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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LONDON - WE have now entered what is being celebrated as the Einstein Year, marking the centenary of the physicist's annus mirabilis in 1905, when he published three landmark papers -- those that proved the existence of the atom, showed the validity of quantum physics and, of course, introduced the world to his theory of special relativity. Not bad for a beginner.
"It's not that I'm so smart," Einstein once said, "It's just that I stay with problems longer." Whatever the reason for his greatness, there is no doubt that this determination allowed him to invent courageous new physics and explore realms that nobody else had dared to investigate.
What he was not, however, was a perfect genius. In fact, when it came to the biggest scientific issue of all -- the origin of the universe -- he was utterly wrong. And while we should certainly laud his achievements over the next 12 months, we may learn a more valuable lesson by investigating Einstein's greatest failure.
The story starts in the late 19th century, when the scientific establishment believed in an eternal and unchanging universe. This was a neat theory of cosmology, because a universe that had always existed did not raise any awkward questions, such as "When was the universe created?" and "What (or Who) created it?"
Einstein grew up in this era, and was similarly convinced that the universe had existed for an eternity. However, when he developed general relativity (his theory of gravity) in 1915, he became aware of a tricky problem. Gravity is an attractive force -- it attracts coins to the ground and it attracts comets toward the sun. So why hadn't gravity caused the matter in the universe to collapse inward on itself?
Gravity seemed to be incompatible with an eternal, unchanging universe, and Einstein certainly had no sympathy for the alternative view of a collapsing universe, stating that: "To admit such a possibility seems senseless."
Isaac Newton had run into the same problem with his own theory of gravity some 250 years earlier. He too believed in an eternal universe, yet he knew that gravity would have to cause its collapse after a finite time. His solution was to propose that God was responsible for keeping apart all the celestial objects, adjusting their positions from time to time as part of his cosmic curatorial responsibilities.
Einstein was reluctant to invoke God, so his solution was to fiddle with his theory of general relativity, adding an antigravity force alongside familiar gravity. This repulsive force would counteract gravity over cosmic distances, thereby maintaining the overall stability of the universe. There was no evidence for this antigravity force, but Einstein assumed that it had to exist in order to provide a platform for eternity.
Although everything now seemed to make sense, there were some dissenters. A small band of renegade cosmologists suggested in the 1920's that the universe was not eternal but had been created at a finite moment in the past. They claimed it had exploded and expanded from a small, hot, dense state into what we see today. In particular, they argued that it had once been compacted into a primeval super atom, which had then ruptured and exploded. This model, which has since developed into the Big Bang theory, did not require any stabilizing antigravity because it proposed a dynamic, evolving universe.
The Big Bang model was initially ridiculed by the scientific establishment. For example, one of its pioneers, Georges Lemaître, was both a cosmologist and an ordained priest, so critics cited his theology as his motivation for advancing such a crackpot theory of creation. They suspected that the model was Lemaître's way of sneaking a Creator into science. While Einstein was not biased against Lemaître's religious background, he did call the priest's physics "abominable." It was enough to banish the Big Bang model to the hinterlands of cosmology.
However, in 1929 Einstein was forced to eat humble pie. Edwin Hubble, working at Mount Wilson Observatory in Southern California, showed that all the distant galaxies in the universe were racing away from one another as though they were debris from a cosmic explosion. The Big Bang model seemed to be correct. And, while it would take several decades before the theory was accepted by the scientific establishment, Einstein, to his credit, did not fight on. "This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened," he said, and even called his repulsive force the biggest blunder of his career.
In 1931, Einstein paid a visit to Hubble at Mount Wilson, where he renounced his own static cosmology and endorsed the expanding universe model. His support was enough for The New York Times to embrace the mavericks, running an article with the headline "Lemaître Suggests One, Single, Great Atom, Embracing All Energy, Started The Universe." Hubble's hometown newspaper in Missouri, The Springfield Daily News, preferred to focus on its local hero: "Youth Who Left Ozark Mountains to Study Stars Causes Einstein to Change His Mind."
It might seem that Einstein emerges from this story as a flawed genius, one who was not perfect. In fact, there is a twist to the tale, one that implies he was perhaps better than perfect.
If gravity pulls everything together, then the expansion of the Big Bang should be slowing, because all the receding galaxies would be attracted to one another. In 1998, however, when astronomers tried to measure this deceleration, they were astonished to find that the universe is in fact accelerating. The galaxies are apparently moving apart faster and faster as time passes.
What is the best explanation scientists can come up with? The existence of an antigravity force. Theorists call this repulsive effect "dark energy," but it is exactly the sort of force that Einstein posited to maintain the stability of the universe. Antigravity is now back in fashion some seven decades after he abandoned it. It seems that even when Einstein thought he was wrong, he turned out to be right.
And, as we celebrate the Einstein Year, let's also bear in mind the fact that he was prepared to admit that he was wrong. Perhaps humility, more than anything, is the mark of true genius.
Op-Ed Contributor Simon Singh is the author of "Fermat's Enigma" and the forthcoming "Big Bang: The Origins of the Universe." | <urn:uuid:caa6e2bf-3452-43cd-924c-129dbc8fcd4d> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/02/opinion/even-einstein-had-his-off-days.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251684146.65/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126013015-20200126043015-00156.warc.gz | en | 0.981039 | 1,311 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
-0.22025662660598755,
-0.050078652799129486,
-0.0804346352815628,
0.03998264670372009,
-0.35267192125320435,
-0.16172176599502563,
0.10032188892364502,
0.2792688310146332,
0.11351017653942108,
-0.09769296646118164,
0.26992499828338623,
-0.44207867980003357,
-0.027084864675998688,
0.2773984... | 1 | LONDON - WE have now entered what is being celebrated as the Einstein Year, marking the centenary of the physicist's annus mirabilis in 1905, when he published three landmark papers -- those that proved the existence of the atom, showed the validity of quantum physics and, of course, introduced the world to his theory of special relativity. Not bad for a beginner.
"It's not that I'm so smart," Einstein once said, "It's just that I stay with problems longer." Whatever the reason for his greatness, there is no doubt that this determination allowed him to invent courageous new physics and explore realms that nobody else had dared to investigate.
What he was not, however, was a perfect genius. In fact, when it came to the biggest scientific issue of all -- the origin of the universe -- he was utterly wrong. And while we should certainly laud his achievements over the next 12 months, we may learn a more valuable lesson by investigating Einstein's greatest failure.
The story starts in the late 19th century, when the scientific establishment believed in an eternal and unchanging universe. This was a neat theory of cosmology, because a universe that had always existed did not raise any awkward questions, such as "When was the universe created?" and "What (or Who) created it?"
Einstein grew up in this era, and was similarly convinced that the universe had existed for an eternity. However, when he developed general relativity (his theory of gravity) in 1915, he became aware of a tricky problem. Gravity is an attractive force -- it attracts coins to the ground and it attracts comets toward the sun. So why hadn't gravity caused the matter in the universe to collapse inward on itself?
Gravity seemed to be incompatible with an eternal, unchanging universe, and Einstein certainly had no sympathy for the alternative view of a collapsing universe, stating that: "To admit such a possibility seems senseless."
Isaac Newton had run into the same problem with his own theory of gravity some 250 years earlier. He too believed in an eternal universe, yet he knew that gravity would have to cause its collapse after a finite time. His solution was to propose that God was responsible for keeping apart all the celestial objects, adjusting their positions from time to time as part of his cosmic curatorial responsibilities.
Einstein was reluctant to invoke God, so his solution was to fiddle with his theory of general relativity, adding an antigravity force alongside familiar gravity. This repulsive force would counteract gravity over cosmic distances, thereby maintaining the overall stability of the universe. There was no evidence for this antigravity force, but Einstein assumed that it had to exist in order to provide a platform for eternity.
Although everything now seemed to make sense, there were some dissenters. A small band of renegade cosmologists suggested in the 1920's that the universe was not eternal but had been created at a finite moment in the past. They claimed it had exploded and expanded from a small, hot, dense state into what we see today. In particular, they argued that it had once been compacted into a primeval super atom, which had then ruptured and exploded. This model, which has since developed into the Big Bang theory, did not require any stabilizing antigravity because it proposed a dynamic, evolving universe.
The Big Bang model was initially ridiculed by the scientific establishment. For example, one of its pioneers, Georges Lemaître, was both a cosmologist and an ordained priest, so critics cited his theology as his motivation for advancing such a crackpot theory of creation. They suspected that the model was Lemaître's way of sneaking a Creator into science. While Einstein was not biased against Lemaître's religious background, he did call the priest's physics "abominable." It was enough to banish the Big Bang model to the hinterlands of cosmology.
However, in 1929 Einstein was forced to eat humble pie. Edwin Hubble, working at Mount Wilson Observatory in Southern California, showed that all the distant galaxies in the universe were racing away from one another as though they were debris from a cosmic explosion. The Big Bang model seemed to be correct. And, while it would take several decades before the theory was accepted by the scientific establishment, Einstein, to his credit, did not fight on. "This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened," he said, and even called his repulsive force the biggest blunder of his career.
In 1931, Einstein paid a visit to Hubble at Mount Wilson, where he renounced his own static cosmology and endorsed the expanding universe model. His support was enough for The New York Times to embrace the mavericks, running an article with the headline "Lemaître Suggests One, Single, Great Atom, Embracing All Energy, Started The Universe." Hubble's hometown newspaper in Missouri, The Springfield Daily News, preferred to focus on its local hero: "Youth Who Left Ozark Mountains to Study Stars Causes Einstein to Change His Mind."
It might seem that Einstein emerges from this story as a flawed genius, one who was not perfect. In fact, there is a twist to the tale, one that implies he was perhaps better than perfect.
If gravity pulls everything together, then the expansion of the Big Bang should be slowing, because all the receding galaxies would be attracted to one another. In 1998, however, when astronomers tried to measure this deceleration, they were astonished to find that the universe is in fact accelerating. The galaxies are apparently moving apart faster and faster as time passes.
What is the best explanation scientists can come up with? The existence of an antigravity force. Theorists call this repulsive effect "dark energy," but it is exactly the sort of force that Einstein posited to maintain the stability of the universe. Antigravity is now back in fashion some seven decades after he abandoned it. It seems that even when Einstein thought he was wrong, he turned out to be right.
And, as we celebrate the Einstein Year, let's also bear in mind the fact that he was prepared to admit that he was wrong. Perhaps humility, more than anything, is the mark of true genius.
Op-Ed Contributor Simon Singh is the author of "Fermat's Enigma" and the forthcoming "Big Bang: The Origins of the Universe." | 1,328 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Some say that today’s #WomenInSTEMWednesdayisn’t well known in the STEM community despite her work being regularly used. Emmy Noether was a mathematician and theoretical physicist that was lucky enough to work with Albert Einstein.
She grew up in Germany in the late 1800s in a Jewish family of mathematicians and wanted to be like them. Emmy wasn’t legally allowed to have higher education, but that didn’t stop her. She sat in the back of classes and audited some before she was allowed to officially become a student.
In the early 1900s, Albert Einstein’s team recruited her to help develop his theory of relativity. She was unpaid at the university but that didn’t stop her. She continued to work and create equations that are still in use today for an understanding of physics. Noether also developed some of the important pieces of abstract algebra, connections between energy and time, and angular momentum. Because of all this work, the Noether theory was developed.
Despite not being recognized, not being paid, and being run from her home country Emmy didn’t let any of that stop her. She continued to work and do what she loved. #WomenInSTEM | <urn:uuid:1f9e7c33-ad71-41e8-91a8-165bcb19062f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://meganmcclellanwx.wordpress.com/2018/11/07/womeninstemwednesday-emmy-noether/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589861.0/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117152059-20200117180059-00074.warc.gz | en | 0.986119 | 252 | 3.640625 | 4 | [
-0.19941763579845428,
0.13078634440898895,
-0.32076284289360046,
0.02722390554845333,
-0.3940936326980591,
-0.27868467569351196,
-0.20177330076694489,
0.3815966248512268,
-0.2404412031173706,
0.0609549917280674,
0.359228253364563,
-0.263896644115448,
-0.15240409970283508,
0.303424805402755... | 2 | Some say that today’s #WomenInSTEMWednesdayisn’t well known in the STEM community despite her work being regularly used. Emmy Noether was a mathematician and theoretical physicist that was lucky enough to work with Albert Einstein.
She grew up in Germany in the late 1800s in a Jewish family of mathematicians and wanted to be like them. Emmy wasn’t legally allowed to have higher education, but that didn’t stop her. She sat in the back of classes and audited some before she was allowed to officially become a student.
In the early 1900s, Albert Einstein’s team recruited her to help develop his theory of relativity. She was unpaid at the university but that didn’t stop her. She continued to work and create equations that are still in use today for an understanding of physics. Noether also developed some of the important pieces of abstract algebra, connections between energy and time, and angular momentum. Because of all this work, the Noether theory was developed.
Despite not being recognized, not being paid, and being run from her home country Emmy didn’t let any of that stop her. She continued to work and do what she loved. #WomenInSTEM | 245 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The first news of a massacre at Katyn Wood came in April 1943 when the Germans found a mass grave of 4,500 Polish soldiers in German-occupied Russia. The discovery at Katyn Wood was to greatly embarrass the Russian government.
The Russians responded to the German claims that Russia’s secret police did it, by claiming that the massacre was carried out by the Germans themselves. In the context of the war – the Allies were fighting the Nazi war machine and Russia was a valued ally – the German version was not accepted by the British or other Allied governments. However, in the era of the Cold War, the Russian version was heavily scrutinised and questionned.
The first announcement of what had been found at Katyn Wood was made on Radio Berlin on April 13th, 1943.
|“A report has reached us from Smolensk to the effect that the local inhabitants have mentioned to the German authorities the existence of a place where mass executions have been carried out by the Bolsheviks and where 10,000 Polish officers have been murdered by the Soviet Secret State Police. The German authorities went to a place called the Hill of Goats, a Russian health resort situated twelve kilometers west of Smolensk, where a gruesome discovery was made.”Radio Berlin broadcast|
The Germans claimed that they found a ditch 28 meters long and 16 meters wide at the Hill of Goats in which were 3,000 bodies piled up in layers of twelve. All the bodies were fully dressed in military uniform; some were bound and all had pistol shots to the back of their heads. The Germans believed that they would find 10,000 bodies (hence the figure in the broadcast) but eventually the final total was 4,500. The Germans claimed that the bodies were in good condition and they even recognised a general Smorawinsky as one of the victims. The soil had done a great deal to preserve the bodies and any documentation found on them.
However, any information relating to this massacre made public during the war came from Goebbel’s propaganda ministry and had to be treated as suspect by the Allies. In January 1943, the Russians had turned the tide of the war with the defeat of the Germans at Stalingrad – a victory Churchill had urged all on the Allied side to celebrate. As if in a knee-jerk reaction, any criticism about the Russians in Easter 1943 would not have been acceptable. Any connection between the massacre and the Germans, however, would have been more readily accepted by all those fighting against the Nazis.
But what exactly did happen at Katyn Wood?
When German forces attacked Poland in September 1939, the Blitzkrieg tactic tore great holes in the Polish defence. However, on September 17th, as part of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, Russian forces also invaded Poland. The Russian leadership called on the Polish soldiers to rise up against their officers and political leaders as a punishment for getting the country into an unjust war. Those Polish officers and senior NCO’s captured by the Red Army were arrested and deported to Russia.
It is known that they were taken to three camps in Russia – Kozelsk, Starobelsk and Ostashkov. One of the camps, Kozelsk, contained more than just officers. It contained arrested Polish university lecturers, surgeons, physicians, barristers and lawyers. One woman prisoner was held at Kozelsk – Janina Lewandowski. Her body was found at Katyn clothed in the uniform of the Polish Air Force. Ostashkov held officers – but it also held anybody from Poland who was considered to be ‘bourgeois’. It seems that only Starobelsk held only officers from the Polish military.
To start with, the Russians attempted to ‘re-educate’ the Poles in all three camps. Brigadier Zarubin of the Soviet Secret State Police was put in charge of this task. His efforts to promote the Soviet way of life probably had no chance. The Poles in the camp were forbidden to say Mass – which for a devout Roman Catholic nation was a major blow and it was almost certainly done secretly. Therefore, it is untenable to think that there were any takers for the Soviet view point which Zarubin was trying to sell. It seems that Zarubin reported his failure to Moscow and shortly after this a colonel from the Soviet Secret State Police turned up at all three camps. Just after the visit of this colonel, groups of prisoners were taken from the camps to an unknown destination.
In April 1940, all three camps were simultaneously cleared.
On June 22nd, 1941, Nazi Germany launched ‘Operation Barbarossa‘. The German military swept aside the Russian army and penetrated deep into Russia. Stalin, alarmed by the collapse of the Red Army, ordered that an amnesty should be granted to all Polish prisoners who were willing to fight against the Germans. On August 14th 1941, a Polish-Soviet military agreement was signed. However, no-one could account for the whereabouts of the officers held in Kozelsk, Starobelsk and Ostashkov. Winston Churchill himself wrote about the embarrassment such a disclosure brought on the Russian authorities.
The Polish government in exile, based in London, was especially concerned that the Russians explain where these men were. Stalin gave two answers. Initially, he claimed that the men had escaped to Manchuria. However, the authorities in Moscow – which was effectively Stalin – claimed that the men were held in territory that the Germans had taken in their lightning attack in June 1941 and that only the Germans could account for their whereabouts. This was to become the standard Moscow answer to the problem – the Germans were responsible.
Locals at Katyn Forest had long known that it was an area used by the secret police to execute those who had fallen out with Stalin’s government. As early as 1929, the Soviet secret police had built a dacha there surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards. To keep out the locals, the secret police also used guard dogs to patrol the perimeter of the dacha.
On July 16th, 1941, Smolensk fell to the Germans. The Russian authorities had fled from Katyn and for the first time in years, the area was open ‘to the public’. In 1942, Poles from the Todt Organisation arrived in the area to collect any form of scrap. As they worked on the Hill of Goats, they found the body of a dead Polish officer who was later buried in a dignified service. However, the winter for 1942-43 was severe and the ground at the Hill of Goats was frozen over.
In the Spring of 1943, a Russian peasant, Ivan Krivozertzev, read an article in a newspaper (‘Novyj Put’) regarding General Sikorski and his search for thousands of Polish officers whom he could not account for. Despite communism in Russia, Krivozertzev had maintained his religious beliefs and re-called what he had seen in Smolensk in 1940.
He had seen rail wagons coming into Smolensk station but being shunted into screened sidings. He had seen men being herded under armed guard into ‘Black Ravens’ – the local nickname for prison vehicles. Krivozertzev had also seen ‘normal’ prisoners being driven from Smolensk city in lorries with shovels and pick axes. Krivozertzev went to the Germans and told them that he believed the Polish officers would be found at the Hill of Goats. The Germans went to the forest and dug up mounds that had young fir trees on the top of them. These trees gave away an obvious secret as the rings on them indicated that they had been planted in April 1940.
The Germans started digging in the Hill of Goats and found the bodies of many men, still in military uniform, who had been shot in the back of the head with their hands tied behind their backs. The Germans also found the bodies of Russian men and women who had been shot long before 1940. Curiously, the Germans claimed that the way the Russians and Poles had been tied was identical and that whoever did both sets of murders was the same organisation. The 4,500 bodies that were exhumed came from Kozelsk – no-one knows what happened to the men held at Starobelsk and Ostashkov. Moscow announced its stance on April 14th 1943:
|“The Polish prisoners in question were interned in the vicinity of Smolensk in special camps and were employed in road construction. In was impossible to evacuate them at the time of the approach of the German troops and, as a result, they fell into their hands. If, therefore, they have been found murdered, it means that they have been murdered by the Germans who, for reasons of provocation, now claim that the crime was committed by Soviet authorities.”|
On April 15th, the British government publically stated via the BBC that the Germans had told lies and that it accepted the Russian version. This caused the Polish government in exile to call for an independent inspection of Katyn – something the International Red Cross in Switzerland could do. The German and Polish government (in exile) agreed to this; Moscow did not. The Russians broke off all relations with Poland and set up a puppet Polish government in Moscow.
When Russia advanced into Europe and re-captured Katyn, it seemed as if the issue was solved as it was clear that the Russians were not going to allow any investigation into what happened at Katyn. At the Nuremburg trials, the murders were linked to the indictment against Goering and the Russians presented their evidence to ‘prove’ it was the Germans, but they were never probed and Katyn drifted into obscurity. At the final judgment of the International Tribunal, Katyn was not even mentioned.
For their part the Russians claimed that the massacre took place after it became obvious that the Wehrmacht was in full retreat after their defeat at Stalingrad and that it was carried out by the Nazis. They put up the following evidence gathered at Nuremburg:
The Germans did not allow any external authority to fully examine either the bodies or the grave sites. The Polish Commission, set up by the Nazis to examine the evidence, was only allowed to see what the Germans wanted them to see. One Bulgarian professor, Marko Markov, claimed that he was only allowed to dissect one body that was presented to him and that he could not conclude from this body that it had been in the ground for three years – as the Nazis tried to suggest to him that it had been. In his written report, Markov only wrote about what he found on the body – he did not give a conclusion as to how the body got into its state.
He and seven other experts were only allowed two half-a-day visits to the grave sites by the Germans. “It reminded me of a tourist trip”, claimed Markov.
The Russians also claimed that the issue of the three year old saplings was also easy to explain. They claimed that there was no evidence that they came from the grave mounds themselves and that they could have been gathered at any point from Katyn Wood and handed in as ‘evidence’.
The Russians also claimed that all the bullets found on the bodies were made by the German firm Geko. It was claimed that they were all Geko 7.65 mm bullets which only the German would have had access to.
Who committed the murders remained a mystery until 1990 when the Russian authorities admitted that it was the Russian Secret police (NKVD), that then spent much time and effort in attaching blame on the Germans. | <urn:uuid:4d7a492b-b3fc-4f71-817e-0c9f6a0733e5> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/world-war-two/world-war-two-and-eastern-europe/the-katyn-wood-massacre/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250595282.35/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119205448-20200119233448-00003.warc.gz | en | 0.990964 | 2,425 | 3.328125 | 3 | [
-0.05500561743974686,
0.2580762505531311,
0.3261054456233978,
0.03133746236562729,
0.45737332105636597,
0.07488060742616653,
0.010354842059314251,
0.24312439560890198,
-0.027529999613761902,
0.1665361374616623,
0.18092156946659088,
-0.08209341764450073,
-0.20041027665138245,
0.704772472381... | 10 | The first news of a massacre at Katyn Wood came in April 1943 when the Germans found a mass grave of 4,500 Polish soldiers in German-occupied Russia. The discovery at Katyn Wood was to greatly embarrass the Russian government.
The Russians responded to the German claims that Russia’s secret police did it, by claiming that the massacre was carried out by the Germans themselves. In the context of the war – the Allies were fighting the Nazi war machine and Russia was a valued ally – the German version was not accepted by the British or other Allied governments. However, in the era of the Cold War, the Russian version was heavily scrutinised and questionned.
The first announcement of what had been found at Katyn Wood was made on Radio Berlin on April 13th, 1943.
|“A report has reached us from Smolensk to the effect that the local inhabitants have mentioned to the German authorities the existence of a place where mass executions have been carried out by the Bolsheviks and where 10,000 Polish officers have been murdered by the Soviet Secret State Police. The German authorities went to a place called the Hill of Goats, a Russian health resort situated twelve kilometers west of Smolensk, where a gruesome discovery was made.”Radio Berlin broadcast|
The Germans claimed that they found a ditch 28 meters long and 16 meters wide at the Hill of Goats in which were 3,000 bodies piled up in layers of twelve. All the bodies were fully dressed in military uniform; some were bound and all had pistol shots to the back of their heads. The Germans believed that they would find 10,000 bodies (hence the figure in the broadcast) but eventually the final total was 4,500. The Germans claimed that the bodies were in good condition and they even recognised a general Smorawinsky as one of the victims. The soil had done a great deal to preserve the bodies and any documentation found on them.
However, any information relating to this massacre made public during the war came from Goebbel’s propaganda ministry and had to be treated as suspect by the Allies. In January 1943, the Russians had turned the tide of the war with the defeat of the Germans at Stalingrad – a victory Churchill had urged all on the Allied side to celebrate. As if in a knee-jerk reaction, any criticism about the Russians in Easter 1943 would not have been acceptable. Any connection between the massacre and the Germans, however, would have been more readily accepted by all those fighting against the Nazis.
But what exactly did happen at Katyn Wood?
When German forces attacked Poland in September 1939, the Blitzkrieg tactic tore great holes in the Polish defence. However, on September 17th, as part of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, Russian forces also invaded Poland. The Russian leadership called on the Polish soldiers to rise up against their officers and political leaders as a punishment for getting the country into an unjust war. Those Polish officers and senior NCO’s captured by the Red Army were arrested and deported to Russia.
It is known that they were taken to three camps in Russia – Kozelsk, Starobelsk and Ostashkov. One of the camps, Kozelsk, contained more than just officers. It contained arrested Polish university lecturers, surgeons, physicians, barristers and lawyers. One woman prisoner was held at Kozelsk – Janina Lewandowski. Her body was found at Katyn clothed in the uniform of the Polish Air Force. Ostashkov held officers – but it also held anybody from Poland who was considered to be ‘bourgeois’. It seems that only Starobelsk held only officers from the Polish military.
To start with, the Russians attempted to ‘re-educate’ the Poles in all three camps. Brigadier Zarubin of the Soviet Secret State Police was put in charge of this task. His efforts to promote the Soviet way of life probably had no chance. The Poles in the camp were forbidden to say Mass – which for a devout Roman Catholic nation was a major blow and it was almost certainly done secretly. Therefore, it is untenable to think that there were any takers for the Soviet view point which Zarubin was trying to sell. It seems that Zarubin reported his failure to Moscow and shortly after this a colonel from the Soviet Secret State Police turned up at all three camps. Just after the visit of this colonel, groups of prisoners were taken from the camps to an unknown destination.
In April 1940, all three camps were simultaneously cleared.
On June 22nd, 1941, Nazi Germany launched ‘Operation Barbarossa‘. The German military swept aside the Russian army and penetrated deep into Russia. Stalin, alarmed by the collapse of the Red Army, ordered that an amnesty should be granted to all Polish prisoners who were willing to fight against the Germans. On August 14th 1941, a Polish-Soviet military agreement was signed. However, no-one could account for the whereabouts of the officers held in Kozelsk, Starobelsk and Ostashkov. Winston Churchill himself wrote about the embarrassment such a disclosure brought on the Russian authorities.
The Polish government in exile, based in London, was especially concerned that the Russians explain where these men were. Stalin gave two answers. Initially, he claimed that the men had escaped to Manchuria. However, the authorities in Moscow – which was effectively Stalin – claimed that the men were held in territory that the Germans had taken in their lightning attack in June 1941 and that only the Germans could account for their whereabouts. This was to become the standard Moscow answer to the problem – the Germans were responsible.
Locals at Katyn Forest had long known that it was an area used by the secret police to execute those who had fallen out with Stalin’s government. As early as 1929, the Soviet secret police had built a dacha there surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards. To keep out the locals, the secret police also used guard dogs to patrol the perimeter of the dacha.
On July 16th, 1941, Smolensk fell to the Germans. The Russian authorities had fled from Katyn and for the first time in years, the area was open ‘to the public’. In 1942, Poles from the Todt Organisation arrived in the area to collect any form of scrap. As they worked on the Hill of Goats, they found the body of a dead Polish officer who was later buried in a dignified service. However, the winter for 1942-43 was severe and the ground at the Hill of Goats was frozen over.
In the Spring of 1943, a Russian peasant, Ivan Krivozertzev, read an article in a newspaper (‘Novyj Put’) regarding General Sikorski and his search for thousands of Polish officers whom he could not account for. Despite communism in Russia, Krivozertzev had maintained his religious beliefs and re-called what he had seen in Smolensk in 1940.
He had seen rail wagons coming into Smolensk station but being shunted into screened sidings. He had seen men being herded under armed guard into ‘Black Ravens’ – the local nickname for prison vehicles. Krivozertzev had also seen ‘normal’ prisoners being driven from Smolensk city in lorries with shovels and pick axes. Krivozertzev went to the Germans and told them that he believed the Polish officers would be found at the Hill of Goats. The Germans went to the forest and dug up mounds that had young fir trees on the top of them. These trees gave away an obvious secret as the rings on them indicated that they had been planted in April 1940.
The Germans started digging in the Hill of Goats and found the bodies of many men, still in military uniform, who had been shot in the back of the head with their hands tied behind their backs. The Germans also found the bodies of Russian men and women who had been shot long before 1940. Curiously, the Germans claimed that the way the Russians and Poles had been tied was identical and that whoever did both sets of murders was the same organisation. The 4,500 bodies that were exhumed came from Kozelsk – no-one knows what happened to the men held at Starobelsk and Ostashkov. Moscow announced its stance on April 14th 1943:
|“The Polish prisoners in question were interned in the vicinity of Smolensk in special camps and were employed in road construction. In was impossible to evacuate them at the time of the approach of the German troops and, as a result, they fell into their hands. If, therefore, they have been found murdered, it means that they have been murdered by the Germans who, for reasons of provocation, now claim that the crime was committed by Soviet authorities.”|
On April 15th, the British government publically stated via the BBC that the Germans had told lies and that it accepted the Russian version. This caused the Polish government in exile to call for an independent inspection of Katyn – something the International Red Cross in Switzerland could do. The German and Polish government (in exile) agreed to this; Moscow did not. The Russians broke off all relations with Poland and set up a puppet Polish government in Moscow.
When Russia advanced into Europe and re-captured Katyn, it seemed as if the issue was solved as it was clear that the Russians were not going to allow any investigation into what happened at Katyn. At the Nuremburg trials, the murders were linked to the indictment against Goering and the Russians presented their evidence to ‘prove’ it was the Germans, but they were never probed and Katyn drifted into obscurity. At the final judgment of the International Tribunal, Katyn was not even mentioned.
For their part the Russians claimed that the massacre took place after it became obvious that the Wehrmacht was in full retreat after their defeat at Stalingrad and that it was carried out by the Nazis. They put up the following evidence gathered at Nuremburg:
The Germans did not allow any external authority to fully examine either the bodies or the grave sites. The Polish Commission, set up by the Nazis to examine the evidence, was only allowed to see what the Germans wanted them to see. One Bulgarian professor, Marko Markov, claimed that he was only allowed to dissect one body that was presented to him and that he could not conclude from this body that it had been in the ground for three years – as the Nazis tried to suggest to him that it had been. In his written report, Markov only wrote about what he found on the body – he did not give a conclusion as to how the body got into its state.
He and seven other experts were only allowed two half-a-day visits to the grave sites by the Germans. “It reminded me of a tourist trip”, claimed Markov.
The Russians also claimed that the issue of the three year old saplings was also easy to explain. They claimed that there was no evidence that they came from the grave mounds themselves and that they could have been gathered at any point from Katyn Wood and handed in as ‘evidence’.
The Russians also claimed that all the bullets found on the bodies were made by the German firm Geko. It was claimed that they were all Geko 7.65 mm bullets which only the German would have had access to.
Who committed the murders remained a mystery until 1990 when the Russian authorities admitted that it was the Russian Secret police (NKVD), that then spent much time and effort in attaching blame on the Germans. | 2,481 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Throughout many times in history, nations have been challenged with the difficult decision of whether to engage in war with a foreign nation. Not only do these decisions affect the current citizens of the country, but they effect the future generations to come. It is not an easy decision to make.
Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "What Happened At Pearl Harbor?" essay for youCreate order
Many nations are often unsure and the decision is usually made too late. This often results in the expense of thousands of lives, shown through the devastation of Pearl Harbor. The United States entering the war prior to Pearl Harbor would have made Japan’s attack more difficult and weakened Japan’s opportunity to expand its empire.
Currently, the United States sees itself as a worldly powerhouse. The United States possess a strong economy, dominant democracy, and a powerful military. Despite having all of these great assests, the United States could have easily lost them, by avoiding the entrance of World War II any longer. The attacks on Pearl Harbor did result in the killing of thousands of people, but it did not destroy a large enough portion of the U.S. naval fleet to stifle the country. The rise and spread of dictator ships now had a direct threat on the United States. However, the United States could have completely avoided this situation by getting involved in the war earlier. If the United States had entered the war earlier, the troops would have already been positioned appropriately. Therefore, the military would not have been as caught off guard by the attacks at Pearl Harbor. Not only would a majority of the forces be deployed, but also the country would have already been adjusting itself to support the war effort at home and abroad. Factories would have been booming- creating weapons and ships at a faster rate. Japan would have had to approach their idea of attacking the United States a different way, because in this scenario the United States would have been more prepared for an attack. Due to the fact that the United States government was reluctant to enter World War II prior to Pearl Harbor, the military were unexpectedly attacked and put at a great disadvantage.
A result of the United States already being involved in the war prior to Pearl Harbor, the Japanese would not have had the momentum they did from the attacks, to fuel Japan’s dominance. The United States would have been in a stronger position to act as more of a force against Japan, thus possibly putting a halt to Japan’s dominance. Even if the United States were unable to put an immediate halt to the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, the U.S. military would have been ready to engage in war, rather than having to waste time preparing itself while Japan took over a majority of the Pacific islands. Not only would the military have had more of an advantage in the Pacific arena, but a decision would have not only saved some if not all of the 2,403 men and women who died during the Pearl Harbor attack, and the thousands of Pacific islanders who died during Japan’s expansion. Pearl Harbor could have been avoided if the United States entered the war before the attacks. This would have also prevented Japan’s pacific expansion.
The United States is a force to be reckoned with on many levels. However, Japan’s attacks at Pearl Harbor caught the United States off guard and not prepared. Entering World War II prior to the attacks at Pearl Harbor would have resulted in the U.S. army being better prepared. They would have been positioned in place, instead of the attacks on its homeland resulting its efforts being too late. The United States would have already been increasing war production to support the war effort, rather than having to rush production to try to catch up. Finally, the United States forces being mobilized would have resulted in the forces posing more of an immediate threat towards Japan’s efforts. The event of the attacks at Pearl Harbor should be used as a vehicle to discourage reluctance to act.
We will send an essay sample to you in 2 Hours. If you need help faster you can always use our custom writing service.Get help with my paper | <urn:uuid:964198ec-983c-4885-b736-ecb37bd2c658> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://studydriver.com/what-happened-at-pearl-harbor/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783000.84/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128184745-20200128214745-00480.warc.gz | en | 0.981779 | 837 | 3.84375 | 4 | [
-0.16464009881019592,
-0.026570361107587814,
0.27097052335739136,
-0.23207038640975952,
0.37169745564460754,
0.42954134941101074,
0.04207705706357956,
0.26622551679611206,
0.1551988124847412,
-0.0744018703699112,
0.3985033631324768,
0.3566158413887024,
0.16248703002929688,
0.43684041500091... | 1 | Throughout many times in history, nations have been challenged with the difficult decision of whether to engage in war with a foreign nation. Not only do these decisions affect the current citizens of the country, but they effect the future generations to come. It is not an easy decision to make.
Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "What Happened At Pearl Harbor?" essay for youCreate order
Many nations are often unsure and the decision is usually made too late. This often results in the expense of thousands of lives, shown through the devastation of Pearl Harbor. The United States entering the war prior to Pearl Harbor would have made Japan’s attack more difficult and weakened Japan’s opportunity to expand its empire.
Currently, the United States sees itself as a worldly powerhouse. The United States possess a strong economy, dominant democracy, and a powerful military. Despite having all of these great assests, the United States could have easily lost them, by avoiding the entrance of World War II any longer. The attacks on Pearl Harbor did result in the killing of thousands of people, but it did not destroy a large enough portion of the U.S. naval fleet to stifle the country. The rise and spread of dictator ships now had a direct threat on the United States. However, the United States could have completely avoided this situation by getting involved in the war earlier. If the United States had entered the war earlier, the troops would have already been positioned appropriately. Therefore, the military would not have been as caught off guard by the attacks at Pearl Harbor. Not only would a majority of the forces be deployed, but also the country would have already been adjusting itself to support the war effort at home and abroad. Factories would have been booming- creating weapons and ships at a faster rate. Japan would have had to approach their idea of attacking the United States a different way, because in this scenario the United States would have been more prepared for an attack. Due to the fact that the United States government was reluctant to enter World War II prior to Pearl Harbor, the military were unexpectedly attacked and put at a great disadvantage.
A result of the United States already being involved in the war prior to Pearl Harbor, the Japanese would not have had the momentum they did from the attacks, to fuel Japan’s dominance. The United States would have been in a stronger position to act as more of a force against Japan, thus possibly putting a halt to Japan’s dominance. Even if the United States were unable to put an immediate halt to the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, the U.S. military would have been ready to engage in war, rather than having to waste time preparing itself while Japan took over a majority of the Pacific islands. Not only would the military have had more of an advantage in the Pacific arena, but a decision would have not only saved some if not all of the 2,403 men and women who died during the Pearl Harbor attack, and the thousands of Pacific islanders who died during Japan’s expansion. Pearl Harbor could have been avoided if the United States entered the war before the attacks. This would have also prevented Japan’s pacific expansion.
The United States is a force to be reckoned with on many levels. However, Japan’s attacks at Pearl Harbor caught the United States off guard and not prepared. Entering World War II prior to the attacks at Pearl Harbor would have resulted in the U.S. army being better prepared. They would have been positioned in place, instead of the attacks on its homeland resulting its efforts being too late. The United States would have already been increasing war production to support the war effort, rather than having to rush production to try to catch up. Finally, the United States forces being mobilized would have resulted in the forces posing more of an immediate threat towards Japan’s efforts. The event of the attacks at Pearl Harbor should be used as a vehicle to discourage reluctance to act.
We will send an essay sample to you in 2 Hours. If you need help faster you can always use our custom writing service.Get help with my paper | 817 | ENGLISH | 1 |
As a nation, there is more that unifies us than that which divides us. A history of reconciliation remembered…
The history of the annual holiday of reconciliation celebrated on 16 December in South Africa dates back to the year 1995 – at the end of apartheid. The day was made as an effort to reconcile a nation, which had been cracked from the foundation up by apartheid and colonialism.
However, before 1994, 16 December was also a public holiday – but for a very different reason.
It was the day that the Afrikaners celebrated their victory over the Zulus in an 1864 battle called the Battle of Blood River. In this, more than 3000 Zulu soldiers were killed. The fighting lasted for hours. Zulu soldiers, armed with spears, fought against Afrikaners fighting in laager formation and armed with guns. This marked the end of the Zulu resistance to the Afrikaners who were taking control of KwaZulu-Natal land.
During apartheid times, the public holiday was known as the ‘Day of the Vow’ as Afrikaners believed the victory had been given to them by God.
It was also a significant date for the struggle against racial discrimination and apartheid. Many protests were held on the day – even as early as 1910.
On 16 December 1961, the military wing of the ANC, uMkhonto we Sizwe was founded. This was in response to the apartheid government’s violent crackdown on peaceful resistance that started at the massacre at Sharpeville. Here unarmed people, who were protesting against the pass laws, were shot by the apartheid police, and 69 people were killed. This led to protests all over the country, and it was Nelson Mandela, a leading figure of the ANC, who called for the establishment of uMkhonto we Sizwe – the military wing of the ANC.
It was perhaps appropriate that when South Africa became a democracy, the date of 16 December – previously commemoration of bloodshed and war – was transformed by President Nelson Mandela and his government of national unity to become a symbol for reconciliation and healing, and to serve as a reminder that there is more unifying us as a nation than dividing us.
Tell us: What are your thought on Day of Reconciliation | <urn:uuid:dbf207d5-c340-482e-ae99-8c612e5b7504> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://live.fundza.mobi/home/library/fiction-blogs/did-you-know/did-you-know-what-happened-at-blood-river/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694071.63/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126230255-20200127020255-00362.warc.gz | en | 0.990514 | 467 | 4.09375 | 4 | [
-0.4096318781375885,
0.8995347619056702,
0.21536493301391602,
0.19196908175945282,
-0.13778363168239594,
-0.09298653900623322,
0.18048010766506195,
-0.0490683987736702,
-0.0735156238079071,
0.4085931181907654,
0.564108669757843,
-0.4063786566257477,
-0.08739987015724182,
0.4328855276107788... | 8 | As a nation, there is more that unifies us than that which divides us. A history of reconciliation remembered…
The history of the annual holiday of reconciliation celebrated on 16 December in South Africa dates back to the year 1995 – at the end of apartheid. The day was made as an effort to reconcile a nation, which had been cracked from the foundation up by apartheid and colonialism.
However, before 1994, 16 December was also a public holiday – but for a very different reason.
It was the day that the Afrikaners celebrated their victory over the Zulus in an 1864 battle called the Battle of Blood River. In this, more than 3000 Zulu soldiers were killed. The fighting lasted for hours. Zulu soldiers, armed with spears, fought against Afrikaners fighting in laager formation and armed with guns. This marked the end of the Zulu resistance to the Afrikaners who were taking control of KwaZulu-Natal land.
During apartheid times, the public holiday was known as the ‘Day of the Vow’ as Afrikaners believed the victory had been given to them by God.
It was also a significant date for the struggle against racial discrimination and apartheid. Many protests were held on the day – even as early as 1910.
On 16 December 1961, the military wing of the ANC, uMkhonto we Sizwe was founded. This was in response to the apartheid government’s violent crackdown on peaceful resistance that started at the massacre at Sharpeville. Here unarmed people, who were protesting against the pass laws, were shot by the apartheid police, and 69 people were killed. This led to protests all over the country, and it was Nelson Mandela, a leading figure of the ANC, who called for the establishment of uMkhonto we Sizwe – the military wing of the ANC.
It was perhaps appropriate that when South Africa became a democracy, the date of 16 December – previously commemoration of bloodshed and war – was transformed by President Nelson Mandela and his government of national unity to become a symbol for reconciliation and healing, and to serve as a reminder that there is more unifying us as a nation than dividing us.
Tell us: What are your thought on Day of Reconciliation | 489 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The toilet, it goes without saying, is an absolute necessity and has changed sanitation in our day to day lives. In fact, it is arguably one of the most important inventions in human history. The toilet as we know it today had a very humble beginning. It certainly may not seem like it at first glance but the toilet has a fascinating history.
2,000 years ago, the Romans grasped the essentials of sanitation. They designed and built the famous viaducts and incredibly innovative draining systems that dramatically improved the state of sanitation in Rome. Supporting a population of 1 million, the Romans had to be sure their systems would be able to serve everyone effectively. Therefore, the first communal toilet was invented. These toilets were situated in long lines, some of which you can still view today, and human waste would drop into the drain below to be washed away by water. After using the toilet, the Romans would wash themselves with a sponge on a stick (hence the saying; don’t grab the wrong end of the stick). Clean water was very precious to the Romans so, instead of washing away their waste with clean water, they used their waste water from their baths to wash away their waste as clean water was so precious.
The Romans had a system of sewers, much like we have today. They built simple outhouses or latrines directly over the running waters of the sewers that poured into the Tiber River. The Romans quickly realised that flowing water greatly improved the disposal of human waste. As early civilisations matured, formal waste areas using flowing water became more available and helped dramatically in improving Man’s waste disposal problems in many ways, not the least of which helped reduce diseases.
The Middle Ages
You’d think that by the time the Middle Ages rolled around, toilets and plumbing systems would have improved dramatically. Unfortunately, you’d be wrong, things were far worse. Since the fall of the Roman Empire, the sewage system they had developed was not adopted across Europe. There are many theories for why this was. Some believe it was due to the paganism belief that water was a precious cleansing and purifying agent and, therefore, should not be used to wash away waste as this would contaminate it. Therefore, Britain headed straight back into the lavatorial dark ages. And for the next 1000 years, they simply went to the toilet wherever was convenient, whether that be in remote fields, chamber pots, or in the middle of the street.
The Industrial Revolution
During the British Industrial Revolution in the 18th and 19th centuries, thousands of people moved to towns and cities, increasing the need for more houses. As a result, many of the houses were extremely crowded with no room for an indoor toilet. ‘Back-to-back’ houses were very common and had no gaps between them. Several of these houses would share a small yard where there would be an outside toilet. Even into the 1950’s it was still common for people to have an outside toilet. The saying goes that the toilets were ‘too far away in the winter and too close in the summer’.
Sir John Harrington
Sir John Harrington (c.1560-1612) is credited with inventing the first modern indoor flushing mechanism. He perfected his flushing device but only made two of his design as it was expensive to produce. So, he made one flushing toilet for his own home and made one for his godmother, Queen Elizabeth I of England.
1858 ‘The Great Stink’
By the 1800s London City had reached its breaking point. All the waste from the city was being dumped continuously into the Thames and the smell had become so bad that the curtains of the Palace of Westminster had to be doused with chlorine just to mask the unpleasantness of the odour. As a result, fixing the problem had become a national priority. It was during this time that Joseph Bazalgetter famously started work on the engineering masterpiece that was the London Sewage System. If you want to learn more about this, be sure to check out our article on the history of the Victorian Sewerage System https://www.coastaldrains.co.uk/blog/history-brighton-sewage-system/
It was after a particularly hot summer in 1858, when rotting sewage resulted in ‘The Great Stink’, that the government commissioned the building of a system of sewers in London. Construction was completed in 1865. Consequently, deaths from cholera, typhoid and other waterborne diseases dropped spectacularly.
First Public Flush Toilets
George Jennings was an English sanitary engineer and plumber who invented the first public flush toilets. In 1851 the first public flushing toilet block opened in London and, due to its popularity, spread around the country. The cost of using these public toilets was 1 penny, hence the famous phrase ‘to spend a penny’. It remained this price for over 100 years.
Thomas Crapper is famously known for inventing the toilet. However, it wasn’t his invention. Crapper was just a wonderful marketing man with a whole lot of money. He entreated people to build toilets for him and then he would place his name on the system before he sold them on. Crapper was famous as a highly successful English plumber who specialised in providing up to date plumbing fixtures and he certainly knew his stuff! Thomas Crapper and his company installed and maintained modern plumbing systems such as flushing toilets, bathtubs, wash basins and modern piping. They also popularised the acceptance of the modern flushing toilet and, thus, his name became somewhat synonymous with the new flushing toilets.
The Modern Toilet
Although the modern flushing toilet has revolutionised and dramatically improved one of our simple yet critical needs, many in our modern world still do not have access to modern toilets. According to the Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000, by the World Health Organisation: 40% of the global population do not have access to “good excreta disposal facilities.” Unfortunately, disease associated with human waste contamination is still extremely rampant in many areas of the world. However, many governments and specialising professionals are fighting to ensure that, one day, everyone will have access to the modern toilet.
Was this article informative? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below! | <urn:uuid:a1e25ddb-7173-476b-9b24-5e9380658ea7> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.coastaldrains.co.uk/blog/fascinating-history-toilet/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00430.warc.gz | en | 0.980582 | 1,317 | 3.40625 | 3 | [
-0.1652653068304062,
0.064094677567482,
0.7939661741256714,
-0.07630285620689392,
-0.20768067240715027,
-0.22571058571338654,
0.18268947303295135,
0.31826573610305786,
0.16102159023284912,
0.10876215994358063,
-0.3256978690624237,
-0.4372994005680084,
0.06971950083971024,
-0.03723754733800... | 4 | The toilet, it goes without saying, is an absolute necessity and has changed sanitation in our day to day lives. In fact, it is arguably one of the most important inventions in human history. The toilet as we know it today had a very humble beginning. It certainly may not seem like it at first glance but the toilet has a fascinating history.
2,000 years ago, the Romans grasped the essentials of sanitation. They designed and built the famous viaducts and incredibly innovative draining systems that dramatically improved the state of sanitation in Rome. Supporting a population of 1 million, the Romans had to be sure their systems would be able to serve everyone effectively. Therefore, the first communal toilet was invented. These toilets were situated in long lines, some of which you can still view today, and human waste would drop into the drain below to be washed away by water. After using the toilet, the Romans would wash themselves with a sponge on a stick (hence the saying; don’t grab the wrong end of the stick). Clean water was very precious to the Romans so, instead of washing away their waste with clean water, they used their waste water from their baths to wash away their waste as clean water was so precious.
The Romans had a system of sewers, much like we have today. They built simple outhouses or latrines directly over the running waters of the sewers that poured into the Tiber River. The Romans quickly realised that flowing water greatly improved the disposal of human waste. As early civilisations matured, formal waste areas using flowing water became more available and helped dramatically in improving Man’s waste disposal problems in many ways, not the least of which helped reduce diseases.
The Middle Ages
You’d think that by the time the Middle Ages rolled around, toilets and plumbing systems would have improved dramatically. Unfortunately, you’d be wrong, things were far worse. Since the fall of the Roman Empire, the sewage system they had developed was not adopted across Europe. There are many theories for why this was. Some believe it was due to the paganism belief that water was a precious cleansing and purifying agent and, therefore, should not be used to wash away waste as this would contaminate it. Therefore, Britain headed straight back into the lavatorial dark ages. And for the next 1000 years, they simply went to the toilet wherever was convenient, whether that be in remote fields, chamber pots, or in the middle of the street.
The Industrial Revolution
During the British Industrial Revolution in the 18th and 19th centuries, thousands of people moved to towns and cities, increasing the need for more houses. As a result, many of the houses were extremely crowded with no room for an indoor toilet. ‘Back-to-back’ houses were very common and had no gaps between them. Several of these houses would share a small yard where there would be an outside toilet. Even into the 1950’s it was still common for people to have an outside toilet. The saying goes that the toilets were ‘too far away in the winter and too close in the summer’.
Sir John Harrington
Sir John Harrington (c.1560-1612) is credited with inventing the first modern indoor flushing mechanism. He perfected his flushing device but only made two of his design as it was expensive to produce. So, he made one flushing toilet for his own home and made one for his godmother, Queen Elizabeth I of England.
1858 ‘The Great Stink’
By the 1800s London City had reached its breaking point. All the waste from the city was being dumped continuously into the Thames and the smell had become so bad that the curtains of the Palace of Westminster had to be doused with chlorine just to mask the unpleasantness of the odour. As a result, fixing the problem had become a national priority. It was during this time that Joseph Bazalgetter famously started work on the engineering masterpiece that was the London Sewage System. If you want to learn more about this, be sure to check out our article on the history of the Victorian Sewerage System https://www.coastaldrains.co.uk/blog/history-brighton-sewage-system/
It was after a particularly hot summer in 1858, when rotting sewage resulted in ‘The Great Stink’, that the government commissioned the building of a system of sewers in London. Construction was completed in 1865. Consequently, deaths from cholera, typhoid and other waterborne diseases dropped spectacularly.
First Public Flush Toilets
George Jennings was an English sanitary engineer and plumber who invented the first public flush toilets. In 1851 the first public flushing toilet block opened in London and, due to its popularity, spread around the country. The cost of using these public toilets was 1 penny, hence the famous phrase ‘to spend a penny’. It remained this price for over 100 years.
Thomas Crapper is famously known for inventing the toilet. However, it wasn’t his invention. Crapper was just a wonderful marketing man with a whole lot of money. He entreated people to build toilets for him and then he would place his name on the system before he sold them on. Crapper was famous as a highly successful English plumber who specialised in providing up to date plumbing fixtures and he certainly knew his stuff! Thomas Crapper and his company installed and maintained modern plumbing systems such as flushing toilets, bathtubs, wash basins and modern piping. They also popularised the acceptance of the modern flushing toilet and, thus, his name became somewhat synonymous with the new flushing toilets.
The Modern Toilet
Although the modern flushing toilet has revolutionised and dramatically improved one of our simple yet critical needs, many in our modern world still do not have access to modern toilets. According to the Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000, by the World Health Organisation: 40% of the global population do not have access to “good excreta disposal facilities.” Unfortunately, disease associated with human waste contamination is still extremely rampant in many areas of the world. However, many governments and specialising professionals are fighting to ensure that, one day, everyone will have access to the modern toilet.
Was this article informative? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below! | 1,308 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Boys born small may be at risk for infertility in adulthood.
Danish researchers examined birth and health records of 10,936 men and women born between 1984 and 1987. The study, in Human Reproduction, found that 10 percent of the babies were born small for gestational age. The health and behavioral characteristics of the mothers of low-birth-weight babies were similar to those of mothers of babies of normal weight, although they were more likely to be first-time mothers and to smoke and consume alcohol.
After controlling for these factors, plus socioeconomic status and pre-pregnancy body mass index, the scientists found that male babies who were born small were 55 percent more likely than their normal weight peers to be infertile as adults. They defined infertility as having sought fertility treatment between their 18th birthdays and the end of 2017, when the men would have been in their early 30s.
Some of the men were born with genital malformations, and when they eliminated those babies, the men born small were 37 percent more likely to be infertile, though that association did not reach statistical significance.
In women, there was no link between birth weight and infertility.
The mechanisms underlying the association remain unknown, said the lead author, Anne Thorsted, a researcher at Aarhus University in Denmark when the study was done. “It’s important to say that not all men born small for gestational age are at increased risk. We must therefore become clearer about what characterizes those men who do experience infertility.” | <urn:uuid:fee2633d-b904-4c47-8416-acb863fe3d08> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/well/live/babies-boys-birth-weight-small-infertility-girls-pregnancy.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00542.warc.gz | en | 0.988407 | 316 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
0.3923804759979248,
0.4122749865055084,
-0.07563626766204834,
-0.1650136113166809,
-0.17877209186553955,
0.4977872371673584,
-0.052963752299547195,
0.2641463875770569,
0.006307600531727076,
0.0008524802979081869,
0.09821700304746628,
-0.38310158252716064,
0.3617836534976959,
0.467549651861... | 2 | Boys born small may be at risk for infertility in adulthood.
Danish researchers examined birth and health records of 10,936 men and women born between 1984 and 1987. The study, in Human Reproduction, found that 10 percent of the babies were born small for gestational age. The health and behavioral characteristics of the mothers of low-birth-weight babies were similar to those of mothers of babies of normal weight, although they were more likely to be first-time mothers and to smoke and consume alcohol.
After controlling for these factors, plus socioeconomic status and pre-pregnancy body mass index, the scientists found that male babies who were born small were 55 percent more likely than their normal weight peers to be infertile as adults. They defined infertility as having sought fertility treatment between their 18th birthdays and the end of 2017, when the men would have been in their early 30s.
Some of the men were born with genital malformations, and when they eliminated those babies, the men born small were 37 percent more likely to be infertile, though that association did not reach statistical significance.
In women, there was no link between birth weight and infertility.
The mechanisms underlying the association remain unknown, said the lead author, Anne Thorsted, a researcher at Aarhus University in Denmark when the study was done. “It’s important to say that not all men born small for gestational age are at increased risk. We must therefore become clearer about what characterizes those men who do experience infertility.” | 327 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Sigmund Freud was born in Freiberg, Moravia in 1856. Freud was a distinguished child. He attended medical school in Vienna; from there he became actively embraced in research under the direction of a physiology. He was engrossed in neurophysiology and hoped for a position in that field but unfortunately there were not enough positions available. From there, he spent some of his years as a resident in neurology and director of a children’s ward in Berlin. Later on, he returned to Vienna and married his fiancée, Martha Bernays. He continued his practice of neuropsychiatry in Vienna with Joseph Breuer as his assistant. Freud achieved fame by his books and lectures; which brought him “both fame and ostracism from mainstream of the medical community” (Boeree 2009). In proceeding of World War II, Freud moved to England; luckily he escaped just in time because Vienna became a perilous place for Jews. For those Jews who were famous, it became especially dangerous for them. Freud was one of the famous Jews, and luckily he escaped in time. Freud died of mouth and jaw cancer that he suffered from for the last twenty years of his life (Boeree 2011).
Sigmund Freud, the father of psychology was notorious for his uncanny knack of dissecting the human mind and developing theories that we later use today as a measuring stick to reveal what a person’s true motives are. He was well known for his dream theory (Oliveira 2011). He believed that our dreams consisted of fears, desires and emotions that we are usually unaware of when we are conscious. Freud shed light on negative dreams as a form of “wish fulfillment”. Wish fulfillment is when primary motivations for dreams in which develops an unconscious desire or urge, unacceptable to the ego and superego because of sociological restrictions or feelings of personal guilt (Oliveira 2011).
The Ego is the balance between the Id and Superego while the Id and Superego accounts for their own motives. Freud believed that although our dreams contain these important messages, they are disguised when we are conscious. The unconscious mind doesn't link to our daily thoughts and feelings so therefore it must communicate with us when we are unconscious (Mendham, 2003).
The whole idea of the Oedipus complex is that
“ The young male, the Oedipus conflict stems from his natural love for his mother, a love which becomes sexual as his libidal energy transfers from the anal region to his genitals. Unfortunately for the boy, his father stands in the way of this love. The boy therefore feels aggression and envy towards this rival, his father, and also feels fear that the father will strike back at him. As the boy has noticed that women, his mother in particular, have no penises, he is struck by a great fear that his father will remove his penis, too. The anxiety is aggravated by the threats and discipline he incurs when caught masturbating by his parents. This castration anxiety outstrips his desire for his mother, so he... | <urn:uuid:4683b143-11b9-44c3-8c1d-7439a66301b3> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://brightkite.com/essay-on/freud-s-impact-in-the-field-of-psychology | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251802249.87/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129194333-20200129223333-00131.warc.gz | en | 0.98574 | 636 | 3.78125 | 4 | [
0.14435535669326782,
0.7427420616149902,
0.03349044919013977,
0.047875359654426575,
-0.04387546330690384,
0.5049057006835938,
0.5061681270599365,
0.17843562364578247,
0.47477179765701294,
-0.3301684260368347,
0.15043197572231293,
-0.6471661329269409,
-0.2646404504776001,
0.4631370306015014... | 1 | Sigmund Freud was born in Freiberg, Moravia in 1856. Freud was a distinguished child. He attended medical school in Vienna; from there he became actively embraced in research under the direction of a physiology. He was engrossed in neurophysiology and hoped for a position in that field but unfortunately there were not enough positions available. From there, he spent some of his years as a resident in neurology and director of a children’s ward in Berlin. Later on, he returned to Vienna and married his fiancée, Martha Bernays. He continued his practice of neuropsychiatry in Vienna with Joseph Breuer as his assistant. Freud achieved fame by his books and lectures; which brought him “both fame and ostracism from mainstream of the medical community” (Boeree 2009). In proceeding of World War II, Freud moved to England; luckily he escaped just in time because Vienna became a perilous place for Jews. For those Jews who were famous, it became especially dangerous for them. Freud was one of the famous Jews, and luckily he escaped in time. Freud died of mouth and jaw cancer that he suffered from for the last twenty years of his life (Boeree 2011).
Sigmund Freud, the father of psychology was notorious for his uncanny knack of dissecting the human mind and developing theories that we later use today as a measuring stick to reveal what a person’s true motives are. He was well known for his dream theory (Oliveira 2011). He believed that our dreams consisted of fears, desires and emotions that we are usually unaware of when we are conscious. Freud shed light on negative dreams as a form of “wish fulfillment”. Wish fulfillment is when primary motivations for dreams in which develops an unconscious desire or urge, unacceptable to the ego and superego because of sociological restrictions or feelings of personal guilt (Oliveira 2011).
The Ego is the balance between the Id and Superego while the Id and Superego accounts for their own motives. Freud believed that although our dreams contain these important messages, they are disguised when we are conscious. The unconscious mind doesn't link to our daily thoughts and feelings so therefore it must communicate with us when we are unconscious (Mendham, 2003).
The whole idea of the Oedipus complex is that
“ The young male, the Oedipus conflict stems from his natural love for his mother, a love which becomes sexual as his libidal energy transfers from the anal region to his genitals. Unfortunately for the boy, his father stands in the way of this love. The boy therefore feels aggression and envy towards this rival, his father, and also feels fear that the father will strike back at him. As the boy has noticed that women, his mother in particular, have no penises, he is struck by a great fear that his father will remove his penis, too. The anxiety is aggravated by the threats and discipline he incurs when caught masturbating by his parents. This castration anxiety outstrips his desire for his mother, so he... | 643 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The early Middle Ages were characterized by art of the Dark Ages and the time preceding them. This art, the Byzantium style, had developed in the Roman Empire prior to its fall. Artists were typically monks in monasteries, and the paintings themselves featured religious imagery in a flat tone with no perspective or sense of dimension. Colors were muted and individuals were portrayed face front, often with long and somber faces.
As the Middle Ages progressed, painting styles began to evolve. The medieval ages brought about the birth of the Gothic and Realism styles, both of which were necessary predecessors to the eventual Renaissance period. Numerous painters in the Middle Ages worked to bring about changes in the current painting style, creating pieces still shown today that were critical to the continued development and evolution of painting.
Painters trended away from the darker and more religious tones of Byzantine art during the Early Middle Ages. Gothic paintings from the Middle Ages featured brighter colors, heightened realism and naturalism, and a move toward improved painting technique that included shadows and light, perspective, and dimensions. Gothic art also featured a change in the subject matter of the works themselves. Paintings could be focused on pastoral scenes, mythology, or animals rather than strictly based in religion.
Naturalism and realism came into play as more paintings were developed by true artists rather than simply by monks in solitude. Painting as a form of personal and individual expression began to be more readily explored, and those who dedicated their lives and talents to painting developed skills previously unknown as far as depicting spatial elements, casting shadows, and playing with light in paintings. These advances were absolutely critical to the continued development of painting as an art form and the eventual Renaissance that marked the end of the Middle Ages.
Groundbreaking Painters of Medieval Times
Giotto di Bondone was born in Italy in 1266 to a land farmer. He apprenticed under another well-regarded painter of the time, Cimabue, before achieving renown in his own right later in his career. Giotto’s works marked a unique period in painting history, combining the religious imagery that was such standard subject matter for so long with advanced techniques of light and realism.
One of Giotto’s most famous works, The Last Supper, depicts the scene of Jesus and his Apostles seated at the last supper in the linear, iconographic fashion of the time. While Giotto maintained focus on religious icons in his work, he combined the subject matter with the more recent techniques marking the Gothic style, including brighter colors and the use of light, to create more accessible and enjoyable works that were brighter and more natural-looking than those of the past.
Filippo Brunelleschi was born in Florence, Italy in 1377. He trained as a goldsmith and a sculptor, and later became a painter and architect as well. Brunelleschi pioneered a unique and wholly new style of architecture with his usage of geometric designs and symmetry. Most importantly, as a painter, his unusual and individualistic vision and approach created the elements of perspective used in paintings to this day. His eye for shapes and ability to translate reality to a canvas was fully new and imitated by artists both contemporary and following his career.
Leon Battista Alberti, arguably the first “Renaissance Man,” continued the legacy left by Brunelleschi in his own art and architectural work. Born in 1404, he was well educated, and studied painting extensively as a basis for his eventual focus on architecture. Like Brunelleschi, his dual studies in painting and architecture informed and assisted one another.
Alberti continued work with spatial techniques, dimension, and light and shadows begun by his predecessors. His architectural work allowed him a unique perspective he was able to bring to the canvas, and his work on canvas allowed him to more easily visualize architectural components and how they could be structured.
Unfortunately, many of the more significant paintings from the Middle Ages have been lost. Frescos painted within cathedrals often marked the most well-known and influential works of the time. As cathedrals were destroyed or suffered the ravages of time, their frescoes were destroyed with them.
Paintings on canvas remained less common, as painters were craftsmen commissioned for works. The works for which they were frequently commissioned were large-scale murals and frescoes rather than smaller, individual pieces. Giotto’s work, including The Last Supper, remains widely regarded as well-executed and important works of the time.
While paintings from the Middle Ages are less commonly referenced, art in many other forms remains throughout the world. Architecture experienced a particular boom during this period, and the Gothic influences in this art remain in use today. They can be seen in castles, buildings, and cathedrals built during this time throughout Europe. Additionally, artists like Donatello worked primarily in sculpture during the Middle Ages, creating unique and revolutionary works that remain on display worldwide today.
Siena Cathedral in Siena, Italy, is in itself a masterpiece of Middle Ages art. In addition to the cathedral’s classical Gothic architecture, it is home to some of the greatest art of the late Middle Ages and early Renaissance in the world, including sculpture by Donatello and early painting by a young, as yet un-established Michaelangelo.
Duccio di Buoninsegna, himself a lifelong resident of Siena, created his masterwork within Siena Cathedral with his altarpiece, the Maestá. Duccio’s work features religious imagery, as was the tradition of the time, merging the Byzantine monks’ signature iconographic style with more modern concepts of light, shading, and perspective. The altarpiece at Siena marks a clear transitional period between older styles of painting and the newer styles that would continue to grow in popularity and improve in technique as the Middle Ages ended and the Renaissance began.
Today, Siena Cathedral remains a rich source of art history, museum-caliber in its importance in history and art. The skill and technique used in the building of the cathedral itself and displayed in the works of art it houses are a stunning example of the artistry, skill, and talent that grew exponentially during the Middle Ages. | <urn:uuid:7a341014-bde2-4c95-943f-e4d5c1c494cf> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.thefinertimes.com/Middle-Ages/paintings-from-the-middle-ages.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614086.44/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123221108-20200124010108-00327.warc.gz | en | 0.980507 | 1,284 | 4.03125 | 4 | [
-0.19243744015693665,
0.21813327074050903,
0.23191390931606293,
0.12449534237384796,
0.04456869512796402,
0.22021344304084778,
-0.4095636308193207,
-0.215696319937706,
0.07294563949108124,
-0.23679497838020325,
-0.22842252254486084,
0.18397881090641022,
0.08592885732650757,
0.2583715617656... | 14 | The early Middle Ages were characterized by art of the Dark Ages and the time preceding them. This art, the Byzantium style, had developed in the Roman Empire prior to its fall. Artists were typically monks in monasteries, and the paintings themselves featured religious imagery in a flat tone with no perspective or sense of dimension. Colors were muted and individuals were portrayed face front, often with long and somber faces.
As the Middle Ages progressed, painting styles began to evolve. The medieval ages brought about the birth of the Gothic and Realism styles, both of which were necessary predecessors to the eventual Renaissance period. Numerous painters in the Middle Ages worked to bring about changes in the current painting style, creating pieces still shown today that were critical to the continued development and evolution of painting.
Painters trended away from the darker and more religious tones of Byzantine art during the Early Middle Ages. Gothic paintings from the Middle Ages featured brighter colors, heightened realism and naturalism, and a move toward improved painting technique that included shadows and light, perspective, and dimensions. Gothic art also featured a change in the subject matter of the works themselves. Paintings could be focused on pastoral scenes, mythology, or animals rather than strictly based in religion.
Naturalism and realism came into play as more paintings were developed by true artists rather than simply by monks in solitude. Painting as a form of personal and individual expression began to be more readily explored, and those who dedicated their lives and talents to painting developed skills previously unknown as far as depicting spatial elements, casting shadows, and playing with light in paintings. These advances were absolutely critical to the continued development of painting as an art form and the eventual Renaissance that marked the end of the Middle Ages.
Groundbreaking Painters of Medieval Times
Giotto di Bondone was born in Italy in 1266 to a land farmer. He apprenticed under another well-regarded painter of the time, Cimabue, before achieving renown in his own right later in his career. Giotto’s works marked a unique period in painting history, combining the religious imagery that was such standard subject matter for so long with advanced techniques of light and realism.
One of Giotto’s most famous works, The Last Supper, depicts the scene of Jesus and his Apostles seated at the last supper in the linear, iconographic fashion of the time. While Giotto maintained focus on religious icons in his work, he combined the subject matter with the more recent techniques marking the Gothic style, including brighter colors and the use of light, to create more accessible and enjoyable works that were brighter and more natural-looking than those of the past.
Filippo Brunelleschi was born in Florence, Italy in 1377. He trained as a goldsmith and a sculptor, and later became a painter and architect as well. Brunelleschi pioneered a unique and wholly new style of architecture with his usage of geometric designs and symmetry. Most importantly, as a painter, his unusual and individualistic vision and approach created the elements of perspective used in paintings to this day. His eye for shapes and ability to translate reality to a canvas was fully new and imitated by artists both contemporary and following his career.
Leon Battista Alberti, arguably the first “Renaissance Man,” continued the legacy left by Brunelleschi in his own art and architectural work. Born in 1404, he was well educated, and studied painting extensively as a basis for his eventual focus on architecture. Like Brunelleschi, his dual studies in painting and architecture informed and assisted one another.
Alberti continued work with spatial techniques, dimension, and light and shadows begun by his predecessors. His architectural work allowed him a unique perspective he was able to bring to the canvas, and his work on canvas allowed him to more easily visualize architectural components and how they could be structured.
Unfortunately, many of the more significant paintings from the Middle Ages have been lost. Frescos painted within cathedrals often marked the most well-known and influential works of the time. As cathedrals were destroyed or suffered the ravages of time, their frescoes were destroyed with them.
Paintings on canvas remained less common, as painters were craftsmen commissioned for works. The works for which they were frequently commissioned were large-scale murals and frescoes rather than smaller, individual pieces. Giotto’s work, including The Last Supper, remains widely regarded as well-executed and important works of the time.
While paintings from the Middle Ages are less commonly referenced, art in many other forms remains throughout the world. Architecture experienced a particular boom during this period, and the Gothic influences in this art remain in use today. They can be seen in castles, buildings, and cathedrals built during this time throughout Europe. Additionally, artists like Donatello worked primarily in sculpture during the Middle Ages, creating unique and revolutionary works that remain on display worldwide today.
Siena Cathedral in Siena, Italy, is in itself a masterpiece of Middle Ages art. In addition to the cathedral’s classical Gothic architecture, it is home to some of the greatest art of the late Middle Ages and early Renaissance in the world, including sculpture by Donatello and early painting by a young, as yet un-established Michaelangelo.
Duccio di Buoninsegna, himself a lifelong resident of Siena, created his masterwork within Siena Cathedral with his altarpiece, the Maestá. Duccio’s work features religious imagery, as was the tradition of the time, merging the Byzantine monks’ signature iconographic style with more modern concepts of light, shading, and perspective. The altarpiece at Siena marks a clear transitional period between older styles of painting and the newer styles that would continue to grow in popularity and improve in technique as the Middle Ages ended and the Renaissance began.
Today, Siena Cathedral remains a rich source of art history, museum-caliber in its importance in history and art. The skill and technique used in the building of the cathedral itself and displayed in the works of art it houses are a stunning example of the artistry, skill, and talent that grew exponentially during the Middle Ages. | 1,253 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The History of Scrubs
The idea of a unified medical uniform for nurses and doctors came into play during World War 1. Despite a surge in the number of nurses that answered the call of duty, there were many fatalities of both nurses and patients because the nurses were not defended from infection and illness. This led to the idea of a dedicated uniform nurses could wear to the hospital, that would help keep them and their patients safe.
When the second great war came around, the uniform was used with better success, and it soon became adopted in mainstream healthcare for surgeries. Officially, the medical uniform was nothing more than a long gown that nurses wore when they did surgeries. While it did keep people safe and sanitized, it also made it so the nurses had to manage the gown while they were rushing from patient to patient.
Imagine moving in a crowded room in your favorite dress or a shirt that’s a few sizes to big and you’ll see the problems early nurses faced. However, the gown soon evolved into a shirt and pants that nurses could get around in, while it still provided the same protection and gave them the working uniform that they needed in the hospital.
Now high end scrubs come in many different colors and styles, allowing for nurses of both genders to customize their appearance. The scrubs also make it very easy to spot a nurse in the crowded hallways of the hospital, and get their attention if you need help. The invention of scrubs and their purpose (to keep people safe from infection) also led to the invention of latex gloves and rubber masks, so the entire nurse’s uniform was covered.
With scrubs, the patient and the nurse are both kept safe, and the nurse can do their job much more effectively. That’s good for everyone all around! | <urn:uuid:73c62983-35ef-4034-affe-4764b3ac409e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.monsterarts.net/the-history-of-scrubs/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607314.32/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122161553-20200122190553-00280.warc.gz | en | 0.988863 | 370 | 3.546875 | 4 | [
-0.7466951608657837,
0.32176750898361206,
0.24877630174160004,
-0.477803498506546,
-0.07274007797241211,
0.4740909934043884,
0.5924448370933533,
0.44657692313194275,
0.07820417732000351,
-0.15524277091026306,
-0.22654487192630768,
0.27778878808021545,
0.07569842040538788,
0.166611775755882... | 2 | The History of Scrubs
The idea of a unified medical uniform for nurses and doctors came into play during World War 1. Despite a surge in the number of nurses that answered the call of duty, there were many fatalities of both nurses and patients because the nurses were not defended from infection and illness. This led to the idea of a dedicated uniform nurses could wear to the hospital, that would help keep them and their patients safe.
When the second great war came around, the uniform was used with better success, and it soon became adopted in mainstream healthcare for surgeries. Officially, the medical uniform was nothing more than a long gown that nurses wore when they did surgeries. While it did keep people safe and sanitized, it also made it so the nurses had to manage the gown while they were rushing from patient to patient.
Imagine moving in a crowded room in your favorite dress or a shirt that’s a few sizes to big and you’ll see the problems early nurses faced. However, the gown soon evolved into a shirt and pants that nurses could get around in, while it still provided the same protection and gave them the working uniform that they needed in the hospital.
Now high end scrubs come in many different colors and styles, allowing for nurses of both genders to customize their appearance. The scrubs also make it very easy to spot a nurse in the crowded hallways of the hospital, and get their attention if you need help. The invention of scrubs and their purpose (to keep people safe from infection) also led to the invention of latex gloves and rubber masks, so the entire nurse’s uniform was covered.
With scrubs, the patient and the nurse are both kept safe, and the nurse can do their job much more effectively. That’s good for everyone all around! | 357 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Liquid error: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
Castle Park (25 hectares-60 acres), situated in the grounds of Colchester Castle and the Hollytrees Mansion, is divided into an upper and lower park by the Roman town wall of Colchester. The Upper Park consists mainly of formal gardens while the lower park has a more natural feel - situated on the banks of the River Colne.
Being originally a defensive structure, the Castle and park is built on a hill overlooking the River Colne. The park is registered as Grade II on the English Heritage Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest. The whole of the upper park is a scheduled Ancient Monument and contains 7 listed buildings.
Over 2,000 years ago (AD43) the Romans invaded Britain and established their first capital and first town on the site of Colchester Town Centre - it was called Colonia Victricensis (City of Victory).
They were the first to landscape the park, when they levelled the area in about AD54 for their Temple, dedicated to the Emperor Claudius.
The Romans treated the Britons very badly when they first arrived and not surprisingly in AD 60 Boudica and her Iceni tribe rose in open revolt against the Romans and destroyed the town.
Many of the town's inhabitants fled to the temple and barricaded themselves inside - they were hoping for relief from a Roman Army fighting in the west. The army never arrived and after two days the temple was burnt to the ground and all the inhabitants were killed.
The Romans later rebuilt the temple and their town. This time they added a defensive wall - parts of this wall can be seen in the park.
The next important date in the park's history is 1066. Shortly afterwards the Normans decided to build a Castle here to defend the eastern approaches to London. Building materials were scarce and so they built the castle on the base of the Roman temple using rubble from the Roman town.
The Castle was built by Eudo Dapifer, High Steward to William the Conqueror, to a design by the Bishop of Rochester - the same man who later designed the Tower of London - both buildings are of a similar design.
The Castle only saw action on one occasion in 1215 when King John laid siege to the Castle, removing a French force that had occupied the Castle in support of the Barons.
By the 15th Century the Castle had become a prison, which had a bloody reputation. During the reign of Bloody Queen Mary and Elizabeth I, 23 religious martyrs were burnt at the stake - many of these people were executed at the front of the Castle.
In the early part of the 17th century, the prison was used by Mathew Hopkins, Witchfinder General, to interrogate witches - A sign of a true witch was a part of the body where the witch showed no pain (Witches Mark) One of his techniques was prick the witch with a pin all over her body - when the witch did not scream he had found her mark.
During the Civil War in 1648, the town was under siege for 11 weeks - at the end of this siege two royalist leaders (Lucas and Lisle) were held in the prison and later executed in the park grounds - the spot of their execution can still be seen today and it is claimed that where the blood of the two officers was spilt - the grass will never grow again.
That completes the history of the park to the 17th century - the next 300 years have seen it's development as a garden
By the 18th century the park had become part of the garden of the Hollytrees Mansion - one of it's best known residents was a Lawyer called Charles Grey (MP for Colchester and one time town clerk) who had a major influence on the park landscape.
The park was first opened as a park in 1892 and later, in 1929 The Castle; Hollytrees Mansion, back lawn and meadow were also opened to the public as part of the towns war memorial. | <urn:uuid:2b9bf985-f012-46ed-bcdb-a7c83290f6a6> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.colchester.gov.uk/info/cbc-article/?catid=castle-park&id=KA-01532 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251728207.68/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127205148-20200127235148-00495.warc.gz | en | 0.981174 | 825 | 3.40625 | 3 | [
0.008879892528057098,
0.038958385586738586,
0.7672262191772461,
-0.02968791127204895,
0.022830020636320114,
-0.15476374328136444,
0.03699476271867752,
-0.43567025661468506,
0.17961956560611725,
-0.09230323135852814,
-0.06103771552443504,
-1.1355286836624146,
0.16341204941272736,
0.19154398... | 1 | Liquid error: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
Castle Park (25 hectares-60 acres), situated in the grounds of Colchester Castle and the Hollytrees Mansion, is divided into an upper and lower park by the Roman town wall of Colchester. The Upper Park consists mainly of formal gardens while the lower park has a more natural feel - situated on the banks of the River Colne.
Being originally a defensive structure, the Castle and park is built on a hill overlooking the River Colne. The park is registered as Grade II on the English Heritage Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest. The whole of the upper park is a scheduled Ancient Monument and contains 7 listed buildings.
Over 2,000 years ago (AD43) the Romans invaded Britain and established their first capital and first town on the site of Colchester Town Centre - it was called Colonia Victricensis (City of Victory).
They were the first to landscape the park, when they levelled the area in about AD54 for their Temple, dedicated to the Emperor Claudius.
The Romans treated the Britons very badly when they first arrived and not surprisingly in AD 60 Boudica and her Iceni tribe rose in open revolt against the Romans and destroyed the town.
Many of the town's inhabitants fled to the temple and barricaded themselves inside - they were hoping for relief from a Roman Army fighting in the west. The army never arrived and after two days the temple was burnt to the ground and all the inhabitants were killed.
The Romans later rebuilt the temple and their town. This time they added a defensive wall - parts of this wall can be seen in the park.
The next important date in the park's history is 1066. Shortly afterwards the Normans decided to build a Castle here to defend the eastern approaches to London. Building materials were scarce and so they built the castle on the base of the Roman temple using rubble from the Roman town.
The Castle was built by Eudo Dapifer, High Steward to William the Conqueror, to a design by the Bishop of Rochester - the same man who later designed the Tower of London - both buildings are of a similar design.
The Castle only saw action on one occasion in 1215 when King John laid siege to the Castle, removing a French force that had occupied the Castle in support of the Barons.
By the 15th Century the Castle had become a prison, which had a bloody reputation. During the reign of Bloody Queen Mary and Elizabeth I, 23 religious martyrs were burnt at the stake - many of these people were executed at the front of the Castle.
In the early part of the 17th century, the prison was used by Mathew Hopkins, Witchfinder General, to interrogate witches - A sign of a true witch was a part of the body where the witch showed no pain (Witches Mark) One of his techniques was prick the witch with a pin all over her body - when the witch did not scream he had found her mark.
During the Civil War in 1648, the town was under siege for 11 weeks - at the end of this siege two royalist leaders (Lucas and Lisle) were held in the prison and later executed in the park grounds - the spot of their execution can still be seen today and it is claimed that where the blood of the two officers was spilt - the grass will never grow again.
That completes the history of the park to the 17th century - the next 300 years have seen it's development as a garden
By the 18th century the park had become part of the garden of the Hollytrees Mansion - one of it's best known residents was a Lawyer called Charles Grey (MP for Colchester and one time town clerk) who had a major influence on the park landscape.
The park was first opened as a park in 1892 and later, in 1929 The Castle; Hollytrees Mansion, back lawn and meadow were also opened to the public as part of the towns war memorial. | 850 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Today Germany has a Federal Parliamentary Republic government system. Germany’s Current president is Frank-Walter Steinmeir since March 19th 2017. Along with Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel. Over the past 100 Years Germany has not been in the same conditions it is in today. In 1933 the Nazi Germany period had began from being under a dictatorship from the most infamous Adolf Hitler. Germany was being controlled nearly in all aspects of life by the Nazi Party. Germany was completely transformed from the failing Weimar Republic government to a Totalitarian state under Hitler’s rule. 6 billion Jews died from Hitler’s dictatorship and Nazi Party, better known as the Holocaust. After Hitler committed suicide with his wife, Germany then surrender over to the Allies. During the Cold War Germany was divided between East and West Germany. The east was formed as a Democratic Republic with its leadership dominated by the Soviets while the economy stayed stagnated because it was organized to meet the needs of the soviets. While West Germany was formed into a Federal Republic with a capitalist economic system. Germans had little to no voice in government during this period of time. After a while East Germans were beginning to be dissatisfied with the life of communism, the west then became a gateway for them. An average of 2,000 East Germans would cross over to West Germany everyday. Many of the people being professionals , skilled laborers , intellectuals and (e.t.c.). This was a huge devastation to East Germany’s economy. The Soviet leader Nikita Khruschev recommended to East Germany that if you close of the access to crossing then there will be less devastation in East Germany. By 1961, from Khruschev idea East Germans then began to build the Berlin Wall in order for East Germans to leave to the west. Many of East Germans still tried to escape to West Germany but they were caught and many were killed. After 30 years of having the Berlin Wall, East Germany finally decided to tear the wall down and that was the fail of communism in East Germany in 1989. East and West Germany no longer was separated they were together. Germany was apart of many alliances and agreements. One of the most famous agreement they were apart of was on September 27, 1970 Germany and two other countries signed the Tripartite Part Pact which later on became better know as the Axis power. The Axis Power ended about as soon as Hitler committed suicide. Seven days after Hitler died on May 7th, 1945 Germany surrendered over to the Allies breaking their Tripartite Part Pact. Also While Germany was split into East and West Germany they both were admitted as full members of the United Nations on September 1973. When the two countries came together on October 3rd, 1990 they were just one member of the United Nations.Misc. Information Germany’s government system today is a Democratic, federal parliamentary republic. Germany’s capital is Berlin and their president is Frank-Walter Stienmeir. While the Chancellor of Germany is Angela Merkel. What life would be like in Germany? Well when you’re 18 you get the right to vote and even in some states in Germany you can vote when you’re 16 years old and municipal elections. The Currency in Germany is Euro because they are a member of the European Union. 1 Euro in Germany equals one dollar and twenty two cents in America so it’s just a little bit less money in Germany. The ethnicity in Germany is not to diverse, Germany is predominantly 91.5% Germans, Turkish 2.4% and the rest of the percentage is made up largely of Greek, Romanian, Polish, Italian, and Syrian. The GDP is $3.479 trillion and the GDPs growth rate is now up to 1.9%. The obesity rate is 22.3% in Germany while their death rate is 11.7 out of a 1,000 percentage of the population. Overall Germany is a great place to live since East Germany and West Germany coming back together.Conclusion In conclusion Germany is a current member of the European Union so in terms of relatability to Europe they are fitting in perfectly. They have allowed themselves to make a connection with twenty eight other countries. They also happen to fit in very well with the world too, because they are a part of NATO. NATO gives them a strong connection with counties that could potentially help them out in tough situations. They also fit well into the world by being a member of the United Nations. Some strengths are Germany’s growth rate keeps rising and they also have Low structural unemployment also “Germany, Europe’s industrial powerhouse and the world’s second largest exporter; a country whose economy has single-handedly stopped the eurozone falling back into recession and the only nation rich enough to save the euro.” (Anderson, Richard). Some weaknesses that come into play with Germany are the obesity rate is going up in Germany and Germany does not have a widespread ethnicity. Germany is still building and becoming better since 1945 each and everyday it’s becoming a better place to live. | <urn:uuid:e4335fba-af08-4117-8768-fe42d77d0fd8> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://firstnightdanbury.org/today-if-you-close-of-the-access/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594101.10/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119010920-20200119034920-00266.warc.gz | en | 0.983315 | 1,021 | 3.65625 | 4 | [
-0.3799973726272583,
0.33921128511428833,
0.21971678733825684,
0.011010553687810898,
0.20827770233154297,
0.48042142391204834,
0.0030899653211236,
0.08132460713386536,
0.15847322344779968,
0.3385411500930786,
0.36883342266082764,
-0.26378118991851807,
0.0005957531975582242,
0.4604907035827... | 2 | Today Germany has a Federal Parliamentary Republic government system. Germany’s Current president is Frank-Walter Steinmeir since March 19th 2017. Along with Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel. Over the past 100 Years Germany has not been in the same conditions it is in today. In 1933 the Nazi Germany period had began from being under a dictatorship from the most infamous Adolf Hitler. Germany was being controlled nearly in all aspects of life by the Nazi Party. Germany was completely transformed from the failing Weimar Republic government to a Totalitarian state under Hitler’s rule. 6 billion Jews died from Hitler’s dictatorship and Nazi Party, better known as the Holocaust. After Hitler committed suicide with his wife, Germany then surrender over to the Allies. During the Cold War Germany was divided between East and West Germany. The east was formed as a Democratic Republic with its leadership dominated by the Soviets while the economy stayed stagnated because it was organized to meet the needs of the soviets. While West Germany was formed into a Federal Republic with a capitalist economic system. Germans had little to no voice in government during this period of time. After a while East Germans were beginning to be dissatisfied with the life of communism, the west then became a gateway for them. An average of 2,000 East Germans would cross over to West Germany everyday. Many of the people being professionals , skilled laborers , intellectuals and (e.t.c.). This was a huge devastation to East Germany’s economy. The Soviet leader Nikita Khruschev recommended to East Germany that if you close of the access to crossing then there will be less devastation in East Germany. By 1961, from Khruschev idea East Germans then began to build the Berlin Wall in order for East Germans to leave to the west. Many of East Germans still tried to escape to West Germany but they were caught and many were killed. After 30 years of having the Berlin Wall, East Germany finally decided to tear the wall down and that was the fail of communism in East Germany in 1989. East and West Germany no longer was separated they were together. Germany was apart of many alliances and agreements. One of the most famous agreement they were apart of was on September 27, 1970 Germany and two other countries signed the Tripartite Part Pact which later on became better know as the Axis power. The Axis Power ended about as soon as Hitler committed suicide. Seven days after Hitler died on May 7th, 1945 Germany surrendered over to the Allies breaking their Tripartite Part Pact. Also While Germany was split into East and West Germany they both were admitted as full members of the United Nations on September 1973. When the two countries came together on October 3rd, 1990 they were just one member of the United Nations.Misc. Information Germany’s government system today is a Democratic, federal parliamentary republic. Germany’s capital is Berlin and their president is Frank-Walter Stienmeir. While the Chancellor of Germany is Angela Merkel. What life would be like in Germany? Well when you’re 18 you get the right to vote and even in some states in Germany you can vote when you’re 16 years old and municipal elections. The Currency in Germany is Euro because they are a member of the European Union. 1 Euro in Germany equals one dollar and twenty two cents in America so it’s just a little bit less money in Germany. The ethnicity in Germany is not to diverse, Germany is predominantly 91.5% Germans, Turkish 2.4% and the rest of the percentage is made up largely of Greek, Romanian, Polish, Italian, and Syrian. The GDP is $3.479 trillion and the GDPs growth rate is now up to 1.9%. The obesity rate is 22.3% in Germany while their death rate is 11.7 out of a 1,000 percentage of the population. Overall Germany is a great place to live since East Germany and West Germany coming back together.Conclusion In conclusion Germany is a current member of the European Union so in terms of relatability to Europe they are fitting in perfectly. They have allowed themselves to make a connection with twenty eight other countries. They also happen to fit in very well with the world too, because they are a part of NATO. NATO gives them a strong connection with counties that could potentially help them out in tough situations. They also fit well into the world by being a member of the United Nations. Some strengths are Germany’s growth rate keeps rising and they also have Low structural unemployment also “Germany, Europe’s industrial powerhouse and the world’s second largest exporter; a country whose economy has single-handedly stopped the eurozone falling back into recession and the only nation rich enough to save the euro.” (Anderson, Richard). Some weaknesses that come into play with Germany are the obesity rate is going up in Germany and Germany does not have a widespread ethnicity. Germany is still building and becoming better since 1945 each and everyday it’s becoming a better place to live. | 1,060 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The famous moment when British and German troops exchanged greetings along the Western Front during World War I is a shining example of how Christmas brings people together.
