry Vane the Younger - a ruling that Henry Vane himself had concurred with in opposition to Oliver Cromwell years earlier. The trial given to Vane as to his own person, and defence of his own part played for the Long Parliament was a foregone conclusion. It was not a fair trial as both his defence, and deportment at the time of defence bears out. He was not given legal counsel (other than the judges that sat at his trial); and was left to conduct his own defence after years in prison. Sir Henry Vane maintained the following at his trial: King Charles II did not keep the promise made to the house but executed the sentence of death on Sir Henry Vane the Younger. The solicitor, openly declared in his speech afterwards "that he (Henry Vane) must be made a public sacrifice". One of his judges stated: "We knew not how to answer him, but we know what to do with him". Edmond Ludlow one of the members of Parliament excepted by the act of indemnity, fled to Switzerland after the restoration of King Charles II, where he wrote his memoirs of these events. The Long Parliament began with the execution of Lord Stafford, and effectively ended with the execution of Henry Vane the Younger. The republican theory is that the goal and aim of the Long Parliament was to institute a constitutional, balanced, and equally representative form of government along similar lines as were later accomplished in America by the American Revolution. It is clear from the writings of both Ludlow, Vane, and historians of the early American period such as Upham, that this is what they were striving for and why they were excepted from the acts of indemnity. The republican theory also suggests that the Long Parliament would have been successful in these necessary reforms except through the forceful intervention of Oliver Cromwell (and others) in removing the loyalists party, the unlawful execution of King Charles I, later dissolving the Rump Parliament; and finally the forceful dissolution of the reconvened Rump Parliament by Monck when less than a fourth of the required members were present. It is believed that in many ways this struggle was but a precursor to the American Revolution.	<urn:uuid:e8792932-7042-47a2-84f1-7f0d68462bc5>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	http://popflock.com/learn?s=Long_Parliament	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251799918.97/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129133601-20200129163601-00004.warc.gz	en	0.982214	7,488	4.21875	4	[ -0.2374742329120636, 0.0883120596408844, 0.403556764125824, 0.2077195942401886, 0.055259328335523605, -0.3100760281085968, -0.16227558255195618, -0.42229634523391724, 0.019238144159317017, -0.25368109345436096, 0.0032694595865905285, -0.2024208903312683, -0.15804634988307953, 0.29128748178...	1	The Long Parliament was an English Parliament which lasted from 1640 until 1660. It followed the fiasco of the Short Parliament which had convened for only three weeks during the spring of 1640, and which in turn had followed an 11-year parliamentary absence. In September 1640,King Charles I issued writs summoning a parliament to convene on 3 November 1640.[a] He intended it to pass financial bills, a step made necessary by the costs of the Bishops' Wars in Scotland. The Long Parliament received its name from the fact that, by Act of Parliament, it stipulated it could be dissolved only with agreement of the members; and, those members did not agree to its dissolution until 16 March 1660, after the English Civil War and near the close of the Interregnum. The parliament sat from 1640 until 1648, when it was purged by the New Model Army. After this point, the remaining members of the House of Commons became known as the Rump Parliament. In the chaos following the death of Oliver Cromwell in 1658, General George Monck allowed the members barred in 1648 to retake their seats, so that they could pass the necessary legislation to allow the Restoration and dissolve the Long Parliament. This cleared the way for a new parliament to be elected, which was known as the Convention Parliament. Some key members of the Long Parliament, such as Sir Henry Vane the Younger and General Edmond Ludlow were barred from the final acts of the Long Parliament. They claimed the parliament was not legally dissolved, its final votes a procedural irregularity (words used contemporaneously "device" and "conspiracy") by General George Monck to ensure the restoration of King Charles II of England. On the restoration the general was awarded with a dukedom. The Long Parliament later became a key moment in Whig histories of the seventeenth century. American Whig historian Charles Wentworth Upham believed the Long Parliament comprised "a set of the greatest geniuses for government that the world ever saw embarked together in one common cause" and whose actions produced an effect, which, at the time, made their country the wonder and admiration of the world, and is still felt and exhibited far beyond the borders of that country, in the progress of reform, and the advancement of popular liberty. He believed its republican principles made it a precursor to the American Revolutionary War. The sole reason Charles I assembled Parliament in November, 1640 was to ask it to pass finance bills, since the controverted taxation of ship money was unpopular, and since the Bishops' Wars had bankrupted him. Instead, Parliament quickly proceeded to impeach William Laud, the Archbishop of Canterbury, of high treason, on 18 December.John Finch was impeached the following day, and he consequently fled to the Netherlands with Charles's permission on 21 December. The parliament was initially influenced by John Pym (1584-1643) and his supporters. Pym rose in his place and entered into a particular enumeration of the troubles of the kingdom. Early in the Long Parliament's proceedings, the house also unanimously accused the Earl of Strafford of high treason, and other high crimes and misdemeanors. This marked a new unanimity in Irish politics, whereby Old English, Gaelic Irish and New English settlers joined together in a legal body to present evidence against governor Strafford. However, the evidence was supplied indirectly by Henry Vane the Younger through the acquisition of notes of his father Henry Vane the Elder. Vane the Elder, on the King's Privy Council, remained completely loyal to his king and was aghast when he learned in public hearings of the theft of his notes of the Privy Council meetings by his son. On 10 April, Pym's case against Strafford collapsed, but Pym made a direct appeal to the Younger Vane to produce a copy of the notes from the Privy Council, which the Younger Vane had discovered and secretly turned over to Pym, to his father's great anguish. These handwritten notes of the elder Vane obtained by Henry Vane the Younger were confirmed by independent testimony. Lord Strafford had told the King: Sir, you have done your duty, and your subjects have failed in theirs; and therefore you are absolved from the rules of government, and may supply yourself by extraordinary ways; you have an army in Ireland, with which you may reduce the kingdom. Parliament, as