When Britain went to war on 28th July 1914, around 3,000 British men signed up daily to join the armed forces during the first weekend. By the end of the year, more than one million men had been recruited.
The harsh realities of life set in as Christmas approached. Soldiers realised they would be spending the festive period dug into cold, flooded trenches along the 400-mile Western Front of France and Belgium. It became known as the “war to end all wars” because of the horrific death rate.
By the time the conflict finally ended, on 11th November 1918, more than 25 million people had been killed or injured in the global war that began in Europe. The assassination of the archduke of Austria-Hungary, Franz Ferdinand, on 28th June 1914 was the trigger.
Moment of joy
Spending Christmas in the misery of the trenches wasn’t what most of the infantrymen had expected. The general belief had been that the war would be over by Christmas. Instead, they found themselves wading around in watery clay and torrential rain, with many being killed or injured by snipers.
The German forces were dug into their own trenches between 50 to 300 yards away and the area in between was known as No Man’s Land. Fighting took place in this area and any soldiers who put their head above the trenches were in danger of being shot.
Despite the despair of living in the trenches of France and Flanders, there was one remarkable moment of joy. On Christmas Day 1914, the German and Allied soldiers held an unofficial truce, laid down their weapons and emerged unarmed into No Man’s Land.
They sang carols, exchanged greetings and small gifts, and developed a sense of camaraderie as they played friendly football matches all along the Western Front. The ordinary troops welcomed the Christmas truce, but a lot of the officers on both sides disapproved, fearing the men would be less likely to go back into battle afterwards.
While it lasted, the truce was magical. Newspapers back in Britain got wind of the story and even the staid Wall Street Journal in the US carried a report, observing that the truce was an “inspiring Christmas story” that had emerged from the “winter fog and misery”.
It was Christmas Eve when the British troops first realised something unusual was happening. In numerous places along the Western Front, no shots had been fired from around noon on 24th December. At around 8.30pm, an officer of the Royal Irish Rifles sent a report of the events to headquarters.
He said the Germans had illuminated their trenches with lanterns and were singing Christmas carols and shouting, “Happy Christmas,” to the British forces. The British soldiers shouted friendly greetings back, but the officer in charge remained suspicious and said he was “taking all military precautions” in case it was a trap.
Similar events were unfolding along the Western Front, instigated by the Germans. Henry Williamson, a 17-year-old soldier with the London Rifles, was interviewed in the 1960s about his experiences.
On Christmas Eve, he was ordered to knock posts into the frozen soil, only 50 yards away from the German trenches. After 2 hours, he realised that no shots had been fired and he completed the task without incident.
Later, at around 11pm, the German troops erected a fir tree and a light shone out. They began to sing a Christmas carol, Heilige Nacht, which the British recognised as Silent Night, so they joined in. Williamson recalled the Germans shouting, “Come over, Tommy!”
Although nervous at first, the British went over after seeing the Germans emerging from their trenches. When the Germans and the Allied troops finally met in No Man’s Land, for one magical day, the war was put aside as they celebrated Christmas.
They exchanged gifts, such as chocolate, cans of bully beef and cigarettes. Some had even managed to get hold of alcohol. They showed each other photographs of their loved ones back home and even began to play football together.
An entry in the Scots Guards’ war diary recorded that “Private Murker met a German patrol and was given a glass of whisky and cigars”. All along the frontline, there were similar scenarios.
The Germans sent messages to the Allies that they wouldn’t fire any shots on Christmas Day and asked the British to agree to do the same.
Singing and laughter
Reports said it seemed to be a “basic understanding”. British soldier Private Fred Heath later wrote a letter to his loved ones back home and said the truce had begun on Christmas Eve “all down our line of trenches”. He said the Germans had called across to them, “English soldier, a merry Christmas, come out here to us!”
Heath said they didn’t answer at first and were cautious, but then he added, “How could we resist wishing each other a Merry Christmas, even though we might be at each other’s throats immediately afterwards?”
They began talking to the Germans, although initially holding on to their rifles at first, but eventually they dropped their guard. Heath added, “Blood and peace, enmity and fraternity — war’s most amazing paradox.”
The exchange of greetings and the singing of carols continued all night. Heath recalled how the “laughter and Christmas carols” rang out from the trenches. “Not a shot was fired,” he wrote.
The games of football on Christmas Day were described as being like “friendly” matches that the men would enjoy back home with their pals in the park. The language barrier did not get in the way. While some of the Germans spoke a little English, the game of football provided a universal language that everyone understood.
For most of the troops, the truce lasted for Christmas Day only, although in a minority of places, it continued into Boxing Day. However, the officers were uneasy the longer it continued, as they wondered if the troops would rebel against going back into battle against individuals who had become their friends.
The sense of camaraderie that was emerging between the opposing sides eventually led both the British and German officers to order the soldiers back to the trenches. It was “business as usual” after the Christmas truce and the soldiers were soon fighting against the men who had briefly become their friends.
The event was important because it was the only time during the Great War that large-scale fraternising took place. The High Command in Britain was furious when newspaper reports detailing the truce appeared, fearing it would make people doubt the war effort.
As a result, on 2nd January 1915, they banned informal truces with the enemy. Anyone who broke the rule was threatened with a Court Martial, so the legendary Christmas truce of 1914 was never repeated.
In December 2014, the 100th anniversary of the truce was commemorated in a joint initiative between Sainsbury’s supermarket and the Royal British Legion. Lauded as the best advert of all time, Sainsbury’s Christmas advert was inspired by the real-life events of World War I.
It showed the guns falling silent and the two armies meeting in no man’s land, exchanging gifts and playing football together. The advert featured a special chocolate bar which went on sale at Sainsbury’s, with all profits being donated to the Royal British Legion to benefit the British armed forces, their families and veterans.
Christmas Day 1914 will go down as a unique event in the history of war – and one that is never likely to be repeated.
Meetings offers an exclusive range of meeting rooms for hire. Contact us for flexible meeting spaces in London and across the UK.
Wishing you all a very Happy and Peaceful Christmas. | <urn:uuid:9945935a-cc19-40e1-8175-4e77855a4e6f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.andmeetings.com/blog/post/no-mans-land-the-christmas-day-meeting | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592565.2/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118110141-20200118134141-00543.warc.gz | en | 0.983032 | 1,662 | 3.84375 | 4 | [
-0.025855794548988342,
0.5454836487770081,
0.37879300117492676,
-0.15116530656814575,
0.17945578694343567,
-0.17178675532341003,
0.046064507216215134,
0.22620657086372375,
0.30621200799942017,
-0.2268766462802887,
0.1710050255060196,
-0.319680392742157,
0.15581297874450684,
0.4105852246284... | 10 | The famous moment when British and German troops exchanged greetings along the Western Front during World War I is a shining example of how Christmas brings people together.
When Britain went to war on 28th July 1914, around 3,000 British men signed up daily to join the armed forces during the first weekend. By the end of the year, more than one million men had been recruited.
The harsh realities of life set in as Christmas approached. Soldiers realised they would be spending the festive period dug into cold, flooded trenches along the 400-mile Western Front of France and Belgium. It became known as the “war to end all wars” because of the horrific death rate.
By the time the conflict finally ended, on 11th November 1918, more than 25 million people had been killed or injured in the global war that began in Europe. The assassination of the archduke of Austria-Hungary, Franz Ferdinand, on 28th June 1914 was the trigger.
Moment of joy
Spending Christmas in the misery of the trenches wasn’t what most of the infantrymen had expected. The general belief had been that the war would be over by Christmas. Instead, they found themselves wading around in watery clay and torrential rain, with many being killed or injured by snipers.
The German forces were dug into their own trenches between 50 to 300 yards away and the area in between was known as No Man’s Land. Fighting took place in this area and any soldiers who put their head above the trenches were in danger of being shot.
Despite the despair of living in the trenches of France and Flanders, there was one remarkable moment of joy. On Christmas Day 1914, the German and Allied soldiers held an unofficial truce, laid down their weapons and emerged unarmed into No Man’s Land.
They sang carols, exchanged greetings and small gifts, and developed a sense of camaraderie as they played friendly football matches all along the Western Front. The ordinary troops welcomed the Christmas truce, but a lot of the officers on both sides disapproved, fearing the men would be less likely to go back into battle afterwards.
While it lasted, the truce was magical. Newspapers back in Britain got wind of the story and even the staid Wall Street Journal in the US carried a report, observing that the truce was an “inspiring Christmas story” that had emerged from the “winter fog and misery”.
It was Christmas Eve when the British troops first realised something unusual was happening. In numerous places along the Western Front, no shots had been fired from around noon on 24th December. At around 8.30pm, an officer of the Royal Irish Rifles sent a report of the events to headquarters.
He said the Germans had illuminated their trenches with lanterns and were singing Christmas carols and shouting, “Happy Christmas,” to the British forces. The British soldiers shouted friendly greetings back, but the officer in charge remained suspicious and said he was “taking all military precautions” in case it was a trap.
Similar events were unfolding along the Western Front, instigated by the Germans. Henry Williamson, a 17-year-old soldier with the London Rifles, was interviewed in the 1960s about his experiences.
On Christmas Eve, he was ordered to knock posts into the frozen soil, only 50 yards away from the German trenches. After 2 hours, he realised that no shots had been fired and he completed the task without incident.
Later, at around 11pm, the German troops erected a fir tree and a light shone out. They began to sing a Christmas carol, Heilige Nacht, which the British recognised as Silent Night, so they joined in. Williamson recalled the Germans shouting, “Come over, Tommy!”
Although nervous at first, the British went over after seeing the Germans emerging from their trenches. When the Germans and the Allied troops finally met in No Man’s Land, for one magical day, the war was put aside as they celebrated Christmas.
They exchanged gifts, such as chocolate, cans of bully beef and cigarettes. Some had even managed to get hold of alcohol. They showed each other photographs of their loved ones back home and even began to play football together.
An entry in the Scots Guards’ war diary recorded that “Private Murker met a German patrol and was given a glass of whisky and cigars”. All along the frontline, there were similar scenarios.
The Germans sent messages to the Allies that they wouldn’t fire any shots on Christmas Day and asked the British to agree to do the same.
Singing and laughter
Reports said it seemed to be a “basic understanding”. British soldier Private Fred Heath later wrote a letter to his loved ones back home and said the truce had begun on Christmas Eve “all down our line of trenches”. He said the Germans had called across to them, “English soldier, a merry Christmas, come out here to us!”
Heath said they didn’t answer at first and were cautious, but then he added, “How could we resist wishing each other a Merry Christmas, even though we might be at each other’s throats immediately afterwards?”
They began talking to the Germans, although initially holding on to their rifles at first, but eventually they dropped their guard. Heath added, “Blood and peace, enmity and fraternity — war’s most amazing paradox.”
The exchange of greetings and the singing of carols continued all night. Heath recalled how the “laughter and Christmas carols” rang out from the trenches. “Not a shot was fired,” he wrote.
The games of football on Christmas Day were described as being like “friendly” matches that the men would enjoy back home with their pals in the park. The language barrier did not get in the way. While some of the Germans spoke a little English, the game of football provided a universal language that everyone understood.
For most of the troops, the truce lasted for Christmas Day only, although in a minority of places, it continued into Boxing Day. However, the officers were uneasy the longer it continued, as they wondered if the troops would rebel against going back into battle against individuals who had become their friends.
The sense of camaraderie that was emerging between the opposing sides eventually led both the British and German officers to order the soldiers back to the trenches. It was “business as usual” after the Christmas truce and the soldiers were soon fighting against the men who had briefly become their friends.
The event was important because it was the only time during the Great War that large-scale fraternising took place. The High Command in Britain was furious when newspaper reports detailing the truce appeared, fearing it would make people doubt the war effort.
As a result, on 2nd January 1915, they banned informal truces with the enemy. Anyone who broke the rule was threatened with a Court Martial, so the legendary Christmas truce of 1914 was never repeated.
In December 2014, the 100th anniversary of the truce was commemorated in a joint initiative between Sainsbury’s supermarket and the Royal British Legion. Lauded as the best advert of all time, Sainsbury’s Christmas advert was inspired by the real-life events of World War I.
It showed the guns falling silent and the two armies meeting in no man’s land, exchanging gifts and playing football together. The advert featured a special chocolate bar which went on sale at Sainsbury’s, with all profits being donated to the Royal British Legion to benefit the British armed forces, their families and veterans.
Christmas Day 1914 will go down as a unique event in the history of war – and one that is never likely to be repeated.
Meetings offers an exclusive range of meeting rooms for hire. Contact us for flexible meeting spaces in London and across the UK.
Wishing you all a very Happy and Peaceful Christmas. | 1,637 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Based off the reviews and research other the novel The Color Purple, written by Alice Walker, the theme that was perceived was to know your self worth, to love yourself, and keep faith because regardless of the circumstances that are given it always passes. Alice Walker tells the story about a poor, African American women named Celie who is has face struggles of abuse from men in her life at a young age. She was being repeatedly sexually abused by her father as a young girl and was forced to give her baby away after becoming pregnant by him.
Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Women Named Celie In The The Color Purple" essay for youCreate order
After being abused by her father she was then given to a man named Albert, who was a widower and was a father to four kids. He not only mentally but also physically abused Celie. In the book Walker talked about the series of events that led Celie to become a strong independent woman who loved herself and spoke up for herself as well. During the 1900’s, which was the time period taking place in the novel, the love displayed between black men and women was highly dysfunctional. Most women were treated less than and taken advantage of much like Celie was, according to an New York times article review. “During the course of the novel, which begins in the early 1900’s and ends in the mid-1940’s, Celie frees herself from her husband’s repressive control” (Watkins,1982).”
The novel has a strong impact for those who have dealt with anything of or relating to the topics that are discussed. It may have had the strongest impact on women who have been trying to find their own voice. After all Celie had been through, she found things that made her happy. She also developed relationships with strong willed women who became much inspiration for her to come out of her shell and demand the respect that she was long overdue for. Shug Avery was one of the important characters that Celie looked up to for the confidence that she lacked. Which was very interesting because she their first encounter with each other wasn’t the most pleasant at all. Shug was the woman that albert longed for when his wife died. He was completely in love with her and would do anything for her. The night that Albert and his son Harpo brought Shug or to their house the first thing she told Celie was that she was ugly. You could imagine how what Celie was feeling when she heard those words coming out of her mouth. But later throughout the book Shug became Celie’s peace you could say. After Celie and her sister Nettie were broken apart by Albert, after his attempt to rape her, Celie felt like she had lost a piece of herself. At that point she didn’t have anyone.
The meaning of the novel to me, kind of has the same interpretation that I had when reading others novels as well such as For Colored Girls who have Committed Suicide When the Rainbow is Enough. I feel as if African American women have had a continuous struggle to be comfortable in their own skin. Colorism is still a topic that affects the United States . That’s why you see ads and slogans such as Black is Beautiful because for a long time black wasn’t considered beautiful especially the darker you were. Overtime views towards african american women and men on the topic of colorism have changed however, the problem is still there. In addition to this, the novel itself also touches basis on inequality between men and women as well as how unequal it was for black people then and even now. There’s an old saying that most of us live by that goes You have to work to work twice as hard to get at least half of what they got. This saying really goes for almost anything, in life when wanting to achieve something. We have to be and go above our counterparts for positions that ultimately shouldn’t need that type of energy pushed towards but yet there is.
Throughout the story she continuously spoke to God asking him for the guidance that she lacked. This helped her find herself spiritually and she build relationships with women that genuinely loved and cared for her.As the relationship between Shug and Celie began to get closer Shug inspired her to build her confidence and be comfortable in her own skin. As I can recall one moment in the book where they were at the opening of a new jazz joint that Harpo had opened up, and as a fight had broken out between Sophia and Harpo’s new wife that erupted into a huge brawl. Shug and Celie managed to escape the flying fist that were being thrown and ended up in her dressing room. Here Shug took notice that Celie always covered her smile and when she was asked why, Celie replied because she was ugly. After hearing that response from then on out she reassured Celie that she was beautiful person inside and out and that she should always be smiling.
Outside of what other viewers have decided that the meaning of the story was, I found my own meaning through actually trying to connect with the things that Celie had to go through even though somethings, I had never experienced for myself. I have seen the movie the color purple millions of times but it wasn’t until after I read the book that I realized what the real meaning of the what was being taught in the movie. Celie struggled to find herself and she didn’t know how to be comfortable in her own skin. She Was spiritually trying to find herself as she talked to God throughout the story and the events she talked about. “Dear God, I am fourteen years old. I am I have always been a good girl. Maybe you can give me a sign letting me know what is happening to me.” (Walker, 1). This was the beginning of the first letter she wrote to God when things had started to go downhill for her. Her mother had passed away and she was being sexually abused by her stepfather.
The legacy of the novel is to stand up for your freedom and stand up for your spirituality. Allowing someone to control you and take advantage of you is not okay. You lose your power to yourself and give someone else the upper hand against you. It is extremely important for you to have control over who you are as person it builds so much character. It symbolizes that you know who you are as an individual and that you hold substance, as well as values to yourself. The Color Purple showed you how to forgive and how to grow from the things that may have hurt you in past, or made your feel less of yourself. The things that Celie had to encounter in order to aspire into the women she had become, she had to humble herself and forgive. No matter how much she felt like she couldn’t make it against the odds she was given, she managed to pull through and do better for her own reasons. As women its takes a lot for us to hold our own, especially back then. “The Color Purple deals with a black woman’s struggle to free herself from a position of servitude in a male-dominated society. Celie, Nettie, Sophia, Shug Avery, each of them must fight her own battle against repression and prejudice…”(Hedge 2009) Women were seen as slaves and just weak back then and the consequence of even thinking about talking back or standing up against a man, were brutal and sadly it carries over into todays’ world as well. I think some people struggle to let children read this book because it is very controversial. There was a lot of sex involved in the storyline as well the gender roles being played. At one point in the book Celie seemed to be attracted to women.
The book is being used as historical significance you could say. During the time period that the book was written there was still segregation and racism. For example, in the book when Sophia was released from jail, after assaulting a white man for calling her a N*gg**, she was asked to be a maid by a white woman named Ms. Millie. Also during this time women had limited rights at this period of time especially for African Americans. Juke joints and small jazz clubs were how African Americans had their fun and came together, besides being in the church.. Males were displayed as the breadwinners while women were to bow down and obey. Women suffered for so long because they believed that this type of behavior is okay and it was not. To be treated like someone’s property, an object and not a subject are still problems we have today.
Something that is still relevant to in the book to me, I believe is to no matter what troubles you’re going through is to keep your faith. It reminds me of my collarbone tattoo that has the quote from the late, but extraordinary Maya Angelou. This too shall pass far as anything that I am going through, it’s a reminder to never give up. Because even after the rain, comes a rainbow. I was put on this earth for a reason, just because I haven’t found my ultimate purpose yet doesn’t mean that I am not important. Also, don’t lose sight of what is in front of you even when the going gets tough. Celie never lost her faith, there were multiple times that she wanted to end it all but with the faith she kept and with the love from the relationships that she built with some of the other characters, it kept her going. She transformed into a completely different person. Her confidence was there, she became reconnected with her sister and most importantly her son and her daughter. She continued to talk to God and he answered all her prayers and blessings.
We will send an essay sample to you in 2 Hours. If you need help faster you can always use our custom writing service.Get help with my paper | <urn:uuid:46e20abd-95f2-4a4d-ac25-139696ef6f70> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://studydriver.com/women-named-celie-in-the-the-color-purple/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251788528.85/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129041149-20200129071149-00286.warc.gz | en | 0.992053 | 2,053 | 3.3125 | 3 | [
-0.5769712328910828,
0.14240694046020508,
-0.015382871963083744,
0.02133272774517536,
-0.23493871092796326,
0.31869766116142273,
0.18894225358963013,
-0.0638931542634964,
0.03232092410326004,
0.4194762706756592,
0.27220872044563293,
0.3407517671585083,
0.07447405159473419,
-0.0512314066290... | 1 | Based off the reviews and research other the novel The Color Purple, written by Alice Walker, the theme that was perceived was to know your self worth, to love yourself, and keep faith because regardless of the circumstances that are given it always passes. Alice Walker tells the story about a poor, African American women named Celie who is has face struggles of abuse from men in her life at a young age. She was being repeatedly sexually abused by her father as a young girl and was forced to give her baby away after becoming pregnant by him.
Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Women Named Celie In The The Color Purple" essay for youCreate order
After being abused by her father she was then given to a man named Albert, who was a widower and was a father to four kids. He not only mentally but also physically abused Celie. In the book Walker talked about the series of events that led Celie to become a strong independent woman who loved herself and spoke up for herself as well. During the 1900’s, which was the time period taking place in the novel, the love displayed between black men and women was highly dysfunctional. Most women were treated less than and taken advantage of much like Celie was, according to an New York times article review. “During the course of the novel, which begins in the early 1900’s and ends in the mid-1940’s, Celie frees herself from her husband’s repressive control” (Watkins,1982).”
The novel has a strong impact for those who have dealt with anything of or relating to the topics that are discussed. It may have had the strongest impact on women who have been trying to find their own voice. After all Celie had been through, she found things that made her happy. She also developed relationships with strong willed women who became much inspiration for her to come out of her shell and demand the respect that she was long overdue for. Shug Avery was one of the important characters that Celie looked up to for the confidence that she lacked. Which was very interesting because she their first encounter with each other wasn’t the most pleasant at all. Shug was the woman that albert longed for when his wife died. He was completely in love with her and would do anything for her. The night that Albert and his son Harpo brought Shug or to their house the first thing she told Celie was that she was ugly. You could imagine how what Celie was feeling when she heard those words coming out of her mouth. But later throughout the book Shug became Celie’s peace you could say. After Celie and her sister Nettie were broken apart by Albert, after his attempt to rape her, Celie felt like she had lost a piece of herself. At that point she didn’t have anyone.
The meaning of the novel to me, kind of has the same interpretation that I had when reading others novels as well such as For Colored Girls who have Committed Suicide When the Rainbow is Enough. I feel as if African American women have had a continuous struggle to be comfortable in their own skin. Colorism is still a topic that affects the United States . That’s why you see ads and slogans such as Black is Beautiful because for a long time black wasn’t considered beautiful especially the darker you were. Overtime views towards african american women and men on the topic of colorism have changed however, the problem is still there. In addition to this, the novel itself also touches basis on inequality between men and women as well as how unequal it was for black people then and even now. There’s an old saying that most of us live by that goes You have to work to work twice as hard to get at least half of what they got. This saying really goes for almost anything, in life when wanting to achieve something. We have to be and go above our counterparts for positions that ultimately shouldn’t need that type of energy pushed towards but yet there is.
Throughout the story she continuously spoke to God asking him for the guidance that she lacked. This helped her find herself spiritually and she build relationships with women that genuinely loved and cared for her.As the relationship between Shug and Celie began to get closer Shug inspired her to build her confidence and be comfortable in her own skin. As I can recall one moment in the book where they were at the opening of a new jazz joint that Harpo had opened up, and as a fight had broken out between Sophia and Harpo’s new wife that erupted into a huge brawl. Shug and Celie managed to escape the flying fist that were being thrown and ended up in her dressing room. Here Shug took notice that Celie always covered her smile and when she was asked why, Celie replied because she was ugly. After hearing that response from then on out she reassured Celie that she was beautiful person inside and out and that she should always be smiling.
Outside of what other viewers have decided that the meaning of the story was, I found my own meaning through actually trying to connect with the things that Celie had to go through even though somethings, I had never experienced for myself. I have seen the movie the color purple millions of times but it wasn’t until after I read the book that I realized what the real meaning of the what was being taught in the movie. Celie struggled to find herself and she didn’t know how to be comfortable in her own skin. She Was spiritually trying to find herself as she talked to God throughout the story and the events she talked about. “Dear God, I am fourteen years old. I am I have always been a good girl. Maybe you can give me a sign letting me know what is happening to me.” (Walker, 1). This was the beginning of the first letter she wrote to God when things had started to go downhill for her. Her mother had passed away and she was being sexually abused by her stepfather.
The legacy of the novel is to stand up for your freedom and stand up for your spirituality. Allowing someone to control you and take advantage of you is not okay. You lose your power to yourself and give someone else the upper hand against you. It is extremely important for you to have control over who you are as person it builds so much character. It symbolizes that you know who you are as an individual and that you hold substance, as well as values to yourself. The Color Purple showed you how to forgive and how to grow from the things that may have hurt you in past, or made your feel less of yourself. The things that Celie had to encounter in order to aspire into the women she had become, she had to humble herself and forgive. No matter how much she felt like she couldn’t make it against the odds she was given, she managed to pull through and do better for her own reasons. As women its takes a lot for us to hold our own, especially back then. “The Color Purple deals with a black woman’s struggle to free herself from a position of servitude in a male-dominated society. Celie, Nettie, Sophia, Shug Avery, each of them must fight her own battle against repression and prejudice…”(Hedge 2009) Women were seen as slaves and just weak back then and the consequence of even thinking about talking back or standing up against a man, were brutal and sadly it carries over into todays’ world as well. I think some people struggle to let children read this book because it is very controversial. There was a lot of sex involved in the storyline as well the gender roles being played. At one point in the book Celie seemed to be attracted to women.
The book is being used as historical significance you could say. During the time period that the book was written there was still segregation and racism. For example, in the book when Sophia was released from jail, after assaulting a white man for calling her a N*gg**, she was asked to be a maid by a white woman named Ms. Millie. Also during this time women had limited rights at this period of time especially for African Americans. Juke joints and small jazz clubs were how African Americans had their fun and came together, besides being in the church.. Males were displayed as the breadwinners while women were to bow down and obey. Women suffered for so long because they believed that this type of behavior is okay and it was not. To be treated like someone’s property, an object and not a subject are still problems we have today.
Something that is still relevant to in the book to me, I believe is to no matter what troubles you’re going through is to keep your faith. It reminds me of my collarbone tattoo that has the quote from the late, but extraordinary Maya Angelou. This too shall pass far as anything that I am going through, it’s a reminder to never give up. Because even after the rain, comes a rainbow. I was put on this earth for a reason, just because I haven’t found my ultimate purpose yet doesn’t mean that I am not important. Also, don’t lose sight of what is in front of you even when the going gets tough. Celie never lost her faith, there were multiple times that she wanted to end it all but with the faith she kept and with the love from the relationships that she built with some of the other characters, it kept her going. She transformed into a completely different person. Her confidence was there, she became reconnected with her sister and most importantly her son and her daughter. She continued to talk to God and he answered all her prayers and blessings.
We will send an essay sample to you in 2 Hours. If you need help faster you can always use our custom writing service.Get help with my paper | 2,002 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Today is the 375th anniversary of the death of Archbishop William Laud. A victim of the divisions which led to the English Civil War, he was beheaded by order of Parliament accused of treason, despite being given a royal pardon by Charles I. There is no doubt that he was a controversial figure with an authoritarian approach to opponents. On the other hand, he stood for his beliefs and did not sway with the political wind for the sake of expediency.
As well as being remembered generally today by the Church of England, Laud is remembered in Wokingham because of his connections with it. Although Laud was born in Reading, his father was a native of Wokingham, and his mother, in her later years, lived in the town. Laud was a benefactor of Wokingham, leaving money in his will to be granted to poor young people.
One of the lasting changes on Church of England tradition attributed to Laud is the custom of placing altars inside a sanctuary area with a rail around them. In the earlier phase of the Reformation’s impact on the Church in England altars in parish churches started to be placed centrally in the chancel. They were regarded as tables around which all participant communicants would gather for the service of Holy Communion, so more literally re-enacting the Last Supper than had been evident in the old-style Mass. Laud was instrumental in reversing this trend and returning altars to a position against the east wall of churches together with a protecting rail. It is said that he and others who agreed with him were perturbed by the increasing use of altars as a handy dumping surface for hats and coats, not to mention their use by dogs for dog-like habits! | <urn:uuid:f6e5f28c-46cf-4339-8f18-c740bc0c956f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://dphodgson.wordpress.com/2020/01/10/archbishop-william-laud/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250593295.11/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118164132-20200118192132-00423.warc.gz | en | 0.990666 | 356 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
0.021752124652266502,
0.10567796975374222,
0.6964616179466248,
-0.27128392457962036,
0.12291233986616135,
-0.07712440192699432,
0.10132860392332077,
-0.10957318544387817,
0.16779688000679016,
-0.20914240181446075,
-0.039856091141700745,
-0.32271090149879456,
0.2543165683746338,
0.203228726... | 6 | Today is the 375th anniversary of the death of Archbishop William Laud. A victim of the divisions which led to the English Civil War, he was beheaded by order of Parliament accused of treason, despite being given a royal pardon by Charles I. There is no doubt that he was a controversial figure with an authoritarian approach to opponents. On the other hand, he stood for his beliefs and did not sway with the political wind for the sake of expediency.
As well as being remembered generally today by the Church of England, Laud is remembered in Wokingham because of his connections with it. Although Laud was born in Reading, his father was a native of Wokingham, and his mother, in her later years, lived in the town. Laud was a benefactor of Wokingham, leaving money in his will to be granted to poor young people.
One of the lasting changes on Church of England tradition attributed to Laud is the custom of placing altars inside a sanctuary area with a rail around them. In the earlier phase of the Reformation’s impact on the Church in England altars in parish churches started to be placed centrally in the chancel. They were regarded as tables around which all participant communicants would gather for the service of Holy Communion, so more literally re-enacting the Last Supper than had been evident in the old-style Mass. Laud was instrumental in reversing this trend and returning altars to a position against the east wall of churches together with a protecting rail. It is said that he and others who agreed with him were perturbed by the increasing use of altars as a handy dumping surface for hats and coats, not to mention their use by dogs for dog-like habits! | 346 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Squantos Journey: The Story of the First Thanksgiving by Joseph BruchacIn 1620 an English ship called the Mayflower landed on the shores inhabited by the Pokanoket people, and it was Squanto who welcomed the newcomers and taught them how to survive in the rugged land they called Plymouth. He showed them how to plant corn, beans, and squash, and how to hunt and fish. And when a good harvest was gathered in the fall, the two peoples feasted together in the spirit of peace and brotherhood.
Almost four hundred years later, the tradition continues. . . .
Squanto: The Former Slave
Squanto was a Native-American from the Patuxet tribe who taught the pilgrims of Plymouth colony how to survive in New England. Squanto was able to communicate with the pilgrims because he spoke fluent English, unlike most of his fellow Native-Americans at the time. Squanto learned to speak English after he was captured by English explorers and taken to Europe where he was sold into slavery. It is speculated that Squanto, whose real name was Tisquantum, had been enslaved a number of times during his lifetime, although many historians disagree on this fact and believe he was only captured by the English once. According to some historians, Squanto was first captured as a young boy in , along with four Penobscots, by Captain George Weymouth, who was exploring the coast of Maine and Massachusetts at the request of a colonial entrepreneur named Sir Ferdinando Gorges.
Squanto was born into the Pawtuxet people who occupied lands in present-day Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Little is known about his early life. Some authorities believe that he was taken from home to England in by George Weymouth and returned with explorer John Smith in — Squanto somehow escaped to England and joined the Newfoundland Company. He returned home in on his second trip back to North America only to find that his people had been wiped out by disease. During the spring of , Squanto was brought to the newly founded Pilgrim settlement of Plymouth by Samoset, an Indian who had been befriended by the English settlers. Squanto, who had been living with the Wampanoag people since his return from England, soon became a member of the Plymouth Colony.
Toggle navigation. Also known as Tisquantum, Squanto was born in approximately in Massachusetts near Plymouth. Squanto returned to America with John Smith in Thomas Hunt, an English explorer, kidnapped him in and sold him as a slave in Spain. By Squanto had escaped and returned to America.
Squanto was a famous Native American Indian who was a member of the Pawtuxet band of the Wampanoag tribe. In an expedition sponsored by Sir Ferdinando Gorges, an English explorer named Captain Weymouth kidnapped Squanto along with 4 other Indians. In , he returned to England.
lana del rey bruce springsteen lyrics
Steeped in Conflict
Squanto or Tisquantum , ? He learned to speak English and was hired as a guide and interpreter. He taught the Pilgrims to plant corn. Squanto had much power among the Native Americans and the Pilgrims. He abused it, and barely escaped an Indian execution. He died in while making a trip around Cape Cod.
Squanto was born circa near Plymouth, Massachusetts. Little is known about his early life. In , he was kidnapped by English explorer Thomas Hunt, who brought him to Spain where he was sold into slavery. Squanto escaped, eventually returning to North America in He then returned to the Patuxet region, where he became an interpreter and guide for the Pilgrim settlers at Plymouth in the s.
Squanto ? Squanto is remembered as the interpreter, guide, and agricultural advisor who shepherded the Pilgrim settlers of Plymouth Colony through their precarious early existence in the New World and did more than anyone else to secure the survival of the settlement. Squanto was a member of the Patuxet band of the Wampanoag tribe, which dominated the area in which the colonists eventually settled. He first enters written history in , as one of 20 Patuxet Indians kidnapped by English explorer Thomas Hunt. Hunt carried his captives to Spain, where he sold them into slavery. Squanto, however, was one of a number who were rescued by Spanish friars, and he eventually made his way to England, where he next surfaced in the employ of John Slaney, whose interests extended to exploration in the New World. | <urn:uuid:48db0ef9-e15f-4242-83c1-3f0738852fa0> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://giddyupwestern.com/about/5-facts-about-squanto-the-indian-961-145.php | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614086.44/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123221108-20200124010108-00371.warc.gz | en | 0.990136 | 925 | 3.5 | 4 | [
0.4324690103530884,
-0.01320633850991726,
0.44321539998054504,
-0.2845603823661804,
-0.1071479469537735,
-0.3900831937789917,
0.12693770229816437,
0.1721227914094925,
-0.14722910523414612,
0.020083066076040268,
-0.24682772159576416,
-0.4004735052585602,
-0.1080811619758606,
0.2809576988220... | 4 | Squantos Journey: The Story of the First Thanksgiving by Joseph BruchacIn 1620 an English ship called the Mayflower landed on the shores inhabited by the Pokanoket people, and it was Squanto who welcomed the newcomers and taught them how to survive in the rugged land they called Plymouth. He showed them how to plant corn, beans, and squash, and how to hunt and fish. And when a good harvest was gathered in the fall, the two peoples feasted together in the spirit of peace and brotherhood.
Almost four hundred years later, the tradition continues. . . .
Squanto: The Former Slave
Squanto was a Native-American from the Patuxet tribe who taught the pilgrims of Plymouth colony how to survive in New England. Squanto was able to communicate with the pilgrims because he spoke fluent English, unlike most of his fellow Native-Americans at the time. Squanto learned to speak English after he was captured by English explorers and taken to Europe where he was sold into slavery. It is speculated that Squanto, whose real name was Tisquantum, had been enslaved a number of times during his lifetime, although many historians disagree on this fact and believe he was only captured by the English once. According to some historians, Squanto was first captured as a young boy in , along with four Penobscots, by Captain George Weymouth, who was exploring the coast of Maine and Massachusetts at the request of a colonial entrepreneur named Sir Ferdinando Gorges.
Squanto was born into the Pawtuxet people who occupied lands in present-day Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Little is known about his early life. Some authorities believe that he was taken from home to England in by George Weymouth and returned with explorer John Smith in — Squanto somehow escaped to England and joined the Newfoundland Company. He returned home in on his second trip back to North America only to find that his people had been wiped out by disease. During the spring of , Squanto was brought to the newly founded Pilgrim settlement of Plymouth by Samoset, an Indian who had been befriended by the English settlers. Squanto, who had been living with the Wampanoag people since his return from England, soon became a member of the Plymouth Colony.
Toggle navigation. Also known as Tisquantum, Squanto was born in approximately in Massachusetts near Plymouth. Squanto returned to America with John Smith in Thomas Hunt, an English explorer, kidnapped him in and sold him as a slave in Spain. By Squanto had escaped and returned to America.
Squanto was a famous Native American Indian who was a member of the Pawtuxet band of the Wampanoag tribe. In an expedition sponsored by Sir Ferdinando Gorges, an English explorer named Captain Weymouth kidnapped Squanto along with 4 other Indians. In , he returned to England.
lana del rey bruce springsteen lyrics
Steeped in Conflict
Squanto or Tisquantum , ? He learned to speak English and was hired as a guide and interpreter. He taught the Pilgrims to plant corn. Squanto had much power among the Native Americans and the Pilgrims. He abused it, and barely escaped an Indian execution. He died in while making a trip around Cape Cod.
Squanto was born circa near Plymouth, Massachusetts. Little is known about his early life. In , he was kidnapped by English explorer Thomas Hunt, who brought him to Spain where he was sold into slavery. Squanto escaped, eventually returning to North America in He then returned to the Patuxet region, where he became an interpreter and guide for the Pilgrim settlers at Plymouth in the s.
Squanto ? Squanto is remembered as the interpreter, guide, and agricultural advisor who shepherded the Pilgrim settlers of Plymouth Colony through their precarious early existence in the New World and did more than anyone else to secure the survival of the settlement. Squanto was a member of the Patuxet band of the Wampanoag tribe, which dominated the area in which the colonists eventually settled. He first enters written history in , as one of 20 Patuxet Indians kidnapped by English explorer Thomas Hunt. Hunt carried his captives to Spain, where he sold them into slavery. Squanto, however, was one of a number who were rescued by Spanish friars, and he eventually made his way to England, where he next surfaced in the employ of John Slaney, whose interests extended to exploration in the New World. | 936 | ENGLISH | 1 |
BUCHACH (Pol. Buczacz ), city in Tarnopol district, Ukraine (until 1939 in Poland). A Jewish settlement there is mentioned in 1572; the earliest Jewish tombstone dates from 1633. In 1672 the town was burned down by the Turks, who killed most of the inhabitants. In 1699 the overlord of the town, Stephan Potocki, renewed privileges previously granted to Buchach Jewry, according to which Jews were not subject to the jurisdiction of the Christian courts; disputes between Jews and Christians were heard by an official appointed by the lord of the town, and inter-Jewish suits by the bet din. Jews were free to own and build houses and to trade or engage in crafts, including distilling of brandy and barley beer. In 1765 there were 1,055 Jews living in Buchach and a further 300 in neighboring settlements within the bounds of the Jewish community of Buchach. Jewish economic activities expanded under Austrian rule (see *Galicia), particularly after the grant of equal civic rights in 1867. In the period preceding 1914, most of the large estates in the neighborhood of Buchach were Jewish owned or leased from the Polish nobility. Distilling and commerce remained major Jewish occupations. Between 1867 and 1906 Buchach, Kolomyya, and Sniatyn were combined to form a single constituency and a Jewish deputy was elected to the Austrian imperial parliament. At the beginning of the 20th century, there were approximately 7,000 Jews living in Buchach. During World War i most of the Jewish inhabitants left but many returned later.
Among notable rabbis of Buchach were Ẓevi Kara (18th–19th centuries), author of Neta Sha'ashu'im; his son-in-law Abraham David b. Asher *Wahrmann, the "holy" Ḥasid (d. 1841), author of Da'at Kedoshim (on the laws of ritual slaughter and dietary laws); Abraham Te'omim, author of the responsa Ḥesed le-Avraham; and Samuel Shtark, author of Minḥat Oni. The Orientalist David Heinrich *Mueller was also from Buchach. Among the writers of the *Haskalah movement before 1914, the best known is Isaac *Fernhof. A Yiddish weekly Der Yidisher Veker was published at the beginning of the 20th century, edited by Eliezer *Rokeah of Safed. A large printing press was established in 1907. Descriptions of Jewish life in Buchach are given in the tales of S.Y. *Agnon, the Nobel prizewinning author, who was born there.
[Abraham J. Brawer]
On the eve of the Nazi invasion about 10,000 Jews lived in Buchach (1941). Under Soviet rule (1939–41), Jewish community life suffered and its institutions ceased functioning. All independent political activity was forbidden. Private enterprise was suppressed and the few privately owned stores that remained were subjected to heavy taxes in order to bring about their liquidation. Officially, religious life was not repressed, but synagogues were obliged to pay heavy taxes. The Hebrew education system was disbanded and in its place a Yiddish language school was set up. When war broke out between Germany and the U.S.S.R. (June 22, 1941), Jews were drafted into the Soviet Army. Groups of young Jews also fled to the Russian interior. The Germans invaded Buchach on July 7, 1941. The Ukrainians immediately began murdering and looting the local Jews. On July 28, 350 Jews were killed on Fedor Hill, about a mile (2 km.) from the town. A *Judenrat was set up, headed by Mendel Reich, the head of the former Jewish community organization until its dissolution in September 1939. Jewish refugees began arriving from Hungary and were extended aid by the Judenrat and local community. Young, able-bodied Jews were taken off for forced labor in camps at Velikiye Borki. On Oct. 17, 1942, the Germans carried out a massive Aktion in which over 1,500 Jews were rounded up and sent to *Belzec death camp. Over 300 Jews were murdered during the Aktion. On Nov. 27, 1942, a second transport with 2,500 Jews was dispatched to Belzec, while about 250 persons were shot in the roundup. On Feb. 1–2, 1943, close to 2,000 Jews were murdered at Fedor Hill on the contention that they were infected with typhus. A labor camp was then set up in a suburb, Podkajecka, for skilled craftsmen. In March–April, over 3,000 Jews were also murdered at Fedor Hill, while other groups were shipped to *Chortkov, Kopiczynce, and Tlusta.
A Jewish resistance movement was organized in Buchach at the end of 1942. Arms were obtained and training was given in preparation for a break for the forests. In mid-June 1943 the Germans liquidated the ghetto and labor camp, but met with resistance. Some Jews managed to escape to the forests while others were murdered near the Jewish cemetery. Armed Jewish bands were active in the vicinity, notably attacking Nazi collaborators. On March 23, 1944, when the city was captured by Soviet forces, about 800 Jews came out of hiding and returned from the forests. However, the German Army again took over, and additional Jews fell victim. On July 21, 1944, when Soviet forces definitively entered the city, there were less than 100 Jewish survivors. About 400 Jews returned from the U.S.S.R. After the war most of them emigrated from Buchach to settle in the West or in Israel. The community was not reestablished after the war.
I. Cohen (ed.), Sefer Buchach (1957). add. bibliography: S.Y.Agnon, Ir u-Melo'ah (1973). | <urn:uuid:aa86ed5e-fe9f-4fd1-b4ef-23169db28934> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/buchach | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250601615.66/warc/CC-MAIN-20200121044233-20200121073233-00052.warc.gz | en | 0.980314 | 1,245 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
-0.08976224064826965,
0.31917819380760193,
-0.07585099339485168,
0.013118244707584381,
-0.3597928583621979,
-0.22779789566993713,
0.06366123259067535,
0.22254124283790588,
-0.16459152102470398,
-0.28345248103141785,
-0.2984811067581177,
-0.6063362956047058,
-0.11841288208961487,
0.17923882... | 1 | BUCHACH (Pol. Buczacz ), city in Tarnopol district, Ukraine (until 1939 in Poland). A Jewish settlement there is mentioned in 1572; the earliest Jewish tombstone dates from 1633. In 1672 the town was burned down by the Turks, who killed most of the inhabitants. In 1699 the overlord of the town, Stephan Potocki, renewed privileges previously granted to Buchach Jewry, according to which Jews were not subject to the jurisdiction of the Christian courts; disputes between Jews and Christians were heard by an official appointed by the lord of the town, and inter-Jewish suits by the bet din. Jews were free to own and build houses and to trade or engage in crafts, including distilling of brandy and barley beer. In 1765 there were 1,055 Jews living in Buchach and a further 300 in neighboring settlements within the bounds of the Jewish community of Buchach. Jewish economic activities expanded under Austrian rule (see *Galicia), particularly after the grant of equal civic rights in 1867. In the period preceding 1914, most of the large estates in the neighborhood of Buchach were Jewish owned or leased from the Polish nobility. Distilling and commerce remained major Jewish occupations. Between 1867 and 1906 Buchach, Kolomyya, and Sniatyn were combined to form a single constituency and a Jewish deputy was elected to the Austrian imperial parliament. At the beginning of the 20th century, there were approximately 7,000 Jews living in Buchach. During World War i most of the Jewish inhabitants left but many returned later.
Among notable rabbis of Buchach were Ẓevi Kara (18th–19th centuries), author of Neta Sha'ashu'im; his son-in-law Abraham David b. Asher *Wahrmann, the "holy" Ḥasid (d. 1841), author of Da'at Kedoshim (on the laws of ritual slaughter and dietary laws); Abraham Te'omim, author of the responsa Ḥesed le-Avraham; and Samuel Shtark, author of Minḥat Oni. The Orientalist David Heinrich *Mueller was also from Buchach. Among the writers of the *Haskalah movement before 1914, the best known is Isaac *Fernhof. A Yiddish weekly Der Yidisher Veker was published at the beginning of the 20th century, edited by Eliezer *Rokeah of Safed. A large printing press was established in 1907. Descriptions of Jewish life in Buchach are given in the tales of S.Y. *Agnon, the Nobel prizewinning author, who was born there.
[Abraham J. Brawer]
On the eve of the Nazi invasion about 10,000 Jews lived in Buchach (1941). Under Soviet rule (1939–41), Jewish community life suffered and its institutions ceased functioning. All independent political activity was forbidden. Private enterprise was suppressed and the few privately owned stores that remained were subjected to heavy taxes in order to bring about their liquidation. Officially, religious life was not repressed, but synagogues were obliged to pay heavy taxes. The Hebrew education system was disbanded and in its place a Yiddish language school was set up. When war broke out between Germany and the U.S.S.R. (June 22, 1941), Jews were drafted into the Soviet Army. Groups of young Jews also fled to the Russian interior. The Germans invaded Buchach on July 7, 1941. The Ukrainians immediately began murdering and looting the local Jews. On July 28, 350 Jews were killed on Fedor Hill, about a mile (2 km.) from the town. A *Judenrat was set up, headed by Mendel Reich, the head of the former Jewish community organization until its dissolution in September 1939. Jewish refugees began arriving from Hungary and were extended aid by the Judenrat and local community. Young, able-bodied Jews were taken off for forced labor in camps at Velikiye Borki. On Oct. 17, 1942, the Germans carried out a massive Aktion in which over 1,500 Jews were rounded up and sent to *Belzec death camp. Over 300 Jews were murdered during the Aktion. On Nov. 27, 1942, a second transport with 2,500 Jews was dispatched to Belzec, while about 250 persons were shot in the roundup. On Feb. 1–2, 1943, close to 2,000 Jews were murdered at Fedor Hill on the contention that they were infected with typhus. A labor camp was then set up in a suburb, Podkajecka, for skilled craftsmen. In March–April, over 3,000 Jews were also murdered at Fedor Hill, while other groups were shipped to *Chortkov, Kopiczynce, and Tlusta.
A Jewish resistance movement was organized in Buchach at the end of 1942. Arms were obtained and training was given in preparation for a break for the forests. In mid-June 1943 the Germans liquidated the ghetto and labor camp, but met with resistance. Some Jews managed to escape to the forests while others were murdered near the Jewish cemetery. Armed Jewish bands were active in the vicinity, notably attacking Nazi collaborators. On March 23, 1944, when the city was captured by Soviet forces, about 800 Jews came out of hiding and returned from the forests. However, the German Army again took over, and additional Jews fell victim. On July 21, 1944, when Soviet forces definitively entered the city, there were less than 100 Jewish survivors. About 400 Jews returned from the U.S.S.R. After the war most of them emigrated from Buchach to settle in the West or in Israel. The community was not reestablished after the war.
I. Cohen (ed.), Sefer Buchach (1957). add. bibliography: S.Y.Agnon, Ir u-Melo'ah (1973). | 1,388 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Adventures of Tom Sawyer Essay
The Adventures of Tom Sawyer
Mark Twain wrote The Adventures of Tom Sawyer in 1876. The story tells of Tom, a young and excitable boy who lives on the Mississippi with his Aunt Polly and his half brother Sid. Whilst the book predominantly tells of Tom’s adventures and the mischief in which he involves himself, it also provides a great deal of insight into the society that was in evidence at the time and the way in which individuals interacted with one another. This paper analyses the character of Tom Sawyer and how his exchanges and behavior provide us with a view of his place within society. The relationships that Tom has throughout the novel will be considered together with the way in which he changes and matures as the novel progresses.
The story takes place within a small American town where members of the society had strict and routine lifestyles that revolved primarily around the church and the expectations that they placed upon one another. This type of lifestyle is dull and unappealing to Tom and he finds the institutions that are forced upon him, school and church, boring and restrictive. He adopts a rebellious nature and attempts to escape the boredom he feels at every opportunity. One of the ways in which he does this is through mischievous games and pranks. An example of this can be seen when he releases a beetle in the church and a comical process ensues with a poodle being bitted on the bum and the sermon being completely ruined by the laughter of the congregation. The joy this gives Tom reveals all too well his disrespect for the church: “Tom Sawyer went home quite cheerful, thinking to himself that there was some satisfaction about divine service when there was a bit of variety in it.” (Twain, 2002, 43).
Tom is largely depicted as being typical of boys of his age growing up in the Deep South at that time. He constantly gets himself into trouble but at heart he is a good and loving boy. He is also very intelligent and is able to use his crafty nature to outwit others. One example of this can be seen when his Aunt tells him that he cannot go out and play until he has finished whitewashing the fence. At first rather dejected by the potential hours of labor ahead, he halfheartedly does as he is told and starts his work. However, once given an opportunity to think his situation through, he craftily persuades his friends to join in by making the duty look interesting and appealing. When asked about it by his friends to their disbelief he replies that it suits him: “Like it? Well, I don’t see why I oughtn’t to like it. Does a boy get a chance to whitewash a fence every day?” (Twain, 20). His strategic behavior leads to a situation where he not only gains the assistance of his friends in painting the fence but also manages to secure some of his friend’s toys and possessions in the process.
A very important character within the novel is that of Huckleberry Fin and at times his character is used as a literary device by which we can gain a better understanding of Tom. Huck has been failed by society, his own alcoholic father beat him and now he is victimized and segregated from the rest of the community. He chooses to rebel even more and refuses to follow rules or act in a way that may one day allow him to join the society from which he is isolated. Within the novel Tom looks up to Huckleberry Finn and admires his free and easy lifestyle. As a social outcast Huck is able to define his own rules and live as he pleases. This strongly appeals to Tom, his adventurous nature and his wish to escape reality. They both compliment each other well and dream of a future life together in the circus. Such dreams act as a literary device and fully represent their innocence and idealistic view of the world:
“Church ain’t shucks to a circus. There’s things going on at a circus all the time. I’m going to be a clown in a circus when I grow up.” “Oh, are you! That will be nice. They’re so lovely, all spotted up.” (op cit, 57).
However, whilst Tom and Huck are largely of a fun-loving disposition, they are both highly superstitious. Whilst many of these superstitions are outrageous and humorous, for example the belief that you can throw a dead cat at the devil to rid warts, they play an important role in the novel as they reveal the potential for humans, such as Huck and Tom, to be illogical and hypocritical; they are able to pick and choose the superstitions they subscribe to in order to serve a personal purpose. They may also be perceived as a literary device by which the book’s author, Mark Twain, disputed religion. For him, the superstitions and the unfounded behaviors they produced could potentially be seen as synonymous with the way religion makes people behave. There is too, a seriousness to some of these superstitions. The presence of a dead cat, for example, reveals the serious side to Tom’s character. He suffers from unfounded fears and allows himself to self-indulgently contemplate his own death. Such actions demonstrate the fact that he isn’t able to entirely escape the realities of life but he is yet to fully understand and relate to them. Leland Krauth discussing this in his analysis of Mark Twain’s works:
By often making the superstitions palpably silly, the stuff of the untutored, he creates an ironic perspective through which to view all manifestations of the gothic except one: the indubitable fact that the body suffers pain and is vulnerable to extinction (2002, 110).
The presence of fear within Tom paves the way for his eventual realization that the social institutions which he despises can also offer him a haven from which he can seek safety and belonging.
Throughout the novel the reader is able to observe a gradual change in Tom as he begins to grow and mature. One way in which this manifests itself is through the development of his relationship with Becky Thatcher, with whom he eventually falls in love. In many ways the courtship between Becky and Tom represents a change in focus for Tom and he starts to use his intelligence to conjure up methods of showing of or making Becky jealous as opposed to causing mischief elsewhere: “At recess Tom continued his flirtation with Amy with jubilant self-satisfaction. And he kept drifting about to find Becky and lacerate her with the performance” (123). A further example of his growing maturity can be seen when he and his friends go to Jackson Island. The intention of the excursion is for the boys to experience freedom and self-reliance away from the constraints of the real world. However, Tom isn’t able to fully distance himself from reality and he recognizes that his actions may worry his aunt: “he excitement was gone, now, and Tom and Joe could not keep back thoughts of certain persons at home who were not enjoying this fine frolic as much as they were. Misgivings came; they grew troubled and unhappy; a sigh or two escaped, unawares.” (Twain, 99).
Tom’s time on Jackson Island has a further purpose than just to demonstrate his inability to achieve freedom like Huck. His time on the island offers him an opportunity to distance himself from society and thus places him in a position from where he can observe it more objectively. He begins to recognize that the community does offer him a great deal and that the rules that it dictates do have an advantage to him, “The pursuit of freedom, however illusory, has its price (…) Tom’s growing sense of responsibility, combined with his discovery of the treasure, makes him give up at least some of his wild ways and submit to the restrictions of society” (Novel Guide, 2009).
Through the utilization of this scenario Mark Twain makes a very important point; freedom comes at a price. Whilst Huck is a character that the boys worship as a status of free will and liberty, he is an outsider who is shunned by society and has no one to protect and look out for him. Tom may have to attend institutions that he despises, he is well looked after and cared for and is offered a degree of safety and protection. The relationship between society and freedom is further emphasized when Huck comes into wealth. The money gives him an opportunity for an entirely new life, one that permits him a social standing. However, he is no longer as free as he once was:
Huck Fin’s wealth and the fact that he was now under the widow Douglas’ protection introduced him into society- no, dragged him into it, hurled him into it- and his sufferings were almost more than he could bear (Twain, 211).
By the end of the novel Tom has matured significantly and his previous rejection of all institutions appears to have subsided as he contemplates an education at the National Military Academy for a future career as a lawyer. Huck however, is unable to assimilate himself in society in the same way as Tom and he eventually turns his back on it in favor of his previous life. The boys are on the cusp of their adult life and for this reason Twain terminates the tale, “So endeth this chronicle. It being strictly a history of a boy, it must stop here; the story could not go much further without becoming the history of a man” (Twain, 254). Whilst the fact that the boys are still plotting to form a “robber gang” reveals that they are still young at heart, Tom’s determination for the gang to be “respectable” is thoroughly representative of the chances that have taken place in him. He is now a respected member of society and he wishes to remain as such, Huck’s lifestyle no longer holds the appeal that it once did.
Krauth, Leland. Mark Twain ; Company – Six Literary Relations. Athens, Ga: University of Georgia Press, 2003.
“NovelGuide: The Adventures of Tom Sawyer: Theme Analysis.” Novelguide: Free Study Guides, Free Book Summaries, Free Book Notes, ; More. 23 Apr. 2009 ;http://www.novelguide.com/TheAdventuresofTomSawyer/themeanalysis.html;.
Twain, Mark. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer (Mark Twain Library). Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. | <urn:uuid:fede37cf-0480-47c3-a841-9973c14ae314> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://niagarafallshypnosiscenter.com/the-adventures-of-tom-sawyer/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608295.52/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123041345-20200123070345-00190.warc.gz | en | 0.982517 | 2,184 | 3.3125 | 3 | [
-0.059074968099594116,
0.2266021966934204,
-0.012974554672837257,
0.020000163465738297,
-0.536819577217102,
0.21961946785449982,
0.31296247243881226,
0.14398719370365143,
-0.0547352060675621,
-0.15636271238327026,
0.12686407566070557,
0.10404765605926514,
0.26656705141067505,
0.32842743396... | 1 | The Adventures of Tom Sawyer Essay
The Adventures of Tom Sawyer
Mark Twain wrote The Adventures of Tom Sawyer in 1876. The story tells of Tom, a young and excitable boy who lives on the Mississippi with his Aunt Polly and his half brother Sid. Whilst the book predominantly tells of Tom’s adventures and the mischief in which he involves himself, it also provides a great deal of insight into the society that was in evidence at the time and the way in which individuals interacted with one another. This paper analyses the character of Tom Sawyer and how his exchanges and behavior provide us with a view of his place within society. The relationships that Tom has throughout the novel will be considered together with the way in which he changes and matures as the novel progresses.
The story takes place within a small American town where members of the society had strict and routine lifestyles that revolved primarily around the church and the expectations that they placed upon one another. This type of lifestyle is dull and unappealing to Tom and he finds the institutions that are forced upon him, school and church, boring and restrictive. He adopts a rebellious nature and attempts to escape the boredom he feels at every opportunity. One of the ways in which he does this is through mischievous games and pranks. An example of this can be seen when he releases a beetle in the church and a comical process ensues with a poodle being bitted on the bum and the sermon being completely ruined by the laughter of the congregation. The joy this gives Tom reveals all too well his disrespect for the church: “Tom Sawyer went home quite cheerful, thinking to himself that there was some satisfaction about divine service when there was a bit of variety in it.” (Twain, 2002, 43).
Tom is largely depicted as being typical of boys of his age growing up in the Deep South at that time. He constantly gets himself into trouble but at heart he is a good and loving boy. He is also very intelligent and is able to use his crafty nature to outwit others. One example of this can be seen when his Aunt tells him that he cannot go out and play until he has finished whitewashing the fence. At first rather dejected by the potential hours of labor ahead, he halfheartedly does as he is told and starts his work. However, once given an opportunity to think his situation through, he craftily persuades his friends to join in by making the duty look interesting and appealing. When asked about it by his friends to their disbelief he replies that it suits him: “Like it? Well, I don’t see why I oughtn’t to like it. Does a boy get a chance to whitewash a fence every day?” (Twain, 20). His strategic behavior leads to a situation where he not only gains the assistance of his friends in painting the fence but also manages to secure some of his friend’s toys and possessions in the process.
A very important character within the novel is that of Huckleberry Fin and at times his character is used as a literary device by which we can gain a better understanding of Tom. Huck has been failed by society, his own alcoholic father beat him and now he is victimized and segregated from the rest of the community. He chooses to rebel even more and refuses to follow rules or act in a way that may one day allow him to join the society from which he is isolated. Within the novel Tom looks up to Huckleberry Finn and admires his free and easy lifestyle. As a social outcast Huck is able to define his own rules and live as he pleases. This strongly appeals to Tom, his adventurous nature and his wish to escape reality. They both compliment each other well and dream of a future life together in the circus. Such dreams act as a literary device and fully represent their innocence and idealistic view of the world:
“Church ain’t shucks to a circus. There’s things going on at a circus all the time. I’m going to be a clown in a circus when I grow up.” “Oh, are you! That will be nice. They’re so lovely, all spotted up.” (op cit, 57).
However, whilst Tom and Huck are largely of a fun-loving disposition, they are both highly superstitious. Whilst many of these superstitions are outrageous and humorous, for example the belief that you can throw a dead cat at the devil to rid warts, they play an important role in the novel as they reveal the potential for humans, such as Huck and Tom, to be illogical and hypocritical; they are able to pick and choose the superstitions they subscribe to in order to serve a personal purpose. They may also be perceived as a literary device by which the book’s author, Mark Twain, disputed religion. For him, the superstitions and the unfounded behaviors they produced could potentially be seen as synonymous with the way religion makes people behave. There is too, a seriousness to some of these superstitions. The presence of a dead cat, for example, reveals the serious side to Tom’s character. He suffers from unfounded fears and allows himself to self-indulgently contemplate his own death. Such actions demonstrate the fact that he isn’t able to entirely escape the realities of life but he is yet to fully understand and relate to them. Leland Krauth discussing this in his analysis of Mark Twain’s works:
By often making the superstitions palpably silly, the stuff of the untutored, he creates an ironic perspective through which to view all manifestations of the gothic except one: the indubitable fact that the body suffers pain and is vulnerable to extinction (2002, 110).
The presence of fear within Tom paves the way for his eventual realization that the social institutions which he despises can also offer him a haven from which he can seek safety and belonging.
Throughout the novel the reader is able to observe a gradual change in Tom as he begins to grow and mature. One way in which this manifests itself is through the development of his relationship with Becky Thatcher, with whom he eventually falls in love. In many ways the courtship between Becky and Tom represents a change in focus for Tom and he starts to use his intelligence to conjure up methods of showing of or making Becky jealous as opposed to causing mischief elsewhere: “At recess Tom continued his flirtation with Amy with jubilant self-satisfaction. And he kept drifting about to find Becky and lacerate her with the performance” (123). A further example of his growing maturity can be seen when he and his friends go to Jackson Island. The intention of the excursion is for the boys to experience freedom and self-reliance away from the constraints of the real world. However, Tom isn’t able to fully distance himself from reality and he recognizes that his actions may worry his aunt: “he excitement was gone, now, and Tom and Joe could not keep back thoughts of certain persons at home who were not enjoying this fine frolic as much as they were. Misgivings came; they grew troubled and unhappy; a sigh or two escaped, unawares.” (Twain, 99).
Tom’s time on Jackson Island has a further purpose than just to demonstrate his inability to achieve freedom like Huck. His time on the island offers him an opportunity to distance himself from society and thus places him in a position from where he can observe it more objectively. He begins to recognize that the community does offer him a great deal and that the rules that it dictates do have an advantage to him, “The pursuit of freedom, however illusory, has its price (…) Tom’s growing sense of responsibility, combined with his discovery of the treasure, makes him give up at least some of his wild ways and submit to the restrictions of society” (Novel Guide, 2009).
Through the utilization of this scenario Mark Twain makes a very important point; freedom comes at a price. Whilst Huck is a character that the boys worship as a status of free will and liberty, he is an outsider who is shunned by society and has no one to protect and look out for him. Tom may have to attend institutions that he despises, he is well looked after and cared for and is offered a degree of safety and protection. The relationship between society and freedom is further emphasized when Huck comes into wealth. The money gives him an opportunity for an entirely new life, one that permits him a social standing. However, he is no longer as free as he once was:
Huck Fin’s wealth and the fact that he was now under the widow Douglas’ protection introduced him into society- no, dragged him into it, hurled him into it- and his sufferings were almost more than he could bear (Twain, 211).
By the end of the novel Tom has matured significantly and his previous rejection of all institutions appears to have subsided as he contemplates an education at the National Military Academy for a future career as a lawyer. Huck however, is unable to assimilate himself in society in the same way as Tom and he eventually turns his back on it in favor of his previous life. The boys are on the cusp of their adult life and for this reason Twain terminates the tale, “So endeth this chronicle. It being strictly a history of a boy, it must stop here; the story could not go much further without becoming the history of a man” (Twain, 254). Whilst the fact that the boys are still plotting to form a “robber gang” reveals that they are still young at heart, Tom’s determination for the gang to be “respectable” is thoroughly representative of the chances that have taken place in him. He is now a respected member of society and he wishes to remain as such, Huck’s lifestyle no longer holds the appeal that it once did.
Krauth, Leland. Mark Twain ; Company – Six Literary Relations. Athens, Ga: University of Georgia Press, 2003.
“NovelGuide: The Adventures of Tom Sawyer: Theme Analysis.” Novelguide: Free Study Guides, Free Book Summaries, Free Book Notes, ; More. 23 Apr. 2009 ;http://www.novelguide.com/TheAdventuresofTomSawyer/themeanalysis.html;.
Twain, Mark. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer (Mark Twain Library). Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. | 2,153 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Famous as the Lords of the Ocean, the Vikings had their homeland in the Nordic regions of Europe known today as Scandinavia.
Many associate Vikings with brutal robbers and people were terrified when they spotted a Viking ship approaching.
It’s true that Vikings were tough warriors who conquered many territories, but these people were also members of an amazing ancient culture that many are unfamiliar with. The legacy and traditions of the Vikings are still alive today, not only in Scandinavia, but also in countries they visited.
In this article, we examine facts and history about the Vikings who became known as the tough Norse seafaring people.
Viking culture is today associated with poetry, woodcarving and storytelling, colorful shields, berserkers, longships, Valhalla, the one-eyed god Odin and men drinking out of skulls or dying with sword in hand.
Their culture was rich and left traces in almost every area of social life.
Vikings were warriors, traders, farmers or craftsmen and shared common features such as house forms, jewelry, tools and everyday equipment. They lived in the Age of the Vikings, from around 800 AD to 1050 AD.
Vikings had a pantheon of gods and a non-standardized alphabet, called runes. They became also famous for their sailing techniques, weapons and a code of conduct.
In the Viking Age society, people were divided into three main classes; the noblemen called Jarls, the middle class, free Vikings (farmers, craftsmen, tradesmen) called Karls, and the slaves — called Thralls, who had many tasks. Kings, princess and nobles, high officials, military leaders were above them.
A household in Viking times could be very large, for one family, relatives, and employees. Houses were built of wood, stone and peat, usually consisting of one long enclosed space with a fire place in the middle, with areas for cooking, eating, sleeping and an indoor relaxation. Vikings enjoyed playing a variety of board games during long, cold winter evenings. One of the most popular board games was the Hnefatafl.
People cultivated rye, barley, oats, wheat, cabbage, peas, beans and root vegetables and used the Radl (primitive wooden plow) which prepared the ground for sowing, spades, wooden forks, and flails. Grain and hay was cut with an iron sickle and knifes were used to cut leaves. Vikings’ farm animals included pigs, sheep, goats, cattle, horses, geese and chickens.
The family was very important to the Vikings, who kept family possessions and valuables in wooden chests, locked with padlocks.
The Viking woman had a respected position in society. She was considered an equal with her husband in almost everything. When the men were out on trips women took care of the household and the defense of the estate, if necessary.
Evidence suggests that there were women warriors in the Viking era (although very rarely). Some experts suggest that Sela, Lathgertha, Hetha and Visna may well have been the names of warrior women.
The Vikings introduced excellent ceramics, distinctive style of dress with a variety of patterns and ornaments, and hairstyle.
Vikings wore clothes similar to those of people in England, Scotland and Wales at that time. Men wore tunics and trousers. Women wore long dresses, with a kind of long apron. Clothes were made from wool, linen and animal skins.
Warriors had helmets and their weapons were — a short sword and a round shield.
Vikings believed in two main families (“clans”) of gods: the Aesir (sky gods, or gods and goddesses of humankind) and the Vanir (earth Gods, or gods and goddesses of nature). They also believed in elves, dwarves, trolls and intelligent, powerful animals, like Jormungand, the sea-serpent and Fenrir.
The Tree of Life, Yggdrasil played an important role in Norse myths and legends. They also believed in Valhalla, the home for warriors who died gloriously in battle. According to Viking beliefs, the warriors who died in battle, were abducted by Valkyrie, virgins in paradise and taken by them to Valhalla, where they could feast among the gods.
The most important god was Odin (also known as Wotan). He was the god of war, magic and justice. Thor was a warrior god and god of thunder and lightning. Freyr with his sister, Freya, were gods of fertility. Behind them further was a whole pantheon of gods of Asgard, home of the gods.
End of the world in Vikings’ beliefs was Ragnarok (twilight of the gods), where a final battle will take place between good and evil, which in turn would result in the advent of a new era.
The Vikings had their own simple alphabet, Futhark – runes. Runic inscriptions have been found where Vikings lived. Runes were written on wood, bone, metal and stones. The most amazing examples of runic inscriptions are free-standing, vertical rocks.
Depending on the geographical location, the sign of the Futhark could vary.
The Rök Stone is the longest runic inscription ever discovered.
The rune stones of the Viking period were erected in memory and honor of the dead – mostly powerful people and their honorable deeds but also informed about sad fates of ordinary people (men and women). Often mentioned are the deceased’s closest kin, position in society, a short description of his or her character and the circumstances surrounding death.
Painted in bright colors, rune stones were intended to be visible by standing near roads or bridges, but they were not necessarily placed at the burial of the person they commemorated.
Around 250 rune stones are known from Viking Age Denmark after Harald Bluetooth erected the large Jelling Stone for his father, Gorm the Old, and his mother, Thyra, around 970. Most of the rune stones in Denmark were raised in the period c. 975-1025.
Most of the Scandinavian examples are from Sweden, where there are over 3000 inscriptions.
The great merit of the Vikings was to perfect the art of navigation. They were skilled ancient seafarers and ship builders.
Their famous longships, with oars along almost the entire length of a boat) were light and narrow wooden boats with a shallow-draft hull designed for easy navigation in shallow waters and for speed, reaching 15 knots in good weather conditions. The longships were double-ended, so they could reverse direction without needing to turn around – a major advantage in a sea packed with concealed icebergs and sea ice.
Longships symbolized the power of the Vikings and were decorated with carved dragon head that deterred enemies. Symbols were important to the Vikings.
The fleets, sailing to England, Scotland, France and Ireland, contained hundreds of longships, mainly used as warships and their other ships called Knarrs (or knorrs in Old Norse), which were slower served as passenger and cargo ships.Known as the lords of the oceans, the Vikings developed navigation to perfection, which in those days was very difficult. They carried portable wooden sundials which helped them on clear days and sunstones the so-called Alderney-like crystals could really have been used as an accurate optical sun compass as an aid to ancient navigation, when the Sun was hidden by clouds or below the horizon.
A wealthy Viking’s complete set of weapons was: a spear, one or two javelins, a wooden shield, a Danish axe and a sword, “fire of Odin”.
Additionally, Glima — the martial arts system — was used by the Vikings. The word Glíma in Old Norse means glimpse or flash, which describes the system’s techniques. Glima is in two categories — Combat Glima and Sport Glima.
They had good armor, shields and a plethora of weapons, including double-edged swords. The prestige as a man was manifest in the fine craftsmanship of his weapons, which were so much part of him, that they had personal names like “leg-biter” or “bone-crusher” or “golden-hilt”.
By the 1100s the Vikings were weakened by domestic unrest. At the same time, many other European countries were becoming stronger and more difficult targets. The Viking raids stopped about 1100. Then, the majority of the Viking converted to Christianity and became less warlike.
Written by – A. Sutherland AncientPages.com Staff Writer
Copyright © AncientPages.com All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or part without the express written permission of AncientPages.com | <urn:uuid:9d94071d-9836-40c2-ad25-dc8399f8babd> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://tall-white-aliens.com/?p=11057 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250628549.43/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125011232-20200125040232-00467.warc.gz | en | 0.980487 | 1,827 | 3.640625 | 4 | [
0.20914170145988464,
0.5941929817199707,
0.07227622717618942,
-0.2721977233886719,
0.18135955929756165,
0.032757434993982315,
-0.07125527411699295,
0.019831236451864243,
0.04544537886977196,
-0.18087762594223022,
0.11742456257343292,
-0.22429914772510529,
0.18557047843933105,
0.10597047954... | 9 | Famous as the Lords of the Ocean, the Vikings had their homeland in the Nordic regions of Europe known today as Scandinavia.
Many associate Vikings with brutal robbers and people were terrified when they spotted a Viking ship approaching.
It’s true that Vikings were tough warriors who conquered many territories, but these people were also members of an amazing ancient culture that many are unfamiliar with. The legacy and traditions of the Vikings are still alive today, not only in Scandinavia, but also in countries they visited.
In this article, we examine facts and history about the Vikings who became known as the tough Norse seafaring people.
Viking culture is today associated with poetry, woodcarving and storytelling, colorful shields, berserkers, longships, Valhalla, the one-eyed god Odin and men drinking out of skulls or dying with sword in hand.
Their culture was rich and left traces in almost every area of social life.
Vikings were warriors, traders, farmers or craftsmen and shared common features such as house forms, jewelry, tools and everyday equipment. They lived in the Age of the Vikings, from around 800 AD to 1050 AD.
Vikings had a pantheon of gods and a non-standardized alphabet, called runes. They became also famous for their sailing techniques, weapons and a code of conduct.
In the Viking Age society, people were divided into three main classes; the noblemen called Jarls, the middle class, free Vikings (farmers, craftsmen, tradesmen) called Karls, and the slaves — called Thralls, who had many tasks. Kings, princess and nobles, high officials, military leaders were above them.
A household in Viking times could be very large, for one family, relatives, and employees. Houses were built of wood, stone and peat, usually consisting of one long enclosed space with a fire place in the middle, with areas for cooking, eating, sleeping and an indoor relaxation. Vikings enjoyed playing a variety of board games during long, cold winter evenings. One of the most popular board games was the Hnefatafl.
People cultivated rye, barley, oats, wheat, cabbage, peas, beans and root vegetables and used the Radl (primitive wooden plow) which prepared the ground for sowing, spades, wooden forks, and flails. Grain and hay was cut with an iron sickle and knifes were used to cut leaves. Vikings’ farm animals included pigs, sheep, goats, cattle, horses, geese and chickens.
The family was very important to the Vikings, who kept family possessions and valuables in wooden chests, locked with padlocks.
The Viking woman had a respected position in society. She was considered an equal with her husband in almost everything. When the men were out on trips women took care of the household and the defense of the estate, if necessary.
Evidence suggests that there were women warriors in the Viking era (although very rarely). Some experts suggest that Sela, Lathgertha, Hetha and Visna may well have been the names of warrior women.
The Vikings introduced excellent ceramics, distinctive style of dress with a variety of patterns and ornaments, and hairstyle.
Vikings wore clothes similar to those of people in England, Scotland and Wales at that time. Men wore tunics and trousers. Women wore long dresses, with a kind of long apron. Clothes were made from wool, linen and animal skins.
Warriors had helmets and their weapons were — a short sword and a round shield.
Vikings believed in two main families (“clans”) of gods: the Aesir (sky gods, or gods and goddesses of humankind) and the Vanir (earth Gods, or gods and goddesses of nature). They also believed in elves, dwarves, trolls and intelligent, powerful animals, like Jormungand, the sea-serpent and Fenrir.
The Tree of Life, Yggdrasil played an important role in Norse myths and legends. They also believed in Valhalla, the home for warriors who died gloriously in battle. According to Viking beliefs, the warriors who died in battle, were abducted by Valkyrie, virgins in paradise and taken by them to Valhalla, where they could feast among the gods.
The most important god was Odin (also known as Wotan). He was the god of war, magic and justice. Thor was a warrior god and god of thunder and lightning. Freyr with his sister, Freya, were gods of fertility. Behind them further was a whole pantheon of gods of Asgard, home of the gods.
End of the world in Vikings’ beliefs was Ragnarok (twilight of the gods), where a final battle will take place between good and evil, which in turn would result in the advent of a new era.
The Vikings had their own simple alphabet, Futhark – runes. Runic inscriptions have been found where Vikings lived. Runes were written on wood, bone, metal and stones. The most amazing examples of runic inscriptions are free-standing, vertical rocks.
Depending on the geographical location, the sign of the Futhark could vary.
The Rök Stone is the longest runic inscription ever discovered.
The rune stones of the Viking period were erected in memory and honor of the dead – mostly powerful people and their honorable deeds but also informed about sad fates of ordinary people (men and women). Often mentioned are the deceased’s closest kin, position in society, a short description of his or her character and the circumstances surrounding death.
Painted in bright colors, rune stones were intended to be visible by standing near roads or bridges, but they were not necessarily placed at the burial of the person they commemorated.
Around 250 rune stones are known from Viking Age Denmark after Harald Bluetooth erected the large Jelling Stone for his father, Gorm the Old, and his mother, Thyra, around 970. Most of the rune stones in Denmark were raised in the period c. 975-1025.
Most of the Scandinavian examples are from Sweden, where there are over 3000 inscriptions.
The great merit of the Vikings was to perfect the art of navigation. They were skilled ancient seafarers and ship builders.
Their famous longships, with oars along almost the entire length of a boat) were light and narrow wooden boats with a shallow-draft hull designed for easy navigation in shallow waters and for speed, reaching 15 knots in good weather conditions. The longships were double-ended, so they could reverse direction without needing to turn around – a major advantage in a sea packed with concealed icebergs and sea ice.
Longships symbolized the power of the Vikings and were decorated with carved dragon head that deterred enemies. Symbols were important to the Vikings.
The fleets, sailing to England, Scotland, France and Ireland, contained hundreds of longships, mainly used as warships and their other ships called Knarrs (or knorrs in Old Norse), which were slower served as passenger and cargo ships.Known as the lords of the oceans, the Vikings developed navigation to perfection, which in those days was very difficult. They carried portable wooden sundials which helped them on clear days and sunstones the so-called Alderney-like crystals could really have been used as an accurate optical sun compass as an aid to ancient navigation, when the Sun was hidden by clouds or below the horizon.
A wealthy Viking’s complete set of weapons was: a spear, one or two javelins, a wooden shield, a Danish axe and a sword, “fire of Odin”.
Additionally, Glima — the martial arts system — was used by the Vikings. The word Glíma in Old Norse means glimpse or flash, which describes the system’s techniques. Glima is in two categories — Combat Glima and Sport Glima.
They had good armor, shields and a plethora of weapons, including double-edged swords. The prestige as a man was manifest in the fine craftsmanship of his weapons, which were so much part of him, that they had personal names like “leg-biter” or “bone-crusher” or “golden-hilt”.
By the 1100s the Vikings were weakened by domestic unrest. At the same time, many other European countries were becoming stronger and more difficult targets. The Viking raids stopped about 1100. Then, the majority of the Viking converted to Christianity and became less warlike.
Written by – A. Sutherland AncientPages.com Staff Writer
Copyright © AncientPages.com All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or part without the express written permission of AncientPages.com | 1,795 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In Luke 10:25–37, Jesus tells the parable of the Good Samaritan to show what it means to love your neighbor as yourself. In the parable, a man is traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho when thieves attack him and leave him on the road severely wounded. A priest and a Levite come by and see the man, but they pass on the other side of the road. But when a Samaritan comes along, he sees the man and has compassion, bandaging his wounds and helping him to an inn where he can receive medical attention. He pays for all the man’s bills.
What makes this story relevant is not only the lesson of kindness, but also the lesson of anti-racism. You see, the man from Jerusalem was a Jew, and the man from Samaria was a half Jew. Jews and Samaritans did not get along because they each perceived themselves as better.
You probably know many people who look different from you. Think about the people on the major continents: Africa, Australia, Asia, Europe, North America, and South America. In each continent and in each country, skin tones, eyes shapes and colors, and hair textures vary.
But it wasn’t always this way!
At the time of the Tower of Babel, all the people in the world lived in one place. Because they were all together, they all spoke the same language, practiced the same culture, and contained a vast gene pool that kept them all looking very different even though they all lived in one place. For instance, a mother and father could have had four (and more!) children that looked nothing alike!
But people of Babel had disobeyed God by staying in one place, for he had told them go forth and inhabit the earth. Because they disobeyed him, God confused their languages. Changing the languages forced the people to separate and inhabit different parts of the world.
Because the people at Babel were separated into smaller groups, their gene pool was also significantly limited. As a result, certain dominant characteristics developed in each people group. Over time, humans started believing that some people groups are better than others. This belief is racism, and it is sinful.
It’s important to remember that all people living today have a common ancestry through Noah and his wife and ultimately Adam and Eve. We may look different from each other, but we are all part of the same human race! God loves all people and sent his only Son so that we all can have eternal life.
After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands (Revelation 7:9) | <urn:uuid:3e5e6d4f-6fc1-4adc-84d9-a8a8bf568b96> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://answersingenesis.org/kids/worldview/why-babel-matters-today-fighting-prejudice-and-racism/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251773463.72/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128030221-20200128060221-00549.warc.gz | en | 0.98018 | 571 | 3.578125 | 4 | [
0.3423222005367279,
0.11363106966018677,
-0.050290148705244064,
-0.1565227210521698,
0.03591301292181015,
0.3951859474182129,
0.7154352068901062,
0.11860087513923645,
0.14509043097496033,
-0.09235119819641113,
0.03707490116357803,
-0.0640806183218956,
0.33681589365005493,
0.006134483031928... | 2 | In Luke 10:25–37, Jesus tells the parable of the Good Samaritan to show what it means to love your neighbor as yourself. In the parable, a man is traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho when thieves attack him and leave him on the road severely wounded. A priest and a Levite come by and see the man, but they pass on the other side of the road. But when a Samaritan comes along, he sees the man and has compassion, bandaging his wounds and helping him to an inn where he can receive medical attention. He pays for all the man’s bills.
What makes this story relevant is not only the lesson of kindness, but also the lesson of anti-racism. You see, the man from Jerusalem was a Jew, and the man from Samaria was a half Jew. Jews and Samaritans did not get along because they each perceived themselves as better.
You probably know many people who look different from you. Think about the people on the major continents: Africa, Australia, Asia, Europe, North America, and South America. In each continent and in each country, skin tones, eyes shapes and colors, and hair textures vary.
But it wasn’t always this way!
At the time of the Tower of Babel, all the people in the world lived in one place. Because they were all together, they all spoke the same language, practiced the same culture, and contained a vast gene pool that kept them all looking very different even though they all lived in one place. For instance, a mother and father could have had four (and more!) children that looked nothing alike!
But people of Babel had disobeyed God by staying in one place, for he had told them go forth and inhabit the earth. Because they disobeyed him, God confused their languages. Changing the languages forced the people to separate and inhabit different parts of the world.
Because the people at Babel were separated into smaller groups, their gene pool was also significantly limited. As a result, certain dominant characteristics developed in each people group. Over time, humans started believing that some people groups are better than others. This belief is racism, and it is sinful.
It’s important to remember that all people living today have a common ancestry through Noah and his wife and ultimately Adam and Eve. We may look different from each other, but we are all part of the same human race! God loves all people and sent his only Son so that we all can have eternal life.
After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands (Revelation 7:9) | 568 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The first international team to play in England, the Aborigine cricket team of 1868
What was the Role of Sport in the British Empire?
Sport was used to transmit values to local populations
In the last quarter of the c19th sport came to play a crucial role in the development and maintenance of the British Empire, especially in the transmission of its values at a time when it was claimed that the Empire had a moral dimension. Sport had always provided opportunities in the Empire for leisure, entertainment and training for soldiers but in the later part of the c19th it became the means by which values were transmitted to local populations, especially local elites, and the means by which the local settler population and the colonial government maintained their coherence and support of the Imperial project.
'Mission to Civilise' justified the expansion of the empire
In the period after 1870 the nature of the British Empire changed. It took centre stage in politics as politicians and the educated classes saw empire as the way of meeting the threat posed by the emergence of European countries like France, Germany and Italy. European empires expanded as countries saw empires as providing opportunities to develop ailing economies. Britain claimed that the development of her colonies had a moral dimension - to justify the conquest and suppression of undeveloped countries in Asia and Africa. The British now talked about a ‘Mission to Civilise’ as justifying imperial expansion although acquiring colonies for strategic and trading reasons remained as important as ever.
As the Empire expanded young men were needed to travel to isolated spots to live in extreme conditions exposed to a variety of diseases. This came at a time when British public schools were changing as a result of the reforms introduced by Arnold and the influence of ‘Tom Brown’s Schooldays’. The public schools increasingly saw the development of character as a fundamental part of the education they provided. The character they sought to develop was what they believed was necessary for those working in the far flung parts of the Empire. Self control, good health, fitness, ability to work in a team and puttking the team before yourself, group cooperation and solidarity were the characteristics that the public schools sought to develop.
Thomas Arnold of Rugby School
Thomas Arnold of Rugby began a revolution in education
Although Arnold at Rugby had initiated the reforms needed to improve the quality of education provided by public schools, it was headmasters like Weldon at Harrow, Rendall at Winchester, Hutchinson Almond at Loretto and Warre at Eton who subscribed to the Imperial project and devoted themselves and their schools to developing young men who would run the Empire as soldiers or administrators or even Governors. It was the public school that sustained the empire and promoted the empire as a means of Christianising the world. As CA Vieland said, empire was simply ‘the best thing that ever happened to mankind.’ The public school became an agent of imperial propaganda committing their students to a life of imperial duty and a belief in the moral dimension of the British Empire.
The development of a muscular elite by the public schools was achieved through the development of sport which was seen as developing not just fitness but also a feeling of solidarity duty and service, and this was seen as providing a vital component in the creation of an enlarged British Empire. The British came to be seen as masterful, resourceful and foreigners came to be jealous of how the British got things done. The man who founded the modern Olympic Games, Baron De Coubertin, saw games as providing the qualities that enabled Britain to build the largest empire the world had ever seen by the end of the c19th. The games which were played in the public schools were team games like cricket and rugby. These games and the way in which they were played, developed the qualities deemed necessary to win and maintain the empire. Games enabled players to demonstrate leadership, loyalty, group work and solidarity, sacrifice, self-control and fitness as well as initiative and personality.
Although entrants to the Indian Civil Service had to take an examination which tested their academic abilities, other imperial services emphasised the importance of success in sport as a criteria for appointment. It became to be better to be good at sport than to be a good scholar and selection boards increasingly paid more attention to the athletic record of applicants and their school than their academic record.
Sport was seen as a way of developing social cohesion
Sport became not just a means of developing character and fitness but was always a source of entertainment and leisure for colonialist and soldiers alike. It was also a means of developing social cohesion among the social classes and providing opportunities of communication between classes and indeed between colonialists and native populations. Class was as important in the colonies as it was in Britain although the empire did provide opportunities for social mobility.
James Logan left Scotland for South Africa as a nineteen year old railway porter and saw cricket as the means of ingratiating himself in South Africa colonial society. Born in 1857 as the son of a railwaymen, he emigrated to South Africa in 1877. His business flair soon saw him establish catering establishments along the railway network in South Africa and as he became wealthier he entered politics to extend his influence, becoming a member of the legislative assembly in 1894. He used his money to found the town of Matjiesfontein and then saw the promotion of cricket in South Africa as a means of enhancing his reputation as well as a way of making himself more money.
It was during the period of Logan’s influence in South African society that cricket became a national institution and part of the training of an Englishman abroad. The destiny of cricket was linked to the destiny of Britain and its role in colonial society was important in maintaining and promoting English values. Cricket had become by the end of the century the dominant sport in Britain and in the Empire and James Logan recognised this. He realised that promoting cricket in South Africa would enable him to become socially more respected and he began to use his money to develop the game. He built a first class cricket ground in Matjiesfontein and as his reputation for a promoter for cricket developed, became involved in bringing teams from England to South Africa. Logan hoped that his association with cricket would divert interest from his more dubious activities. He joined charitable boards along with James Sivewright and Cecil Rhodes but this could not prevent his being embroiled in a scandal which led to Rhodes resigning as Prime Minister. Cricket had been the vehicle for his rise in South Africa society. It was also the means by which the likes of immigrants like Logan could mix with his social betters and gain prestige.
Throughout the colonies, sport was deemed necessary to develop imperial values and provided a sense of shared roots and a sense of Britishness. For the colonial community living in harsh conditions far away from home, cricket matches provided opportunities for communities to come together and play out what it meant to be British. Cricket matches also provided opportunities for the different elements of colonial society to come together and demonstrate their commitment to the colonial enterprise.
Cricket was the most important game that was played around the empire and in Britain at the time. It captured the public imagination in Britain in a new age of improved communications but was also a game that could be played in most colonies unlike football which was not suited to the hot climates and hard grounds. Tennis was also a game played around the empire – it provided opportunities for social contact – and many imperial servants built tennis courts in the grounds of their houses or civil buildings. Horse racing was also popular as providing an opportunity for all classes to come together.
In India, polo and pig sticking became popular amongst the officer class as was hunting. Games and sport was important for the military to develop fitness but also to fight boredom. Snooker also became popular among the officer class as providing entertainment on long winter evenings.
Sport could bring together administrators, settlers and the local population
Sport was important to inculcate local populations with imperial values and to promote greater social cohesion amongst settler populations and administrators but it came to be seen as an important way of building bridges with local elites. The British could never have governed the empire without the consent of the governed. In India 1,000 civil servants governed a population of over 280 million but these 1,000 civil servants responsible for running the Raj could not have done so without the co-operation of millions of Indians who filled the ranks of the army, the bureaucracy and the police. In the countryside where most Indians lived without ever setting eyes on an Englishman, the administration was run by village headmen and functionaries who kept the fiscal, judicial and transport systems ticking over. It was important to make the Indian governing elite feel part of the administration and on good terms with the British. The Indian Uprising of 1857 had shown how powerless the British were if the Indian people withdrew their consent. Sport came to seen as a way of bringing the British and local elites together and enabling a limited amount of assimilation to take place. Sport also helped to foster loyalty to the imperial government.
Schools like Rajkumar College and Mayo College prepared future local princes for government
When the British established schools abroad for the sons of local elites, the curriculum always mirrored the curriculum of British public schools with sport playing an important part in inculcating imperial values. Schools like Rajkumar College and Mayo College in India came to be seen as crucial to the development of local princes who supported the Raj.