representatives of the people, felt betrayed, and accused Strafford of raising an Irish army for the purpose of subduing England, abolishing English freedoms, and collecting revenues for the King. Pym immediately moved a Bill of Attainder, asserting Strafford's guilt and ordering that he be put to death. Charles, however, promised Strafford that he would not sign the attainder, so it could not be passed. The Lords opposed the severity of the death sentence imposed upon Strafford, but increased tensions and an attempted army coup in support of Strafford began to sway the issue. On 21 April, the bill went virtually unopposed in the Commons (204 in favour, 59 opposed, and 250 abstained), and the Lords then acquiesced. Charles, fearing for his family's safety, signed the death warrant on 10 May. Strafford was beheaded two days later. With the king having been implicated, the Long Parliament passed the Triennial Act, also known as the Dissolution Act, in May 1641, to which the Royal Assent was readily granted. In the meantime both Parliament and the King agreed to an independent investigation of royal involvement in Strafford's plot. This Triennial Act required Parliament to be summoned at least once every three years, and stipulated that when the King failed to issue proper summons, the members could assemble on their own. This act also forbade ship money without Parliament's consent, declared unlawful both fines in destraint of knighthood and forced loans, severely cut back monopolies, and abolished the courts of Star Chamber and High Commission by the Habeas Corpus Act 1640 and the Triennial Act 1641. The very doctrine of modern freedoms has, to some degree, its origins in these acts. All remaining forms of taxation were legalised and regulated by the Tonnage and Poundage Act, the billetting of soldiers was funded, whereas it had not been under Charles; and the Ship Money Act 1640 vacated the contentious ship money issue. On 3 May, Parliament issued the Protestation of 1641, attacking the 'wicked counsels' of Charles's government. Those who signed the petition undertook to defend 'the true reformed religion', Parliament, and the king's person, honour, and estate. Throughout May, the House of Commons passed several bills attacking bishops and episcopalianism in general, but each time the Lords refused to acquiesce. Charles made several important concessions to Parliament, but improved his own military position by securing the favour of the Scots that summer. He promised the official establishment of Presbyterianism in Scotland; in return, he enlisted considerable Scottish support. But "The Incident", an attempted royalist coup in Scotland, significantly undermined Charles's credibility there. The Irish Rebellion, which started in October 1641, brought the control of the army back into the discussions between King and Parliament. Led by John Pym, Parliament presented the King with the Grand Remonstrance, which the House of Commons passed by 11 votes (159-148) on 22 November 1641. It listed over 150 perceived "misdeeds" of Charles' reign, including putting the Church under the influence of foreign papists, and royal advisers also "have[ing] engaged themselves to further the interests of some foreign powers". The second half of the Remonstrance proposed solutions to the "misdeeds," including church reform and Parliamentary influence over the appointment of royal ministers. In December 1641, Parliament asserted control over appointment of Army and Navy commanders in the Militia Ordinance. The king rejected the Grand Remonstrance and refused to give royal assent to the Militia Ordinance. Charles believed that Puritans (or Dissenters) had encouraged the Scots to invade England in the recent Bishops' Wars. He thought the Puritans had been stirred up by the Five Members, the vociferous MPs John Pym, John Hampden, Denzil Holles, Arthur Haselrig, and William Strode; also Viscount Mandeville (the future Earl of Manchester) who sat in the House of Lords, and that the Five intended to turn the London mob against him. When rumours reached the court that they were also planning to impeach the Queen for alleged involvement in Catholic plots, Charles decided to arrest them for treason. On Tuesday, 4 January 1642,[a] the King entered the House with armed men to arrest the Five Members. They had been warned and fled. Charles sat in the chair of the Speaker of the House, William Lenthall. Looking around in vain for the Five Members, he commented, "I see the birds have flown." He then turned to Lenthall, who stood below, and demanded of him whether any of those persons were in the House, whether he saw any of them and where they were. Lenthall fell on his knees and replied: "May it please your Majesty, I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak in this place but as the House is pleased to direct me, whose servant I am here."[b] After failing to arrest the Five Members and fearing for his safety, Charles left London on 10 January. Most royalist MPs also departed. However, because of the Dissolution Act, the Long Parliament continued to sit during and beyond the Civil War, without its royalist members. In March 1642, with the King absent from London and war clouds gathering, Parliament decreed that its own Parliamentary Ordinances were valid laws, even without royal assent. The Militia Ordinance was passed on 5 March by Parliament and gave Parliament control of the local militia called Trained Bands. Control of the Trained Bands of London was the most strategically critical, because they could protect Parliament from armed intervention by any soldiers which Charles had near the capital. In response to the Militia Ordinance, Charles revived the Commissions of Array as a means of summoning an army instead. In 1645 Parliament reaffirmed its determination to fight the war to a finish. It passed the Self-denying Ordinance, by which all members of either House of Parliament resigned any military commands, and formed the New Model Army under the command of Fairfax and Cromwell. The New Model Army soon destroyed Charles' armies. Charles tried to rally support in the Midlands, but by May 1646 he sought shelter with a Presbyterian Scottish army at Southwell, Nottinghamshire. The Scots later handed over Charles to Parliament and he was imprisoned. This marked the end of the First English Civil War. While Charles negotiated with Parliament, the House of Commons investigated his policies. A political stalemate resulted. Charles briefly escaped captivity in 1647, made a secret alliance with the Scots, and incited fresh Royalist rebellions. This resulted in the Second English Civil War of 1648, which the New Model Army again quickly won. Nonetheless, in 1648, Parliament determined that it was not to abjure the King's person; that is, depose him from the throne. "During the negotiations with the King, he manifested a fixed resolution to do all that could be done to make the best of the opportunity the country then enjoyed, of securing to itself the blessings of liberty." Parliament was by this time deeply suspicious of the Army, and vice versa. On 1 December 1648, the House voted 129 to 83 to continue negotiations with Charles for reforming the government on terms they had proposed and he had accepted. This would allow for the King's restoration and the end of the stalemate between Parliament and the King. Legally, this should have ended the Civil War and restored the King with limited powers. Divisions emerged between various factions, culminating in Pride's Purge on 7 December 1648, when, under the orders of Oliver Cromwell's son-in-law Henry Ireton, Colonel Pride physically barred and arrested 41 of the members of Parliament. Many of the excluded members were Presbyterians. Henry Vane the Younger removed himself from Parliament in protest of this unlawful action by Ireton. He was not party to the execution of Charles I, although Cromwell was. In the wake of the ejections, the remnant, the Rump Parliament, arranged for the trial and execution of Charles I on 30 January 1649. It was also responsible for the setting up of the Commonwealth of England in 1649. Henry Vane the Younger was persuaded to rejoin Parliament on 17 February 1649 and a Council of state was installed, into whose hands the executive government of the nation was committed. Sir Henry Vane was appointed a member of the Council. Cromwell used great pains to induce Vane to accept the appointment, and after many consultations, he so far prevailed in satisfying Vane of the purity of his principles in reference to the Commonwealth, as to overcome his reluctance again to enter the public service. Sir Henry Vane was for some time President of the Council, and, as Treasurer and Commissioner for the Navy, he had almost the exclusive direction of that branch of public service. Cromwell "well knew that while the Long Parliament, that noble company, who had fought the great battle of liberty from the beginning, remained in session, and such men as Vane were enabled to mingle in its deliberations, it would be utterly useless for him to think of executing his purposes" (to set up a Protectorate or Dictatorship). Henry Vane was working on a Reform Bill. Cromwell knew "that if the Reform Bill should be suffered to pass, and a House of Commons be convened, freely elected on popular principles, and constituting a full and fair and equal representation, it would be impossible ever after to overthrow the liberties of the people, or break down the government of the country". According to General Edmund Ludlow (an unapologetic supporter of the Good Old Cause who lived in exile after the Restoration), this reform bill provided for an equal representation of the people, disfranchised several boroughs which had ceased to have a population in proportion to representation, fixed the number of the House at four hundred". It would have "secured to England and to the rest of the world the blessings of republican institutions, two centuries earlier than can now be expected". "Harrison, who was in Cromwell's confidence on this occasion, rose to debate the motion, merely in order to gain time. Word was carried to Cromwell, that the House were on the point of putting the final motion; and Colonel Ingoldby hastened to Whitehall to tell him, that, if he intended to do anything decisive, he had no time to lose". Once the troops were in place Cromwell entered the assembly. He was dressed in a suit of plain black; with grey worsted stockings. He took his seat; and appeared to be listening to the debate. As the Speaker was about to rise to put the question, Cromwell whispered to Harrison, "Now is the time; I must do it". As he rose, his countenance became flushed and blacked by the terrific passions which the crisis awakened. With the most reckless violence of manner and language, he abused the character of the House; and, after the first burst of his denunciations had passed, suddenly changing his tone, he exclaimed, "You think, perhaps, this is not parliamentary language; I know it; nor are you to expect such from me". He then advanced out into the middle of the hall, and walked to and fro, like a man beside himself. In a few moments he stamped upon the floor, the doors flew open and a file of musketeers entered. As they advanced, Cromwell exclaimed, looking over the House, "You are no Parliament; I say you are no Parliament; begone, and give place to honester men". "While this extraordinary scene was transacting, the members, hardly believing their own ears and eyes, sat in mute amazement, horror, and pity of the maniac traitor who was storming and raving before them. At length Vane rose to remonstrate, and call him to his senses; but Cromwell, instead of listening to him, drowned his voice, repeating with great vehemence, and as though with the desperate excitement of the moment, "Sir Harry Vane! Sir Harry Vane! Good Lord deliver me from Sir Harry Vane!" He then seized the records, snatched the bill from the hands of the clerk, drove the members out at the point of the bayonet, locked the doors, put the key in his pocket, and returned to Whitehall. Oliver Cromwell forcibly disbanded the Rump in 1653 when it seemed to be planning to perpetuate itself rather than call new elections as had been agreed. It was followed by Barebone's Parliament and then the First, Second and Third Protectorate Parliament. After Richard Cromwell, who had succeeded his father Oliver as Lord Protector in 1658, was effectively deposed by an officers' coup in April 1659, the officers re-summoned the Rump Parliament to sit. It convened on 7 May 1659, but after five months in power it again clashed with the army (led by John Lambert) and was again forcibly dissolved on 13 October 1659. Once again, Sir Henry Vane was the leading catalyst for the republican cause in opposition to force by the military. The persons connected with the administration as it existed at the death of Oliver were, of course, interested in keeping things as they were. Also, it was necessary for someone to assume the reins of government until the public will could be ascertained and brought into exercise. Henry Vane was elected to Parliament at Kingston upon Hull, but the certificate was given to another. Vane proceeded to Bristol, entered the canvass, and received the majority. Again the certificate was given to another. Finally Vane proceeded to Whitechurch in Hampshire and was elected a third time and was this time seated in Parliament. Vane managed the debates on behalf of the House of Commons. One of Vane's speeches effectively ended Richard Cromwell's career: Mr. Speaker, among all the people of the universe, I know none who have shown so much zeal for the liberty of their country, as the English, at this time, have done. They have, by the help of Divine Providence, overcome all obstacles, and have made themselves free ... I know not by what misfortune, we are fallen into the error of those, who poised the Emperor Titus to make room for Domitian, who made away Augustus that they might have Tiberius, and changed Claudius for Nero ... whereas the people of England are now renowned, all over the world, for their great virtue and discipline; and yet suffer an idiot, without courage, without sense, nay, without ambition, to have dominion in a country of liberty. One