Rajkumar School, where Ranjitsinhji received his education
One of Rajkumer College’s famous sons was Ranjitsinhji who represented Sussex and England from 1895-1904 and who became the Maharajah Jam Saheb of Nawanagar. His education by the British at Rajkumer and Cambridge left him with a commitment to the British Raj and a love of cricket. In the difficult years after WW1 he supported a federal system for India with the local princes like himself having local powers.
Ranjitsinhji as the Jam Sahib of Nawanagar
Ranjitsinhji playing for Sussex
Elsewhere in the Empire similar schools to Rajkumar College were founded. In East Africa Bishop Tucker founded Budo College in Uganda to teach discipline in work and games in a boarding school environment, and Frederick Lugard in Nigeria proposed to educate the sons of local chieftains so that boys could acquire Anglo-Saxon values.
Cricket could be played in all the colonies unlike football
Football was never the imperial game that cricket was. It was not played in the public schools where the future administrators of the Empire were educated and the climate was not conducive although rugby was taken up in the white dominions. Cricket could be played in all the colonies of the empire and indeed became the national game of many. Although cricket came to be seen as a way of transmitting imperial values it ultimately became in many colonies a means of developing and fostering a sense of nationhood and victories against England were seen as evidence of the gaining of maturity by colonies and the justification for being granted self government.
Peter Crowhurst, updated January 2020
Sport and the British by Richard Holt, 1989
British Sport, A Social History by Dennis Brailsford, 1992
The Games Ethic and Imperialism by J.A.Mangan, 1986
Empire, War and Cricket by Dean Allen, 2015
Batting for the Empire by Mario Rodriques, 2003 (A Political Biography of Ranjitsinhji)
Sport and the English Middle Classes, 1870-1914 by John Lowerson, 1993 | <urn:uuid:d7bd36ae-8341-420f-95cc-85d92949bcf5> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://britishempire.me.uk/what-was-the-role-of-sport-in-the-british-empire-.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251678287.60/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125161753-20200125190753-00248.warc.gz | en | 0.981349 | 2,357 | 3.4375 | 3 | [
0.04966128617525101,
0.29028210043907166,
0.5887139439582825,
-0.7547874450683594,
-0.10272764414548874,
0.13933183252811432,
0.036157310009002686,
0.3813232481479645,
0.12342134118080139,
0.2643483877182007,
0.048445358872413635,
-1.0231435298919678,
0.004843698814511299,
0.33835220336914... | 3 | The first international team to play in England, the Aborigine cricket team of 1868
What was the Role of Sport in the British Empire?
Sport was used to transmit values to local populations
In the last quarter of the c19th sport came to play a crucial role in the development and maintenance of the British Empire, especially in the transmission of its values at a time when it was claimed that the Empire had a moral dimension. Sport had always provided opportunities in the Empire for leisure, entertainment and training for soldiers but in the later part of the c19th it became the means by which values were transmitted to local populations, especially local elites, and the means by which the local settler population and the colonial government maintained their coherence and support of the Imperial project.
'Mission to Civilise' justified the expansion of the empire
In the period after 1870 the nature of the British Empire changed. It took centre stage in politics as politicians and the educated classes saw empire as the way of meeting the threat posed by the emergence of European countries like France, Germany and Italy. European empires expanded as countries saw empires as providing opportunities to develop ailing economies. Britain claimed that the development of her colonies had a moral dimension - to justify the conquest and suppression of undeveloped countries in Asia and Africa. The British now talked about a ‘Mission to Civilise’ as justifying imperial expansion although acquiring colonies for strategic and trading reasons remained as important as ever.
As the Empire expanded young men were needed to travel to isolated spots to live in extreme conditions exposed to a variety of diseases. This came at a time when British public schools were changing as a result of the reforms introduced by Arnold and the influence of ‘Tom Brown’s Schooldays’. The public schools increasingly saw the development of character as a fundamental part of the education they provided. The character they sought to develop was what they believed was necessary for those working in the far flung parts of the Empire. Self control, good health, fitness, ability to work in a team and puttking the team before yourself, group cooperation and solidarity were the characteristics that the public schools sought to develop.
Thomas Arnold of Rugby School
Thomas Arnold of Rugby began a revolution in education
Although Arnold at Rugby had initiated the reforms needed to improve the quality of education provided by public schools, it was headmasters like Weldon at Harrow, Rendall at Winchester, Hutchinson Almond at Loretto and Warre at Eton who subscribed to the Imperial project and devoted themselves and their schools to developing young men who would run the Empire as soldiers or administrators or even Governors. It was the public school that sustained the empire and promoted the empire as a means of Christianising the world. As CA Vieland said, empire was simply ‘the best thing that ever happened to mankind.’ The public school became an agent of imperial propaganda committing their students to a life of imperial duty and a belief in the moral dimension of the British Empire.
The development of a muscular elite by the public schools was achieved through the development of sport which was seen as developing not just fitness but also a feeling of solidarity duty and service, and this was seen as providing a vital component in the creation of an enlarged British Empire. The British came to be seen as masterful, resourceful and foreigners came to be jealous of how the British got things done. The man who founded the modern Olympic Games, Baron De Coubertin, saw games as providing the qualities that enabled Britain to build the largest empire the world had ever seen by the end of the c19th. The games which were played in the public schools were team games like cricket and rugby. These games and the way in which they were played, developed the qualities deemed necessary to win and maintain the empire. Games enabled players to demonstrate leadership, loyalty, group work and solidarity, sacrifice, self-control and fitness as well as initiative and personality.
Although entrants to the Indian Civil Service had to take an examination which tested their academic abilities, other imperial services emphasised the importance of success in sport as a criteria for appointment. It became to be better to be good at sport than to be a good scholar and selection boards increasingly paid more attention to the athletic record of applicants and their school than their academic record.
Sport was seen as a way of developing social cohesion
Sport became not just a means of developing character and fitness but was always a source of entertainment and leisure for colonialist and soldiers alike. It was also a means of developing social cohesion among the social classes and providing opportunities of communication between classes and indeed between colonialists and native populations. Class was as important in the colonies as it was in Britain although the empire did provide opportunities for social mobility.
James Logan left Scotland for South Africa as a nineteen year old railway porter and saw cricket as the means of ingratiating himself in South Africa colonial society. Born in 1857 as the son of a railwaymen, he emigrated to South Africa in 1877. His business flair soon saw him establish catering establishments along the railway network in South Africa and as he became wealthier he entered politics to extend his influence, becoming a member of the legislative assembly in 1894. He used his money to found the town of Matjiesfontein and then saw the promotion of cricket in South Africa as a means of enhancing his reputation as well as a way of making himself more money.
It was during the period of Logan’s influence in South African society that cricket became a national institution and part of the training of an Englishman abroad. The destiny of cricket was linked to the destiny of Britain and its role in colonial society was important in maintaining and promoting English values. Cricket had become by the end of the century the dominant sport in Britain and in the Empire and James Logan recognised this. He realised that promoting cricket in South Africa would enable him to become socially more respected and he began to use his money to develop the game. He built a first class cricket ground in Matjiesfontein and as his reputation for a promoter for cricket developed, became involved in bringing teams from England to South Africa. Logan hoped that his association with cricket would divert interest from his more dubious activities. He joined charitable boards along with James Sivewright and Cecil Rhodes but this could not prevent his being embroiled in a scandal which led to Rhodes resigning as Prime Minister. Cricket had been the vehicle for his rise in South Africa society. It was also the means by which the likes of immigrants like Logan could mix with his social betters and gain prestige.
Throughout the colonies, sport was deemed necessary to develop imperial values and provided a sense of shared roots and a sense of Britishness. For the colonial community living in harsh conditions far away from home, cricket matches provided opportunities for communities to come together and play out what it meant to be British. Cricket matches also provided opportunities for the different elements of colonial society to come together and demonstrate their commitment to the colonial enterprise.
Cricket was the most important game that was played around the empire and in Britain at the time. It captured the public imagination in Britain in a new age of improved communications but was also a game that could be played in most colonies unlike football which was not suited to the hot climates and hard grounds. Tennis was also a game played around the empire – it provided opportunities for social contact – and many imperial servants built tennis courts in the grounds of their houses or civil buildings. Horse racing was also popular as providing an opportunity for all classes to come together.
In India, polo and pig sticking became popular amongst the officer class as was hunting. Games and sport was important for the military to develop fitness but also to fight boredom. Snooker also became popular among the officer class as providing entertainment on long winter evenings.
Sport could bring together administrators, settlers and the local population
Sport was important to inculcate local populations with imperial values and to promote greater social cohesion amongst settler populations and administrators but it came to be seen as an important way of building bridges with local elites. The British could never have governed the empire without the consent of the governed. In India 1,000 civil servants governed a population of over 280 million but these 1,000 civil servants responsible for running the Raj could not have done so without the co-operation of millions of Indians who filled the ranks of the army, the bureaucracy and the police. In the countryside where most Indians lived without ever setting eyes on an Englishman, the administration was run by village headmen and functionaries who kept the fiscal, judicial and transport systems ticking over. It was important to make the Indian governing elite feel part of the administration and on good terms with the British. The Indian Uprising of 1857 had shown how powerless the British were if the Indian people withdrew their consent. Sport came to seen as a way of bringing the British and local elites together and enabling a limited amount of assimilation to take place. Sport also helped to foster loyalty to the imperial government.
Schools like Rajkumar College and Mayo College prepared future local princes for government
When the British established schools abroad for the sons of local elites, the curriculum always mirrored the curriculum of British public schools with sport playing an important part in inculcating imperial values. Schools like Rajkumar College and Mayo College in India came to be seen as crucial to the development of local princes who supported the Raj.
Rajkumar School, where Ranjitsinhji received his education
One of Rajkumer College’s famous sons was Ranjitsinhji who represented Sussex and England from 1895-1904 and who became the Maharajah Jam Saheb of Nawanagar. His education by the British at Rajkumer and Cambridge left him with a commitment to the British Raj and a love of cricket. In the difficult years after WW1 he supported a federal system for India with the local princes like himself having local powers.
Ranjitsinhji as the Jam Sahib of Nawanagar
Ranjitsinhji playing for Sussex
Elsewhere in the Empire similar schools to Rajkumar College were founded. In East Africa Bishop Tucker founded Budo College in Uganda to teach discipline in work and games in a boarding school environment, and Frederick Lugard in Nigeria proposed to educate the sons of local chieftains so that boys could acquire Anglo-Saxon values.
Cricket could be played in all the colonies unlike football
Football was never the imperial game that cricket was. It was not played in the public schools where the future administrators of the Empire were educated and the climate was not conducive although rugby was taken up in the white dominions. Cricket could be played in all the colonies of the empire and indeed became the national game of many. Although cricket came to be seen as a way of transmitting imperial values it ultimately became in many colonies a means of developing and fostering a sense of nationhood and victories against England were seen as evidence of the gaining of maturity by colonies and the justification for being granted self government.
Peter Crowhurst, updated January 2020
Sport and the British by Richard Holt, 1989
British Sport, A Social History by Dennis Brailsford, 1992
The Games Ethic and Imperialism by J.A.Mangan, 1986
Empire, War and Cricket by Dean Allen, 2015
Batting for the Empire by Mario Rodriques, 2003 (A Political Biography of Ranjitsinhji)
Sport and the English Middle Classes, 1870-1914 by John Lowerson, 1993 | 2,385 | ENGLISH | 1 |
NUCLEAR, BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL WEAPONS
June 13, 2013: The great nuclear disarmament that began in the 1990s continues. While China, Pakistan, India, and North Korea together added 40-50 warheads in the last year, the U.S. and Russia continued to reduce their huge Cold War era nuclear stockpiles by some 1,800 warheads. It was only three years ago that the major powers confirmed how many warheads they had. The holdings were: Britain- 225, France- 300, and the U.S.- 5,113. Unofficially China was believed to have 300, Israel 80, India 70, and Pakistan 75. The U.S. and Russia each had about 2,200 usable warheads and a new treaty in 2010 pledges to reduce that to at least 1,550. The U.S. has 7,700 and Russia 8,500 warheads but most are disassembled or partially disabled. Recycling the nuclear material as power plant fuel takes time.
At the end of the Cold War, the U.S. still had over 20,000 warheads. This is way down from its Cold War peak (in 1967) of 31,225. Since 1945, the U.S. has built over 70,000 nuclear warheads. Only 1,054 were detonated, all but two of them in tests. Detonations ceased, because of a treaty, in 1992. Over the last two decades most of these Cold War era warheads have been demilitarized and their nuclear material recycled as power plant fuel. This was one of the more successful nuclear disarmament efforts since the Cold War ended. It was a joint effort by the United States, Russia, and the successor states of the Soviet Union to round up and secure or destroy thousands of nuclear weapons. It worked. In particular, it assures the smaller weapons (nuclear artillery shells and "backpack" nukes) never fell into terrorist hands. By the end of the 1990s, Russia reported that it had accounted for, and dismantled, all its nuclear armed rocket warheads and artillery shells.
All this was accomplished by an agreement between the United States and Russia to account for all Soviet nuclear weapons and dismantle most of them. The U.S. would provide funding and technical assistance, but the hard work would be carried out by Russian experts and diplomats. Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine inherited nuclear weapons when the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991 (and everyone agreed that whatever Soviet assets were on the territory of the 14 new nations created from parts of the Soviet Union were the property of the new country). Russia, with the financial and diplomatic help of Western nations, bought and dismantled the nukes owned by those three nations.
Russia was quick in getting rid of their smaller nuclear warheads because they had fewer of them (than the U.S.) and wanted to rid themselves of a serious security threat. These small weapons were ideal for terrorists, and if the bad guys got a hold of one and used it, it could be traced back to the manufacturer (via analysis of the radioactive reside). It took the U.S. another three years to get rid of their small nukes. By the early 1970s, the United States had over 7,000 nuclear warheads stored in Europe, most of them 8 inch and 155mm artillery shells. The last of these was finally dismantled in 2003.
Meanwhile, the Russians had other, uniquely Russian, problems. They had a lot (tons) of other highly radioactive material in circulation, much of it in power form, and largely used for medical and industrial purposes. Particularly worrisome are the hundreds of Radiothermal Generators (RTGs) Russia set up in remote parts of the country during the Soviet era. The RTGs were similar to the power supplies found on some space satellites, using radioactive material to generate heat, and thus electricity, for radio beacons and signal repeaters in remote areas. In the early 1990s, the Russians weren't even sure where some of these RTGs were, and there were cases of civilians finding them, cracking them open, and being injured, or killed, from the radiation. The Russians noted that there have been many attempts to steal radioactive material in Russia, but none, so far as is known, have succeeded. All of the RTGs were eventually found and destroyed.
There was one last problem. Russian officials admitted that, during the 1990s, 5-10 pounds of enriched uranium and several ounces of weapons grade plutonium had been stolen from their nuclear power facilities. Some of this stuff was later discovered, in small quantities, in Western Europe, Turkey, and Russia as the thieves sought to sell it. The amount the Russians admit to losing is not enough to make a bomb, and much of the missing stuff could be accounting and handling errors (both common in the Russian bureaucracy).
In the last two decades, the only radioactive material smuggled out of Russia was small quantities, and usually low-level stuff unsuitable for a bomb. Most Russian nukes have been disassembled and their nuclear material turned into power-plant fuel. The remaining nukes are under very tight security and most of their nuclear scientists were given financial and career incentives (paid for by the U.S.) to leave nuclear weapons work behind. Nevertheless, for two decades, breathless new stories of Russian "loose nukes" were a media staple on slow news days. | <urn:uuid:7e164a2e-f433-4d7e-8d42-7058367d53b2> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htchem/articles/20130613.aspx | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608062.57/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123011418-20200123040418-00078.warc.gz | en | 0.980251 | 1,099 | 3.34375 | 3 | [
-0.3416432738304138,
-0.08815385401248932,
0.30904045701026917,
-0.28768086433410645,
0.496315062046051,
-0.11199092119932175,
0.07456937432289124,
0.32352638244628906,
-0.3791743516921997,
-0.11750353872776031,
0.36125195026397705,
-0.12567190825939178,
0.3599897027015686,
0.1543466150760... | 10 | NUCLEAR, BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL WEAPONS
June 13, 2013: The great nuclear disarmament that began in the 1990s continues. While China, Pakistan, India, and North Korea together added 40-50 warheads in the last year, the U.S. and Russia continued to reduce their huge Cold War era nuclear stockpiles by some 1,800 warheads. It was only three years ago that the major powers confirmed how many warheads they had. The holdings were: Britain- 225, France- 300, and the U.S.- 5,113. Unofficially China was believed to have 300, Israel 80, India 70, and Pakistan 75. The U.S. and Russia each had about 2,200 usable warheads and a new treaty in 2010 pledges to reduce that to at least 1,550. The U.S. has 7,700 and Russia 8,500 warheads but most are disassembled or partially disabled. Recycling the nuclear material as power plant fuel takes time.
At the end of the Cold War, the U.S. still had over 20,000 warheads. This is way down from its Cold War peak (in 1967) of 31,225. Since 1945, the U.S. has built over 70,000 nuclear warheads. Only 1,054 were detonated, all but two of them in tests. Detonations ceased, because of a treaty, in 1992. Over the last two decades most of these Cold War era warheads have been demilitarized and their nuclear material recycled as power plant fuel. This was one of the more successful nuclear disarmament efforts since the Cold War ended. It was a joint effort by the United States, Russia, and the successor states of the Soviet Union to round up and secure or destroy thousands of nuclear weapons. It worked. In particular, it assures the smaller weapons (nuclear artillery shells and "backpack" nukes) never fell into terrorist hands. By the end of the 1990s, Russia reported that it had accounted for, and dismantled, all its nuclear armed rocket warheads and artillery shells.
All this was accomplished by an agreement between the United States and Russia to account for all Soviet nuclear weapons and dismantle most of them. The U.S. would provide funding and technical assistance, but the hard work would be carried out by Russian experts and diplomats. Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine inherited nuclear weapons when the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991 (and everyone agreed that whatever Soviet assets were on the territory of the 14 new nations created from parts of the Soviet Union were the property of the new country). Russia, with the financial and diplomatic help of Western nations, bought and dismantled the nukes owned by those three nations.
Russia was quick in getting rid of their smaller nuclear warheads because they had fewer of them (than the U.S.) and wanted to rid themselves of a serious security threat. These small weapons were ideal for terrorists, and if the bad guys got a hold of one and used it, it could be traced back to the manufacturer (via analysis of the radioactive reside). It took the U.S. another three years to get rid of their small nukes. By the early 1970s, the United States had over 7,000 nuclear warheads stored in Europe, most of them 8 inch and 155mm artillery shells. The last of these was finally dismantled in 2003.
Meanwhile, the Russians had other, uniquely Russian, problems. They had a lot (tons) of other highly radioactive material in circulation, much of it in power form, and largely used for medical and industrial purposes. Particularly worrisome are the hundreds of Radiothermal Generators (RTGs) Russia set up in remote parts of the country during the Soviet era. The RTGs were similar to the power supplies found on some space satellites, using radioactive material to generate heat, and thus electricity, for radio beacons and signal repeaters in remote areas. In the early 1990s, the Russians weren't even sure where some of these RTGs were, and there were cases of civilians finding them, cracking them open, and being injured, or killed, from the radiation. The Russians noted that there have been many attempts to steal radioactive material in Russia, but none, so far as is known, have succeeded. All of the RTGs were eventually found and destroyed.
There was one last problem. Russian officials admitted that, during the 1990s, 5-10 pounds of enriched uranium and several ounces of weapons grade plutonium had been stolen from their nuclear power facilities. Some of this stuff was later discovered, in small quantities, in Western Europe, Turkey, and Russia as the thieves sought to sell it. The amount the Russians admit to losing is not enough to make a bomb, and much of the missing stuff could be accounting and handling errors (both common in the Russian bureaucracy).
In the last two decades, the only radioactive material smuggled out of Russia was small quantities, and usually low-level stuff unsuitable for a bomb. Most Russian nukes have been disassembled and their nuclear material turned into power-plant fuel. The remaining nukes are under very tight security and most of their nuclear scientists were given financial and career incentives (paid for by the U.S.) to leave nuclear weapons work behind. Nevertheless, for two decades, breathless new stories of Russian "loose nukes" were a media staple on slow news days. | 1,211 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Blue Island Rock Island Rail Roads have been a part of the town since 1852. This was created only a mere 17 years after the town’s formation. The town had been formed in order to help individuals travel to Chicago and south to Joliet in a much faster rate. This site is where a significant event in the Pullman Strike occurred. James Murwin threw a switch into the train. This has caused a shutdown in the railroads for three days.
Blue Island, Illinois was formed in 1835, and 17 years later the town decided to create the railroads. The railroads can be found in 2300 Grove street down Vermont Street at 135th. This brought in some controversy within the town. Many people opposed the idea of railroads. During this time in Blue Island, they were already spending money on plank roads. Plank roads were wooded boards put together in order to be manufactured as plank roads So they thought, it was not necessary to have the railroads.1 However, the first railroad was succeeded on October 10, 1852. They used a little rocket “engine” and it was pulling six gaudily painted coaches into Grove street.1 In a couple of years, Blue Island had become a town of railroads.
17 years later, Blue Island decided to create a suburban line. Blue Island took advantage of both lines because it was located down the hill which would provide easier access to sand and gravel which was the need for ballast on the track. 2 For railroad workers, some of these individuals had to load the cars into the trains by hand. Records show these workers were only paid fifty cents a day.2 Their wages begin soon rose to $1.10. 2 Labor employees did not just only lift cars they had other tasks to work on. The company decided they needed more workers so they could be able to fill. For these workers, each individual would keep the tender filled with water and wood and this was to make sure the engine would not die out from loss of fuel during every stop. 2 This railroad made it more efficient for individuals to get to Chicago and Joliet at a faster pace. Blue Island's railroads have been improved so much since their first creation that many used the trains on a daily basis.
Pullman Strike of 1894 and Blue Island’s Rail Road.
One of the most important aspects of the Pullman Strike was the involvement of the railroad workers from Blue Island. During the strike, many Blue Islanders gave support to those who were on strike. 3 One of the issues labor railroad workers had against their employers was their treatment and services. Individuals fought for the protest in Blue Island believing they did not provide safety precautions at night when it was the most hazardous. 3 Blue Islanders went to the town hall in order to discuss their problems. Problems hit a high, in Blue Island on June 30, James Murwin, threw the switch on locomotive no.19.4 It was a controversial decision that led to delays in the services of the company. Many of those who were on strike did not approve of the decision to hit the switch. Over time they felt it was an effective move. This led to Rock Island being closed for three days. A couple of days later, strikers went out to protest the site. They did not want the train to keep on going. Police were at the scene ready to arrest anyone who would cause a disturbance. It took two hours for the trains to go through. The workers who were on strike lost their effort against their companies. Then, Murwin had to pay a bail of $500 to $5,000 for what he had done to the locomotive.3 Everything soon went back to normal once the strike was over.
This was the importance of Blue Island because they were in unity with their workers. Many people forget about the Pullman Strike in 1894. And so many forget about Blue Island's involvement within the event. These workers were fighting for better conditions in their working environment and helping others with their wages. James Murwin took a risk because he believed what he was doing was effective and caused changes. Even though the strikers lost in the end, they will be remembered in Illinois history. | <urn:uuid:224362a1-410c-4927-972a-0c9b192eee98> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.theclio.com/entry/76961 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251737572.61/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127235617-20200128025617-00101.warc.gz | en | 0.992026 | 856 | 3.75 | 4 | [
-0.32778212428092957,
-0.40798255801200867,
0.33519163727760315,
-0.05009167641401291,
-0.7312737703323364,
0.22017920017242432,
-0.20416273176670074,
0.16984225809574127,
-0.5738344192504883,
0.019411725923419,
-0.03914135694503784,
0.025223033502697945,
-0.22060883045196533,
0.4878802299... | 2 | The Blue Island Rock Island Rail Roads have been a part of the town since 1852. This was created only a mere 17 years after the town’s formation. The town had been formed in order to help individuals travel to Chicago and south to Joliet in a much faster rate. This site is where a significant event in the Pullman Strike occurred. James Murwin threw a switch into the train. This has caused a shutdown in the railroads for three days.
Blue Island, Illinois was formed in 1835, and 17 years later the town decided to create the railroads. The railroads can be found in 2300 Grove street down Vermont Street at 135th. This brought in some controversy within the town. Many people opposed the idea of railroads. During this time in Blue Island, they were already spending money on plank roads. Plank roads were wooded boards put together in order to be manufactured as plank roads So they thought, it was not necessary to have the railroads.1 However, the first railroad was succeeded on October 10, 1852. They used a little rocket “engine” and it was pulling six gaudily painted coaches into Grove street.1 In a couple of years, Blue Island had become a town of railroads.
17 years later, Blue Island decided to create a suburban line. Blue Island took advantage of both lines because it was located down the hill which would provide easier access to sand and gravel which was the need for ballast on the track. 2 For railroad workers, some of these individuals had to load the cars into the trains by hand. Records show these workers were only paid fifty cents a day.2 Their wages begin soon rose to $1.10. 2 Labor employees did not just only lift cars they had other tasks to work on. The company decided they needed more workers so they could be able to fill. For these workers, each individual would keep the tender filled with water and wood and this was to make sure the engine would not die out from loss of fuel during every stop. 2 This railroad made it more efficient for individuals to get to Chicago and Joliet at a faster pace. Blue Island's railroads have been improved so much since their first creation that many used the trains on a daily basis.
Pullman Strike of 1894 and Blue Island’s Rail Road.
One of the most important aspects of the Pullman Strike was the involvement of the railroad workers from Blue Island. During the strike, many Blue Islanders gave support to those who were on strike. 3 One of the issues labor railroad workers had against their employers was their treatment and services. Individuals fought for the protest in Blue Island believing they did not provide safety precautions at night when it was the most hazardous. 3 Blue Islanders went to the town hall in order to discuss their problems. Problems hit a high, in Blue Island on June 30, James Murwin, threw the switch on locomotive no.19.4 It was a controversial decision that led to delays in the services of the company. Many of those who were on strike did not approve of the decision to hit the switch. Over time they felt it was an effective move. This led to Rock Island being closed for three days. A couple of days later, strikers went out to protest the site. They did not want the train to keep on going. Police were at the scene ready to arrest anyone who would cause a disturbance. It took two hours for the trains to go through. The workers who were on strike lost their effort against their companies. Then, Murwin had to pay a bail of $500 to $5,000 for what he had done to the locomotive.3 Everything soon went back to normal once the strike was over.
This was the importance of Blue Island because they were in unity with their workers. Many people forget about the Pullman Strike in 1894. And so many forget about Blue Island's involvement within the event. These workers were fighting for better conditions in their working environment and helping others with their wages. James Murwin took a risk because he believed what he was doing was effective and caused changes. Even though the strikers lost in the end, they will be remembered in Illinois history. | 889 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Alexander the Great, (Alexander III) was the King of Macedonia. Born in July of 356 B.C., he was the son to Philip II of Macedonia. During his lifetime and brief reign, he conducted extensive military campaigns, which resulted in bringing the largest empire of the ancient world together. His massive holdings spread far and wide. He was one of the most brilliant military tacticians of all time and remains celebrated for this feat today.
As a young man, he was tutored by one of the greatest Greek minds, Aristotle. It is said that Aristotle gave young Alexander a copy of Homer’s annotated work, The Iliad, which was reported to be one of the young man’s favorite books, even accompanying him on military campaigns. After his education was over, he entered the military arena. There, he and his companions, the generals that helped him conquer much of the known world, began illustrious careers.
At the beginning of his reign, he removed any rivals that might be close to the throne. After these persons had been dispatched, he turned his eye to the known world. His goal was to bring Greek influence, art, and culture with him. Egypt was one of the territories conquered by Alexander that fully embraced the Greek culture. After ending his military campaigns in India after the mutiny of his army, Alexander prepared to return home. He died from an unknown cause in June of 323 B.C. in Babylon. | <urn:uuid:a1061481-9d8a-4a23-a406-66d2060d93c3> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.proprofs.com/discuss/q/1506631/who-was-alexander-the-great | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594662.6/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119151736-20200119175736-00477.warc.gz | en | 0.990717 | 295 | 3.5625 | 4 | [
0.1424061357975006,
0.6334012746810913,
0.4527650475502014,
-0.06628037244081497,
-0.339080810546875,
-0.7617533206939697,
0.16856695711612701,
0.6160145401954651,
-0.1252041757106781,
-0.11846330016851425,
-0.004847387317568064,
-0.38773754239082336,
0.24926546216011047,
0.062007371336221... | 2 | Alexander the Great, (Alexander III) was the King of Macedonia. Born in July of 356 B.C., he was the son to Philip II of Macedonia. During his lifetime and brief reign, he conducted extensive military campaigns, which resulted in bringing the largest empire of the ancient world together. His massive holdings spread far and wide. He was one of the most brilliant military tacticians of all time and remains celebrated for this feat today.
As a young man, he was tutored by one of the greatest Greek minds, Aristotle. It is said that Aristotle gave young Alexander a copy of Homer’s annotated work, The Iliad, which was reported to be one of the young man’s favorite books, even accompanying him on military campaigns. After his education was over, he entered the military arena. There, he and his companions, the generals that helped him conquer much of the known world, began illustrious careers.
At the beginning of his reign, he removed any rivals that might be close to the throne. After these persons had been dispatched, he turned his eye to the known world. His goal was to bring Greek influence, art, and culture with him. Egypt was one of the territories conquered by Alexander that fully embraced the Greek culture. After ending his military campaigns in India after the mutiny of his army, Alexander prepared to return home. He died from an unknown cause in June of 323 B.C. in Babylon. | 293 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Last Tuesday night, police officers were dispatched to the remote icy intersection of Elm Road and Winding Way for a routine collision investigation. The driver of a car seems to have lost control of his vehicle on the ice and crashed into a black van sitting idle on the side of the road.
Investigators took some measurements at the crime scene in order to determine how fast the car was going before it hit the van. Since the car skidded on an icy road, there were no tire tracks to measure to determine its speed. However, the van was parked on a sandy shoulder, and investigators were able to measure the distance it was pushed when the car hit it.
The marks in the sand show that the van was pushed 1.6 meters when it was struck by the car. According to the car manufacturer, the car has a mass of 1000 kg.
- Establish a relationship between the momentum of a vehicle and the distance a stationary object moves when the vehicle hits it.
- Accurately gather data from a collision of a vehicle with a stationary object.
- Establish a relationship between the distance an object moves after a collision with a vehicle and the momentum of the vehicle. | <urn:uuid:c74883fd-cd1f-4de0-8979-c9f8d605766d> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.vernier.com/experiment/fwv-6_measuring-momentum/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606872.19/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122071919-20200122100919-00010.warc.gz | en | 0.984011 | 240 | 3.75 | 4 | [
-0.3012417256832123,
0.005961612798273563,
0.2512812316417694,
-0.03157813102006912,
0.42322733998298645,
0.4740396738052368,
0.9292735457420349,
0.21201357245445251,
0.04148085415363312,
-0.049412503838539124,
0.3423296809196472,
0.07389482855796814,
0.30685633420944214,
0.122768387198448... | 8 | Last Tuesday night, police officers were dispatched to the remote icy intersection of Elm Road and Winding Way for a routine collision investigation. The driver of a car seems to have lost control of his vehicle on the ice and crashed into a black van sitting idle on the side of the road.
Investigators took some measurements at the crime scene in order to determine how fast the car was going before it hit the van. Since the car skidded on an icy road, there were no tire tracks to measure to determine its speed. However, the van was parked on a sandy shoulder, and investigators were able to measure the distance it was pushed when the car hit it.
The marks in the sand show that the van was pushed 1.6 meters when it was struck by the car. According to the car manufacturer, the car has a mass of 1000 kg.
- Establish a relationship between the momentum of a vehicle and the distance a stationary object moves when the vehicle hits it.
- Accurately gather data from a collision of a vehicle with a stationary object.
- Establish a relationship between the distance an object moves after a collision with a vehicle and the momentum of the vehicle. | 238 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Alfred Adler was born near Vienna on February 7, 1870. His father was a middle-class Jewish grain merchant and his mother was a housewife. He had an older brother and sister and four younger siblings. This unremarkable family, in the indirect ways Adler later posited, led Adler to formulate important theories. Destined to become one of the century’s leading social scientists, the founder of a provocative and widely accepted school of psychology iaipwebsite, he drew on his family to illustrate the concept of social interest and the significance of birth order.
He recognized the justness of equality for women. Above all, he recognized in the frail, fearful boy he himself had been the key to his theory: an individual strives toward a personal goal; his attempts to over come his inadequacies should be a healthy means of fulfilling life. In the 1870s the Jews of Vienna had a choice of where they might live: either in voluntary ghettoes, which Adler’s father declined; or in primarily Gentile neighborhoods. During the periodic waves of anti-Semitism which swept the country during Adler’s formative years, his family enjoyed peace, for the old cliché, “Some of my best friends are Jews,” was seemingly re spected. According to Carl Furtmüller, “early experiences made him unable to feel the difference between Jews and Gentiles as something personally important.”
His physical health in childhood has been described fully. Early rickets “impeded his movements and made him heavy dur ing his childhood.” “A mild form of spasm of his vocal cords . .. caused a feeling of inferiority.” This latter he apparently con quered and as a schoolboy he had a “strong interest in classical and popular music … a good, strong, dependable voice and a good gift for delivery.” A brush with death due to pneumonia at about the age of 4 made him resolve to become a doctor. Such stories, over time, tend to sound apocryphal, but their importance cannot be shrugged off in that they undoubtedly contributed as the basis of his theory.
Apparently no record exists of his interaction with teachers at die Vienna Medical School. He was influenced by the internist Hermann Nothnagel, who told his students, “If you want to be a good doctor, you have to be a kind person.” Even more, Adler took to heart Nothnagel’s dictum, “the physician must always look at the patient as a whole, not as an isolated organ or an isolated ailment. . . the emotional influence of the physician on the patient must be taken into account.”
Upon graduation, Adler established a medical practice in Vienna in 1895, near the Prater, a large amusement park in a lower middle-class section of the city. Among his patients were many who worked at the Prater restaurants, as well as waiters, acrobats and artists whose livelihood depended on bodily skills. Their ailments exposed physical weaknesses and helped Adler to develop his theory of overcompensation. In the same way he had had a physical voice problem which he overcame to sing heartily, so many of his amusement park patients had physical inadequacies which they overcame and utilized them to make a career.
During his student days Adler was only peripherally involved with the political movement sweeping the country. His in volvement came through friends who took him along to political meetings rather than through strong personal enthusiasm. His disinterest in racial or religious differences “immunized him against nationalism.” He participated in the excited gatherings more as a listener than as a speaker. During those days he was sometimes seen at the meetings with a Russian student, Raissa Timofeyewna Epstein.
He married Raissa Epstein in 1897 and the following year his first child, Valentine, was born. A second daughter, Alexandra, was born in 1901, his son Kurt in 1905, and finally his daughter Nellie in 1909.
His practice was successful, in part because of his disarming manner. “He administered science to his patients as if it were as simple as scrambling eggs.” When there was a popular term to describe a technical condition, he chose to use it. But he was haunted when he was unable to heal a patient’s disease. As he searched for the reasons for his patients’ persistent pains and illnesses he was steered away from medical practice and into the fields of psychiatry, psychology, and eventually a philosophical position which spanned the social sciences.
The meeting of Adler and Freud was catalytic to psychology and psychotherapy. Adler felt attracted to Freud’s Dream Theory and had the courage to proclaim it, as he “hated prejudice and hackneyed opinions.” In 1902 Adler was invited to be one of four people to form Freud’s circle, meeting weekly in Freud’s home to discuss work and philosophies, and especially the prob lems of neurosis. This evolved to become the Psychoanalytic Society. Adler was the first among them to show an active inter est in the problems of education.
In 1910 Adler was made the president of the Vienna branch of the International Psychoanalytic Association. In October 1910 the publication Zentralblatt für Psychoanalyse was founded, with Adler and Wilhelm Stekel as co-editors and Freud as editor-in-chief. The good spirit did not prevail as Adler con tinued to develop his own theory. The following summer Freud wrote the publisher that either he or Adler must leave. Adler resigned. He also withdrew from his office as president of the Vienna organization.
It was not long after the break that Adler moved from his office on the Praterstrasse and essentially gave up his practice as a family physician. He began to specialize exclusively in psychiatry. The split between Adler and Freud became irrevo cable in October 1911 when Freud declared, at a meeting of the Psychoanalytic Society, that any affiliation with the society formed by Adler would be incompatible with the membership of the group. Adler left, with nine others who were disenchanted with Freud, and formed the Society for Free Psychoanalytic Re search. In 1912 Adler gave his society the name by which it first became known, the Society for Individual Psychology.
- While there were many who integrated Adler’s theories with their own, allowing him no word of credit Adler himself gener ously acknowledged those whose work influenced him. In 1911 the German philosopher Hans Vaihinger published “The Phi losophy of As IF in Berlin. The following year Adler’s book “The Neurotic Character” commended “It was good fortune which made me acquainted with Vaihinger’s ingenious ‘Philosophy of As If … a work in which I found the thoughts familiar”.
- While Freud maintained exclusiveness among his follow ers, and imposed a formality upon his patients, who were bound to lie down and have their therapist be a silent and invisible presence behind them, Adler started immediately on another tack. His group practiced neither the initiation rites nor the oaths of allegiance that Freud had used. Adler’s followers were en couraged to introduce a guest to the meetings-a guest who might be qualified by interest, experience or ability to become a member.
- Similarly, Adler, in his professional encounters with patients, sat facing them, the two in comfortable chairs so that the treatment had an almost social ambience. This, Adler was con vinced, made it easier for the patient to accept facts about himself which might be unpleasant or difficult.
In 1915 Adler was drafted into the Austro-Hungarian army. He served as a physician, at first in a Vienna hospital, then in the Polish province of Austria, and finally back in Vienna. During . these years he further developed his system, discovering from his insightful watching of the war casualties, with the many neurotics among them, the paramount importance of social inter est. He realized with absolute clarity that “one should not be content to cure mental illnesses, but one should make every ef fort to prevent them”.
The end of the war heralded his involvement with the new political regime. He served on the local Workers’ Committee, which carried out minor administrative functions on behalf of the Socialist-Democratic Party, and was able to attend to his special interest in educational activities.
One of the principal objectives of the first Austrian Republic was school reform, and in this new climate Adler received per mission to establish his first child guidance clinic in Vienna in 1922. He included the child’s parents and teacher as well as an interested audience during each session. His original intention with the clinics was to help teachers who had difficulty coping with “backward” children, now that the 70-year-old law requiring primary education for all had become a reality. Yet he realized the need to help the children themselves, and by the end of the 1920s, thirty-two clinics in Vienna were conducted by schools and parent-teacher associations under the direction of Alfred Adler. There were additional clinics in Germany.
He delivered regular lectures at the Volksheim, an adult edu cation center. He also lectured as a faculty member of the Pedagogical Institute, the_ Vienna teacher training college.
The number of his followers continued to grow. Gone were the days when they could gather for weekly discussions at his apartment. In the evenings, the social meeting place became the Café Siller, overlooking the Danube channel, where Adler, after a long day of counseling, lecturing and attending to his clinics, would have friendly talks until the late hours.
In 1926 he acquired a house at Salmannsdorf, a suburb of Vienna, by all accounts a substantial residence with spacious grounds. Here he hosted the visits of many eminent Austrian and foreign colleagues and students.
As the year drew to a close he made his first trip to America. He lectured at the New School for Social Research and the Community Church in New York. He visited and spoke across the country at Harvard, at Brown in Rhode Island, in Philadel phia, Cincinnati, Milwaukee and several schools in California. In Chicago 2,500 applications to attend his lecture for teachers had to be turned down.
It was then, in his mid-fifties, that he felt the need to master the English language, and accordingly he took daily lessons until he felt confident to deliver lectures. As Carl Furtmüller explained, “Shunning this task because his English was not perfect would have been in his opinion one of those pretexts which neurotics use to excuse their avoidance of real solutions to life’s problems.” As he was spending increasing periods each year in the United States, undaunted by advancing years, he learned to drive an automobile at the age of 60.
His 60th birthday, at his request, was not made a public celeb ration. He was in New York for this occasion, and none of his family was able to be present. Starting the day as usual, he was unaware that many of his friends had planned a party for him. Through a frantic quest in the midst of Prohibition, they man aged to find Rhine wine, and the festivities got under way. His birthday was also celebrated by a special issue of the Interna tional Zeitschrift für Individualpsychologie.
Appointed as a visiting professor La connaissance Minceur, façons de diète psychologique at Columbia University in 1929, Adler consolidated his American migration when, in 1932, he was called to the first chair of Medical Psychology in the United States at Long Island Medical College.
In 1934 the Austrofascists overthrew the Austrian Republic. One of their first acts was to abolish school reform and any pro grams involved with it. Adler’s clinics were closed. In 1935, Adler and his wife formally left Vienna to reside at the Gramercy Park Hotel in New York. Soon after moving, he launched the Zeitschrift in English as the International Journal of Individual Psychology.
Adler continued to work with no sign of a slowing pace. In the spring of 1937, he traveled to Europe and started on a round of lectures and meetings. He enjoyed several weeks of vigorous work, of meetings with friends. Late in May he went to Scotland. These types of diet simplifications accompany us in our minds every day, but they cause that we accept certain things without reflection. On May 28, shortly before he was due to lecture in Aberdeen, he took a walk along the streets near his hotel. He collapsed from a heart attack and died in the ambulance taking him to the hos pital.
The primary sources for this short biography were Hertha Orgler, Alfred Adler: The Man and His Work, London: Sidgwick and Jackson, 1973; an essay by Carl FurrmiUler in Superiority and Social Interest, edited by Heinz L. Ansbachet and Rowena R. Ansbacher, Evanston, 111.: Northwestern Univer sity Press, 1964; Guiding the Child by Alfred Adler and his associates. New York: Greenberg, 1930, anil H. F. Ellenberger, The Discovery of the Uncon scious, New York: Basic Books, 1970 | <urn:uuid:90ca2031-3cd0-446c-ae61-bd6735bc5405> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.iaipwebsite.org/alfred-adler.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599789.45/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120195035-20200120224035-00502.warc.gz | en | 0.985739 | 2,800 | 3.484375 | 3 | [
-0.09860038757324219,
0.6897846460342407,
-0.20838481187820435,
-0.14873939752578735,
-0.38626086711883545,
0.20162071287631989,
0.37454426288604736,
0.3765115737915039,
-0.16808022558689117,
-0.5179967284202576,
0.1969587355852127,
-0.37389326095581055,
-0.3070717453956604,
0.167279615998... | 3 | Alfred Adler was born near Vienna on February 7, 1870. His father was a middle-class Jewish grain merchant and his mother was a housewife. He had an older brother and sister and four younger siblings. This unremarkable family, in the indirect ways Adler later posited, led Adler to formulate important theories. Destined to become one of the century’s leading social scientists, the founder of a provocative and widely accepted school of psychology iaipwebsite, he drew on his family to illustrate the concept of social interest and the significance of birth order.
He recognized the justness of equality for women. Above all, he recognized in the frail, fearful boy he himself had been the key to his theory: an individual strives toward a personal goal; his attempts to over come his inadequacies should be a healthy means of fulfilling life. In the 1870s the Jews of Vienna had a choice of where they might live: either in voluntary ghettoes, which Adler’s father declined; or in primarily Gentile neighborhoods. During the periodic waves of anti-Semitism which swept the country during Adler’s formative years, his family enjoyed peace, for the old cliché, “Some of my best friends are Jews,” was seemingly re spected. According to Carl Furtmüller, “early experiences made him unable to feel the difference between Jews and Gentiles as something personally important.”
His physical health in childhood has been described fully. Early rickets “impeded his movements and made him heavy dur ing his childhood.” “A mild form of spasm of his vocal cords . .. caused a feeling of inferiority.” This latter he apparently con quered and as a schoolboy he had a “strong interest in classical and popular music … a good, strong, dependable voice and a good gift for delivery.” A brush with death due to pneumonia at about the age of 4 made him resolve to become a doctor. Such stories, over time, tend to sound apocryphal, but their importance cannot be shrugged off in that they undoubtedly contributed as the basis of his theory.
Apparently no record exists of his interaction with teachers at die Vienna Medical School. He was influenced by the internist Hermann Nothnagel, who told his students, “If you want to be a good doctor, you have to be a kind person.” Even more, Adler took to heart Nothnagel’s dictum, “the physician must always look at the patient as a whole, not as an isolated organ or an isolated ailment. . . the emotional influence of the physician on the patient must be taken into account.”
Upon graduation, Adler established a medical practice in Vienna in 1895, near the Prater, a large amusement park in a lower middle-class section of the city. Among his patients were many who worked at the Prater restaurants, as well as waiters, acrobats and artists whose livelihood depended on bodily skills. Their ailments exposed physical weaknesses and helped Adler to develop his theory of overcompensation. In the same way he had had a physical voice problem which he overcame to sing heartily, so many of his amusement park patients had physical inadequacies which they overcame and utilized them to make a career.
During his student days Adler was only peripherally involved with the political movement sweeping the country. His in volvement came through friends who took him along to political meetings rather than through strong personal enthusiasm. His disinterest in racial or religious differences “immunized him against nationalism.” He participated in the excited gatherings more as a listener than as a speaker. During those days he was sometimes seen at the meetings with a Russian student, Raissa Timofeyewna Epstein.
He married Raissa Epstein in 1897 and the following year his first child, Valentine, was born. A second daughter, Alexandra, was born in 1901, his son Kurt in 1905, and finally his daughter Nellie in 1909.
His practice was successful, in part because of his disarming manner. “He administered science to his patients as if it were as simple as scrambling eggs.” When there was a popular term to describe a technical condition, he chose to use it. But he was haunted when he was unable to heal a patient’s disease. As he searched for the reasons for his patients’ persistent pains and illnesses he was steered away from medical practice and into the fields of psychiatry, psychology, and eventually a philosophical position which spanned the social sciences.
The meeting of Adler and Freud was catalytic to psychology and psychotherapy. Adler felt attracted to Freud’s Dream Theory and had the courage to proclaim it, as he “hated prejudice and hackneyed opinions.” In 1902 Adler was invited to be one of four people to form Freud’s circle, meeting weekly in Freud’s home to discuss work and philosophies, and especially the prob lems of neurosis. This evolved to become the Psychoanalytic Society. Adler was the first among them to show an active inter est in the problems of education.
In 1910 Adler was made the president of the Vienna branch of the International Psychoanalytic Association. In October 1910 the publication Zentralblatt für Psychoanalyse was founded, with Adler and Wilhelm Stekel as co-editors and Freud as editor-in-chief. The good spirit did not prevail as Adler con tinued to develop his own theory. The following summer Freud wrote the publisher that either he or Adler must leave. Adler resigned. He also withdrew from his office as president of the Vienna organization.
It was not long after the break that Adler moved from his office on the Praterstrasse and essentially gave up his practice as a family physician. He began to specialize exclusively in psychiatry. The split between Adler and Freud became irrevo cable in October 1911 when Freud declared, at a meeting of the Psychoanalytic Society, that any affiliation with the society formed by Adler would be incompatible with the membership of the group. Adler left, with nine others who were disenchanted with Freud, and formed the Society for Free Psychoanalytic Re search. In 1912 Adler gave his society the name by which it first became known, the Society for Individual Psychology.
- While there were many who integrated Adler’s theories with their own, allowing him no word of credit Adler himself gener ously acknowledged those whose work influenced him. In 1911 the German philosopher Hans Vaihinger published “The Phi losophy of As IF in Berlin. The following year Adler’s book “The Neurotic Character” commended “It was good fortune which made me acquainted with Vaihinger’s ingenious ‘Philosophy of As If … a work in which I found the thoughts familiar”.
- While Freud maintained exclusiveness among his follow ers, and imposed a formality upon his patients, who were bound to lie down and have their therapist be a silent and invisible presence behind them, Adler started immediately on another tack. His group practiced neither the initiation rites nor the oaths of allegiance that Freud had used. Adler’s followers were en couraged to introduce a guest to the meetings-a guest who might be qualified by interest, experience or ability to become a member.
- Similarly, Adler, in his professional encounters with patients, sat facing them, the two in comfortable chairs so that the treatment had an almost social ambience. This, Adler was con vinced, made it easier for the patient to accept facts about himself which might be unpleasant or difficult.
In 1915 Adler was drafted into the Austro-Hungarian army. He served as a physician, at first in a Vienna hospital, then in the Polish province of Austria, and finally back in Vienna. During . these years he further developed his system, discovering from his insightful watching of the war casualties, with the many neurotics among them, the paramount importance of social inter est. He realized with absolute clarity that “one should not be content to cure mental illnesses, but one should make every ef fort to prevent them”.
The end of the war heralded his involvement with the new political regime. He served on the local Workers’ Committee, which carried out minor administrative functions on behalf of the Socialist-Democratic Party, and was able to attend to his special interest in educational activities.
One of the principal objectives of the first Austrian Republic was school reform, and in this new climate Adler received per mission to establish his first child guidance clinic in Vienna in 1922. He included the child’s parents and teacher as well as an interested audience during each session. His original intention with the clinics was to help teachers who had difficulty coping with “backward” children, now that the 70-year-old law requiring primary education for all had become a reality. Yet he realized the need to help the children themselves, and by the end of the 1920s, thirty-two clinics in Vienna were conducted by schools and parent-teacher associations under the direction of Alfred Adler. There were additional clinics in Germany.
He delivered regular lectures at the Volksheim, an adult edu cation center. He also lectured as a faculty member of the Pedagogical Institute, the_ Vienna teacher training college.
The number of his followers continued to grow. Gone were the days when they could gather for weekly discussions at his apartment. In the evenings, the social meeting place became the Café Siller, overlooking the Danube channel, where Adler, after a long day of counseling, lecturing and attending to his clinics, would have friendly talks until the late hours.
In 1926 he acquired a house at Salmannsdorf, a suburb of Vienna, by all accounts a substantial residence with spacious grounds. Here he hosted the visits of many eminent Austrian and foreign colleagues and students.
As the year drew to a close he made his first trip to America. He lectured at the New School for Social Research and the Community Church in New York. He visited and spoke across the country at Harvard, at Brown in Rhode Island, in Philadel phia, Cincinnati, Milwaukee and several schools in California. In Chicago 2,500 applications to attend his lecture for teachers had to be turned down.
It was then, in his mid-fifties, that he felt the need to master the English language, and accordingly he took daily lessons until he felt confident to deliver lectures. As Carl Furtmüller explained, “Shunning this task because his English was not perfect would have been in his opinion one of those pretexts which neurotics use to excuse their avoidance of real solutions to life’s problems.” As he was spending increasing periods each year in the United States, undaunted by advancing years, he learned to drive an automobile at the age of 60.
His 60th birthday, at his request, was not made a public celeb ration. He was in New York for this occasion, and none of his family was able to be present. Starting the day as usual, he was unaware that many of his friends had planned a party for him. Through a frantic quest in the midst of Prohibition, they man aged to find Rhine wine, and the festivities got under way. His birthday was also celebrated by a special issue of the Interna tional Zeitschrift für Individualpsychologie.
Appointed as a visiting professor La connaissance Minceur, façons de diète psychologique at Columbia University in 1929, Adler consolidated his American migration when, in 1932, he was called to the first chair of Medical Psychology in the United States at Long Island Medical College.
In 1934 the Austrofascists overthrew the Austrian Republic. One of their first acts was to abolish school reform and any pro grams involved with it. Adler’s clinics were closed. In 1935, Adler and his wife formally left Vienna to reside at the Gramercy Park Hotel in New York. Soon after moving, he launched the Zeitschrift in English as the International Journal of Individual Psychology.
Adler continued to work with no sign of a slowing pace. In the spring of 1937, he traveled to Europe and started on a round of lectures and meetings. He enjoyed several weeks of vigorous work, of meetings with friends. Late in May he went to Scotland. These types of diet simplifications accompany us in our minds every day, but they cause that we accept certain things without reflection. On May 28, shortly before he was due to lecture in Aberdeen, he took a walk along the streets near his hotel. He collapsed from a heart attack and died in the ambulance taking him to the hos pital.
The primary sources for this short biography were Hertha Orgler, Alfred Adler: The Man and His Work, London: Sidgwick and Jackson, 1973; an essay by Carl FurrmiUler in Superiority and Social Interest, edited by Heinz L. Ansbachet and Rowena R. Ansbacher, Evanston, 111.: Northwestern Univer sity Press, 1964; Guiding the Child by Alfred Adler and his associates. New York: Greenberg, 1930, anil H. F. Ellenberger, The Discovery of the Uncon scious, New York: Basic Books, 1970 | 2,762 | ENGLISH | 1 |
"Lichfield / June 14 1804"
Lichfield Cathedral is situated in Lichfield, Staffordshire, England. It is the only medieval English cathedral with three spires. The Diocese of Lichfield covers all of Staffordshire, much of Shropshire and part of the Black Country and West Midlands. When Chad was made Bishop of Mercia in 669 he moved his See from Repton to Lichfield, possibly because this was already a holy site, as the scene of martyrdoms during the Roman period. The first cathedral to be built on the present site was in 700AD when Bishop Hedda built a new church to house the bones of St Chad which had become a sacred shrine to many pilgrims when he died in 672. Offa, King of Mercia seemed to resent his own bishops paying allegiance to the Archbishop of Canterbury in Kent who, whilst under Offa's control, was not of his own kingdom of Mercia. Offa therefore created his own archbishopric in Lichfield, who presided over all the bishops from the Humber to the Thames. All this began in 786, with the consent of Pope Adrian. The Pope’s official representatives were received warmly by Offa and were present at the Council of Chelsea (787), often called `the contentious synod', where it was proposed that the Archbishopric of Canterbury be restricted in order to make way for Offa's new archbishop. It was vehemently opposed, but Offa and the papal representatives defeated Archbishop Jaenbert, installing Higbert as the new Archbishop of Lichfield. Pope Adrian sent Higbert the pallium, denoting his support for this move. In gratitude, Offa promised to send an annual shipment of gold to the pope for alms and supplying the lights in St. Peter's church in Rome. However, The Archbishopric of Lichfield only lasted for 16 years, ending soon after Offa's death, when it was restored to Archbishop Aethelheard of Canterbury.
Starting in 1085 and continuing through the twelfth century the original wooden Saxon church was replaced by a Norman cathedral made from stone, and this was in turn replaced by the present Gothic cathedral begun in 1195. It was completed by the building of the Lady Chapel in the 1330s. The Choir dates from 1200, the Transepts from 1220 to 1240 and the Nave was started in 1260. The octagonal Chapter House, which was completed in 1249 and is one of the most beautiful parts of the Cathedral with some charming stone carvings, houses an exhibition of the cathedral's greatest treasure, the Lichfield Gospels, an 8th century illuminated manuscript. There were three great sieges of Lichfield during the period 1643–1646 as the cathedral was surrounded by a ditch and defensive walls it made a natural fortress. The cathedral authorities with a certain following were for the king, but the townsfolk generally sided with the parliament, and this led to the fortification of the close in 1643. Robert Greville, 2nd Baron Brooke, led an assault against it, but was killed by a deflected bullet from John Dyott (known as 'dumb' because he was a deaf mute) who along with his brother Richard Dyott had taken up a position on the battlements of the central cathedral spire on 2 March 1643. Brooke's deputy Sir John Gell, took over the siege. Although the Royalist garrison surrendered to Gell two days later, the close yielded and was retaken by Prince Rupert of the Rhine on 20 April of the same year. Rupert's engineers detonated the first mine to be used in England to breach the defences. Unable to defend the breach, the parliamentarians surrendered to Rupert the following day. The cathedral suffered extensive damage: the central spire was demolished, the roofs ruined and all the stained glass smashed. Bishop Hacket began the restoration of the cathedral in the 1660s, aided by substantial funds donated by the restored monarch, but it was not until the 19th century that the damage caused by the Civil War was fully repaired. Up until the 19th century, on top of an ornamented gable, between the two spires, stood a colossal figure of Charles II, by Sir William Wilson. Today it stands just outside the south doors. Although the 18th century was a golden age for the City of Lichfield, it was a period of decay for the cathedral. The 15th-century library, on the north side of the nave, was pulled down and the books moved to their present location above the Chapter House. Most of the statues on the west front were removed and the stonework covered with Roman cement. At the end of the century James Wyatt organised some major structural work, removing the High Altar to make one worship area of Choir and Lady Chapel and adding a massive stone screen at the entrance to the Choir. The ornate west front was extensively renovated in the Victorian era by Sir George Gilbert Scott. It includes a remarkable number of ornate carved figures of kings, queens and saints, working with original materials where possible and creating fine new imitations and additions when the originals were not available. Wyatt's choir-screen had utilised medieval stone-work which Scott in turn used to create the clergy's seats in the sanctuary. The new metal screen by Francis Skidmore and John Birnie Philip to designs by Scott himself is a triumph of High Victorian art, as are the fine Minton tiles in the choir, inspired by the medieval ones found in the Choir foundations and still seen in the Library.
The Rev John Louis Petit (1801–1868), architectural historian and watercolour painter, was born on 31 May 1801 in Ashton under Lyne, Lancashire, the only son of John Hayes Petit (1771–1822), a Church of England clergyman and JP, and his wife, Harriet Astley.
The family was descended from Lewis Petit, also known as Lewis Petit des Etans (1665?–1720), a Huguenot refugee and military engineer. Petit's grandfather was John Lewis Petit (1736–1780), the son of John Petit of Little Aston Hall, Shenstone, Staffordshire. He graduated from Queens' College, Cambridge (BA 1756, MA 1759, and MD 1766), was elected fellow of the College of Physicians in 1767, was Gulstonian lecturer in 1768, and was censor in that year, 1774, and 1777. From 1770 to 1774 he was physician to St George's Hospital, then on the death of Dr Anthony Askew in 1774 he was elected physician to St Bartholomew's Hospital. In November 1769 he married Katherine Laetitia Serces, the daughter of one of the preachers of the French Chapel Royal in London. He died on 27 May 1780 and was buried at St Anne's, Soho. John Louis Petit was educated at Eton College and contributed to The Etonian, then in its heyday. He was elected to a scholarship at Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1822, and graduated BA in 1823 and MA in 1826. On 17 June 1828 he married Louisa Elizabeth, the daughter of George Reid of Trelawny, Jamaica. He had been ordained deacon in 1824 and priest the year after, but it was not until 1840 that he took up his sole church appointment, as curate of Bradfield in Essex, which he held until 1848. By this time he had written and illustrated several works of architectural history, the main occupation of his career.
Petit had shown a taste for sketching in his early years and he made many hundreds of drawings in pencil and ink. These were often finished in watercolour, though in a limited palette. His favourite subject was old buildings, particularly churches, and he spent much time visiting and sketching them. His drawings were rapidly and adeptly executed on the spot, his style in the tradition of English topographical watercolour painters of the previous generation, such as Samuel Prout (1783–1852). Although his works display an instinct for the picturesque setting and the telling viewpoint, his aim was less to produce finished paintings for their own sake than to record historic buildings and architectural details. Many were reproduced in his profusely illustrated books. He occasionally painted in oils. In almost all of these respects he resembles John Ruskin (1819–1900), whose concern for the conservation of old buildings was Petit's too. In 1839 Petit made his first extensive tour on the continent, which informed his Remarks on Church Architecture (1841), part travelogue, part discursive survey of architectural styles since the Roman. Subsequent works provide more detailed analyses of individual buildings, including Tewkesbury Abbey, Sherborne Abbey, and Southwell Minster. Petit's credentials as an antiquary are reflected in his co-founding of the British Archaeological Institute in 1844 and his elections as fellow of the Society of Antiquaries and honorary member of the Institute of British Architects. He lectured to the Oxford society for promoting the study of Gothic architecture, a body which mirrored the Cambridge Camden Society and whose membership similarly took a deep interest in the way churches old and new should be laid out and used. This Oxford connection was fruitful academically for Petit, who was admitted to the university ad eundem in 1850, and personally too, as his sister, Maria, married a classics don, William Jelf (1811–1875), in 1849. Architectural Studies in France, Petit's principal work, appeared in 1854 (new edition 1890). It is a detailed survey of French Gothic, profusely illustrated by Petit and by his companion on the research tour, Philip Delamotte (1820/21–1889), an artist, engraver, and early exponent of photography. Petit does not seem to have used photography for recording buildings; nevertheless, some of the illustrations were reproduced using a new technique, that of anastatic drawing.
Petit's books come from a rich period in England for research, publication, and debate on architectural history. His writing style was accessible and the illustrations attractive, but he lacked the intellectual rigour of others in the field, such as his Cambridge contemporaries William Whewell (1794–1866) and Robert Willis (1800–1875). His judgements could be shaky and, with his genteel admiration of almost anything old, he could elicit harsh reviews at a time when attitudes were hardening in favour of particular styles as models for revival. While he had a taste for the Romanesque, for example, just before it became fashionable as a style for new churches in the 1840s, he did not make himself its champion. He was not a polemicist like A. W. N. Pugin or George Gilbert Scott; besides, he had a distaste for debates that smacked of religious controversy. This was the tendency from the 1840s, particularly in the pages of The Ecclesiologist, the organ of the Cambridge Camden Society.
When Petit did turn his attention to contemporary architectural practice, he encountered spirited opposition. In 1841 Scott's designs for the remodelling of St Mary's, Stafford, were exhibited. This was a church close to Petit's heart (his brother-in-law was a benefactor) and he objected in writing to the proposal for the thoroughgoing redesign of the south transept. He could accept Scott's interventions elsewhere in the building but not so the replacement of Gothic fabric, albeit sixteenth-century. Scott accepted the principle but argued that it could be ignored if the style was ‘debased’. Their debate by correspondence was eventually put to a panel of experts from the Cambridge Camden Society and the Oxford society noted above. Scott won and Petit gamely published the papers. As galling was the reception of Petit's only executed architectural design. His sister and brother-in-law moved to Cae'rdeon, near Barmouth, Merioneth, in 1854. Jelf took exception to the fact that most of the services in the Anglican parish church were said in Welsh, so in 1862 he asked his brother-in-law to design him a church, to be built at his own expense, where he could officiate in English. Petit designed him a rugged and muscular church for the mountainous setting. The Ecclesiologist lambasted it in a pithy review, attacking the design on practical grounds (roof pitches too shallow) and on theoretical grounds (pilasters for show, not structural necessity). The critic is clearly exasperated that Petit preferred picturesque effect to the application of formal principles: the alpine-style stone hut is simply not appropriate for an Anglican church on a turnpike road. There may also be a difference of churchmanship here. Petit and Jelf (for all his belligerence on the language issue) had avoided the febrile excesses of the Oxford Movement. Happily, St Philip Cae'rdeon still stands, somewhat altered but recently repaired.
During 1864–5 Petit travelled to Syria, Palestine, and Egypt. He continued to draw and paint avidly. He died in Lichfield on 1 December 1868 from a cold caught or aggravated while out sketching, and was buried in St Michael's churchyard. An exhibition of 339 of his sketches, including two views of the church at Cae'rdeon, was shown by the Architectural Exhibition Society in London during 1869. That year also saw the posthumous publication of a volume of his poetry. Sir Nikolaus Pevsner gives a characteristically pungent account of Petit in his survey of nineteenth-century architectural writers. As an artist, his modest talent was given almost unlimited scope, producing a corpus of architectural impressions which is impressive, if slight as individual works of art. As a critic of contemporary practice, he is probably most significant as a spokesman for tolerance: he valued buildings and styles of many eras and favoured, if not consistently or dogmatically, repair over rebuilding. | <urn:uuid:130b628e-e6fa-4f67-8c84-606cebc6e55a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://artwarefineart.com/archive/gallery/lichfield-cathedral-staffordshire | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00403.warc.gz | en | 0.983399 | 2,924 | 3.265625 | 3 | [
-0.23080801963806152,
0.33000826835632324,
0.0824650377035141,
0.2616434395313263,
-0.22608505189418793,
-0.037599027156829834,
-0.31371021270751953,
-0.1434340924024582,
0.0962325930595398,
-0.09913629293441772,
-0.35003554821014404,
-0.72877436876297,
-0.014926832169294357,
-0.0097927935... | 3 | "Lichfield / June 14 1804"
Lichfield Cathedral is situated in Lichfield, Staffordshire, England. It is the only medieval English cathedral with three spires. The Diocese of Lichfield covers all of Staffordshire, much of Shropshire and part of the Black Country and West Midlands. When Chad was made Bishop of Mercia in 669 he moved his See from Repton to Lichfield, possibly because this was already a holy site, as the scene of martyrdoms during the Roman period. The first cathedral to be built on the present site was in 700AD when Bishop Hedda built a new church to house the bones of St Chad which had become a sacred shrine to many pilgrims when he died in 672. Offa, King of Mercia seemed to resent his own bishops paying allegiance to the Archbishop of Canterbury in Kent who, whilst under Offa's control, was not of his own kingdom of Mercia. Offa therefore created his own archbishopric in Lichfield, who presided over all the bishops from the Humber to the Thames. All this began in 786, with the consent of Pope Adrian. The Pope’s official representatives were received warmly by Offa and were present at the Council of Chelsea (787), often called `the contentious synod', where it was proposed that the Archbishopric of Canterbury be restricted in order to make way for Offa's new archbishop. It was vehemently opposed, but Offa and the papal representatives defeated Archbishop Jaenbert, installing Higbert as the new Archbishop of Lichfield. Pope Adrian sent Higbert the pallium, denoting his support for this move. In gratitude, Offa promised to send an annual shipment of gold to the pope for alms and supplying the lights in St. Peter's church in Rome. However, The Archbishopric of Lichfield only lasted for 16 years, ending soon after Offa's death, when it was restored to Archbishop Aethelheard of Canterbury.
Starting in 1085 and continuing through the twelfth century the original wooden Saxon church was replaced by a Norman cathedral made from stone, and this was in turn replaced by the present Gothic cathedral begun in 1195. It was completed by the building of the Lady Chapel in the 1330s. The Choir dates from 1200, the Transepts from 1220 to 1240 and the Nave was started in 1260. The octagonal Chapter House, which was completed in 1249 and is one of the most beautiful parts of the Cathedral with some charming stone carvings, houses an exhibition of the cathedral's greatest treasure, the Lichfield Gospels, an 8th century illuminated manuscript. There were three great sieges of Lichfield during the period 1643–1646 as the cathedral was surrounded by a ditch and defensive walls it made a natural fortress. The cathedral authorities with a certain following were for the king, but the townsfolk generally sided with the parliament, and this led to the fortification of the close in 1643. Robert Greville, 2nd Baron Brooke, led an assault against it, but was killed by a deflected bullet from John Dyott (known as 'dumb' because he was a deaf mute) who along with his brother Richard Dyott had taken up a position on the battlements of the central cathedral spire on 2 March 1643. Brooke's deputy Sir John Gell, took over the siege. Although the Royalist garrison surrendered to Gell two days later, the close yielded and was retaken by Prince Rupert of the Rhine on 20 April of the same year. Rupert's engineers detonated the first mine to be used in England to breach the defences. Unable to defend the breach, the parliamentarians surrendered to Rupert the following day. The cathedral suffered extensive damage: the central spire was demolished, the roofs ruined and all the stained glass smashed. Bishop Hacket began the restoration of the cathedral in the 1660s, aided by substantial funds donated by the restored monarch, but it was not until the 19th century that the damage caused by the Civil War was fully repaired. Up until the 19th century, on top of an ornamented gable, between the two spires, stood a colossal figure of Charles II, by Sir William Wilson. Today it stands just outside the south doors. Although the 18th century was a golden age for the City of Lichfield, it was a period of decay for the cathedral. The 15th-century library, on the north side of the nave, was pulled down and the books moved to their present location above the Chapter House. Most of the statues on the west front were removed and the stonework covered with Roman cement. At the end of the century James Wyatt organised some major structural work, removing the High Altar to make one worship area of Choir and Lady Chapel and adding a massive stone screen at the entrance to the Choir. The ornate west front was extensively renovated in the Victorian era by Sir George Gilbert Scott. It includes a remarkable number of ornate carved figures of kings, queens and saints, working with original materials where possible and creating fine new imitations and additions when the originals were not available. Wyatt's choir-screen had utilised medieval stone-work which Scott in turn used to create the clergy's seats in the sanctuary. The new metal screen by Francis Skidmore and John Birnie Philip to designs by Scott himself is a triumph of High Victorian art, as are the fine Minton tiles in the choir, inspired by the medieval ones found in the Choir foundations and still seen in the Library.
The Rev John Louis Petit (1801–1868), architectural historian and watercolour painter, was born on 31 May 1801 in Ashton under Lyne, Lancashire, the only son of John Hayes Petit (1771–1822), a Church of England clergyman and JP, and his wife, Harriet Astley.
The family was descended from Lewis Petit, also known as Lewis Petit des Etans (1665?–1720), a Huguenot refugee and military engineer. Petit's grandfather was John Lewis Petit (1736–1780), the son of John Petit of Little Aston Hall, Shenstone, Staffordshire. He graduated from Queens' College, Cambridge (BA 1756, MA 1759, and MD 1766), was elected fellow of the College of Physicians in 1767, was Gulstonian lecturer in 1768, and was censor in that year, 1774, and 1777. From 1770 to 1774 he was physician to St George's Hospital, then on the death of Dr Anthony Askew in 1774 he was elected physician to St Bartholomew's Hospital. In November 1769 he married Katherine Laetitia Serces, the daughter of one of the preachers of the French Chapel Royal in London. He died on 27 May 1780 and was buried at St Anne's, Soho. John Louis Petit was educated at Eton College and contributed to The Etonian, then in its heyday. He was elected to a scholarship at Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1822, and graduated BA in 1823 and MA in 1826. On 17 June 1828 he married Louisa Elizabeth, the daughter of George Reid of Trelawny, Jamaica. He had been ordained deacon in 1824 and priest the year after, but it was not until 1840 that he took up his sole church appointment, as curate of Bradfield in Essex, which he held until 1848. By this time he had written and illustrated several works of architectural history, the main occupation of his career.
Petit had shown a taste for sketching in his early years and he made many hundreds of drawings in pencil and ink. These were often finished in watercolour, though in a limited palette. His favourite subject was old buildings, particularly churches, and he spent much time visiting and sketching them. His drawings were rapidly and adeptly executed on the spot, his style in the tradition of English topographical watercolour painters of the previous generation, such as Samuel Prout (1783–1852). Although his works display an instinct for the picturesque setting and the telling viewpoint, his aim was less to produce finished paintings for their own sake than to record historic buildings and architectural details. Many were reproduced in his profusely illustrated books. He occasionally painted in oils. In almost all of these respects he resembles John Ruskin (1819–1900), whose concern for the conservation of old buildings was Petit's too. In 1839 Petit made his first extensive tour on the continent, which informed his Remarks on Church Architecture (1841), part travelogue, part discursive survey of architectural styles since the Roman. Subsequent works provide more detailed analyses of individual buildings, including Tewkesbury Abbey, Sherborne Abbey, and Southwell Minster. Petit's credentials as an antiquary are reflected in his co-founding of the British Archaeological Institute in 1844 and his elections as fellow of the Society of Antiquaries and honorary member of the Institute of British Architects. He lectured to the Oxford society for promoting the study of Gothic architecture, a body which mirrored the Cambridge Camden Society and whose membership similarly took a deep interest in the way churches old and new should be laid out and used. This Oxford connection was fruitful academically for Petit, who was admitted to the university ad eundem in 1850, and personally too, as his sister, Maria, married a classics don, William Jelf (1811–1875), in 1849. Architectural Studies in France, Petit's principal work, appeared in 1854 (new edition 1890). It is a detailed survey of French Gothic, profusely illustrated by Petit and by his companion on the research tour, Philip Delamotte (1820/21–1889), an artist, engraver, and early exponent of photography. Petit does not seem to have used photography for recording buildings; nevertheless, some of the illustrations were reproduced using a new technique, that of anastatic drawing.
Petit's books come from a rich period in England for research, publication, and debate on architectural history. His writing style was accessible and the illustrations attractive, but he lacked the intellectual rigour of others in the field, such as his Cambridge contemporaries William Whewell (1794–1866) and Robert Willis (1800–1875). His judgements could be shaky and, with his genteel admiration of almost anything old, he could elicit harsh reviews at a time when attitudes were hardening in favour of particular styles as models for revival. While he had a taste for the Romanesque, for example, just before it became fashionable as a style for new churches in the 1840s, he did not make himself its champion. He was not a polemicist like A. W. N. Pugin or George Gilbert Scott; besides, he had a distaste for debates that smacked of religious controversy. This was the tendency from the 1840s, particularly in the pages of The Ecclesiologist, the organ of the Cambridge Camden Society.
When Petit did turn his attention to contemporary architectural practice, he encountered spirited opposition. In 1841 Scott's designs for the remodelling of St Mary's, Stafford, were exhibited. This was a church close to Petit's heart (his brother-in-law was a benefactor) and he objected in writing to the proposal for the thoroughgoing redesign of the south transept. He could accept Scott's interventions elsewhere in the building but not so the replacement of Gothic fabric, albeit sixteenth-century. Scott accepted the principle but argued that it could be ignored if the style was ‘debased’. Their debate by correspondence was eventually put to a panel of experts from the Cambridge Camden Society and the Oxford society noted above. Scott won and Petit gamely published the papers. As galling was the reception of Petit's only executed architectural design. His sister and brother-in-law moved to Cae'rdeon, near Barmouth, Merioneth, in 1854. Jelf took exception to the fact that most of the services in the Anglican parish church were said in Welsh, so in 1862 he asked his brother-in-law to design him a church, to be built at his own expense, where he could officiate in English. Petit designed him a rugged and muscular church for the mountainous setting. The Ecclesiologist lambasted it in a pithy review, attacking the design on practical grounds (roof pitches too shallow) and on theoretical grounds (pilasters for show, not structural necessity). The critic is clearly exasperated that Petit preferred picturesque effect to the application of formal principles: the alpine-style stone hut is simply not appropriate for an Anglican church on a turnpike road. There may also be a difference of churchmanship here. Petit and Jelf (for all his belligerence on the language issue) had avoided the febrile excesses of the Oxford Movement. Happily, St Philip Cae'rdeon still stands, somewhat altered but recently repaired.
During 1864–5 Petit travelled to Syria, Palestine, and Egypt. He continued to draw and paint avidly. He died in Lichfield on 1 December 1868 from a cold caught or aggravated while out sketching, and was buried in St Michael's churchyard. An exhibition of 339 of his sketches, including two views of the church at Cae'rdeon, was shown by the Architectural Exhibition Society in London during 1869. That year also saw the posthumous publication of a volume of his poetry. Sir Nikolaus Pevsner gives a characteristically pungent account of Petit in his survey of nineteenth-century architectural writers. As an artist, his modest talent was given almost unlimited scope, producing a corpus of architectural impressions which is impressive, if slight as individual works of art. As a critic of contemporary practice, he is probably most significant as a spokesman for tolerance: he valued buildings and styles of many eras and favoured, if not consistently or dogmatically, repair over rebuilding. | 3,116 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Main / Capital / What does freedom mean to former slaves
What does freedom mean to former slaves
What did freedom mean to former slaves? What became the central focus of freedom for former slaves? How did former slaves advocate the right to vote?. What did freedom mean to a people who had endured and survived . How did the government help former slaves acquire land of their own? Land. First of all, we must recognize that not all of the African Americans who had been slaves reacted in the same way after the Civil War made them free. Different.
The meaning of freedom itself became a point of conflict in the Reconstruction South. Former slaves relished the opportunity to flaunt their liberation from the. African Americans celebrated their newfound freedom both privately and in public In a few places in the South, former slaves seized land from former slave .. This means that it is not absorbed by the polarizer, and simply propagates with. How did former slaveholders define their freedom and that of their former slaves? The African-Americans' sense of freedom came from their experience of.
How do the ideas and tone of the American Anti-Slavery Society pamphlets differ . it doesn't necessarily mean that the group was dedicated to preserving slavery .. In the year the total expenditure for education in the ex-slave states. Many discarded the names their former masters had chosen for them and that crops would be harvested, agents sometimes coerced former slaves into signing . Illustrates the difficulties of adjusting to freedom through observations of former slave owners from the United States and Africa, letters written by former slaves to . The following first-person accounts by former slaves and free blacks in the years following emancipation, defined what freedom would entail, from social. | <urn:uuid:4a314f1b-3cfa-45c7-b216-944f5f805205> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://vuworehyqyxi.tk/capital/what-does-freedom-mean-to-former-slaves.php | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592261.1/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118052321-20200118080321-00257.warc.gz | en | 0.987692 | 345 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
-0.272256463766098,
0.5567380785942078,
0.36762672662734985,
-0.08171302825212479,
-0.016698166728019714,
-0.13498124480247498,
0.7963514924049377,
-0.344901442527771,
-0.12292133271694183,
0.3069242238998413,
0.5502815842628479,
0.04746289551258087,
-0.17523543536663055,
-0.10594847798347... | 1 | Main / Capital / What does freedom mean to former slaves
What does freedom mean to former slaves
What did freedom mean to former slaves? What became the central focus of freedom for former slaves? How did former slaves advocate the right to vote?. What did freedom mean to a people who had endured and survived . How did the government help former slaves acquire land of their own? Land. First of all, we must recognize that not all of the African Americans who had been slaves reacted in the same way after the Civil War made them free. Different.
The meaning of freedom itself became a point of conflict in the Reconstruction South. Former slaves relished the opportunity to flaunt their liberation from the. African Americans celebrated their newfound freedom both privately and in public In a few places in the South, former slaves seized land from former slave .. This means that it is not absorbed by the polarizer, and simply propagates with. How did former slaveholders define their freedom and that of their former slaves? The African-Americans' sense of freedom came from their experience of.
How do the ideas and tone of the American Anti-Slavery Society pamphlets differ . it doesn't necessarily mean that the group was dedicated to preserving slavery .. In the year the total expenditure for education in the ex-slave states. Many discarded the names their former masters had chosen for them and that crops would be harvested, agents sometimes coerced former slaves into signing . Illustrates the difficulties of adjusting to freedom through observations of former slave owners from the United States and Africa, letters written by former slaves to . The following first-person accounts by former slaves and free blacks in the years following emancipation, defined what freedom would entail, from social. | 341 | ENGLISH | 1 |
As Davis received reports detailing Sherman's advance on Atlanta, he became convinced that Johnston's reluctance to attack the invading Northern army would eventually result in the loss of the city. Hood contributed to Davis's mounting anxiety by sending a series of letters that were highly critical of Johnston's defensive strategy. The Confederate president thus decided to replace Johnston with Hood, even though General Lee thought that appointing Hood was a bad idea. "Hood is a bold fighter," stated Lee. "I am doubtful as to [whether he possesses] other qualities necessary [to lead the army effectively]."
Hood assumed his new position as commander of the Confederate Army of Tennessee on July 17, 1864. One day later he was made a full general with temporary rank. Hood understood that he had been promoted because of his aggressiveness and willingness to fight. With this in mind, he immediately made plans to attack Sherman's forces. He ignored the advice of many other officers, engaging Sherman's larger force in a series of battles around the outskirts of Atlanta. Delighted with the dramatic change in the South's strategy, Sherman battered Hood in each of these engagements.
By August, Hood's tired army was trapped in the city of Atlanta, and Sherman had seized control of most of the surrounding countryside. Rather than order a bloody assault on the city's defenses, though, Sherman placed the city under siege (a military blockade designed to prevent the city from receiving food and other supplies from outside). Hood's defense of Atlanta ended on September 1, when his forces lost control of the last railway lines providing supplies to Atlanta at the Battle of Jonesboro. Aware that he could no longer keep Atlanta out of Union hands, Hood hurriedly withdrew his army out of the city. Sherman's Army of the Mississippi moved in to take possession of the town one day later, on September 2.
Was this article helpful? | <urn:uuid:20233d69-c051-47e1-ac2a-14343384f6d2> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.minecreek.info/union-army/hood-takes-command-in-the-west.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00539.warc.gz | en | 0.981527 | 376 | 3.765625 | 4 | [
-0.5299355387687683,
0.37446460127830505,
0.22434358298778534,
0.061958152800798416,
-0.06623665243387222,
0.1551685780286789,
0.6088917851448059,
-0.30232998728752136,
-0.17036592960357666,
-0.1688574105501175,
0.005436372011899948,
0.15108822286128998,
0.15528689324855804,
0.142623141407... | 1 | As Davis received reports detailing Sherman's advance on Atlanta, he became convinced that Johnston's reluctance to attack the invading Northern army would eventually result in the loss of the city. Hood contributed to Davis's mounting anxiety by sending a series of letters that were highly critical of Johnston's defensive strategy. The Confederate president thus decided to replace Johnston with Hood, even though General Lee thought that appointing Hood was a bad idea. "Hood is a bold fighter," stated Lee. "I am doubtful as to [whether he possesses] other qualities necessary [to lead the army effectively]."
Hood assumed his new position as commander of the Confederate Army of Tennessee on July 17, 1864. One day later he was made a full general with temporary rank. Hood understood that he had been promoted because of his aggressiveness and willingness to fight. With this in mind, he immediately made plans to attack Sherman's forces. He ignored the advice of many other officers, engaging Sherman's larger force in a series of battles around the outskirts of Atlanta. Delighted with the dramatic change in the South's strategy, Sherman battered Hood in each of these engagements.
By August, Hood's tired army was trapped in the city of Atlanta, and Sherman had seized control of most of the surrounding countryside. Rather than order a bloody assault on the city's defenses, though, Sherman placed the city under siege (a military blockade designed to prevent the city from receiving food and other supplies from outside). Hood's defense of Atlanta ended on September 1, when his forces lost control of the last railway lines providing supplies to Atlanta at the Battle of Jonesboro. Aware that he could no longer keep Atlanta out of Union hands, Hood hurriedly withdrew his army out of the city. Sherman's Army of the Mississippi moved in to take possession of the town one day later, on September 2.
Was this article helpful? | 381 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Sam is a shy and sensitive five-and-a-half year old, who is in his first year of school. His parents always thought of him as a bright boy. As a pre-schooler, Sam had always displayed an eagerness to learn, and engaged in discussions about complex and abstract topics such as the existence of God, the nature of space, and questions of right and wrong. Sam was a late talker, but when he did start talking he used full sentences and a wide vocabulary.
Sam's parents and teacher
On starting school, Sam’s parents were surprised and concerned that Sam struggled to learn to read. His teacher tried to reassure them that there was nothing to worry about, as there will always be some children not reading at this age. Sam’s parents, however, were still concerned because he appeared to be making no progress in his reading, and this did not fit with their previous experience of their child as ‘bright’.
They organised for Sam to have a formal psychological assessment, including an IQ test, choosing a psychologist with experience of assessing young children, including young gifted children. The results of the assessments confirmed that Sam is indeed very intelligent, with scores in the gifted range. At the same time the tests indicated that he also has dyslexia.
Together, the psychologist, Sam’s parents, his teacher and the school organised for Sam to attend sessions with a speech pathologist and have one-on-one tuition with a specialist literacy teacher. He is now making good progress in his reading. He has also been enrolled in an extension program within the school.
His teacher has told Sam’s parents that after discussing the assessment with the psychologist who conducted the testing, she now feels she understands him better. Sam’s parents have also joined an association for parents of gifted children, and Sam has been able to attend workshops and programs in areas of interest, specially organised for young gifted children.
Sam’s case is an illustration of how gifted children can also have specific learning difficulties or other disabilities, what is sometimes called dual exceptionality. In such situations, the child’s giftedness can sometimes be ‘hidden’.
Because he was not an early reader, Sam’s teacher initially saw his development as being typical for his age. She did not see him as gifted, and was therefore not concerned that he was not yet reading. But his parents saw him as bright and advanced in his thinking, and therefore were concerned that he was struggling to read.
Sam’s case is one that highlights the potential value of formal assessments such as IQ tests, where the results are carefully interpreted and there is positive follow-up to support the child at home and at their early childhood or school setting.
As a professional working with young children, how would you respond to the situation with Sam?
Are there children that you work with that remind you of Sam?
Sam’s Case Study is from Dr Anne-Marie Morrissey’s (2012) book Young gifted children: A practical guide to understanding and supporting their needs (p.26). | <urn:uuid:1d3f2d04-cb47-4b9b-83b4-f20af0bb1584> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.education.vic.gov.au/childhood/professionals/learning/Pages/caseidgifted5.aspx | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00159.warc.gz | en | 0.990298 | 643 | 3.4375 | 3 | [
0.3129042387008667,
0.06321483850479126,
0.052144214510917664,
-0.4147089719772339,
-0.1457642912864685,
0.14860910177230835,
0.2208603024482727,
-0.09515810012817383,
0.06690482795238495,
-0.4741743505001068,
0.22529549896717072,
-0.08654335886240005,
0.19308850169181824,
0.35172146558761... | 2 | Sam is a shy and sensitive five-and-a-half year old, who is in his first year of school. His parents always thought of him as a bright boy. As a pre-schooler, Sam had always displayed an eagerness to learn, and engaged in discussions about complex and abstract topics such as the existence of God, the nature of space, and questions of right and wrong. Sam was a late talker, but when he did start talking he used full sentences and a wide vocabulary.
Sam's parents and teacher
On starting school, Sam’s parents were surprised and concerned that Sam struggled to learn to read. His teacher tried to reassure them that there was nothing to worry about, as there will always be some children not reading at this age. Sam’s parents, however, were still concerned because he appeared to be making no progress in his reading, and this did not fit with their previous experience of their child as ‘bright’.
They organised for Sam to have a formal psychological assessment, including an IQ test, choosing a psychologist with experience of assessing young children, including young gifted children. The results of the assessments confirmed that Sam is indeed very intelligent, with scores in the gifted range. At the same time the tests indicated that he also has dyslexia.
Together, the psychologist, Sam’s parents, his teacher and the school organised for Sam to attend sessions with a speech pathologist and have one-on-one tuition with a specialist literacy teacher. He is now making good progress in his reading. He has also been enrolled in an extension program within the school.
His teacher has told Sam’s parents that after discussing the assessment with the psychologist who conducted the testing, she now feels she understands him better. Sam’s parents have also joined an association for parents of gifted children, and Sam has been able to attend workshops and programs in areas of interest, specially organised for young gifted children.
Sam’s case is an illustration of how gifted children can also have specific learning difficulties or other disabilities, what is sometimes called dual exceptionality. In such situations, the child’s giftedness can sometimes be ‘hidden’.
Because he was not an early reader, Sam’s teacher initially saw his development as being typical for his age. She did not see him as gifted, and was therefore not concerned that he was not yet reading. But his parents saw him as bright and advanced in his thinking, and therefore were concerned that he was struggling to read.
Sam’s case is one that highlights the potential value of formal assessments such as IQ tests, where the results are carefully interpreted and there is positive follow-up to support the child at home and at their early childhood or school setting.
As a professional working with young children, how would you respond to the situation with Sam?
Are there children that you work with that remind you of Sam?
Sam’s Case Study is from Dr Anne-Marie Morrissey’s (2012) book Young gifted children: A practical guide to understanding and supporting their needs (p.26). | 604 | ENGLISH | 1 |
During the Joseon period, this was the gate of the office of the Dongnae Magistrate. This gate reflects the military importance of Dongnae-bu in the late of Joseon period., Dongnae-bu was not far from Japan, so it is an important place for national defense and diplomacy. Japanese envoys were received at the Dongnae Magistrate's office. Compared with other towns, there were many large government offices.
It is presumed that this gate was first built by Jeong Yang Pil, the Dongnae Magistrate, with the Dongnaebu dongheon. in 1636 ( the 14th year of the reign of King Injo).
After that it was rebuilt many times. But the present gate was rebuilt by Jeong Hyeon Deok, the Dongnae Magistrate in 1870 ( the 7th year of the reign of King Gojong ). originally it was located behind the Mangmiru, gate tower but was moved to the present location when the Japanese rezoned the city. A signboard reading "Dongnae Dokjindaeamun" was hung up in the middle of the tall three gates. The letters mean the Gate of the Independent Fortress of Dongnae. This signifies military right of Dongnae became independent of the Gyeongju fortress in 1655.
It is a small but a rare building which has three gates. It is an L-shaped building with three rooms in the front part and one in the rear. It has a tall roof and single eaves.