could bear a little with Oliver Cromwell, though, contrary to his oath of fidelity to Parliament, contrary to his duty to the public, ... But as for Richard Cromwell, his son, who is he? Where are his titles ... For my part, I declare, Sir, it shall never be said that I made such a man my master. This speech swept everything before it. The Rump Parliament which Oliver Cromwell had dispersed in 1653 was once more summoned to assemble, by a declaration from the Council of Officers dated on 6 May 1659. Edmond Ludlow made several attempts to reconcile the army and parliament in this time period but was ultimately unsuccessful. Parliament ordered the regiments of Colonel Morley and Colonel Moss to march to Westminster for their security, and sent for the rest of the troops that were about London to draw down to them also with all speed. In October 1659, Colonel Lambert and various subordinate members of the army, acting in the military interest, resisted Colonel Morley and others who were defending the rump Parliament. Colonel Lambert, Major Grimes, and Colonel Sydenham eventually gained their points, and placed guards both by land and water, to hinder the members of Parliament from approaching the House. Colonel Lambert subsequently acquitted himself to Henry Vane the Younger, Edmond Ludlow and the "Committee on Safety," an instrument of the Wallingford House party acting under their misdirection. Nevertheless, Parliament was closed once again by military force until such time that the army and leaders of Parliament could effect a resolution. Rule then passed to an unelected Committee of Safety, including Lambert and Vane; pending a resolution or compromise with the Army. During these disorders, the Council of State still assembled at the usual place, and: the Lord President Bradshaw, who was present, though by long sickness very weak and much extenuated, yet animated by his ardent zeal and constant affection to the common cause, upon hearing Col Syndenham's justifications of the proceedings of the army in again disrupting parliament, stood up and interrupted him, declaring his abhorrence of that detestable action, and telling the council, that being now going to his God, he had not patience to sit there to hear his great name so openly blasphemed; and thereupon departed to his lodgings, and withdrew himself from public employment. The Council of Officers at first attempted to come to some agreement with the leaders of Parliament. On 15 October 1659, the Council of Officers appointed ten persons to "consider of fit ways and means to carry on the affairs and government of the Commonwealth". On 26 October 1659 the Council of Officers appointed a new Committee of Safety of twenty-three members. On 1 November 1659, the Committee of Safety nominated a committee "to consider of and prepare a form of government to be settled over the three nations in the way of a free state and Commonwealth, and afterwards to present it to the Committee of Safety for their further considerations". The Wallingford House party, as if infatuated by a superior power to procure their own destruction, continued obstinately to oppose the Parliament, and fixed in their resolution to call another (that is a reformed Parliament more agreeable to their interests). On the other side, I was sorry to find most of the Parliament men as stiff, in requiring an absolute submission to their authority as if no differences had happened among us, nor the privileges of Parliament ever been violated, peremptorily insisting upon the entire subjection of the army, and refusing to hearken to any terms of accommodation, though the necessity of affairs seemed to demand it, if we would preserve our cause from ruin. Edmond Ludlow warned both the Army and key members of Parliament that unless a compromise could be made it would "render all the blood and treasure that had been spent in asserting our liberties of no use to us, but also force us under such a yoke of servitude, that neither we nor our posterity should be able to bear". Starting on 17 December 1659, Henry Vane representing the Parliament, Major Saloway and Colonel Salmon with powers from the officers of the army to treat with the fleet, and Vice-Admiral Lawson met in negotiating a compromise. The navy was very adverse to any proposal of terms to be made with the Parliament before Parliament's readmission, insisting upon the absolute submission of the army to the authority of Parliament. A plan was then put in place declaring a resolution to join with the Generals at Portsmouth, Colonel Monck, and Vice-Admiral Lawson, but it was still unknown to the republican party that Colonel Monck was in league with King Charles II. Colonel Monck, though a hero to the restoration of King Charles II, was also treacherously disloyal to the Long Parliament, to his oath to the present Parliament, and to the Good Old Cause. Ludlow stated in early January 1660 when in conversation with several key officers of the army: "Then", said Capt. Lucas, "you do not think us to be for the Parliament?" "No indeed", said I; "and it is most manifest to me, that the design of those who now govern the Council of Officers, though at present it be covered with pretences for the Parliament, is to destroy both them and their friends, and to bring in the son of the late King". This statement may be verified by the many executions of key Parliament members and Generals after the restoration of King Charles II. Therefore, the restoration of King Charles II could not be an act of the Long Parliament acting freely under its own authority, but only under the influence of the sword by Colonel Monck, who traded his loyalties for the present Long Parliament, in preference to a reformed Long Parliament and to the restoration of King Charles II. General George Monck, who had been Cromwell's viceroy in Scotland, feared that the military stood to lose power and secretly shifted his loyalty to the Crown. As he began to march south, Lambert, who had ridden out to face him, lost support in London. However, the Navy declared for Parliament, and on 26 December 1659 the Rump was restored to power. On 9 January 1660, Monck arrived in London and his plans were communicated. Whereupon Henry Vane the Younger was discharged from being a member of the Long Parliament; and Major Saloway was reproved for his role and committed to the Tower during the pleasure of the house. Lieutenant-General Fleetwood, Col. Sydenham, Lord Commissioner Whitlock, Cornelius Holland, and Mr. Strickland were required to clear themselves touching their deportment in that affair. High treason was also declared against Miles Corbet, Cor. John Jones, Col. Thomlinson, and Edmond Ludlow on 19 January 1660. 1,500 other officers were removed from their command and "scarce one of ten of the old officers of the army were continued". Any known Anabaptists in the army were specifically discharged. So tame had Parliament become, that though it was most visible that Monk's letters and Arthur Haslerig's instructions were designed for the dissolution of the Long Parliament, they were obeyed by the remainder of the members and all these designs were to be put into execution. Though named by Parliament for treason, Miles Corbet and Edmond Ludlow were for a while were permitted to continue to sit with Parliament, and for a time the charges against these men were dropped. After his initial show of deference to the Rump, Monck quickly found them unwilling to continue in cooperation with his plan for an election of a new parliament (the Rump Parliament believed Monck was accountable to them and had its own plan for free elections); so on 21 February 1660 he forcibly reinstated the members 'secluded' by Pride's purge in 1648, so that they could prepare legislation for the Convention Parliament. Some of the Rump Parliament were opposed and refused to sit with the Secluded Members. On 27 February 1660, "the new Council of State being informed of some designs against the usurped power, issued out warrants for apprehending divers officers of the army; and having some jealousy of others that were members of Parliament, they procured an order of their House to authorize them to seize any member who had not sat since the coming in of the Secluded Members, if there should be occasion. When the house was ready to pass the act for dissolution, Crew who had been as forward as any man in beginning and carrying on the war against the last King, moved, that before they dissolved themselves, they would bear their witness against the horrid murder, as he called it, of the King. According to Ludlow: Mr. Thomas Scott, who had been so much deluded by the hypocrisy of Monk ... said: 'That though he knew not where to hide his head at that time, yet he durst not refuse to own, that not only his hand, but his heart also was in it' and after he had produced divers reasons to prove the justice of it, he concluded, 'that he should desire no greater honor in this world, than that the following inscription might be engraved on his tomb; "Here lies one who had a hand and a heart in the execution of Charles Stuart late King of England.' Having said this, he and most of the members who had a right to sit in Parliament, withdrew from the House; so that there was not the fourth part of a quorum of lawful members present in the House when the Secluded Members, who had been voted out of the Parliament by those that had an undisputed authority over their own members, undertook to dissolve the Parliament, which was not to be done, unless by their own consent; and whether that consent was ever given, is submitted to the judgement of all impartial men. Having called for elections for a new Parliament to meet on 25 April, the Long Parliament was dissolved on 16 March 1660. Finally, on 22 April 1660, "Major-General Lambert's party was dispersed" and General Lambert taken prisoner by Colonel Ingoldsby. "Hitherto Monk had continued to make solemn protestations of his affection and fidelity to the Commonwealth interest, against a King and House of Lords; but the new militia being settled, and a Convention, calling themselves a Parliament and fit for his purpose, being met at Westminster, he sent to such lords as had sat with the Parliament till 1648, to return to the place where they used to sit, which they did, upon assurance from him, that no others should be permitted to sit with them; which promise he also broke, and let in not only such as had deserted to Oxford, but the late created lords. And Charles Stuart, eldest son of the late King, being informed of these transactions, left the Spanish territories where he then resided, and by the advice of Monk went to Breda, a town belonging to the States of Holland: from when he sent his letters and a declaration to the two House by Sir John Greenvil; whereupon the nominal House of Commons, though called by a Commonwealth writ in the name of the Keepers of the Liberties of England, passed a vote [on about April 25, 1660], 'That the government of the nation should be by a King, Lords and Commons, and that Charles Stuart should be proclaimed King of England'". "The Lord Mayor, Sheriffs and Aldermen of the City, treated their King with a collation under a tent, placed in St. George's Fields; and five or six hundred citizens cloathed in coats of black velvet, and (not improperly) wearing chains about their necks, by an order of the Common Council, attended on the triumph of that day; ... and those who had been so often defeated in the field, and had contributed nothing either of bravery or policy to this change, in ordering the souldiery to ride with swords drawn through the city of London to White Hall, the Duke of York and Monk leading the way; and intimating (as was supposed) a resolution to maintain that by force which had been obtained by fraud". Initially seven, and later 'twenty persons were put to death for life and estate.' These included: Chief Justice Coke, who had been Solicitor to the High Court of Justice, Major-General Harrison, Col. John Jones (also a member of the High Court of Justice), Mr. Thomas Scot, Sir. Henry Vane, Sir. Arthur Haslerig, Sir. Henry Mildmay, Mr. Robert Wallop, the Lord Mounson, Sir. James Harrington, Mr. James Challoner, Mr. John Phelps, Mr. John Carew, Mr. Hugh Peters, Mr. Gregory Clement, Colonel Adrian Scroop, Col. Francis Hacker, Col. Daniel Axtel. Among those who appeared the most basely subservient to these 'exorbitancies' of the Court, 'Mr. William Prynn was singularly remarkable' and attempted to add to these all who 'abjured the family of the Stuarts' previously, though this motion failed. "John Finch who had been accused of high treason twenty years before, by a full Parliament, and who by flying from their justice had saved his life, was appointed to judge some of those who should have been his judges; and Sir. Orlando Bridgman, who upon his submission to Cromwell had been permitted to practice the law in a private manner, and under that colour had served both as spy and agent for his master, was entrusted with the principal management of this tragic scene; and in his charge to the Grand Jury, had the assurance to tell them 'That no authority, no single person, or community of men; not the people collectively or representatively, had any coercive power over the King of England'". In framing the Act of Indemnity and Oblivion, the House of Commons were unwilling to except Sir Henry Vane, Sir. Arthur Haslerig, and Major-General Lambert as they had no immediate hand in the death of the King, and there was as much reason to except them as most of the members of Parliament from its benefits. In Henry Vane's case the House of Lords were desirous of having him specifically excepted, so as to leave him at the mercy of the government and thus restrain him from the exercise of his great talents in promoting his favourite republican principles at any time during the remainder of his life. At a conference between the two Houses, it was concluded that the Commons should consent to except him from the act of indemnity, the Lords agreeing, on their part, to concur with the other House in petitioning the King, in case of the condemnation of Vane, not to carry the sentence into execution. General Edmond Ludlow, still loyal to the Rump Parliament was also excepted. According to contemporary royalist