Cultural property : Busan Tangible Cultural Property No.5
Designated on June 26, 1972
Location : San 20-4, Oncheon-dong, Dongnae-gu, Busan | <urn:uuid:3c054fae-7a82-45de-97f8-2ca55e1e5417> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.dongnae.go.kr/english/index.dongnae?menuCd=DOM_000001203001003000 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608062.57/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123011418-20200123040418-00206.warc.gz | en | 0.980545 | 364 | 3.46875 | 3 | [
0.11806874722242355,
0.25836676359176636,
0.520206868648529,
-0.783630907535553,
-0.0070630526170134544,
0.10352546721696854,
0.47492969036102295,
-0.3129245936870575,
-0.33419370651245117,
0.18456287682056427,
-0.1535506397485733,
-0.23830847442150116,
0.558046281337738,
0.238674506545066... | 4 | During the Joseon period, this was the gate of the office of the Dongnae Magistrate. This gate reflects the military importance of Dongnae-bu in the late of Joseon period., Dongnae-bu was not far from Japan, so it is an important place for national defense and diplomacy. Japanese envoys were received at the Dongnae Magistrate's office. Compared with other towns, there were many large government offices.
It is presumed that this gate was first built by Jeong Yang Pil, the Dongnae Magistrate, with the Dongnaebu dongheon. in 1636 ( the 14th year of the reign of King Injo).
After that it was rebuilt many times. But the present gate was rebuilt by Jeong Hyeon Deok, the Dongnae Magistrate in 1870 ( the 7th year of the reign of King Gojong ). originally it was located behind the Mangmiru, gate tower but was moved to the present location when the Japanese rezoned the city. A signboard reading "Dongnae Dokjindaeamun" was hung up in the middle of the tall three gates. The letters mean the Gate of the Independent Fortress of Dongnae. This signifies military right of Dongnae became independent of the Gyeongju fortress in 1655.
It is a small but a rare building which has three gates. It is an L-shaped building with three rooms in the front part and one in the rear. It has a tall roof and single eaves.
Cultural property : Busan Tangible Cultural Property No.5
Designated on June 26, 1972
Location : San 20-4, Oncheon-dong, Dongnae-gu, Busan | 379 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In the midterm election, Roosevelt and his liberal supporters lost control of Congress to the bipartisan conservative coalition. The Second New Deal in — included the Wagner Act to protect labor organizing, the Works Progress Administration WPA relief program which made the federal government by far the largest single employer in the nation the Social Security Act and new programs to aid tenant farmers and migrant workers. The final major items of New Deal legislation were the creation of the United States Housing Authority and the FSA, which both occurred in ; and the Fair Labor Standards Act ofwhich set maximum hours and minimum wages for most categories of workers. Conservative Republicans and Democrats in Congress joined in the informal conservative coalition.
Rooseveltall sons of Cornelius Roosevelt.
He had an older sister, Anna nicknamed "Bamie"a younger brother, Elliottand a younger sister, Corinne. His paternal grandfather was of Dutch descent; his other ancestry included primarily Scottish and Scots-Irish, English and smaller amounts of German, Welsh, and French.
He repeatedly experienced sudden nighttime asthma attacks that caused the experience of being smothered to death, which terrified both Theodore and his parents. Doctors had no cure. Having learned the rudiments of taxidermyhe filled his makeshift museum with animals that he killed or caught; he then studied the animals and prepared them for display.
At age nine, he recorded his observation of insects in a paper entitled "The Natural History of Insects". Roosevelt said, "My father, Theodore Roosevelt, was the best man I ever knew. He combined strength and courage with gentleness, tenderness, and great unselfishness. He would not tolerate in us children selfishness or cruelty, idleness, cowardice, or untruthfulness.
He had discovered the significant benefits of physical exertion to minimize his asthma and bolster his spirits.
After being manhandled by two older boys on a camping trip, he found a boxing coach to teach him to fight and strengthen his body. Brands argued that "The most obvious drawback to his home schooling was uneven coverage of the various areas of human knowledge". When he entered Harvard College on September 27,his father advised: He studied biology intently and was already an accomplished naturalist and a published ornithologist; he read prodigiously with an almost photographic memory.
Biographer Henry Pringle states: Roosevelt, attempting to analyze his college career and weigh the benefits he had received, felt that he had obtained little from Harvard. He had been depressed by the formalistic treatment of many subjects, by the rigidity, the attention to minutiae that were important in themselves, but which somehow were never linked up with the whole.
Roosevelt was an able law student, but he often found law to be irrational; he spent much of his time writing a book on the War of Nonetheless, Roosevelt found allies in the local Republican Party, and he defeated an incumbent Republican state assemblyman closely tied to the political machine of Senator Roscoe Conkling.
After his election victory, Roosevelt decided to drop out of law school, later saying, "I intended to be one of the governing class. Navy records, ultimately publishing The Naval War of in The book contained drawings of individual and combined ship maneuvers, charts depicting the differences in iron throw weights of cannon shot between rival forces, and analyses of the differences between British and American leadership down to the ship-to-ship level.
Upon release, The Naval War of was praised for its scholarship and style, and it remains a standard study of the war.
He assumed custody of his daughter when she was three. While working with Joseph Bucklin Bishop on a biography that included a collection of his letters, Roosevelt did not mention his marriage to Alice nor his second marriage to Edith Kermit Carow.
He immediately began making his mark, specifically in corporate corruption issues. Roosevelt exposed suspected collusion in the matter by Judge Theodore Westbrook, and argued for and received approval for an investigation to proceed, aiming for the impeachment of the judge.
The investigation committee rejected impeachment, but Roosevelt had exposed the potential corruption in Albany, and thus assumed a high and positive political profile in multiple New York publications. He allied with Governor Cleveland to win passage of a civil service reform bill.
United States presidential election, With numerous presidential hopefuls to choose from, Roosevelt supported Senator George F. Edmunds of Vermont, a colorless reformer.The US stock market crash occurred in October of The value of common stock and shares dropped by 40% resulting in an unprecedented global depression.
At the age of 51, Franklin D. Roosevelt was inaugurated president on March 4, The ceremony was the last to be held in March. All subsequent inaugurations have been held in January, under Amendment 20 to the Constitution (text).. The depression had relentlessly worsened. Bread lines were commonplace as thousands of jobless people .
Theodore Roosevelt Jr. (/ ˈ r oʊ z ə v ɛ l t / ROH-zə-velt; October 27, – January 6, ) was an American statesman and writer who served as the 26th President of the United States from to He also served as the 25th Vice President of the United States from March to September and as the 33rd Governor of New York from .
The war was hardly over, it was February , the IWW leadership was in jail, but the IWW idea of the general strike became reality for five days in Seattle, Washington, when a walkout of , working people brought the city to a halt.
Robert Dallek is the author of Camelot’s Court, An Unfinished Life, and Nixon and Kissinger, among other heartoftexashop.com writing has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Atlantic Monthly, and Vanity heartoftexashop.com is an elected fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and of the Society of American Historians, .
Successes and failures of Roosevelt's "New Deal" programs imposing military socialism of Edward Bellamy, Francis Bellamy, the Pledge of Allegiance. by Dr. Rex Curry. | <urn:uuid:0b9c6522-4324-44fc-ac7c-9dbbb0eb8901> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://mibujakome.heartoftexashop.com/franklin-roosevelt-brought-the-new-deal-into-the-life-of-americans-45861th.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251779833.86/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128153713-20200128183713-00552.warc.gz | en | 0.980212 | 1,251 | 3.28125 | 3 | [
-0.3562885522842407,
0.1866108775138855,
-0.00920956488698721,
0.013775398954749107,
0.29754140973091125,
0.4511186182498932,
-0.17614169418811798,
0.215206116437912,
-0.34545350074768066,
-0.212985098361969,
0.18589869141578674,
0.20197062194347382,
0.16382773220539093,
0.2874699831008911... | 1 | In the midterm election, Roosevelt and his liberal supporters lost control of Congress to the bipartisan conservative coalition. The Second New Deal in — included the Wagner Act to protect labor organizing, the Works Progress Administration WPA relief program which made the federal government by far the largest single employer in the nation the Social Security Act and new programs to aid tenant farmers and migrant workers. The final major items of New Deal legislation were the creation of the United States Housing Authority and the FSA, which both occurred in ; and the Fair Labor Standards Act ofwhich set maximum hours and minimum wages for most categories of workers. Conservative Republicans and Democrats in Congress joined in the informal conservative coalition.
Rooseveltall sons of Cornelius Roosevelt.
He had an older sister, Anna nicknamed "Bamie"a younger brother, Elliottand a younger sister, Corinne. His paternal grandfather was of Dutch descent; his other ancestry included primarily Scottish and Scots-Irish, English and smaller amounts of German, Welsh, and French.
He repeatedly experienced sudden nighttime asthma attacks that caused the experience of being smothered to death, which terrified both Theodore and his parents. Doctors had no cure. Having learned the rudiments of taxidermyhe filled his makeshift museum with animals that he killed or caught; he then studied the animals and prepared them for display.
At age nine, he recorded his observation of insects in a paper entitled "The Natural History of Insects". Roosevelt said, "My father, Theodore Roosevelt, was the best man I ever knew. He combined strength and courage with gentleness, tenderness, and great unselfishness. He would not tolerate in us children selfishness or cruelty, idleness, cowardice, or untruthfulness.
He had discovered the significant benefits of physical exertion to minimize his asthma and bolster his spirits.
After being manhandled by two older boys on a camping trip, he found a boxing coach to teach him to fight and strengthen his body. Brands argued that "The most obvious drawback to his home schooling was uneven coverage of the various areas of human knowledge". When he entered Harvard College on September 27,his father advised: He studied biology intently and was already an accomplished naturalist and a published ornithologist; he read prodigiously with an almost photographic memory.
Biographer Henry Pringle states: Roosevelt, attempting to analyze his college career and weigh the benefits he had received, felt that he had obtained little from Harvard. He had been depressed by the formalistic treatment of many subjects, by the rigidity, the attention to minutiae that were important in themselves, but which somehow were never linked up with the whole.
Roosevelt was an able law student, but he often found law to be irrational; he spent much of his time writing a book on the War of Nonetheless, Roosevelt found allies in the local Republican Party, and he defeated an incumbent Republican state assemblyman closely tied to the political machine of Senator Roscoe Conkling.
After his election victory, Roosevelt decided to drop out of law school, later saying, "I intended to be one of the governing class. Navy records, ultimately publishing The Naval War of in The book contained drawings of individual and combined ship maneuvers, charts depicting the differences in iron throw weights of cannon shot between rival forces, and analyses of the differences between British and American leadership down to the ship-to-ship level.
Upon release, The Naval War of was praised for its scholarship and style, and it remains a standard study of the war.
He assumed custody of his daughter when she was three. While working with Joseph Bucklin Bishop on a biography that included a collection of his letters, Roosevelt did not mention his marriage to Alice nor his second marriage to Edith Kermit Carow.
He immediately began making his mark, specifically in corporate corruption issues. Roosevelt exposed suspected collusion in the matter by Judge Theodore Westbrook, and argued for and received approval for an investigation to proceed, aiming for the impeachment of the judge.
The investigation committee rejected impeachment, but Roosevelt had exposed the potential corruption in Albany, and thus assumed a high and positive political profile in multiple New York publications. He allied with Governor Cleveland to win passage of a civil service reform bill.
United States presidential election, With numerous presidential hopefuls to choose from, Roosevelt supported Senator George F. Edmunds of Vermont, a colorless reformer.The US stock market crash occurred in October of The value of common stock and shares dropped by 40% resulting in an unprecedented global depression.
At the age of 51, Franklin D. Roosevelt was inaugurated president on March 4, The ceremony was the last to be held in March. All subsequent inaugurations have been held in January, under Amendment 20 to the Constitution (text).. The depression had relentlessly worsened. Bread lines were commonplace as thousands of jobless people .
Theodore Roosevelt Jr. (/ ˈ r oʊ z ə v ɛ l t / ROH-zə-velt; October 27, – January 6, ) was an American statesman and writer who served as the 26th President of the United States from to He also served as the 25th Vice President of the United States from March to September and as the 33rd Governor of New York from .
The war was hardly over, it was February , the IWW leadership was in jail, but the IWW idea of the general strike became reality for five days in Seattle, Washington, when a walkout of , working people brought the city to a halt.
Robert Dallek is the author of Camelot’s Court, An Unfinished Life, and Nixon and Kissinger, among other heartoftexashop.com writing has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Atlantic Monthly, and Vanity heartoftexashop.com is an elected fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and of the Society of American Historians, .
Successes and failures of Roosevelt's "New Deal" programs imposing military socialism of Edward Bellamy, Francis Bellamy, the Pledge of Allegiance. by Dr. Rex Curry. | 1,237 | ENGLISH | 1 |
|← Issues of Upbringing Adopted Children||Race Issues and Inequalities →|
Kristin Ross, a witness in the May 68 event was instrumental in providing most of the information included in this paper. The term “subculture” gained a major significance from the 1940s. Unlike the larger society or culture, it is used to mean a minority of groups that are united around a common belief. These groups can sometimes feel marginalized and left out. Due to this, the groups may then resort to violence. To illustrate the effects of subcultures, this paper looks at the event of the popular May 1968 violent revolution by students and other social groups in France. It was one of the ugliest protests France has ever witnessed. The effects were felt for a long time. What started as a peaceful protest eventually culminated in a major revolt. In order to understand the cause of the violent protests, this paper seeks to discuss subcultures.
Subcultures can be widely viewed as social groups that have a common motivation. For instance, if one considers a group of revelers in social joints, then the group of merry-makers in the bars, restaurants-basically everywhere-then the group can be considered as a subculture. They can easily influence each other. They are what behavioral scientists call mob psychology. They are peers in the sense that they consider themselves closer to one another. It is always this closeness that makes them unite towards a common goal. Truth be told, some of the groups always conjure to take part in “peaceful” movements that could become violent over time.
This was the case in the May ’68 event in France. It can be argued that subcultures are mainly associated but not are limited to students and the younger generations. If one considers a group of adolescents who have recently been recruited into the job market, the picture could also come out clearly. If they all work at the same place, they will tend to form a subculture within the organizations where they have been posted. The entire organization is then considered as the larger society whereas it has always been assumed that society and communities are different, this is further from the truth. A community is made up of people who share common characteristics. They could share a common language, tribe, race or ethnicity. It can also be argued that a community can refer to organizations or groups of people with a common goal. A society represents any social setting; it is larger than a community.
Gelder (2008) argues that subcultures tend to be built around public opinions, relationships and propagated by the mass media. Subcultures represent sets of people who have some common beliefs. They have distinct behaviors and are driven by common motivations. They could adopt a common way of dressing. They believe that this makes them unique and distinct from other members of society. They associate with members who also dress the same way they do. To understand subcultures, one only needs to look at different dates in history and particular events that they are ascribed to. They may be able to also have common interests and tastes that make them distinct from other members of the larger society. They have a minority style that makes them different from others. The paper will randomly connect subcultures to the events of the French May Great violent Protests or May 1968 Movement in France.
Kristin Ross was a witness and gives an important chronology of events that did occur.
The administration at Paris University and the students at the institution have been having conflicts among them for a long time. The University students in this scenario can be considered as the subculture. What they share in common is that they belong to the same institution, and are driven by a common goal. On the material day of the protest - 2nd May 1968 - the students at the University met in a united protest. They were protesting against the threats of the University authorities that they would expel several students. The administration had also threatened to close the Sorbonne. The student union then (UNEF) organized for the protests in a bid to express their displeasure at the decisions of the University. The UNEF is still the largest student Union in France to date. Another strike involved the University teachers. The Union of teachers also called for a protest to air their grievances about the invasion of the University by the Police. About 20,000 teachers, students, and supporters marched along the streets, towards Sorbonne. The Sorbonne area was cordoned off by the police at the moment.
The police marched towards the protesters with batons and other weapons. Some members of the crowd dispersed. Some of them remained unmoved. A clique of people within the marching crowd began throwing stones at the police. Barricades were erected on the roads. In response, the police threw tear gas cans at the protesters. Many students were arrested on that day. There were wall slogans on the classroom walls. “Vive De Gaulle” was among the graffiti used on the building of the Law School. The excessive use of force on the protesters by the police was widely opposed. High school student unions also joined in the protests. They supported the strike by the students of Paris University. On the next day of the strike, they joined the protests as well. By doing this, the number of young workers in the united protests was increased. They gathered at the Arc de Triomphe. Some of their demands included:
- Charges against the students arrested to be dropped unconditionally
- The police to move away from the University
- That the university administration reopen Sorbonne and Nanterre University
The negotiations did not yield any viable solutions. The University gave a false report to the media that the government had agreed to re-open the Nanterre University and the Sorbonne.
The truth though was that the Police were still occupying the premises. This angered the students further. They became revolutionary. On 10th May 1968, a huge crowd of students gathered at the Rive Gauche. The Companies Republicaines de Securite, the French Police, blocked the students from crossing the river. Again, the protesting crowd threw barricades at the charging police. There were negotiations, but they too did not yield any fruits. As a result, there was a confrontation between the protesters and the police. The police arrested hundreds of protesters; several others were injured in the protests. The confrontation was the fiercest and it lasted until the next morning. The events were broadcasted on radio and other mass media the following day. The police were accused of participation in the strikes. There were allegations that they had contributed to burning cars and throwing Molotov cocktails at the rioters. The government was seen to have exercised excessive force on the protesters. This led to the general public sympathizing with the students, teachers, workers and high school students who had participated in the strikes. Poets, singers, activists and various groups joined in condemning the government and the high-handedness of the police.
The brutality of the police came to the fore. Artists voiced their displeasure at the police as well. The communists supported the students, albeit reluctantly. The communists referred to the students as anarchists and adventurers. This was not all. Left Union federations, popularly known as the CGT, and Force Ouvriere, known as CGT-FO, called for a general strike that was slated to last one day. The general demonstration took place on 13, May 1968. This was the climactic demonstration that saw close to a million people march along major streets of Paris. The Police must have been embarrassed by the public backlash at them; on this day they stayed out of the way and out of sight. The then Prime Minister, Georges Pompidou, announced that the prisoners had been released and that the Sorbonne had been reopened. This did not convince the protesters. They still carried on with the strike. They became more violent. The students declared the Sorbonne autonomous and “people’s University”. At first, the public supported the students and their leaders. However, when the leaders were invited to national television, they did not behave to the expectation of the public. According to them, they behaved irresponsibly. They accused them of wanting to destroy the “consumer society”. These notwithstanding, some 401 action committees were set up to investigate the grievances levied against the government as well as the French Society. The committees set up included the Sorbonne Occupation Committee. The main references in the committees were two students: Daniel Cohn-Bendit and Alain Krivine.
Workers Joining the Students
Workers also joined the students in the subsequent days of the strike. They occupied most of the factories. At first, they participated in peaceful protests. However, the protests soon became violent. They conducted the first strike at Sud Aviation plant near Nantes. The date was 14th, May 1968. The second strike was at Renault plant, next to the Rouen. By 16th May, workers had occupied about 50 factories. By 17th, May, about 200, 000 workers were involved in the strike. The number rose exponentially over the next few days such that it hit ten million. This represented about two-thirds of the workforce in France. The strikes were not led through union movements; the CGT tried to contain the outbreak of the militancy. The demands of the workers were economic demands and higher wages. But, psychologists have argued that the workers put forward a more political, broader and radical agenda that underscored their genuine demands.
Now, they wanted the then president, De Gaulle, to be ousted. They wanted to run factories as well. This was unacceptable. The union proposed a 35% increase in the minimum wage and a 7% rise for other workers. This was selfish. Major employers’ associations were also involved. The workers refused to return to work. Instead, they jeered at their union leaders. The fact is that there were a lot of anti-unionist euphorias. The euphoria was directed at the CGT, FO and the CFDT unions. These were the groups that were willing to compromise with the demands. On the 26th, May saw the Grenelle agreements conducted between the workers and the Ministry of Social Affairs. The agreement saw the Ministry of Social Affairs propose a 25% minimum wage increase and a 10% rise in average salaries. The workers rejected the offers and the protests carried on. Intellectuals and the working class joined in the revolution. It was major solidarity that sought to see to it that there was a major change in the rights of the workers. In the subsequent days that followed, the UNEF, the largest student union in France, gathered about 50,000 people at the Stade Sebastien Charlety. The meetings were mostly militant; the speakers demanded that the government be overthrown, an election held and a new government is brought into the office.
The socialists took advantage of the situation to see President de Gaulle ousted. They expected to compromise between the communists and the president. The Federation of the Democratic and Socialist Left, through its leader, Francois Mitterrand, declared a state of emergency and the readiness to form a new government. These were propaganda that he used to help win favor with the socialists. His plan seemed to have worked because he continued to garner support from the public. President Gaulle was left with no option but to bulge to their demands. He fled the country in a calculated move to avoid bloodshed among his supporters and the supporters of the revolution. This time around the police avoided the use of force. What started as a protest by university students had turned into the greatest revolution France has ever witnessed. It showed what a united uprising can achieve.
The Relevance of Subculture
The subculture in this scenario is represented by the students, teachers, workers and the top intellectuals in the society. They were able to work together towards a common cause. They wanted better working conditions - better salaries. They represented the new social movements within society. They won favor with the public. They sympathized with them and supported them throughout the course. Of course, there were casualties; loss of lives. Subcultures, in this case, helped the workers occupy the factories. But, it can also be argued that subcultures can sometimes be misused. In the case of the “May, 68”, the leaders of the federations and unions used the protests to their advantage. They used it as a platform to get to power. This was after they plotted to oust President Gaulle. The impact of subcultures is fast being felt in various parts of the world. Its members are able to respond to situations and see to it that they are corrected.
The subculture helped the students at the Paris University to come as one and protest against the threats of the university to close the University and expel some of the students. It also saw the reopening of the Sorbonne. The Police had to stay away after their high-handedness was exposed by the media, namely the radio and the television networks showed their captured “brutality”. Again, this brings an important question: What is the role of the media in subcultures? Psychologists argue that members of a subculture are able to gang up within the shortest time when they have a common motivation. This seemed to have been the May, 68. Through the exposure, the students were able to come together. Their plights were resonated across other major social groups as well. Soon the workers, teachers and high school students joined. The number kept rising. It hit the ten million mark in a matter of weeks. This was quite phenomenal and points towards the effects of subcultures and their ability to achieve quick results. Could it be that these groups have a common Psychology? This question has baffled many a scientist, with a bias for behavioral scientists.
Subcultures are associated with resistance and opposition, just like it was witnessed in the case investigated. Subcultures have a profound effect in any society. One outstanding element of subcultures is the fact that they are composed of people who are intellectually oriented and are able to unite towards a common goal. Subcultures can lead to coups and ousting of governments. The social groups are able to articulate their grievances within the shortest time possible. The French case was a typical example of this. The numbers joining the streets skyrocketed within a short time. In a matter of weeks, the number stood at two-thirds of the French workforce. The trends of subcultures are worrying. Sometimes they are based on fallacies of mob psychology; members of the subculture tend to just play along. Subcultures can lead to anarchies if not well controlled. The groups often feel marginalized and not well represented. It is always a fight between the “greater society” and the subcultures.
May 1968 will forever remain engrossed in the memories of the French people. It represented a significant era of subculture. It brought to the fore the influence of subcultures in society. After May 1968, the topic has been widely covered. Today, subcultures are taken seriously. The date of the great protest is important in history and appears in so many historical books and archives. Subcultures exist in every society today; they will continue to exist. May 1968 will forever be an important reference in French politics. It represented the possibility of liberations associated with subcultures. The students averted the possibility of closure of the Sorbonne. They also saw to it that all the students who had been arrested were released. The workers were able to negotiate for better pay packages. But, they also misused the opportunity. They became greedy. They became political and planned to oust the government. Was this a manipulation on their part? This question then leads me to another side of subculture: subcultures can be a recipe to anarchies.
It saw the demise of the collective action that had been employed traditionally. It saw the start of a new era, an era that would be dominated by the “new social movements”. These new social movements constitute subcultures. Gelder (2008) argues that subcultures should not only be seen as confrontational or associated with the opposition. Rather, they should be viewed as catalysts of change. American society is experiencing a phenomenon where adolescents are increasingly becoming rebellious and living “outside” their parents’ social status. If it is not a rebellion, it is a change.
- Race Issues and Inequalities
- Development of Sociological Theories
- Issues of Upbringing Adopted Children
- Sociology: Researches on Jewishness and Gender Identity | <urn:uuid:61b7dded-99c6-4082-a362-39e94cb617fe> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://bestessaywriters.org/essays/sociology/the-french-may-protest-subculture.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00418.warc.gz | en | 0.982204 | 3,433 | 3.421875 | 3 | [
0.12578099966049194,
-0.014896625652909279,
-0.05574728175997734,
-0.12103869020938873,
-0.042812809348106384,
0.563349723815918,
-0.3470844328403473,
0.2480837106704712,
0.09027761965990067,
0.04637336730957031,
0.21120041608810425,
-0.006130982656031847,
0.421786367893219,
0.238275870680... | 1 | |← Issues of Upbringing Adopted Children||Race Issues and Inequalities →|
Kristin Ross, a witness in the May 68 event was instrumental in providing most of the information included in this paper. The term “subculture” gained a major significance from the 1940s. Unlike the larger society or culture, it is used to mean a minority of groups that are united around a common belief. These groups can sometimes feel marginalized and left out. Due to this, the groups may then resort to violence. To illustrate the effects of subcultures, this paper looks at the event of the popular May 1968 violent revolution by students and other social groups in France. It was one of the ugliest protests France has ever witnessed. The effects were felt for a long time. What started as a peaceful protest eventually culminated in a major revolt. In order to understand the cause of the violent protests, this paper seeks to discuss subcultures.
Subcultures can be widely viewed as social groups that have a common motivation. For instance, if one considers a group of revelers in social joints, then the group of merry-makers in the bars, restaurants-basically everywhere-then the group can be considered as a subculture. They can easily influence each other. They are what behavioral scientists call mob psychology. They are peers in the sense that they consider themselves closer to one another. It is always this closeness that makes them unite towards a common goal. Truth be told, some of the groups always conjure to take part in “peaceful” movements that could become violent over time.
This was the case in the May ’68 event in France. It can be argued that subcultures are mainly associated but not are limited to students and the younger generations. If one considers a group of adolescents who have recently been recruited into the job market, the picture could also come out clearly. If they all work at the same place, they will tend to form a subculture within the organizations where they have been posted. The entire organization is then considered as the larger society whereas it has always been assumed that society and communities are different, this is further from the truth. A community is made up of people who share common characteristics. They could share a common language, tribe, race or ethnicity. It can also be argued that a community can refer to organizations or groups of people with a common goal. A society represents any social setting; it is larger than a community.
Gelder (2008) argues that subcultures tend to be built around public opinions, relationships and propagated by the mass media. Subcultures represent sets of people who have some common beliefs. They have distinct behaviors and are driven by common motivations. They could adopt a common way of dressing. They believe that this makes them unique and distinct from other members of society. They associate with members who also dress the same way they do. To understand subcultures, one only needs to look at different dates in history and particular events that they are ascribed to. They may be able to also have common interests and tastes that make them distinct from other members of the larger society. They have a minority style that makes them different from others. The paper will randomly connect subcultures to the events of the French May Great violent Protests or May 1968 Movement in France.
Kristin Ross was a witness and gives an important chronology of events that did occur.
The administration at Paris University and the students at the institution have been having conflicts among them for a long time. The University students in this scenario can be considered as the subculture. What they share in common is that they belong to the same institution, and are driven by a common goal. On the material day of the protest - 2nd May 1968 - the students at the University met in a united protest. They were protesting against the threats of the University authorities that they would expel several students. The administration had also threatened to close the Sorbonne. The student union then (UNEF) organized for the protests in a bid to express their displeasure at the decisions of the University. The UNEF is still the largest student Union in France to date. Another strike involved the University teachers. The Union of teachers also called for a protest to air their grievances about the invasion of the University by the Police. About 20,000 teachers, students, and supporters marched along the streets, towards Sorbonne. The Sorbonne area was cordoned off by the police at the moment.
The police marched towards the protesters with batons and other weapons. Some members of the crowd dispersed. Some of them remained unmoved. A clique of people within the marching crowd began throwing stones at the police. Barricades were erected on the roads. In response, the police threw tear gas cans at the protesters. Many students were arrested on that day. There were wall slogans on the classroom walls. “Vive De Gaulle” was among the graffiti used on the building of the Law School. The excessive use of force on the protesters by the police was widely opposed. High school student unions also joined in the protests. They supported the strike by the students of Paris University. On the next day of the strike, they joined the protests as well. By doing this, the number of young workers in the united protests was increased. They gathered at the Arc de Triomphe. Some of their demands included:
- Charges against the students arrested to be dropped unconditionally
- The police to move away from the University
- That the university administration reopen Sorbonne and Nanterre University
The negotiations did not yield any viable solutions. The University gave a false report to the media that the government had agreed to re-open the Nanterre University and the Sorbonne.
The truth though was that the Police were still occupying the premises. This angered the students further. They became revolutionary. On 10th May 1968, a huge crowd of students gathered at the Rive Gauche. The Companies Republicaines de Securite, the French Police, blocked the students from crossing the river. Again, the protesting crowd threw barricades at the charging police. There were negotiations, but they too did not yield any fruits. As a result, there was a confrontation between the protesters and the police. The police arrested hundreds of protesters; several others were injured in the protests. The confrontation was the fiercest and it lasted until the next morning. The events were broadcasted on radio and other mass media the following day. The police were accused of participation in the strikes. There were allegations that they had contributed to burning cars and throwing Molotov cocktails at the rioters. The government was seen to have exercised excessive force on the protesters. This led to the general public sympathizing with the students, teachers, workers and high school students who had participated in the strikes. Poets, singers, activists and various groups joined in condemning the government and the high-handedness of the police.
The brutality of the police came to the fore. Artists voiced their displeasure at the police as well. The communists supported the students, albeit reluctantly. The communists referred to the students as anarchists and adventurers. This was not all. Left Union federations, popularly known as the CGT, and Force Ouvriere, known as CGT-FO, called for a general strike that was slated to last one day. The general demonstration took place on 13, May 1968. This was the climactic demonstration that saw close to a million people march along major streets of Paris. The Police must have been embarrassed by the public backlash at them; on this day they stayed out of the way and out of sight. The then Prime Minister, Georges Pompidou, announced that the prisoners had been released and that the Sorbonne had been reopened. This did not convince the protesters. They still carried on with the strike. They became more violent. The students declared the Sorbonne autonomous and “people’s University”. At first, the public supported the students and their leaders. However, when the leaders were invited to national television, they did not behave to the expectation of the public. According to them, they behaved irresponsibly. They accused them of wanting to destroy the “consumer society”. These notwithstanding, some 401 action committees were set up to investigate the grievances levied against the government as well as the French Society. The committees set up included the Sorbonne Occupation Committee. The main references in the committees were two students: Daniel Cohn-Bendit and Alain Krivine.
Workers Joining the Students
Workers also joined the students in the subsequent days of the strike. They occupied most of the factories. At first, they participated in peaceful protests. However, the protests soon became violent. They conducted the first strike at Sud Aviation plant near Nantes. The date was 14th, May 1968. The second strike was at Renault plant, next to the Rouen. By 16th May, workers had occupied about 50 factories. By 17th, May, about 200, 000 workers were involved in the strike. The number rose exponentially over the next few days such that it hit ten million. This represented about two-thirds of the workforce in France. The strikes were not led through union movements; the CGT tried to contain the outbreak of the militancy. The demands of the workers were economic demands and higher wages. But, psychologists have argued that the workers put forward a more political, broader and radical agenda that underscored their genuine demands.
Now, they wanted the then president, De Gaulle, to be ousted. They wanted to run factories as well. This was unacceptable. The union proposed a 35% increase in the minimum wage and a 7% rise for other workers. This was selfish. Major employers’ associations were also involved. The workers refused to return to work. Instead, they jeered at their union leaders. The fact is that there were a lot of anti-unionist euphorias. The euphoria was directed at the CGT, FO and the CFDT unions. These were the groups that were willing to compromise with the demands. On the 26th, May saw the Grenelle agreements conducted between the workers and the Ministry of Social Affairs. The agreement saw the Ministry of Social Affairs propose a 25% minimum wage increase and a 10% rise in average salaries. The workers rejected the offers and the protests carried on. Intellectuals and the working class joined in the revolution. It was major solidarity that sought to see to it that there was a major change in the rights of the workers. In the subsequent days that followed, the UNEF, the largest student union in France, gathered about 50,000 people at the Stade Sebastien Charlety. The meetings were mostly militant; the speakers demanded that the government be overthrown, an election held and a new government is brought into the office.
The socialists took advantage of the situation to see President de Gaulle ousted. They expected to compromise between the communists and the president. The Federation of the Democratic and Socialist Left, through its leader, Francois Mitterrand, declared a state of emergency and the readiness to form a new government. These were propaganda that he used to help win favor with the socialists. His plan seemed to have worked because he continued to garner support from the public. President Gaulle was left with no option but to bulge to their demands. He fled the country in a calculated move to avoid bloodshed among his supporters and the supporters of the revolution. This time around the police avoided the use of force. What started as a protest by university students had turned into the greatest revolution France has ever witnessed. It showed what a united uprising can achieve.
The Relevance of Subculture
The subculture in this scenario is represented by the students, teachers, workers and the top intellectuals in the society. They were able to work together towards a common cause. They wanted better working conditions - better salaries. They represented the new social movements within society. They won favor with the public. They sympathized with them and supported them throughout the course. Of course, there were casualties; loss of lives. Subcultures, in this case, helped the workers occupy the factories. But, it can also be argued that subcultures can sometimes be misused. In the case of the “May, 68”, the leaders of the federations and unions used the protests to their advantage. They used it as a platform to get to power. This was after they plotted to oust President Gaulle. The impact of subcultures is fast being felt in various parts of the world. Its members are able to respond to situations and see to it that they are corrected.
The subculture helped the students at the Paris University to come as one and protest against the threats of the university to close the University and expel some of the students. It also saw the reopening of the Sorbonne. The Police had to stay away after their high-handedness was exposed by the media, namely the radio and the television networks showed their captured “brutality”. Again, this brings an important question: What is the role of the media in subcultures? Psychologists argue that members of a subculture are able to gang up within the shortest time when they have a common motivation. This seemed to have been the May, 68. Through the exposure, the students were able to come together. Their plights were resonated across other major social groups as well. Soon the workers, teachers and high school students joined. The number kept rising. It hit the ten million mark in a matter of weeks. This was quite phenomenal and points towards the effects of subcultures and their ability to achieve quick results. Could it be that these groups have a common Psychology? This question has baffled many a scientist, with a bias for behavioral scientists.
Subcultures are associated with resistance and opposition, just like it was witnessed in the case investigated. Subcultures have a profound effect in any society. One outstanding element of subcultures is the fact that they are composed of people who are intellectually oriented and are able to unite towards a common goal. Subcultures can lead to coups and ousting of governments. The social groups are able to articulate their grievances within the shortest time possible. The French case was a typical example of this. The numbers joining the streets skyrocketed within a short time. In a matter of weeks, the number stood at two-thirds of the French workforce. The trends of subcultures are worrying. Sometimes they are based on fallacies of mob psychology; members of the subculture tend to just play along. Subcultures can lead to anarchies if not well controlled. The groups often feel marginalized and not well represented. It is always a fight between the “greater society” and the subcultures.
May 1968 will forever remain engrossed in the memories of the French people. It represented a significant era of subculture. It brought to the fore the influence of subcultures in society. After May 1968, the topic has been widely covered. Today, subcultures are taken seriously. The date of the great protest is important in history and appears in so many historical books and archives. Subcultures exist in every society today; they will continue to exist. May 1968 will forever be an important reference in French politics. It represented the possibility of liberations associated with subcultures. The students averted the possibility of closure of the Sorbonne. They also saw to it that all the students who had been arrested were released. The workers were able to negotiate for better pay packages. But, they also misused the opportunity. They became greedy. They became political and planned to oust the government. Was this a manipulation on their part? This question then leads me to another side of subculture: subcultures can be a recipe to anarchies.
It saw the demise of the collective action that had been employed traditionally. It saw the start of a new era, an era that would be dominated by the “new social movements”. These new social movements constitute subcultures. Gelder (2008) argues that subcultures should not only be seen as confrontational or associated with the opposition. Rather, they should be viewed as catalysts of change. American society is experiencing a phenomenon where adolescents are increasingly becoming rebellious and living “outside” their parents’ social status. If it is not a rebellion, it is a change.
- Race Issues and Inequalities
- Development of Sociological Theories
- Issues of Upbringing Adopted Children
- Sociology: Researches on Jewishness and Gender Identity | 3,471 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Built by the kings of the First Dynasty, Memphis had been the capital city of Egypt around 3000 BC, after the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt. Though not much have survived from ancient Memphis, little remains– including scattered statues, alabaster beds, gigantic sarcophagi, sphinxes, and temples– provide clues to the religious life of the city. At the reduction of influence of gods of Heliopolis, about the fifth and sixth dynasties, the gods of Memphis started to take a new character. As first principle, creator, 'father of gods', and head of a triad (that included his consort Sekhmet and their son Nefertem ), god Ptah (who was believed to have had international political powers) was combined with the gods of Heliopolis. Since Horus was an ingredient of god Ptah, the latter was made a supreme god when the former became the god of both Upper and Lower Egypt (after wars between him and Seth were brought to an end).
- The Hidden God Ptah
Ptah was the head of the Triad of Memphis accompanied by his wife Sekhmet and his son Nefertem. The origin of Ptah is still controversial: some scholars believe that he is the incarnation of the Apis Bulls; others state that he is "a variation of the sun god"; and some others suggest that he is related to the moon. In one of the prayers to Ptah, there is an indication that his right eye is the sun and his left is the moon; and by both of which day and night are circled. Some inscriptions on a granite slab dating to the Twenty-fifth Dynasty identify Ptah with Ta-Tenen (an ancient earth-god from Memphis) and with the king. Ptah is presented in many texts as the creator of himself and the father of all the other immortal gods. He is belived to be the provider of food and provisions and all the other blessings that help the mortal beings in leading a happy life. Many ancient myths amalgamate Ptah with other gods such as Osiris and Sokaris. In the Book of the Dead, Ptah is assigned with opening the mouth of the recently dead person with his metal knife to give him the breath of eternity and this justifies calling him the" Lord of Resurrection".
Ptah was known with several names due to the various role attributed to him including the Fashioner of Earth, the King of Two Lands, and the God of Beautiful Face since he was regarded as the creator of his own self and the creator and dominant of the whole earth. Ptah is usually depicted as a bearded bald-headed man wearing a tight garment; holding a scepter of three symbols (strength, life and stability); and standing on the platform associated with Maat with a flower symbolizing happiness gracefully hung at his neck's back. The main cult for Ptah was the Temple of Ptah that marks the increase of his power among the other gods and goddesses. In addition to that there are many other places involving statues for Ptah or paintings depicting worshiping him all over Egypt. The Temple of Seti I in Abydos is one of the major places that encloses some wall paintings for the king while praying for the Chief god. In addition to that, numerous statues for Ptah and his wife Sekhmet have been found in the Temple of King Thutmes III in Karnak complex. Many other statues for Ptah and the other members of the triad are displayed in the Egyptian Museum and the Temple of Ramsses II in Abu Simbel.
- Goddess Sekhmet
Goddess Sekhmet is Ptah's wife and sister. Her name means "to be strong, mighty, and violent". Usually she is depicted as a lion-headed woman dressed in red with a solar disk and a uraeus or cobra over her head and carrying the ankh (the sign of life). The reason for her great role in the ancient Egyptian mythology is the belief that she was the beloved daughter of Ra whose destructive power was used for attacking his enemies and punishing those who disobey him. Among the name she was known for in the ancient mythology: "Great Lady", "the Holy Powerful One" and many other names. Often given the name 'the Eye of Ra', Sekhmet is thought to be the daughter of Ra that supposedly represented the traditional evil eye, the eye represents the god at attacking his foes. She possessed both might and violence and there are many references attesting her destructive use of the heat of the sun. Being a goddess of war and accompanying the king into battlefields, she was associated with weapons like arrows and swift darts. She was associated with the hot blows of winds. In the Book of the Dead, it is mentioned that, at times, her power exceeds that of the god of the underworld, especially when storms blow or floods come. Nevertheless, what virtually seems contrary to her wild nature is her possessing magical insights.
- The God Nefertem
In the ancient Egyptian mythology, Nefertem is the son of Ptah and Sekhmet. Some texts found in the Pyramid of Unas at Saqqara and some vignettes of the Book of the Dead negotiates that Nefertem had risen from the lotus to the nostrils of Ra and went forth from the horizon. In his usual depiction, he appears as a man wearing lotus blossoms permanently on his head and carrying an ankh. On some reliefs, he is pictured putting his feet on a lion or a lion-headed body. Despite being the son of Ptah and Sekhmet, his actions were quite contradictory with his mother's: he was the god of fragrance who allowed only pleasant odors to ascend to the solar god during his daily passage through the sky. In addition to that some of the hymns highlight that he played an important role in the afterworld in purifying the dead people from their 42 sins.
It is debatable whether or not Imhotep, the son of ptah and Sekhmet whose name meant "he who comes in peace," is the third member of the triad of Memphis. He is depicted as a bald-headed man in a scribe-like posture with papyrus on his knees. Among his names are the "Great One, Son of Ptah, the Creative God, made by Thenen, Begotten by Him and Beloved by Him, the God of Divine Forms in the Temples, who Gives Life to All Men, the Mighty One of Wonders, the Maker of Times and many other names deifying his great power and blessings. Recognized as a god of medicine who sent sleep to those in severe pain and suffering, Imhotep was famous for his healing abilities and curative powers, the reason why he was often associated with Thuth, the god of wisdom. The worshipers of Imhotep were usually sacrificing Ibisis in his tomd and sick people pled for being healed by Imhotep's miraculous cures.
One of the most interesting myths of Imhotep highlights his role as the god who helps women to give birth in boys. The tale relates that a miserable married couple had no male heirs went to a temple of Imhotep and pled for giving birth to a boy. Falling asleep in the temple, she had a dream that instructed her to make a medicine for her husband from the root of a certain plant, the colocasia. As she did, she became pregnant with a baby boy. Besides being Zoser's chief advisor early in the Third Dynasty (2686 B.C), Imhotep was the architect of both the funerary complex and the King's Step Pyramid at Saqqara. In a famous myth, his duty as an advisor is highly manifested. That myth relates that Zoser went to Aswan to plead the god for stopping a famine that struck Egypt. After consulting his books, Imhotep said that the reason of god Khnum's rage was Zoser's negligence of the Temple of the god. Thus, he prescribed that a journey should be made to the angered god to whom the king should pay the due tribute. Though not a king and merely a man of a lower position, Imhotep was largely defied, especially after nearly two thousand years after his death. In Imhotep's honor, temples were erected at Memphis, Philae, and Thebes and a school of medicine and magic was built for him at a hospital at Memphis. Probably, his tomb (not yet discovered) lies somewhere in the funeral complex at Saqqara. | <urn:uuid:dc816a4a-706e-4d31-a242-794c443d18cb> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://egyptopia.com/en/articles/Egypt/The-Triad-of-Memphis.s.29.13750/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250613416.54/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123191130-20200123220130-00082.warc.gz | en | 0.984238 | 1,759 | 3.328125 | 3 | [
-0.07590584456920624,
0.8158819675445557,
0.14025187492370605,
-0.07616613060235977,
-0.6971298456192017,
0.16218651831150055,
0.4158197045326233,
0.13671636581420898,
-0.03543814271688461,
0.48017382621765137,
-0.10880643129348755,
-0.66595858335495,
0.22875739634037018,
0.163018301129341... | 17 | Built by the kings of the First Dynasty, Memphis had been the capital city of Egypt around 3000 BC, after the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt. Though not much have survived from ancient Memphis, little remains– including scattered statues, alabaster beds, gigantic sarcophagi, sphinxes, and temples– provide clues to the religious life of the city. At the reduction of influence of gods of Heliopolis, about the fifth and sixth dynasties, the gods of Memphis started to take a new character. As first principle, creator, 'father of gods', and head of a triad (that included his consort Sekhmet and their son Nefertem ), god Ptah (who was believed to have had international political powers) was combined with the gods of Heliopolis. Since Horus was an ingredient of god Ptah, the latter was made a supreme god when the former became the god of both Upper and Lower Egypt (after wars between him and Seth were brought to an end).
- The Hidden God Ptah
Ptah was the head of the Triad of Memphis accompanied by his wife Sekhmet and his son Nefertem. The origin of Ptah is still controversial: some scholars believe that he is the incarnation of the Apis Bulls; others state that he is "a variation of the sun god"; and some others suggest that he is related to the moon. In one of the prayers to Ptah, there is an indication that his right eye is the sun and his left is the moon; and by both of which day and night are circled. Some inscriptions on a granite slab dating to the Twenty-fifth Dynasty identify Ptah with Ta-Tenen (an ancient earth-god from Memphis) and with the king. Ptah is presented in many texts as the creator of himself and the father of all the other immortal gods. He is belived to be the provider of food and provisions and all the other blessings that help the mortal beings in leading a happy life. Many ancient myths amalgamate Ptah with other gods such as Osiris and Sokaris. In the Book of the Dead, Ptah is assigned with opening the mouth of the recently dead person with his metal knife to give him the breath of eternity and this justifies calling him the" Lord of Resurrection".
Ptah was known with several names due to the various role attributed to him including the Fashioner of Earth, the King of Two Lands, and the God of Beautiful Face since he was regarded as the creator of his own self and the creator and dominant of the whole earth. Ptah is usually depicted as a bearded bald-headed man wearing a tight garment; holding a scepter of three symbols (strength, life and stability); and standing on the platform associated with Maat with a flower symbolizing happiness gracefully hung at his neck's back. The main cult for Ptah was the Temple of Ptah that marks the increase of his power among the other gods and goddesses. In addition to that there are many other places involving statues for Ptah or paintings depicting worshiping him all over Egypt. The Temple of Seti I in Abydos is one of the major places that encloses some wall paintings for the king while praying for the Chief god. In addition to that, numerous statues for Ptah and his wife Sekhmet have been found in the Temple of King Thutmes III in Karnak complex. Many other statues for Ptah and the other members of the triad are displayed in the Egyptian Museum and the Temple of Ramsses II in Abu Simbel.
- Goddess Sekhmet
Goddess Sekhmet is Ptah's wife and sister. Her name means "to be strong, mighty, and violent". Usually she is depicted as a lion-headed woman dressed in red with a solar disk and a uraeus or cobra over her head and carrying the ankh (the sign of life). The reason for her great role in the ancient Egyptian mythology is the belief that she was the beloved daughter of Ra whose destructive power was used for attacking his enemies and punishing those who disobey him. Among the name she was known for in the ancient mythology: "Great Lady", "the Holy Powerful One" and many other names. Often given the name 'the Eye of Ra', Sekhmet is thought to be the daughter of Ra that supposedly represented the traditional evil eye, the eye represents the god at attacking his foes. She possessed both might and violence and there are many references attesting her destructive use of the heat of the sun. Being a goddess of war and accompanying the king into battlefields, she was associated with weapons like arrows and swift darts. She was associated with the hot blows of winds. In the Book of the Dead, it is mentioned that, at times, her power exceeds that of the god of the underworld, especially when storms blow or floods come. Nevertheless, what virtually seems contrary to her wild nature is her possessing magical insights.
- The God Nefertem
In the ancient Egyptian mythology, Nefertem is the son of Ptah and Sekhmet. Some texts found in the Pyramid of Unas at Saqqara and some vignettes of the Book of the Dead negotiates that Nefertem had risen from the lotus to the nostrils of Ra and went forth from the horizon. In his usual depiction, he appears as a man wearing lotus blossoms permanently on his head and carrying an ankh. On some reliefs, he is pictured putting his feet on a lion or a lion-headed body. Despite being the son of Ptah and Sekhmet, his actions were quite contradictory with his mother's: he was the god of fragrance who allowed only pleasant odors to ascend to the solar god during his daily passage through the sky. In addition to that some of the hymns highlight that he played an important role in the afterworld in purifying the dead people from their 42 sins.
It is debatable whether or not Imhotep, the son of ptah and Sekhmet whose name meant "he who comes in peace," is the third member of the triad of Memphis. He is depicted as a bald-headed man in a scribe-like posture with papyrus on his knees. Among his names are the "Great One, Son of Ptah, the Creative God, made by Thenen, Begotten by Him and Beloved by Him, the God of Divine Forms in the Temples, who Gives Life to All Men, the Mighty One of Wonders, the Maker of Times and many other names deifying his great power and blessings. Recognized as a god of medicine who sent sleep to those in severe pain and suffering, Imhotep was famous for his healing abilities and curative powers, the reason why he was often associated with Thuth, the god of wisdom. The worshipers of Imhotep were usually sacrificing Ibisis in his tomd and sick people pled for being healed by Imhotep's miraculous cures.
One of the most interesting myths of Imhotep highlights his role as the god who helps women to give birth in boys. The tale relates that a miserable married couple had no male heirs went to a temple of Imhotep and pled for giving birth to a boy. Falling asleep in the temple, she had a dream that instructed her to make a medicine for her husband from the root of a certain plant, the colocasia. As she did, she became pregnant with a baby boy. Besides being Zoser's chief advisor early in the Third Dynasty (2686 B.C), Imhotep was the architect of both the funerary complex and the King's Step Pyramid at Saqqara. In a famous myth, his duty as an advisor is highly manifested. That myth relates that Zoser went to Aswan to plead the god for stopping a famine that struck Egypt. After consulting his books, Imhotep said that the reason of god Khnum's rage was Zoser's negligence of the Temple of the god. Thus, he prescribed that a journey should be made to the angered god to whom the king should pay the due tribute. Though not a king and merely a man of a lower position, Imhotep was largely defied, especially after nearly two thousand years after his death. In Imhotep's honor, temples were erected at Memphis, Philae, and Thebes and a school of medicine and magic was built for him at a hospital at Memphis. Probably, his tomb (not yet discovered) lies somewhere in the funeral complex at Saqqara. | 1,759 | ENGLISH | 1 |
From The Salem Witchcraft Trials: A Legal History, by Peter Charles Hoffer Chapter 9, The Scoffers, pages 108-110:
John Proctor and George Burroughs were brought to trial on charges of witchcraft on August 2, 1692. Despite their spirited defense, they were condemned to die. The sentence was carried out on August 19, both men insisting to the end that the court was unfair to them. The Puritans of eastern Massachusetts were no more authoritarian in their views or ways than any comparable group of English men and women. New England ministers and magistrates demanded the respect and obedience that any English pastor or justice of the peace could reasonably expect at home. But in the midst of the witchcraft crisis, challenges to authority took on more sinister shape. Critics of church and state cracked the wall of piety, allowing the sinuous Evil One to enter God’s land. Indeed, cynicism and criticism were seen by some as evidence that a scoffer had already made a pact with the Devil. Tavern keeper John Proctor and minister George Burroughs were two of these scoffers, and they paid for their attitude with their lives. The history of early Massachusetts was filled with remonstrances of religious and political dissenters. Some dissenters, like Roger Williams and Ann Hutchinson early in the century, were exiled for disputing the leading ministers’ self-proclaimed monopoly on conscience. Others, like Samuel Gorton and Robert Child, were muzzled when they protested against the government. The Quakers were persecuted and driven from the colony. When a few of their number returned and persisted in their preaching, they were hanged. By 1692 the English Act of Toleration had forced Massachusetts authorities to allow Anglicans, Baptists, and Quakers to live and worship in the towns, but toleration was limited and grudging. Proctor was associated with a small group of Quakers in Essex County, and Burroughs, though ordained a minister in conventional Puritan fashion, had veered toward the Baptist faith. … Proctor came under suspicion early in April, perhaps even earlier. A friend of his overheard one of the girls saying that they “must have sport,” and that is why they turned their sights on the Proctors. By the end of the crisis, nine immediate family members, including the Proctors’ three oldest children and Elizabeth’s Bassett kin, had all been arrested. Most readers will know the family from Arthur Miller’s moving dramatic recreation of their case in The Crucible. Miller read historical accounts but intentionally changed details. He made Proctor younger and more attractive than he was at the time of the trials and invented an adulterous relationship between Proctor and Abigail Williams, whose age he changed from eleven to seventeen years. In real life Proctor may or may not have had relationships out of wedlock, but they were not what he was accused of doing. Instead, it was the usual chorus of girls seeing Proctor’s specter and feeling his pinching and punching. The girls knew that he and his wife were vulnerable, for Proctor’s wife and her kin were closely tied to Quakers. More important, perhaps, was the fact that the Proctors were almost certainly openly contemptuous of the proceedings. At Ingersoll’s tavern, jest became a forerunner of real accusation. William Rayment, perhaps in drink(for there was a kind of tavern culture at Ingersoll’s, as in most of the colonial watering holes, where common people could joke, toast, fight, gamble and escape their betters’ indignation), told Ingeroll’s wife that he had heard Elizabeth Proctor would soon be examined. Not so, replied Goody Ingersoll, or she would have heard of it. Ingersoll was one of the semiofficial complaint makers, and he surely would have known and told his wife. But Rayment’s companions were not so reticent – or so well informed. Some of the accusers were there as well and began to clamor, “there good proctor, there goody proctor,” [sic] and Goodwife Ingersoll had to silence them. The mockers then made jest of what had been, but moments before, the very sort of performance that was sending people to jail. The first accusations fell not on Elizabeth Proctor alone, as some historians have written, but on both John and Elizabeth. He did not come to her examination unbidden and come under fire for his loyalty, as the common story reports, but had already been denounced by Abigail and Ann Putnam Jr. a week before the official inquiry into the couple convened. He and his wife were arrested and brought to a hearing in Salem, not the Village, on April 11. There Corwin and Hathorne were joined by Deputy Governor Thomas Danforth and councilor Samuel Sewall. Sewall had just returned from England and no doubt was curious to see what was going on in Salem. He had long been a judge on the Court of Assistant and probably had more than an inkling that Phips would ask him to sit on the court to hear Proctor’s case.
To read more about John Proctor’s legal proceedings, please read Peter Charles Hoffer’s The Salem Witchcraft Trials: A Legal History. | <urn:uuid:f0bf55d6-775e-43c0-ab3d-05dcd771aef1> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://salemwitchmuseum.com/2011/08/19/john-proctor/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250615407.46/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124040939-20200124065939-00232.warc.gz | en | 0.989546 | 1,108 | 3.5625 | 4 | [
-0.337852418422699,
0.2665554881095886,
0.19650369882583618,
-0.24986577033996582,
-0.27434366941452026,
0.22047390043735504,
0.28908571600914,
-0.269153892993927,
-0.31407544016838074,
0.2659790515899658,
-0.3332868218421936,
0.34170228242874146,
-0.4615139663219452,
0.1223364993929863,
... | 3 | From The Salem Witchcraft Trials: A Legal History, by Peter Charles Hoffer Chapter 9, The Scoffers, pages 108-110:
John Proctor and George Burroughs were brought to trial on charges of witchcraft on August 2, 1692. Despite their spirited defense, they were condemned to die. The sentence was carried out on August 19, both men insisting to the end that the court was unfair to them. The Puritans of eastern Massachusetts were no more authoritarian in their views or ways than any comparable group of English men and women. New England ministers and magistrates demanded the respect and obedience that any English pastor or justice of the peace could reasonably expect at home. But in the midst of the witchcraft crisis, challenges to authority took on more sinister shape. Critics of church and state cracked the wall of piety, allowing the sinuous Evil One to enter God’s land. Indeed, cynicism and criticism were seen by some as evidence that a scoffer had already made a pact with the Devil. Tavern keeper John Proctor and minister George Burroughs were two of these scoffers, and they paid for their attitude with their lives. The history of early Massachusetts was filled with remonstrances of religious and political dissenters. Some dissenters, like Roger Williams and Ann Hutchinson early in the century, were exiled for disputing the leading ministers’ self-proclaimed monopoly on conscience. Others, like Samuel Gorton and Robert Child, were muzzled when they protested against the government. The Quakers were persecuted and driven from the colony. When a few of their number returned and persisted in their preaching, they were hanged. By 1692 the English Act of Toleration had forced Massachusetts authorities to allow Anglicans, Baptists, and Quakers to live and worship in the towns, but toleration was limited and grudging. Proctor was associated with a small group of Quakers in Essex County, and Burroughs, though ordained a minister in conventional Puritan fashion, had veered toward the Baptist faith. … Proctor came under suspicion early in April, perhaps even earlier. A friend of his overheard one of the girls saying that they “must have sport,” and that is why they turned their sights on the Proctors. By the end of the crisis, nine immediate family members, including the Proctors’ three oldest children and Elizabeth’s Bassett kin, had all been arrested. Most readers will know the family from Arthur Miller’s moving dramatic recreation of their case in The Crucible. Miller read historical accounts but intentionally changed details. He made Proctor younger and more attractive than he was at the time of the trials and invented an adulterous relationship between Proctor and Abigail Williams, whose age he changed from eleven to seventeen years. In real life Proctor may or may not have had relationships out of wedlock, but they were not what he was accused of doing. Instead, it was the usual chorus of girls seeing Proctor’s specter and feeling his pinching and punching. The girls knew that he and his wife were vulnerable, for Proctor’s wife and her kin were closely tied to Quakers. More important, perhaps, was the fact that the Proctors were almost certainly openly contemptuous of the proceedings. At Ingersoll’s tavern, jest became a forerunner of real accusation. William Rayment, perhaps in drink(for there was a kind of tavern culture at Ingersoll’s, as in most of the colonial watering holes, where common people could joke, toast, fight, gamble and escape their betters’ indignation), told Ingeroll’s wife that he had heard Elizabeth Proctor would soon be examined. Not so, replied Goody Ingersoll, or she would have heard of it. Ingersoll was one of the semiofficial complaint makers, and he surely would have known and told his wife. But Rayment’s companions were not so reticent – or so well informed. Some of the accusers were there as well and began to clamor, “there good proctor, there goody proctor,” [sic] and Goodwife Ingersoll had to silence them. The mockers then made jest of what had been, but moments before, the very sort of performance that was sending people to jail. The first accusations fell not on Elizabeth Proctor alone, as some historians have written, but on both John and Elizabeth. He did not come to her examination unbidden and come under fire for his loyalty, as the common story reports, but had already been denounced by Abigail and Ann Putnam Jr. a week before the official inquiry into the couple convened. He and his wife were arrested and brought to a hearing in Salem, not the Village, on April 11. There Corwin and Hathorne were joined by Deputy Governor Thomas Danforth and councilor Samuel Sewall. Sewall had just returned from England and no doubt was curious to see what was going on in Salem. He had long been a judge on the Court of Assistant and probably had more than an inkling that Phips would ask him to sit on the court to hear Proctor’s case.
To read more about John Proctor’s legal proceedings, please read Peter Charles Hoffer’s The Salem Witchcraft Trials: A Legal History. | 1,094 | ENGLISH | 1 |
A FEW days after Argyle reached Scotland, the Duke of Monmouth sailed from Holland and landed in England. He was received with great joy. The common people flocked to his standard, many of them armed only with scythes, and pruning-hooks fastened to poles. Nine hundred young men marched before him, twenty beautiful girls gave him a Bible splendidly bound and a banner which they had themselves embroidered. The roads wherever he went were lined with cheering crowds. "A Monmouth! A Monmouth! the Protestant religion!" they cried as he passed.
The Duke's followers begged him to take the title of king, so, on 20th June 1685 A.D., the same day on which Argyle was led captive through Edinburgh, Monmouth was proclaimed king at Taunton, a little town in the south of England. But like the real King, he was named James so, instead of calling him King James, his followers called him King Monmouth.
King Monmouth did not enjoy his title long. In the dark of the early morning of the 6th July, a battle was fought between King James's men and the followers of Monmouth, on the plain of Sedgemoor. Monmouth fought bravely, but when he saw that his men were being defeated, he turned and fled away leaving them leaderless and hopeless. This was the last real battle ever fought on English ground.
Monmouth tried to escape in disguise. He changed clothes with a poor shepherd, but the country was so full of the King's soldiers that he found it impossible to get away. For several days he lived in the fields, hiding in ditches and having nothing to eat but raw peas and beans. At last, miserable and ragged, half starving from cold and hunger, he was discovered by the soldiers and taken prisoner to London.
Bound with a cord of silk he was led before King James, and falling upon his knees he begged for mercy and forgiveness. But James never forgave. Monmouth, like so many other men, good and bad, was beheaded.
The anger and vengeance of the King did not end with the death of Monmouth. His soldiers, under a dreadful man called Kirke, tortured and murdered, in a terrible manner, the poor rebels who escaped from Sedgemoor. Judge Jeffreys followed next, and so many people did he kill, such terrible things did he do, that his journey through the country was for ever after called the Bloody Assize.
Assize means Court of Justice. At certain times in England judges make what is called a circuit or journey through the country, when they hear what wrong things people have done, and when they judge and punish. But on this dreadful journey Judge Jeffreys did not do justice. He did wrong and murder, and King James praised and rewarded him for it. | <urn:uuid:fa7d55bb-7ca7-466d-b0fb-2e1c0f9ddb6c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.gatewaytotheclassics.com/browse/displayitem.php?item=books/marshall/island/monmouth | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597458.22/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120052454-20200120080454-00111.warc.gz | en | 0.988109 | 588 | 3.59375 | 4 | [
-0.44210153818130493,
0.4178204834461212,
0.23239754140377045,
-0.17040520906448364,
-0.20307078957557678,
-0.541822075843811,
0.3583559989929199,
0.23130720853805542,
-0.2459024041891098,
0.10108014941215515,
0.2471565455198288,
-0.17101959884166718,
0.5082403421401978,
0.2403348088264465... | 1 | A FEW days after Argyle reached Scotland, the Duke of Monmouth sailed from Holland and landed in England. He was received with great joy. The common people flocked to his standard, many of them armed only with scythes, and pruning-hooks fastened to poles. Nine hundred young men marched before him, twenty beautiful girls gave him a Bible splendidly bound and a banner which they had themselves embroidered. The roads wherever he went were lined with cheering crowds. "A Monmouth! A Monmouth! the Protestant religion!" they cried as he passed.
The Duke's followers begged him to take the title of king, so, on 20th June 1685 A.D., the same day on which Argyle was led captive through Edinburgh, Monmouth was proclaimed king at Taunton, a little town in the south of England. But like the real King, he was named James so, instead of calling him King James, his followers called him King Monmouth.
King Monmouth did not enjoy his title long. In the dark of the early morning of the 6th July, a battle was fought between King James's men and the followers of Monmouth, on the plain of Sedgemoor. Monmouth fought bravely, but when he saw that his men were being defeated, he turned and fled away leaving them leaderless and hopeless. This was the last real battle ever fought on English ground.
Monmouth tried to escape in disguise. He changed clothes with a poor shepherd, but the country was so full of the King's soldiers that he found it impossible to get away. For several days he lived in the fields, hiding in ditches and having nothing to eat but raw peas and beans. At last, miserable and ragged, half starving from cold and hunger, he was discovered by the soldiers and taken prisoner to London.
Bound with a cord of silk he was led before King James, and falling upon his knees he begged for mercy and forgiveness. But James never forgave. Monmouth, like so many other men, good and bad, was beheaded.
The anger and vengeance of the King did not end with the death of Monmouth. His soldiers, under a dreadful man called Kirke, tortured and murdered, in a terrible manner, the poor rebels who escaped from Sedgemoor. Judge Jeffreys followed next, and so many people did he kill, such terrible things did he do, that his journey through the country was for ever after called the Bloody Assize.
Assize means Court of Justice. At certain times in England judges make what is called a circuit or journey through the country, when they hear what wrong things people have done, and when they judge and punish. But on this dreadful journey Judge Jeffreys did not do justice. He did wrong and murder, and King James praised and rewarded him for it. | 585 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Political hypocrisy is the state where a politician is pretending to have beliefs, qualities, standards or feelings that they actually do not have. It involves a situation where the politician deceives others and lies so that they can have it their way. This can be related to the introduction of Japanese American relocation camp from World War II. It all started when the then American president issued the Executive order 9066 after 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7. The act as stated by the museum archives was based on ethnicity which allowed the military to forgo constitutional safeguards of citizens in the name of defending the country. The order included relocation of all people of Japanese ancestry. The U.S government forced more than 120,000 Japanese Americans to depart from their homes, schools, businesses and families. In the process, there was separation during the relocation. Many of those who were put in these internment camps were American citizens and half of them were children.
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!
On its exhibitions, the museum indicates that these people were detained for three years from 1942-1945. It was the first action done by American leadership that raised eyebrows of whether the rights of American citizens are encompassed in the first ten amendments of the constitution. In reacting to pressure from un-supporting forces, American leadership justified their action by claiming that there was danger imposed by Japanese descendants. The danger was that these people were spying for the Japanese. Despite doing this, no internee was accused of disloyalty to the American state. During the entire war it happened that those people who were accused and convicted over the crime of spying happened to be white Caucasians. During the relocation, the prisonerswere only allowed to carry with them few possessions. This made life in the internment camps hard. To worsen it up, the Japanese Americans were only given 48 hours to evacuate their homes.
As depicted in the exhibition pictures, Japanese were forced to live behind barbed wire while under the watch of armed guards. The camps that they were forced into were very bleak and located in very remote locations. Despite the constitution’s recommendation for the government to safeguard the rights of its citizens, the then government ignored this they took the internment camps in desert areas. This forces the people to cope with extreme heat and worse temperature conditions. This people did not only suffer from environmental conditions, but also suffered from emotional stress as depicted in the pictures. Some of them ended up dead because they were provided with inadequate medical care.
Japanese incarceration before the world war, had been going on for a while, these internment camps were just the cherry on top of the cake for all those who racially discriminated Japanese Americans. All the information depicted in the museum is proof to the fact that Japanese Americans were left to fight against discrimination during World War II. This caused pain and suffering to women and innocent children.
Such a process can still take place in the U.S. this is because having all the rules that govern the rights of citizens be it those who have gained entry by birth or migration, should be taken care of by the government, the then president ordered for internment of Japanese Americans going against the laws that have been put in place. Having many petitions in court concerning the internment, which resulted from legal claims by the Japanese Americans that thee actions of the internment camps violated their rights as U.S citizens, congress agreed to make payments of $20, 000 to every Japanese American from internment camps.
This is typical of American government of paying their way out of an incriminating situation that they are being accused of. American government can still violate people’s rights with a claim that they acted in the interest of Americans because there was a threat to national security. They would do this without seeking court action and when found guilty of human rights violation the will pay their way out of the situation. In the case of the internment camps and the payments made, we should be aware that they did not take the interest of the dead and those who suffered more before dying.
The Japanese internment is not the only case at hand, because during this same period there was Asian racial discrimination which began when the Chinese people first started to migrate to the U.S in 1800s. The Chinese were seen as a source of cheap labor just like the Japanese. They were also treated to the same conditions of not being provided for with their rights as the constitution demands. This therefore sums up the hypocritical actions of U.S leadership. This is a group of leaders who can get a way with human rights violation in the name of protecting the county’s national security. As a political hypocrisy which includes situations where leaders pretend to have beliefs, qualities, standards or feelings that they actually do not have, Japanese American internment is a political hypocrisy which the then American leader depicted. The government deceived the public with lies that Japanese were spies, but in the actual sense, they were paying back on what had taken place at the Pearl Harbor.
Most popular orders | <urn:uuid:e07aff3e-cef8-4f32-9194-249f563d363c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://essaysexperts.com/essays/history/museum-visitation.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783000.84/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128184745-20200128214745-00031.warc.gz | en | 0.985978 | 1,057 | 3.578125 | 4 | [
-0.06610150635242462,
0.3988614082336426,
0.054306063801050186,
-0.24043653905391693,
0.1284961998462677,
0.47314077615737915,
0.274141788482666,
0.043925561010837555,
-0.31802666187286377,
0.34062737226486206,
0.5222731828689575,
0.1056804209947586,
0.4230002164840698,
0.7836306691169739,... | 1 | Political hypocrisy is the state where a politician is pretending to have beliefs, qualities, standards or feelings that they actually do not have. It involves a situation where the politician deceives others and lies so that they can have it their way. This can be related to the introduction of Japanese American relocation camp from World War II. It all started when the then American president issued the Executive order 9066 after 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7. The act as stated by the museum archives was based on ethnicity which allowed the military to forgo constitutional safeguards of citizens in the name of defending the country. The order included relocation of all people of Japanese ancestry. The U.S government forced more than 120,000 Japanese Americans to depart from their homes, schools, businesses and families. In the process, there was separation during the relocation. Many of those who were put in these internment camps were American citizens and half of them were children.
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!
On its exhibitions, the museum indicates that these people were detained for three years from 1942-1945. It was the first action done by American leadership that raised eyebrows of whether the rights of American citizens are encompassed in the first ten amendments of the constitution. In reacting to pressure from un-supporting forces, American leadership justified their action by claiming that there was danger imposed by Japanese descendants. The danger was that these people were spying for the Japanese. Despite doing this, no internee was accused of disloyalty to the American state. During the entire war it happened that those people who were accused and convicted over the crime of spying happened to be white Caucasians. During the relocation, the prisonerswere only allowed to carry with them few possessions. This made life in the internment camps hard. To worsen it up, the Japanese Americans were only given 48 hours to evacuate their homes.
As depicted in the exhibition pictures, Japanese were forced to live behind barbed wire while under the watch of armed guards. The camps that they were forced into were very bleak and located in very remote locations. Despite the constitution’s recommendation for the government to safeguard the rights of its citizens, the then government ignored this they took the internment camps in desert areas. This forces the people to cope with extreme heat and worse temperature conditions. This people did not only suffer from environmental conditions, but also suffered from emotional stress as depicted in the pictures. Some of them ended up dead because they were provided with inadequate medical care.
Japanese incarceration before the world war, had been going on for a while, these internment camps were just the cherry on top of the cake for all those who racially discriminated Japanese Americans. All the information depicted in the museum is proof to the fact that Japanese Americans were left to fight against discrimination during World War II. This caused pain and suffering to women and innocent children.
Such a process can still take place in the U.S. this is because having all the rules that govern the rights of citizens be it those who have gained entry by birth or migration, should be taken care of by the government, the then president ordered for internment of Japanese Americans going against the laws that have been put in place. Having many petitions in court concerning the internment, which resulted from legal claims by the Japanese Americans that thee actions of the internment camps violated their rights as U.S citizens, congress agreed to make payments of $20, 000 to every Japanese American from internment camps.
This is typical of American government of paying their way out of an incriminating situation that they are being accused of. American government can still violate people’s rights with a claim that they acted in the interest of Americans because there was a threat to national security. They would do this without seeking court action and when found guilty of human rights violation the will pay their way out of the situation. In the case of the internment camps and the payments made, we should be aware that they did not take the interest of the dead and those who suffered more before dying.
The Japanese internment is not the only case at hand, because during this same period there was Asian racial discrimination which began when the Chinese people first started to migrate to the U.S in 1800s. The Chinese were seen as a source of cheap labor just like the Japanese. They were also treated to the same conditions of not being provided for with their rights as the constitution demands. This therefore sums up the hypocritical actions of U.S leadership. This is a group of leaders who can get a way with human rights violation in the name of protecting the county’s national security. As a political hypocrisy which includes situations where leaders pretend to have beliefs, qualities, standards or feelings that they actually do not have, Japanese American internment is a political hypocrisy which the then American leader depicted. The government deceived the public with lies that Japanese were spies, but in the actual sense, they were paying back on what had taken place at the Pearl Harbor.
Most popular orders | 1,070 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Dogs will sometimes do anything to get a treat. When Negro saw children in a cafeteria use green money to pay for their lunches and snacks, he tried to do the same thing with leaves. He doesn’t know what money is and that it has value. The one thing that he does know is that if you give something, then you get something in return. Sadly, Negro’s idea of offering leaves as money didn’t result in getting a lot of treats for him to enjoy.
Negro is a dog that stays at the Diversified Technical Education Institute, interacting with the students and teachers on campus. Many of the teachers feed Negro and make sure he’s taken care of during the week. Since he provides a sense of encouragement and love for the students and staff, everyone tries to do what they can to treat him like family.
Since Negro stays at the school during the week, he started trying to get cookies to enjoy. At first, he didn’t get a lot of treats. After paying attention to some of the students, he started picking up leaves with his nose to give to the students and teachers. When they saw the leaves, they gave him cookies. This is how Negro learned that he could pay for cookies with his own money. At first, his actions weren’t successful. When the students realized what he was doing, they caught on to his trick and rewarded him.
One day, Negro took a leaf to the person at the register. This was the person who the students gave money to when they got food, so he was only copying what everyone else was doing. When Negro would offer his leaves, he would always wag his tail to show that he was happy and anxiously waiting for his treat. Once the cashier knew what he wanted, Negro usually got a cookie in exchange for leaves.
Even though Negro’s money goes a long way to get his cookies, the teachers and students try to limit how many he’s able to get each day, which isn’t something that he likes all the time. Negro is allowed to get two cookies in exchange for his leaves. The reason is that no one wants Negro to get sick from eating too many treats. All of the treats are dog-friendly. The students stand amazed at how quickly Negro learned how to use his money. | <urn:uuid:c294d120-02bd-4315-848b-752c6984d700> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.familyfeed.net/en/dog-wants-cookies-and-uses-leaves-as-money/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592565.2/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118110141-20200118134141-00428.warc.gz | en | 0.991984 | 485 | 3.3125 | 3 | [
-0.17973457276821136,
-0.06699634343385696,
0.2488664835691452,
-0.08091705292463303,
0.19019591808319092,
-0.16264843940734863,
0.5291814208030701,
-0.004177127033472061,
-0.09595092386007309,
0.014026646502315998,
0.31317245960235596,
-0.09543494135141373,
-0.26627087593078613,
0.2149283... | 7 | Dogs will sometimes do anything to get a treat. When Negro saw children in a cafeteria use green money to pay for their lunches and snacks, he tried to do the same thing with leaves. He doesn’t know what money is and that it has value. The one thing that he does know is that if you give something, then you get something in return. Sadly, Negro’s idea of offering leaves as money didn’t result in getting a lot of treats for him to enjoy.
Negro is a dog that stays at the Diversified Technical Education Institute, interacting with the students and teachers on campus. Many of the teachers feed Negro and make sure he’s taken care of during the week. Since he provides a sense of encouragement and love for the students and staff, everyone tries to do what they can to treat him like family.
Since Negro stays at the school during the week, he started trying to get cookies to enjoy. At first, he didn’t get a lot of treats. After paying attention to some of the students, he started picking up leaves with his nose to give to the students and teachers. When they saw the leaves, they gave him cookies. This is how Negro learned that he could pay for cookies with his own money. At first, his actions weren’t successful. When the students realized what he was doing, they caught on to his trick and rewarded him.
One day, Negro took a leaf to the person at the register. This was the person who the students gave money to when they got food, so he was only copying what everyone else was doing. When Negro would offer his leaves, he would always wag his tail to show that he was happy and anxiously waiting for his treat. Once the cashier knew what he wanted, Negro usually got a cookie in exchange for leaves.
Even though Negro’s money goes a long way to get his cookies, the teachers and students try to limit how many he’s able to get each day, which isn’t something that he likes all the time. Negro is allowed to get two cookies in exchange for his leaves. The reason is that no one wants Negro to get sick from eating too many treats. All of the treats are dog-friendly. The students stand amazed at how quickly Negro learned how to use his money. | 459 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Chapter 2 of History deals with the earliest people who move from place to place in the search of food. The chapter discusses many topics in detail, such as how we come to know about these people, how they start farming and herding etc. The chapter ends with the explanation of people’s journey from birth to death at Mehrgarh. So, go through CBSE Notes Class 6 History Chapter 2: From Hunting-Gathering to Growing Food and explore each topic in detail.
The earliest people: why were they on the move?
We describe people who lived in the subcontinent 2 million years ago as hunter-gatherers. This name has been provided because they hunted wild animals, caught fish and birds, gathered fruits, roots, nuts, seeds, leaves, stalks and eggs for their food.
Hunter-gatherers moved from place to place because of the following reasons:
- If they had stayed at one place for a long time, they would have eaten up all the available plant and animal resources.
- Animals move from place to place so these people had to follow their movements for hunting purposes.
- People may have moved from season to season in search of different kinds of plants.
- People living on their banks would have had to go in search of water during the dry seasons from their places.
How do we know about these people?
Archaeologists have found some of the things hunter-gatherers made and used. They made and used tools of stone, wood and bone, of which stone tools have survived best.
- Stone tools were used to cut meat and bone, scrape bark (from trees) and hides (animal skins), chop fruit and roots.
- Other tools were used to chop wood.
Choosing a place to live in
People preferred to live in places having the following availability.
- They lived near to the sources of water, such as rivers and lakes.
- People tried to find places where good quality stone was easily available as it was important for hunting.
Finding out about the fire
Traces of ash show that the people at that time have invented the fire. It could have been used for many things:
- as a source of light
- to roast meat
- to scare away animals
A changing environment
Around 12,000 years ago, there were major changes in the climate of the world which led to the development of grasslands in many areas. This also led to an increase in the number of animals that survived on the grass. So, people start thinking about herding and rearing these animals. Fishing also became important for people.
The beginning of farming and herding
With the development of grassland, people came to know about growing wheat, barley, rice in different parts of the subcontinent. This is how they started practising farming.
People also attract and then tame animals by leaving food for them near their shelters. The first animal to be tamed was the wild ancestor of the dog. Animals such as sheep, goat, cattle and also the pig lived in herds, and most of them ate grass. Often, people protected these animals from attacks by other wild animals. This is how they became herders.
A new way of life
People had to stay in the same place for a long time looking after the plants, watering, weeding, driving away animals and birds – till the grain ripened. Then they start thinking of storing the grain for food and seeds. They began making large clay pots, or wove baskets, or dug pits into the ground.
Animals that are reared can be used as a ‘store’ of food.
Towards a settled life
Archaeologists have found traces of huts or houses at some sites which shows that people have a stable life.
- They have also found cooking hearths both inside and outside the huts, which suggests that, depending on the weather, people used to cook food either indoors or outdoors.
- Stone tools have been found from many sites. Many of these are different from the earlier Palaeolithic tools and that is why they are called neolithic. These include tools that were polished to give a fine cutting edge, and mortars and pestles. Mortars and pestles are used for grinding grain even today. Apart from these tools, some of the tools were also made of bone.
- Many kinds of earthen pots have also been found. These were used for decoration and for storing things.
- People also began weaving cloth, using different kinds of materials. For example: cotton.
A closer look – Living and dying in Mehrgarh
Mehrgarh was one of the places where people learnt to grow barley and wheat, and rear sheep and goats for the first time in this area. At this village, many animal bones were found. Other finds at Mehrgarh include remains of square or rectangular houses. When people die, their relatives and friends pay respect to them. The dead person was buried with goats, which were probably meant to serve as food in the next world. Several burial sites have been found at Mehrgarh.
We hope you have found CBSE Notes Class 6 History Chapter 2 helpful for your exam preparation. Keep learning and stay tuned for more updates on CBSE and NCERT. | <urn:uuid:3faa7249-5a2f-47a5-9b6b-e7407d30b882> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://byjus.com/cbse-notes/class-6-social-science-history-chapter-2-from-hunting-gathering-to-growing-food/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251671078.88/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125071430-20200125100430-00454.warc.gz | en | 0.984122 | 1,097 | 3.703125 | 4 | [
-0.24863216280937195,
0.2732198238372803,
0.4257650673389435,
-0.15327295660972595,
0.11617674678564072,
-0.2056136131286621,
0.397402822971344,
-0.1739029735326767,
-0.057080723345279694,
-0.03555521368980408,
0.2330513894557953,
-0.4523865282535553,
-0.12346439063549042,
0.12292154878377... | 2 | Chapter 2 of History deals with the earliest people who move from place to place in the search of food. The chapter discusses many topics in detail, such as how we come to know about these people, how they start farming and herding etc. The chapter ends with the explanation of people’s journey from birth to death at Mehrgarh. So, go through CBSE Notes Class 6 History Chapter 2: From Hunting-Gathering to Growing Food and explore each topic in detail.
The earliest people: why were they on the move?
We describe people who lived in the subcontinent 2 million years ago as hunter-gatherers. This name has been provided because they hunted wild animals, caught fish and birds, gathered fruits, roots, nuts, seeds, leaves, stalks and eggs for their food.
Hunter-gatherers moved from place to place because of the following reasons:
- If they had stayed at one place for a long time, they would have eaten up all the available plant and animal resources.
- Animals move from place to place so these people had to follow their movements for hunting purposes.
- People may have moved from season to season in search of different kinds of plants.
- People living on their banks would have had to go in search of water during the dry seasons from their places.
How do we know about these people?
Archaeologists have found some of the things hunter-gatherers made and used. They made and used tools of stone, wood and bone, of which stone tools have survived best.
- Stone tools were used to cut meat and bone, scrape bark (from trees) and hides (animal skins), chop fruit and roots.
- Other tools were used to chop wood.
Choosing a place to live in
People preferred to live in places having the following availability.
- They lived near to the sources of water, such as rivers and lakes.
- People tried to find places where good quality stone was easily available as it was important for hunting.
Finding out about the fire
Traces of ash show that the people at that time have invented the fire. It could have been used for many things:
- as a source of light
- to roast meat
- to scare away animals
A changing environment
Around 12,000 years ago, there were major changes in the climate of the world which led to the development of grasslands in many areas. This also led to an increase in the number of animals that survived on the grass. So, people start thinking about herding and rearing these animals. Fishing also became important for people.
The beginning of farming and herding
With the development of grassland, people came to know about growing wheat, barley, rice in different parts of the subcontinent. This is how they started practising farming.
People also attract and then tame animals by leaving food for them near their shelters. The first animal to be tamed was the wild ancestor of the dog. Animals such as sheep, goat, cattle and also the pig lived in herds, and most of them ate grass. Often, people protected these animals from attacks by other wild animals. This is how they became herders.
A new way of life
People had to stay in the same place for a long time looking after the plants, watering, weeding, driving away animals and birds – till the grain ripened. Then they start thinking of storing the grain for food and seeds. They began making large clay pots, or wove baskets, or dug pits into the ground.
Animals that are reared can be used as a ‘store’ of food.
Towards a settled life
Archaeologists have found traces of huts or houses at some sites which shows that people have a stable life.
- They have also found cooking hearths both inside and outside the huts, which suggests that, depending on the weather, people used to cook food either indoors or outdoors.
- Stone tools have been found from many sites. Many of these are different from the earlier Palaeolithic tools and that is why they are called neolithic. These include tools that were polished to give a fine cutting edge, and mortars and pestles. Mortars and pestles are used for grinding grain even today. Apart from these tools, some of the tools were also made of bone.
- Many kinds of earthen pots have also been found. These were used for decoration and for storing things.
- People also began weaving cloth, using different kinds of materials. For example: cotton.
A closer look – Living and dying in Mehrgarh
Mehrgarh was one of the places where people learnt to grow barley and wheat, and rear sheep and goats for the first time in this area. At this village, many animal bones were found. Other finds at Mehrgarh include remains of square or rectangular houses. When people die, their relatives and friends pay respect to them. The dead person was buried with goats, which were probably meant to serve as food in the next world. Several burial sites have been found at Mehrgarh.
We hope you have found CBSE Notes Class 6 History Chapter 2 helpful for your exam preparation. Keep learning and stay tuned for more updates on CBSE and NCERT. | 1,068 | ENGLISH | 1 |
By the late 1800s, America was rapidly on the rise as a strong nation. One-hundred years before, this had not been the case. America was just beginning the road of independence and becoming its own nation, instead of being governed by a larger one. As America became more and more stable, the country began to expand. First, it captured places in the South, and then began its move West. By the late 1800s, America reached from one coast to the other, yet Americans still wanted more, so they looked to their neighbors. The expansionism of the late nineteenth century and the early twentieth century was mostly a continuation of the expansionism of American history based on the reasons of protection, power, and profit.
The United States during this time period was rapidly becoming one of the largest nations in the world, and what a large nation needs is a large amount of protection. Originally, Secretary Adams had persuaded President Monroe to agree with his thinking back in 1823. From this, the Monroe Doctrine was put into place, which stated that there was to be no more colonization by foreign countries in the Americas. It also proclaimed that monarchies should be kept away from this continent, or the United States would react with military strength. This of course had only been a bluff. However, at the end of the 1800s, the American people wanted military protection from nearby foreign neighbors. As depicted in Thomas Nast's "The World's Plunderers," large nations like Russia, Germany, and Britain were claiming more and more land and creeping ever closer to the United States. Many people began to think that one of these countries might take away a part of their own country if the government did not put into place some sort of military protection. Josiah Strong stated "And can any one doubt that the result of this competition of races will be the 'survival of the fittest'" in his Our Country: Its Possible Future and Its Present Crisis. | <urn:uuid:4f3ccf2e-9630-4404-ba03-69c70e7e5bbf> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.exampleessays.com/viewpaper/42285.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783000.84/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128184745-20200128214745-00531.warc.gz | en | 0.985966 | 395 | 3.9375 | 4 | [
-0.3910781443119049,
0.20527327060699463,
0.40251752734184265,
-0.08650822937488556,
0.15375587344169617,
0.18501262366771698,
-0.2700852155685425,
-0.06433707475662231,
-0.17664454877376556,
-0.13187997043132782,
0.1283346265554428,
0.26917916536331177,
0.04074773192405701,
0.129623562097... | 3 | By the late 1800s, America was rapidly on the rise as a strong nation. One-hundred years before, this had not been the case. America was just beginning the road of independence and becoming its own nation, instead of being governed by a larger one. As America became more and more stable, the country began to expand. First, it captured places in the South, and then began its move West. By the late 1800s, America reached from one coast to the other, yet Americans still wanted more, so they looked to their neighbors. The expansionism of the late nineteenth century and the early twentieth century was mostly a continuation of the expansionism of American history based on the reasons of protection, power, and profit.
The United States during this time period was rapidly becoming one of the largest nations in the world, and what a large nation needs is a large amount of protection. Originally, Secretary Adams had persuaded President Monroe to agree with his thinking back in 1823. From this, the Monroe Doctrine was put into place, which stated that there was to be no more colonization by foreign countries in the Americas. It also proclaimed that monarchies should be kept away from this continent, or the United States would react with military strength. This of course had only been a bluff. However, at the end of the 1800s, the American people wanted military protection from nearby foreign neighbors. As depicted in Thomas Nast's "The World's Plunderers," large nations like Russia, Germany, and Britain were claiming more and more land and creeping ever closer to the United States. Many people began to think that one of these countries might take away a part of their own country if the government did not put into place some sort of military protection. Josiah Strong stated "And can any one doubt that the result of this competition of races will be the 'survival of the fittest'" in his Our Country: Its Possible Future and Its Present Crisis. | 409 | ENGLISH | 1 |
A Selective Review of H. G. Unger’s Biography
Harlow Giles Unger’s Noah Webster: The Life and Times of an American Patriot (N.Y.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1998) is must reading for anyone interested in the early days of America because it contains important, but little-known, information about the significant role which Noah Webster played in the development of the American Constitution, American education, and American language. Webster exercised this influence in three ways; and Unger’s discussion of these (and of just about everything else in his biography) is quite interesting and well-written.
First, Webster wrote a pamphlet published in 1785 and read by virtually every educated American entitled Sketches of American Policy, most of whose principles became incorporated into the Constitution as well as into the essays in the Federalist Papers written by Hamilton and Madison. Although the principles themselves were not original with Webster, he was the first to publish them in the form of specific proposals for a new Constitution. After the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Webster wrote anonymously his Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, a short, easy-to-read pamphlet, which was influential among ordinary Americans.
Second, in 1785 Webster began delivering, all across the country, a series of public lectures advocating a purified, uniform national language and an improved and universal education. These language and educational reforms were embodied in the school textbooks Webster had written, which shall be discussed below. These lectures and textbooks were the vehicles Webster used to accomplish these reforms.
Third, Webster in the course of his wide travels had the opportunity to meet and influence almost all the prominent people in the nation at that time, and some of these resulted in close friendships, such as the one with Benjamin Franklin, a surprising fact, given the great disparity in their ages.
This, in itself, is interesting enough, but what makes it even more interesting is another little-known fact brought to light by Unger, namely that Noah Webster embarked upon this arduous national tour mainly for the purpose of promoting the passage of state copyright laws in order that his textbooks might be protected from piracy. And he succeeded: at his instigation every one of the thirteen states passed a copyright law! It was necessary for Webster to do this on the state level because no federal copyright protection was possible under the Articles of Confederation.