legal theory, the Long Parliament was regarded as having been automatically dissolved from the moment of Charles I's execution on 30 January 1649. This view was confirmed by a court ruling during the treason trial of Henry Vane the Younger - a ruling that Henry Vane himself had concurred with in opposition to Oliver Cromwell years earlier. The trial given to Vane as to his own person, and defence of his own part played for the Long Parliament was a foregone conclusion. It was not a fair trial as both his defence, and deportment at the time of defence bears out. He was not given legal counsel (other than the judges that sat at his trial); and was left to conduct his own defence after years in prison. Sir Henry Vane maintained the following at his trial: King Charles II did not keep the promise made to the house but executed the sentence of death on Sir Henry Vane the Younger. The solicitor, openly declared in his speech afterwards "that he (Henry Vane) must be made a public sacrifice". One of his judges stated: "We knew not how to answer him, but we know what to do with him". Edmond Ludlow one of the members of Parliament excepted by the act of indemnity, fled to Switzerland after the restoration of King Charles II, where he wrote his memoirs of these events. The Long Parliament began with the execution of Lord Stafford, and effectively ended with the execution of Henry Vane the Younger. The republican theory is that the goal and aim of the Long Parliament was to institute a constitutional, balanced, and equally representative form of government along similar lines as were later accomplished in America by the American Revolution. It is clear from the writings of both Ludlow, Vane, and historians of the early American period such as Upham, that this is what they were striving for and why they were excepted from the acts of indemnity. The republican theory also suggests that the Long Parliament would have been successful in these necessary reforms except through the forceful intervention of Oliver Cromwell (and others) in removing the loyalists party, the unlawful execution of King Charles I, later dissolving the Rump Parliament; and finally the forceful dissolution of the reconvened Rump Parliament by Monck when less than a fourth of the required members were present. It is believed that in many ways this struggle was but a precursor to the American Revolution.	7,715	ENGLISH	1
Portugal’s colony of Brazil was a target for other colonial forces for all of the resources and ready slave labor available. One of the heroes against them was Henrique Dias, a Black Brazilian who faced off against the Dutch. His service would see him earn the title of “governador da gente preta” or “governor of the Black people.” Not much is known about Dias’ youth. He was born to parents who had been freed and opted to join the militia in fighting the Dutch in 1633. He eventually came to command a 300 strong Black militia. Not large compared to the numbers that would take place in wars throughout Brazil but small and fast enough for the guerrilla warfare Henrique Dias enjoyed employing. FIRST BATTLE OF THE GUARARAPES Occurring on April 14, 1648, in Pernambuco, this was one of the last big showdowns with the Dutch invasion force. It also saw Dias as one of the leaders in command of a terço. This was an infantry unit—usually of a couple thousand—split up among multiple commanders. The Dutch forces were 5,000 with cannons while Portugal had 2,000. Henrique Dias’ job was to take his Black terço and hold the Dutch off while the Portuguese would take the fight to the Dutch from the swamp. The Dutch would suffer losses to the tune of around 1,000 while Portugal lost 80 and had 400 injured. Successful in this battle, Dias would join Portugal in fighting the Dutch in the start of 1649. SECOND BATTLE OF THE GUARARAPES This battle saw the Portuguese forces outnumbered by about 900 troops. However, they had a huge advantage in morale, native and Black troops, and knowledge of the terrain. The result was another slaughter by the home colonial force with the Dutch losing 1,045. Portugal would lose 45 and walk off with 200 injured. AWARDS AND PRIVILEGES As a result of his performance in battle, King Peter II made Henrique Dias and native commander Filipe Camarão Knights of the Order of Christ. He was also made “Governor of All Creoles, Blacks, and Mulattoes.” Dias headed to Lisbon and requested that the Black men who served under him and helped Portugal hold on to Brazil be freed and given privileges. In the future, militia forces made up of free Blacks would take his name and be called “Henriques.”	<urn:uuid:5af81318-a9dc-4858-b0b1-f2ae9528523e>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://blackthen.com/henrique-dias-governor-black-people/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250610919.33/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123131001-20200123160001-00141.warc.gz	en	0.984186	526	4.15625	4	[ -0.40780025720596313, 0.6764876842498779, 0.08104710280895233, -0.06092866510152817, 0.1180691197514534, -0.15482927858829498, -0.160116046667099, 0.1380016952753067, -0.0005945701850578189, 0.07118165493011475, 0.03167523443698883, -0.7111952900886536, -0.6632068753242493, 0.6652213931083...	11	Portugal’s colony of Brazil was a target for other colonial forces for all of the resources and ready slave labor available. One of the heroes against them was Henrique Dias, a Black Brazilian who faced off against the Dutch. His service would see him earn the title of “governador da gente preta” or “governor of the Black people.” Not much is known about Dias’ youth. He was born to parents who had been freed and opted to join the militia in fighting the Dutch in 1633. He eventually came to command a 300 strong Black militia. Not large compared to the numbers that would take place in wars throughout Brazil but small and fast enough for the guerrilla warfare Henrique Dias enjoyed employing. FIRST BATTLE OF THE GUARARAPES Occurring on April 14, 1648, in Pernambuco, this was one of the last big showdowns with the Dutch invasion force. It also saw Dias as one of the leaders in command of a terço. This was an infantry unit—usually of a couple thousand—split up among multiple commanders. The Dutch forces were 5,000 with cannons while Portugal had 2,000. Henrique Dias’ job was to take his Black terço and hold the Dutch off while the Portuguese would take the fight to the Dutch from the swamp. The Dutch would suffer losses to the tune of around 1,000 while Portugal lost 80 and had 400 injured. Successful in this battle, Dias would join Portugal in fighting the Dutch in the start of 1649. SECOND BATTLE OF THE GUARARAPES This battle saw the Portuguese forces outnumbered by about 900 troops. However, they had a huge advantage in morale, native and Black troops, and knowledge of the terrain. The result was another slaughter by the home colonial force with the Dutch losing 1,045. Portugal would lose 45 and walk off with 200 injured. AWARDS AND PRIVILEGES As a result of his performance in battle, King Peter II made Henrique Dias and native commander Filipe Camarão Knights of the Order of Christ. He was also made “Governor of All Creoles, Blacks, and Mulattoes.” Dias headed to Lisbon and requested that the Black men who served under him and helped Portugal hold on to Brazil be freed and given privileges. In the future, militia forces made up of free Blacks would take his name and be called “Henriques.”	531	ENGLISH	1
One of the most significant events in United States history was the American Revolution. However, the significance of the event did not lay in the number of casualties or in Revolutionary wartime strategies. The importance of the Revolution lay in its effects of American Society. This landmark in American history has caused important changes to the government, affected vast and deep social changes, and altered the economic state of the newborn nation in the years of 1775 to 1800. From the American Revolution, the United States came to establish a strong government that functions to this day. The Articles of Confederation, written in 1777, was the first American …show more content… In addition to the political effects caused by the Revolution, there were also numerous social influences, as the role of women and the role of slavery in society saw significant change. Demonstrated through artwork of the Revolutionary era, such as a Woodcut of Patriot Woman created in Massachusetts in 1779, women played an important role during the Revolution (Doc. A). They played significant roles in supporting Revolutionary troops and running society, as the men were off to fight. Some women even dressed up as men to join in to fight. Deborah Samson, for example, was a willing volunteer whom had disguised herself as a young man to fight against the British. As the Revolutionary Era progressed, women's cries for rights and suffrage were further amplified. More women sought education, and with it, more women's education institutions were established, such as the Young Ladies' Academy of Philadelphia (Doc. J) With education, women became much more politically active and opinionated. As expressed by Molly Wallace, an educated woman in 1792, they fought for women's suffrage, wanting a public say in society, and the ability to vote (Doc. J) Furthermore, they	<urn:uuid:abfdf9d7-760c-47c7-a0f8-9c2bfe15b45a>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.cram.com/essay/how-the-american-revolution-changed-american-society/P3CRDEE2SC	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690095.81/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126165718-20200126195718-00207.warc.gz	en	0.980685	361	3.859375	4	[ 0.009333985857665539, 0.35447055101394653, 0.5793225169181824, 0.05404035001993179, -0.23783861100673676, 0.6672120690345764, -0.12082989513874054, 0.5824947357177734, -0.3178393244743347, -0.03091958910226822, -0.02922827936708927, 0.4577363133430481, -0.07347355037927628, 0.0804867073893...	1	One of the most significant events in United States history was the American Revolution. However, the significance of the event did not lay in the number of casualties or in Revolutionary wartime strategies. The importance of the Revolution lay in its effects of American Society. This landmark in American history has caused important changes to the government, affected vast and deep social changes, and altered the economic state of the newborn nation in the years of 1775 to 1800. From the American Revolution, the United States came to establish a strong government that functions to this day. The Articles of Confederation, written in 1777, was the first American …show more content… In addition to the political effects caused by the Revolution, there were also numerous social influences, as the role of women and the role of slavery in society saw significant change. Demonstrated through artwork of the Revolutionary era, such as a Woodcut of Patriot Woman created in Massachusetts in 1779, women played an important role during the Revolution (Doc. A). They played significant roles in supporting Revolutionary troops and running society, as the men were off to fight. Some women even dressed up as men to join in to fight. Deborah Samson, for example, was a willing volunteer whom had disguised herself as a young man to fight against the British. As the Revolutionary Era progressed, women's cries for rights and suffrage were further amplified. More women sought education, and with it, more women's education institutions were established, such as the Young Ladies' Academy of Philadelphia (Doc. J) With education, women became much more politically active and opinionated. As expressed by Molly Wallace, an educated woman in 1792, they fought for women's suffrage, wanting a public say in society, and the ability to vote (Doc. J) Furthermore, they	376	ENGLISH	1
Why Are Red Squirrels So Threatened In The UK? 16th April 2018Once one of the most widespread and common woodland creatures in the country, red squirrels are now seldom seen in many parts of the UK as numbers have declined significantly over the past century. Still commonly found in isolated regions and throughout the European continent, one of our most historically iconic native species is becoming increasingly threatened in the UK due to a number of factors but most notably with the introduction of grey squirrels from America. Red squirrels are a highly distinctive squirrel species and are easily recognised by their dark to bright red fur, long ear tufts and fluffy tails. They are relatively small in size compared to grey squirrels and can be found inhabiting coniferous and deciduous woodlands from the UK and Northern Ireland, throughout Europe and as far east as northwest China. They mainly ingest plant materials such as seeds, green acorns, fungi and hazelnuts as well as occasionally consuming eggs and small birds. Red squirrels do not hibernate through the winter months and instead stock-pile food reserves during the autumn to last them through the less prolific winter months when they primarily feed on fungus. Constant consumption throughout the winter is particularly important for females who mate in the spring and produce litters of just two or three young (known as kittens) between February and April. Squirrel kittens can often remain with their mother for the duration of the year and sadly, only between 20 and 50 percent are expected to survive. Although locally common in Scotland, their population numbers throughout England, Wales and Northern Ireland have dropped so dramatically that they are now listed as a Near Threatened species. In the 1870s, grey squirrels were introduced as an ornamental species from America and since then, our native red squirrels have decreased from around 3.5 million individuals to less than 160,000, with just 15,000 thought to now reside in England. Along with increasing traffic on roads, habitat loss and being affected by growing numbers of domestic predators such as dogs and cats, the introduction of grey squirrels has had by far the biggest impact on red squirrels throughout the UK. According to the Woodland Trust, the three main reasons why grey squirrels are such a threat to reds are: - Grey squirrels are known to carry the squirrel parapox virus which is a disease that is not thought to affect their health but often kills red squirrel individuals. - The larger size of grey squirrels means that they require more food in order to gain the nutrients that they need to survive, and can quickly consume food sources such as green acorns before red squirrels have even found them. This is a particular problem as red squirrels cannot digest mature acorns and therefore rely heavily on the green ones to survive. - Another big reason that red squirrels have been so affected by the introduction of greys, is that the pressure from habitat and food loss means that they do not breed as often so populations have not remained stable.	