Unger’s discussion of how and why Webster wrote his spelling book (the first edition of which was published in 1783) also makes for interesting reading. Webster was then a schoolteacher who was so dissatisfied with the deficiencies of the spellers then in use that he decided to write his own, which became ever more widely used until it became the standard in spellers, and consequently, one of the best-selling books in the nation. Due to the color of its cover, it was known by the public as “the blue back speller” or “Old Blue Back.”
Webster also wrote a grammar (in 1784) and a reader (in 1785), again due to his dissatisfaction with those then in use. The patriotic significance of these is apparent from their inclusion of American words, references to American places and American events, and of speeches, essays, and poems written by Americans. The speller, grammar, and reader were then published, beginning in 1785, as a three volume set. The grammar and reader are not as well-known today as the speller because they were supplanted later on (circa 1836) by the McGuffey Readers. But the speller was not supplanted because McGuffey intended his Readers to be used with it. So, the speller continued to be used along with the McGuffey Readers until they themselves were supplanted by the textbooks of the twentieth century. Webster also wrote two other widely used books: a series of concise biographies (21 of which were of prominent Americans) for use in the schools (in 1830) and a History of the United States (in 1832), which gave credit to the guiding hand of God for the development of the USA, and which claimed that the civil liberty we enjoy is due to the principles of the Christian religion, especially early New England Puritanism.
One of the first — and most prestigious — endorsers of Webster’s speller was Ezra Stiles, the President of Yale College, from which Webster had received his B.A. and M.A. degrees. President Stiles was so interested in this speller that he even suggested to Webster a title for it, which Webster used for the first six editions as the main title, but after that relegated to a sub-title, using then as the main title The American Spelling Book. This title contains the term “Grammatical Institute,” which Stiles believed was warranted for such an important project as the creation of a new system of education, since the term “institute” denotes an authoritative codification, as in law (e.g., The Institutes of Justinian) or theology (e.g., John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion). In fact, according to Unger’s discussion, it appears that Stiles, as a Calvinist, had Calvin’s Institutes in mind when he made the suggestion, and that Webster, as a Calvinist, thus acceded to the suggestion, although, as a young man (only twenty-five years of age), he feared that the term “Institute” might seem too “pompous” and that its obvious derivation from Calvin’s monumental Institutes would expose him to criticism for vanity. While this humility is certainly commendable, it must not be forgotten that John Calvin himself was only 26 years old when he wrote the first edition of his Institutes!
Unger mentions Webster’s Calvinism from time to time, but, unfortunately, he provides no systematic study of it, which would have been helpful, because from what Unger does say, it appears that Calvinism was important to Webster, but that he was not always consistent with it in his thinking. For instance, for a period of time in his early life he believed in Rousseau’s social contract theory, but later turned away from it when he began to see the dangers of what today we would call “mobocracy.”
The work for which Noah Webster is best known, his An American Dictionary of the English language (1828), was done at the end of his life and was such a gargantuan work — both in its composition and as a finished product -— that it is impossible in a short book review such as this to even summarize what was involved. You will need to read Unger’s account of it, which is quite fascinating. It was the largest and best English dictionary ever produced, and it received high praise from Englishmen as well as Americans.
Webster was an indefatigable worker who did far more than this review might indicate (as if that weren’t enough). This is a selective review: I have only included discussion of Webster’s activities which were nationally influential. I did not mention his endeavors which did not succeed: e.g., a newspaper, a magazine, and a revised translation of the Bible; nor his work as a lawyer and a public servant in New England, which were successful, but were only of local importance.
In conclusion, Unger’s biography clearly shows the important but little-known role which Noah Webster played in the formation of the early American nation, especially in its political, linguistic, and educational aspects. This study needs to be followed by one which examines the influence of Webster’s Calvinism upon his patriotism, because Unger’s book only provides a few glimpses of this influence. | <urn:uuid:2772d46a-6bf0-4400-9d8c-c61160933127> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/noah-webster-and-the-formation-of-the-american-nation-a-selective-review-of-h-g-ungers-biography | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251678287.60/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125161753-20200125190753-00329.warc.gz | en | 0.984617 | 1,619 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
-0.36921101808547974,
0.3697476387023926,
0.10994866490364075,
-0.1755821406841278,
-0.18511302769184113,
0.19056770205497742,
0.13679072260856628,
0.6489206552505493,
-0.2235478162765503,
0.3361489474773407,
-0.2782175540924072,
0.17466479539871216,
-0.021192600950598717,
0.36607202887535... | 5 | A Selective Review of H. G. Unger’s Biography
Harlow Giles Unger’s Noah Webster: The Life and Times of an American Patriot (N.Y.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1998) is must reading for anyone interested in the early days of America because it contains important, but little-known, information about the significant role which Noah Webster played in the development of the American Constitution, American education, and American language. Webster exercised this influence in three ways; and Unger’s discussion of these (and of just about everything else in his biography) is quite interesting and well-written.
First, Webster wrote a pamphlet published in 1785 and read by virtually every educated American entitled Sketches of American Policy, most of whose principles became incorporated into the Constitution as well as into the essays in the Federalist Papers written by Hamilton and Madison. Although the principles themselves were not original with Webster, he was the first to publish them in the form of specific proposals for a new Constitution. After the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Webster wrote anonymously his Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, a short, easy-to-read pamphlet, which was influential among ordinary Americans.
Second, in 1785 Webster began delivering, all across the country, a series of public lectures advocating a purified, uniform national language and an improved and universal education. These language and educational reforms were embodied in the school textbooks Webster had written, which shall be discussed below. These lectures and textbooks were the vehicles Webster used to accomplish these reforms.
Third, Webster in the course of his wide travels had the opportunity to meet and influence almost all the prominent people in the nation at that time, and some of these resulted in close friendships, such as the one with Benjamin Franklin, a surprising fact, given the great disparity in their ages.
This, in itself, is interesting enough, but what makes it even more interesting is another little-known fact brought to light by Unger, namely that Noah Webster embarked upon this arduous national tour mainly for the purpose of promoting the passage of state copyright laws in order that his textbooks might be protected from piracy. And he succeeded: at his instigation every one of the thirteen states passed a copyright law! It was necessary for Webster to do this on the state level because no federal copyright protection was possible under the Articles of Confederation.
Unger’s discussion of how and why Webster wrote his spelling book (the first edition of which was published in 1783) also makes for interesting reading. Webster was then a schoolteacher who was so dissatisfied with the deficiencies of the spellers then in use that he decided to write his own, which became ever more widely used until it became the standard in spellers, and consequently, one of the best-selling books in the nation. Due to the color of its cover, it was known by the public as “the blue back speller” or “Old Blue Back.”
Webster also wrote a grammar (in 1784) and a reader (in 1785), again due to his dissatisfaction with those then in use. The patriotic significance of these is apparent from their inclusion of American words, references to American places and American events, and of speeches, essays, and poems written by Americans. The speller, grammar, and reader were then published, beginning in 1785, as a three volume set. The grammar and reader are not as well-known today as the speller because they were supplanted later on (circa 1836) by the McGuffey Readers. But the speller was not supplanted because McGuffey intended his Readers to be used with it. So, the speller continued to be used along with the McGuffey Readers until they themselves were supplanted by the textbooks of the twentieth century. Webster also wrote two other widely used books: a series of concise biographies (21 of which were of prominent Americans) for use in the schools (in 1830) and a History of the United States (in 1832), which gave credit to the guiding hand of God for the development of the USA, and which claimed that the civil liberty we enjoy is due to the principles of the Christian religion, especially early New England Puritanism.
One of the first — and most prestigious — endorsers of Webster’s speller was Ezra Stiles, the President of Yale College, from which Webster had received his B.A. and M.A. degrees. President Stiles was so interested in this speller that he even suggested to Webster a title for it, which Webster used for the first six editions as the main title, but after that relegated to a sub-title, using then as the main title The American Spelling Book. This title contains the term “Grammatical Institute,” which Stiles believed was warranted for such an important project as the creation of a new system of education, since the term “institute” denotes an authoritative codification, as in law (e.g., The Institutes of Justinian) or theology (e.g., John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion). In fact, according to Unger’s discussion, it appears that Stiles, as a Calvinist, had Calvin’s Institutes in mind when he made the suggestion, and that Webster, as a Calvinist, thus acceded to the suggestion, although, as a young man (only twenty-five years of age), he feared that the term “Institute” might seem too “pompous” and that its obvious derivation from Calvin’s monumental Institutes would expose him to criticism for vanity. While this humility is certainly commendable, it must not be forgotten that John Calvin himself was only 26 years old when he wrote the first edition of his Institutes!
Unger mentions Webster’s Calvinism from time to time, but, unfortunately, he provides no systematic study of it, which would have been helpful, because from what Unger does say, it appears that Calvinism was important to Webster, but that he was not always consistent with it in his thinking. For instance, for a period of time in his early life he believed in Rousseau’s social contract theory, but later turned away from it when he began to see the dangers of what today we would call “mobocracy.”
The work for which Noah Webster is best known, his An American Dictionary of the English language (1828), was done at the end of his life and was such a gargantuan work — both in its composition and as a finished product -— that it is impossible in a short book review such as this to even summarize what was involved. You will need to read Unger’s account of it, which is quite fascinating. It was the largest and best English dictionary ever produced, and it received high praise from Englishmen as well as Americans.
Webster was an indefatigable worker who did far more than this review might indicate (as if that weren’t enough). This is a selective review: I have only included discussion of Webster’s activities which were nationally influential. I did not mention his endeavors which did not succeed: e.g., a newspaper, a magazine, and a revised translation of the Bible; nor his work as a lawyer and a public servant in New England, which were successful, but were only of local importance.
In conclusion, Unger’s biography clearly shows the important but little-known role which Noah Webster played in the formation of the early American nation, especially in its political, linguistic, and educational aspects. This study needs to be followed by one which examines the influence of Webster’s Calvinism upon his patriotism, because Unger’s book only provides a few glimpses of this influence. | 1,579 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Invention of the Zipper: Who Invented the Zipper?
Who invented the zipper? How was the zipper invented? It was not very easy to come to the present state of the zipper, which is a modest accessory despite being produced billions of times every day and having a considerable amount of demand throughout many sectors. The zipper has undergone many design changes since it was first invented. We owe the widespread popularity of the modern zipper to the mind and incredible patience of the inventors who invented and developed it.
History of the Zipper
When we go back to the first product resembling to the zipper, we encounter Elias Howe, who was a master of the sewing machine. Howe designed something similar in 1851 on a jumper and registered the first patent under the name “Automatic Continuous Clothing Closure”. This first model of the zipper consisted of hooks extending along a wire and interlocking with each other. Although this product resembled today’s zippers, there were many other ways to accomplish the task. As a result, Howe did not pursue this new product and perhaps missed the opportunity to become the inventor of the zipper. Perhaps he thought, “I invented the sewing machine, let someone else invent the zipper”. Who knows?
Just 40 years after Howe, another inventor, Whitcomb L. Judson, patented a product called “Clasp Locker or Unlocker for Shoes“. This product was actually the predecessor of today’s zipper slider. When the slider slid, the shoelaces of the shoe were interlocked and locked in the same way. This slider was not on the shoe but could be removed and stored after use. Unfortunately, this product did not stick because its very specific design made production difficult and time-consuming.
Whitcomb got his second patent two years later. With this new product, hooks were made from big hooks. Called “C-curity“, this product had a series of short, metal extensions (rather than today’s zipper teeth) sewn on by hand. With this new design, an important stage in the history of the zipper was born because there was now a product that worked as a whole, rather than just single hooks. But guess what happened? Yes, this product did not stick either! It did not stick, because the product separated after it was zipped.
Who Invented the Zipper? The Inventor of the Zipper
And then we get to Gideon Sundback, who is the man we recognize as the inventor of the zipper.
Gideon Sundback, the inventor of the zipper, was an engineer born in Sweden who emigrated to America. He developed a product called the “Plako Fastener” by taking designs made before him. This product housed oval hooks extending out of the lanyard to which they were attached and was more reliable than the “C-curity” design with regards to separating. But since its stiffness did not allow for flexibility, it also had a problem with separating.
Transition to Final Design and Production
Sundback, in 1913, redesigned this design and developed a new model. In this new model, instead of hooks as zipper teeth, he used the oval scoop system sitting on top of each other. These scoop-like teeth were clamped together in a simple motion as a result of the slider passing by. This final model is the modern zipper we still use today. Although successful, this model took time to find its place in the industrial market.
Initially, zippers were only used in boots and tobacco pouches. During World War I, the zipper’s reputation increased. Military designers began to use zippers in flight covers and belt packs.
In essence, the first zipper produced was the metal zipper. Metal zippers were easily able to be used in heavy objects and thick materials. Metal zippers, made of aluminum, nickel or brass, have begun to enter every aspect of life, especially with regards to jeans. The increasingly important zippers are made from more flexible and lightweight materials such as plastic and nylon. The zipper has become indispensable for humanity in many areas of life, especially with regards to clothing. | <urn:uuid:cc2d74ec-c719-40ef-a442-3d4315a643df> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.inofermuar.com/en/2018/02/18/who-invented-the-zipper-invention-of-the-zipper/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606975.49/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122101729-20200122130729-00433.warc.gz | en | 0.981573 | 861 | 3.953125 | 4 | [
-0.43512973189353943,
0.06713078171014786,
0.0963042676448822,
-0.13500483334064484,
-0.46454864740371704,
0.21525299549102783,
0.881883978843689,
0.267181932926178,
-0.09054969996213913,
0.10034923255443573,
0.0907784253358841,
0.07218638062477112,
0.03988920897245407,
-0.0650221705436706... | 1 | Invention of the Zipper: Who Invented the Zipper?
Who invented the zipper? How was the zipper invented? It was not very easy to come to the present state of the zipper, which is a modest accessory despite being produced billions of times every day and having a considerable amount of demand throughout many sectors. The zipper has undergone many design changes since it was first invented. We owe the widespread popularity of the modern zipper to the mind and incredible patience of the inventors who invented and developed it.
History of the Zipper
When we go back to the first product resembling to the zipper, we encounter Elias Howe, who was a master of the sewing machine. Howe designed something similar in 1851 on a jumper and registered the first patent under the name “Automatic Continuous Clothing Closure”. This first model of the zipper consisted of hooks extending along a wire and interlocking with each other. Although this product resembled today’s zippers, there were many other ways to accomplish the task. As a result, Howe did not pursue this new product and perhaps missed the opportunity to become the inventor of the zipper. Perhaps he thought, “I invented the sewing machine, let someone else invent the zipper”. Who knows?
Just 40 years after Howe, another inventor, Whitcomb L. Judson, patented a product called “Clasp Locker or Unlocker for Shoes“. This product was actually the predecessor of today’s zipper slider. When the slider slid, the shoelaces of the shoe were interlocked and locked in the same way. This slider was not on the shoe but could be removed and stored after use. Unfortunately, this product did not stick because its very specific design made production difficult and time-consuming.
Whitcomb got his second patent two years later. With this new product, hooks were made from big hooks. Called “C-curity“, this product had a series of short, metal extensions (rather than today’s zipper teeth) sewn on by hand. With this new design, an important stage in the history of the zipper was born because there was now a product that worked as a whole, rather than just single hooks. But guess what happened? Yes, this product did not stick either! It did not stick, because the product separated after it was zipped.
Who Invented the Zipper? The Inventor of the Zipper
And then we get to Gideon Sundback, who is the man we recognize as the inventor of the zipper.
Gideon Sundback, the inventor of the zipper, was an engineer born in Sweden who emigrated to America. He developed a product called the “Plako Fastener” by taking designs made before him. This product housed oval hooks extending out of the lanyard to which they were attached and was more reliable than the “C-curity” design with regards to separating. But since its stiffness did not allow for flexibility, it also had a problem with separating.
Transition to Final Design and Production
Sundback, in 1913, redesigned this design and developed a new model. In this new model, instead of hooks as zipper teeth, he used the oval scoop system sitting on top of each other. These scoop-like teeth were clamped together in a simple motion as a result of the slider passing by. This final model is the modern zipper we still use today. Although successful, this model took time to find its place in the industrial market.
Initially, zippers were only used in boots and tobacco pouches. During World War I, the zipper’s reputation increased. Military designers began to use zippers in flight covers and belt packs.
In essence, the first zipper produced was the metal zipper. Metal zippers were easily able to be used in heavy objects and thick materials. Metal zippers, made of aluminum, nickel or brass, have begun to enter every aspect of life, especially with regards to jeans. The increasingly important zippers are made from more flexible and lightweight materials such as plastic and nylon. The zipper has become indispensable for humanity in many areas of life, especially with regards to clothing. | 828 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Explain Why Cultural Diversity Is Important In A C Essayollege Education
I come from a small town. Hannibal, MO, the boyhood home of Mark Twain,
is described its claim to fame as “a sleepy town drowsing.” Most surely he has
never been more accurate, for this small enchanted river town has never awakened
It is a town full of ignorance, where nobody has ever thought twice of
sharing and spreading their sly comments and idiotic judgements to anyone and
everyone who will listen, and most people do. It is a town where fathers,
mothers, brothers, sisters, and grandparents teach their kids to “ignore those
no-good niggers,” stay away from those “half-breeds” and give hell to anyone ”
nigger-lover” who refuses to believe the truth.
It sickens me.
Last year, we had an issue to address at our school. It later became
known as The Cowboys vs. The Blacks, and never has our school been more
involved. The newspapers screamed of the hate, violence, and threat of gangs
that were corrupting our schools; the halls rang with the lastest gossip on the
next big showdown. This problem slapped a school full of apathetic kids into a
lively bunch ready to get involved.
Involved in what? A controversy that all
had opinions on, but how could you not have an opinion? It was the talk at all
of the dinner tables, bars, and stores in town. Kids went home scared of the
racial tension. Parents whined and cried of violence in the school.
The parents whined and cried, and at the same time forgot to remember
that it was they, not the kids, who had taught the very prejudices that were ”
disrupting the education process.” My opinion is simple and elementary:
Children are not born to hate others, they must be taught to judge colors. If
we are taught prejudices, then obviously, the racial tensions at my school
didn’t disrupt education, rather enforced lessons often reviewed over fried
chicken and potatoes.
I cried once in my sophomore history class. The girl in front of me sang
and preached that life was just that way, no one could ever change anything, so
why should we even try? Prejudice is taught in the home, and the home is where
we learn everything we really need to know. I listened, fumed, and stood up to
interrupt her. (I rarely frown, let alone yell, but I had had enough of her
pessimism. All eyes and ears were on me, and as my dramatic nature began to
influence me, I started to preach.)
I have a theory.
I created it. Some say I’m naive, others say I’m too
hopeful, but so far no one has told me to abandon it, so I cling to my idea and
share it as often as the issue comes up.
I have a story about my experiences. At my grandparents house, we
cannot watch Cosby without hearing a racist slur from my grandfather. Great guy,
but racially unfair. My dad grew up around jokes and hints about those half-
breeds’ and such, but I did not.
Enter my theory. Somewhere in my family, the
racist ideas were tamed, not eliminated entirely, but curtailed in such a way
that I was able to escape them. How did my father, who was conditioned at an
early age to slight those of other cultures, unlearn?
Two words: education and experience. My dad played football and
studied with people of different ethnic backgrounds. Although he was still
exposed to the beliefs at home, he was beginning to slowly form his own. Always
around different cultural backgrounds, always aware and always learning that
maybe what he had been earlier taught wasn’t entirely true.
Questioning all the
time, wondering if maybe they weren’t so low-down and no-good.
There comes a point in all of our lifes when we simply grow up. We no
longer blindly latch on to what our parents say. We believe ourselves before we
fall victim to other influences, and we question and reteach ourselves answers
we believe correct. We evaluate and review what we have been taught, and
sometimes, if lucky, we are able to unlearn.
If my dad had never studied, sweated, and sheltered others of different
ethnic backgrounds, I would have grown up hearing as many sly jokes and racist
comments that he did.
I would not, however, repeat them to my children. Why?
Because I would have played in the sandbox at kindergarten with someone not like
me, cheered . | <urn:uuid:ec55b9fd-44ac-4e93-ae95-e27f2241d356> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://artscolumbia.org/essays/explain-why-cultural-diversity-is-important-in-a-c-essay-2-107905/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250589560.16/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117123339-20200117151339-00220.warc.gz | en | 0.98315 | 1,015 | 3.265625 | 3 | [
0.15789794921875,
0.24878033995628357,
-0.01211780495941639,
-0.13425731658935547,
-0.12181941419839859,
0.09090539813041687,
0.28010794520378113,
0.41454192996025085,
0.03593668341636658,
-0.3103488087654114,
0.23763495683670044,
-0.14945855736732483,
0.2155088484287262,
0.272768318653106... | 3 | Explain Why Cultural Diversity Is Important In A C Essayollege Education
I come from a small town. Hannibal, MO, the boyhood home of Mark Twain,
is described its claim to fame as “a sleepy town drowsing.” Most surely he has
never been more accurate, for this small enchanted river town has never awakened
It is a town full of ignorance, where nobody has ever thought twice of
sharing and spreading their sly comments and idiotic judgements to anyone and
everyone who will listen, and most people do. It is a town where fathers,
mothers, brothers, sisters, and grandparents teach their kids to “ignore those
no-good niggers,” stay away from those “half-breeds” and give hell to anyone ”
nigger-lover” who refuses to believe the truth.
It sickens me.
Last year, we had an issue to address at our school. It later became
known as The Cowboys vs. The Blacks, and never has our school been more
involved. The newspapers screamed of the hate, violence, and threat of gangs
that were corrupting our schools; the halls rang with the lastest gossip on the
next big showdown. This problem slapped a school full of apathetic kids into a
lively bunch ready to get involved.
Involved in what? A controversy that all
had opinions on, but how could you not have an opinion? It was the talk at all
of the dinner tables, bars, and stores in town. Kids went home scared of the
racial tension. Parents whined and cried of violence in the school.
The parents whined and cried, and at the same time forgot to remember
that it was they, not the kids, who had taught the very prejudices that were ”
disrupting the education process.” My opinion is simple and elementary:
Children are not born to hate others, they must be taught to judge colors. If
we are taught prejudices, then obviously, the racial tensions at my school
didn’t disrupt education, rather enforced lessons often reviewed over fried
chicken and potatoes.
I cried once in my sophomore history class. The girl in front of me sang
and preached that life was just that way, no one could ever change anything, so
why should we even try? Prejudice is taught in the home, and the home is where
we learn everything we really need to know. I listened, fumed, and stood up to
interrupt her. (I rarely frown, let alone yell, but I had had enough of her
pessimism. All eyes and ears were on me, and as my dramatic nature began to
influence me, I started to preach.)
I have a theory.
I created it. Some say I’m naive, others say I’m too
hopeful, but so far no one has told me to abandon it, so I cling to my idea and
share it as often as the issue comes up.
I have a story about my experiences. At my grandparents house, we
cannot watch Cosby without hearing a racist slur from my grandfather. Great guy,
but racially unfair. My dad grew up around jokes and hints about those half-
breeds’ and such, but I did not.
Enter my theory. Somewhere in my family, the
racist ideas were tamed, not eliminated entirely, but curtailed in such a way
that I was able to escape them. How did my father, who was conditioned at an
early age to slight those of other cultures, unlearn?
Two words: education and experience. My dad played football and
studied with people of different ethnic backgrounds. Although he was still
exposed to the beliefs at home, he was beginning to slowly form his own. Always
around different cultural backgrounds, always aware and always learning that
maybe what he had been earlier taught wasn’t entirely true.
Questioning all the
time, wondering if maybe they weren’t so low-down and no-good.
There comes a point in all of our lifes when we simply grow up. We no
longer blindly latch on to what our parents say. We believe ourselves before we
fall victim to other influences, and we question and reteach ourselves answers
we believe correct. We evaluate and review what we have been taught, and
sometimes, if lucky, we are able to unlearn.
If my dad had never studied, sweated, and sheltered others of different
ethnic backgrounds, I would have grown up hearing as many sly jokes and racist
comments that he did.
I would not, however, repeat them to my children. Why?
Because I would have played in the sandbox at kindergarten with someone not like
me, cheered . | 973 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Who Was Booker T. Washington?
Born into slavery, Booker T. Washington put himself through school and became a teacher after the Civil War. In 1881, he founded the Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute in Alabama (now known as Tuskegee University), which grew immensely and focused on training African Americans in agricultural pursuits. A political adviser and writer, Washington clashed with intellectual W.E.B. Du Bois over the best avenues for racial uplift.
Born to a slave on April 5, 1856, Booker's life had little promise early on. In Franklin County, Virginia, as in most states prior to the Civil War, the child of a slave became a slave. Booker's mother, Jane, worked as a cook for plantation owner James Burroughs. His father was an unknown white man, most likely from a nearby plantation. Booker and his mother lived in a one-room log cabin with a large fireplace, which also served as the plantation’s kitchen.
At an early age, Booker went to work carrying sacks of grain to the plantation’s mill. Toting 100-pound sacks was hard work for a small boy, and he was beaten on occasion for not performing his duties satisfactorily. Booker's first exposure to education was from the outside of a schoolhouse near the plantation; looking inside, he saw children his age sitting at desks and reading books. He wanted to do what those children were doing, but he was a slave, and it was illegal to teach slaves to read and write.
After the Civil War, Booker and his mother moved to Malden, West Virginia, where she married freedman Washington Ferguson. The family was very poor, and nine-year-old Booker went to work in the nearby salt furnaces with his stepfather instead of going to school. Booker's mother noticed his interest in learning and got him a book from which he learned the alphabet and how to read and write basic words. Because he was still working, he got up nearly every morning at 4 a.m. to practice and study. At about this time, Booker took the first name of his stepfather as his last name, Washington.
In 1866, Booker T. Washington got a job as a houseboy for Viola Ruffner, the wife of coal mine owner Lewis Ruffner. Mrs. Ruffner was known for being very strict with her servants, especially boys. But she saw something in Washington — his maturity, intelligence and integrity — and soon warmed up to him. Over the two years he worked for her, she understood his desire for an education and allowed him to go to school for an hour a day during the winter months.
In 1872, Washington left home and walked 500 miles to Hampton Normal Agricultural Institute in Virginia. Along the way, he took odd jobs to support himself. He convinced administrators to let him attend the school and took a job as a janitor to help pay his tuition. The school's founder and headmaster, General Samuel C. Armstrong, soon discovered the hardworking Washington and offered him a scholarship, sponsored by a white man. Armstrong had been a commander of a Union African American regiment during the Civil War and was a strong supporter of providing newly freed slaves with a practical education. Armstrong became Washington's mentor, strengthening his values of hard work and strong moral character.
Washington graduated from Hampton in 1875 with high marks. For a time, he taught at his old grade school in Malden, Virginia, and attended Wayland Seminary in Washington, D.C. In 1879, he was chosen to speak at Hampton's graduation ceremonies, where afterward General Armstrong offered Washington a job teaching at Hampton. In 1881, the Alabama legislature approved $2,000 for a "colored" school, the Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute (now known as Tuskegee University). General Armstrong was asked to recommend a white man to run the school but instead recommended Washington. Classes were first held in an old church, while Washington traveled all over the countryside promoting the school and raising money. He reassured whites that nothing in the Tuskegee program would threaten white supremacy or pose any economic competition to whites.
Under Washington's leadership, Tuskegee became a leading school in the country. At his death, it had more than 100 well-equipped buildings, 1,500 students, a 200-member faculty teaching 38 trades and professions, and a nearly $2 million endowment. Washington put much of himself into the school's curriculum, stressing the virtues of patience, enterprise, and thrift. He taught that economic success for African Americans would take time, and that subordination to whites was a necessary evil until African Americans could prove they were worthy of full economic and political rights. He believed that if African Americans worked hard and obtained financial independence and cultural advancement, they would eventually win acceptance and respect from the white community.
Booker T. Washington's Beliefs and the 'Atlanta Compromise'
In 1895, Washington publicly put forth his philosophy on race relations in a speech at the Cotton States and International Exposition in Atlanta, Georgia, known as the "Atlanta Compromise." In his speech, Washington stated that African Americans should accept disenfranchisement and social segregation as long as whites allow them economic progress, educational opportunity and justice in the courts.
Booker T. Washington vs W.E.B. Du Bois
This started a firestorm in parts of the African American community, especially in the North. Activists like W.E.B. Du Bois (who was working as a professor at Atlanta University at the time) deplored Washington's conciliatory philosophy and his belief that African Americans were only suited to vocational training. Du Bois criticized Washington for not demanding equality for African Americans, as granted by the 14th Amendment, and subsequently became an advocate for full and equal rights in every realm of a person's life.
Though Washington had done much to help advance many African Americans, there was some truth in the criticism. During Washington's rise as a national spokesperson for African Americans, they were systematically excluded from the vote and political participation through black codes and Jim Crow laws as rigid patterns of segregation and discrimination became institutionalized throughout the South and much of the country.
White House Dinner with Theodore Roosevelt
In 1901, President Theodore Roosevelt invited Washington to the White House, making him the first African American to be so honored. But the fact that Roosevelt asked Washington to dine with him (inferring the two were equal) was unprecedented and controversial, causing an ferocious uproar among whites.
Both President Roosevelt and his successor, President William Howard Taft, used Washington as an adviser on racial matters, partly because he accepted racial subservience. His White House visit and the publication of his autobiography, Up from Slavery, brought him both acclaim and indignation from many Americans. While some African Americans looked upon Washington as a hero, others, like Du Bois, saw him as a traitor. Many Southern whites, including some prominent members of Congress, saw Washington's success as an affront and called for action to put African Americans "in their place."
Booker T. Washington Books
With the aid of ghostwriters, Washington wrote a total of five books: The Story of My Life and Work (1900), Up from Slavery (1901), The Story of the Negro: The Rise of the Race from Slavery (1909), My Larger Education (1911), and The Man Farthest Down (1912).
Death and Legacy
Washington was a complex individual, who lived during a precarious time in advancing racial equality. On one hand, he was openly supportive of African Americans taking a "back seat" to whites, while on the other he secretly financed several court cases challenging segregation. By 1913, Washington had lost much of his influence. The newly inaugurated Wilson administration was cool to the idea of racial integration and African American equality.
Washington remained the head of Tuskegee Institute until his death on November 14, 1915, at the age of 59, of congestive heart failure.
We strive for accuracy and fairness. If you see something that doesn't look right, contact us! | <urn:uuid:2df629be-03ae-4397-bdb0-834c8543e75b> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.biography.com/activist/booker-t-washington | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594662.6/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119151736-20200119175736-00412.warc.gz | en | 0.981103 | 1,668 | 3.65625 | 4 | [
-0.30112385749816895,
0.47796905040740967,
0.29190880060195923,
-0.04107930138707161,
-0.38652241230010986,
-0.03959431126713753,
0.1571170538663864,
-0.1356068104505539,
-0.30977240204811096,
0.17116877436637878,
0.395064115524292,
-0.1828646957874298,
-0.19138047099113464,
0.346877187490... | 3 | Who Was Booker T. Washington?
Born into slavery, Booker T. Washington put himself through school and became a teacher after the Civil War. In 1881, he founded the Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute in Alabama (now known as Tuskegee University), which grew immensely and focused on training African Americans in agricultural pursuits. A political adviser and writer, Washington clashed with intellectual W.E.B. Du Bois over the best avenues for racial uplift.
Born to a slave on April 5, 1856, Booker's life had little promise early on. In Franklin County, Virginia, as in most states prior to the Civil War, the child of a slave became a slave. Booker's mother, Jane, worked as a cook for plantation owner James Burroughs. His father was an unknown white man, most likely from a nearby plantation. Booker and his mother lived in a one-room log cabin with a large fireplace, which also served as the plantation’s kitchen.
At an early age, Booker went to work carrying sacks of grain to the plantation’s mill. Toting 100-pound sacks was hard work for a small boy, and he was beaten on occasion for not performing his duties satisfactorily. Booker's first exposure to education was from the outside of a schoolhouse near the plantation; looking inside, he saw children his age sitting at desks and reading books. He wanted to do what those children were doing, but he was a slave, and it was illegal to teach slaves to read and write.
After the Civil War, Booker and his mother moved to Malden, West Virginia, where she married freedman Washington Ferguson. The family was very poor, and nine-year-old Booker went to work in the nearby salt furnaces with his stepfather instead of going to school. Booker's mother noticed his interest in learning and got him a book from which he learned the alphabet and how to read and write basic words. Because he was still working, he got up nearly every morning at 4 a.m. to practice and study. At about this time, Booker took the first name of his stepfather as his last name, Washington.
In 1866, Booker T. Washington got a job as a houseboy for Viola Ruffner, the wife of coal mine owner Lewis Ruffner. Mrs. Ruffner was known for being very strict with her servants, especially boys. But she saw something in Washington — his maturity, intelligence and integrity — and soon warmed up to him. Over the two years he worked for her, she understood his desire for an education and allowed him to go to school for an hour a day during the winter months.
In 1872, Washington left home and walked 500 miles to Hampton Normal Agricultural Institute in Virginia. Along the way, he took odd jobs to support himself. He convinced administrators to let him attend the school and took a job as a janitor to help pay his tuition. The school's founder and headmaster, General Samuel C. Armstrong, soon discovered the hardworking Washington and offered him a scholarship, sponsored by a white man. Armstrong had been a commander of a Union African American regiment during the Civil War and was a strong supporter of providing newly freed slaves with a practical education. Armstrong became Washington's mentor, strengthening his values of hard work and strong moral character.
Washington graduated from Hampton in 1875 with high marks. For a time, he taught at his old grade school in Malden, Virginia, and attended Wayland Seminary in Washington, D.C. In 1879, he was chosen to speak at Hampton's graduation ceremonies, where afterward General Armstrong offered Washington a job teaching at Hampton. In 1881, the Alabama legislature approved $2,000 for a "colored" school, the Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute (now known as Tuskegee University). General Armstrong was asked to recommend a white man to run the school but instead recommended Washington. Classes were first held in an old church, while Washington traveled all over the countryside promoting the school and raising money. He reassured whites that nothing in the Tuskegee program would threaten white supremacy or pose any economic competition to whites.
Under Washington's leadership, Tuskegee became a leading school in the country. At his death, it had more than 100 well-equipped buildings, 1,500 students, a 200-member faculty teaching 38 trades and professions, and a nearly $2 million endowment. Washington put much of himself into the school's curriculum, stressing the virtues of patience, enterprise, and thrift. He taught that economic success for African Americans would take time, and that subordination to whites was a necessary evil until African Americans could prove they were worthy of full economic and political rights. He believed that if African Americans worked hard and obtained financial independence and cultural advancement, they would eventually win acceptance and respect from the white community.
Booker T. Washington's Beliefs and the 'Atlanta Compromise'
In 1895, Washington publicly put forth his philosophy on race relations in a speech at the Cotton States and International Exposition in Atlanta, Georgia, known as the "Atlanta Compromise." In his speech, Washington stated that African Americans should accept disenfranchisement and social segregation as long as whites allow them economic progress, educational opportunity and justice in the courts.
Booker T. Washington vs W.E.B. Du Bois
This started a firestorm in parts of the African American community, especially in the North. Activists like W.E.B. Du Bois (who was working as a professor at Atlanta University at the time) deplored Washington's conciliatory philosophy and his belief that African Americans were only suited to vocational training. Du Bois criticized Washington for not demanding equality for African Americans, as granted by the 14th Amendment, and subsequently became an advocate for full and equal rights in every realm of a person's life.
Though Washington had done much to help advance many African Americans, there was some truth in the criticism. During Washington's rise as a national spokesperson for African Americans, they were systematically excluded from the vote and political participation through black codes and Jim Crow laws as rigid patterns of segregation and discrimination became institutionalized throughout the South and much of the country.
White House Dinner with Theodore Roosevelt
In 1901, President Theodore Roosevelt invited Washington to the White House, making him the first African American to be so honored. But the fact that Roosevelt asked Washington to dine with him (inferring the two were equal) was unprecedented and controversial, causing an ferocious uproar among whites.
Both President Roosevelt and his successor, President William Howard Taft, used Washington as an adviser on racial matters, partly because he accepted racial subservience. His White House visit and the publication of his autobiography, Up from Slavery, brought him both acclaim and indignation from many Americans. While some African Americans looked upon Washington as a hero, others, like Du Bois, saw him as a traitor. Many Southern whites, including some prominent members of Congress, saw Washington's success as an affront and called for action to put African Americans "in their place."
Booker T. Washington Books
With the aid of ghostwriters, Washington wrote a total of five books: The Story of My Life and Work (1900), Up from Slavery (1901), The Story of the Negro: The Rise of the Race from Slavery (1909), My Larger Education (1911), and The Man Farthest Down (1912).
Death and Legacy
Washington was a complex individual, who lived during a precarious time in advancing racial equality. On one hand, he was openly supportive of African Americans taking a "back seat" to whites, while on the other he secretly financed several court cases challenging segregation. By 1913, Washington had lost much of his influence. The newly inaugurated Wilson administration was cool to the idea of racial integration and African American equality.
Washington remained the head of Tuskegee Institute until his death on November 14, 1915, at the age of 59, of congestive heart failure.
We strive for accuracy and fairness. If you see something that doesn't look right, contact us! | 1,713 | ENGLISH | 1 |
(Jewish Museum of Rome, 18th December 2014 – 18th March 2015
Since the Italian Risorgimento, the Jews, hitherto considered extraneous to national values and excluded from society and military service, began to develop a strong patriotic identity, which was the same to that of the rest of the Italians. They therefore began to relegate their Judaism to the private and family dimension only.
The adhesion of Italian Jews to the First World War was therefore strong, their participation is seen as their definitive legitimization of emancipation.
The attachment of the majority of Jews to Italy and to the Savoys was strong and certain. It should therefore come as no surprise that the majority of Jews accepted Italy entering into the war with great enthusiasm.
The Italian Jews who took part in the conflict were about 5,000; 50% of them held the rank of officers (compared to 4% of the national data). The higher level of education of the majority of them (with the exception of the Romans) meant that they could hold positions of greater importance and prestige within the army. As a matter of fact, in order to take the grade of officer, it was necessary to have obtained at least a diploma of higher studies: overall, they were much more educated than the national average and their level of schooling was more advanced.
The Italian region that had the highest number of Jewish combat officers (around 500) was Piedmont, followed by Tuscany (around 400), Veneto and Emilia Romagna (around 350 each); only after these regions there was Lazio which, with Rome, could count the largest community of the peninsula.
Roman Jews were an exception to the Italian Jewish population: during the ghetto era they had dealt with commerce and continued to exercise humble trades over the centuries.
In 1870, year that marks the end of Jews segregation and the beginning of their emancipation, they were still mostly small traders, above all of fabrics, rag-sellers and craftsmen, whose level of education was rather poor. Even if their status had changed at the dawn of the Great War, the social composition remained more or less the same; so it should come as no surprise that most of those called to participate in the conflict were simple troop soldiers, with a minority of officers.
The Great War was a crucial step in the path towards the full participation of Jews in the life of Italian society. This was, indeed, the first occasion in which all male Jews faced their duty as Italian citizens, which they had become with full rights. Military courage was the most suitable response for those who identified Judaism with cowardice and hostility towards the Italian homeland.
The institution of the military Rabbinate in June 1915 was of fundamental importance: during the war, in fact, religious assistance was guaranteed to fighters of all religions. The rabbi was authorized to follow the troops to the front, in the same way as the Catholic chaplains. His authority was recognized by many as an antidote to the assimilative force of war life. He had to provide for spiritual needs by using words of consolation towards the suffering, instilling hope and giving the ones who were dying the comfort of faith.
It was therefore with the institution of the military rabbinate that all the fighters, initially reluctant to reveal and profess their identity and religion publicly, became aware and proud of being Jewish and Italian at the same time, thus sharing the same fate as their fellow citizens, who were glad to fight for their country.
Finally, it must be underlined that many of those who fought during the First World War, who were still alive in the 1930s, underwent the racial laws promulgated by fascists in Italy in 1938. Many of the 1,600 Jewish officers who lived in the 1940s perished following the persecutions during the Second World War. | <urn:uuid:232cc14d-064c-4f78-9983-da4d1470661b> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://museoebraico.roma.it/en/2020/01/07/first-of-all-italians-roman-jews-and-the-great-war/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250607407.48/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122191620-20200122220620-00322.warc.gz | en | 0.988106 | 772 | 3.875 | 4 | [
-0.37602734565734863,
0.768234133720398,
0.401576429605484,
-0.26714420318603516,
-0.3954058289527893,
0.16366074979305267,
0.10773733258247375,
0.46793901920318604,
-0.021681049838662148,
-0.3027457594871521,
0.18077775835990906,
-0.051238760352134705,
0.11320739984512329,
0.7542749643325... | 11 | (Jewish Museum of Rome, 18th December 2014 – 18th March 2015
Since the Italian Risorgimento, the Jews, hitherto considered extraneous to national values and excluded from society and military service, began to develop a strong patriotic identity, which was the same to that of the rest of the Italians. They therefore began to relegate their Judaism to the private and family dimension only.
The adhesion of Italian Jews to the First World War was therefore strong, their participation is seen as their definitive legitimization of emancipation.
The attachment of the majority of Jews to Italy and to the Savoys was strong and certain. It should therefore come as no surprise that the majority of Jews accepted Italy entering into the war with great enthusiasm.
The Italian Jews who took part in the conflict were about 5,000; 50% of them held the rank of officers (compared to 4% of the national data). The higher level of education of the majority of them (with the exception of the Romans) meant that they could hold positions of greater importance and prestige within the army. As a matter of fact, in order to take the grade of officer, it was necessary to have obtained at least a diploma of higher studies: overall, they were much more educated than the national average and their level of schooling was more advanced.
The Italian region that had the highest number of Jewish combat officers (around 500) was Piedmont, followed by Tuscany (around 400), Veneto and Emilia Romagna (around 350 each); only after these regions there was Lazio which, with Rome, could count the largest community of the peninsula.
Roman Jews were an exception to the Italian Jewish population: during the ghetto era they had dealt with commerce and continued to exercise humble trades over the centuries.
In 1870, year that marks the end of Jews segregation and the beginning of their emancipation, they were still mostly small traders, above all of fabrics, rag-sellers and craftsmen, whose level of education was rather poor. Even if their status had changed at the dawn of the Great War, the social composition remained more or less the same; so it should come as no surprise that most of those called to participate in the conflict were simple troop soldiers, with a minority of officers.
The Great War was a crucial step in the path towards the full participation of Jews in the life of Italian society. This was, indeed, the first occasion in which all male Jews faced their duty as Italian citizens, which they had become with full rights. Military courage was the most suitable response for those who identified Judaism with cowardice and hostility towards the Italian homeland.
The institution of the military Rabbinate in June 1915 was of fundamental importance: during the war, in fact, religious assistance was guaranteed to fighters of all religions. The rabbi was authorized to follow the troops to the front, in the same way as the Catholic chaplains. His authority was recognized by many as an antidote to the assimilative force of war life. He had to provide for spiritual needs by using words of consolation towards the suffering, instilling hope and giving the ones who were dying the comfort of faith.
It was therefore with the institution of the military rabbinate that all the fighters, initially reluctant to reveal and profess their identity and religion publicly, became aware and proud of being Jewish and Italian at the same time, thus sharing the same fate as their fellow citizens, who were glad to fight for their country.
Finally, it must be underlined that many of those who fought during the First World War, who were still alive in the 1930s, underwent the racial laws promulgated by fascists in Italy in 1938. Many of the 1,600 Jewish officers who lived in the 1940s perished following the persecutions during the Second World War. | 820 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Italian occupation of Libya is an often-overlooked period of time in the history of Africa colonization by western powers. The Italians were as brutal as any other nation in their nation during their reign and justified it with orientalist rhetoric. Historically, Libya has always been a part of another empire. The Greeks were the first to conquer the trading posts of Libya, followed by the Romans, than the Islamic Empire under the Umayyad caliphate. In the mid-16th century the area we know today as Libya was taken by the Ottoman Empire who held it until 1911.
The Italian interest in Libya begins in 1878, following the Congress of Berlin. The Congress of Berlin was held following the Russo-Turkish War in the same year. At this period in history, the Ottoman Empire was disintegrating and the European powers were deciding how they were going to divide it. The Italians were late on the colonization of Africa and were looking forward to the economic opportunity. The Ottoman Empire began propaganda to try to convince their population that they should go to war with the Ottoman Empire and take Libya.
An example of the propaganda can be found in a speech by Italian poet Giovanni Pascoli. He would argue that “Libyans are creatures who sequester for themselves and leave uncultivated land that is necessary to all mankind,” implying that the Libyans were not as human as the Italians and they are wasting the land. He would also use the excuse of his Italy being the successor of the Roman Empire and the Roman Empire controlled Libya. He would mention the economic opportunity in Libya saying the land had become desert because of “inertia of the nomadic and slothful population. Emigrants would soon turn the colony into “a continuation of their native land (Segre, 21-23). ” In September of 1911 Italy invaded Libya. At the time Libya was divided in three territories, Tripolitania, Fezzan, and Cyrenaica. Italy began with Tripolitania and Fezzan, which were taken easily. They were met with much resistance in Cyrenaica. In Cyrenaica, Omar Mukhtar organized the revolt against the colonizers that lasted 20 years and prevented full-scale colonization of Libya. Mukhtar used the desert and mountains to his advantage, the Italians were not used to this environment (Santarelli).
With guerilla tactics, he would attack the Italian forces than disappear back into the desert. The initial Italian surge of 20,000 troops did not suffice, an additional 100,000 were sent into Libya. By this time the Ottoman Empire was able to organize 20,000 Arabs and 8,000 Turks. However, in 1912 Montenegro would declare war on the Ottoman Empire, forcing them to focus their forces elsewhere. They would sign a peace treaty with the Italians, giving them Libya in exchange for islands in the Aegean Sea.
Although the Turks were out of the fight, there was still Arab resistance in Cyrenaica. To combat this, Italians would take the population of people living in the region and send them all to concentration camps. As a result the resistors of colonization would lose their support. In 1931 Omar Mukhtar was captured and was tried and executed in three days (Santarelli). This allowed to Italians to finally begin their plans for full-scale colonization in Libya. Italy’s full control of Libya was gained largely through violence.
In one account, Libyan resistance fighters captured two companies of Italian fighters, executing 250 of them. In response to these types of events, Italians would execute any Libyan they saw with a gun or a knife that they felt was a threat. To the Italians, the Libyans were already lesser people so that sentiment justified the actions. Over the course of 30 years, at least 200,000 Libyan’s were killed. Italians would deport Libyans to concentration camps on remote Italian islands or in camps made in Libya. The poor conditions of the camps led to death of many civilians (Pappe, 26).
In 1933, the Italian Army Health Department Chairman wrote, “80,000 Libyans were forced to leave their land and live in concentration camps, they were taken 300 at a time watched by soldiers to make sure that the Libyans go directly to the concentration camps…By the end of 1930 all Libyans who live in tents were forced to go and live in the camps. Fifty-five percent of the Libyans died in the camps. ” The reason for the displacement was so Italians could take the land that would be good for farming. Italy did make strides in modernizing Libya; they built roads, highways, ports, and railways.
These improvements were mostly for the Italian settlers. Libyans were treated as second-class citizens during the Italian occupation. The best farmland was given out to the Italian settlers, who would hire Libyans to work that land. The schools that Italians built were mainly for Italian settlers, and were often much better than Libyan schools meaning there was less opportunity for the Libyans. Italy had said it wanted to integrate all of the population into the Italian society. Mussolini would refer to Muslims as “Muslim-Italians. ” He also would call himself a “protector of Islam”.
Jews initially integrated fine into the Italian society, but in the late 1930’s there began an anti-Semitic sentiment under the Fascist regime. This would force Jews from the jobs, schools, preventing them from any form of success. Italian Libya would collapse during World War II. Libya would attempt to invade Egypt and face Allied Forces there but would fail and get pushed back, losing parts of Cyrenaica. Italy would regain Cyrenaica with the help of the Germany and would try again to invade Egypt. Once again, they would fail this time they would get pushed back to Tripolitania and eventually out of Africa in February of 1943.
The rule of Italy in Libya was short but it was a brutal one, filled with warfare. In 2008, Italy acknowledged their brutal rule and became the first former colonial power to apologize for the actions of their nation. They gave the current Libyan nation $5 billion in reparations. The package involves construction projects, student grants, and pensions for Libyan soldiers who served with Italians during World War II (Italy to Pay Libya $5 Billion). Libya also underwent a Muslim political-religious order referred to as the Senussi.
This methodology of order originated in Mecca in the year 1837 by the Grand Senussi named Sayyid Muhammad ibn Ali as-Senussi. It primarily involved and concerned the decline of Islamic thought as well as spirituality and the weakening of Muslim political integrity. The Senussi played an integral role in the fight against Italian colonization of Libya that began in 1911. The Senussi of Cyrenaica specifically labeled the Senussi brotherhood or Sanusiyya was primarily established as a direct response to the dominance of European nations over the once Islamic lands of traditional significance (Rogerson, 283).
The Senuusis also often resorted to the vast desert lands of North Africa as both a return the lifestyle of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and the 7th century lifestyle as well as primarily seeking a corporeal refuge from increasing European colonial authority. The involvement of the Senussi in Libyan international affairs with Italy was not regarded as the most pleasing of descriptions. Ralph Bagnold, who was the first commander of one of the British Army groups during World War II coined the term “the Senussi menace,” in Karen Lynnea Piper’s book “Cartographic fictions: maps, race, and identity”.
The Senussi provided a vital hand in Libya’s battle with Italian colonization and to the point where Italy regarded the Senussi as a viable threat and proclaimed “the tribes must either obey Italian government or be destroyed as rebels” (Piper, 100). The Armed bands of Senussis in the Northern African Libyan region were often mercilessly targeted with vicious forms of artillery. Often the discovery and subsequent fascination of the desert oases, where these apparent attackers used as hideouts, led to an overlie the militaristic ambition of discovering insurgents (Piper, 101).
The Senussi were even vigorously supported by Great Britain during World War II and the Senussi rebellion against Italy, which provided a guarantee that Libya would be liberated if they did indeed succeed in their revolt. Mohammed Idris al-Mahdi al-Sanussi and Colonel C. O. Bromilow together issued a statement to Libya regarding the agreement and mutual sentiment towards the country. | <urn:uuid:f9423f50-81d9-4825-85cc-394ef0f1b61c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://bereavementpractitioners.org/essay-italian-colonization-libya/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250626449.79/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124221147-20200125010147-00021.warc.gz | en | 0.983353 | 1,785 | 3.765625 | 4 | [
-0.38348639011383057,
0.6244189739227295,
0.3352504372596741,
0.11723010241985321,
-0.4477776288986206,
-0.04672979936003685,
0.26717478036880493,
0.059779319912195206,
0.0518578365445137,
0.15518808364868164,
0.1463724672794342,
-0.13415756821632385,
0.46957939863204956,
0.598917961120605... | 1 | The Italian occupation of Libya is an often-overlooked period of time in the history of Africa colonization by western powers. The Italians were as brutal as any other nation in their nation during their reign and justified it with orientalist rhetoric. Historically, Libya has always been a part of another empire. The Greeks were the first to conquer the trading posts of Libya, followed by the Romans, than the Islamic Empire under the Umayyad caliphate. In the mid-16th century the area we know today as Libya was taken by the Ottoman Empire who held it until 1911.
The Italian interest in Libya begins in 1878, following the Congress of Berlin. The Congress of Berlin was held following the Russo-Turkish War in the same year. At this period in history, the Ottoman Empire was disintegrating and the European powers were deciding how they were going to divide it. The Italians were late on the colonization of Africa and were looking forward to the economic opportunity. The Ottoman Empire began propaganda to try to convince their population that they should go to war with the Ottoman Empire and take Libya.
An example of the propaganda can be found in a speech by Italian poet Giovanni Pascoli. He would argue that “Libyans are creatures who sequester for themselves and leave uncultivated land that is necessary to all mankind,” implying that the Libyans were not as human as the Italians and they are wasting the land. He would also use the excuse of his Italy being the successor of the Roman Empire and the Roman Empire controlled Libya. He would mention the economic opportunity in Libya saying the land had become desert because of “inertia of the nomadic and slothful population. Emigrants would soon turn the colony into “a continuation of their native land (Segre, 21-23). ” In September of 1911 Italy invaded Libya. At the time Libya was divided in three territories, Tripolitania, Fezzan, and Cyrenaica. Italy began with Tripolitania and Fezzan, which were taken easily. They were met with much resistance in Cyrenaica. In Cyrenaica, Omar Mukhtar organized the revolt against the colonizers that lasted 20 years and prevented full-scale colonization of Libya. Mukhtar used the desert and mountains to his advantage, the Italians were not used to this environment (Santarelli).
With guerilla tactics, he would attack the Italian forces than disappear back into the desert. The initial Italian surge of 20,000 troops did not suffice, an additional 100,000 were sent into Libya. By this time the Ottoman Empire was able to organize 20,000 Arabs and 8,000 Turks. However, in 1912 Montenegro would declare war on the Ottoman Empire, forcing them to focus their forces elsewhere. They would sign a peace treaty with the Italians, giving them Libya in exchange for islands in the Aegean Sea.
Although the Turks were out of the fight, there was still Arab resistance in Cyrenaica. To combat this, Italians would take the population of people living in the region and send them all to concentration camps. As a result the resistors of colonization would lose their support. In 1931 Omar Mukhtar was captured and was tried and executed in three days (Santarelli). This allowed to Italians to finally begin their plans for full-scale colonization in Libya. Italy’s full control of Libya was gained largely through violence.
In one account, Libyan resistance fighters captured two companies of Italian fighters, executing 250 of them. In response to these types of events, Italians would execute any Libyan they saw with a gun or a knife that they felt was a threat. To the Italians, the Libyans were already lesser people so that sentiment justified the actions. Over the course of 30 years, at least 200,000 Libyan’s were killed. Italians would deport Libyans to concentration camps on remote Italian islands or in camps made in Libya. The poor conditions of the camps led to death of many civilians (Pappe, 26).
In 1933, the Italian Army Health Department Chairman wrote, “80,000 Libyans were forced to leave their land and live in concentration camps, they were taken 300 at a time watched by soldiers to make sure that the Libyans go directly to the concentration camps…By the end of 1930 all Libyans who live in tents were forced to go and live in the camps. Fifty-five percent of the Libyans died in the camps. ” The reason for the displacement was so Italians could take the land that would be good for farming. Italy did make strides in modernizing Libya; they built roads, highways, ports, and railways.
These improvements were mostly for the Italian settlers. Libyans were treated as second-class citizens during the Italian occupation. The best farmland was given out to the Italian settlers, who would hire Libyans to work that land. The schools that Italians built were mainly for Italian settlers, and were often much better than Libyan schools meaning there was less opportunity for the Libyans. Italy had said it wanted to integrate all of the population into the Italian society. Mussolini would refer to Muslims as “Muslim-Italians. ” He also would call himself a “protector of Islam”.
Jews initially integrated fine into the Italian society, but in the late 1930’s there began an anti-Semitic sentiment under the Fascist regime. This would force Jews from the jobs, schools, preventing them from any form of success. Italian Libya would collapse during World War II. Libya would attempt to invade Egypt and face Allied Forces there but would fail and get pushed back, losing parts of Cyrenaica. Italy would regain Cyrenaica with the help of the Germany and would try again to invade Egypt. Once again, they would fail this time they would get pushed back to Tripolitania and eventually out of Africa in February of 1943.
The rule of Italy in Libya was short but it was a brutal one, filled with warfare. In 2008, Italy acknowledged their brutal rule and became the first former colonial power to apologize for the actions of their nation. They gave the current Libyan nation $5 billion in reparations. The package involves construction projects, student grants, and pensions for Libyan soldiers who served with Italians during World War II (Italy to Pay Libya $5 Billion). Libya also underwent a Muslim political-religious order referred to as the Senussi.
This methodology of order originated in Mecca in the year 1837 by the Grand Senussi named Sayyid Muhammad ibn Ali as-Senussi. It primarily involved and concerned the decline of Islamic thought as well as spirituality and the weakening of Muslim political integrity. The Senussi played an integral role in the fight against Italian colonization of Libya that began in 1911. The Senussi of Cyrenaica specifically labeled the Senussi brotherhood or Sanusiyya was primarily established as a direct response to the dominance of European nations over the once Islamic lands of traditional significance (Rogerson, 283).
The Senuusis also often resorted to the vast desert lands of North Africa as both a return the lifestyle of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and the 7th century lifestyle as well as primarily seeking a corporeal refuge from increasing European colonial authority. The involvement of the Senussi in Libyan international affairs with Italy was not regarded as the most pleasing of descriptions. Ralph Bagnold, who was the first commander of one of the British Army groups during World War II coined the term “the Senussi menace,” in Karen Lynnea Piper’s book “Cartographic fictions: maps, race, and identity”.
The Senussi provided a vital hand in Libya’s battle with Italian colonization and to the point where Italy regarded the Senussi as a viable threat and proclaimed “the tribes must either obey Italian government or be destroyed as rebels” (Piper, 100). The Armed bands of Senussis in the Northern African Libyan region were often mercilessly targeted with vicious forms of artillery. Often the discovery and subsequent fascination of the desert oases, where these apparent attackers used as hideouts, led to an overlie the militaristic ambition of discovering insurgents (Piper, 101).
The Senussi were even vigorously supported by Great Britain during World War II and the Senussi rebellion against Italy, which provided a guarantee that Libya would be liberated if they did indeed succeed in their revolt. Mohammed Idris al-Mahdi al-Sanussi and Colonel C. O. Bromilow together issued a statement to Libya regarding the agreement and mutual sentiment towards the country. | 1,838 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Famously Known as Nanny of The Maroons, Queen Nanny was the leader of the Maroons, a community which had escaped slavery in Jamaica, during the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. She led the maroons to victory against the British colonizers.
Born in Ghana in 1686, Nanny and her four brothers (all of whom became Maroon leaders) were sold into slavery and later escaped from their plantations into the mountains and jungles of Jamaica. Nanny and one of her brothers, Quao, founded a village in the Blue Mountains that became known as Nanny Town. Nanny has been described as a practitioner of Obeah, a term used in the Caribbean to describe folk magic and religion based on West African influences.
Maroons were enslaved people in the Americas who escaped and formed independent settlements.
Nanny Town, placed as it was in the mountains away from European settlements and difficult to assault, thrived. Nanny limited her attacks on plantations and European settlements and preferred instead to farm and trade peacefully with her neighbours. She did however make numerous successful raids to free enslaved people held on plantations and it has been widely accepted that her efforts contributed to the escape and freedom of almost a thousand maroons.
While Nanny lived, Nanny Town and the Windward Maroons thrived and multiplied. The British colonial administration became embarrassed and threatened by the successes of the Maroons. Plantation owners who were losing slaves and having equipment and crops burned by Maroon raiders demanded that colonial authorities act. Hunting parties, made up of British regular army soldiers, militiamen, and mercenaries (many from the free black community), scoured the Jamaican jungles.
After Queen Nanny’s death in 1733, many of the Windward Maroons moved across the island to the more sparsely inhabited Western (or Leeward) side of Jamaica. Nanny Town was eventually captured by the British and destroyed in 1734.
Queen Nanny’s life and accomplishments have been recognised by the Jamaican government and she has been the only woman honoured as a National Hero. A modern portrait of Nanny, based on her description, appears on the Jamaican $500 note, the largest banknote in circulation in Jamaica.
Nanny is known as one of the earliest leaders of resistance against slavery in the Americas. | <urn:uuid:3721206b-d674-4f8b-9f0b-36d1c8cbe848> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.mbbaglobal.com/queen-nanny-jamaicas-heroine/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250619323.41/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124100832-20200124125832-00183.warc.gz | en | 0.983046 | 481 | 3.859375 | 4 | [
-0.07277725636959076,
-0.014459304511547089,
0.5054035186767578,
-0.09508886188268661,
0.687187135219574,
0.0763186663389206,
0.1504826545715332,
-0.29179906845092773,
-0.07046817988157272,
0.18531014025211334,
-0.13905377686023712,
-0.14571502804756165,
-0.15853190422058105,
-0.0569462813... | 6 | Famously Known as Nanny of The Maroons, Queen Nanny was the leader of the Maroons, a community which had escaped slavery in Jamaica, during the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. She led the maroons to victory against the British colonizers.
Born in Ghana in 1686, Nanny and her four brothers (all of whom became Maroon leaders) were sold into slavery and later escaped from their plantations into the mountains and jungles of Jamaica. Nanny and one of her brothers, Quao, founded a village in the Blue Mountains that became known as Nanny Town. Nanny has been described as a practitioner of Obeah, a term used in the Caribbean to describe folk magic and religion based on West African influences.
Maroons were enslaved people in the Americas who escaped and formed independent settlements.
Nanny Town, placed as it was in the mountains away from European settlements and difficult to assault, thrived. Nanny limited her attacks on plantations and European settlements and preferred instead to farm and trade peacefully with her neighbours. She did however make numerous successful raids to free enslaved people held on plantations and it has been widely accepted that her efforts contributed to the escape and freedom of almost a thousand maroons.
While Nanny lived, Nanny Town and the Windward Maroons thrived and multiplied. The British colonial administration became embarrassed and threatened by the successes of the Maroons. Plantation owners who were losing slaves and having equipment and crops burned by Maroon raiders demanded that colonial authorities act. Hunting parties, made up of British regular army soldiers, militiamen, and mercenaries (many from the free black community), scoured the Jamaican jungles.
After Queen Nanny’s death in 1733, many of the Windward Maroons moved across the island to the more sparsely inhabited Western (or Leeward) side of Jamaica. Nanny Town was eventually captured by the British and destroyed in 1734.
Queen Nanny’s life and accomplishments have been recognised by the Jamaican government and she has been the only woman honoured as a National Hero. A modern portrait of Nanny, based on her description, appears on the Jamaican $500 note, the largest banknote in circulation in Jamaica.
Nanny is known as one of the earliest leaders of resistance against slavery in the Americas. | 485 | ENGLISH | 1 |
William Tecumseh Sherman was born on February 8, 1820 in Lancaster, Ohio, his father died when he was young. His mother, widowed and unable to care for the entire family, sent William’s brother Thomas to be raised by an aunt and William became a foster child to Thomas Ewing, his father's friend. William was also called “Cump” by Thomas Ewing’s family. He married Mr. Ewing's daughter, Ellen. He was educated at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and he graduated in 1840. Prior to the outbreak of hostilities between the North and the South, William Tecumseh Sherman was Superintendent of the Louisiana State Seminary and Military Academy at Alexandria, Louisiana.
In October 1861, Sherman relieved Robert Anderson. Anderson was in command of Ft Sumter and requested that Sherman be transferred to his command. It was extremely difficult filling quotas for Kentucky volunteers. The state of Kentucky was split on their beliefs and where their allegiance should be. Later that month, Sherman told Secretary of War Cameron that if he had 60,000 men, he would drive the enemy out of Kentucky and if he had 200,000 men, he would finish the war. When Cameron returned to Washington, he reported that Sherman required 200,000 men. The report was given to newspapers and the public was not happy. A writer of one of these newspapers even went as far as saying that Sherman must be "crazy" in demanding such a large force. The public accepted that he must be crazy and writers have always declared him to be. Due to the pressure of the press and politicians, Sherman was relieved of his command and then was assigned to the Department of the West, in St. Louis, Missouri. After moving to Missouri, newspapers and gossip continued to harass him with reports that he was insane and that he was not fit to command.
William Sherman is one of the most hated and despised man in the history of Georgia. On September 1, 1864, Sherman's troops captured the city of Atlanta. Sherman declared Atlanta to be a military encampment and ordered the civilians to leave the city. He made arrangements with John B. Hood for safe passage of these civilians, that because of where they lived, no matter if they had Confederate or Union sympathies, they could not remain in their homes if they were within the city of Atlanta. From September to November, Sherman's forces were on the defensive guarding the city. Hood tried several unsuccessful attacks but his efforts were futile. Hood then began marching northward, hoping to destroy Sherman's supply line.
On September 12, 1864, Sherman wrote a letter, in response to a letter he received, to the mayor of Atlanta James M. Calhoun and S.C. Wells who represented the City Council of Atlanta. In his letter, Sherman says he will not revoke his orders. He says to secure peace the war must be stopped. To stop war they must defeat the rebel armies that go against the laws and the Constitution. Sherman plans on using Atlanta for warlike purposes which is uncharacteristic of Atlanta which is home to families. He says there will be no manufacturing commerce or agriculture in… | <urn:uuid:25c17a48-1f9d-41b0-bab6-0f123f65122f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.majortests.com/essay/William-Tecumseh-560984.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608062.57/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123011418-20200123040418-00555.warc.gz | en | 0.989076 | 649 | 3.390625 | 3 | [
-0.054013051092624664,
0.30505239963531494,
0.36418744921684265,
-0.14956429600715637,
-0.4061598777770996,
-0.36595457792282104,
0.2797795832157135,
-0.21029075980186462,
-0.4521649181842804,
-0.29644522070884705,
0.08473549038171768,
-0.07382845878601074,
0.009034222923219204,
0.17943236... | 1 | William Tecumseh Sherman was born on February 8, 1820 in Lancaster, Ohio, his father died when he was young. His mother, widowed and unable to care for the entire family, sent William’s brother Thomas to be raised by an aunt and William became a foster child to Thomas Ewing, his father's friend. William was also called “Cump” by Thomas Ewing’s family. He married Mr. Ewing's daughter, Ellen. He was educated at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and he graduated in 1840. Prior to the outbreak of hostilities between the North and the South, William Tecumseh Sherman was Superintendent of the Louisiana State Seminary and Military Academy at Alexandria, Louisiana.
In October 1861, Sherman relieved Robert Anderson. Anderson was in command of Ft Sumter and requested that Sherman be transferred to his command. It was extremely difficult filling quotas for Kentucky volunteers. The state of Kentucky was split on their beliefs and where their allegiance should be. Later that month, Sherman told Secretary of War Cameron that if he had 60,000 men, he would drive the enemy out of Kentucky and if he had 200,000 men, he would finish the war. When Cameron returned to Washington, he reported that Sherman required 200,000 men. The report was given to newspapers and the public was not happy. A writer of one of these newspapers even went as far as saying that Sherman must be "crazy" in demanding such a large force. The public accepted that he must be crazy and writers have always declared him to be. Due to the pressure of the press and politicians, Sherman was relieved of his command and then was assigned to the Department of the West, in St. Louis, Missouri. After moving to Missouri, newspapers and gossip continued to harass him with reports that he was insane and that he was not fit to command.
William Sherman is one of the most hated and despised man in the history of Georgia. On September 1, 1864, Sherman's troops captured the city of Atlanta. Sherman declared Atlanta to be a military encampment and ordered the civilians to leave the city. He made arrangements with John B. Hood for safe passage of these civilians, that because of where they lived, no matter if they had Confederate or Union sympathies, they could not remain in their homes if they were within the city of Atlanta. From September to November, Sherman's forces were on the defensive guarding the city. Hood tried several unsuccessful attacks but his efforts were futile. Hood then began marching northward, hoping to destroy Sherman's supply line.
On September 12, 1864, Sherman wrote a letter, in response to a letter he received, to the mayor of Atlanta James M. Calhoun and S.C. Wells who represented the City Council of Atlanta. In his letter, Sherman says he will not revoke his orders. He says to secure peace the war must be stopped. To stop war they must defeat the rebel armies that go against the laws and the Constitution. Sherman plans on using Atlanta for warlike purposes which is uncharacteristic of Atlanta which is home to families. He says there will be no manufacturing commerce or agriculture in… | 678 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The crusades were military expeditions launched against the Muslims by the Christians in an attempt to regain the Holy Land. They took place between 1095 A.D. and 1270 A.D. It was one of the most violent periods in the history of mankind. The starting point of the crusades was on November 18, 1095 A.D. when Pope Urban II opened the Council of Clermont.
On November 27, outside the French city of Clermont-Ferrand, the Pope made an important speech . He called upon everyone to help the Christians in the east to restore peace. The crowd’s response was very positive. Garments were cut into crosses which were attached to people’s shoulders in an imitation of Christ (Matthew 10:38).(1) The original object of the First Crusade was to help Christian churches in the east. The new goal became to free the Holy Land from Muslim control, especially Jerusalem.
Pope Urban II stayed in France until September 1096 to provide leadership and guidance for the members of the First Crusade. He urged churchmen to preach the cross in France. Urban wanted the crusading army to be mostly made up of knights and other military personnel. Since the news of his speech at Clermont spread through the west, people from all social classes and occupations joined the Crusade. As a result of Urban losing control of personnel, violence was launched against the Jews of northern France.
This violence was mostly instigated by bands of the urban and rural poor led by men like Peter the Hermit and Walter Sans-Avoir. These groups lacked supplies and discipline. They attempted to reach Constantinople but most of them never got that far. The leaders in lands which they passed through were frightened and killed many of the crusading bands. Some did get to Constantinople and traveled across the Bosphorus in August 1096.
There they split into two groups. One tried to overtake Nicaea and was unsuccessful. The other was ambushed and slaughtered near Civetot in October. The remaining crusaders retreated to Constantinople and joined the second wave of the Crusade. The crusaders were eager to start the journey to Jerusalem but they needed to capture the Anatolian Turkish capital of Nicaea first because it blocked the road that would be their main supply route.
It was held by Seljuk Turks. In May 1097, the crusaders attacked Nicaea. The Turks realized that they were defeated and agreed to give the city to the Byzantines in exchange for the lives of their men. The Byzantines agreed to this and on June 18, Nicaea was under Byzantine control. The leaders of the crusade disagreed and wanted to slaughter the Turks because they were enemies of Christ.(2) On June 30, 1097, the crusaders were ambushed at the city of Dorylaeum by Seljuk Turks led by Kilij Arslam the Seljuk Sultan.
The fight continued until July 1. The crusaders won a big victory and nearly wiped out the Turkish force. This victory opened up the way to Anatolia. The crusaders attacked Anitoch in northern Syria on October 21, 1097. “This was the main obstacle on the road to Jerusalem.”(3) In a long and gruesome battle, the city finally fell on June 2, 1098.
The crusaders were quickly attacked by a new Turkish army from Al Mawsil. They arrived too late to revive Anitoch’s Turkish defenders and they were forced to retreat on June 28. The starting date for the march to Jerusalem was set for November 1, 1098 but was delayed by an epidemic as well as fighting to the south of Anitoch. On January 13, 1099 the commander-in-chief, Count Raymond IV of Toulouse, led the crusaders’ march to Jerusalem. They avoided attacks on cities to conserve forces.
In May 1099 they reached the northern border of Palestine. On June 7 they camped on the summit of a hill where they could see Jerusalem. Many soldiers had tears of joy on that day. The hill was named Montjoie. Jerusalem was well fortified and only vulnerable from the north and the southwest.
On June 13 they tried to storm Jerusalem but were driven back because of insufficient supplies. Extreme heat and a water shortage lowered morale. A priest called Peter Desiderius told them that if they fasted and held a procession around the walls of Jerusalem with sufficient piety, the city would be theirs within nine days. The crusaders did this and, when they completed building three mini castles, they assaulted Jerusalem on July 13. “There was a frenzy of killing as everyone was hacked down.”(4) The governor and his staff were the only Muslims to escape alive.
The Jewish library containing 8 Torah rolls and 330 manuscripts survived. After the First Crusade, four Levant states were established: Jerusalem, Tripoli, Anitoch, and Edessa. The success of this crusade was largely due to the isolation and weakness of the Muslim powers.(5) The Muslim reunification started in the Middle East under Imad ad-Din Zangi, the ruler of Al Mawsil and Halab. The Muslims got their first great victory versus the crusaders when they captured Edessa in 1144 and destroyed the crusader state in that region. This led to the Second Crusade, which was proclaimed late in 1145.
Many people joined the crusade, including the King Louis VII of France and the holy Roman emperor, Conrad III. Conrad’s army left Nuremberg, Germany for Jerusalem in May 1147. A few weeks later the French army set out for Metz. The Germans tried to cross central Anatolia in October, but the Seljuks defeated them near Dorylaeum. The survivors fled to Nicaea.
The other German contingent, led by Otto of Freising, was defeated by Turks at Ladoicea. The remaining crusaders fled to the coast of Pamphylia and were slaughtered in February 1148. Few survivors finished the trip to Syria by ship. The French army had reached Constantinople on October 4, 1147. The French then journeyed through Byzantine territory in west Asia Minor.
The Turks destroyed most of them, but the French king, the German Emperor, and some knights survived and traveled by ship to Outremer from Antalya on the southern coast of Asia Minor. Zengi had died before the crusaders arrived so his sons took control, Saif al-Din in Mosul and Nur al-Din in Aleppo. Joescelin II, the Frankish count of Edessa, took advantage of Zengi’s death and tried to regain his capital, but Nur al-Din massacred the Edessan population and retook it. On June 24, 1148 the High Court of Jerusalem met at Palmarea near Acre. The decision was made to attack Damascus, since Edessa was no longer the war objective.
On July 24, they camped along the west side of Damascus. The Palestinian barons convinced the two kings that the orchards on the west were making the siege more difficult, so they moved to the southeast. They couldn’t stay very long in the southeast because it was a hot waterless plain. On that same day they withdrew their army. The Second Crusade had failed miserably.
There was only one success from the whole crusade: a group of Dutch and English crusaders had captured the cities of Libson and Tortosa.(6) T … | <urn:uuid:aba79734-0bce-4a1b-96c1-4e164b6f271c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://stringsforschools.org/the-crusades-were-military-expeditions-launched-against-the/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597458.22/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120052454-20200120080454-00196.warc.gz | en | 0.983934 | 1,553 | 3.984375 | 4 | [
-0.46967536211013794,
0.653181254863739,
-0.13699406385421753,
-0.22704340517520905,
-0.3936888575553894,
-0.06062763184309006,
-0.46685469150543213,
0.3951547145843506,
0.21802252531051636,
0.117547407746315,
0.03334573283791542,
-0.35752570629119873,
-0.1020050048828125,
0.17264962196350... | 1 | The crusades were military expeditions launched against the Muslims by the Christians in an attempt to regain the Holy Land. They took place between 1095 A.D. and 1270 A.D. It was one of the most violent periods in the history of mankind. The starting point of the crusades was on November 18, 1095 A.D. when Pope Urban II opened the Council of Clermont.
On November 27, outside the French city of Clermont-Ferrand, the Pope made an important speech . He called upon everyone to help the Christians in the east to restore peace. The crowd’s response was very positive. Garments were cut into crosses which were attached to people’s shoulders in an imitation of Christ (Matthew 10:38).(1) The original object of the First Crusade was to help Christian churches in the east. The new goal became to free the Holy Land from Muslim control, especially Jerusalem.
Pope Urban II stayed in France until September 1096 to provide leadership and guidance for the members of the First Crusade. He urged churchmen to preach the cross in France. Urban wanted the crusading army to be mostly made up of knights and other military personnel. Since the news of his speech at Clermont spread through the west, people from all social classes and occupations joined the Crusade. As a result of Urban losing control of personnel, violence was launched against the Jews of northern France.
This violence was mostly instigated by bands of the urban and rural poor led by men like Peter the Hermit and Walter Sans-Avoir. These groups lacked supplies and discipline. They attempted to reach Constantinople but most of them never got that far. The leaders in lands which they passed through were frightened and killed many of the crusading bands. Some did get to Constantinople and traveled across the Bosphorus in August 1096.
There they split into two groups. One tried to overtake Nicaea and was unsuccessful. The other was ambushed and slaughtered near Civetot in October. The remaining crusaders retreated to Constantinople and joined the second wave of the Crusade. The crusaders were eager to start the journey to Jerusalem but they needed to capture the Anatolian Turkish capital of Nicaea first because it blocked the road that would be their main supply route.
It was held by Seljuk Turks. In May 1097, the crusaders attacked Nicaea. The Turks realized that they were defeated and agreed to give the city to the Byzantines in exchange for the lives of their men. The Byzantines agreed to this and on June 18, Nicaea was under Byzantine control. The leaders of the crusade disagreed and wanted to slaughter the Turks because they were enemies of Christ.(2) On June 30, 1097, the crusaders were ambushed at the city of Dorylaeum by Seljuk Turks led by Kilij Arslam the Seljuk Sultan.
The fight continued until July 1. The crusaders won a big victory and nearly wiped out the Turkish force. This victory opened up the way to Anatolia. The crusaders attacked Anitoch in northern Syria on October 21, 1097. “This was the main obstacle on the road to Jerusalem.”(3) In a long and gruesome battle, the city finally fell on June 2, 1098.
The crusaders were quickly attacked by a new Turkish army from Al Mawsil. They arrived too late to revive Anitoch’s Turkish defenders and they were forced to retreat on June 28. The starting date for the march to Jerusalem was set for November 1, 1098 but was delayed by an epidemic as well as fighting to the south of Anitoch. On January 13, 1099 the commander-in-chief, Count Raymond IV of Toulouse, led the crusaders’ march to Jerusalem. They avoided attacks on cities to conserve forces.
In May 1099 they reached the northern border of Palestine. On June 7 they camped on the summit of a hill where they could see Jerusalem. Many soldiers had tears of joy on that day. The hill was named Montjoie. Jerusalem was well fortified and only vulnerable from the north and the southwest.
On June 13 they tried to storm Jerusalem but were driven back because of insufficient supplies. Extreme heat and a water shortage lowered morale. A priest called Peter Desiderius told them that if they fasted and held a procession around the walls of Jerusalem with sufficient piety, the city would be theirs within nine days. The crusaders did this and, when they completed building three mini castles, they assaulted Jerusalem on July 13. “There was a frenzy of killing as everyone was hacked down.”(4) The governor and his staff were the only Muslims to escape alive.
The Jewish library containing 8 Torah rolls and 330 manuscripts survived. After the First Crusade, four Levant states were established: Jerusalem, Tripoli, Anitoch, and Edessa. The success of this crusade was largely due to the isolation and weakness of the Muslim powers.(5) The Muslim reunification started in the Middle East under Imad ad-Din Zangi, the ruler of Al Mawsil and Halab. The Muslims got their first great victory versus the crusaders when they captured Edessa in 1144 and destroyed the crusader state in that region. This led to the Second Crusade, which was proclaimed late in 1145.
Many people joined the crusade, including the King Louis VII of France and the holy Roman emperor, Conrad III. Conrad’s army left Nuremberg, Germany for Jerusalem in May 1147. A few weeks later the French army set out for Metz. The Germans tried to cross central Anatolia in October, but the Seljuks defeated them near Dorylaeum. The survivors fled to Nicaea.
The other German contingent, led by Otto of Freising, was defeated by Turks at Ladoicea. The remaining crusaders fled to the coast of Pamphylia and were slaughtered in February 1148. Few survivors finished the trip to Syria by ship. The French army had reached Constantinople on October 4, 1147. The French then journeyed through Byzantine territory in west Asia Minor.
The Turks destroyed most of them, but the French king, the German Emperor, and some knights survived and traveled by ship to Outremer from Antalya on the southern coast of Asia Minor. Zengi had died before the crusaders arrived so his sons took control, Saif al-Din in Mosul and Nur al-Din in Aleppo. Joescelin II, the Frankish count of Edessa, took advantage of Zengi’s death and tried to regain his capital, but Nur al-Din massacred the Edessan population and retook it. On June 24, 1148 the High Court of Jerusalem met at Palmarea near Acre. The decision was made to attack Damascus, since Edessa was no longer the war objective.
On July 24, they camped along the west side of Damascus. The Palestinian barons convinced the two kings that the orchards on the west were making the siege more difficult, so they moved to the southeast. They couldn’t stay very long in the southeast because it was a hot waterless plain. On that same day they withdrew their army. The Second Crusade had failed miserably.
There was only one success from the whole crusade: a group of Dutch and English crusaders had captured the cities of Libson and Tortosa.(6) T … | 1,615 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Christmas carols are a popular tradition that is followed during the festive season. Everyone follows all the other Christmas traditions of decorating their homes, giving gifts, preparing a Christmas feast and all the other trappings of the season. The tradition of singing Christmas carols was never popular in Goa in the beginning. Not unless you counted on going to someone’s house for a Christmas party and people began singing there.
But that has changed in recent years. In fact, every year, just before Christmas, a big group gathers at the Panjim church square to sing all the Christmas favourites and they sure have a great time doing it. According to one of the organizers, they’ve been doing in for the last 15 years! That is quite an achievement and a fun one at that. Anyone wanting to join them is more than welcome. The only requisites are to wear Christmas colours and hats and bring your singing voice with you.
Christmas carols are an excellent tradition but what do we know about their history? Let’s find out.
The History of Christmas Carols
The word ‘carol’ is a medieval word of French and Anglo-Norman origin. It was said to be a song of praise and joy, accompanied by dancing in a circle. But carols weren’t really referred to as Christmas carols in those days. This was because they were mainly pagan songs that were sung at the Winter Solstice which is the shortest day in the year and occurs on 22nd December. Eventually, Early Christians took over the theses celebrations and gave people Christian songs to sing instead of pagan ones.
No one knows for sure as to when the first carol was written. It is believed that circa 1350 to 1550 is the golden age of English carols. It was during the 14th century that these carols became popular and since then, people all over the world have turned carolling into a much loved Christmas tradition. There was a period in history, around 1647 when the celebration of Christmas and singing carols was stopped. This was a result of Oliver Cromwell and the Puritans coming to power in England. However, it didn’t deter people from singing Christmas carols in secret.
The tradition of Christmas carolling was eventually revived once more by the 18th century as this was when many orchestras and choirs were being set up in the cities of England. People wanted Christmas songs to sing and the tradition became popular once more.
Today, the tradition of Christmas carolling is evident in Western countries in Europe and North America. In Goa, besides the group that sings at the Panjim church square, during Christmas week, don’t be surprised if groups turn up at your door singing all your favourite Christmas carols too. | <urn:uuid:a85059c5-d27b-4d56-8aef-23d03caf9f5b> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://itsgoa.com/history-christmas-carols-festive-season/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250610004.56/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123101110-20200123130110-00459.warc.gz | en | 0.98045 | 576 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
0.173868328332901,
0.15564069151878357,
0.4338659346103668,
-0.16628451645374298,
-0.010566642507910728,
0.06218993663787842,
0.027954258024692535,
-0.02131066843867302,
0.3756868839263916,
-0.04281806945800781,
0.02494310960173607,
0.3603385090827942,
0.08431053906679153,
0.16152852773666... | 9 | Christmas carols are a popular tradition that is followed during the festive season. Everyone follows all the other Christmas traditions of decorating their homes, giving gifts, preparing a Christmas feast and all the other trappings of the season. The tradition of singing Christmas carols was never popular in Goa in the beginning. Not unless you counted on going to someone’s house for a Christmas party and people began singing there.
But that has changed in recent years. In fact, every year, just before Christmas, a big group gathers at the Panjim church square to sing all the Christmas favourites and they sure have a great time doing it. According to one of the organizers, they’ve been doing in for the last 15 years! That is quite an achievement and a fun one at that. Anyone wanting to join them is more than welcome. The only requisites are to wear Christmas colours and hats and bring your singing voice with you.
Christmas carols are an excellent tradition but what do we know about their history? Let’s find out.
The History of Christmas Carols
The word ‘carol’ is a medieval word of French and Anglo-Norman origin. It was said to be a song of praise and joy, accompanied by dancing in a circle. But carols weren’t really referred to as Christmas carols in those days. This was because they were mainly pagan songs that were sung at the Winter Solstice which is the shortest day in the year and occurs on 22nd December. Eventually, Early Christians took over the theses celebrations and gave people Christian songs to sing instead of pagan ones.
No one knows for sure as to when the first carol was written. It is believed that circa 1350 to 1550 is the golden age of English carols. It was during the 14th century that these carols became popular and since then, people all over the world have turned carolling into a much loved Christmas tradition. There was a period in history, around 1647 when the celebration of Christmas and singing carols was stopped. This was a result of Oliver Cromwell and the Puritans coming to power in England. However, it didn’t deter people from singing Christmas carols in secret.
The tradition of Christmas carolling was eventually revived once more by the 18th century as this was when many orchestras and choirs were being set up in the cities of England. People wanted Christmas songs to sing and the tradition became popular once more.
Today, the tradition of Christmas carolling is evident in Western countries in Europe and North America. In Goa, besides the group that sings at the Panjim church square, during Christmas week, don’t be surprised if groups turn up at your door singing all your favourite Christmas carols too. | 570 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Bust of the Roman Empress Tranquillina (reigned 241 – 244 CE). She was wife of Emperor Gordian III thanks to her father, the prefect of the Praetorian Guards, who were the emperor’s personal bodyguards and by this point controlled who ran the empire. Empress Tranquillina reigned with her husband for just three years before her father died and the emperor lost power – and his life.
LUCIUS Cornelius Sulla (l. 138 – 78 BCE) enacted his constitutional reforms (81 BCE) as dictator to strengthen the Roman Senate’s power. Sulla was born in a very turbulent era of Rome’s history, which has often been described as the beginning of the fall of the Roman Republic. The political climate was marked by civil discord and rampant political violence where voting in the Assembly was sometimes settled by armed gangs. There were two primary opposing factions in Roman politics: the Optimates who emphasized the leadership and prominent role of the Senate, and the Populares who generally advocated for the rights of the people.
During this era, senatorial power was curbed and significant progress was made for the rights of the common folk, particularly the magistracy of tribune of the plebs, which was specifically created to be a guardian of the people. Sulla was an Optimate and after his rise to power, he declared himself dictator and passed several reforms to the constitution to revitalize and restore senatorial power to what it once was. Although his reforms did not last very long, his legacy greatly influenced Roman politics in the final years of the Republic until it fell in 27 BCE.
The ancient Roman orator and politician Cicero once wrote poetry! And it was notoriously poor, too.
Over a hundred years after Cicero’s death, the Roman historian Tacitus quipped that Julius Caesar and Brutus wrote poetry too, and “though they were no better poets than Cicero, they were more fortunate, because fewer people know about their poetic endeavors.”
THE Saturnalia was an enduring Roman festival dedicated to the agricultural god Saturn which was held between the 17th and 23rd of December each year during the winter solstice. Originating from archaic agricultural rituals the Roman festivities came to include a general round of gift-giving, merrymaking, and role-reversals so that it became one of the most popular celebrations in the calendar and certainly the jolliest. The similarities of some of its features and the timing – pushed later into December over time – suggest a strong influence on the Christian celebration of Christmas.
The focus of the Saturnalia and the god who gave his name to the festival was Saturn (or Saturnus), who is something of a mysterious figure in Roman religion. Depictions of the god in surviving art have him wearing a veil and brandishing either a sickle or a pruning knife suggesting a close relation with agriculture and especially seed-growing or seed-corn. With links to indigenous Italian deities and perhaps, too, a version of the Greek god Kronos, he was regarded as a primordial deity who had taught humanity important agricultural skills. He was thought to have ruled when the world enjoyed a Golden Age of prosperity and happiness, hence the general frivolity of his festival.
In about 250 BCE, a Celtic tribe known as the Parisii first settled Paris
on the Île de la Cité. In 52 BCE, the Parisii settlement was conquered
by the Romans and their general, Julius Caesar.
The Romans named the city
Lutetia, from an earlier Greek name
Lukotokía, whose origin is unknown. But the renaming did not stick. So the city of lights is known today as Paris, the name of its first founders, from over 2,200 years ago.
AUTHORITY IN ANCIENT ROME: AUCTORITAS, POTESTAS, IMPERIUM & THE PATERFAMILIAS:
AUTHORITY in ancient Rome was complex, and as one can expect from Rome, full of tradition, myth, and awareness of their own storied history. Perhaps the ultimate authority was imperium, the power to command the Roman army. Potestas was legal power belonging to the various roles of political offices. There was also auctoritas, a kind of intangible social authority tied to reputation and status.
In the everyday Roman household, the absolute authority was the father, known as the paterfamilias. In this article, we will examine these various types of authority which spanned across centuries and covered all facets of Roman life – from the household to public politics to the battlefield. | <urn:uuid:86958745-aba5-43a1-aa1c-c2f7a986b0ea> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://history.blogberth.com/category/ancient-rome/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251737572.61/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127235617-20200128025617-00185.warc.gz | en | 0.98179 | 960 | 3.875 | 4 | [
-0.18453103303909302,
0.46590763330459595,
0.6209796071052551,
-0.10337112843990326,
-0.3400009870529175,
0.1282876431941986,
-0.09241017699241638,
0.23071017861366272,
-0.003927632234990597,
-0.194422647356987,
0.1403585821390152,
-0.2329234927892685,
0.03886093199253082,
0.16285754740238... | 1 | Bust of the Roman Empress Tranquillina (reigned 241 – 244 CE). She was wife of Emperor Gordian III thanks to her father, the prefect of the Praetorian Guards, who were the emperor’s personal bodyguards and by this point controlled who ran the empire. Empress Tranquillina reigned with her husband for just three years before her father died and the emperor lost power – and his life.
LUCIUS Cornelius Sulla (l. 138 – 78 BCE) enacted his constitutional reforms (81 BCE) as dictator to strengthen the Roman Senate’s power. Sulla was born in a very turbulent era of Rome’s history, which has often been described as the beginning of the fall of the Roman Republic. The political climate was marked by civil discord and rampant political violence where voting in the Assembly was sometimes settled by armed gangs. There were two primary opposing factions in Roman politics: the Optimates who emphasized the leadership and prominent role of the Senate, and the Populares who generally advocated for the rights of the people.
During this era, senatorial power was curbed and significant progress was made for the rights of the common folk, particularly the magistracy of tribune of the plebs, which was specifically created to be a guardian of the people. Sulla was an Optimate and after his rise to power, he declared himself dictator and passed several reforms to the constitution to revitalize and restore senatorial power to what it once was. Although his reforms did not last very long, his legacy greatly influenced Roman politics in the final years of the Republic until it fell in 27 BCE.
The ancient Roman orator and politician Cicero once wrote poetry! And it was notoriously poor, too.
Over a hundred years after Cicero’s death, the Roman historian Tacitus quipped that Julius Caesar and Brutus wrote poetry too, and “though they were no better poets than Cicero, they were more fortunate, because fewer people know about their poetic endeavors.”
THE Saturnalia was an enduring Roman festival dedicated to the agricultural god Saturn which was held between the 17th and 23rd of December each year during the winter solstice. Originating from archaic agricultural rituals the Roman festivities came to include a general round of gift-giving, merrymaking, and role-reversals so that it became one of the most popular celebrations in the calendar and certainly the jolliest. The similarities of some of its features and the timing – pushed later into December over time – suggest a strong influence on the Christian celebration of Christmas.
The focus of the Saturnalia and the god who gave his name to the festival was Saturn (or Saturnus), who is something of a mysterious figure in Roman religion. Depictions of the god in surviving art have him wearing a veil and brandishing either a sickle or a pruning knife suggesting a close relation with agriculture and especially seed-growing or seed-corn. With links to indigenous Italian deities and perhaps, too, a version of the Greek god Kronos, he was regarded as a primordial deity who had taught humanity important agricultural skills. He was thought to have ruled when the world enjoyed a Golden Age of prosperity and happiness, hence the general frivolity of his festival.
In about 250 BCE, a Celtic tribe known as the Parisii first settled Paris
on the Île de la Cité. In 52 BCE, the Parisii settlement was conquered
by the Romans and their general, Julius Caesar.
The Romans named the city
Lutetia, from an earlier Greek name
Lukotokía, whose origin is unknown. But the renaming did not stick. So the city of lights is known today as Paris, the name of its first founders, from over 2,200 years ago.
AUTHORITY IN ANCIENT ROME: AUCTORITAS, POTESTAS, IMPERIUM & THE PATERFAMILIAS:
AUTHORITY in ancient Rome was complex, and as one can expect from Rome, full of tradition, myth, and awareness of their own storied history. Perhaps the ultimate authority was imperium, the power to command the Roman army. Potestas was legal power belonging to the various roles of political offices. There was also auctoritas, a kind of intangible social authority tied to reputation and status.
In the everyday Roman household, the absolute authority was the father, known as the paterfamilias. In this article, we will examine these various types of authority which spanned across centuries and covered all facets of Roman life – from the household to public politics to the battlefield. | 957 | ENGLISH | 1 |
When pioneers and other explorers first ventured into what would become West Virginia, they encountered artifacts of a much earlier age — carvings, burial mounds, and stone walls, the origins of which natives could not explain with certainty.
Petroglyphs inscribed in rock and featuring human and animal figures were perhaps the most striking and inexplicable finds. Mounds and earthworks could be practically accounted for as defensive or monumental — but carvings? They were certainly communications.
With whom were the creators attempting to communicate and why? Were the carvings inspired by ritual or sheerly as human expression?
Archaeologists can only speculate. Without written records, we may never know with certainty.
Scholars have, however, begun to piece together the larger story of life here before written record, thanks to artifacts that remain — carvings, earthworks, and common relics such as arrowheads and shards of pottery.
Some of the most extensively carved rocks, we now know, were located in river valleys, along which many prehistoric settlements were located. Most are long gone, though others are protected by archaeologists who will not reveal their locations.
Some have been destroyed and incorporated into new construction. Others were drowned when rivers such as the Ohio, Kanawha, and Monongahela were locked and dammed for navigation.
The Half-Moon Site, as the monument is known today, was surveyed in 1838 by James McBride — long after its discovery by European explorers. His account was published in 1847 in Squier and Davis's "Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley," which was later reviewed by the Ohio Historical Society, republished in the West Virginia Archaeologist in 1978.
“July 4, 1838. When making a survey of a turnpike road up the Ohio River, on the of the (sic) third of July 1838 in the evening encamped on the farm of Mr. Ephraim Cable four miles above Steubenville. On the next morning July 4th accompanied by John W. Erwin, Civil Enginer (sic), crossed the Ohio river to the Virginia side, for the purpose of examining a rock which we were informed was on that side.”
“We found the rock lying on the Virginia side of the river. It lies about three feet above low water mark, having a flat surface of about nine feet by seven inclining a little toward the water. It is of hard sand stone, and all over the surface are various figures cut and sunk into the hard rock, amongst these figures are rude representations of the human form, tracts (sic) of human feet representing the bare foot and print of the toes as if made in soft mud, tracts of horses, turkeys, and a rabbit. Several figures of snakes, a tortois (sic), and other figures not understood. A drawing of them was made on the spot by Mr. Erwin as here represented.
"There are a number of other rocks lying on the shore both above and below the one on which the figures are cut, which appear as though they had at some former period rolled down from the hill above. Below this rock is one of much larger size, being about twenty feet in diameter, with a flat surface inclining up stream, on which are several deep cuts or the remains of figures, with which the rock may have been covered; but owing to its exposed situation the current of the river, ice and other floating substances have worn the face of the rock and defaced the figures upon it.”
James L. Murphy, of the Ohio Historical Society, noted in his review of McBride's survey that the sketch of the rock and petroglyphs was likely inaccurate, though that criticism did not devalue the find.
"It seems clear from McBride’s description that Squier and Davis’ drawing is also inaccurate in portraying the petroglyphs as lying on an upright, monument-like slab of sandstone, for McBride clearly states that the rock had a flat surface “inclining a little towards the water.” Probably the other discrepancies between McBride’s drawing and that of Squier and Davis’ are also due to artistic licences or carelessness on the part of the engraver.
Perhaps not surprisingly, the Half-Moon rock is only one of many archaeological sites that did and do exist elsewhere in the Ohio Valley near Weirton and elsewhere in West Virginia.
Do you think you've found an archaeological site in West Virginia? Many such sites have been cataloged though they're their locations have not been publicized. In this way archaeologists can help protect them. Such delicate, finite resources are best explored by trained investigators.
If you think you've found an archaeological landmark or relic, contact the the W.Va. Division of Culture and History at 304-558-0220.
Mysterious stone face attracting curious in New River Gorge
An enigmatic stone face carved into mossy sandstone along the rim of the New River Gorge is attracting increased attention as hiking, biking, and climbing in the region grows. Though its origins are popularly regarded as a mystery, the bas-relief countenance was likely carved in the 1950s, and the son of its creator may still live in the area near Fayetteville, according to area residents who still regard it with a sense of awe. Read the full story here. | <urn:uuid:bfc15f88-0104-4d30-bb8d-01dc73081219> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://wvexplorer.com/2019/01/12/strange-carvings-greeted-west-virginia-explorers/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700988.64/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127143516-20200127173516-00376.warc.gz | en | 0.98016 | 1,110 | 3.953125 | 4 | [
-0.25484710931777954,
0.20039673149585724,
0.3755526542663574,
0.19472938776016235,
-0.46810948848724365,
0.11335278302431107,
-0.14330074191093445,
-0.07873065769672394,
-0.3724507689476013,
0.11296132206916809,
0.1435617059469223,
-0.37613987922668457,
-0.15079225599765778,
0.38995808362... | 8 | When pioneers and other explorers first ventured into what would become West Virginia, they encountered artifacts of a much earlier age — carvings, burial mounds, and stone walls, the origins of which natives could not explain with certainty.
Petroglyphs inscribed in rock and featuring human and animal figures were perhaps the most striking and inexplicable finds. Mounds and earthworks could be practically accounted for as defensive or monumental — but carvings? They were certainly communications.
With whom were the creators attempting to communicate and why? Were the carvings inspired by ritual or sheerly as human expression?
Archaeologists can only speculate. Without written records, we may never know with certainty.
Scholars have, however, begun to piece together the larger story of life here before written record, thanks to artifacts that remain — carvings, earthworks, and common relics such as arrowheads and shards of pottery.
Some of the most extensively carved rocks, we now know, were located in river valleys, along which many prehistoric settlements were located. Most are long gone, though others are protected by archaeologists who will not reveal their locations.
Some have been destroyed and incorporated into new construction. Others were drowned when rivers such as the Ohio, Kanawha, and Monongahela were locked and dammed for navigation.
The Half-Moon Site, as the monument is known today, was surveyed in 1838 by James McBride — long after its discovery by European explorers. His account was published in 1847 in Squier and Davis's "Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley," which was later reviewed by the Ohio Historical Society, republished in the West Virginia Archaeologist in 1978.
“July 4, 1838. When making a survey of a turnpike road up the Ohio River, on the of the (sic) third of July 1838 in the evening encamped on the farm of Mr. Ephraim Cable four miles above Steubenville. On the next morning July 4th accompanied by John W. Erwin, Civil Enginer (sic), crossed the Ohio river to the Virginia side, for the purpose of examining a rock which we were informed was on that side.”
“We found the rock lying on the Virginia side of the river. It lies about three feet above low water mark, having a flat surface of about nine feet by seven inclining a little toward the water. It is of hard sand stone, and all over the surface are various figures cut and sunk into the hard rock, amongst these figures are rude representations of the human form, tracts (sic) of human feet representing the bare foot and print of the toes as if made in soft mud, tracts of horses, turkeys, and a rabbit. Several figures of snakes, a tortois (sic), and other figures not understood. A drawing of them was made on the spot by Mr. Erwin as here represented.
"There are a number of other rocks lying on the shore both above and below the one on which the figures are cut, which appear as though they had at some former period rolled down from the hill above. Below this rock is one of much larger size, being about twenty feet in diameter, with a flat surface inclining up stream, on which are several deep cuts or the remains of figures, with which the rock may have been covered; but owing to its exposed situation the current of the river, ice and other floating substances have worn the face of the rock and defaced the figures upon it.”
James L. Murphy, of the Ohio Historical Society, noted in his review of McBride's survey that the sketch of the rock and petroglyphs was likely inaccurate, though that criticism did not devalue the find.
"It seems clear from McBride’s description that Squier and Davis’ drawing is also inaccurate in portraying the petroglyphs as lying on an upright, monument-like slab of sandstone, for McBride clearly states that the rock had a flat surface “inclining a little towards the water.” Probably the other discrepancies between McBride’s drawing and that of Squier and Davis’ are also due to artistic licences or carelessness on the part of the engraver.
Perhaps not surprisingly, the Half-Moon rock is only one of many archaeological sites that did and do exist elsewhere in the Ohio Valley near Weirton and elsewhere in West Virginia.
Do you think you've found an archaeological site in West Virginia? Many such sites have been cataloged though they're their locations have not been publicized. In this way archaeologists can help protect them. Such delicate, finite resources are best explored by trained investigators.
If you think you've found an archaeological landmark or relic, contact the the W.Va. Division of Culture and History at 304-558-0220.
Mysterious stone face attracting curious in New River Gorge
An enigmatic stone face carved into mossy sandstone along the rim of the New River Gorge is attracting increased attention as hiking, biking, and climbing in the region grows. Though its origins are popularly regarded as a mystery, the bas-relief countenance was likely carved in the 1950s, and the son of its creator may still live in the area near Fayetteville, according to area residents who still regard it with a sense of awe. Read the full story here. | 1,108 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In the first National Intangible Cultural Heritage Inventory of St. Maarten, jollification has a modest entry:
A traditional gathering of people to help build a house, well, or fence and at which food is served as compensation.
To most of the world, and even most of the Caribbean, a jollification is a just a party. Parties are great and jollification is a great word for party. But the meaning of the word on St. Martin is more complex. It also tell us a lot about local culture.
On St. Martin, neighbors had to come together to help each other. Some tasks, like fixing a roof or digging a well couldn’t happen any other way. Before the modern era most labor was done by hand. People had to lift and dig and carry together.
St. Martin was a small island and it was a poor island. But the people of the island provided for themselves by combining their talents and labor. There was not just an idea of community. People truly depended on each other.
Working together also makes sense in St. Martin’s climate. Crops had to be planted in time for the wet season. A well can only be dug during the dry season. People used jollification to do things when they needed to be done.
It would not be surprising if the roots of jollification stretch back to the time of slavery. Enslaved people were forced to work long hours. They typically worked six days a week. But they were also growing their own food and taking care of their basic needs during the little time they had left. It is hard to imagine how they could have survived without helping each other.
Today, the tradition of jollification is in decline. People are busy with their jobs. There are companies that build houses and replace roofs. Most St. Martiners aren’t digging wells or reaping provision grounds. Thankfully, the tradition is kept alive by events like the Arrowroot Jollification in Columbier.
Jollification is a key part of local culture, but it also has a place in today’s society. When people come together to volunteer, the spirit of jollification lives on. Especially when there are food and drinks. After all, volunteering isn’t really a jollification unless you also have a party.
What does jollification mean to you? Tell us by writing in to The Daily Herald or firstname.lastname@example.org. | <urn:uuid:5ed062d5-b678-4905-95b0-1ee281b9dc0f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.lesfruitsdemer.com/category/traditions/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251801423.98/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129164403-20200129193403-00299.warc.gz | en | 0.980368 | 512 | 3.65625 | 4 | [
0.15775556862354279,
0.1994951367378235,
0.3921401798725128,
-0.5945567488670349,
0.08184996247291565,
-0.15463295578956604,
0.12252173572778702,
0.22303204238414764,
-0.08432885259389877,
0.1270194798707962,
0.21418043971061707,
0.07571081817150116,
0.04729025438427925,
0.0006449595093727... | 5 | In the first National Intangible Cultural Heritage Inventory of St. Maarten, jollification has a modest entry:
A traditional gathering of people to help build a house, well, or fence and at which food is served as compensation.
To most of the world, and even most of the Caribbean, a jollification is a just a party. Parties are great and jollification is a great word for party. But the meaning of the word on St. Martin is more complex. It also tell us a lot about local culture.
On St. Martin, neighbors had to come together to help each other. Some tasks, like fixing a roof or digging a well couldn’t happen any other way. Before the modern era most labor was done by hand. People had to lift and dig and carry together.
St. Martin was a small island and it was a poor island. But the people of the island provided for themselves by combining their talents and labor. There was not just an idea of community. People truly depended on each other.
Working together also makes sense in St. Martin’s climate. Crops had to be planted in time for the wet season. A well can only be dug during the dry season. People used jollification to do things when they needed to be done.
It would not be surprising if the roots of jollification stretch back to the time of slavery. Enslaved people were forced to work long hours. They typically worked six days a week. But they were also growing their own food and taking care of their basic needs during the little time they had left. It is hard to imagine how they could have survived without helping each other.
Today, the tradition of jollification is in decline. People are busy with their jobs. There are companies that build houses and replace roofs. Most St. Martiners aren’t digging wells or reaping provision grounds. Thankfully, the tradition is kept alive by events like the Arrowroot Jollification in Columbier.
Jollification is a key part of local culture, but it also has a place in today’s society. When people come together to volunteer, the spirit of jollification lives on. Especially when there are food and drinks. After all, volunteering isn’t really a jollification unless you also have a party.
What does jollification mean to you? Tell us by writing in to The Daily Herald or firstname.lastname@example.org. | 489 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Europeans introduced horses to New Zealand from the early 19th century. At first horses were uncommon and expensive, so only chiefs owned them. Government officials often gifted horses to chiefs as a sign of goodwill.
Hapū (sub-tribes) banded together to buy horses, paying for them with large numbers of pigs or quantities of flax. Horses made overland travel faster, and probably helped bring neighbouring hapū and iwi (tribes) closer together.
From the 1840s, some tribes had significant numbers of horses and were able to gift them to other iwi. In some areas, Māori owned more horses than local Pākehā communities. By the 1850s, horses were the main form of land transport for Māori.
Horses were used by all iwi involved in the New Zealand wars of the 1860s.
Ngāpuhi were the first tribe to own horses. The first horses in New Zealand were a stallion and two mares, which arrived at Rangihoua in the Bay of Islands on 22 December 1814. One of the mares was a gift from the governor of New South Wales to the Ngāpuhi chief Ruatara.
Eruera Maihi Patuone, another Ngāpuhi chief, was gifted a horse named New Zealander by Governor George Grey. It won at the Auckland races.
Iwi often acquired horses as gifts from other tribes. Te Arawa requested and received a horse named Taika from Eruera Patuone, who also gave a mare to Te Kohika of Tūhourangi.
Ngāti Tūwharetoa were given their first horse by Patuone’s brother, Tāmati Wāka Nene. Tūwharetoa paramount chief Mananui Te Heuheu named his son Te Waaka after Nene, and sent him to live with Nene in the Hokianga. In 1842 Te Waaka returned to Taupō with a horse Nene had given him, escorted by a large Ngāpuhi party.
In 1875, a large group of Ngāti Raukawa visited the Taupō region on horseback. However, Parāone Taupiri and his wife came on foot, as their horses had recently died. Taupiri asked in a waiata (song) for horses from the Taupō chiefs. By then, they had so many that they gave him seven.
Māui Pōmare told a story – possibly apocryphal – about one of the first horses in Wellington, which was brought ashore by a trader. The local Ngāti Tama people ran away when they saw the horse swimming to shore, thinking that ‘a great taniwha [water monster] was making straight for us’. 1 One sailor tied a rope to the neck of the ‘taniwha’ and went to ride it. The sailors called to the local people, but the chief Taringa Kurī (also known as Te Kāeaea) was the only one who would approach the horse and ride it. The tribe then bought the horse by filling the ship’s hold with muka (flax fibre) and covering the deck with pigs.
Te Maitaranui, an important Ngāi Tūhoe chief, first saw horses in the Bay of Islands. The tribe bought their first horse at Tūranga (Gisborne) around the 1840s. It was named Tūhoe, demonstrating its importance to the iwi. Later, Tūhoe members went to Auckland to purchase horses, paying for them with pigs and potatoes. The price of a horse was around 40 pigs.
For some, horses seemed so extraordinary that they called them taniwha or tipua (supernatural creatures). Others saw these four-legged animals as similar to dogs, which Māori had known for centuries. So horses were sometimes called ‘kurī’ or ‘kararehe’, which had previously just meant dog. A Tūhoe chief, Te Maitaranui, described these new beasts to his people as 'kurī waha tangata' (people-carrying dogs).
However, the most common name was hōiho, a transliteration of horse. An 1875 Māori-language advertisement for the sale of a stallion (transliterated as tāriana) used two different terms for horse: ‘He hōiho kaha, he kurī kakama ki te haere’ – it is a strong horse (hōiho), it is a fast horse (kurī). 1
One uncommon word for horse was ‘kāmia’, which came from Māori hearing Pākehā saying ‘Come here’ to horses. Ngāti Porou people called a large horse a ‘hōiho pūru kāta’ – a pull-cart horse.
While horses were not incorporated into Māori mythology, they sometimes became mystical symbols. The prophet Te Kooti was famed for his white horse, in one tradition called Pōkai Whenua (travel the land), in others Te Panerua. It was believed to have spiritual power. Te Kooti also had a black horse, which shadowed his group and was considered tapu (sacred). Both were seen as horses of the apocalypse, after the four horses of different colours in the Book of Revelation in the Bible.
Later, the Tūhoe prophet Rua Kēnana was said to have ridden the same white horse (named Te Ia in this tradition) into the Rongopai meeting house at Repongaere on the East Coast. The house had been built to receive Te Kooti in 1887.
Two groups of horses are closely associated with particular iwi (tribes).
Wild horses inhabit the southern Kaimanawa mountains in the central North Island. They are descended from horses which were released by or escaped from their Pākehā or Māori owners. Kaimanawa horses are associated with Ngāti Tūwharetoa, and the Ngāti Tama Whiti hapū in particular. They are seen as kaitiaki (guardians) and taonga (treasures), and a Waitangi Tribunal claim was lodged to prevent them being culled.
One man buying a ‘Māori horse’ from the East Coast found that the locals were tough negotiators. After he offered $50 for a horse, its owner went inside and came back with a gun, saying that he might as well shoot the animal for dog meat if it was only worth that much. The purchaser hastily made a better offer, which was accepted.
Nāti horses are found on the East Coast and associated with the Ngāti Porou tribe – who are also nicknamed Nāti. These horses are a mix of breeds, including Clydesdales and thoroughbreds. They have a sleepy disposition, and are relaxed but intelligent. They are seen as versatile, whether ascending mountains, going into water or the bush, or travelling over stony ground.
In many rural Māori communities in the North Island, horses became an integral part of the community. This close association with horses probably led to the coining of the term ‘Māori horses’. These are mixed-breed saddle horses, generally from Northland, the Bay of Plenty, King Country and East Coast regions. They often live in a semi-feral state, with mares being run with a stallion in a herd and foals weaned naturally. They are not wild – every horse has an owner, and breeding is controlled by culling unsuitable animals and bringing in fresh blood. This makes for sound, sure-footed horses that are suited to a range of activities.
From the 19th century, horses were vital for transport between Māori communities and nearby towns. They were also used in farming. Most Māori lived in rural areas until the 1950s, so remained reliant on horses. In the 2000s, horses were still used to get to school or town in a number of rural Māori communities.
Tribal competitions involving horses have often been held. In the early 2000s, Ngāti Porou’s inter-marae competition, Pā Wars, included horse contests. Rodeos have significant Māori participation, often involving several generations of the same whānau (family).
Māori have long been involved in horse racing. In the early days, these were often informal events run on beaches. Māori also often took part in events organised by Pākehā.
In 1842, a horse race for Māori was included at a race meeting in Auckland. A similar race was run in 1851 in Christchurch, and there was even a 'wahines race' for Māori women at the 1877 Ōhinemutu races.
Māori riders and their horses also often took part in the main events. In the 1870s, horses owned by Māori won the Hawke's Bay Cup, the Tauranga Plate and other important races.
Māori also organised their own races. In the 1850s, race meetings were held at Katihiku Pā in Ōtaki. Meetings under the patronage of the Māori king were held in Ōtaki in the 1860s, and in Karioi in 1870. This led to a desire by iwi to set up their own racing clubs.
Clubs included the Ākura Māori Racing Club (later renamed the Kotahitanga Māori Racing Club) near Masterton, Waiōmatatini Native Jockey Club and the Tūranganui Native Club at Gisborne. However, none of these lasted very long. The Ōtaki-Māori Racing Club, formed in 1886, is the only Māori racing club still operating in 2008. Its first president was Hoani Taipua, who was also a member of the House of Representatives for Western Māori from 1887 to 1893. The club’s first race meeting was held at Rikiriki on 18 February 1887.
From 1899 to 1907 there was a Māori company within the Wellington (Wairarapa) Mounted Rifles. B Company (Wairarapa Mounted Rifles) was based at Pāpāwai, near Greytown. It was supported by Ngāti Kahungunu leader Tamahau Mahupuku, who supplied a large number of horses.
During the 1901 visit of the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and York to Rotorua, the Wairarapa Mounted Rifles acted as an unofficial escort. The journey up to Rotorua was arduous, and a large number of the horses died on the way.
Brooking, Tom. ‘The equine factor: the powerhouse of the colonisation of New Zealand to 1945.’ In On the horse’s back, 2004: proceedings of the 2004 conference of the New Zealand Society of Genealogists, edited by Lily Baker, 53–56. Auckland: New Zealand Society of Genealogists, 2004.
Mincham, Carolyn. ‘Horse racing in the colonial community, 1841–1911.’ MA thesis, Massey University, 2001. | <urn:uuid:6cfb50b3-8967-408e-8d3e-cab476690bd6> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://admin.teara.govt.nz/en/hoiho-horses-and-iwi/print | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690379.95/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126195918-20200126225918-00189.warc.gz | en | 0.985602 | 2,419 | 3.75 | 4 | [
-0.35342925786972046,
0.3340168297290802,
0.285651832818985,
0.21828530728816986,
-0.5792926549911499,
-0.08043987303972244,
0.2846406102180481,
0.10741777718067169,
0.17786510288715363,
0.38472720980644226,
0.11120686680078506,
-0.47626420855522156,
0.231351837515831,
0.4236358404159546,
... | 4 | Europeans introduced horses to New Zealand from the early 19th century. At first horses were uncommon and expensive, so only chiefs owned them. Government officials often gifted horses to chiefs as a sign of goodwill.
Hapū (sub-tribes) banded together to buy horses, paying for them with large numbers of pigs or quantities of flax. Horses made overland travel faster, and probably helped bring neighbouring hapū and iwi (tribes) closer together.
From the 1840s, some tribes had significant numbers of horses and were able to gift them to other iwi. In some areas, Māori owned more horses than local Pākehā communities. By the 1850s, horses were the main form of land transport for Māori.
Horses were used by all iwi involved in the New Zealand wars of the 1860s.
Ngāpuhi were the first tribe to own horses. The first horses in New Zealand were a stallion and two mares, which arrived at Rangihoua in the Bay of Islands on 22 December 1814. One of the mares was a gift from the governor of New South Wales to the Ngāpuhi chief Ruatara.
Eruera Maihi Patuone, another Ngāpuhi chief, was gifted a horse named New Zealander by Governor George Grey. It won at the Auckland races.
Iwi often acquired horses as gifts from other tribes. Te Arawa requested and received a horse named Taika from Eruera Patuone, who also gave a mare to Te Kohika of Tūhourangi.
Ngāti Tūwharetoa were given their first horse by Patuone’s brother, Tāmati Wāka Nene. Tūwharetoa paramount chief Mananui Te Heuheu named his son Te Waaka after Nene, and sent him to live with Nene in the Hokianga. In 1842 Te Waaka returned to Taupō with a horse Nene had given him, escorted by a large Ngāpuhi party.
In 1875, a large group of Ngāti Raukawa visited the Taupō region on horseback. However, Parāone Taupiri and his wife came on foot, as their horses had recently died. Taupiri asked in a waiata (song) for horses from the Taupō chiefs. By then, they had so many that they gave him seven.
Māui Pōmare told a story – possibly apocryphal – about one of the first horses in Wellington, which was brought ashore by a trader. The local Ngāti Tama people ran away when they saw the horse swimming to shore, thinking that ‘a great taniwha [water monster] was making straight for us’. 1 One sailor tied a rope to the neck of the ‘taniwha’ and went to ride it. The sailors called to the local people, but the chief Taringa Kurī (also known as Te Kāeaea) was the only one who would approach the horse and ride it. The tribe then bought the horse by filling the ship’s hold with muka (flax fibre) and covering the deck with pigs.
Te Maitaranui, an important Ngāi Tūhoe chief, first saw horses in the Bay of Islands. The tribe bought their first horse at Tūranga (Gisborne) around the 1840s. It was named Tūhoe, demonstrating its importance to the iwi. Later, Tūhoe members went to Auckland to purchase horses, paying for them with pigs and potatoes. The price of a horse was around 40 pigs.
For some, horses seemed so extraordinary that they called them taniwha or tipua (supernatural creatures). Others saw these four-legged animals as similar to dogs, which Māori had known for centuries. So horses were sometimes called ‘kurī’ or ‘kararehe’, which had previously just meant dog. A Tūhoe chief, Te Maitaranui, described these new beasts to his people as 'kurī waha tangata' (people-carrying dogs).
However, the most common name was hōiho, a transliteration of horse. An 1875 Māori-language advertisement for the sale of a stallion (transliterated as tāriana) used two different terms for horse: ‘He hōiho kaha, he kurī kakama ki te haere’ – it is a strong horse (hōiho), it is a fast horse (kurī). 1
One uncommon word for horse was ‘kāmia’, which came from Māori hearing Pākehā saying ‘Come here’ to horses. Ngāti Porou people called a large horse a ‘hōiho pūru kāta’ – a pull-cart horse.
While horses were not incorporated into Māori mythology, they sometimes became mystical symbols. The prophet Te Kooti was famed for his white horse, in one tradition called Pōkai Whenua (travel the land), in others Te Panerua. It was believed to have spiritual power. Te Kooti also had a black horse, which shadowed his group and was considered tapu (sacred). Both were seen as horses of the apocalypse, after the four horses of different colours in the Book of Revelation in the Bible.
Later, the Tūhoe prophet Rua Kēnana was said to have ridden the same white horse (named Te Ia in this tradition) into the Rongopai meeting house at Repongaere on the East Coast. The house had been built to receive Te Kooti in 1887.
Two groups of horses are closely associated with particular iwi (tribes).
Wild horses inhabit the southern Kaimanawa mountains in the central North Island. They are descended from horses which were released by or escaped from their Pākehā or Māori owners. Kaimanawa horses are associated with Ngāti Tūwharetoa, and the Ngāti Tama Whiti hapū in particular. They are seen as kaitiaki (guardians) and taonga (treasures), and a Waitangi Tribunal claim was lodged to prevent them being culled.
One man buying a ‘Māori horse’ from the East Coast found that the locals were tough negotiators. After he offered $50 for a horse, its owner went inside and came back with a gun, saying that he might as well shoot the animal for dog meat if it was only worth that much. The purchaser hastily made a better offer, which was accepted.
Nāti horses are found on the East Coast and associated with the Ngāti Porou tribe – who are also nicknamed Nāti. These horses are a mix of breeds, including Clydesdales and thoroughbreds. They have a sleepy disposition, and are relaxed but intelligent. They are seen as versatile, whether ascending mountains, going into water or the bush, or travelling over stony ground.
In many rural Māori communities in the North Island, horses became an integral part of the community. This close association with horses probably led to the coining of the term ‘Māori horses’. These are mixed-breed saddle horses, generally from Northland, the Bay of Plenty, King Country and East Coast regions. They often live in a semi-feral state, with mares being run with a stallion in a herd and foals weaned naturally. They are not wild – every horse has an owner, and breeding is controlled by culling unsuitable animals and bringing in fresh blood. This makes for sound, sure-footed horses that are suited to a range of activities.
From the 19th century, horses were vital for transport between Māori communities and nearby towns. They were also used in farming. Most Māori lived in rural areas until the 1950s, so remained reliant on horses. In the 2000s, horses were still used to get to school or town in a number of rural Māori communities.
Tribal competitions involving horses have often been held. In the early 2000s, Ngāti Porou’s inter-marae competition, Pā Wars, included horse contests. Rodeos have significant Māori participation, often involving several generations of the same whānau (family).
Māori have long been involved in horse racing. In the early days, these were often informal events run on beaches. Māori also often took part in events organised by Pākehā.
In 1842, a horse race for Māori was included at a race meeting in Auckland. A similar race was run in 1851 in Christchurch, and there was even a 'wahines race' for Māori women at the 1877 Ōhinemutu races.
Māori riders and their horses also often took part in the main events. In the 1870s, horses owned by Māori won the Hawke's Bay Cup, the Tauranga Plate and other important races.
Māori also organised their own races. In the 1850s, race meetings were held at Katihiku Pā in Ōtaki. Meetings under the patronage of the Māori king were held in Ōtaki in the 1860s, and in Karioi in 1870. This led to a desire by iwi to set up their own racing clubs.
Clubs included the Ākura Māori Racing Club (later renamed the Kotahitanga Māori Racing Club) near Masterton, Waiōmatatini Native Jockey Club and the Tūranganui Native Club at Gisborne. However, none of these lasted very long. The Ōtaki-Māori Racing Club, formed in 1886, is the only Māori racing club still operating in 2008. Its first president was Hoani Taipua, who was also a member of the House of Representatives for Western Māori from 1887 to 1893. The club’s first race meeting was held at Rikiriki on 18 February 1887.
From 1899 to 1907 there was a Māori company within the Wellington (Wairarapa) Mounted Rifles. B Company (Wairarapa Mounted Rifles) was based at Pāpāwai, near Greytown. It was supported by Ngāti Kahungunu leader Tamahau Mahupuku, who supplied a large number of horses.
During the 1901 visit of the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and York to Rotorua, the Wairarapa Mounted Rifles acted as an unofficial escort. The journey up to Rotorua was arduous, and a large number of the horses died on the way.
Brooking, Tom. ‘The equine factor: the powerhouse of the colonisation of New Zealand to 1945.’ In On the horse’s back, 2004: proceedings of the 2004 conference of the New Zealand Society of Genealogists, edited by Lily Baker, 53–56. Auckland: New Zealand Society of Genealogists, 2004.
Mincham, Carolyn. ‘Horse racing in the colonial community, 1841–1911.’ MA thesis, Massey University, 2001. | 2,472 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Children practice the “Duck and Cover” drill, to protect themselves against the effects of a nuclear explosion, 1950s
Duck and Cover is a method of personal protection against the effects of a nuclear explosion, which the United States government taught to generations of United States school children from the early 1950s until the end of the Cold War in the late 1980s. It was intended to protect them in the event of both an unexpected nuclear attack, which, they were told, might come at any time without warning and in the event sufficient warning is given.
Under the conditions of a surprise attack, immediately after they saw a flash they had to stop what they were doing and get on the ground under some cover—such as a table, or at least next to a wall—and assume a prone like position, lying face-down and covering their exposed skin and back of their heads with their clothes, or if no excess clothes such as a coat was available, to cover the back of their heads with their hands. Similar instructions were given in 1964 in the United Kingdom by Civil Defence Information Bulletin No. 5. and, in the 1980s, by the Protect and Survive series. Under the conditions where sufficient warning is given, they were told to find the nearest Civil Defense shelter, or if one could not be found, any well built building to stay and shelter in. From Wikipedia
A coal hole is a hatch in the pavement (sidewalk, in US usage) above an underground coal bunker. They are sometimes found outside houses that existed during the period when coal was widely used for domestic heating from the early 19th century to the middle 20th century. | <urn:uuid:afe8fe99-0a17-45ea-ba34-94710a8c55ad> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://miepvonsydow.wordpress.com/tag/1950s/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00381.warc.gz | en | 0.984749 | 337 | 3.3125 | 3 | [
-0.21651628613471985,
0.12852509319782257,
0.13148130476474762,
-0.10198122262954712,
0.41899991035461426,
0.33416301012039185,
0.22479082643985748,
-0.02838417887687683,
-0.5232662558555603,
-0.06091610714793205,
-0.2115711122751236,
-0.03748233616352081,
0.27492937445640564,
0.2434063255... | 7 | Children practice the “Duck and Cover” drill, to protect themselves against the effects of a nuclear explosion, 1950s
Duck and Cover is a method of personal protection against the effects of a nuclear explosion, which the United States government taught to generations of United States school children from the early 1950s until the end of the Cold War in the late 1980s. It was intended to protect them in the event of both an unexpected nuclear attack, which, they were told, might come at any time without warning and in the event sufficient warning is given.
Under the conditions of a surprise attack, immediately after they saw a flash they had to stop what they were doing and get on the ground under some cover—such as a table, or at least next to a wall—and assume a prone like position, lying face-down and covering their exposed skin and back of their heads with their clothes, or if no excess clothes such as a coat was available, to cover the back of their heads with their hands. Similar instructions were given in 1964 in the United Kingdom by Civil Defence Information Bulletin No. 5. and, in the 1980s, by the Protect and Survive series. Under the conditions where sufficient warning is given, they were told to find the nearest Civil Defense shelter, or if one could not be found, any well built building to stay and shelter in. From Wikipedia
A coal hole is a hatch in the pavement (sidewalk, in US usage) above an underground coal bunker. They are sometimes found outside houses that existed during the period when coal was widely used for domestic heating from the early 19th century to the middle 20th century. | 358 | ENGLISH | 1 |
How Far does Quarry Bank Mill enable you to understand the factory system of textile production introduced during the Industrial Revolution of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries? Before the factory system was introduced people used the domestic system to produce cotton, where spinning and then weaving was a very slow and simple process.
The Domestic system was very relaxed where people could have lunch or go to the bathroom whenever they wanted to, unlike in the factory system, which was very disciplined and regimented. We have to determine if Quarry Bank Mill was typical of other mills at the time, to be able to see how much it tells us of the factory system. Quarry Bank Mill may be an exception to other mills, maybe having better or worse conditions than most. How much can we actually learn about the factory system by studying Quarry Bank Mill?
There were many machines used in the factory and we saw some of these when we visited the mill. The machines we saw included a Spinning Jenny, a Flying Shuttle and a carding and mule machine, although the Spinning Jenny and the Flying Shuttle were from the domestic system, seeing how they were used also helped to understand more of the importance of the factory system noticing the changes from domestic to factory.
We saw machines from different time periods, not just from the industrial revolution. We were told that the carding machine that we saw, although was an 1864 design, it was a 1920s model and the Mule machine was also a 1926 model, so there may have been slight variations between the machines and might have been altered since the mill was opened. So this does not give us an entirely accurate impression of what the factory system was like.
We visited the different rooms and saw that they were quite big. There would have been 16 machines in each row with two or three children operating each machine making it quite crowded. They would have been doing jobs, which were shown or explained to us. There were simple jobs like piecers or can tenters, who would have moved a can of cotton back and forth from carding machines. This tells us that the factory system included many unskilled jobs for children, which was also the case in other mills across Britain.
When we were in the weaving shed only a fraction of machines which were there would have been working in the mill, were on. The noise was horrific so it is difficult to imagine how deafening the noise would have been in the factories compared to the noise of one machine in the domestic system. We would not know what kind of noise level the children had to withstand in the mill as machines in the different rooms were ran at different times when we were present, contrary to when the mill was being run.
Using looms was useful as only one person needed to operate it, which is good for the factory system, as fewer employees were needed to produce a large amount of cotton. The condenser mule had 560 spindles, which would produce as much yarn as hundreds of hand spinners. The mule shed was an unhealthy environment, the air being full of cotton dust where they showed the machines working, so in the factory system the people would be of poor health falling victim to white lung, from cotton dust. This shows that employers in the factory system were not as concerned about the children's health as they were about producing large amounts of cloth as there were no health regulations, although Greg provided a doctor, as many mills did, so they must have been concerned even though the treatments failed to work.
The building was big and had small windows to let the light in, as the gaslights could not be used for their light to work in because the mill would be very flammable from all the cotton and dust floating about. I could clearly see where an extension had been added, showing that the mill had been successful so far, so they had decided to expand it.
A bell and clock was added because the apprentices would need to know the time for where they should be, which shows that the factory system was very regimented. They would have a bell for everything, like what time for work, school, and meals. This all shows a significant change in industrial production, that the factory system was much more disciplined than the domestic system. A steam chimney was also added which proves that power is very important in the factory system of textile production.
There were only very small windows in the mill as Greg would want to keep it humid and hot, therefore the cotton would not snap. When we were there we did not experience how hot it would have been, as they had to take out more windowpanes as a result of the hot weather, presumably to meet today's health and safety regulations.
Our time in the weaving shed was recommended to spend less than 15 minutes in there, because of the cotton, dust, noise and the heat. We have to imagine what it would have been like to work in there for about 12 to 13 hours every day and even longer in other mills, which is very difficult to reconstruct. It would probably have posed serious health risks to the apprentices, mainly children. | <urn:uuid:50ddc97b-9fff-45c8-9b67-56c88e3d10fd> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://lawaspect.com/industrial-revolution-of-the-late-eighteenth-and-early-nineteenth-centuries/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594662.6/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119151736-20200119175736-00327.warc.gz | en | 0.993482 | 1,034 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
-0.07858628779649734,
0.0027098732534796,
0.16240248084068298,
0.20454232394695282,
0.016572244465351105,
-0.14237426221370697,
0.05870574712753296,
0.1461298167705536,
-0.17176809906959534,
-0.02914259396493435,
0.22184495627880096,
-0.18123853206634521,
-0.3630024194717407,
-0.1662257611... | 2 | How Far does Quarry Bank Mill enable you to understand the factory system of textile production introduced during the Industrial Revolution of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries? Before the factory system was introduced people used the domestic system to produce cotton, where spinning and then weaving was a very slow and simple process.
The Domestic system was very relaxed where people could have lunch or go to the bathroom whenever they wanted to, unlike in the factory system, which was very disciplined and regimented. We have to determine if Quarry Bank Mill was typical of other mills at the time, to be able to see how much it tells us of the factory system. Quarry Bank Mill may be an exception to other mills, maybe having better or worse conditions than most. How much can we actually learn about the factory system by studying Quarry Bank Mill?
There were many machines used in the factory and we saw some of these when we visited the mill. The machines we saw included a Spinning Jenny, a Flying Shuttle and a carding and mule machine, although the Spinning Jenny and the Flying Shuttle were from the domestic system, seeing how they were used also helped to understand more of the importance of the factory system noticing the changes from domestic to factory.
We saw machines from different time periods, not just from the industrial revolution. We were told that the carding machine that we saw, although was an 1864 design, it was a 1920s model and the Mule machine was also a 1926 model, so there may have been slight variations between the machines and might have been altered since the mill was opened. So this does not give us an entirely accurate impression of what the factory system was like.
We visited the different rooms and saw that they were quite big. There would have been 16 machines in each row with two or three children operating each machine making it quite crowded. They would have been doing jobs, which were shown or explained to us. There were simple jobs like piecers or can tenters, who would have moved a can of cotton back and forth from carding machines. This tells us that the factory system included many unskilled jobs for children, which was also the case in other mills across Britain.
When we were in the weaving shed only a fraction of machines which were there would have been working in the mill, were on. The noise was horrific so it is difficult to imagine how deafening the noise would have been in the factories compared to the noise of one machine in the domestic system. We would not know what kind of noise level the children had to withstand in the mill as machines in the different rooms were ran at different times when we were present, contrary to when the mill was being run.
Using looms was useful as only one person needed to operate it, which is good for the factory system, as fewer employees were needed to produce a large amount of cotton. The condenser mule had 560 spindles, which would produce as much yarn as hundreds of hand spinners. The mule shed was an unhealthy environment, the air being full of cotton dust where they showed the machines working, so in the factory system the people would be of poor health falling victim to white lung, from cotton dust. This shows that employers in the factory system were not as concerned about the children's health as they were about producing large amounts of cloth as there were no health regulations, although Greg provided a doctor, as many mills did, so they must have been concerned even though the treatments failed to work.
The building was big and had small windows to let the light in, as the gaslights could not be used for their light to work in because the mill would be very flammable from all the cotton and dust floating about. I could clearly see where an extension had been added, showing that the mill had been successful so far, so they had decided to expand it.
A bell and clock was added because the apprentices would need to know the time for where they should be, which shows that the factory system was very regimented. They would have a bell for everything, like what time for work, school, and meals. This all shows a significant change in industrial production, that the factory system was much more disciplined than the domestic system. A steam chimney was also added which proves that power is very important in the factory system of textile production.
There were only very small windows in the mill as Greg would want to keep it humid and hot, therefore the cotton would not snap. When we were there we did not experience how hot it would have been, as they had to take out more windowpanes as a result of the hot weather, presumably to meet today's health and safety regulations.
Our time in the weaving shed was recommended to spend less than 15 minutes in there, because of the cotton, dust, noise and the heat. We have to imagine what it would have been like to work in there for about 12 to 13 hours every day and even longer in other mills, which is very difficult to reconstruct. It would probably have posed serious health risks to the apprentices, mainly children. | 1,043 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Many women played key roles in the Italian Risorgimento: some fought with the soldiers, others held secret meetings or helped important men raise funds. Some became nurses, or took charge of hospitals. These fiery women were mostly well-educated and somewhat liberated. Some were even rebellious members of the aristocracy.
Two women who played important roles in the unification of Italy are Margaret Fuller and Princess Cristina di Belgiojoso, real example of women of the Italian Risorgimento.
Margaret Fuller was an American who became one of the women of the Italian Risorgimento, leaving her mark in this period of Italian history.
Extremely well-educated, she studied Latin and Shakespeare from an early age. She spoke fluent French, Italian and Greek before she turned 15. When she came of age, she taught at a school run by Bronson Alcott, Louisa May’s father.
At 29, Fuller joined the great writer Ralph Waldo Emerson in publishing the quarterly The Duel. She also started writing articles herself, as well as reviewing books for the New York Tribune.
When the struggle for the unity of Italy began, she became the first wartime woman foreign correspondent. She sent articles about the war to the Tribune, hoping to obtain the sympathy of Americans for the cause.
By then, Fuller was 35. Surprisingly, many European men began taking a great interest in this strong, peculiar woman. Two of them proposed: the Polish poet Mickiewicz and the great Italian revolutionary Giuseppe Mazzini, father of Italian Risorgimento.
She rejected both of them, but she soon fell in love with the charismatic Marchese Giovanni Ossoli and helped him with the revolutionary cause. She told her friends that she was married to the Marchese, but that may not have been true. They did have a son, however, Angelo.
The dedicated woman supported Garibaldi‘s siege of Rome. She also took charge of the hospital Fate Bene Fratelli for Princess of Belgiojoso. The American Consul praised her highly: “The weather was intensely hot; her health was feeble and delicate; the dead and dying were around her in every form of pain and horror; but she never shrank from the duty she had assumed. Her heart and soul were in the cause for which these men had fought, and all was done that a woman could do to comfort them in their sufferings.”
Fuller was writing a history of the Italian movement for unification when she and her whole family were drowned when their ship crashed on rocks during a hurricane off Fire Island.
Princess Cristina Trivulzio di Belgiojoso
An Italian woman from an aristocratic Italian family, Cristina Trivulzio of Belgiojoso was also well-educated. She learned Latin, French, English and studied music and the arts. She even made a living by teaching music at one stage. Unlike Fuller, however, she was raised in the world of revolutionary politics. Her stepfather may have introduced her to the Italian struggle: he even went to jail for his politics.
Cristina, born Cristina Trivulzio, married prince Belgiojoso at only 16. The marriage was not happy because of his gambling and womanising. Although the prince eventually left his wife for another woman, they remained good friends and wrote to each other.
Like Fuller, Belgioioso wrote articles to Italian newspapers trying to gain support for the cause. She also asked important politicians, such as Cavour, another icon of Italian Risorgimento, for it. She may even have spoken in the French Chamber of Deputies about the cause.
Courageous and fervent, the princess even financed her own regiment and travelled with them to support the Milanese against the Austrians. She also became known as the Florence Nightingale of Italy: she took charge of the hospitals in Rome, especially the main one, the Trinità de’ Pellegrini, and asked Roman women for help in supplying lint and bandages. She would remain there day and night helping the wounded, according to Margaret Fuller.
These inspirational women of the Risorgimento were different from most women of their day, who often didn’t become involved in politics because it wasn’t ‘feminine’ and indulged in more womanly pursuits.
The female politicians and political fund-raisers of today can thank also these Risorgimento women for showing the way forward. | <urn:uuid:2c899f47-d167-477a-8d30-b0cde777d0a4> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.lifeinitaly.com/history/two-women-of-the-italian-risorgimento | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614086.44/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123221108-20200124010108-00115.warc.gz | en | 0.987468 | 937 | 3.703125 | 4 | [
-0.4687519967556,
0.5398272275924683,
0.24718821048736572,
0.29750311374664307,
-0.3497823178768158,
0.507332444190979,
0.2256990373134613,
0.3298318088054657,
-0.07475036382675171,
-0.3715077042579651,
-0.053510405123233795,
0.046202853322029114,
0.2504689693450928,
0.5556557178497314,
... | 10 | Many women played key roles in the Italian Risorgimento: some fought with the soldiers, others held secret meetings or helped important men raise funds. Some became nurses, or took charge of hospitals. These fiery women were mostly well-educated and somewhat liberated. Some were even rebellious members of the aristocracy.
Two women who played important roles in the unification of Italy are Margaret Fuller and Princess Cristina di Belgiojoso, real example of women of the Italian Risorgimento.
Margaret Fuller was an American who became one of the women of the Italian Risorgimento, leaving her mark in this period of Italian history.
Extremely well-educated, she studied Latin and Shakespeare from an early age. She spoke fluent French, Italian and Greek before she turned 15. When she came of age, she taught at a school run by Bronson Alcott, Louisa May’s father.
At 29, Fuller joined the great writer Ralph Waldo Emerson in publishing the quarterly The Duel. She also started writing articles herself, as well as reviewing books for the New York Tribune.
When the struggle for the unity of Italy began, she became the first wartime woman foreign correspondent. She sent articles about the war to the Tribune, hoping to obtain the sympathy of Americans for the cause.
By then, Fuller was 35. Surprisingly, many European men began taking a great interest in this strong, peculiar woman. Two of them proposed: the Polish poet Mickiewicz and the great Italian revolutionary Giuseppe Mazzini, father of Italian Risorgimento.
She rejected both of them, but she soon fell in love with the charismatic Marchese Giovanni Ossoli and helped him with the revolutionary cause. She told her friends that she was married to the Marchese, but that may not have been true. They did have a son, however, Angelo.
The dedicated woman supported Garibaldi‘s siege of Rome. She also took charge of the hospital Fate Bene Fratelli for Princess of Belgiojoso. The American Consul praised her highly: “The weather was intensely hot; her health was feeble and delicate; the dead and dying were around her in every form of pain and horror; but she never shrank from the duty she had assumed. Her heart and soul were in the cause for which these men had fought, and all was done that a woman could do to comfort them in their sufferings.”
Fuller was writing a history of the Italian movement for unification when she and her whole family were drowned when their ship crashed on rocks during a hurricane off Fire Island.
Princess Cristina Trivulzio di Belgiojoso
An Italian woman from an aristocratic Italian family, Cristina Trivulzio of Belgiojoso was also well-educated. She learned Latin, French, English and studied music and the arts. She even made a living by teaching music at one stage. Unlike Fuller, however, she was raised in the world of revolutionary politics. Her stepfather may have introduced her to the Italian struggle: he even went to jail for his politics.
Cristina, born Cristina Trivulzio, married prince Belgiojoso at only 16. The marriage was not happy because of his gambling and womanising. Although the prince eventually left his wife for another woman, they remained good friends and wrote to each other.
Like Fuller, Belgioioso wrote articles to Italian newspapers trying to gain support for the cause. She also asked important politicians, such as Cavour, another icon of Italian Risorgimento, for it. She may even have spoken in the French Chamber of Deputies about the cause.
Courageous and fervent, the princess even financed her own regiment and travelled with them to support the Milanese against the Austrians. She also became known as the Florence Nightingale of Italy: she took charge of the hospitals in Rome, especially the main one, the Trinità de’ Pellegrini, and asked Roman women for help in supplying lint and bandages. She would remain there day and night helping the wounded, according to Margaret Fuller.
These inspirational women of the Risorgimento were different from most women of their day, who often didn’t become involved in politics because it wasn’t ‘feminine’ and indulged in more womanly pursuits.
The female politicians and political fund-raisers of today can thank also these Risorgimento women for showing the way forward. | 902 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Authorization to build Duluth’s first streetcar line—which by grant had to consist of at least one-mile of track with rides on cars of “the best quality” costing no more than a ten-cent toll—was granted in October 1870, but no one rode on a Duluth streetcar until 1883. The Duluth Street Railway Company incorporated in 1881 and work began on tracks along Superior Street from Eighth Avenue West to Third Avenue East in September 1882. Small trolley cars or “dinkies” pulled by mules began service on July 6, 1883. The ride cost a nickel. The mules sometimes pulled the cars off the tracks; passengers had to help lift the cars back on track before the trolley could proceed. The company stored its cars and mules in a barn built at Eleventh Avenue West. By 1889 horses had replaced mules as the streetcar engines.
Those first small cars had open cabs, so early motormen had to dress for all kinds of weather, even if it meant covering their woolen uniforms with buffalo coats and slickers in the winter. The cars were soon adapted with closures, but that didn’t make the job easier: a motorman was not allowed to sit, speak to patrons, nor smoke cigarettes while operating a dinky. And until 1922, when a token system was introduced, they had to make change for customers. The pay was low, and conductors and those in the machine shops were often expected to work sixteen hours a day. Most employees were immigrants. During the winter, operators had to fight the cold and wet, as slush often clogged machinery. Operators of later electrified streetcars had to also contend with ice forming on wires, which reduced conductivity, and therefore power. Along the way they had to constantly tend to the coal fire of the trollies’ heaters.
When Duluth regained its city charter in 1887, surrounding townsitess folded in to create a much larger city. As neighborhoods developed, the streetcar system developed with them. Often streetcar lines were built by land development companies who created the neighborhoods, but their operation would be handled by the Duluth Street Railway Company. In 1890 the dinkies were replaced with electrically powered cars. Overhead wires were strung along the tracks and a power station was built at the Eleventh Avenue West car barn. By 1892 the entire line was electrified, and the railway had increased from four to nearly thirty miles of track. Major arteries included lines along Superior Street, Fourth Street, and Eighth Street. They were extended to Twenty-Second Avenue East, Twenty-Third Avenue West, and later up Woodland Avenue to Hunter’s Park and out to Lester Park. The Highland Park Tramway line, connected to the Incline Railway, served Duluth Heights.
Electrical substations sprung up along the lines to provide them with power. Land Companies added stations to their lines, including the Glen Avon station at 2102 Woodland Avenue (it is now a private home). But like so many other businesses in Duluth and throughout the United States, the financial panic of 1893 put great financial strain on the streetcar operation. It had invested heavily during the boom, and now its revenues had suddenly been cut in half. The company reduced operations, leaving new equipment idle. They tried cutting employee wages to stay alive, but that resulted in an employee strike, even though the work force was not organized in a union. The work stoppage resulted in the resignation of manager Fred S. Wardell. In 1898, the company entered receivership. | <urn:uuid:afbb0577-582a-47a2-ac47-cef2ac437ffe> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://zenithcity.com/archive/historic-industry/duluth-street-railway-company/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250608295.52/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123041345-20200123070345-00227.warc.gz | en | 0.986502 | 741 | 3.28125 | 3 | [
-0.5630356073379517,
-0.18037381768226624,
0.43284153938293457,
0.2412724792957306,
-0.5278393626213074,
0.18810349702835083,
-0.22314348816871643,
0.1480831801891327,
-0.29812315106391907,
-0.30986908078193665,
0.3213413953781128,
0.1282760202884674,
0.22886522114276886,
0.049890022724866... | 13 | Authorization to build Duluth’s first streetcar line—which by grant had to consist of at least one-mile of track with rides on cars of “the best quality” costing no more than a ten-cent toll—was granted in October 1870, but no one rode on a Duluth streetcar until 1883. The Duluth Street Railway Company incorporated in 1881 and work began on tracks along Superior Street from Eighth Avenue West to Third Avenue East in September 1882. Small trolley cars or “dinkies” pulled by mules began service on July 6, 1883. The ride cost a nickel. The mules sometimes pulled the cars off the tracks; passengers had to help lift the cars back on track before the trolley could proceed. The company stored its cars and mules in a barn built at Eleventh Avenue West. By 1889 horses had replaced mules as the streetcar engines.
Those first small cars had open cabs, so early motormen had to dress for all kinds of weather, even if it meant covering their woolen uniforms with buffalo coats and slickers in the winter. The cars were soon adapted with closures, but that didn’t make the job easier: a motorman was not allowed to sit, speak to patrons, nor smoke cigarettes while operating a dinky. And until 1922, when a token system was introduced, they had to make change for customers. The pay was low, and conductors and those in the machine shops were often expected to work sixteen hours a day. Most employees were immigrants. During the winter, operators had to fight the cold and wet, as slush often clogged machinery. Operators of later electrified streetcars had to also contend with ice forming on wires, which reduced conductivity, and therefore power. Along the way they had to constantly tend to the coal fire of the trollies’ heaters.
When Duluth regained its city charter in 1887, surrounding townsitess folded in to create a much larger city. As neighborhoods developed, the streetcar system developed with them. Often streetcar lines were built by land development companies who created the neighborhoods, but their operation would be handled by the Duluth Street Railway Company. In 1890 the dinkies were replaced with electrically powered cars. Overhead wires were strung along the tracks and a power station was built at the Eleventh Avenue West car barn. By 1892 the entire line was electrified, and the railway had increased from four to nearly thirty miles of track. Major arteries included lines along Superior Street, Fourth Street, and Eighth Street. They were extended to Twenty-Second Avenue East, Twenty-Third Avenue West, and later up Woodland Avenue to Hunter’s Park and out to Lester Park. The Highland Park Tramway line, connected to the Incline Railway, served Duluth Heights.
Electrical substations sprung up along the lines to provide them with power. Land Companies added stations to their lines, including the Glen Avon station at 2102 Woodland Avenue (it is now a private home). But like so many other businesses in Duluth and throughout the United States, the financial panic of 1893 put great financial strain on the streetcar operation. It had invested heavily during the boom, and now its revenues had suddenly been cut in half. The company reduced operations, leaving new equipment idle. They tried cutting employee wages to stay alive, but that resulted in an employee strike, even though the work force was not organized in a union. The work stoppage resulted in the resignation of manager Fred S. Wardell. In 1898, the company entered receivership. | 771 | ENGLISH | 1 |
You may remember Fort Sumter from middle school history, as the place where the Civil War began. The decades of tension between the northern states and southern states came to ahead at the fort on the 12th of April in the year 1861.
It was on this date, that Confederate soldiers attacked the Federal Fort of Sumter in the Charleston Harbor, capturing it within 34 hours. Over the next four years, there were many more battles as Union forces never gave up hope of recapturing the fort.
Fort Sumter’s importance to both sides, caused a constant stream of battles. The prominence of the fort would continue through the duration of the war, and the scars from the era would be felt for generations long after.
Fort Sumter was named in honor of the Patriot and icon of the American Revolution, Thomas Sumter. The fort was constructed shortly after the War of 1812, as part of a fortification process along the Southern Atlantic United States. This was a necessary step in protecting the harbors of the coast from would be attackers.
While construction commenced on the fort in the year of 1829, the fort still was not finished when the Confederate artillery attack the structure in 1861. Perhaps, one of the reasons why the rebels were able to take control of Sumter.
After South Carolina seceded from the Union on the 26th of December in 1860, tension in the state was finally about to explode. US Army Major Robert Anderson left Fort Moultrie in secret, taking the guns and men with him to Fort Sumter, believing Sumter gave the Union a better chance against the South Carolina Militia.
However, as already mentioned Sumter was still under construction at the time Major Anderson relocated his men to the fort. There was also a shortage of cannons and other artillery (the result of cuts to military funding by President Buchanan).
Over the next few months there were calls by South Carolina Governor Pickens, and Confederate Brigadier Gen. P. G. T. Beauregard for then President Buchanan to surrender and evacuate Fort Sumter, but these requests were discarded.
On March 4th, 1861, Abraham Lincoln began his presidency, and upon gaining the knowledge of the dire situation that Anderson and his men were in at Fort Sumter, Lincoln order Gustavus V. Fox to lead a fleet in an aid mission into Charleston Harbor.
The first of the ships carrying aid, arrived on the 11th of April. Knowing this, Beauregard sent men to demand the Union surrender the fort, but once again Anderson refused. There were a few more brief discussions, but ultimately peace was never an option.
The following day (April 12th) at 4:30 in the morning the Confederates attacked the fort with the bombardment lasting for 34 hours.
The Union waited two hours into the battle before finally firing their first shot, which they ended up missing on the account that the did not used their highest mounted guns situated on the top tier of the fort. The Union was also forced to use their ammo methodically and sparingly as they could not match the Confederates shot for shot.
On the 13th of April, the Union faced the reality that they had no choice but to surrender the fort and evacuate.
Each side experienced casualties during the battle. One confederate soldier died as the result of a cannon being misfired. On the Union side two soldiers were killed, one during battle and another during a 100 shot salute, which was cut short to 50, as the soldier was killed on the 47th shot.
Nearly two years later, on the 7th of April in the year 1863, the Union attempted to regain control of Fort Sumter and the Charleston Harbor. However, in the two year following the first battle, the Confederates went to great length to ensure the fort would be able to sustain impending sieges. Thus, the Union’s attack would prove to be unsuccessful.
Once again the Union soldiers were simply unable to match the Confederate’s artillery. During the battle, the Union’s USS Keokuk was badly damaged and sunk the following day. After the battle, the Confederates worked in the dark of night (to elude Union soldiers) as they recovered the ship’s guns. Which were soon brought back to Fort Sumter, for added defence.
To further strengthen the fort, hundreds of slaves were also forced to upgrade protection standards. As the Confederates knew there was yet another battle on the horizon. During this endeavor and throughout the Confederate’s occupation of Sumter, a large but unconfirmed number of slaves died from extreme working conditions.
Following the failure of their siege, Major General Gilmore, and Rear Admiral Dahlgren begin planning their next attacked, which they had goaled for the 8th and 9th of September of 1863. However, the willingness on the parts of Gilmore and Dahlgren to work together was reductive at best.
The most notable sign of their poor leadership, occurred when Dahlgren refused to defer command of his sailors and marines to the Army, and opted to send out his flotillas before the army’s flotilla was able to join them. Due to Dahlgren’s impatience, the navy was easily defeated, before the Army could even arrive to provide much needed backup.
During this poorly executed assault, only the Union experienced death, 8 men were killed, with 19 wounded and another 105 captured.
Despite the Union’s lack of success in trying to capture Fort Sumter, there would be several more attempts and more blood spilt in the years to follow.
Finally on February 17th in 1865, upon hearing news that General William T. Sherman and his men were working their way through South Carolina, the Confederates voluntarily evacuated Fort Sumter, and abandoned the City of Charleston altogether.
With the war over and the fort in ruins, the Army began the process of restoring Sumter. The fort would later go on to serve as a lighthouse until the year of 1897, when the brewing Spanish-American War (in 1898), revived interest in the fort. And, thus, Sumter was renovated with new installations, and artillery.
68 years later (in 1966) Fort Sumter was named to the list of National Register of Historic Places. To visit Fort Sumter today, you must travel by boat or via a ferry ride. Whilst, at the Fort Sumter’s museum, you’ll find information about the critical role it clearly played during the Civil War.
Today, Fort Sumter is a popular tourist attraction, drawing students on school field trips, Civil War buffs and other curious visitors. All in fact curious in seeing the sight of the first battle of the Civil War. But, at Fort Sumter there is more than just tales of history. Some say, that at the Fort there are ghosts. Ghost of fallen soldiers, and departed slaves.
One of these lost souls who is rumored to haunt Fort Sumter is the Union soldier who was killed on the 47th shot of the 100 gun salute. The Soldier’s name was Daniel Hough.
Daniel was born in Tipperary, Ireland during the year of 1825. It is believed that he enlisted into the U.S. Army in 1849, not long after he immigrated to America. He was eventually stationed at Fort Sumter in April of the year 1861 shortly before the war was destined to begin.
The morning of the first battle of the Civil War, Hough saw action, serving as an artillerist. The Confederates out shot the Union soldiers with reportedly more than 3,000 rounds. After the 34 hour deluge of bullets and cannonballs, Major Anderson surrendered the fort.
The Union soldiers were permitted a 100 gun salute before they were to evacuate Sumter. However, on the 47th round, there was a misfire which cost Daniel Hough his life.
Major General Abner Doubleday who was present at the time of Hough’s death, spoke of what he had witnessed, “It happened that some flakes of fire had entered the muzzle of one of the guns after it was sponged. Of course, when the gunner attempted to ram the cartridge down it exploded prematurely, killing Private Daniel Hough instantly, and setting fire to a pile of cartridges underneath, which also exploded, seriously wounding five men. Fifty guns were fired in the salute.”
That day Hough was buried at the fort, and with that final act, the Union Army left the grounds of Fort Sumter.
Reports of people witnessing the ghost of Daniel Hough begin popping up shortly after the Confederates took control of Sumter. Rebel soldiers would claim to see a Union Soldier walking around the fort.
Even to this day visitors have claim to have seen a ghostly Union dressed soldiers. Others have even claim to seen smoke and smell the scent of gunpowder while in the ghost’s presence.
Daniel Hough legacy also has grown over the years to include a story about the very flag he was saluting upon being shot. Some believe that a faded section on the flag holds an image of a man’s face, of Daniel Hough’s face. This flag is located the Fort Sumter Museum. Check it out for yourself, the face in the flag just may even wink at you.
One person who visited Fort Sumter in the spring of 2015, did so during the evening hours. The visitor claimed to have seen a ghostly figure rise out from the shadows to salute the flag. The visitor believing this shadowy image to be the lost soul of Daniel Hough, quickly snapped a few photos as proof of the ghost’s existence. Unfortunately, all of the photos taken were blurred by white splotches.
Later in 2015, another individual named Delaney, claims to have also seen a ghost saluting the flag whilst visiting Fort Sumter. The only difference in this account is that Delaney claims not to have seen just one spirit, but two. Delaney says the two spirit manifested seemingly out of nowhere.
A woman went to Fort Sumter with her family, a good year prior to the previously mentioned accounts, on Mother’s Day of 2014 (I guess they never heard of flowers and breakfast in bed).
When they arrived at the fort they were allowed about an hour to walk the grounds and explore the area. And, so the woman and her family walked every inch of the fort, taking in the sights and reflecting on the historical significance of Fort Sumter.
Once, it was time for the family to head back to the boat (which carried them to the fort), the women’s mother began to feel an extremely heavy pressure upon her chest. The sensation her mother was experiencing, intensified as they reached the highest point of Sumter.
Then suddenly the woman’s brother also begin to feel the pressure on his chest. Shortly after that occurrence the women and her family all suddenly caught the aroma of gunpowder in the air.
Visiting Fort Sumter is one of those things that has to be done, even if you are only briefly staying in the City of Charleston. Take a moment, and include a visit to Fort Sumter in your travel plans. Brave the high winds like the soldiers of the fort did in the early-mid 1860s.
After all, it’s not everyday one gets the chance to visit the fort where the American Civil War began, a battle which led to the seemingly unavoidable war. A war in which more than 600,000 people were killed, a war that turned American against American, brother against brother.
To stand at the center of the fort, to feel the ground beneath your very feet, to know you are at the very location where the Civil War officially started (on April 12, 1861) is a sobering experience. Whether you believe in ghosts are not, in that moment you will swear that you are surrounded by all of the lost souls of the soldiers who fought at Fort Sumter.
Surrounded by water, you'll need to find a company which offers transportation by boat. Luckily for you, there are numerous companies which offer tours of Fort Sumter. You can enjoy the beautiful scenes on the boatride our to Fort Sumter.. | <urn:uuid:1e47ab1f-7b6f-4545-a664-150e37da59bd> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://ghostcitytours.com/charleston/haunted-places/fort-sumter/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251678287.60/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125161753-20200125190753-00153.warc.gz | en | 0.980607 | 2,518 | 3.78125 | 4 | [
-0.13506433367729187,
0.19308629631996155,
0.7154924273490906,
-0.09662570059299469,
-0.10201957821846008,
-0.004664930980652571,
0.14176705479621887,
0.1158125028014183,
-0.17463956773281097,
-0.13821983337402344,
0.29859504103660583,
-0.02131938748061657,
0.005891680717468262,
0.37521594... | 2 | You may remember Fort Sumter from middle school history, as the place where the Civil War began. The decades of tension between the northern states and southern states came to ahead at the fort on the 12th of April in the year 1861.
It was on this date, that Confederate soldiers attacked the Federal Fort of Sumter in the Charleston Harbor, capturing it within 34 hours. Over the next four years, there were many more battles as Union forces never gave up hope of recapturing the fort.
Fort Sumter’s importance to both sides, caused a constant stream of battles. The prominence of the fort would continue through the duration of the war, and the scars from the era would be felt for generations long after.
Fort Sumter was named in honor of the Patriot and icon of the American Revolution, Thomas Sumter. The fort was constructed shortly after the War of 1812, as part of a fortification process along the Southern Atlantic United States. This was a necessary step in protecting the harbors of the coast from would be attackers.
While construction commenced on the fort in the year of 1829, the fort still was not finished when the Confederate artillery attack the structure in 1861. Perhaps, one of the reasons why the rebels were able to take control of Sumter.
After South Carolina seceded from the Union on the 26th of December in 1860, tension in the state was finally about to explode. US Army Major Robert Anderson left Fort Moultrie in secret, taking the guns and men with him to Fort Sumter, believing Sumter gave the Union a better chance against the South Carolina Militia.
However, as already mentioned Sumter was still under construction at the time Major Anderson relocated his men to the fort. There was also a shortage of cannons and other artillery (the result of cuts to military funding by President Buchanan).
Over the next few months there were calls by South Carolina Governor Pickens, and Confederate Brigadier Gen. P. G. T. Beauregard for then President Buchanan to surrender and evacuate Fort Sumter, but these requests were discarded.
On March 4th, 1861, Abraham Lincoln began his presidency, and upon gaining the knowledge of the dire situation that Anderson and his men were in at Fort Sumter, Lincoln order Gustavus V. Fox to lead a fleet in an aid mission into Charleston Harbor.
The first of the ships carrying aid, arrived on the 11th of April. Knowing this, Beauregard sent men to demand the Union surrender the fort, but once again Anderson refused. There were a few more brief discussions, but ultimately peace was never an option.
The following day (April 12th) at 4:30 in the morning the Confederates attacked the fort with the bombardment lasting for 34 hours.
The Union waited two hours into the battle before finally firing their first shot, which they ended up missing on the account that the did not used their highest mounted guns situated on the top tier of the fort. The Union was also forced to use their ammo methodically and sparingly as they could not match the Confederates shot for shot.
On the 13th of April, the Union faced the reality that they had no choice but to surrender the fort and evacuate.
Each side experienced casualties during the battle. One confederate soldier died as the result of a cannon being misfired. On the Union side two soldiers were killed, one during battle and another during a 100 shot salute, which was cut short to 50, as the soldier was killed on the 47th shot.
Nearly two years later, on the 7th of April in the year 1863, the Union attempted to regain control of Fort Sumter and the Charleston Harbor. However, in the two year following the first battle, the Confederates went to great length to ensure the fort would be able to sustain impending sieges. Thus, the Union’s attack would prove to be unsuccessful.
Once again the Union soldiers were simply unable to match the Confederate’s artillery. During the battle, the Union’s USS Keokuk was badly damaged and sunk the following day. After the battle, the Confederates worked in the dark of night (to elude Union soldiers) as they recovered the ship’s guns. Which were soon brought back to Fort Sumter, for added defence.
To further strengthen the fort, hundreds of slaves were also forced to upgrade protection standards. As the Confederates knew there was yet another battle on the horizon. During this endeavor and throughout the Confederate’s occupation of Sumter, a large but unconfirmed number of slaves died from extreme working conditions.
Following the failure of their siege, Major General Gilmore, and Rear Admiral Dahlgren begin planning their next attacked, which they had goaled for the 8th and 9th of September of 1863. However, the willingness on the parts of Gilmore and Dahlgren to work together was reductive at best.
The most notable sign of their poor leadership, occurred when Dahlgren refused to defer command of his sailors and marines to the Army, and opted to send out his flotillas before the army’s flotilla was able to join them. Due to Dahlgren’s impatience, the navy was easily defeated, before the Army could even arrive to provide much needed backup.
During this poorly executed assault, only the Union experienced death, 8 men were killed, with 19 wounded and another 105 captured.
Despite the Union’s lack of success in trying to capture Fort Sumter, there would be several more attempts and more blood spilt in the years to follow.
Finally on February 17th in 1865, upon hearing news that General William T. Sherman and his men were working their way through South Carolina, the Confederates voluntarily evacuated Fort Sumter, and abandoned the City of Charleston altogether.
With the war over and the fort in ruins, the Army began the process of restoring Sumter. The fort would later go on to serve as a lighthouse until the year of 1897, when the brewing Spanish-American War (in 1898), revived interest in the fort. And, thus, Sumter was renovated with new installations, and artillery.
68 years later (in 1966) Fort Sumter was named to the list of National Register of Historic Places. To visit Fort Sumter today, you must travel by boat or via a ferry ride. Whilst, at the Fort Sumter’s museum, you’ll find information about the critical role it clearly played during the Civil War.
Today, Fort Sumter is a popular tourist attraction, drawing students on school field trips, Civil War buffs and other curious visitors. All in fact curious in seeing the sight of the first battle of the Civil War. But, at Fort Sumter there is more than just tales of history. Some say, that at the Fort there are ghosts. Ghost of fallen soldiers, and departed slaves.
One of these lost souls who is rumored to haunt Fort Sumter is the Union soldier who was killed on the 47th shot of the 100 gun salute. The Soldier’s name was Daniel Hough.
Daniel was born in Tipperary, Ireland during the year of 1825. It is believed that he enlisted into the U.S. Army in 1849, not long after he immigrated to America. He was eventually stationed at Fort Sumter in April of the year 1861 shortly before the war was destined to begin.
The morning of the first battle of the Civil War, Hough saw action, serving as an artillerist. The Confederates out shot the Union soldiers with reportedly more than 3,000 rounds. After the 34 hour deluge of bullets and cannonballs, Major Anderson surrendered the fort.
The Union soldiers were permitted a 100 gun salute before they were to evacuate Sumter. However, on the 47th round, there was a misfire which cost Daniel Hough his life.
Major General Abner Doubleday who was present at the time of Hough’s death, spoke of what he had witnessed, “It happened that some flakes of fire had entered the muzzle of one of the guns after it was sponged. Of course, when the gunner attempted to ram the cartridge down it exploded prematurely, killing Private Daniel Hough instantly, and setting fire to a pile of cartridges underneath, which also exploded, seriously wounding five men. Fifty guns were fired in the salute.”
That day Hough was buried at the fort, and with that final act, the Union Army left the grounds of Fort Sumter.
Reports of people witnessing the ghost of Daniel Hough begin popping up shortly after the Confederates took control of Sumter. Rebel soldiers would claim to see a Union Soldier walking around the fort.
Even to this day visitors have claim to have seen a ghostly Union dressed soldiers. Others have even claim to seen smoke and smell the scent of gunpowder while in the ghost’s presence.
Daniel Hough legacy also has grown over the years to include a story about the very flag he was saluting upon being shot. Some believe that a faded section on the flag holds an image of a man’s face, of Daniel Hough’s face. This flag is located the Fort Sumter Museum. Check it out for yourself, the face in the flag just may even wink at you.
One person who visited Fort Sumter in the spring of 2015, did so during the evening hours. The visitor claimed to have seen a ghostly figure rise out from the shadows to salute the flag. The visitor believing this shadowy image to be the lost soul of Daniel Hough, quickly snapped a few photos as proof of the ghost’s existence. Unfortunately, all of the photos taken were blurred by white splotches.
Later in 2015, another individual named Delaney, claims to have also seen a ghost saluting the flag whilst visiting Fort Sumter. The only difference in this account is that Delaney claims not to have seen just one spirit, but two. Delaney says the two spirit manifested seemingly out of nowhere.
A woman went to Fort Sumter with her family, a good year prior to the previously mentioned accounts, on Mother’s Day of 2014 (I guess they never heard of flowers and breakfast in bed).
When they arrived at the fort they were allowed about an hour to walk the grounds and explore the area. And, so the woman and her family walked every inch of the fort, taking in the sights and reflecting on the historical significance of Fort Sumter.
Once, it was time for the family to head back to the boat (which carried them to the fort), the women’s mother began to feel an extremely heavy pressure upon her chest. The sensation her mother was experiencing, intensified as they reached the highest point of Sumter.
Then suddenly the woman’s brother also begin to feel the pressure on his chest. Shortly after that occurrence the women and her family all suddenly caught the aroma of gunpowder in the air.
Visiting Fort Sumter is one of those things that has to be done, even if you are only briefly staying in the City of Charleston. Take a moment, and include a visit to Fort Sumter in your travel plans. Brave the high winds like the soldiers of the fort did in the early-mid 1860s.
After all, it’s not everyday one gets the chance to visit the fort where the American Civil War began, a battle which led to the seemingly unavoidable war. A war in which more than 600,000 people were killed, a war that turned American against American, brother against brother.
To stand at the center of the fort, to feel the ground beneath your very feet, to know you are at the very location where the Civil War officially started (on April 12, 1861) is a sobering experience. Whether you believe in ghosts are not, in that moment you will swear that you are surrounded by all of the lost souls of the soldiers who fought at Fort Sumter.
Surrounded by water, you'll need to find a company which offers transportation by boat. Luckily for you, there are numerous companies which offer tours of Fort Sumter. You can enjoy the beautiful scenes on the boatride our to Fort Sumter.. | 2,577 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Jo Nova posted this map of the bushfire extent in Victoria during January, 1939
Compare with satellite imagery from January 4, 2019.
It appears that the burn area was much larger in 1939.
After the 1939 fires in Australia, there was a commission set up to study what happened and what could have been done differently.
- The fires were man-made
- There was a long drought followed by extreme heat
- Almost the entire state of Victoria appeared to be on fire on January 13
- It was dark as night at midday
- The amount of controlled burning was “ridiculously inadequate”
Report of the Royal Commission to inquire into the causes of and measures taken to prevent the bush fires of January, 1939 and to protect life and property and the measures to be taken to prevent bush fires in Victoria and to protect life and property in the event of future bush fires.
Two days earlier was the hottest day on record in Melbourne, Canberra and Adelaide.
Koalas nearly went extinct. | <urn:uuid:4a89b0cb-2db3-4983-b39b-37df20d9b7c3> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://realclimatescience.com/2020/01/2019-fires-much-less-extensive-than-1939/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250619323.41/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124100832-20200124125832-00180.warc.gz | en | 0.982871 | 207 | 3.265625 | 3 | [
-0.018230736255645752,
0.3697429895401001,
0.20341677963733673,
0.11466633528470993,
0.6935650706291199,
0.4606178402900696,
-0.1741698980331421,
-0.03174678236246109,
-0.3639896512031555,
0.37110042572021484,
0.1388828605413437,
-0.5970633625984192,
0.06699512898921967,
0.5150872468948364... | 12 | Jo Nova posted this map of the bushfire extent in Victoria during January, 1939
Compare with satellite imagery from January 4, 2019.
It appears that the burn area was much larger in 1939.
After the 1939 fires in Australia, there was a commission set up to study what happened and what could have been done differently.
- The fires were man-made
- There was a long drought followed by extreme heat
- Almost the entire state of Victoria appeared to be on fire on January 13
- It was dark as night at midday
- The amount of controlled burning was “ridiculously inadequate”
Report of the Royal Commission to inquire into the causes of and measures taken to prevent the bush fires of January, 1939 and to protect life and property and the measures to be taken to prevent bush fires in Victoria and to protect life and property in the event of future bush fires.
Two days earlier was the hottest day on record in Melbourne, Canberra and Adelaide.
Koalas nearly went extinct. | 223 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Winchester Cathedral Dedicated
The dedication by Bishop Walkelin of a new cathedral in Winchester was hugely symbolic for both conquered and conquerors in England.
Winchester’s new Norman cathedral had been under construction since 1079, a mere 13 years after the victory of William I at the Battle of Hastings . It formed part of the Norman drive to impose their will, their style, their rule on the beaten Saxons . In modern terms it was a symbol of oppression. Not for the last time, this oppression found form through a church leader - Walkelin was the first Norman bishop of Winchester.
On April 8 1093, with Walkelin presiding, the monks who had previously occupied the Saxon cathedral which had been the place of coronation for Edward the Confessor in 1043 and had seen the funeral service for Hardicanute in 1042, moved to the first completed section of the new building, now its crypt.
Great ceremony attached to the change. The work on the building was continuing, but the vastness of the project, and by extension the power of those organising it, was evident to all observers. The Normans were here to stay.
More famous dates here
6774 views since 8th April 2010
On this day: | <urn:uuid:dfbc8272-01ab-4b71-b049-9c7a60249a93> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://edit.information-britain.co.uk/famdates.php?id=917 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251689924.62/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126135207-20200126165207-00097.warc.gz | en | 0.983064 | 260 | 3.65625 | 4 | [
-0.2705775201320648,
0.3537861704826355,
-0.20194974541664124,
-0.15105095505714417,
0.0005088695324957371,
0.4768833816051483,
-0.26146385073661804,
-0.2706233263015747,
0.1195855662226677,
-0.15314415097236633,
-0.5608724355697632,
-0.40426090359687805,
-0.10219773650169373,
0.2095946520... | 1 | Winchester Cathedral Dedicated
The dedication by Bishop Walkelin of a new cathedral in Winchester was hugely symbolic for both conquered and conquerors in England.
Winchester’s new Norman cathedral had been under construction since 1079, a mere 13 years after the victory of William I at the Battle of Hastings . It formed part of the Norman drive to impose their will, their style, their rule on the beaten Saxons . In modern terms it was a symbol of oppression. Not for the last time, this oppression found form through a church leader - Walkelin was the first Norman bishop of Winchester.
On April 8 1093, with Walkelin presiding, the monks who had previously occupied the Saxon cathedral which had been the place of coronation for Edward the Confessor in 1043 and had seen the funeral service for Hardicanute in 1042, moved to the first completed section of the new building, now its crypt.
Great ceremony attached to the change. The work on the building was continuing, but the vastness of the project, and by extension the power of those organising it, was evident to all observers. The Normans were here to stay.
More famous dates here
6774 views since 8th April 2010
On this day: | 271 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Pont du Gard, Roman Empire, October 2007, by Emanuele
The Romans were the first civilization to introduce a public health system. They had to do this because Rome had grown in size and it was impossible to find a natural source of fresh water in the city. It was also necessary to find a way of disposing of the rubbish to prevent pollution causing health problems.
Aqueducts were built to transport fresh water into the city. In AD100 there were a total of nine aqueducts that brought fresh water into the city of Rome.
Public baths were places where people could go to bathe, meet and discuss business. There were hot and cold baths as well as massage rooms.
A network of sewers was built to take sewerage and waste out of the city to the river Tiber. There were also public lavatories.
This article is part of our larger resource on the Romans culture, society, economics, and warfare. Click here for our comprehensive article on the Romans.
Cite This Article"The Romans – Public Health" History on the Net
© 2000-2020, Salem Media.
January 18, 2020 <https://www.historyonthenet.com/the-romans-public-health>
More Citation Information. | <urn:uuid:eb470eec-82d4-44cb-adda-2bf3587430dc> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.historyonthenet.com/the-romans-public-health | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00537.warc.gz | en | 0.980073 | 264 | 3.546875 | 4 | [
-0.2184062898159027,
0.21654371917247772,
0.7822438478469849,
0.19768114387989044,
-0.24432258307933807,
-0.44966191053390503,
0.06091015413403511,
0.47804704308509827,
-0.10080167651176453,
-0.14409926533699036,
-0.0037728436291217804,
-0.7245421409606934,
-0.11894611269235611,
0.19309693... | 1 | Pont du Gard, Roman Empire, October 2007, by Emanuele
The Romans were the first civilization to introduce a public health system. They had to do this because Rome had grown in size and it was impossible to find a natural source of fresh water in the city. It was also necessary to find a way of disposing of the rubbish to prevent pollution causing health problems.
Aqueducts were built to transport fresh water into the city. In AD100 there were a total of nine aqueducts that brought fresh water into the city of Rome.
Public baths were places where people could go to bathe, meet and discuss business. There were hot and cold baths as well as massage rooms.
A network of sewers was built to take sewerage and waste out of the city to the river Tiber. There were also public lavatories.
This article is part of our larger resource on the Romans culture, society, economics, and warfare. Click here for our comprehensive article on the Romans.
Cite This Article"The Romans – Public Health" History on the Net
© 2000-2020, Salem Media.
January 18, 2020 <https://www.historyonthenet.com/the-romans-public-health>
More Citation Information. | 265 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Children often are disenfranchised in their grief. Well-meaning adults try to protect them from the enormousness of loss by distracting them, telling them half-truths, even lying to them about the death of someone they loved. Some adults, perhaps to protect themselves from having to manage the full impact of a child’s grief, fool themselves into believing that children are “too young” to know what is going on. As noted children’s psychologist, Alan Wolfelt (1991), has said, “Anyone old enough to love is old enough to grieve.”
Children need avenues for safe expression of feelings that may include fear, sadness, guilt, and anger. Children’s play is their “work.” Provide a child-friendly environment where a child may choose the avenue best suited to his or her self-expression. For some children, it may be drawing or writing, for others, it may be puppetry, music, or physical activity. Keep in mind that a child’s reactions to grief will not appear the same as those seen in adults; as a result, children often are misunderstood. They may appear disinterested or respond as if they don’t understand the significance of what has happened.
For example, upon being told that her mother might soon die from metastatic cancer, a 10-year-old responded by asking, “When we go to dinner tonight, can I order extra pickles?” She was letting the adults know that she had heard enough for the moment. A four-year-old was told that his father died. He continued to ask, “When will he be back?” At this age, children don’t understand that death is permanent, final, and irreversible. Adults need to understand what is appropriate and expectable with children at different ages and stages of development and to recognize that children grieve in their own way and in their own time. Adults who tend to these children must focus on the children’s individual needs as well as their own.
When a child is denied the opportunity for grieving, there may be adverse consequences. At the D’Esopo Resource Center for Loss and Transition, located in Wethersfield, Conn., we regularly receive calls from parents who are worried about their children’s response to loss.
Recently, a mother called to say that she was very concerned about her three-year-old daughter. The child’s grandmother had died the previous month. The mother explained that she had consulted with the child’s pediatrician who told her that three-year-olds are too young to go to a funeral service because they do not understand death. The parents had therefore not included the child in any of the family’s commemorative rituals. Ever since, the little girl had been afraid to go to sleep and, when she did go to sleep, she experienced nightmares. During the day she was uncharacteristically anxious and clingy.
Fortunately this child, like most young children, is remarkably resilient. The problem was corrected by giving her a simple, direct, child-centered, age-appropriate explanation. She was told what happens to the body upon death (“It stops working”). And she was also given an explanation of the type of ritual that the family chose based on their religion and culture. She responded by sleeping well, having no more nightmares, and returning to her usual outgoing behavior.
While it is true that three-year-olds don’t understand that death is permanent, final, and irreversible, they do understand that something terribly sad has happened. They will miss the presence of people who have died, and they will worry about the sadness they feel around them. Lying to children or hiding the truth increases their anxiety. They are better observers of adults than most people recognize. You can’t fool them. They are remarkably perceptive.
When children of any age are not given proper explanations, their powerful imaginations will fill in the blanks in the information they have picked up from those around them. Unfortunately, their imaginations often come up with things that are far worse than the simple truth would have been. If, for example, they don’t understand the concept of “burial,” they may create images of dead loved ones being buried alive, gasping for air and trying to claw out of the ground. In the case of cremation, they may imagine their loved one being burned alive and suffering horribly.
It is far better to give them a clear idea about what is going on than to leave them to the mercy of their own imaginations. Children need to know not only what happens to the body upon death, they also need an explanation of what happens to the spirit or the soul, based on the family’s religious, spiritual, and cultural beliefs. It is essential to offer a detailed description of everything they likely will see and experience. At least one responsible adult should be present to support the child during the funeral and any other rituals.
One of the first workshops I attended regarding children and death began with the statement, “Anyone old enough to die is old enough to go to a funeral.” Participants gasped until the presenter went on to say, “as long as they are properly prepared and given the option — never forced — to attend.”
Children thrive when they are told what to expect and are allowed to participate in the commemoration of loved ones. When children and adults are encouraged to develop creative, personalized rituals, it helps everyone find comfort during the sad times. At the Resource Center, we ask children to draw or write a description of their favorite memory of the person who died. They love to share their memories and place the pictures, stories, and other items they have made into the casket to be buried or cremated along with their loved one. These kinds of activities can help the rituals around death become a meaningful family bonding experience rather than a continuing source of fear and pain.