<urn:uuid:e8c997d3-aed2-49e4-8067-a5e0c1f4c436>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://a-z-animals.com/blog/why-are-red-squirrels-so-threatened-in-the-uk/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00469.warc.gz	en	0.980075	610	3.625	4	[ -0.011209974996745586, -0.49585989117622375, 0.24201293289661407, -0.00100396026391536, 0.7075672745704651, 0.19287794828414917, 0.06163327395915985, 0.35458648204803467, 0.09825380146503448, 0.09633738547563553, -0.08889612555503845, -0.49739915132522583, 0.3636959195137024, 0.08327489346...	3	Why Are Red Squirrels So Threatened In The UK? 16th April 2018Once one of the most widespread and common woodland creatures in the country, red squirrels are now seldom seen in many parts of the UK as numbers have declined significantly over the past century. Still commonly found in isolated regions and throughout the European continent, one of our most historically iconic native species is becoming increasingly threatened in the UK due to a number of factors but most notably with the introduction of grey squirrels from America. Red squirrels are a highly distinctive squirrel species and are easily recognised by their dark to bright red fur, long ear tufts and fluffy tails. They are relatively small in size compared to grey squirrels and can be found inhabiting coniferous and deciduous woodlands from the UK and Northern Ireland, throughout Europe and as far east as northwest China. They mainly ingest plant materials such as seeds, green acorns, fungi and hazelnuts as well as occasionally consuming eggs and small birds. Red squirrels do not hibernate through the winter months and instead stock-pile food reserves during the autumn to last them through the less prolific winter months when they primarily feed on fungus. Constant consumption throughout the winter is particularly important for females who mate in the spring and produce litters of just two or three young (known as kittens) between February and April. Squirrel kittens can often remain with their mother for the duration of the year and sadly, only between 20 and 50 percent are expected to survive. Although locally common in Scotland, their population numbers throughout England, Wales and Northern Ireland have dropped so dramatically that they are now listed as a Near Threatened species. In the 1870s, grey squirrels were introduced as an ornamental species from America and since then, our native red squirrels have decreased from around 3.5 million individuals to less than 160,000, with just 15,000 thought to now reside in England. Along with increasing traffic on roads, habitat loss and being affected by growing numbers of domestic predators such as dogs and cats, the introduction of grey squirrels has had by far the biggest impact on red squirrels throughout the UK. According to the Woodland Trust, the three main reasons why grey squirrels are such a threat to reds are: - Grey squirrels are known to carry the squirrel parapox virus which is a disease that is not thought to affect their health but often kills red squirrel individuals. - The larger size of grey squirrels means that they require more food in order to gain the nutrients that they need to survive, and can quickly consume food sources such as green acorns before red squirrels have even found them. This is a particular problem as red squirrels cannot digest mature acorns and therefore rely heavily on the green ones to survive. - Another big reason that red squirrels have been so affected by the introduction of greys, is that the pressure from habitat and food loss means that they do not breed as often so populations have not remained stable.	625	ENGLISH	1
The Nobel Peace Prize was a dignified honor bestowed upon Martin Luther King, Jr. for his work in helping to create an equal society and bring peace to the United States. He is honored on his birthday, and the entire month of February is, in turn, a time to honor the rich history of African Americans. This year is a monumental occasion in African American history, as the first black President of the United States was also awarded the Nobel Peace Prize just as Martin Luther King, Jr. was before him. Peace is something that our world is still struggling to achieve, but this project will encourage your child to brainstorm his own solutions to our problems. Just as Martin Luther King, Jr. and President Obama have dreams for a more peaceful society and have set goals and plans to achieve them, your child can come up with plans of his own. This project will not only tap into your child's creative and critical thinking skills to come up with a plan for peace but in the assembling of their very own Nobel Peace Prize, they will also boost their fine motor skills.	<urn:uuid:db2ad8af-efd9-48bf-ae92-596fafb2f335>	CC-MAIN-2020-05	https://www.education.com/activity/article/nobel-peace-prize/	s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251737572.61/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127235617-20200128025617-00207.warc.gz	en	0.9805	215	3.765625	4	[ -0.3997095227241516, 0.7773013710975647, 0.31739383935928345, -0.5351995229721069, -0.6438483595848083, 0.12094409763813019, 0.49118638038635254, 0.09922299534082413, -0.1733303815126419, 0.5400285720825195, 0.32822728157043457, -0.04587649926543236, 0.24127113819122314, 0.2707462310791015...	5	The Nobel Peace Prize was a dignified honor bestowed upon Martin Luther King, Jr. for his work in helping to create an equal society and bring peace to the United States. He is honored on his birthday, and the entire month of February is, in turn, a time to honor the rich history of African Americans. This year is a monumental occasion in African American history, as the first black President of the United States was also awarded the Nobel Peace Prize just as Martin Luther King, Jr. was before him. Peace is something that our world is still struggling to achieve, but this project will encourage your child to brainstorm his own solutions to our problems. Just as Martin Luther King, Jr. and President Obama have dreams for a more peaceful society and have set goals and plans to achieve them, your child can come up with plans of his own. This project will not only tap into your child's creative and critical thinking skills to come up with a plan for peace but in the assembling of their very own Nobel Peace Prize, they will also boost their fine motor skills.	214	ENGLISH	1

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

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