Shakespeare said it best: “Give sorrow words. The grief that does not speak whispers the o’er fraught heart and bids it . . . break.” (Macbeth, Act IV, Scene 1)
Wolfelt, A. (1991). A Child’s View of Grief (video). Fort Collins: Center for Loss and Life Transition. | <urn:uuid:b760f4a4-b19f-4159-8238-f6e0ef334c41> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://psychcentral.com/lib/children-and-grief/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690379.95/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126195918-20200126225918-00184.warc.gz | en | 0.981505 | 1,319 | 3.484375 | 3 | [
-0.0035095768980681896,
-0.1402762234210968,
0.2970188856124878,
-0.49604642391204834,
-0.2099737524986267,
0.26025882363319397,
0.43359917402267456,
0.09309308975934982,
-0.1984025537967682,
-0.44444048404693604,
0.39981332421302795,
0.09198252856731415,
0.0030231636483222246,
0.245103359... | 1 | Children often are disenfranchised in their grief. Well-meaning adults try to protect them from the enormousness of loss by distracting them, telling them half-truths, even lying to them about the death of someone they loved. Some adults, perhaps to protect themselves from having to manage the full impact of a child’s grief, fool themselves into believing that children are “too young” to know what is going on. As noted children’s psychologist, Alan Wolfelt (1991), has said, “Anyone old enough to love is old enough to grieve.”
Children need avenues for safe expression of feelings that may include fear, sadness, guilt, and anger. Children’s play is their “work.” Provide a child-friendly environment where a child may choose the avenue best suited to his or her self-expression. For some children, it may be drawing or writing, for others, it may be puppetry, music, or physical activity. Keep in mind that a child’s reactions to grief will not appear the same as those seen in adults; as a result, children often are misunderstood. They may appear disinterested or respond as if they don’t understand the significance of what has happened.
For example, upon being told that her mother might soon die from metastatic cancer, a 10-year-old responded by asking, “When we go to dinner tonight, can I order extra pickles?” She was letting the adults know that she had heard enough for the moment. A four-year-old was told that his father died. He continued to ask, “When will he be back?” At this age, children don’t understand that death is permanent, final, and irreversible. Adults need to understand what is appropriate and expectable with children at different ages and stages of development and to recognize that children grieve in their own way and in their own time. Adults who tend to these children must focus on the children’s individual needs as well as their own.
When a child is denied the opportunity for grieving, there may be adverse consequences. At the D’Esopo Resource Center for Loss and Transition, located in Wethersfield, Conn., we regularly receive calls from parents who are worried about their children’s response to loss.
Recently, a mother called to say that she was very concerned about her three-year-old daughter. The child’s grandmother had died the previous month. The mother explained that she had consulted with the child’s pediatrician who told her that three-year-olds are too young to go to a funeral service because they do not understand death. The parents had therefore not included the child in any of the family’s commemorative rituals. Ever since, the little girl had been afraid to go to sleep and, when she did go to sleep, she experienced nightmares. During the day she was uncharacteristically anxious and clingy.
Fortunately this child, like most young children, is remarkably resilient. The problem was corrected by giving her a simple, direct, child-centered, age-appropriate explanation. She was told what happens to the body upon death (“It stops working”). And she was also given an explanation of the type of ritual that the family chose based on their religion and culture. She responded by sleeping well, having no more nightmares, and returning to her usual outgoing behavior.
While it is true that three-year-olds don’t understand that death is permanent, final, and irreversible, they do understand that something terribly sad has happened. They will miss the presence of people who have died, and they will worry about the sadness they feel around them. Lying to children or hiding the truth increases their anxiety. They are better observers of adults than most people recognize. You can’t fool them. They are remarkably perceptive.
When children of any age are not given proper explanations, their powerful imaginations will fill in the blanks in the information they have picked up from those around them. Unfortunately, their imaginations often come up with things that are far worse than the simple truth would have been. If, for example, they don’t understand the concept of “burial,” they may create images of dead loved ones being buried alive, gasping for air and trying to claw out of the ground. In the case of cremation, they may imagine their loved one being burned alive and suffering horribly.
It is far better to give them a clear idea about what is going on than to leave them to the mercy of their own imaginations. Children need to know not only what happens to the body upon death, they also need an explanation of what happens to the spirit or the soul, based on the family’s religious, spiritual, and cultural beliefs. It is essential to offer a detailed description of everything they likely will see and experience. At least one responsible adult should be present to support the child during the funeral and any other rituals.
One of the first workshops I attended regarding children and death began with the statement, “Anyone old enough to die is old enough to go to a funeral.” Participants gasped until the presenter went on to say, “as long as they are properly prepared and given the option — never forced — to attend.”
Children thrive when they are told what to expect and are allowed to participate in the commemoration of loved ones. When children and adults are encouraged to develop creative, personalized rituals, it helps everyone find comfort during the sad times. At the Resource Center, we ask children to draw or write a description of their favorite memory of the person who died. They love to share their memories and place the pictures, stories, and other items they have made into the casket to be buried or cremated along with their loved one. These kinds of activities can help the rituals around death become a meaningful family bonding experience rather than a continuing source of fear and pain.
Shakespeare said it best: “Give sorrow words. The grief that does not speak whispers the o’er fraught heart and bids it . . . break.” (Macbeth, Act IV, Scene 1)
Wolfelt, A. (1991). A Child’s View of Grief (video). Fort Collins: Center for Loss and Life Transition. | 1,239 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Joseph Smith Travels to Missouri
|On June 19, 1831, Joseph Smith left Kirtland, Ohio, to travel to Missouri. He was accompanied by Sidney Rigdon, Edward Partridge, Martin Harris, Joseph Coe, William W. Phelps, Algernon S. Gilbert and his wife. Before leaving on this trip, Joseph had received a revelation from God in which he was told that if they were faithful and obedient it would be revealed to them where Zion, or the New Jerusalem, should be built, and that this land would be a place for the members of the Mormon Church to gather.The group traveled to Cincinnati. In Cincinnati they boarded a steamer, which took them to Louisville, Kentucky.During the trip, the group made it a rule to read from the Bible everyday and to pray together. In Kentucky the group had to wait three days for a steamer that would take them to St. Louis, Missouri. In St. Louis Joseph decided that he would like to walk the rest of the way to Independence so that he could see the land. He was accompanied by Martin Harris, William W. Phelps, Edward Partridge and Joseph Coe on the 300 mile walk. They arrived in Independence in the middle of July.When the group arrived they were happy to meet up with missionaries who had been sent to teach the Native Americans, and a couple of days later, members of the Church who were moving from Colesville, New York, to Missouri. | <urn:uuid:ee76a6f1-9896-4976-9f39-b78469204b53> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://prophetjosephsmith.org/index/life_joseph_smith/joseph_smith_timeline/1830-1833/travel_missiouri | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591234.15/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117205732-20200117233732-00405.warc.gz | en | 0.987635 | 299 | 3.390625 | 3 | [
0.03941667824983597,
0.1343153417110443,
0.06606452167034149,
0.09492169320583344,
-0.37810584902763367,
-0.13569854199886322,
0.2977297902107239,
0.31987181305885315,
-0.6985106468200684,
-0.0588386096060276,
0.15688471496105194,
-0.09155833721160889,
0.3130527436733246,
-0.17814481258392... | 2 | Joseph Smith Travels to Missouri
|On June 19, 1831, Joseph Smith left Kirtland, Ohio, to travel to Missouri. He was accompanied by Sidney Rigdon, Edward Partridge, Martin Harris, Joseph Coe, William W. Phelps, Algernon S. Gilbert and his wife. Before leaving on this trip, Joseph had received a revelation from God in which he was told that if they were faithful and obedient it would be revealed to them where Zion, or the New Jerusalem, should be built, and that this land would be a place for the members of the Mormon Church to gather.The group traveled to Cincinnati. In Cincinnati they boarded a steamer, which took them to Louisville, Kentucky.During the trip, the group made it a rule to read from the Bible everyday and to pray together. In Kentucky the group had to wait three days for a steamer that would take them to St. Louis, Missouri. In St. Louis Joseph decided that he would like to walk the rest of the way to Independence so that he could see the land. He was accompanied by Martin Harris, William W. Phelps, Edward Partridge and Joseph Coe on the 300 mile walk. They arrived in Independence in the middle of July.When the group arrived they were happy to meet up with missionaries who had been sent to teach the Native Americans, and a couple of days later, members of the Church who were moving from Colesville, New York, to Missouri. | 306 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In “Federalist No. 10”, Madison continued on the topic from “Federalist No. 9”, the fears of factions. Madison defined a faction as an amount of citizens, majority or minority, which are combined by some common interest or passion. Factions put the liberties of others at risk, and could influence the government as they wished. He stated that many believed the majority was overbearing and decisions were made unjustly, causing the government to be unstable. He presented two ways of fixing the wrong doings of factions: one, by eliminating the causes and two, by managing the effects. He also offered two methods of ridding the causes. The first was to demolish liberty, which in his eyes was fundamental, and the second, by giving all citizens similar passions, interests, and beliefs. Liberty was essential to political life, but went hand in hand with faction. Men were at liberty to exercise their reasons; therefore, various opinions would of course be formed. The concepts of liberty and diversity were the most important part of defending liberty in the first place.
Men, who are imperfect human beings, made up factions and were unable to keep themselves in check, especially if these factions were able to rise with little notice. Madison believed a direct democracy could not cure the problems of factions. He defined this type of democracy as a society which consisted of a small amount of people who gathered and directed the government. He put his trust into a republic, defining it as a government where the method of representation took place, discussed various views, and supplied the people with the cure of the problem(s). Madison believed his ideas for a republic would offset the risk of small factions because the republic would merely out vote them. For a larger faction, he believed by having absolute rights defined in the Constitution, along with the system of Federalism put into place, no faction would have been able to overpower those whom do not have the same opinions. Madison then backed up why he felt the republic was the most superior type of government.
He made note of how electing the sensible to represent would allow those chosen to differentiate between the real interests of the nation, and not give into momentary considerations caused by emotions or outward forces. To protect civil liberties, he pointed out that a large republic would keep any single group from uniting greatly throughout the country to push their interests on the government. With a small government, it would have been rather easy for an undesirable passion to pass through a majority. However, with a larger government, the passion would have to go through a much larger number of members to become a majority. The rights and liberties of minorities would be lost and unprotected in a direct democracy. Therefore, he was able to show people that through a republic, the rights of all groups would be secured through compromise.
“Federalist No. 51” dealt with worries about how to divide the power amongst the three branches of government so that a single branch would not become too dominant. He talked of how the separation… | <urn:uuid:8885cee9-b60a-4a2e-a666-fadabed37b34> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.majortests.com/essay/Federalist-Papers-Essay-544663.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250597458.22/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120052454-20200120080454-00502.warc.gz | en | 0.987005 | 613 | 3.765625 | 4 | [
-0.3519337475299835,
-0.1208505854010582,
0.02596622332930565,
-0.2637398838996887,
-0.12706242501735687,
0.16141098737716675,
0.3408271074295044,
0.4638477563858032,
-0.1819806545972824,
0.10431227087974548,
-0.16497860848903656,
0.3421952724456787,
-0.08293399214744568,
0.541244983673095... | 1 | In “Federalist No. 10”, Madison continued on the topic from “Federalist No. 9”, the fears of factions. Madison defined a faction as an amount of citizens, majority or minority, which are combined by some common interest or passion. Factions put the liberties of others at risk, and could influence the government as they wished. He stated that many believed the majority was overbearing and decisions were made unjustly, causing the government to be unstable. He presented two ways of fixing the wrong doings of factions: one, by eliminating the causes and two, by managing the effects. He also offered two methods of ridding the causes. The first was to demolish liberty, which in his eyes was fundamental, and the second, by giving all citizens similar passions, interests, and beliefs. Liberty was essential to political life, but went hand in hand with faction. Men were at liberty to exercise their reasons; therefore, various opinions would of course be formed. The concepts of liberty and diversity were the most important part of defending liberty in the first place.
Men, who are imperfect human beings, made up factions and were unable to keep themselves in check, especially if these factions were able to rise with little notice. Madison believed a direct democracy could not cure the problems of factions. He defined this type of democracy as a society which consisted of a small amount of people who gathered and directed the government. He put his trust into a republic, defining it as a government where the method of representation took place, discussed various views, and supplied the people with the cure of the problem(s). Madison believed his ideas for a republic would offset the risk of small factions because the republic would merely out vote them. For a larger faction, he believed by having absolute rights defined in the Constitution, along with the system of Federalism put into place, no faction would have been able to overpower those whom do not have the same opinions. Madison then backed up why he felt the republic was the most superior type of government.
He made note of how electing the sensible to represent would allow those chosen to differentiate between the real interests of the nation, and not give into momentary considerations caused by emotions or outward forces. To protect civil liberties, he pointed out that a large republic would keep any single group from uniting greatly throughout the country to push their interests on the government. With a small government, it would have been rather easy for an undesirable passion to pass through a majority. However, with a larger government, the passion would have to go through a much larger number of members to become a majority. The rights and liberties of minorities would be lost and unprotected in a direct democracy. Therefore, he was able to show people that through a republic, the rights of all groups would be secured through compromise.
“Federalist No. 51” dealt with worries about how to divide the power amongst the three branches of government so that a single branch would not become too dominant. He talked of how the separation… | 607 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Inside of a three-story wooden building on the banks of the Blackstone River late in 1790, machinery groaned into motion for spinning, roving and carding cotton. It was a dream come true for Sam Slater – and the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in America.
Sam Slater was born in Belper, England, on June 9, 1768, and went to work in a cotton-spinning factory when he was 10. By the time he was 21 he had memorized how much of the machinery of the mill worked. British law forbade the export of such information, so Slater kept it in his head and emigrated to America in 1789. The people of Belper later called him Slater the Traitor.
Slater wasn’t the first to try to manufacture cloth using water power. Rhode Island industrialist Moses Brown and partners moved to Pawtucket in 1789 to run a textile mill. They bought machinery based on a design by English inventor Richard Arkwright, but they couldn’t get it to work.
Slater had worked on the Arkwright machinery in England. He got wind of Brown’s problem and wrote to him offering his services:
If I do not make as good yarn, as they do in England, I will have nothing for my services, but will throw the whole of what I have attempted over the bridge.
Slater persuaded Brown he could make the machinery work. The two men made a deal: Slater would replicate the Arkwright machinery, and Brown would put up the money. Slater would get half the profit and half the business.
Slater didn’t have enough tools. He didn’t have any skilled mechanics. But with about a dozen workers, the mill machinery started successfully on Dec. 20, 1790.
By 1793, Brown and Slater owned a mill that was fully operational in Pawtucket. Slater would ultimately own 13 mills and become a rich man. In the process he developed the ‘Rhode Island System’ of employment, hiring entire families – including women and children — to work in his mills.
This story was updated from the 2014 version. | <urn:uuid:77b94d86-177b-44d8-a89b-7d497a4c13a9> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/flashback-photo-sam-slater-wildly-successful-startup-1790/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591234.15/warc/CC-MAIN-20200117205732-20200117233732-00143.warc.gz | en | 0.982467 | 443 | 3.640625 | 4 | [
-0.19134379923343658,
-0.2673368453979492,
-0.28665101528167725,
-0.21834692358970642,
-0.04639744013547897,
0.08198894560337067,
-0.24718095362186432,
0.26914384961128235,
-0.4255176782608032,
0.10422447323799133,
0.05501987040042877,
-0.2839593291282654,
-0.08986649662256241,
0.036253076... | 9 | Inside of a three-story wooden building on the banks of the Blackstone River late in 1790, machinery groaned into motion for spinning, roving and carding cotton. It was a dream come true for Sam Slater – and the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in America.
Sam Slater was born in Belper, England, on June 9, 1768, and went to work in a cotton-spinning factory when he was 10. By the time he was 21 he had memorized how much of the machinery of the mill worked. British law forbade the export of such information, so Slater kept it in his head and emigrated to America in 1789. The people of Belper later called him Slater the Traitor.
Slater wasn’t the first to try to manufacture cloth using water power. Rhode Island industrialist Moses Brown and partners moved to Pawtucket in 1789 to run a textile mill. They bought machinery based on a design by English inventor Richard Arkwright, but they couldn’t get it to work.
Slater had worked on the Arkwright machinery in England. He got wind of Brown’s problem and wrote to him offering his services:
If I do not make as good yarn, as they do in England, I will have nothing for my services, but will throw the whole of what I have attempted over the bridge.
Slater persuaded Brown he could make the machinery work. The two men made a deal: Slater would replicate the Arkwright machinery, and Brown would put up the money. Slater would get half the profit and half the business.
Slater didn’t have enough tools. He didn’t have any skilled mechanics. But with about a dozen workers, the mill machinery started successfully on Dec. 20, 1790.
By 1793, Brown and Slater owned a mill that was fully operational in Pawtucket. Slater would ultimately own 13 mills and become a rich man. In the process he developed the ‘Rhode Island System’ of employment, hiring entire families – including women and children — to work in his mills.
This story was updated from the 2014 version. | 452 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The flood story in Genesis 6-9 begins with God's realization of the evil tendencies of humans. He grieved his creation of humans and decided to wipe out the entire race. However, Noah came into God's good graces for his righteousness. God called on Noah to build and arch and take 7 pairs of all clean animals onto the arch. Noah did so, and waited out the rains of forty days and forty nights. At the end of the flood, Noah sent out a dove, who returned with an olive branch to show good news of the lands drying. .
Scholars believe this story to be a literary work because of its contradictions with science and history. First, it seems impossible for Noah to have built an arch, alone, which was over 120 cubits and several decks tall. Not only would technology of the time limit this, but there are mechanical limitations, as well. .
The flood stories of Noah and Gilgamesh have many similarities. In both stories, God(s) were displeased with humanity and thus initiated the flood. Both include a hero, who was faithful and worshiped God(s), which was informed of the flood and instructed to construct a massive arch/boat to wait out the length of the flood. However, there are many differences as well. Mainly in the endings, Gilgamesh becomes a God, unlike Noah. Also, it was against the Gods wishes that Gilgamesh discovered the coming floods. Noah's righteousness allowed for God to inform him of his plans. Other differences include dimensions of the arch, length of the flood and number of animals collected by each man. .
The flood story shows God's mercy and understanding of humans. It demonstrates his salvation and his love of the human race. He could have wiped out everyone, however, chose to save Noah and his family in the hopes they would be fruitful and righteous. The dove and olive branch represent peace and the renewal of life. Its representation comes from Noah's dove returning to him with an olive branch which told of the floods drying. | <urn:uuid:d425b307-9bfc-474c-bf14-b451ac32f08e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.exampleessays.com/viewpaper/23118.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250624328.55/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124161014-20200124190014-00509.warc.gz | en | 0.986323 | 415 | 3.515625 | 4 | [
0.19547323882579803,
0.4697462022304535,
-0.29135462641716003,
-0.005045163910835981,
-0.4160010516643524,
-0.14880570769309998,
-0.1180453673005104,
0.07216966152191162,
0.19879664480686188,
0.1741943657398224,
-0.20031368732452393,
-0.2337087243795395,
-0.006034193094819784,
-0.290491104... | 5 | The flood story in Genesis 6-9 begins with God's realization of the evil tendencies of humans. He grieved his creation of humans and decided to wipe out the entire race. However, Noah came into God's good graces for his righteousness. God called on Noah to build and arch and take 7 pairs of all clean animals onto the arch. Noah did so, and waited out the rains of forty days and forty nights. At the end of the flood, Noah sent out a dove, who returned with an olive branch to show good news of the lands drying. .
Scholars believe this story to be a literary work because of its contradictions with science and history. First, it seems impossible for Noah to have built an arch, alone, which was over 120 cubits and several decks tall. Not only would technology of the time limit this, but there are mechanical limitations, as well. .
The flood stories of Noah and Gilgamesh have many similarities. In both stories, God(s) were displeased with humanity and thus initiated the flood. Both include a hero, who was faithful and worshiped God(s), which was informed of the flood and instructed to construct a massive arch/boat to wait out the length of the flood. However, there are many differences as well. Mainly in the endings, Gilgamesh becomes a God, unlike Noah. Also, it was against the Gods wishes that Gilgamesh discovered the coming floods. Noah's righteousness allowed for God to inform him of his plans. Other differences include dimensions of the arch, length of the flood and number of animals collected by each man. .
The flood story shows God's mercy and understanding of humans. It demonstrates his salvation and his love of the human race. He could have wiped out everyone, however, chose to save Noah and his family in the hopes they would be fruitful and righteous. The dove and olive branch represent peace and the renewal of life. Its representation comes from Noah's dove returning to him with an olive branch which told of the floods drying. | 415 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In society today, the smallest most unexpected event or person can make an enormous impact on the course of history as “we” know it. A perfect example of this was caused by John Wilkes Booth. In just a minute he changed history and America in a way that no one thought could or would ever happen.
Son of noted actor Junius Brutus Booth and one of ten children, John Wilkes Booth was born on May 10, 1838 near the town of Bel Air, Maryland (Historynet.com). At the ripe age of seventeen, he made his first stage appearance, following in the footsteps of his father. Booth became expert at interpreting Shakespearian works. As a result of that, his roles were mainly in plays like Romeo and Juliet, Julius Caesar, and other plays by Shakespeare. Although he rarely prepared for his roles, his dark and muscular appearance made him a desirable candidate for many characters.
When the Civil War erupted, Wilkes was in his early twenties- still very young and naïve. Booth’s family mostly supported the Union. On the other hand, Booth was a supporter of the Confederates. As a child, his father’s farm had been operated by slaves, which influenced his views on the subject of the Confederates. Malicious and harmful emotions and opinions materialized from the war that led Booth to start creating schemes against President Lincoln. By 1864, at age 26, he created a plan to keep Lincoln hostage and planned to release him only if the Confederates in the war were freed. The plan began to crumble, so Booth decided to reach out to others who felt the same as he did. He met with several conspirators. The most crucial meeting was when Booth and a few others met at a woman named Mary Surratt’s boarding house in Washington D.C. to come up with a new plan of action according to an article by Salem Press.
After meeting with fellow conspirators and finding a few allies to team up with, Booth finally began to put his plans into action. Booth had heard that the President would be at the theatre he was supposed to be performing and he saw the perfect chance to execute his plot. President Lincoln was attending a play on Good Friday, 1865 at Ford Theatre. Booth was aware of this. Before the play began and the scheme was put into action, Booth had heavily intoxicated himself with brandy. The play began as expected but soon took a turn for the worst. As the plan rolled on, a drunken John Wilkes Booth entered into the President’s Box where Lincoln was watching and shot the president with one bullet. Meanwhile, Booth’s accomplice had attacked Secretary of State William H. Seward.
After all the commotion, Booth quickly jumped onto the stage and broke his leg. Despite that he still managed to escape. David E. Herold, the accomplice, ran away with Booth to Maryland to hide out. After a few days of life in secrecy, the then began to make their way to a place called Richard Garrett’s Farm in Bowling Green, Virginia. (Salem Press).
On April 26, 1865, ten days after... | <urn:uuid:0d33e522-dfee-4679-b4c5-5058533441a2> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://brightkite.com/essay-on/john-wilkes-booth-his-impact-on-united-states-history | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250606269.37/warc/CC-MAIN-20200122012204-20200122041204-00369.warc.gz | en | 0.988547 | 648 | 3.96875 | 4 | [
-0.3375612497329712,
0.34938573837280273,
0.47295689582824707,
0.11751138418912888,
-0.023438069969415665,
0.3881406784057617,
0.23882101476192474,
0.24277272820472717,
-0.36070579290390015,
-0.16979461908340454,
0.08004956692457199,
0.1501348614692688,
0.08582401275634766,
0.5484895706176... | 1 | In society today, the smallest most unexpected event or person can make an enormous impact on the course of history as “we” know it. A perfect example of this was caused by John Wilkes Booth. In just a minute he changed history and America in a way that no one thought could or would ever happen.
Son of noted actor Junius Brutus Booth and one of ten children, John Wilkes Booth was born on May 10, 1838 near the town of Bel Air, Maryland (Historynet.com). At the ripe age of seventeen, he made his first stage appearance, following in the footsteps of his father. Booth became expert at interpreting Shakespearian works. As a result of that, his roles were mainly in plays like Romeo and Juliet, Julius Caesar, and other plays by Shakespeare. Although he rarely prepared for his roles, his dark and muscular appearance made him a desirable candidate for many characters.
When the Civil War erupted, Wilkes was in his early twenties- still very young and naïve. Booth’s family mostly supported the Union. On the other hand, Booth was a supporter of the Confederates. As a child, his father’s farm had been operated by slaves, which influenced his views on the subject of the Confederates. Malicious and harmful emotions and opinions materialized from the war that led Booth to start creating schemes against President Lincoln. By 1864, at age 26, he created a plan to keep Lincoln hostage and planned to release him only if the Confederates in the war were freed. The plan began to crumble, so Booth decided to reach out to others who felt the same as he did. He met with several conspirators. The most crucial meeting was when Booth and a few others met at a woman named Mary Surratt’s boarding house in Washington D.C. to come up with a new plan of action according to an article by Salem Press.
After meeting with fellow conspirators and finding a few allies to team up with, Booth finally began to put his plans into action. Booth had heard that the President would be at the theatre he was supposed to be performing and he saw the perfect chance to execute his plot. President Lincoln was attending a play on Good Friday, 1865 at Ford Theatre. Booth was aware of this. Before the play began and the scheme was put into action, Booth had heavily intoxicated himself with brandy. The play began as expected but soon took a turn for the worst. As the plan rolled on, a drunken John Wilkes Booth entered into the President’s Box where Lincoln was watching and shot the president with one bullet. Meanwhile, Booth’s accomplice had attacked Secretary of State William H. Seward.
After all the commotion, Booth quickly jumped onto the stage and broke his leg. Despite that he still managed to escape. David E. Herold, the accomplice, ran away with Booth to Maryland to hide out. After a few days of life in secrecy, the then began to make their way to a place called Richard Garrett’s Farm in Bowling Green, Virginia. (Salem Press).
On April 26, 1865, ten days after... | 650 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Robert Donnelly (Lynching of)
Robert Donnelly, an African-American man, was lynched in Lee County on June 29, 1892, by a mob of more than 200 other African Americans. His alleged crime was the repeated assault of a twelve-year-old black girl. While black-on-black lynchings were rare, historian Karlos Hill asserts that many of those that occurred shared a number of similarities. Most of the victims were young, married males who worked as farm laborers. Many of the victims were also connected with plantation societies, communities where everyone knew each other and which were inclined to punish their own criminals. Many of the thinly populated areas in the Arkansas Delta were similar to frontier areas, where violence was rampant and white officials were unresponsive, especially to crimes within the black community. Of the cases Hill studied, about one third of the crimes were alleged rapes, of which approximately eighty percent of the victims were children.
There is no information available about Robert Donnelly’s background. According to the Arkansas Gazette, on Tuesday morning, June 28, Donnelly went to a home on the Sampson place near Haynes (Lee County), pointed a pistol at the head of a twelve-year-old African-American girl, and forced her to go with him to the nearby woods. He kept her in the woods and raped her repeatedly until 9:00 p.m. that night. He then released her, and she went home and told her parents what had happened. They told the authorities, and city marshal Mart Hill captured Donnelly on the morning of June 29.
Hill took Donnelly to Haynes, where he was found guilty at a preliminary trial. He was put in the city jail pending transfer to nearby Marianna (Lee County). During the afternoon, a crowd of black citizens gathered around the jail, eventually numbering over 200. They were soon threatening to lynch Donnelly. According to the Gazette, “The cowering wretch begged piteously for protection,” but the large crowd overpowered the officers. They took Donnelly and hanged him from a nearby tree, breaking his neck. The paper’s informant declared him the “deadest nigger” in Arkansas. According to the informant, “All people deplore mob law, yet it was conceded by whites and blacks alike that Donnelly deserved the fate which befell him.”
For additional information:
Hill, Karlos. “Resisting Lynching: Black Grassroots Responses to Lynching in the Mississippi and Arkansas Deltas, 1882–1938.” PhD diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2009.
“His Black Neck Broken by a Mob Composed Entirely of Three Hundred Negroes.” Arkansas Gazette, July 1, 1892, p. 1.
Nancy Snell Griffith
Clinton, South Carolina
Last Updated: 12/16/2014 | <urn:uuid:99a3a8fa-1ff8-42c9-b99f-4e097ee9eb57> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/robert-donnelly-8355/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251789055.93/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129071944-20200129101944-00007.warc.gz | en | 0.986472 | 610 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
-0.005657928064465523,
-0.07706665992736816,
-0.25884509086608887,
0.06320536136627197,
0.041082024574279785,
-0.3358025550842285,
0.15267831087112427,
-0.24772152304649353,
-0.13462278246879578,
0.02750328928232193,
0.5169207453727722,
-0.061396174132823944,
-0.024257760494947433,
-0.0117... | 7 | Robert Donnelly (Lynching of)
Robert Donnelly, an African-American man, was lynched in Lee County on June 29, 1892, by a mob of more than 200 other African Americans. His alleged crime was the repeated assault of a twelve-year-old black girl. While black-on-black lynchings were rare, historian Karlos Hill asserts that many of those that occurred shared a number of similarities. Most of the victims were young, married males who worked as farm laborers. Many of the victims were also connected with plantation societies, communities where everyone knew each other and which were inclined to punish their own criminals. Many of the thinly populated areas in the Arkansas Delta were similar to frontier areas, where violence was rampant and white officials were unresponsive, especially to crimes within the black community. Of the cases Hill studied, about one third of the crimes were alleged rapes, of which approximately eighty percent of the victims were children.
There is no information available about Robert Donnelly’s background. According to the Arkansas Gazette, on Tuesday morning, June 28, Donnelly went to a home on the Sampson place near Haynes (Lee County), pointed a pistol at the head of a twelve-year-old African-American girl, and forced her to go with him to the nearby woods. He kept her in the woods and raped her repeatedly until 9:00 p.m. that night. He then released her, and she went home and told her parents what had happened. They told the authorities, and city marshal Mart Hill captured Donnelly on the morning of June 29.
Hill took Donnelly to Haynes, where he was found guilty at a preliminary trial. He was put in the city jail pending transfer to nearby Marianna (Lee County). During the afternoon, a crowd of black citizens gathered around the jail, eventually numbering over 200. They were soon threatening to lynch Donnelly. According to the Gazette, “The cowering wretch begged piteously for protection,” but the large crowd overpowered the officers. They took Donnelly and hanged him from a nearby tree, breaking his neck. The paper’s informant declared him the “deadest nigger” in Arkansas. According to the informant, “All people deplore mob law, yet it was conceded by whites and blacks alike that Donnelly deserved the fate which befell him.”
For additional information:
Hill, Karlos. “Resisting Lynching: Black Grassroots Responses to Lynching in the Mississippi and Arkansas Deltas, 1882–1938.” PhD diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2009.
“His Black Neck Broken by a Mob Composed Entirely of Three Hundred Negroes.” Arkansas Gazette, July 1, 1892, p. 1.
Nancy Snell Griffith
Clinton, South Carolina
Last Updated: 12/16/2014 | 612 | ENGLISH | 1 |
As we approach Memorial Day here at the USS Constitution Museum, we pause to reflect on those who lost their lives while in service on board USS Constitution, not just in battle but in the daily operation of the ship across the globe.
More than 260 officers and crew have died while serving on board the ship over her centuries of service. Only 26 of those died either in battle or as a result of wounds sustained in battle. Constitution was fortunate in the relatively low numbers of casualties sustained in her major battles during the War of 1812, but for sailors on the world’s oceans in the 1800s, illness, disease and infection were far more common killers. A list of those crew who died has been compiled by the museum from references in the ship’s logbooks, medical logs and crew service records.
The causes of death includes simple descriptions of symptoms or early names for diseases that have since been identified, cured, contained, or made treatable. Between 1799 and 1844, 16 crew died of “consumption,” a common name for tuberculosis. In addition, the death of John Weston on December 19, 1844 was specifically blamed on tuberculosis.
Various descriptions of fevers were blamed for 26 deaths. “Bilious fever” was a term used to describe fever accompanied by vomiting or diarrhea. That description accompanies five deaths, and usually denoted malaria, a parasite spread by mosquitoes, or typhus, a bacteria spread by fleas and chiggers. Two more were specifically attributed to typhus.
Unfortunately, more than half of the deaths remain a mystery, because the causes were unspecified in the records we have available. It’s quite possible no explanation was available at the time. Often the ship’s logbook simply noted that someone died on a given day. If that sailor had not already been seen or treated by the ship’s surgeon, there may be no record or explanation in the medical log either. Fourteen crew are recorded as having died of “illness.” Though brief descriptions of the illness accompany some of those, they are as vague as “a complication of disorders,” which was the cause given to the death of Archibald Thompson on November 15, 1799.
The precarious nature of working high in the ship’s rigging on the rolling seas killed six people in the 1800s. Most appear to have struck the deck, dying immediately or quickly after from their injuries. Only one crew member’s death is specifically attributed to drowning after falling off Constitution. William Nine, an able seaman, fell overboard on January 4, 1814. It’s unclear whether he was on deck or in the rigging at the time. The ship stopped and launched a small boat in an effort to retrieve him, but it was too late.
Constitution crew are buried in ports of call around the world, but the vast majority of them have no gravesite for us to visit. If a crew member died while the ship was far offshore, he was buried there beneath the waves. Returning a deceased crew member to a grave on land was often just not possible in the 19th century.
Burials on shore occasionally happened in places without tended cemeteries. Seaman William Cooke died on May 10, 1845, while the ship was at anchor in Touron Bay in what is today’s Da Nang, Vietnam. He was listed as having died “after a long illness,” although he likely had dysentery, which had plagued the crew during the previous two ocean passages. Cooke was buried ashore on the edge of the hill overlooking the beach. Though Cooke himself appears to have been forgotten, the site continued to be maintained by local people. Over decades, it evolved into a shrine where until just recently, fishermen continued to leave offerings for good luck before going to sea. The most recent reports of people attempting to visit the location within the last 10 years indicate that the entire area of the beachfront bay has been redeveloped into a resort and any remnants of structures or monuments connected to Cooke are now gone.
Public Historian, USS Constitution Museum
Carl Herzog is the Public Historian at the USS Constitution Museum. | <urn:uuid:769786fb-6dc2-4a85-af21-a36a7c63902a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://ussconstitutionmuseum.org/2019/05/07/consigned-to-a-seamans-grave/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598217.23/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120081337-20200120105337-00014.warc.gz | en | 0.981563 | 864 | 3.5625 | 4 | [
-0.05230956897139549,
0.2106805443763733,
0.6974236965179443,
-0.481860876083374,
0.1400091052055359,
-0.0723441019654274,
0.49913886189460754,
0.4683852195739746,
-0.19542978703975677,
-0.24843056499958038,
0.2090894877910614,
-0.02844984084367752,
-0.026540301740169525,
0.368846774101257... | 12 | As we approach Memorial Day here at the USS Constitution Museum, we pause to reflect on those who lost their lives while in service on board USS Constitution, not just in battle but in the daily operation of the ship across the globe.
More than 260 officers and crew have died while serving on board the ship over her centuries of service. Only 26 of those died either in battle or as a result of wounds sustained in battle. Constitution was fortunate in the relatively low numbers of casualties sustained in her major battles during the War of 1812, but for sailors on the world’s oceans in the 1800s, illness, disease and infection were far more common killers. A list of those crew who died has been compiled by the museum from references in the ship’s logbooks, medical logs and crew service records.
The causes of death includes simple descriptions of symptoms or early names for diseases that have since been identified, cured, contained, or made treatable. Between 1799 and 1844, 16 crew died of “consumption,” a common name for tuberculosis. In addition, the death of John Weston on December 19, 1844 was specifically blamed on tuberculosis.
Various descriptions of fevers were blamed for 26 deaths. “Bilious fever” was a term used to describe fever accompanied by vomiting or diarrhea. That description accompanies five deaths, and usually denoted malaria, a parasite spread by mosquitoes, or typhus, a bacteria spread by fleas and chiggers. Two more were specifically attributed to typhus.
Unfortunately, more than half of the deaths remain a mystery, because the causes were unspecified in the records we have available. It’s quite possible no explanation was available at the time. Often the ship’s logbook simply noted that someone died on a given day. If that sailor had not already been seen or treated by the ship’s surgeon, there may be no record or explanation in the medical log either. Fourteen crew are recorded as having died of “illness.” Though brief descriptions of the illness accompany some of those, they are as vague as “a complication of disorders,” which was the cause given to the death of Archibald Thompson on November 15, 1799.
The precarious nature of working high in the ship’s rigging on the rolling seas killed six people in the 1800s. Most appear to have struck the deck, dying immediately or quickly after from their injuries. Only one crew member’s death is specifically attributed to drowning after falling off Constitution. William Nine, an able seaman, fell overboard on January 4, 1814. It’s unclear whether he was on deck or in the rigging at the time. The ship stopped and launched a small boat in an effort to retrieve him, but it was too late.
Constitution crew are buried in ports of call around the world, but the vast majority of them have no gravesite for us to visit. If a crew member died while the ship was far offshore, he was buried there beneath the waves. Returning a deceased crew member to a grave on land was often just not possible in the 19th century.
Burials on shore occasionally happened in places without tended cemeteries. Seaman William Cooke died on May 10, 1845, while the ship was at anchor in Touron Bay in what is today’s Da Nang, Vietnam. He was listed as having died “after a long illness,” although he likely had dysentery, which had plagued the crew during the previous two ocean passages. Cooke was buried ashore on the edge of the hill overlooking the beach. Though Cooke himself appears to have been forgotten, the site continued to be maintained by local people. Over decades, it evolved into a shrine where until just recently, fishermen continued to leave offerings for good luck before going to sea. The most recent reports of people attempting to visit the location within the last 10 years indicate that the entire area of the beachfront bay has been redeveloped into a resort and any remnants of structures or monuments connected to Cooke are now gone.
Public Historian, USS Constitution Museum
Carl Herzog is the Public Historian at the USS Constitution Museum. | 879 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Tudor Rose is the symbol of the Tudor family and is represented by the union of a red and white rose. The red rose being the House of Lancaster and the white the House of York. This union brought to an end the bitter civil war which is commonly referred to as ‘The War of the Roses’. The design of the joined roses was chosen to signify the union of the two houses in the marriage of Henry VII and Elizabeth of York.
Designing the Tudor Rose
Henry Tudor was part of the House of Lancaster, Elizabeth was of the House of York. These were the two most powerful of all of the noble families in England at the time. The Lancastrian faction was rising against Richard III who was a Yorkist. The rebellion being instigated by the disappearance of the two young princes in the Tower of London. The princes being the young sons of Edward IV.
Richard was defeated in the Battle of Bosworth Field leaving the way open for Henry to take the throne, which his did, becoming King Henry VII. This marked the birth of the Tudor Dynasty which was to follow. His claim on the throne however was not as solid as he would have liked, therefore a marriage to Elizabeth of York would solidify his claim as she was the daughter of Edward IV. The floral emblems of the two houses were merged which created what became known as the Tudor Rose.
England’s National Flower is a Rose
The rose has been England’s national flower since the War of the Roses (1455-1485). It is the white rose of the House of York which lies at the centre of the Tudor Rose, with the red rose of the House of Lancaster surrounding it. The design was created especially to symbolise unity as well as mutual regard for the families towards each other.
The emblem was used in many different ways including as a badge which was worn by individuals as a symbol of loyalty and allegiance. The Tudor Rose is as much a part of English heraldry now as it has always been, and is still worn on the uniform of the Yeoman Guards (Beefeaters) at the Tower of London.
Tudor Rose of England
Look at the architecture of many old buildings in England, and you will most likely see a Tudor Rose somewhere. They can appear on ceilings, in mouldings and as reliefs in all kinds of historic buildings. Some of the best examples of its use can be found on Anne Boleyn’s Gate in London. Builders, masons and architects would have the rose installed anywhere they thought was appropriate.
There was even a Tudor Rose found carved into the guns on the Mary Rose, Henry VIII famous gun ship. Today the design is still being used and can be found on the reverse of some 20p coins. It is an English tradition which has stood the test of time and will no doubt still be used for many years to come. | <urn:uuid:398e827c-3b78-4b46-b4a3-969b0c0a12c5> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://elizabethanenglandlife.com/thetudorsfacts/the-tudor-rose-symbol.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251681625.83/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125222506-20200126012506-00537.warc.gz | en | 0.9886 | 606 | 3.625 | 4 | [
-0.20054000616073608,
0.05474100261926651,
0.1915537416934967,
0.42571505904197693,
-0.2459295392036438,
-0.2125048041343689,
0.22319737076759338,
0.2877458333969116,
0.12043973803520203,
-0.1440751850605011,
-0.310187965631485,
-0.524556040763855,
0.0689600259065628,
0.1528431475162506,
... | 6 | The Tudor Rose is the symbol of the Tudor family and is represented by the union of a red and white rose. The red rose being the House of Lancaster and the white the House of York. This union brought to an end the bitter civil war which is commonly referred to as ‘The War of the Roses’. The design of the joined roses was chosen to signify the union of the two houses in the marriage of Henry VII and Elizabeth of York.
Designing the Tudor Rose
Henry Tudor was part of the House of Lancaster, Elizabeth was of the House of York. These were the two most powerful of all of the noble families in England at the time. The Lancastrian faction was rising against Richard III who was a Yorkist. The rebellion being instigated by the disappearance of the two young princes in the Tower of London. The princes being the young sons of Edward IV.
Richard was defeated in the Battle of Bosworth Field leaving the way open for Henry to take the throne, which his did, becoming King Henry VII. This marked the birth of the Tudor Dynasty which was to follow. His claim on the throne however was not as solid as he would have liked, therefore a marriage to Elizabeth of York would solidify his claim as she was the daughter of Edward IV. The floral emblems of the two houses were merged which created what became known as the Tudor Rose.
England’s National Flower is a Rose
The rose has been England’s national flower since the War of the Roses (1455-1485). It is the white rose of the House of York which lies at the centre of the Tudor Rose, with the red rose of the House of Lancaster surrounding it. The design was created especially to symbolise unity as well as mutual regard for the families towards each other.
The emblem was used in many different ways including as a badge which was worn by individuals as a symbol of loyalty and allegiance. The Tudor Rose is as much a part of English heraldry now as it has always been, and is still worn on the uniform of the Yeoman Guards (Beefeaters) at the Tower of London.
Tudor Rose of England
Look at the architecture of many old buildings in England, and you will most likely see a Tudor Rose somewhere. They can appear on ceilings, in mouldings and as reliefs in all kinds of historic buildings. Some of the best examples of its use can be found on Anne Boleyn’s Gate in London. Builders, masons and architects would have the rose installed anywhere they thought was appropriate.
There was even a Tudor Rose found carved into the guns on the Mary Rose, Henry VIII famous gun ship. Today the design is still being used and can be found on the reverse of some 20p coins. It is an English tradition which has stood the test of time and will no doubt still be used for many years to come. | 595 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In the earlier period, Alappuzha had trade relations with countries like Greece and Rome. During the Sangam age, the place called Kuttanad was home to the Cheras who were called as Kuttuvans. The ancient history of Alappuzha can be seen from the literacy works “Unninili Sandesham”. There are some archaeological works like inscriptions on stone, monuments, rock-cut caves etc. which emphasize on the historical value.
During the period between 9th and 12th century, there was a great development in the field of religion. During the rule of the king Pooradam Thirunal Devanarayana, the Chempakasseri kingdom was at great height. In the 17th century, the Portuguese control declined and the Dutch came into power. The Dutch made great improvements in the district and had constructed factories and industries here. It was mainly used for storing spices and many treaties were signed between the Dutch and the rulers of Purakkad, Kayamkulam and Karappuram.
The Dutch also took part in the political affairs of the district. Later Maharaja Marthandavarma interfered in the political affairs. He made great contributions for the progress of the district. With the addition of kingdoms of Kayamkulam, Ambalappuzha, Thekkumkur, Vadakkumkur and Karappuram, the Dutch began to decline.
There were some improvements in the district during the rule of Dharmaraja. The Diwan of Travancore named Raja Kesava Das, made Alappuzha a main port town of Travancore. Another prominent person responsible for the development of Alappuzha is Velu Thampi Dalawa who took great effort for the development of the district.
Before, Alappuzha was combined with Kottayam and Kollam but after 1957, Alappuzha became a separate district. It was in Alappuzha that the first post office and telegraph office of the Travancore was established. The role of Alappuzha in the Indian Independence is worth mentioning. In 1946, there was the struggle of Punnapra and Vayalar. It was against the Diwan of Travancore which led to his withdrawal from the politics. | <urn:uuid:8adeb25d-878e-4355-834d-0cbbe8962344> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.kerala.me/districts/alappuzha/alappuzha_history | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594705.17/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119180644-20200119204644-00246.warc.gz | en | 0.985257 | 489 | 3.765625 | 4 | [
-0.32503682374954224,
0.44081738591194153,
0.11774426698684692,
-0.021788377314805984,
-0.37822818756103516,
-0.17194505035877228,
0.31585371494293213,
-0.059740517288446426,
-0.31652289628982544,
0.01001726370304823,
-0.19926558434963226,
-0.6883271336555481,
0.037181075662374496,
0.65276... | 8 | In the earlier period, Alappuzha had trade relations with countries like Greece and Rome. During the Sangam age, the place called Kuttanad was home to the Cheras who were called as Kuttuvans. The ancient history of Alappuzha can be seen from the literacy works “Unninili Sandesham”. There are some archaeological works like inscriptions on stone, monuments, rock-cut caves etc. which emphasize on the historical value.
During the period between 9th and 12th century, there was a great development in the field of religion. During the rule of the king Pooradam Thirunal Devanarayana, the Chempakasseri kingdom was at great height. In the 17th century, the Portuguese control declined and the Dutch came into power. The Dutch made great improvements in the district and had constructed factories and industries here. It was mainly used for storing spices and many treaties were signed between the Dutch and the rulers of Purakkad, Kayamkulam and Karappuram.
The Dutch also took part in the political affairs of the district. Later Maharaja Marthandavarma interfered in the political affairs. He made great contributions for the progress of the district. With the addition of kingdoms of Kayamkulam, Ambalappuzha, Thekkumkur, Vadakkumkur and Karappuram, the Dutch began to decline.
There were some improvements in the district during the rule of Dharmaraja. The Diwan of Travancore named Raja Kesava Das, made Alappuzha a main port town of Travancore. Another prominent person responsible for the development of Alappuzha is Velu Thampi Dalawa who took great effort for the development of the district.
Before, Alappuzha was combined with Kottayam and Kollam but after 1957, Alappuzha became a separate district. It was in Alappuzha that the first post office and telegraph office of the Travancore was established. The role of Alappuzha in the Indian Independence is worth mentioning. In 1946, there was the struggle of Punnapra and Vayalar. It was against the Diwan of Travancore which led to his withdrawal from the politics. | 481 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The letter Christopher Columbus wrote back to Spain to report his findings in the New World sparked intrigued me and sparked my imagination. Why I have been so absorbed in this letter I can not explain. This letter is supposed to be about describing an unknown land, a land that has not been seen by anyone besides the natives, but it seems that there is more to it than that. Columbus is known in elementary schools as the man who found the New World, and is regarded as a hero. To the contrary, historians who have done more research on Columbus say that he was driven by fame and fortune and that he was tyrannical in his ways with the indigenous peoples of the places that he came to find.Order now
I feel that the contradictory tones Columbus uses gives this letter an eerie feel, and Columbus’s eventual desire to take over the indigenous peoples brings doubt on his reliability as an accurate and fair eyewitness.
Columbus begins this letter to Luis De Sant Angel by saying how fortunate he was to find these great islands. Right away, before even describing his findings, he thanks the king and queen and begins to explain how he named the islands he discovered. Everyone knows that the king and queen gave Columbus those ships, yet he wanted to recognize them for some reason. I think that he wanted the king and queen to feel as if they themselves discovered the islands, not him. Whether it was out of fear, or out of respect, Columbus really gave them credit.
So much tribute was given that the first island they discovered, Columbus named San Salvador, commemorating the king. He seemed like he really wanted to give credit to everyone that may have had a hand in this voyage, especially the king and queen, who financially supported this expedition. Contrary to what historians believe about Columbus, he was very humble and giving in the naming of these islands. Keeping with the standard tone of the Spanish monarchial society, he named these islands for the wisdom and greatness of the monarchs.
Columbus then went on to describe the natives, whom he called “Indians”. He made it clear that there were many people, and even used the word, “innumerable” on several occasions.
One of the more disturbing lines to me was in the beginning of the letter, “I have heard from other Indians I have already taken that this land was and island” Columbus goes on to explain how he explored the island after receiving the advice from the natives. The reason I am so disturbed by this line is the fact that Columbus said, “I have already taken,” to me that was pretty barbaric. The way Columbus said those words so nonchalantly really gives me an idea of what kind of man Columbus really was and what kind of mission the Spaniards were really on. What does “I have already taken” mean? To me it means that Columbus now owns these “Indians” and their freedom was most likely taken by force. It means that he has already enslaved these people and they must have not put up much of a fight. He just kind of threw those four words into a sentence in the letter, did not mention how they have taken them or what happened, he just mentions that there are “Indians” and he is letting the monarchs back in Spain know that he has taken them.
He mentions nothing more of the people he has just conquered, but moves on to mention how he named their island Hispaniola. This was just a preview for the more barbarism to come.
When Columbus describes the environment of the land they have discovered, he gives it much praise. Columbus gives a vast description of Hispaniola, saying that the mountains and trees are beautiful, but then saying that they were as lovely as the trees in Spain. Speaking of the mountains Columbus said, “They are most beautiful, of a thousand varied forms, accessible, and full of trees of endless varieties, so high that they seem to touch the sky, and I have been told that they never lose . | <urn:uuid:edeeed17-0b89-4e87-9f4f-0338b3f12571> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://artscolumbia.org/essays/christopher-columbus-the-liar-essay-107247/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700988.64/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127143516-20200127173516-00492.warc.gz | en | 0.988438 | 821 | 3.421875 | 3 | [
-0.3775995373725891,
0.3646584749221802,
0.3768482208251953,
0.17383714020252228,
-0.14195135235786438,
-0.09018950164318085,
0.3968670964241028,
0.218744158744812,
-0.06714306771755219,
-0.05399604141712189,
0.30397164821624756,
-0.21221329271793365,
-0.4092060625553131,
0.247041076421737... | 5 | The letter Christopher Columbus wrote back to Spain to report his findings in the New World sparked intrigued me and sparked my imagination. Why I have been so absorbed in this letter I can not explain. This letter is supposed to be about describing an unknown land, a land that has not been seen by anyone besides the natives, but it seems that there is more to it than that. Columbus is known in elementary schools as the man who found the New World, and is regarded as a hero. To the contrary, historians who have done more research on Columbus say that he was driven by fame and fortune and that he was tyrannical in his ways with the indigenous peoples of the places that he came to find.Order now
I feel that the contradictory tones Columbus uses gives this letter an eerie feel, and Columbus’s eventual desire to take over the indigenous peoples brings doubt on his reliability as an accurate and fair eyewitness.
Columbus begins this letter to Luis De Sant Angel by saying how fortunate he was to find these great islands. Right away, before even describing his findings, he thanks the king and queen and begins to explain how he named the islands he discovered. Everyone knows that the king and queen gave Columbus those ships, yet he wanted to recognize them for some reason. I think that he wanted the king and queen to feel as if they themselves discovered the islands, not him. Whether it was out of fear, or out of respect, Columbus really gave them credit.
So much tribute was given that the first island they discovered, Columbus named San Salvador, commemorating the king. He seemed like he really wanted to give credit to everyone that may have had a hand in this voyage, especially the king and queen, who financially supported this expedition. Contrary to what historians believe about Columbus, he was very humble and giving in the naming of these islands. Keeping with the standard tone of the Spanish monarchial society, he named these islands for the wisdom and greatness of the monarchs.
Columbus then went on to describe the natives, whom he called “Indians”. He made it clear that there were many people, and even used the word, “innumerable” on several occasions.
One of the more disturbing lines to me was in the beginning of the letter, “I have heard from other Indians I have already taken that this land was and island” Columbus goes on to explain how he explored the island after receiving the advice from the natives. The reason I am so disturbed by this line is the fact that Columbus said, “I have already taken,” to me that was pretty barbaric. The way Columbus said those words so nonchalantly really gives me an idea of what kind of man Columbus really was and what kind of mission the Spaniards were really on. What does “I have already taken” mean? To me it means that Columbus now owns these “Indians” and their freedom was most likely taken by force. It means that he has already enslaved these people and they must have not put up much of a fight. He just kind of threw those four words into a sentence in the letter, did not mention how they have taken them or what happened, he just mentions that there are “Indians” and he is letting the monarchs back in Spain know that he has taken them.
He mentions nothing more of the people he has just conquered, but moves on to mention how he named their island Hispaniola. This was just a preview for the more barbarism to come.
When Columbus describes the environment of the land they have discovered, he gives it much praise. Columbus gives a vast description of Hispaniola, saying that the mountains and trees are beautiful, but then saying that they were as lovely as the trees in Spain. Speaking of the mountains Columbus said, “They are most beautiful, of a thousand varied forms, accessible, and full of trees of endless varieties, so high that they seem to touch the sky, and I have been told that they never lose . | 801 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Phase 3: Interpreting Information
There haven't been too many widely accepted moral developement theories, and of those that are, Kohlberg's theory is at the very top. Besides that, Jean Piaget and Carol Gilligan 's two theories are the only two theories that have been taken in by the world.
Lawrence Kohlberg: Read about his theory here
Simple Breakdown: Kohlberg's theory states that people will reason about things differently, or act differently altogether as they start to mature in terms of their morals and moral reasoning. His theory is split into 6 phases.
1) Punishment avoidence- They believe that if something is given a punishment for being done, that something is "wrong."
2) Punishment avoidence- They believe that it is a bad idea because it is given punishment, but it isn't absolutely "wrong"
3) Good motives- They believe that something is right if the intentions behind the action are good.
4) Social order- People will do things in order to benifit Society as whole, and being a good citizen. Following the law is what is "right"
5) Social Contract and Rights- People don't want to break laws, but believe that if things like life and liberty are threatened, those are more important than the laws.
6) Following morals and values- Following our own versions of "justice", and even going against the majority in order to follow our own rules. Examples include people like Martin Luther King, Hitler, Gandhi.
Jean Piaget: Read about his theory here
Simple Breakdown: His theory states that people develop awareness of the things around them at the age of 2, and continue to develope their sense of self until the age of 7. At 7, they start to develop rules and restrictions for the things they do around them, and at age 11, they are able to create hypotheses by drawing upon past experience
Carol Gilligan: Read about her theory here
Simple Breakdown: Her theory of moral development was made for women, in contrast to Kohlberg and Piaget's theories, which more mostly based on male subjects. She stated that women have stronger emotional feelings due to their dependence on their mother for later into their lives. Gilligan's theory is split into three sections. The first is switching over from selfish to responsible. The second is finding a place within a group of people (joining society), and finally, third stage is starting to understand the consequences for their own actions.
Note: Among these three, Lawrence Kohlberg's theory is the one most widely accepted.
The Railway Track Dilemma (Watch Michael Sandel's "Justice" videos for more information)
Simple dreakdown: There's a train that can't stop, and if the train keeps going, it will kill 5 workers working on the tracks. Fortunetly, there's a way to stop the train with the death of one person, but that involves you deliberatly pushing him onto the tracks. What do you do?
Robin Hood Dilemma: (Read here for more information)
Simple Breakdown: You catch a robber stealing from the bank to donate the money to an orphanage. If he doesn't get this money, the orphanage will have to close down. Do you turn the robber in, or turn a blind eye?
Simple Breakdown: You notice your friend is looking off of your paper during a test. Your friend hasn't thought of it, but if you didn't study at all, and if the two of you were to hand in papers with all the same mistakes, your teacher is bound to figure out. You can either risk secretly telling your friend to stop, and risk being caught, resulting in both of you getting zeros, or simply let your friend copy off of your paper, and when the teacher asks, act clueless and pin the blame on your friend.
The Concentration camp Dilemma:
Simple Breakdown: you're living in a concentration camp. A guard is about to hang your son (he was caught trying to run away from the camp), and tells you to be the one that pulls the chair from underneath him. if you don't pull the chair out, the guard will spare your son, but kill 10 other innocent strangers from the camp. What do you do?
For most of the people that don't have specific choices that I wish to ask about, I will ask them to answer these dilemmas and to give me their reasons for their choices. I will post the more interesting answers, and try to derive out of those answers some of the answers to my questions from phase one.
Mr. Yang (Horse Cart Driver)
Mr. Yang is a very interesting man. I first met him when he was passing by, and thought that we were a bit far from where we were heading, and decided to give us a ride. We'd tried to pay him when we shook his head "no" to the money. I asked him why, and he said "I didn't give you a ride for the money." We hung out with him for a while to sort of talk, and hand-feed his horse some apples. He told us very interesting stories about some of his old horses. He'd become a horse cart driver because of the people he'd meet, and the love of horses that his father had passed from him. He stated that when he was younger, he'd wanted to have the same job in Dali Old Town, but he couldn't let go of the connection to home, and didn't really like noise and business of a bigger town. "I love the quiet of Xizhou... It shows that part of the older world can still be preserved in this new world we live in."
Mr. Yang (Linden Centre Greeter)
Mr. Yang grew up in Xizhou, and started work at 16 to help with the work around the farm. He's lived in the same home for 61 years, and has hardly left the confines of the village. He mentioned that even after various chances of leaving and living in Dali, he's always turned down the chances in order to stay in his "home." He says that the reasons that he'd never left was because he'd valued history, and instead of continuing to move from place to place in search of better luck, he's always stayed in the same place, valuing the home that was passed down to him.
Upon trying to answer how the locals here reason, I came blank. I think the happiness of being where you were born, and the joy of doing what you love is what's so special here. My view is that they value the concept of home, and being where you can truly live your life in pursuit of happiness, not money. That is the part of Xizhou that impresses me so much. In many other cultures, children grow up valuing emotions, and reach adulthood valuing shallow things like money. Not here. Here, the bond between people and the concept of "home" is stronger than anywhere I've ever seen, and people live their lives with no want for accumulation of money, just the need for it to buy food and clothes. Following their own rules, living in the home that they believe is the life for them, is the culture so well preserved here, and is the culture that inspired Mr. Linden to build his center here.
The Linden Center
Train track Dilemma: Shane stated that he'd push the person in front of the train track, even if it was a friend.
Reasons: 5 strangers' lives are obviously more important than one person's life, no matter who or what that person may be. "All life is equal. Even though the person I have to push in front of the train may be my friend, the five workers working with the track are all the same level of friend to someone else.
Concentration Camp Dilemma: Shane said that he'd pull the chair from underneath the Son.
Reasons: "The ten people from the concentration camp that the guard would kill wouldn't have been killed if it weren't for me not pulling out the chair. So in this case, it's like killing 10 innocent strangers versus killing one son."
When asked what he liked about living in the Linden Center, Shane answered that he liked how everything was so slow. No deadlines, no countdowns, no busy atmosphere of the city. It got a bit slow going once in a while, and America is always a treat to Shane, but he also mentioned that if he were to live in America 9 months a year, and spent the summer in Xizhou, it’d be the same situation.
Result: Through these two answers, one can tell that Shane's values weigh into human life more than the emotional connections. Justice is an obvious value, and so is equality. Even though it'd be justified for one person to die in exchange for two to live, most people can't make the decision of saving 10 in exchange for the death of their friend. It isn't heartless or cruel, it's saving as many people as possible. Again, "all life is equal."
Brian and Jeanee decided to create the Linden Centre because they believed that they could create a lifestyle that would be able to combine the Western and Eastern cultures, and share the love of Chinese culture and history, giving guests an oppurtunity to experience the joys of the world slowly going by.
Frank is very strange in many aspects. His hometown is less than a 4-hour drive from here, and in no way is the culture foreign to him. He’d set off working abroad, going from place to place as assistant CEO of a massive company, but always wanted to find a place closer to home, where he could feel at peace. Going from the Philippines to Hong Kong, he was content for a while. However, the hustle and bustle of Hong Kong was so unlike the slow, easy-going town he grew up that he started to get discontent with the world of Hong Kong little by little. Eventually, he came across the Linden Center through CCTV (Central Chinese Television) and the Discovery Channel, and was glued to his TV for the next hour, taking in as much of the world he was dreaming of simply be described to him. He spent more time afterwards researching the Center on the internet, trying to learn as much as possible. At last, he set off for the Center in hopes of checking it out. However, listening to Brian and Jeanee explain their vision of the Center, Frank was so sure that this was what he wanted that he immediately went and quit his job and signed on to the Linden Center. As a result, he is now the member of the staff that’s worked for the longest at the Linden Center, and considers the Center his "family."
Results: Some of the main points that many of the Linden Center staff share are those of loving peace. Shane likes America, but mentioned that he preferred how much slower everything went here, and how much everything that came with America was so much more focused on money. Frank also said that he'd been working at a massive company, but hated the feeling. He hated the way everything was so strict, and there were no times where, like back at home (Near Xizhou, similar village), he could simply take a break and watch the world go by. The Linden Center is the symbol of that calamity that the people working at the Linden Center value, a place where all that peace of rural China clashes with western culture, taking upon a world that makes it so special.
Train Track Dilemma: Derek would push the stranger onto the train tracks, but wouldn’t for the friend.
Reasons: “To me, one strangers life is worth less than five stranger’s lives, but if a friend is worth more.”
Robin Hood Dilemma: I would stop the robber, but wouldn’t turn him in.
Reasons: Derek said that it was justified (in a way) because the robber was stealing for the sake of an orphanage, but the money from the bank may be someone’s life’s savings. Creating happiness for the orphanage by ruining another’s life isn’t worth it, and if it’s the only way, allowing it to happen will be the same as he himself robbing the bank.
Cheating Dilemma: Derek would risk it and tell the friend he had no idea what the answers were.
Reasons: He said that he didn’t know the answers, and that if the friend didn’t know either, they were both sunk for the test. The guilt on conscience of being the one that somehow got his friend caught cheating on the test is bad enough that risking getting caught to tell him that he was clueless as well is worth it. Quoting Derek, “I got his back.”
Concentration Camp: Derek said that he’d pull the chair.
Reasons: Different circumstances, different decisions he said. Even though he’d answered that he’d let the friend live in the train track dilemma at the cost of 5 strangers, in this case, his son is in a position where he has to die in order for the 10 others to live. In the train track dilemma, it was different because you’d be killing one person to save five but in the concentration camp situation, if you don’t kill your son, you’re technically killing ten people to save one.
Train Track Dilemma: Jeremiah would push the stranger, and wouldn’t push the friend.
Reasons: Jeremiah gave the same reply as Derek, almost word for word. “You save five lives by killing one life in the case of pushing stranger, but when you push the friend, it’s like pushing ten people to save five lives.”
Robin Hood Dilemma: Jeremiah would turn a blind eye.
Reasons: Jeremiah’s most noticeable quote was “Steal from the rich, steal from the poor” ©. When I asked him to explain, he said that even though people with life’s savings may have their money in the bank, the fact that it’s in a bank means that they’re 1) not using it right now, 2) saving it for later, or 3) have so much that they just keep it in a bank to be safe. The orphanage is at a stage where if they don’t get this money, it will have to close down. No matter how badly off the people being stolen from may be, the orphanage needs money more.
Cheating Dilemma: Jeremiah said he would risk both people getting zeros by telling his friend.
Reasons: Your friend will get a zero if you don’t do anything, and will get a zero if you both get caught.
Concentration Camp: Jeremiah would pull the chair.
Reasons: Jeremiah said the son tried to escape, and the hanging is a punishment. Whereas he doesn’t exactly like the idea of killing anyone at all, in the case of the train track dilemma, the friend was innocent, and had no reason to be killed except for to stop the train. It’s all a philosophical idea, with what line you’ll draw on killing less for the sake of saving more.
Train Track Dilemma: Ryan wouldn't push the stranger OR the friend in.
Reasons: Interfering with the course or something like that by killing someone else in the four peoples place would be killing somebody that shouldn't have been killed, like changing the course of "fate." The guilt
Robin Hood Dilemma: Ryan would turn a blind eye towards the robber.
Reasons: At first, Ryan said that he'd stop the robber, but not turn him in, as stealing was absolutely wrong, but then changed his answer because he believed that things like stealing are justified if they're done for the right causes.
Cheating Dilemma: Ryan said that he'd definetly risk getting caught while trying to tell his friend that he had no idea what the answers were.
Reasons: It was "my fault I got a failed grade because I didn't study. However, making it my fault that my friend got a failed grade just makes me guilty. Besides, pinning the blame AFTER the test was over would just be mean."
Concentration Camp Dilemma: Ryan wouldn't pull the chair from underneath the son.
Reasons: Because "no matter what the circumstances are, killing somebody is always wrong. Even if I knew I needed to kill the son, I never would have had the nerve to do it."
Results: Most of my friends have different extents of how far they'd go to help another, but in terms of the cheating dilemma, they all said they'd risk telling the other person. I think this goes very far in showing that friends will always be there for each other. All of them stated that they'd never push a friend in front of a track, and it's interesting to see how all of them are so against killing people at all, even if they know in their minds that they need to.
What do my friends believe is morally just?
I think that the one part of "moral justice" that's so well shown in these interviews is the concept of friends never stabbing each other in the back, and never hurting them for the sake of strangers. At our age, unlike what Kohlberg believes, our emotional bonts are stronger than are moral obligations, and if we were to have to choose between what's right and what's good for our friends, we'd do what's good for our friends. At our age, I guess that's the most important part.
Where do some of their morals and values come from?
Like it was written in Johnathan Haidt's paper, people cannot entirely be held responsible for their actions when facing morality. In some cases, things like religion or parents push them to make actions that they have no say in. I think that some of the morals that my friends have come from religion, especially the strict, no killing policy that seems to occur between many of them.
If I were to compare myself to the Lindens, or the locals, or even my friends, I seem to be very different. My values of what kind of life is the best fit for me go along the lines of the life I was living in Shanghai. I’m not a very independent person, and I value change and movement. The calamity of the Linden Center taught me a lot about slowing down and thinking about things, but I’ve lived my entire life speeding up and hurrying. My life is intertwined with the city, and that’s where my bubble of comfort lies. Like the story of the City Mouse and the Country Mouse, my life goes on a lot faster, and I’m not to good with the slow atmosphere of Xizhou.
I think the level of Moral reasoning I operate on most often is usually on levels one and two. I know that that those are the beginning levels, but the instinctual “do it when you need to, and don’t if you don’t need to” knee-jerk reflex after living in Shanghai for so long is irresistible.
I think I can become a lot more mature in making my own choices by simply being self-conscientious of my actions. Whenever I have to make a choice, I take the decision apart and look at the reasons I might choose something on either side. Right now, my choices are made by instinct. When faced with a choice, I simply narrow the decision to two sides, and decide which one sounds better. Because I never really weigh in the consequences that arise, my actions usually cause me to regret, and if I’m inclined to thinking of my actions every time, I’ll eventually get to a phase where that’s what I do instinctively.
Like I mentioned before, my values are a lot more focused on the fast-paced life and routine of Shanghai, where my life feels a lot more comfortable. The independency of making my choices here is probably the one thing that isn’t for me, as, like I mentioned before, my choices are probably the things I regret after I make them, because I hardly think of the consequences. | <urn:uuid:3fe5b344-e530-4970-a720-57d90cf68508> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.sasmicrocampus.org/node/2539 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250598726.39/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120110422-20200120134422-00195.warc.gz | en | 0.980021 | 4,272 | 3.5 | 4 | [
-0.2682448923587799,
0.24501195549964905,
-0.31832873821258545,
-0.19589078426361084,
-0.032319389283657074,
0.2798103094100952,
0.15962812304496765,
0.15672963857650757,
0.4381818175315857,
0.07716278731822968,
0.4897606670856476,
-0.10093824565410614,
-0.1132291853427887,
0.0736029148101... | 2 | Phase 3: Interpreting Information
There haven't been too many widely accepted moral developement theories, and of those that are, Kohlberg's theory is at the very top. Besides that, Jean Piaget and Carol Gilligan 's two theories are the only two theories that have been taken in by the world.
Lawrence Kohlberg: Read about his theory here
Simple Breakdown: Kohlberg's theory states that people will reason about things differently, or act differently altogether as they start to mature in terms of their morals and moral reasoning. His theory is split into 6 phases.
1) Punishment avoidence- They believe that if something is given a punishment for being done, that something is "wrong."
2) Punishment avoidence- They believe that it is a bad idea because it is given punishment, but it isn't absolutely "wrong"
3) Good motives- They believe that something is right if the intentions behind the action are good.
4) Social order- People will do things in order to benifit Society as whole, and being a good citizen. Following the law is what is "right"
5) Social Contract and Rights- People don't want to break laws, but believe that if things like life and liberty are threatened, those are more important than the laws.
6) Following morals and values- Following our own versions of "justice", and even going against the majority in order to follow our own rules. Examples include people like Martin Luther King, Hitler, Gandhi.
Jean Piaget: Read about his theory here
Simple Breakdown: His theory states that people develop awareness of the things around them at the age of 2, and continue to develope their sense of self until the age of 7. At 7, they start to develop rules and restrictions for the things they do around them, and at age 11, they are able to create hypotheses by drawing upon past experience
Carol Gilligan: Read about her theory here
Simple Breakdown: Her theory of moral development was made for women, in contrast to Kohlberg and Piaget's theories, which more mostly based on male subjects. She stated that women have stronger emotional feelings due to their dependence on their mother for later into their lives. Gilligan's theory is split into three sections. The first is switching over from selfish to responsible. The second is finding a place within a group of people (joining society), and finally, third stage is starting to understand the consequences for their own actions.
Note: Among these three, Lawrence Kohlberg's theory is the one most widely accepted.
The Railway Track Dilemma (Watch Michael Sandel's "Justice" videos for more information)
Simple dreakdown: There's a train that can't stop, and if the train keeps going, it will kill 5 workers working on the tracks. Fortunetly, there's a way to stop the train with the death of one person, but that involves you deliberatly pushing him onto the tracks. What do you do?
Robin Hood Dilemma: (Read here for more information)
Simple Breakdown: You catch a robber stealing from the bank to donate the money to an orphanage. If he doesn't get this money, the orphanage will have to close down. Do you turn the robber in, or turn a blind eye?
Simple Breakdown: You notice your friend is looking off of your paper during a test. Your friend hasn't thought of it, but if you didn't study at all, and if the two of you were to hand in papers with all the same mistakes, your teacher is bound to figure out. You can either risk secretly telling your friend to stop, and risk being caught, resulting in both of you getting zeros, or simply let your friend copy off of your paper, and when the teacher asks, act clueless and pin the blame on your friend.
The Concentration camp Dilemma:
Simple Breakdown: you're living in a concentration camp. A guard is about to hang your son (he was caught trying to run away from the camp), and tells you to be the one that pulls the chair from underneath him. if you don't pull the chair out, the guard will spare your son, but kill 10 other innocent strangers from the camp. What do you do?
For most of the people that don't have specific choices that I wish to ask about, I will ask them to answer these dilemmas and to give me their reasons for their choices. I will post the more interesting answers, and try to derive out of those answers some of the answers to my questions from phase one.
Mr. Yang (Horse Cart Driver)
Mr. Yang is a very interesting man. I first met him when he was passing by, and thought that we were a bit far from where we were heading, and decided to give us a ride. We'd tried to pay him when we shook his head "no" to the money. I asked him why, and he said "I didn't give you a ride for the money." We hung out with him for a while to sort of talk, and hand-feed his horse some apples. He told us very interesting stories about some of his old horses. He'd become a horse cart driver because of the people he'd meet, and the love of horses that his father had passed from him. He stated that when he was younger, he'd wanted to have the same job in Dali Old Town, but he couldn't let go of the connection to home, and didn't really like noise and business of a bigger town. "I love the quiet of Xizhou... It shows that part of the older world can still be preserved in this new world we live in."
Mr. Yang (Linden Centre Greeter)
Mr. Yang grew up in Xizhou, and started work at 16 to help with the work around the farm. He's lived in the same home for 61 years, and has hardly left the confines of the village. He mentioned that even after various chances of leaving and living in Dali, he's always turned down the chances in order to stay in his "home." He says that the reasons that he'd never left was because he'd valued history, and instead of continuing to move from place to place in search of better luck, he's always stayed in the same place, valuing the home that was passed down to him.
Upon trying to answer how the locals here reason, I came blank. I think the happiness of being where you were born, and the joy of doing what you love is what's so special here. My view is that they value the concept of home, and being where you can truly live your life in pursuit of happiness, not money. That is the part of Xizhou that impresses me so much. In many other cultures, children grow up valuing emotions, and reach adulthood valuing shallow things like money. Not here. Here, the bond between people and the concept of "home" is stronger than anywhere I've ever seen, and people live their lives with no want for accumulation of money, just the need for it to buy food and clothes. Following their own rules, living in the home that they believe is the life for them, is the culture so well preserved here, and is the culture that inspired Mr. Linden to build his center here.
The Linden Center
Train track Dilemma: Shane stated that he'd push the person in front of the train track, even if it was a friend.
Reasons: 5 strangers' lives are obviously more important than one person's life, no matter who or what that person may be. "All life is equal. Even though the person I have to push in front of the train may be my friend, the five workers working with the track are all the same level of friend to someone else.
Concentration Camp Dilemma: Shane said that he'd pull the chair from underneath the Son.
Reasons: "The ten people from the concentration camp that the guard would kill wouldn't have been killed if it weren't for me not pulling out the chair. So in this case, it's like killing 10 innocent strangers versus killing one son."
When asked what he liked about living in the Linden Center, Shane answered that he liked how everything was so slow. No deadlines, no countdowns, no busy atmosphere of the city. It got a bit slow going once in a while, and America is always a treat to Shane, but he also mentioned that if he were to live in America 9 months a year, and spent the summer in Xizhou, it’d be the same situation.
Result: Through these two answers, one can tell that Shane's values weigh into human life more than the emotional connections. Justice is an obvious value, and so is equality. Even though it'd be justified for one person to die in exchange for two to live, most people can't make the decision of saving 10 in exchange for the death of their friend. It isn't heartless or cruel, it's saving as many people as possible. Again, "all life is equal."
Brian and Jeanee decided to create the Linden Centre because they believed that they could create a lifestyle that would be able to combine the Western and Eastern cultures, and share the love of Chinese culture and history, giving guests an oppurtunity to experience the joys of the world slowly going by.
Frank is very strange in many aspects. His hometown is less than a 4-hour drive from here, and in no way is the culture foreign to him. He’d set off working abroad, going from place to place as assistant CEO of a massive company, but always wanted to find a place closer to home, where he could feel at peace. Going from the Philippines to Hong Kong, he was content for a while. However, the hustle and bustle of Hong Kong was so unlike the slow, easy-going town he grew up that he started to get discontent with the world of Hong Kong little by little. Eventually, he came across the Linden Center through CCTV (Central Chinese Television) and the Discovery Channel, and was glued to his TV for the next hour, taking in as much of the world he was dreaming of simply be described to him. He spent more time afterwards researching the Center on the internet, trying to learn as much as possible. At last, he set off for the Center in hopes of checking it out. However, listening to Brian and Jeanee explain their vision of the Center, Frank was so sure that this was what he wanted that he immediately went and quit his job and signed on to the Linden Center. As a result, he is now the member of the staff that’s worked for the longest at the Linden Center, and considers the Center his "family."
Results: Some of the main points that many of the Linden Center staff share are those of loving peace. Shane likes America, but mentioned that he preferred how much slower everything went here, and how much everything that came with America was so much more focused on money. Frank also said that he'd been working at a massive company, but hated the feeling. He hated the way everything was so strict, and there were no times where, like back at home (Near Xizhou, similar village), he could simply take a break and watch the world go by. The Linden Center is the symbol of that calamity that the people working at the Linden Center value, a place where all that peace of rural China clashes with western culture, taking upon a world that makes it so special.
Train Track Dilemma: Derek would push the stranger onto the train tracks, but wouldn’t for the friend.
Reasons: “To me, one strangers life is worth less than five stranger’s lives, but if a friend is worth more.”
Robin Hood Dilemma: I would stop the robber, but wouldn’t turn him in.
Reasons: Derek said that it was justified (in a way) because the robber was stealing for the sake of an orphanage, but the money from the bank may be someone’s life’s savings. Creating happiness for the orphanage by ruining another’s life isn’t worth it, and if it’s the only way, allowing it to happen will be the same as he himself robbing the bank.
Cheating Dilemma: Derek would risk it and tell the friend he had no idea what the answers were.
Reasons: He said that he didn’t know the answers, and that if the friend didn’t know either, they were both sunk for the test. The guilt on conscience of being the one that somehow got his friend caught cheating on the test is bad enough that risking getting caught to tell him that he was clueless as well is worth it. Quoting Derek, “I got his back.”
Concentration Camp: Derek said that he’d pull the chair.
Reasons: Different circumstances, different decisions he said. Even though he’d answered that he’d let the friend live in the train track dilemma at the cost of 5 strangers, in this case, his son is in a position where he has to die in order for the 10 others to live. In the train track dilemma, it was different because you’d be killing one person to save five but in the concentration camp situation, if you don’t kill your son, you’re technically killing ten people to save one.
Train Track Dilemma: Jeremiah would push the stranger, and wouldn’t push the friend.
Reasons: Jeremiah gave the same reply as Derek, almost word for word. “You save five lives by killing one life in the case of pushing stranger, but when you push the friend, it’s like pushing ten people to save five lives.”
Robin Hood Dilemma: Jeremiah would turn a blind eye.
Reasons: Jeremiah’s most noticeable quote was “Steal from the rich, steal from the poor” ©. When I asked him to explain, he said that even though people with life’s savings may have their money in the bank, the fact that it’s in a bank means that they’re 1) not using it right now, 2) saving it for later, or 3) have so much that they just keep it in a bank to be safe. The orphanage is at a stage where if they don’t get this money, it will have to close down. No matter how badly off the people being stolen from may be, the orphanage needs money more.
Cheating Dilemma: Jeremiah said he would risk both people getting zeros by telling his friend.
Reasons: Your friend will get a zero if you don’t do anything, and will get a zero if you both get caught.
Concentration Camp: Jeremiah would pull the chair.
Reasons: Jeremiah said the son tried to escape, and the hanging is a punishment. Whereas he doesn’t exactly like the idea of killing anyone at all, in the case of the train track dilemma, the friend was innocent, and had no reason to be killed except for to stop the train. It’s all a philosophical idea, with what line you’ll draw on killing less for the sake of saving more.
Train Track Dilemma: Ryan wouldn't push the stranger OR the friend in.
Reasons: Interfering with the course or something like that by killing someone else in the four peoples place would be killing somebody that shouldn't have been killed, like changing the course of "fate." The guilt
Robin Hood Dilemma: Ryan would turn a blind eye towards the robber.
Reasons: At first, Ryan said that he'd stop the robber, but not turn him in, as stealing was absolutely wrong, but then changed his answer because he believed that things like stealing are justified if they're done for the right causes.
Cheating Dilemma: Ryan said that he'd definetly risk getting caught while trying to tell his friend that he had no idea what the answers were.
Reasons: It was "my fault I got a failed grade because I didn't study. However, making it my fault that my friend got a failed grade just makes me guilty. Besides, pinning the blame AFTER the test was over would just be mean."
Concentration Camp Dilemma: Ryan wouldn't pull the chair from underneath the son.
Reasons: Because "no matter what the circumstances are, killing somebody is always wrong. Even if I knew I needed to kill the son, I never would have had the nerve to do it."
Results: Most of my friends have different extents of how far they'd go to help another, but in terms of the cheating dilemma, they all said they'd risk telling the other person. I think this goes very far in showing that friends will always be there for each other. All of them stated that they'd never push a friend in front of a track, and it's interesting to see how all of them are so against killing people at all, even if they know in their minds that they need to.
What do my friends believe is morally just?
I think that the one part of "moral justice" that's so well shown in these interviews is the concept of friends never stabbing each other in the back, and never hurting them for the sake of strangers. At our age, unlike what Kohlberg believes, our emotional bonts are stronger than are moral obligations, and if we were to have to choose between what's right and what's good for our friends, we'd do what's good for our friends. At our age, I guess that's the most important part.
Where do some of their morals and values come from?
Like it was written in Johnathan Haidt's paper, people cannot entirely be held responsible for their actions when facing morality. In some cases, things like religion or parents push them to make actions that they have no say in. I think that some of the morals that my friends have come from religion, especially the strict, no killing policy that seems to occur between many of them.
If I were to compare myself to the Lindens, or the locals, or even my friends, I seem to be very different. My values of what kind of life is the best fit for me go along the lines of the life I was living in Shanghai. I’m not a very independent person, and I value change and movement. The calamity of the Linden Center taught me a lot about slowing down and thinking about things, but I’ve lived my entire life speeding up and hurrying. My life is intertwined with the city, and that’s where my bubble of comfort lies. Like the story of the City Mouse and the Country Mouse, my life goes on a lot faster, and I’m not to good with the slow atmosphere of Xizhou.
I think the level of Moral reasoning I operate on most often is usually on levels one and two. I know that that those are the beginning levels, but the instinctual “do it when you need to, and don’t if you don’t need to” knee-jerk reflex after living in Shanghai for so long is irresistible.
I think I can become a lot more mature in making my own choices by simply being self-conscientious of my actions. Whenever I have to make a choice, I take the decision apart and look at the reasons I might choose something on either side. Right now, my choices are made by instinct. When faced with a choice, I simply narrow the decision to two sides, and decide which one sounds better. Because I never really weigh in the consequences that arise, my actions usually cause me to regret, and if I’m inclined to thinking of my actions every time, I’ll eventually get to a phase where that’s what I do instinctively.
Like I mentioned before, my values are a lot more focused on the fast-paced life and routine of Shanghai, where my life feels a lot more comfortable. The independency of making my choices here is probably the one thing that isn’t for me, as, like I mentioned before, my choices are probably the things I regret after I make them, because I hardly think of the consequences. | 4,115 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Page "Dutch Republic" Paragraph 23
In the Union of Utrecht of 20 January 1579, Holland and Zeeland were granted the right to accept only one religion ( in practice Calvinism ).
Every other province had the freedom to regulate the religious question as it wished, although the Union stated every person should be free in the choice of his personal religion and no person should be prosecuted based on his or her religious choice.
William of Orange had been a strong supporter of public as well as personal freedom of religion and hoped to unite Protestants and Catholics in the new union, and for him the Union was a defeat.
In practice, Catholic services in all provinces were quickly forbidden and the Reformed Church became the " public " or " privileged " church in the Republic. | <urn:uuid:bf350eb7-7108-4e2f-8f61-35ff993d772f> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.altsci.com/3/p/Dutch%20Republic/23 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00457.warc.gz | en | 0.987283 | 157 | 3.8125 | 4 | [
-0.259954035282135,
0.26249322295188904,
-0.05291655287146568,
-0.3488368093967438,
0.06651311367750168,
-0.09226582199335098,
0.1177975982427597,
0.2862546741962433,
0.021114135161042213,
0.21612365543842316,
-0.36736923456192017,
-0.22914113104343414,
-0.26279500126838684,
0.400632262229... | 2 | Page "Dutch Republic" Paragraph 23
In the Union of Utrecht of 20 January 1579, Holland and Zeeland were granted the right to accept only one religion ( in practice Calvinism ).
Every other province had the freedom to regulate the religious question as it wished, although the Union stated every person should be free in the choice of his personal religion and no person should be prosecuted based on his or her religious choice.
William of Orange had been a strong supporter of public as well as personal freedom of religion and hoped to unite Protestants and Catholics in the new union, and for him the Union was a defeat.
In practice, Catholic services in all provinces were quickly forbidden and the Reformed Church became the " public " or " privileged " church in the Republic. | 161 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Essay on The Four Functions Of Management
Managers perform certain activities, tasks and function as they direct and oversee other’s work. According to Henry Fayol, managers engage in 5 management activities such as planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating and controlling. His choices were based on his own observations and experiences. Today, based on scientific analysis of his work and on the basis of various surveys his management functions were condensed to four attributes such as planning, organizing, leading and controlling.
The management functions of planning, organizing, leading and controlling could be defined as:-
Planning - The act of defining goals, establishing strategy and developing plans to coordinate activities could be referred as planning. It entails the setting of goal and includes the creation of a blueprint to achieve them. It is essential that managers create objectives, which serve to focus the efforts of employees, motivate them and provide a standard against which performance can be measured. Plans also serve as a guide to action and assist managers in resource allocation. For example, if growth is an objective, a budget may include funds for expansion of facilities.
Organizing- The act of determining what tasks are to be done, who is to do them, how the tasks are to be grouped, who reports to whom, and who will make decisions could be referred as organizing. It could also be defined as the allocation of resources to achieve goals. It is clear that… | <urn:uuid:43439d76-0adf-4a09-8f78-64af2cc9694a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.cram.com/essay/The-Four-Functions-Of-Management/PK3HQ7AZ7MQW | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250610919.33/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123131001-20200123160001-00370.warc.gz | en | 0.980995 | 284 | 3.296875 | 3 | [
-0.12873157858848572,
-0.1140262633562088,
0.5017306208610535,
-0.4278900921344757,
-0.13483348488807678,
-0.04849179834127426,
0.7336448431015015,
0.1441975086927414,
0.1530696451663971,
-0.1293490082025528,
-0.018396621569991112,
0.12194322049617767,
0.2973766326904297,
0.093474082648754... | 1 | Essay on The Four Functions Of Management
Managers perform certain activities, tasks and function as they direct and oversee other’s work. According to Henry Fayol, managers engage in 5 management activities such as planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating and controlling. His choices were based on his own observations and experiences. Today, based on scientific analysis of his work and on the basis of various surveys his management functions were condensed to four attributes such as planning, organizing, leading and controlling.
The management functions of planning, organizing, leading and controlling could be defined as:-
Planning - The act of defining goals, establishing strategy and developing plans to coordinate activities could be referred as planning. It entails the setting of goal and includes the creation of a blueprint to achieve them. It is essential that managers create objectives, which serve to focus the efforts of employees, motivate them and provide a standard against which performance can be measured. Plans also serve as a guide to action and assist managers in resource allocation. For example, if growth is an objective, a budget may include funds for expansion of facilities.
Organizing- The act of determining what tasks are to be done, who is to do them, how the tasks are to be grouped, who reports to whom, and who will make decisions could be referred as organizing. It could also be defined as the allocation of resources to achieve goals. It is clear that… | 279 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Naturalist and Conservationist who explored Yosemite and is known as the "Father of the National Park." He was an advocate for Western forests and he was a strong proponent of the National park bill, which was passed by congress in 1890 and established Yosemite and Sequoia National Parks.
He emigrated to the US because his father thought the Church of Scotland was not strict enough in its faith and practice.
His letters, essays, and books telling of his adventures in nature, especially in the Sierra Nevada mountains of California, have been read by millions and greatly inspired President Roosevelt, who in turn became one of the first Presidents to make conservation a national issue.
He married Louisa Wanda Strentzel in 1880, and together they had two daughters.
He went to Yosemite with President Theodore Roosevelt. | <urn:uuid:a7b233ac-bde1-4e99-9f21-ec50dd5ae302> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.idolnetworth.com/john-muir-net-worth-156944 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250594333.5/warc/CC-MAIN-20200119064802-20200119092802-00364.warc.gz | en | 0.986168 | 162 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
-0.18195302784442902,
0.41245490312576294,
0.3329310417175293,
-0.27966439723968506,
0.09937772154808044,
0.24307221174240112,
0.32183343172073364,
-0.13007625937461853,
-0.22031299769878387,
-0.13392125070095062,
-0.17038941383361816,
-0.22048839926719666,
0.46468880772590637,
0.350215226... | 1 | Naturalist and Conservationist who explored Yosemite and is known as the "Father of the National Park." He was an advocate for Western forests and he was a strong proponent of the National park bill, which was passed by congress in 1890 and established Yosemite and Sequoia National Parks.
He emigrated to the US because his father thought the Church of Scotland was not strict enough in its faith and practice.
His letters, essays, and books telling of his adventures in nature, especially in the Sierra Nevada mountains of California, have been read by millions and greatly inspired President Roosevelt, who in turn became one of the first Presidents to make conservation a national issue.
He married Louisa Wanda Strentzel in 1880, and together they had two daughters.
He went to Yosemite with President Theodore Roosevelt. | 167 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Massordination, and the presence in Ireland of Catholic Bishops were all banned, although some did carry on secretly. The beliefs that underlie the sort of strong anti-Catholicism once seen in the United Kingdom were summarized by William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England : As to papistswhat has been said of the Protestant dissenters would hold equally strong for a general toleration of them; provided their separation was founded only upon difference of opinion in religion, and their principles did not also extend to a subversion of the civil government.
The section as to taking and prosecuting priests were repealed, as also the penalty of perpetual imprisonment for keeping a school.
The Act of Supremacy which asserted England's independence from papal authority was repealed in by Henry's devoutly Catholic daughter Queen Mary I when she reinstituted Catholicism as England's state religion.
Hundreds of Catholic homes and at least one Church were burnt out in the aftermath of the skirmish. InPope Pius V sought to depose Elizabeth with the papal bull Regnans in Excelsiswhich declared her a heretic and purported to dissolve the duty of all Elizabeth's subjects of their allegiance to her.
Violent persecution also resulted, leading to the torture and execution of many Catholics, both clergy and laity. Catholics were also enabled to inherit and purchase land, nor was a Protestant heir any longer empowered to enter and enjoy the estate of his Catholic kinsman.
The Great Fire of London in was blamed on the Catholics and an inscription ascribing it to 'Popish frenzy' was engraved on the Monument to the Great Fire of Londonwhich marked the location where the fire started this inscription was only removed in The Bull released Catholics from any loyalty to Elizabeth and called upon them to remove her from the throne.
Despite this, Parliament took no chances and in passed a series of Acts designed to protect Elizabeth from any consequences of the Papal Bull.
However, the Pope had miscalculated.
English and Welsh Catholics preferred to keep quiet about their religious beliefs and remained loyal to Elizabeth.
In addition, Catholics began to enter the linen weaving trade, thus depressing Protestant wage rates. | <urn:uuid:8525f412-859d-43e1-a9d7-2a805cce9429> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://fomalogaxapoxizot.whatshanesaid.com/a-study-of-the-catholic-threats-to-elizabeths-rule-in-england46003656da.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251802249.87/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129194333-20200129223333-00232.warc.gz | en | 0.98172 | 443 | 3.421875 | 3 | [
0.16947312653064728,
0.006039581727236509,
0.14501546323299408,
-0.0798538476228714,
0.010517500340938568,
-0.10743231326341629,
0.13866248726844788,
-0.16661350429058075,
0.2923347055912018,
-0.24178390204906464,
-0.6803348660469055,
-0.23780137300491333,
0.12231049686670303,
0.1040096953... | 1 | The Massordination, and the presence in Ireland of Catholic Bishops were all banned, although some did carry on secretly. The beliefs that underlie the sort of strong anti-Catholicism once seen in the United Kingdom were summarized by William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England : As to papistswhat has been said of the Protestant dissenters would hold equally strong for a general toleration of them; provided their separation was founded only upon difference of opinion in religion, and their principles did not also extend to a subversion of the civil government.
The section as to taking and prosecuting priests were repealed, as also the penalty of perpetual imprisonment for keeping a school.
The Act of Supremacy which asserted England's independence from papal authority was repealed in by Henry's devoutly Catholic daughter Queen Mary I when she reinstituted Catholicism as England's state religion.
Hundreds of Catholic homes and at least one Church were burnt out in the aftermath of the skirmish. InPope Pius V sought to depose Elizabeth with the papal bull Regnans in Excelsiswhich declared her a heretic and purported to dissolve the duty of all Elizabeth's subjects of their allegiance to her.
Violent persecution also resulted, leading to the torture and execution of many Catholics, both clergy and laity. Catholics were also enabled to inherit and purchase land, nor was a Protestant heir any longer empowered to enter and enjoy the estate of his Catholic kinsman.
The Great Fire of London in was blamed on the Catholics and an inscription ascribing it to 'Popish frenzy' was engraved on the Monument to the Great Fire of Londonwhich marked the location where the fire started this inscription was only removed in The Bull released Catholics from any loyalty to Elizabeth and called upon them to remove her from the throne.
Despite this, Parliament took no chances and in passed a series of Acts designed to protect Elizabeth from any consequences of the Papal Bull.
However, the Pope had miscalculated.
English and Welsh Catholics preferred to keep quiet about their religious beliefs and remained loyal to Elizabeth.
In addition, Catholics began to enter the linen weaving trade, thus depressing Protestant wage rates. | 436 | ENGLISH | 1 |
History of the U.S. Navy
What is the Unites States Navy?The United States Navy is America’s primary naval force. The Navy is responsible for many things other than protecting and attacking at sea. They also have a very interesting history, which is divided into two time periods, the Old Navy, a small but fierce fleet that was recognized for their resourcefulness in using ironclads during the American Civil War and the New Navy, which is the result of an extensive modernization in the 1880's that helped the US Navy to be the largest in the world by the 1920's.
The Revolutionary WarThe Navy was officially created during the Revolutionary war. They were fairly well used during the war, but afterwards, their primary focus was fighting off pirates and other small combat, but they were not used for much official military combat. More
The New NavyWhen it was realized that the American Navy was lacking in size, quality, and number of ships, they hurried to catch up with the rest of the world and modernize. They converted from sail boats of wood to steam ships of iron and steel, cannons to loaded guns, and they streamlined the organization of the ranks. More
World War OneThe entire world became involved in the First World War, and as much as the United States tried to remain neutral, the Navy was attacked unprovoked, and so they joined the war on the side of the Allied forces. The American Navy was a very important Allied force throughout the war, and as such, the Navy developed in many ways during the war, such as in their organization, technique, and technology. More
World War TwoWhen the world was once again thrown into war, the United States again participated immensely on the side of the Allied forces. The Navy was a large part of the contribution that America committed to the Allied forces. They were especially noted for the great help to the war effort with their Island Hopping Campaign in Japan. More
The Cold WarIn the Cold War, the Navy again played a very vital part in protecting and attacking strategically. The world started having larger scale naval battles more commonly, and so the United States Navy needed to develop quickly while still campaigning in the war. More
Modern DayToday, the development of the United States Navy continues at a steady pace, and it is still a very great asset to the United States. The size, weapons, technology and renown of the Navy are as large as ever while it continues to participate in military affairs around the world. More
Article Citation (MLA format):
"History of the U.S. Navy." Military Ranks Online. 04 Feb 2012.
Military-Ranks.org. 29 Jan 2020. <https://www.military-ranks.org/info/navy-history> | <urn:uuid:e3af57fa-35b0-406d-a03f-695834d6f18a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.military-ranks.org/info/navy-history | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251796127.92/warc/CC-MAIN-20200129102701-20200129132701-00531.warc.gz | en | 0.981255 | 566 | 3.703125 | 4 | [
-0.10283990204334259,
-0.08982229232788086,
0.24782124161720276,
-0.5728185176849365,
0.26559269428253174,
0.18968205153942108,
-0.23890802264213562,
0.2203039526939392,
-0.05538460612297058,
-0.16626930236816406,
0.5091519951820374,
0.1446353793144226,
0.005349102895706892,
0.179028362035... | 1 | History of the U.S. Navy
What is the Unites States Navy?The United States Navy is America’s primary naval force. The Navy is responsible for many things other than protecting and attacking at sea. They also have a very interesting history, which is divided into two time periods, the Old Navy, a small but fierce fleet that was recognized for their resourcefulness in using ironclads during the American Civil War and the New Navy, which is the result of an extensive modernization in the 1880's that helped the US Navy to be the largest in the world by the 1920's.
The Revolutionary WarThe Navy was officially created during the Revolutionary war. They were fairly well used during the war, but afterwards, their primary focus was fighting off pirates and other small combat, but they were not used for much official military combat. More
The New NavyWhen it was realized that the American Navy was lacking in size, quality, and number of ships, they hurried to catch up with the rest of the world and modernize. They converted from sail boats of wood to steam ships of iron and steel, cannons to loaded guns, and they streamlined the organization of the ranks. More
World War OneThe entire world became involved in the First World War, and as much as the United States tried to remain neutral, the Navy was attacked unprovoked, and so they joined the war on the side of the Allied forces. The American Navy was a very important Allied force throughout the war, and as such, the Navy developed in many ways during the war, such as in their organization, technique, and technology. More
World War TwoWhen the world was once again thrown into war, the United States again participated immensely on the side of the Allied forces. The Navy was a large part of the contribution that America committed to the Allied forces. They were especially noted for the great help to the war effort with their Island Hopping Campaign in Japan. More
The Cold WarIn the Cold War, the Navy again played a very vital part in protecting and attacking strategically. The world started having larger scale naval battles more commonly, and so the United States Navy needed to develop quickly while still campaigning in the war. More
Modern DayToday, the development of the United States Navy continues at a steady pace, and it is still a very great asset to the United States. The size, weapons, technology and renown of the Navy are as large as ever while it continues to participate in military affairs around the world. More
Article Citation (MLA format):
"History of the U.S. Navy." Military Ranks Online. 04 Feb 2012.
Military-Ranks.org. 29 Jan 2020. <https://www.military-ranks.org/info/navy-history> | 573 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Ash Wednesday fires
The Ash Wednesday fires were an Australian natural disaster which occurred in February 1983. The fires affected much of Victoria, including the Macedon and Dandenong Ranges, as well as the Otways in the sea. They also affected much of South Australia, mainly the Adelaide Hills. The Ash Wednesday fires were caused by the El Nino drought of 1982, where there was extremely low rainfall and high winds, mostly northerly. Another precipitating factor was a fire going on in eastern Victoria that went uncontrolled for almost a month. Many of the forests exploded with the wind conditions and lack of rain, creating many separate fires.
The human loss was 75 lives - 47 in Victoria and 28 in South Australia. In the Dandenong Ranges, 17 firefighters also lost their lives while they were fighting the fires. This was because of an abrupt change in direction. The Ash Wednesday fires were freaky in other ways too - a mattress was seen flying out of control in the Otways. 2,400 individuals and families also lost their homes.
The natural loss was over a 10,000 km² in Victoria and South Australia, including 5,200 km² which were destroyed in a few days of the fire.
http://sres.anu.edu.au/associated/fire/IUFRO/CONFLAG/ASHWED83/AWweath.HTM which is an inquiry about the specific fire weather event. | <urn:uuid:37706c1b-956c-480b-bd4c-67f9daf3216a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://bvio.com/index.php/Ash_Wednesday_fires | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250591763.20/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118023429-20200118051429-00455.warc.gz | en | 0.985208 | 295 | 3.5 | 4 | [
-0.47226080298423767,
0.2706596553325653,
0.22307249903678894,
-0.1270098239183426,
0.5713852643966675,
0.3287486433982849,
-0.13077488541603088,
0.0281323604285717,
-0.4574401378631592,
0.3084571361541748,
0.45701396465301514,
-0.7758116722106934,
0.1673581898212433,
0.5616856813430786,
... | 2 | Ash Wednesday fires
The Ash Wednesday fires were an Australian natural disaster which occurred in February 1983. The fires affected much of Victoria, including the Macedon and Dandenong Ranges, as well as the Otways in the sea. They also affected much of South Australia, mainly the Adelaide Hills. The Ash Wednesday fires were caused by the El Nino drought of 1982, where there was extremely low rainfall and high winds, mostly northerly. Another precipitating factor was a fire going on in eastern Victoria that went uncontrolled for almost a month. Many of the forests exploded with the wind conditions and lack of rain, creating many separate fires.
The human loss was 75 lives - 47 in Victoria and 28 in South Australia. In the Dandenong Ranges, 17 firefighters also lost their lives while they were fighting the fires. This was because of an abrupt change in direction. The Ash Wednesday fires were freaky in other ways too - a mattress was seen flying out of control in the Otways. 2,400 individuals and families also lost their homes.
The natural loss was over a 10,000 km² in Victoria and South Australia, including 5,200 km² which were destroyed in a few days of the fire.
http://sres.anu.edu.au/associated/fire/IUFRO/CONFLAG/ASHWED83/AWweath.HTM which is an inquiry about the specific fire weather event. | 314 | ENGLISH | 1 |
"From watching the History Channel or from school, some of you may have heard about the “code talkers” of World War II. Sometimes they were called “wind talkers.” The U.S. military needed a code to use on telephone or radio for messages that the enemy could not easily figure out. People existed on both sides of the war effort who became expert at breaking whatever code their opponent devised.
A man named Philip Johnston, who grew up on the Navajo reservation, suggested that Navajos be used. He was the son of a missionary to the Navajos and spoke their language. As a veteran of World War I, he had learned that some Native American languages, particularly the Choctaw, had been used in World War I for encoded messages. In fact, the 36th Division that was created at Camp Bowie in Fort Worth in World War I included numerous tribes from Oklahoma in its organization. Its insignia patch, which all soldiers of the Division wore, was a yellow arrowhead (representing the Oklahoma Indians) with a big capital “T” on it (representing the Texas soldiers also in the Division).
Knowing about the World War I experience, Johnston realized that the Navajo language would fit the specifications as an undecipherable code. Navajo is an unwritten language, very complex, and has many dialects. Although Johnston spoke it himself, he knew that anyone who had not spent years exposed to it would not be able to understand it. No alphabet or symbols existed. The only place it was spoken was on the land of the Navajo in the Southwest."
Get the Story:
J’Nell Pate: A code never broken
(The Azle News 12/17) | <urn:uuid:45799fa9-ea4c-44ed-b27e-e18f84fca7b6> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://indianz.com/News/2009/017834.asp | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599718.13/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120165335-20200120194335-00265.warc.gz | en | 0.982201 | 358 | 3.921875 | 4 | [
-0.41427749395370483,
0.43318644165992737,
-0.038114387542009354,
-0.08936692029237747,
-0.13948149979114532,
-0.050325945019721985,
0.26834630966186523,
0.19952645897865295,
-0.6031329035758972,
-0.22552381455898285,
0.06538525968790054,
0.3019710183143616,
-0.04364622384309769,
0.1481984... | 2 | "From watching the History Channel or from school, some of you may have heard about the “code talkers” of World War II. Sometimes they were called “wind talkers.” The U.S. military needed a code to use on telephone or radio for messages that the enemy could not easily figure out. People existed on both sides of the war effort who became expert at breaking whatever code their opponent devised.
A man named Philip Johnston, who grew up on the Navajo reservation, suggested that Navajos be used. He was the son of a missionary to the Navajos and spoke their language. As a veteran of World War I, he had learned that some Native American languages, particularly the Choctaw, had been used in World War I for encoded messages. In fact, the 36th Division that was created at Camp Bowie in Fort Worth in World War I included numerous tribes from Oklahoma in its organization. Its insignia patch, which all soldiers of the Division wore, was a yellow arrowhead (representing the Oklahoma Indians) with a big capital “T” on it (representing the Texas soldiers also in the Division).
Knowing about the World War I experience, Johnston realized that the Navajo language would fit the specifications as an undecipherable code. Navajo is an unwritten language, very complex, and has many dialects. Although Johnston spoke it himself, he knew that anyone who had not spent years exposed to it would not be able to understand it. No alphabet or symbols existed. The only place it was spoken was on the land of the Navajo in the Southwest."
Get the Story:
J’Nell Pate: A code never broken
(The Azle News 12/17) | 353 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Treatment of Slaves: Punishment
According to abolitionist Theodore Dwight Weld, the following testimony came from a Mr. L. Turner, a native of Caroline County, Virginia, several counties north of Southampton.
The following facts I have just taken down from the lips of Mr. L. Turner, a regular and respectable member of the Second Presbyterian Church in Springfield, our county town. He was born and brought up in Caroline county, Virginia. He says that the slaves are neither considered nor treated as human beings. One of his neighbors whose name was Barr, he says, on one occasion stripped a slave and lacerated his back with a handcard (for cotton or wool) and then washed it with salt and water, with pepper in it. Mr. Turner saw this. He further remarked that he believed there were many slaves there in advanced life whose backs had never been well since they began to work.
He stated that one of his uncles had killed a woman--broke her skull with an ax helve: she had insulted her mistress! No notice was taken of the affair. Mr. T. said, further, that slaves were frequently murdered.
He mentioned the case of one slaveholder, whom he had seen lay his slaves on a large log, which he kept for the purpose, strip them, tie them with the face downward, then have a kettle of hot water brought--take the paddle, made of hard wood, and perforated with holes, dip it into the hot water and strike--before every blow dipping it into the water--every hole at every blow would raise a 'whelk.' This was the usual punishment for running away.
Another slaveholder had a slave who had often run away, and often been severely whipped. After one of his floggings he burnt his master's barn: this so enraged the man, that when he caught him he took a pair of pincers and pulled his toe nails out. The negro then murdered two of his master's children. He was taken after a desperate pursuit, (having been shot through the shoulder) and hung. . . .
Mr. T. related the whipping habits of one of his uncles in Virginia. He was a wealthy man, had a splendid house and grounds. A tree in his front yard, was used as a whipping post. When a slave was to be punished, he would frequently invite some of his friends, have a table, cards and wine set out under the shade; he would then flog his slave a little while, and then play cards and drink with his friends, occasionally taunting the slave, giving him the privilege of confessing such and such things, at his leisure, after a while flog him again, thus keeping it up for hours or half the day, and sometimes all day. This was his habit.
From Theodore Dwight Weld, American Slavery As It Is: Testimony of a Thousand Witnesses (New York: American Antislavery Society, 1839), 46. | <urn:uuid:734d62c0-1e29-4a26-b467-51500b155f5c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.natturnerproject.org/punishment-l-turner | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251783000.84/warc/CC-MAIN-20200128184745-20200128214745-00369.warc.gz | en | 0.991031 | 613 | 3.375 | 3 | [
0.06572029739618301,
0.561821460723877,
0.10946565866470337,
-0.05130688101053238,
0.06895949691534042,
-0.19983559846878052,
0.4034026265144348,
-0.26342490315437317,
0.21322670578956604,
0.14937470853328705,
0.28152987360954285,
-0.23121437430381775,
-0.12530845403671265,
0.0504975728690... | 3 | Treatment of Slaves: Punishment
According to abolitionist Theodore Dwight Weld, the following testimony came from a Mr. L. Turner, a native of Caroline County, Virginia, several counties north of Southampton.
The following facts I have just taken down from the lips of Mr. L. Turner, a regular and respectable member of the Second Presbyterian Church in Springfield, our county town. He was born and brought up in Caroline county, Virginia. He says that the slaves are neither considered nor treated as human beings. One of his neighbors whose name was Barr, he says, on one occasion stripped a slave and lacerated his back with a handcard (for cotton or wool) and then washed it with salt and water, with pepper in it. Mr. Turner saw this. He further remarked that he believed there were many slaves there in advanced life whose backs had never been well since they began to work.
He stated that one of his uncles had killed a woman--broke her skull with an ax helve: she had insulted her mistress! No notice was taken of the affair. Mr. T. said, further, that slaves were frequently murdered.
He mentioned the case of one slaveholder, whom he had seen lay his slaves on a large log, which he kept for the purpose, strip them, tie them with the face downward, then have a kettle of hot water brought--take the paddle, made of hard wood, and perforated with holes, dip it into the hot water and strike--before every blow dipping it into the water--every hole at every blow would raise a 'whelk.' This was the usual punishment for running away.
Another slaveholder had a slave who had often run away, and often been severely whipped. After one of his floggings he burnt his master's barn: this so enraged the man, that when he caught him he took a pair of pincers and pulled his toe nails out. The negro then murdered two of his master's children. He was taken after a desperate pursuit, (having been shot through the shoulder) and hung. . . .
Mr. T. related the whipping habits of one of his uncles in Virginia. He was a wealthy man, had a splendid house and grounds. A tree in his front yard, was used as a whipping post. When a slave was to be punished, he would frequently invite some of his friends, have a table, cards and wine set out under the shade; he would then flog his slave a little while, and then play cards and drink with his friends, occasionally taunting the slave, giving him the privilege of confessing such and such things, at his leisure, after a while flog him again, thus keeping it up for hours or half the day, and sometimes all day. This was his habit.
From Theodore Dwight Weld, American Slavery As It Is: Testimony of a Thousand Witnesses (New York: American Antislavery Society, 1839), 46. | 611 | ENGLISH | 1 |
A University of Alberta paleontologist has helped discover the existence of a 95 million-year-old snakelike marine animal, a finding that provides not only the earliest example of limbloss in lizards but the first example of limbloss in an aquatic lizard.
"This was unsuspected," said Dr. Michael Caldwell, from the U of A's Faculty of Science. "It adds to the picture we have of what was happening 100 million years ago. We now know that losing limbs isn't a new thing and that lizards were doing it much earlier than we originally thought. On top of that, this lizard is aquatic. All the examples we have in our modern world are terrestrial, so it's a big deal."
The evidence offers the earliest record of vestigial limbs—once used in an animal's evolutionary past but that has lost its original function-- in a fossil lizard. The newly named species--Adriosaurus microbrachis--is described in the current issue of the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology and offers clues to the evolution of terrestrial lizards as they returned to water. The fossil was originally collected during the 19th Century from a limestone quarry in Slovenia. It then sat at the Natural History Museum in Trieste, Italy for almost 100 years before Caldwell and a colleague found it in 1996 during a trip to Europe. He later connected with Alessandro Palci, then a graduate student in Italy whom he helped supervise, and they worked on the fossil together.
The researchers soon realized the lizard's front limbs were not formed during development. "There was a moment when I said, 'I think we stumbled on a new fossil illustrating some portion of the aquatic process of losing limbs,'" said Caldwell. "There are lots of living lizards that love to lose their forelimbs and then their rearlimbs, but we didn't know it was being done 100 million years ago and we didn't know that it was happening among groups of marine lizards."
The researchers think this snake-like lizard was about 10 to 12 inches long, had a small head perched on an elongated neck, body and tail and relatively large and well-developed rear limbs. All bones of the forearm, including the hands and digits were not formed during development.
"For some oddball reason the forelimbs were lost before the rear limbs when you would think it would be the opposite," said Caldwell. "The front limbs would be useful for holding onto dinner or digging a hole but it must be developmentally easier to get rid of the forelimbs."
The most well known ancient fossil snakes also kept their hind limbs. Living lizards also show almost every variation in limb reduction from a perfectly formed back limb with no forelimb, or a spike for a forelimb and one or two toes on the rearlimb, to total limblessness. This degree of variation makes it very difficult to understand the pattern of evolutionary limb loss in these animals.
"This discovery is one more data point that might help us answer some questions and perhaps shed some light on the fin to limb transition, which is a key step in the evolution of land animals," said Caldwell. "It doesn't give us all the answers but it's a start."
Written from a news release by University of Alberta. | <urn:uuid:d9ac8a6f-846c-425c-87c9-deb585d8bc6e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.science20.com/news/fossil_discovery_marks_earliest_record_of_limbloss_in_ancient_lizard | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690379.95/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126195918-20200126225918-00243.warc.gz | en | 0.98078 | 674 | 3.46875 | 3 | [
-0.4602212905883789,
0.01209163386374712,
0.5917884111404419,
-0.03150392323732376,
-0.38718146085739136,
-0.16150322556495667,
-0.007885903120040894,
0.5919767618179321,
0.15097399055957794,
0.33028644323349,
0.246646448969841,
-0.2492462396621704,
0.2294413149356842,
0.4824642539024353,
... | 3 | A University of Alberta paleontologist has helped discover the existence of a 95 million-year-old snakelike marine animal, a finding that provides not only the earliest example of limbloss in lizards but the first example of limbloss in an aquatic lizard.
"This was unsuspected," said Dr. Michael Caldwell, from the U of A's Faculty of Science. "It adds to the picture we have of what was happening 100 million years ago. We now know that losing limbs isn't a new thing and that lizards were doing it much earlier than we originally thought. On top of that, this lizard is aquatic. All the examples we have in our modern world are terrestrial, so it's a big deal."
The evidence offers the earliest record of vestigial limbs—once used in an animal's evolutionary past but that has lost its original function-- in a fossil lizard. The newly named species--Adriosaurus microbrachis--is described in the current issue of the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology and offers clues to the evolution of terrestrial lizards as they returned to water. The fossil was originally collected during the 19th Century from a limestone quarry in Slovenia. It then sat at the Natural History Museum in Trieste, Italy for almost 100 years before Caldwell and a colleague found it in 1996 during a trip to Europe. He later connected with Alessandro Palci, then a graduate student in Italy whom he helped supervise, and they worked on the fossil together.
The researchers soon realized the lizard's front limbs were not formed during development. "There was a moment when I said, 'I think we stumbled on a new fossil illustrating some portion of the aquatic process of losing limbs,'" said Caldwell. "There are lots of living lizards that love to lose their forelimbs and then their rearlimbs, but we didn't know it was being done 100 million years ago and we didn't know that it was happening among groups of marine lizards."
The researchers think this snake-like lizard was about 10 to 12 inches long, had a small head perched on an elongated neck, body and tail and relatively large and well-developed rear limbs. All bones of the forearm, including the hands and digits were not formed during development.
"For some oddball reason the forelimbs were lost before the rear limbs when you would think it would be the opposite," said Caldwell. "The front limbs would be useful for holding onto dinner or digging a hole but it must be developmentally easier to get rid of the forelimbs."
The most well known ancient fossil snakes also kept their hind limbs. Living lizards also show almost every variation in limb reduction from a perfectly formed back limb with no forelimb, or a spike for a forelimb and one or two toes on the rearlimb, to total limblessness. This degree of variation makes it very difficult to understand the pattern of evolutionary limb loss in these animals.
"This discovery is one more data point that might help us answer some questions and perhaps shed some light on the fin to limb transition, which is a key step in the evolution of land animals," said Caldwell. "It doesn't give us all the answers but it's a start."
Written from a news release by University of Alberta. | 680 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Morocco became independent from the colonial powers of France and Spain in 1956. The sultan, Mohammed V immediately announced plans to turn Morocco in to a constitutional monarchy and the first step towards this was him proclaiming himself King in 1957.
Although elections took place in 1960, they were limited and the King became Prime Minister with his heir, Crown Prince Hassan, as Deputy PM. The promised constitution was delayed until 1962.
Hassan II became King on the death of his father in 1961, ruled for nearly four decades and was a strong king, though he often ignored civil rights, particularly of his political opponents. He held the first general election in 1963 but suspended parliament and declared a state of emergency in 1965 He survived several assassination attempts and an attempted coup attempt in 1971 from rival's intent on making Morocco a republic. There were major riots in 1981 in Casablanca.
Despite a host of constitutional reforms and elections, the real power stayed with Hassan. Perhaps the most important events of his reign were those centred around Western Sahara and Morocco's neighbours, Algeria and Mauretania. The border with Algeria had been redrawn to Algeria's advantage during the French occupation of both countries and as the area in question is rich in iron ore, Hassan disputed the position. Although in 1970 a compromise was reached, allowing the two countries to share the mineral wealth, Hassan had also laid claim to the Spanish protectorate of Spanish or Western Sahara, historically said to be part of Morocco according to Hassan. The Spanish enclave in the south of Morocco, Ifni was returned to Morocco in 1969 and the Polisario Movement for an Independent Western Sahara formed in 1973.
In 1975, King Hassan II asked for volunteers to join him and 350,000 unarmed Moroccans crossed the border into Spanish Sahara in what is known and celebrated as "The Green March". Helpless, the Spanish left the following month, leaving the area under the joint control of Mauretania and Morocco. Fighting followed and continued for many years until a UN monitored ceasefire began in 1991. The number of refugees from the region still living in Algeria is estimated at 165,000.
Hassan II died in 1999 and his young, progressive son, Mohammed VI became King. He is still ruling today and has over seen cautious moves towards greater democracy and openness with economic and social liberalization.
Problems still exist, the issue of Western Sahara is not yet settled, the Moroccans want the return of the Spanish enclaves of Ceuta and Mellila, many illegal immigrants still cross from Morocco into Spain and there have been protests, particularly during the Arab Spring of 2011 to 2012 which led to further Moroccan constitutional reform.
Unemployment is rising among the young, the educational system is seriously in need of a major reform and their have been protests in some of the poorer and Berber areas.
However, modern Morocco is happy to welcome ever increasing numbers of tourists, vital to its economy, the country is safe and stable and progressing in the right direction. | <urn:uuid:804348aa-c6cb-4574-8230-a872d293f6f1> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.fes-desert-trips.com/en/blog/the-recent-history-and-current-political-situation-in-morocco.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672537.90/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125131641-20200125160641-00422.warc.gz | en | 0.984724 | 609 | 3.34375 | 3 | [
-0.569204568862915,
0.8624120950698853,
0.21238771080970764,
-0.2888941466808319,
-0.18073660135269165,
0.22580373287200928,
0.05007565766572952,
0.12307512760162354,
0.4303085505962372,
0.14579154551029205,
0.508484423160553,
-0.22040092945098877,
0.12456456571817398,
0.17182424664497375,... | 5 | Morocco became independent from the colonial powers of France and Spain in 1956. The sultan, Mohammed V immediately announced plans to turn Morocco in to a constitutional monarchy and the first step towards this was him proclaiming himself King in 1957.
Although elections took place in 1960, they were limited and the King became Prime Minister with his heir, Crown Prince Hassan, as Deputy PM. The promised constitution was delayed until 1962.
Hassan II became King on the death of his father in 1961, ruled for nearly four decades and was a strong king, though he often ignored civil rights, particularly of his political opponents. He held the first general election in 1963 but suspended parliament and declared a state of emergency in 1965 He survived several assassination attempts and an attempted coup attempt in 1971 from rival's intent on making Morocco a republic. There were major riots in 1981 in Casablanca.
Despite a host of constitutional reforms and elections, the real power stayed with Hassan. Perhaps the most important events of his reign were those centred around Western Sahara and Morocco's neighbours, Algeria and Mauretania. The border with Algeria had been redrawn to Algeria's advantage during the French occupation of both countries and as the area in question is rich in iron ore, Hassan disputed the position. Although in 1970 a compromise was reached, allowing the two countries to share the mineral wealth, Hassan had also laid claim to the Spanish protectorate of Spanish or Western Sahara, historically said to be part of Morocco according to Hassan. The Spanish enclave in the south of Morocco, Ifni was returned to Morocco in 1969 and the Polisario Movement for an Independent Western Sahara formed in 1973.
In 1975, King Hassan II asked for volunteers to join him and 350,000 unarmed Moroccans crossed the border into Spanish Sahara in what is known and celebrated as "The Green March". Helpless, the Spanish left the following month, leaving the area under the joint control of Mauretania and Morocco. Fighting followed and continued for many years until a UN monitored ceasefire began in 1991. The number of refugees from the region still living in Algeria is estimated at 165,000.
Hassan II died in 1999 and his young, progressive son, Mohammed VI became King. He is still ruling today and has over seen cautious moves towards greater democracy and openness with economic and social liberalization.
Problems still exist, the issue of Western Sahara is not yet settled, the Moroccans want the return of the Spanish enclaves of Ceuta and Mellila, many illegal immigrants still cross from Morocco into Spain and there have been protests, particularly during the Arab Spring of 2011 to 2012 which led to further Moroccan constitutional reform.
Unemployment is rising among the young, the educational system is seriously in need of a major reform and their have been protests in some of the poorer and Berber areas.
However, modern Morocco is happy to welcome ever increasing numbers of tourists, vital to its economy, the country is safe and stable and progressing in the right direction. | 681 | ENGLISH | 1 |
This book discusses the men and women who opposed the entry of the United States into World War I. All had personal or political relations with Wilson, and with one exception, supported him in the 1916 election. Most of them denied they were pacifists. Ironically, almost all were internationalists while condemned as isolationists. They were not, however, a homogeneous group. Differences with the President evolved over specific issues. The book
does not dwell on what might have happened in an ideal world. Essentially, it is concerned with judgment, foresight, and freedom of thought. Many questions are raised that are relevant today, such as the use of war as an instrument of foreign policy and the potential for mediation. It is ideal as supplementary reading for college students of introductory courses in American history, as well as advanced classes in twentieth century history, political science, and peace studies. | <urn:uuid:3abc3a1c-03af-4fd4-9a32-e72118d62e2a> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://krieger-publishing.com/History/STACKAmericanHistory/stackamericanhistory_1.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251694071.63/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126230255-20200127020255-00159.warc.gz | en | 0.986893 | 175 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
-0.046350542455911636,
0.3957722783088684,
-0.032387182116508484,
0.04534104838967323,
0.2434900850057602,
0.20233263075351715,
-0.09123305976390839,
0.3060273826122284,
0.028976313769817352,
0.1501418799161911,
0.3085100054740906,
0.23615914583206177,
0.2683010697364807,
0.358219385147094... | 4 | This book discusses the men and women who opposed the entry of the United States into World War I. All had personal or political relations with Wilson, and with one exception, supported him in the 1916 election. Most of them denied they were pacifists. Ironically, almost all were internationalists while condemned as isolationists. They were not, however, a homogeneous group. Differences with the President evolved over specific issues. The book
does not dwell on what might have happened in an ideal world. Essentially, it is concerned with judgment, foresight, and freedom of thought. Many questions are raised that are relevant today, such as the use of war as an instrument of foreign policy and the potential for mediation. It is ideal as supplementary reading for college students of introductory courses in American history, as well as advanced classes in twentieth century history, political science, and peace studies. | 179 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Get help with any kind of project - from a high school essay to a PhD dissertation
Why Girls Failed to obtain the Right to Vote Between 1900 and 1914 In the 19th century, the voting system was classed as un-equal. In certain areas of the world guys may vote for who they wanted to govern them, whereas at other areas, only tiny groups of guys may depending on their wealth and eminence. The status of girls in England at this time was easy; they remained at home, cooked, cleaned, cared for their kids and took care of their husbands. Women weren't allowed to vote or have some say in the way their country was conducted, or whom it was conducted by. Many women resented this way of life. They too paid taxes, possessed properties and land just as the men did, but they did not receive the identical treatment or the same amount of rights as the guys recieved. They believed that women who paid such taxation must have a say in how it was spent. Women who owned property wanted the same rights as a guy who had land, e.g the right to vote. They also thought that they were just as capable of running parliment, or fighting for their country since males were. As a result of these strong opinions two campaign groups were formed; The Suffragists- that was founded by Mrs Millicent Garrett in 1897 and The Suffragettes-which was set by Mrs Emmeline Pankhurst at 1903. Both teams' goal was to gain more respect and the right to vote. Both groups failed to obtain the right to vote between 1900 and 1914. There are numerous reasons suggested as to why this was, the first was believed to be the actions that the Women took, this was said to have severely damaged their standing and the quantity of respect they received. The Suffragists were known for the... | <urn:uuid:9a59c642-581e-4783-b458-2c483078409b> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://studybay.com/example-works/essay/other/1013002/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251672537.90/warc/CC-MAIN-20200125131641-20200125160641-00538.warc.gz | en | 0.991659 | 377 | 3.6875 | 4 | [
-0.22537323832511902,
0.06782252341508865,
-0.12843206524848938,
-0.1682141125202179,
-0.24662737548351288,
0.3303639590740204,
-0.10950124263763428,
0.3190324902534485,
-0.014290343970060349,
0.29918843507766724,
0.23556435108184814,
-0.2163175344467163,
0.3354538083076477,
-0.00618950463... | 1 | Get help with any kind of project - from a high school essay to a PhD dissertation
Why Girls Failed to obtain the Right to Vote Between 1900 and 1914 In the 19th century, the voting system was classed as un-equal. In certain areas of the world guys may vote for who they wanted to govern them, whereas at other areas, only tiny groups of guys may depending on their wealth and eminence. The status of girls in England at this time was easy; they remained at home, cooked, cleaned, cared for their kids and took care of their husbands. Women weren't allowed to vote or have some say in the way their country was conducted, or whom it was conducted by. Many women resented this way of life. They too paid taxes, possessed properties and land just as the men did, but they did not receive the identical treatment or the same amount of rights as the guys recieved. They believed that women who paid such taxation must have a say in how it was spent. Women who owned property wanted the same rights as a guy who had land, e.g the right to vote. They also thought that they were just as capable of running parliment, or fighting for their country since males were. As a result of these strong opinions two campaign groups were formed; The Suffragists- that was founded by Mrs Millicent Garrett in 1897 and The Suffragettes-which was set by Mrs Emmeline Pankhurst at 1903. Both teams' goal was to gain more respect and the right to vote. Both groups failed to obtain the right to vote between 1900 and 1914. There are numerous reasons suggested as to why this was, the first was believed to be the actions that the Women took, this was said to have severely damaged their standing and the quantity of respect they received. The Suffragists were known for the... | 401 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Albert Einstein was a German born theoretical physicist who developed the theory of relatively, one of the two pillars of modern physics, alongside quantum mechanics. His work is also known for its influence on the philosophy of science. He’s best known to the general public for his mass-energy equivalence formula E = mc2, which has been dubbed “the world’s most famous equation.” Take a look below for 30 more fun and interesting facts about Albert Einstein.
1. He received the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics for his services to theoretical physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of photoelectric effect, a pivotal step in the development of quantum theory.
2. Near the beginning of his career, Einstein thought that Newtonian mechanics weren’t enough to reconcile the laws of classical mechanics with the laws of the electromagnetic field.
3. Eventually, Einstein realized that the principle of relativity could also be extended to gravitational fields, and he published a paper on general relativity in 1916 with his theory of gravitation.
4. His continued involved with problems of statistical mechanics and quantum theory led to his explanations of particle theory and the motion of molecules.
5. His investigation into the thermal properties of light laid the foundation of the photon theory of light.
6. In 1917, Einstein applied the general theory of relativity to model the structure of the universe.
7. He lived in Switzerland between 1895 and 1914, except for one year in Prague, and he received his academic diploma from the Swiss federal polytechnic school in Zurich in 1900.
8. He taught theoretical physics at the Swiss federal polytechnic school between 1912 and 1914 before he left Berlin.
9. Einstein acquired Swiss citizenship in 1901, which he kept for the rest of his life after being stateless for more than five years.
10. In 1905, he was awarded a PhD by the University of Zurich. That same year, he published four groundbreaking papers during his renowned annus mirabilis which brought him to the notice of the academic world at the age of 26.
11. He was visiting the United States when Adolf Hitler came to power in 1933 and he didn’t go back to Germany, where he had been a professor at the Berlin Academy of Sciences.
12. Einstein settled in the United States and became an American citizen in 1940.
13. At the cusp of World War II, he endorsed a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt alerting him to the potential developed of extremely powerful bombs of a new type and recommending that the United States begin similar research. This eventually led to the Manhattan Project.
14. Einstein supported the Allied forces, but he generally denounced the idea of using nuclear fission as a weapon. He signed the Russell-Einstein Manifesto with British philosopher Bertrand Russell, which highlighted the danger of nuclear weapons.
15. Einstein was affiliated with the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey until his death in 1955.
16. He published more than 300 scientific papers and more than 150 non-scientific works.
17. Einstein once declared that his second best idea after the theory of relativity was adding an egg to his soup while it was cooking so he wouldn’t have an extra pot to wash afterwards.
18. He used to charge $1 for singing an autograph. He would later donate the money to charity.
19. Einstein never actually failed math. While he was an average student, math was one area where he excelled in.
20. In 1895, a 16 year old Einstein took the entrance exam for the Swiss Federal Polytechnic, a science, technology, engineering and mathematics school. While he had exceptional scores in physics and math, his other scores weren’t good enough and he failed the exam as a whole.
21. He was a great musician. His mother played the piano so he had the love of music instilled in him with violin lessons at the age of five.
22. When Israel’s first president, Chaim Weizmann, died, Einstein was offered the position but he declined it.
23. Einstein divorced his first wife, Mileva Maric, a gifted mathematician in her own right, and married his cousin Elsa Lowenthal. By all accounts, Einstein was actually a bad husband to his first wife in their later years. He had affairs that he never even tried to hide, he moved the entire family to Berlin without any discussion and treated her more as a servant than a wife.
24. He had his first wife agree to a written list of demeaning duties and conditions if she wanted to stay with him. For example, one condition was, “you will renounce all personal relations with me insofar as they are not completely necessary for social reasons.”
25. Einstein promised his Nobel Prize money to his wife upon their divorce, before he’d even won the prize.
26. According to correspondence between Einstein and Maric, it was determined that the two had a daughter in 1902 named Lieserl. However, at one point, all mention of her in the letters stopped so it’s not known what happened to her.
27. Ever since university, Einstein loved to sail. However, he never made a good sailor and he never even learned how to swim.
28. In a letter to Lowenthal, he bragged about getting away without wearing socks while at Oxford.
29. He didn’t begin speaking until he was four years old. Today, Einstein Syndrome, a term coined by economic Thomas Sowell, refers to exceptionally bright people who have early problems with speech.
30. After Einstein’s death, the pathologist who did his autopsy took his brain without permission. While he eventually did get permission from Einstein’s son, he was fired from Princeton when he refused to turn the brain over. He kept it for over 40 years before finally returning it in 1998. | <urn:uuid:cc59ffca-2504-4741-9f9a-f604c15743c3> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://tonsoffacts.com/30-fun-and-interesting-facts-about-albert-einstein/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250614880.58/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124011048-20200124040048-00373.warc.gz | en | 0.982177 | 1,218 | 3.53125 | 4 | [
-0.18891049921512604,
0.23571264743804932,
-0.13022728264331818,
0.035760752856731415,
-0.35097187757492065,
-0.126045823097229,
0.2787477374076843,
0.11922255903482437,
0.0066384016536176205,
-0.11646726727485657,
0.46663302183151245,
-0.42049527168273926,
-0.10349653661251068,
0.34796163... | 8 | Albert Einstein was a German born theoretical physicist who developed the theory of relatively, one of the two pillars of modern physics, alongside quantum mechanics. His work is also known for its influence on the philosophy of science. He’s best known to the general public for his mass-energy equivalence formula E = mc2, which has been dubbed “the world’s most famous equation.” Take a look below for 30 more fun and interesting facts about Albert Einstein.
1. He received the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics for his services to theoretical physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of photoelectric effect, a pivotal step in the development of quantum theory.
2. Near the beginning of his career, Einstein thought that Newtonian mechanics weren’t enough to reconcile the laws of classical mechanics with the laws of the electromagnetic field.
3. Eventually, Einstein realized that the principle of relativity could also be extended to gravitational fields, and he published a paper on general relativity in 1916 with his theory of gravitation.
4. His continued involved with problems of statistical mechanics and quantum theory led to his explanations of particle theory and the motion of molecules.
5. His investigation into the thermal properties of light laid the foundation of the photon theory of light.
6. In 1917, Einstein applied the general theory of relativity to model the structure of the universe.
7. He lived in Switzerland between 1895 and 1914, except for one year in Prague, and he received his academic diploma from the Swiss federal polytechnic school in Zurich in 1900.
8. He taught theoretical physics at the Swiss federal polytechnic school between 1912 and 1914 before he left Berlin.
9. Einstein acquired Swiss citizenship in 1901, which he kept for the rest of his life after being stateless for more than five years.
10. In 1905, he was awarded a PhD by the University of Zurich. That same year, he published four groundbreaking papers during his renowned annus mirabilis which brought him to the notice of the academic world at the age of 26.
11. He was visiting the United States when Adolf Hitler came to power in 1933 and he didn’t go back to Germany, where he had been a professor at the Berlin Academy of Sciences.
12. Einstein settled in the United States and became an American citizen in 1940.
13. At the cusp of World War II, he endorsed a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt alerting him to the potential developed of extremely powerful bombs of a new type and recommending that the United States begin similar research. This eventually led to the Manhattan Project.
14. Einstein supported the Allied forces, but he generally denounced the idea of using nuclear fission as a weapon. He signed the Russell-Einstein Manifesto with British philosopher Bertrand Russell, which highlighted the danger of nuclear weapons.
15. Einstein was affiliated with the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey until his death in 1955.
16. He published more than 300 scientific papers and more than 150 non-scientific works.
17. Einstein once declared that his second best idea after the theory of relativity was adding an egg to his soup while it was cooking so he wouldn’t have an extra pot to wash afterwards.
18. He used to charge $1 for singing an autograph. He would later donate the money to charity.
19. Einstein never actually failed math. While he was an average student, math was one area where he excelled in.
20. In 1895, a 16 year old Einstein took the entrance exam for the Swiss Federal Polytechnic, a science, technology, engineering and mathematics school. While he had exceptional scores in physics and math, his other scores weren’t good enough and he failed the exam as a whole.
21. He was a great musician. His mother played the piano so he had the love of music instilled in him with violin lessons at the age of five.
22. When Israel’s first president, Chaim Weizmann, died, Einstein was offered the position but he declined it.
23. Einstein divorced his first wife, Mileva Maric, a gifted mathematician in her own right, and married his cousin Elsa Lowenthal. By all accounts, Einstein was actually a bad husband to his first wife in their later years. He had affairs that he never even tried to hide, he moved the entire family to Berlin without any discussion and treated her more as a servant than a wife.
24. He had his first wife agree to a written list of demeaning duties and conditions if she wanted to stay with him. For example, one condition was, “you will renounce all personal relations with me insofar as they are not completely necessary for social reasons.”
25. Einstein promised his Nobel Prize money to his wife upon their divorce, before he’d even won the prize.
26. According to correspondence between Einstein and Maric, it was determined that the two had a daughter in 1902 named Lieserl. However, at one point, all mention of her in the letters stopped so it’s not known what happened to her.
27. Ever since university, Einstein loved to sail. However, he never made a good sailor and he never even learned how to swim.
28. In a letter to Lowenthal, he bragged about getting away without wearing socks while at Oxford.
29. He didn’t begin speaking until he was four years old. Today, Einstein Syndrome, a term coined by economic Thomas Sowell, refers to exceptionally bright people who have early problems with speech.
30. After Einstein’s death, the pathologist who did his autopsy took his brain without permission. While he eventually did get permission from Einstein’s son, he was fired from Princeton when he refused to turn the brain over. He kept it for over 40 years before finally returning it in 1998. | 1,260 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Co-author of the Price-Harney Agreement, Brigadier-General William S. Harney was a forty-five-year veteran of the United States Army, who participated in the Seminole Wars, the Black Hawk War, the Mexican-American War, the Mormon Expedition, and the American Civil War.
William Selby Harney was born on August 27, 1800, at Haysboro, Tennessee, which has since become a part of Nashville. Harney was the last of eight children born to Thomas and Margaret (Hudson) Harney. His father was a merchant and surveyor, who had served as a major in the Revolutionary War. Harney was educated at home as a youth, before attending local common schools in his area. In 1814, he enrolled in a private academy in his hometown.
On February 13, 1818, with the help of his older brother, Benjamin F. Harney, who was an army surgeon, Harney was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the 1st United States Infantry. He reported for duty on June 28, 1818 in Louisiana, where his first assignment was a campaign against the pirate Jean Lafitte. Participating in the Seminole Wars in Florida, Harney was promoted to first lieutenant on January 7, 1819. In 1821, Harney served as an aide to General Andrew Jackson, who was a fellow Tennessean and friend of the Harney family.
Harney served mostly in Louisiana for the next six years, until August 1824, when he was transferred to Jefferson Barracks, Missouri. On May 14, 1825, while on an expedition to initiate peace treaties with western Indian tribes, Harney learned that he had been promoted to captain.
In 1832, Harney and his company engaged the Sauk Indians during the Black Hawk War. Other future notable military and political leaders who participated in that brief conflict were Winfield Scott, Jefferson Davis, David Twiggs, Albert Sidney Johnston, Robert Anderson, Zachary Taylor, and Abraham Lincoln.
Following the Black Hawk War, Harney met and became engaged to Mary Mullanphy. The two were wed on January 27, 1833. Their marriage, which produced three children, ended in an estrangement, when Mrs. Harney moved to France, where she died in 1860.
On May 1, 1833, at the urging of President Andrew Jackson, Harney was promoted to major and assigned to the paymaster corps. A little over three years later, on August 15, 1836, he was promoted to lieutenant colonel of the 2nd Dragoons. He joined his unit in Florida in January 1837, where he once again campaigned against the Seminoles. On December 20, 1840, Harney received a brevet promotion to colonel for "gallant and meritorious conduct" during the Seminole Wars.
In October 1845, Harney was sent to Texas, when the United States and Mexico quarreled over the establishment of the border between the two nations. When the dispute eventually led to warfare, he played a leading role in Brigadier-General John Wool's campaign against Chihuahua. Harney also fought under the leadership of Major General Zachary Taylor at the Battle of Buena Vista (February 22-23, 1847), before joining Major General Winfield Scott's Army of Invasion in March 1847. Harney led Scott's cavalry, but the two officers did not see eye to eye. When Scott relieved Harney of his command, Harney appealed to Washington, and President James K. Polk reinstated him over Scott's objections. Despite his differences with Scott, Harney performed well during the Mexican-American War. On April 18, 1847, he was brevetted to brigadier-general for his participation in the battle of Cerro Gordo (April 12, 1847).
Between 1849 and 1853, Harney briefly commanded Military Department Number Five, which included much of Texas, on three occasions. In 1854, he was transferred to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas to campaign against Sioux Indians on the Great Plains from 1855 into early 1856. In 1856, Harney briefly returned to Florida, again battling the Seminoles. Harney was redeployed to Kansas in May 1857 to help curtail bloodshed between pro-slavery "border ruffians" from Missouri and anti-slavery Jayhawkers from Kansas, during the Kansas Border Wars.
Harney remained in Kansas a little less than a year before he was ordered to lead a campaign against the Mormons in Utah in April 1858. While travelling west with the Mormon Expedition, Harney learned that he had been promoted to the full rank of brigadier-general, effective June 14, 1858. Before reaching Salt Lake City, General Harney received orders to depart for the West Coast where he would command the Department of Oregon.
Harney arrived at Fort Vancouver on October 24, 1858 and immediately began planning a campaign to pacify hostile Indian tribes. He soon faced a more pressing matter, however, when a dispute over the ownership of San Juan Island, in the Oregon Country, nearly led to bloodshed between British and United States forces. On July 27, 1859, during the so-called Pig War, Harney deployed federal troops commanded by George Pickett to the island to protect American interests. The bloodless encounter was eventually resolved through negotiations, but because of his inflammatory anti-British posturing, Harney was ordered back to Missouri in July 1860.
When the Union began to dissolve after the election of Abraham Lincoln as president, Harney was in command of the Army's Department of the West, headquartered at Jefferson Barracks in St. Louis. Sympathies in the border state were greatly divided. In March 1861, Missouri's Secession Convention opted to remain in the Union despite the secessionist leanings of Governor Claiborne Jackson. After the fall of Fort Sumter, federal officials suspected that secessionists were plotting to seize the St. Louis arsenal. On May 10, 1861, Harney's subordinate, Captain Nathaniel Lyon ordered his troops to surround and to imprison approximately 670 members of the Missouri Volunteer Militia, who were training at Camp Jackson, near St. Louis. Lyon then marched his prisoners through the streets of St. Louis, thereby inciting pro-secessionist residents to protest. When a riot ensued, Lyon's soldiers fired on the angry crowd, killing twenty-eight civilians and wounding as many as fifty more. Lyon's actions fanned anti-Union flames in Missouri. On May 11, the Missouri General Assembly approved a measure that created the Missouri State Guard, commanded by former Governor Sterling Price, and that granted Governor Jackson with extensive executive powers to resist Union forces in the state.
Despite Lyon's provocative actions, Price was committed to maintaining peace in Missouri. On May 21, 1861, he and Harney met and negotiated the Price-Harney Agreement. The pact charged the Missouri State Guard with the responsibility of protecting pro-Unionist citizens in Missouri. When Price proved unable to fulfill his end of the bargain, radical Unionists, led by U.S. Representative Frank Blair and his brother, U.S. Postmaster-General Montgomery Blair, contrived to have Harney relieved of his command. On May 16, 1861, the United States War Department issued Special Orders, No. 135 relieving Harney as commander of the Department of the West. The department then promoted Lyon to the rank of brigadier-general effective May 17, 1861. Harney received word that he had been sacked on May 30, and Lyon succeeded him as departmental commander.
Harney returned to Washington, where he performed administrative duties, until he retired from the army on August 1, 1863. Despite being retired, Harney was brevetted to major general on March 13, 1865, "for long and faithful service."
Following the Civil War, the government engaged Harney to negotiate peace with the Plains Indians in the West in 1868. In 1869, President Andrew Johnson appointed him as a member of the Board of Commissioners for Indian Affairs and as a member of the Board of Indian Peace Commissioners in the Northwest.
Harney spent the later years of his life residing at his extensive landholdings in Missouri, in Mississippi and at his last home on Lake Eola, near Orlando, Florida. On November 12, 1884, Harney married his housekeeper and caretaker, Mary E. (Cromwell) St. Cyr in St. Louis. The couple had no children and remained married until Harney's death on May 9, 1889 in Florida. Harney was buried with full military honors at Arlington National Cemetery.
Cite this Entry
"William Selby Harney," Ohio Civil War Central, 2020, Ohio Civil War Central. 27 Jan 2020 <http://www.www.ohiocivilwarcentral.com/entry.php?rec=1534>
"William Selby Harney." (2020) In Ohio Civil War Central, Retrieved January 27, 2020, from Ohio Civil War Central: http://www.www.ohiocivilwarcentral.com/entry.php?rec=1534
This entry has not been associated with any topics. | <urn:uuid:838369b9-5056-4334-814c-206d8bbad19c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.ohiocivilwarcentral.com/entry.php?rec=1534 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251728207.68/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127205148-20200127235148-00487.warc.gz | en | 0.981504 | 1,889 | 3.359375 | 3 | [
-0.36279749870300293,
0.3771578073501587,
-0.014521472156047821,
-0.04312855005264282,
-0.3733161687850952,
-0.0799313485622406,
-0.0063585867173969746,
0.23804102838039398,
-0.37677037715911865,
-0.09474079310894012,
0.5316099524497986,
-0.2737610340118408,
-0.03820459172129631,
0.3903629... | 1 | Co-author of the Price-Harney Agreement, Brigadier-General William S. Harney was a forty-five-year veteran of the United States Army, who participated in the Seminole Wars, the Black Hawk War, the Mexican-American War, the Mormon Expedition, and the American Civil War.
William Selby Harney was born on August 27, 1800, at Haysboro, Tennessee, which has since become a part of Nashville. Harney was the last of eight children born to Thomas and Margaret (Hudson) Harney. His father was a merchant and surveyor, who had served as a major in the Revolutionary War. Harney was educated at home as a youth, before attending local common schools in his area. In 1814, he enrolled in a private academy in his hometown.
On February 13, 1818, with the help of his older brother, Benjamin F. Harney, who was an army surgeon, Harney was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the 1st United States Infantry. He reported for duty on June 28, 1818 in Louisiana, where his first assignment was a campaign against the pirate Jean Lafitte. Participating in the Seminole Wars in Florida, Harney was promoted to first lieutenant on January 7, 1819. In 1821, Harney served as an aide to General Andrew Jackson, who was a fellow Tennessean and friend of the Harney family.
Harney served mostly in Louisiana for the next six years, until August 1824, when he was transferred to Jefferson Barracks, Missouri. On May 14, 1825, while on an expedition to initiate peace treaties with western Indian tribes, Harney learned that he had been promoted to captain.
In 1832, Harney and his company engaged the Sauk Indians during the Black Hawk War. Other future notable military and political leaders who participated in that brief conflict were Winfield Scott, Jefferson Davis, David Twiggs, Albert Sidney Johnston, Robert Anderson, Zachary Taylor, and Abraham Lincoln.
Following the Black Hawk War, Harney met and became engaged to Mary Mullanphy. The two were wed on January 27, 1833. Their marriage, which produced three children, ended in an estrangement, when Mrs. Harney moved to France, where she died in 1860.
On May 1, 1833, at the urging of President Andrew Jackson, Harney was promoted to major and assigned to the paymaster corps. A little over three years later, on August 15, 1836, he was promoted to lieutenant colonel of the 2nd Dragoons. He joined his unit in Florida in January 1837, where he once again campaigned against the Seminoles. On December 20, 1840, Harney received a brevet promotion to colonel for "gallant and meritorious conduct" during the Seminole Wars.
In October 1845, Harney was sent to Texas, when the United States and Mexico quarreled over the establishment of the border between the two nations. When the dispute eventually led to warfare, he played a leading role in Brigadier-General John Wool's campaign against Chihuahua. Harney also fought under the leadership of Major General Zachary Taylor at the Battle of Buena Vista (February 22-23, 1847), before joining Major General Winfield Scott's Army of Invasion in March 1847. Harney led Scott's cavalry, but the two officers did not see eye to eye. When Scott relieved Harney of his command, Harney appealed to Washington, and President James K. Polk reinstated him over Scott's objections. Despite his differences with Scott, Harney performed well during the Mexican-American War. On April 18, 1847, he was brevetted to brigadier-general for his participation in the battle of Cerro Gordo (April 12, 1847).
Between 1849 and 1853, Harney briefly commanded Military Department Number Five, which included much of Texas, on three occasions. In 1854, he was transferred to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas to campaign against Sioux Indians on the Great Plains from 1855 into early 1856. In 1856, Harney briefly returned to Florida, again battling the Seminoles. Harney was redeployed to Kansas in May 1857 to help curtail bloodshed between pro-slavery "border ruffians" from Missouri and anti-slavery Jayhawkers from Kansas, during the Kansas Border Wars.
Harney remained in Kansas a little less than a year before he was ordered to lead a campaign against the Mormons in Utah in April 1858. While travelling west with the Mormon Expedition, Harney learned that he had been promoted to the full rank of brigadier-general, effective June 14, 1858. Before reaching Salt Lake City, General Harney received orders to depart for the West Coast where he would command the Department of Oregon.
Harney arrived at Fort Vancouver on October 24, 1858 and immediately began planning a campaign to pacify hostile Indian tribes. He soon faced a more pressing matter, however, when a dispute over the ownership of San Juan Island, in the Oregon Country, nearly led to bloodshed between British and United States forces. On July 27, 1859, during the so-called Pig War, Harney deployed federal troops commanded by George Pickett to the island to protect American interests. The bloodless encounter was eventually resolved through negotiations, but because of his inflammatory anti-British posturing, Harney was ordered back to Missouri in July 1860.
When the Union began to dissolve after the election of Abraham Lincoln as president, Harney was in command of the Army's Department of the West, headquartered at Jefferson Barracks in St. Louis. Sympathies in the border state were greatly divided. In March 1861, Missouri's Secession Convention opted to remain in the Union despite the secessionist leanings of Governor Claiborne Jackson. After the fall of Fort Sumter, federal officials suspected that secessionists were plotting to seize the St. Louis arsenal. On May 10, 1861, Harney's subordinate, Captain Nathaniel Lyon ordered his troops to surround and to imprison approximately 670 members of the Missouri Volunteer Militia, who were training at Camp Jackson, near St. Louis. Lyon then marched his prisoners through the streets of St. Louis, thereby inciting pro-secessionist residents to protest. When a riot ensued, Lyon's soldiers fired on the angry crowd, killing twenty-eight civilians and wounding as many as fifty more. Lyon's actions fanned anti-Union flames in Missouri. On May 11, the Missouri General Assembly approved a measure that created the Missouri State Guard, commanded by former Governor Sterling Price, and that granted Governor Jackson with extensive executive powers to resist Union forces in the state.
Despite Lyon's provocative actions, Price was committed to maintaining peace in Missouri. On May 21, 1861, he and Harney met and negotiated the Price-Harney Agreement. The pact charged the Missouri State Guard with the responsibility of protecting pro-Unionist citizens in Missouri. When Price proved unable to fulfill his end of the bargain, radical Unionists, led by U.S. Representative Frank Blair and his brother, U.S. Postmaster-General Montgomery Blair, contrived to have Harney relieved of his command. On May 16, 1861, the United States War Department issued Special Orders, No. 135 relieving Harney as commander of the Department of the West. The department then promoted Lyon to the rank of brigadier-general effective May 17, 1861. Harney received word that he had been sacked on May 30, and Lyon succeeded him as departmental commander.
Harney returned to Washington, where he performed administrative duties, until he retired from the army on August 1, 1863. Despite being retired, Harney was brevetted to major general on March 13, 1865, "for long and faithful service."
Following the Civil War, the government engaged Harney to negotiate peace with the Plains Indians in the West in 1868. In 1869, President Andrew Johnson appointed him as a member of the Board of Commissioners for Indian Affairs and as a member of the Board of Indian Peace Commissioners in the Northwest.
Harney spent the later years of his life residing at his extensive landholdings in Missouri, in Mississippi and at his last home on Lake Eola, near Orlando, Florida. On November 12, 1884, Harney married his housekeeper and caretaker, Mary E. (Cromwell) St. Cyr in St. Louis. The couple had no children and remained married until Harney's death on May 9, 1889 in Florida. Harney was buried with full military honors at Arlington National Cemetery.
Cite this Entry
"William Selby Harney," Ohio Civil War Central, 2020, Ohio Civil War Central. 27 Jan 2020 <http://www.www.ohiocivilwarcentral.com/entry.php?rec=1534>
"William Selby Harney." (2020) In Ohio Civil War Central, Retrieved January 27, 2020, from Ohio Civil War Central: http://www.www.ohiocivilwarcentral.com/entry.php?rec=1534
This entry has not been associated with any topics. | 2,083 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Provocation (What I did – my lesson) Hypothesis (What I think it means) Observation (What I saw) The children drew a blueprint of the structure they would like to build as a team. The children are thinking about working as a team.. The children discussed what part each of them will draw and build. I think the children understood that a plan is needed so everyone knows what to do. We read the story Dewey Doo-it Builds a House. This is a story about Habitat for Humanity. The children asked questions about what certain lines were on the blueprints. I think the children were beginning to see how a plan could help them lay out what they were going to build. The children discussed what might happen if a team of builders didn’t have a plan. The children commented that they wanted to build something, but didn’t know how. The children viewed blueprints of houses , bridges, and ships. I think that the children were beginning to understand that they needed a plan.
I noticed that the children have a lot of experience building with various types of blocks. The children enjoy building standing structures. The children built flat structures. We explored building with wood craft sticks,. START The children were not sure how to build up with flat sticks. The children understood that different adhesives have different drying times. We explored building with wood craft sticks, liquid glue, and glue sticks. The children discussed using too much liquid glue and how it would take a long time to dry. They also noticed that the glue sticks dried faster. I think the children would like to build three-dimensional structures, but find it difficult with flat blocks or sticks. The children view pictures of bridges and houses being built. The children commented on what kinds of structures they have built with each type of block. The children viewed pictures of bridges and houses being built. I think the children understood that the X’s were there for a reason, but they weren’t sure what the reason was. The children pointed out X’s in the constructions. We used the same pictures and outlined shapes we found in the structures. I think the children knew that triangles had something to do with building strong structures. The children found a lot of shapes in the structures, especially triangles.
The children began creating a catalog of how to build with wood craft sticks. The children explored building with wood craft sticks and tape. The children reflected on their experiences with working with liquid glue and glue sticks. The children thought that the liquid glue stuck better but was messy and took longer to dry. We created pages about tape for our catalog. The children found the tape easier to work with because it held well and they didn’t have to wait for it to dry. The children built many different structures, including standing structures, hanging structures, and bendable structures. The children reflected on their experience building with tape and wood craft sticks. They commented that the tape was stronger than the glue. We explored building with wood craft sticks and covered wire. The children had difficulty working with the wire. One child said it was because she hadn’t worked with wire before. The children were unsure how to use this new material.. I think that the children were saying “stronger” when they meant “easier to work with.” The children explored building with wood craft sticks and clay. The children thought that the clay was easier to work with because they had worked with it before. The children built a variety of three-dimensional structures. | <urn:uuid:4af3b1a6-e781-4d5f-a95b-a147340ff9d2> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.slideserve.com/kristy/the-children-commented-that-they-wanted-to-build-something-but-didn-t-know-how | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250609478.50/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123071220-20200123100220-00485.warc.gz | en | 0.985169 | 723 | 3.78125 | 4 | [
-0.07542114704847336,
0.3336727023124695,
0.13485462963581085,
-0.1016741693019867,
-0.3303031623363495,
0.31566929817199707,
0.02116142027080059,
0.16216926276683807,
-0.1545572131872177,
0.11547709256410599,
0.31056010723114014,
-0.04483504593372345,
-0.14980153739452362,
0.2202146202325... | 1 | Provocation (What I did – my lesson) Hypothesis (What I think it means) Observation (What I saw) The children drew a blueprint of the structure they would like to build as a team. The children are thinking about working as a team.. The children discussed what part each of them will draw and build. I think the children understood that a plan is needed so everyone knows what to do. We read the story Dewey Doo-it Builds a House. This is a story about Habitat for Humanity. The children asked questions about what certain lines were on the blueprints. I think the children were beginning to see how a plan could help them lay out what they were going to build. The children discussed what might happen if a team of builders didn’t have a plan. The children commented that they wanted to build something, but didn’t know how. The children viewed blueprints of houses , bridges, and ships. I think that the children were beginning to understand that they needed a plan.
I noticed that the children have a lot of experience building with various types of blocks. The children enjoy building standing structures. The children built flat structures. We explored building with wood craft sticks,. START The children were not sure how to build up with flat sticks. The children understood that different adhesives have different drying times. We explored building with wood craft sticks, liquid glue, and glue sticks. The children discussed using too much liquid glue and how it would take a long time to dry. They also noticed that the glue sticks dried faster. I think the children would like to build three-dimensional structures, but find it difficult with flat blocks or sticks. The children view pictures of bridges and houses being built. The children commented on what kinds of structures they have built with each type of block. The children viewed pictures of bridges and houses being built. I think the children understood that the X’s were there for a reason, but they weren’t sure what the reason was. The children pointed out X’s in the constructions. We used the same pictures and outlined shapes we found in the structures. I think the children knew that triangles had something to do with building strong structures. The children found a lot of shapes in the structures, especially triangles.
The children began creating a catalog of how to build with wood craft sticks. The children explored building with wood craft sticks and tape. The children reflected on their experiences with working with liquid glue and glue sticks. The children thought that the liquid glue stuck better but was messy and took longer to dry. We created pages about tape for our catalog. The children found the tape easier to work with because it held well and they didn’t have to wait for it to dry. The children built many different structures, including standing structures, hanging structures, and bendable structures. The children reflected on their experience building with tape and wood craft sticks. They commented that the tape was stronger than the glue. We explored building with wood craft sticks and covered wire. The children had difficulty working with the wire. One child said it was because she hadn’t worked with wire before. The children were unsure how to use this new material.. I think that the children were saying “stronger” when they meant “easier to work with.” The children explored building with wood craft sticks and clay. The children thought that the clay was easier to work with because they had worked with it before. The children built a variety of three-dimensional structures. | 695 | ENGLISH | 1 |
In 1587 Eleanor Dare started a history of first New England's female settlers. In XVI-XVII century it was characterized more with dismal end then with a story of prosperous life and happy ending. Coming to New World mostly in search for a good partner, as "tobacco brides " or being simply deported as undesirable citizens, women died from starvation, malaria or Indian attacks. Some women sailed across the ocean as indentured servants and suffered from the cruelty of their masters. There were, of course, stories of success such as with the Brent sisters. Unmarried, they ran Maryland colony during crises. Margaret Brent became to be known as the nation's first lawyer and the first colonial woman who demanded the right to vote. Although, not being a settler, a young noble Indian women Pocahontas was a figure of no small importance. She not only provided struggling colonist with food, but also brought peace between settlers and Algonquin tribe by the act of marriage with John Rolfe. .
Although women didn't hold office or vote, they played an active role in the South colonies. Sarah Drummond, Sarah Grendon and Lydia Chisman came to prominence during Bacon Rebellion as a strong rulers and advocates of their husbands. Male dominance began to weaken.
Women were legally vested a right to operate business and perform jobs such as merchants, printers and doctors, but were paid much less for performing the same duties as men. .
Ann Hutchinson, who opposed Puritan authority, was the most famous dissident in early colonial history. She was banished from Massachusetts and moved to New York where she found her death due to Indian attack. There were many other strong-minded women living in colonies. Hannah Dustan was taken captive and could escape, returning home with scalps of Indians. Elizabeth Tozier pretended to be a man so she could protect the fields. .
During late XVII century notorious Salem with-hunt took place in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. | <urn:uuid:e942bcdc-ebaa-40fb-8a50-ae2d297e6464> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.exampleessays.com/viewpaper/205099.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250624328.55/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124161014-20200124190014-00053.warc.gz | en | 0.984546 | 400 | 4.125 | 4 | [
-0.1712520271539688,
0.22802568972110748,
0.24573560059070587,
-0.09043397009372711,
-0.27575257420539856,
0.2873159646987915,
0.03776733949780464,
-0.07712730765342712,
-0.062094006687402725,
0.033485449850559235,
0.15862247347831726,
-0.12764683365821838,
0.08807957172393799,
0.123172961... | 4 | In 1587 Eleanor Dare started a history of first New England's female settlers. In XVI-XVII century it was characterized more with dismal end then with a story of prosperous life and happy ending. Coming to New World mostly in search for a good partner, as "tobacco brides " or being simply deported as undesirable citizens, women died from starvation, malaria or Indian attacks. Some women sailed across the ocean as indentured servants and suffered from the cruelty of their masters. There were, of course, stories of success such as with the Brent sisters. Unmarried, they ran Maryland colony during crises. Margaret Brent became to be known as the nation's first lawyer and the first colonial woman who demanded the right to vote. Although, not being a settler, a young noble Indian women Pocahontas was a figure of no small importance. She not only provided struggling colonist with food, but also brought peace between settlers and Algonquin tribe by the act of marriage with John Rolfe. .
Although women didn't hold office or vote, they played an active role in the South colonies. Sarah Drummond, Sarah Grendon and Lydia Chisman came to prominence during Bacon Rebellion as a strong rulers and advocates of their husbands. Male dominance began to weaken.
Women were legally vested a right to operate business and perform jobs such as merchants, printers and doctors, but were paid much less for performing the same duties as men. .
Ann Hutchinson, who opposed Puritan authority, was the most famous dissident in early colonial history. She was banished from Massachusetts and moved to New York where she found her death due to Indian attack. There were many other strong-minded women living in colonies. Hannah Dustan was taken captive and could escape, returning home with scalps of Indians. Elizabeth Tozier pretended to be a man so she could protect the fields. .
During late XVII century notorious Salem with-hunt took place in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. | 397 | ENGLISH | 1 |
While the rest of the world was recuperating from the aftermath of the second World War and its consequences, the people of India were subjected, in 1947, to another tragedy of unprecedented proportions, in the form of Partition of India. It was not just a division of civilization, it was also a partition of an ancient civilization, and the partition of an open economy, which had never been closed and divided like this…
The bitter memories of communal violence associated with partition often prevent us from imagining as to what could have happened, had India not been divided in 1947. After all, it was not something that was decided by the will of people on either side of the divide. While it is true that Muslim League had begun to demand a separate State for Muslims, but it was neither the first nor the last such call for a separate political unit on one basis or the other. As far as people of India are concerned, for most of them, it was a fait accompli, just as the British colonization of India and their subsequent exist from India had been. Beyond the cities, where only a small part of India lived, the State and Government hardly had a presence. Most villages were visited by Government officials either for collecting taxes, or if they were serious crimes.
Actually, that was also one of the most important reason for the prevailing indifference of these Indians to annexation of political power by foreigners from the urban and royal elites living in cities and palaces far away from their life.
Division of India, Consequent Migration & Opportunistic Violence that kept spreading
For all those who were unexpectedly caught in the power games played by the nascent political parties with an obliging British establishment and a less than Indian bureaucracy, Partition of India was a bigger event than the exit of the British. After all, for those millions who had to migrate to faraway lands all of a sudden, with little support from anywhere, it was a matter of life and death. One shudders to think, how world will respond today to their miseries if such a thing was to happen today! Yet, what is astonishing, is the ease with which the British masters of India could approve of such a proposition. This decision not only led to the death of over half a million Indians - Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims, but it also laid down permanent divisions in the Indian civilization, which has till then always flown across in this region, without obstructions from the kingdoms and their monarchs.
1947 brought about a kind of partition and blockade within the Indian civilization, which the Indian civilization had never experienced before, and the consequences of which continue to remain out of public awareness even today, largely due to the preoccupation of everyone with the history of bloodshed and consequent communal divide, which vested interests continue to exploit even today in the name of India Pakistan conflict. The subsequent events in East Pakistan and its liberation from the stranglehold of those who wanted partition in the name of Islam, makes it clear that partition was a result of their political aspirations, for which religion just became an easily available tool. Had the ease of communal division not been available, these forces would have found some other cause to serve their ends.
In many ways, 1947 culminated a process of putting political divisions in place in the Indian civilization, that has been gradually implemented by British since a hundred years or so prior to 1947, largely to serve their own strategic interests. Curzon’s partition of Bengal in 1905, Separation of Myanmar and strict controls and restrictions in movement of people across borders, were all part of this chain that happened a little before that it. Thus, the civilization of India, which has always dominated its political units and kings till then, was increasingly restrained, divided and undermined. Before British, the political borders had always been for the Kings. They meant little for the people, who were often not even concerned with who the King may have been!
Partition of India in 1947 changed all that. It was like dividing a large and rapidly flowing river into parts, by blocking the flow of water. The consequences were significantly adverse for the eco-system of the sub-continent, leading all parts of erstwhile India into disarray. People suffer from these consequences even today, and pay the price of it, in the form of poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, lack of development, conflicts and much more.
Economic Consequences of Partition have obstructed Economic & Human Development
The communal violence and suffering that the people faced during partition was a one-time event. Two wars between India and Pakistan were also short lived events, as was the subsequent partition of Pakistan and creation of Bangladesh. What continues to endure, however, are the huge economic costs that the people have been paying, and will probably keep paying in the foreseeable future. These costs are primarily in the nature of opportunity cost, or the costs in terms of what we could have achieved, had we not been faced with this catastrophic event.
Throughout history, or at least since the time of Alexander’s failed invasion of India more than two thousand years ago, India has been one of the most prosperous places on this planet … a place where every business of the world wanted to come and trade. It is estimated that India contributed at least one fourth of the global economic production. While this began to change since the beginning of the industrial revolution in the Europe in last few centuries, the trade between India and Europe continued to be in India’s favour up to the middle of nineteenth century. That should suffice to describe the economic might of Indian civilization.
Till 1820s, even while Europe was reaping the benefits of its industrial bandwagon and even though large parts of India had already come under practical control of British East India Company, the per capita income of an Indian was not less than half of what an average European earned. All this changed drastically during the next hundred years or so, as the ratio of average income of an Indian and a European changed from 1:2 to 1: 10 and reached a nadir of 1:15, in spite of the widespread destruction of Europe during the great wars. By 1947, it was already bad enough largely due to the phenomenon described as ‘drain of wealth” by Dadabhai Nauroji, who was also the first Asian to be a Member of Parliament in United Kingdom, and the first Indian to be a Professor at Elphinstone Institution in 1850.
With Indian independence in 1947, it was all supposed to change. Change it did… but the heavy costs of partition ensured that people were condemned to another era of under-development and poverty, while the State actors, and many of the none-State actors acting in collusion with the States, kept spending the precious resources that were needed by the people, in a mindless conflict.
Partition caused massive Destruction of Economy between 1947-50
More than 15 million people were directly displaced by partition, being forced all of a sudden to move lock, stock and barrel to a new territory. The astonishing failure of British administration, with all its resources, including the mighty armed forces and large police force, allowed opportunistic miscreants to target the hapless migrating masses on both sides, at times, with inhuman cruelty. These incidents of violence incited reactionary violence, gradually leading to a spiral of hatred on both sides that the administration and bureaucracy of that time seems to have left completely to its own fate.
More than half a million perished during this man made tragedy, actually far more than what would have been the case had the League actually carried out its threats of inciting communal violence. Almost 5% of the population was affected, and rendered homeless. Apart from the human tragedy, the loss of economy was also of unprecedented proportion, coming as it was, after the stress of wars and the Bengal famine. Instead of the after-war recovery, which the rest of the world was enjoying at that time, India and Pakistan may have lost anywhere between 5 to 10% of their national wealth and resources, including skilled and unskilled workforce, in this enormous tragedy.
Indigenous Agro-industries were the First Casualty of Partition
Undivided India was a single economy, and a common market, and the territories that now fell in different countries of India and Pakistan were economically interdependent. As a result of partition, 70% of raw jute grown in East Bengal was of little use, since most of the processing mills were on the Indian side. Nearly same was the story with several other products, though on a lower scale.
Break-down of Business Networks and Markets
The political division of India came with borders that blocked the movement of goods as well as people, perhaps for the first time in the history of Indian civilization, where borders have always remained porous for trade and business. These borders continue to remain largely non-porous, even after seven decades, even while such borders have been destroyed long back in other places like Europe.
What it meant was that all of a sudden there were three closed markets, instead of a large and open market that the Indian civilization had always been since ancient times. The regional trade blockades prevent all three countries from reaping the benefits from globalization in subsequent decades, simply because closed border also closes access to rest of the world.
Military Expenditure diverted Precious Scarce Resources
India, Pakistan and Bangladesh – all have been guilty of spending enormous resources on preparing for potential escalation of conflict during the last seven decades. These scarce resources were badly required by their already suffering people. It may be worth remembering that a very large part of this money went to Western Governments and Multinational Companies supplying arms and ammunition to all three countries. Greater the escalation of conflict, more the arms sale to the region! The defense spend by India is over 2.5% of GDP every year. For Pakistan it is over 3% and Bangladesh a little less than 2.5%. Compound these amounts for seventy years, and it is not difficult to see what we have lost.
Long Term Costs of Continuous Conflict
As conflicts, including terrorism, continue to prosper in the region due to India-Pakistan conflict, significant costs continue to be imposed on the economy, mainly in the form of opportunities of economic development that are lost. Border areas suffer more, since they could have prospered more from free trade in the region. Political uncertainties continue to haunt the economy, especially in places that are affected more, like Kashmir or Baluchistan.
There have also been enormous non-economic consequences, which in turn obstruct economic development. The most important of them was the change in balance of power between India and China, the two great civilizations of the East that have never before come into a confrontation with each other. Development of Mao’s nationalism in an integrated Chinese State under communist leadership gave it an edge over India primarily because of the division of the latter.
Together, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh carry more resources than China, but the divided economies and their failure to grow at a pace at which the rest of the world grew meant that Chinese economy today is more than four times the size of the combined economy of the three countries that came out of undivided India.
Today, the Chinese economy has an annual GDP of US$11.2 trillion. The size of economies of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are US$2.26 trillion, 0.28 and 0.22 trillion, making a total of US$ 2.76 trillion. Per capital GDP of a Chinese today is more than US$ 8100, while that of a person in Bangladesh, Pakistan and India are US$ 1350, 1475 and 1700 respectively. An average Chinese is more than five times prosperous his counterpart, in stark contrast to what it was in 1947.
Perhaps, what Chinese economy is today, is the best economic indicator of what the people of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh have lost since 1947 in terms of opportunity cost. Without doubt, a very large part of this has been lost, directly or indirectly, due to the partition that was unleashed on them in 1947, and which continues to haunt them, at least economically.
This is the real cost of partition of India ….. even if most people suffering from it do not even realize it!
Governor dela Torre's rule over the Philippines brings liberal minds amongst our citizens. And when this new ideals were harassed and censored by his successors (Gov.-General Izquierdo), the dawn of the Filipino unity and revolution begins.
Ancient Indian society had succeeded in orienting the lifestyle, expectations and duties of its people in accordance with their vocation or profession. This helped in achieving greater vocational specialization and gave rise to four classes of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras.
Kerala before 1956 was a group of sovereigns. Read about the important kingdoms here..
Thanks. You are right. An undivided India would be what China is trying is trying to be today, the next superpower. The difference of course, would have been that Indian civilization, with people at the centre instead of the political rulers would have made the world more peaceful. Pakistan would also not have been what it is today!reply 0
The undivided India would have been quite a dream for today's generation. I liked the way you showed that map upfront, which gives us a fair bit of idea of what things would have been. Another thing is that I had read that Pakistan and Bangladesh were also a part of undived India. Please correct me if I am wrong. But it would have been a big power today. And there would have been no those political or any other issues that we are facing today. Moreover, there would not have been those enmities and the picture would have looked quite different. As far as these figures are concerned, they are some awesome that you mentioned in the end. The GDP is one thing that I don't understand a lot, but yes, the figures speak for themselves. A very good and nicely written article that I read after quite a few days.reply 0 | <urn:uuid:30d66d33-95c9-4166-8ec6-d35f82af575e> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://travelandculture.expertscolumn.com/what-if-india-had-not-been-divided-in-1947 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00483.warc.gz | en | 0.980562 | 2,869 | 3.5625 | 4 | [
-0.06074613332748413,
-0.11098244786262512,
0.26131266355514526,
-0.21921491622924805,
0.11698728799819946,
-0.024349164217710495,
-0.006466647144407034,
0.052016228437423706,
0.3667981028556824,
0.019155088812112808,
0.17726293206214905,
-0.2294408082962036,
0.21639585494995117,
0.4896087... | 1 | While the rest of the world was recuperating from the aftermath of the second World War and its consequences, the people of India were subjected, in 1947, to another tragedy of unprecedented proportions, in the form of Partition of India. It was not just a division of civilization, it was also a partition of an ancient civilization, and the partition of an open economy, which had never been closed and divided like this…
The bitter memories of communal violence associated with partition often prevent us from imagining as to what could have happened, had India not been divided in 1947. After all, it was not something that was decided by the will of people on either side of the divide. While it is true that Muslim League had begun to demand a separate State for Muslims, but it was neither the first nor the last such call for a separate political unit on one basis or the other. As far as people of India are concerned, for most of them, it was a fait accompli, just as the British colonization of India and their subsequent exist from India had been. Beyond the cities, where only a small part of India lived, the State and Government hardly had a presence. Most villages were visited by Government officials either for collecting taxes, or if they were serious crimes.
Actually, that was also one of the most important reason for the prevailing indifference of these Indians to annexation of political power by foreigners from the urban and royal elites living in cities and palaces far away from their life.
Division of India, Consequent Migration & Opportunistic Violence that kept spreading
For all those who were unexpectedly caught in the power games played by the nascent political parties with an obliging British establishment and a less than Indian bureaucracy, Partition of India was a bigger event than the exit of the British. After all, for those millions who had to migrate to faraway lands all of a sudden, with little support from anywhere, it was a matter of life and death. One shudders to think, how world will respond today to their miseries if such a thing was to happen today! Yet, what is astonishing, is the ease with which the British masters of India could approve of such a proposition. This decision not only led to the death of over half a million Indians - Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims, but it also laid down permanent divisions in the Indian civilization, which has till then always flown across in this region, without obstructions from the kingdoms and their monarchs.
1947 brought about a kind of partition and blockade within the Indian civilization, which the Indian civilization had never experienced before, and the consequences of which continue to remain out of public awareness even today, largely due to the preoccupation of everyone with the history of bloodshed and consequent communal divide, which vested interests continue to exploit even today in the name of India Pakistan conflict. The subsequent events in East Pakistan and its liberation from the stranglehold of those who wanted partition in the name of Islam, makes it clear that partition was a result of their political aspirations, for which religion just became an easily available tool. Had the ease of communal division not been available, these forces would have found some other cause to serve their ends.
In many ways, 1947 culminated a process of putting political divisions in place in the Indian civilization, that has been gradually implemented by British since a hundred years or so prior to 1947, largely to serve their own strategic interests. Curzon’s partition of Bengal in 1905, Separation of Myanmar and strict controls and restrictions in movement of people across borders, were all part of this chain that happened a little before that it. Thus, the civilization of India, which has always dominated its political units and kings till then, was increasingly restrained, divided and undermined. Before British, the political borders had always been for the Kings. They meant little for the people, who were often not even concerned with who the King may have been!
Partition of India in 1947 changed all that. It was like dividing a large and rapidly flowing river into parts, by blocking the flow of water. The consequences were significantly adverse for the eco-system of the sub-continent, leading all parts of erstwhile India into disarray. People suffer from these consequences even today, and pay the price of it, in the form of poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, lack of development, conflicts and much more.
Economic Consequences of Partition have obstructed Economic & Human Development
The communal violence and suffering that the people faced during partition was a one-time event. Two wars between India and Pakistan were also short lived events, as was the subsequent partition of Pakistan and creation of Bangladesh. What continues to endure, however, are the huge economic costs that the people have been paying, and will probably keep paying in the foreseeable future. These costs are primarily in the nature of opportunity cost, or the costs in terms of what we could have achieved, had we not been faced with this catastrophic event.
Throughout history, or at least since the time of Alexander’s failed invasion of India more than two thousand years ago, India has been one of the most prosperous places on this planet … a place where every business of the world wanted to come and trade. It is estimated that India contributed at least one fourth of the global economic production. While this began to change since the beginning of the industrial revolution in the Europe in last few centuries, the trade between India and Europe continued to be in India’s favour up to the middle of nineteenth century. That should suffice to describe the economic might of Indian civilization.
Till 1820s, even while Europe was reaping the benefits of its industrial bandwagon and even though large parts of India had already come under practical control of British East India Company, the per capita income of an Indian was not less than half of what an average European earned. All this changed drastically during the next hundred years or so, as the ratio of average income of an Indian and a European changed from 1:2 to 1: 10 and reached a nadir of 1:15, in spite of the widespread destruction of Europe during the great wars. By 1947, it was already bad enough largely due to the phenomenon described as ‘drain of wealth” by Dadabhai Nauroji, who was also the first Asian to be a Member of Parliament in United Kingdom, and the first Indian to be a Professor at Elphinstone Institution in 1850.
With Indian independence in 1947, it was all supposed to change. Change it did… but the heavy costs of partition ensured that people were condemned to another era of under-development and poverty, while the State actors, and many of the none-State actors acting in collusion with the States, kept spending the precious resources that were needed by the people, in a mindless conflict.
Partition caused massive Destruction of Economy between 1947-50
More than 15 million people were directly displaced by partition, being forced all of a sudden to move lock, stock and barrel to a new territory. The astonishing failure of British administration, with all its resources, including the mighty armed forces and large police force, allowed opportunistic miscreants to target the hapless migrating masses on both sides, at times, with inhuman cruelty. These incidents of violence incited reactionary violence, gradually leading to a spiral of hatred on both sides that the administration and bureaucracy of that time seems to have left completely to its own fate.
More than half a million perished during this man made tragedy, actually far more than what would have been the case had the League actually carried out its threats of inciting communal violence. Almost 5% of the population was affected, and rendered homeless. Apart from the human tragedy, the loss of economy was also of unprecedented proportion, coming as it was, after the stress of wars and the Bengal famine. Instead of the after-war recovery, which the rest of the world was enjoying at that time, India and Pakistan may have lost anywhere between 5 to 10% of their national wealth and resources, including skilled and unskilled workforce, in this enormous tragedy.
Indigenous Agro-industries were the First Casualty of Partition
Undivided India was a single economy, and a common market, and the territories that now fell in different countries of India and Pakistan were economically interdependent. As a result of partition, 70% of raw jute grown in East Bengal was of little use, since most of the processing mills were on the Indian side. Nearly same was the story with several other products, though on a lower scale.
Break-down of Business Networks and Markets
The political division of India came with borders that blocked the movement of goods as well as people, perhaps for the first time in the history of Indian civilization, where borders have always remained porous for trade and business. These borders continue to remain largely non-porous, even after seven decades, even while such borders have been destroyed long back in other places like Europe.
What it meant was that all of a sudden there were three closed markets, instead of a large and open market that the Indian civilization had always been since ancient times. The regional trade blockades prevent all three countries from reaping the benefits from globalization in subsequent decades, simply because closed border also closes access to rest of the world.
Military Expenditure diverted Precious Scarce Resources
India, Pakistan and Bangladesh – all have been guilty of spending enormous resources on preparing for potential escalation of conflict during the last seven decades. These scarce resources were badly required by their already suffering people. It may be worth remembering that a very large part of this money went to Western Governments and Multinational Companies supplying arms and ammunition to all three countries. Greater the escalation of conflict, more the arms sale to the region! The defense spend by India is over 2.5% of GDP every year. For Pakistan it is over 3% and Bangladesh a little less than 2.5%. Compound these amounts for seventy years, and it is not difficult to see what we have lost.
Long Term Costs of Continuous Conflict
As conflicts, including terrorism, continue to prosper in the region due to India-Pakistan conflict, significant costs continue to be imposed on the economy, mainly in the form of opportunities of economic development that are lost. Border areas suffer more, since they could have prospered more from free trade in the region. Political uncertainties continue to haunt the economy, especially in places that are affected more, like Kashmir or Baluchistan.
There have also been enormous non-economic consequences, which in turn obstruct economic development. The most important of them was the change in balance of power between India and China, the two great civilizations of the East that have never before come into a confrontation with each other. Development of Mao’s nationalism in an integrated Chinese State under communist leadership gave it an edge over India primarily because of the division of the latter.
Together, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh carry more resources than China, but the divided economies and their failure to grow at a pace at which the rest of the world grew meant that Chinese economy today is more than four times the size of the combined economy of the three countries that came out of undivided India.
Today, the Chinese economy has an annual GDP of US$11.2 trillion. The size of economies of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are US$2.26 trillion, 0.28 and 0.22 trillion, making a total of US$ 2.76 trillion. Per capital GDP of a Chinese today is more than US$ 8100, while that of a person in Bangladesh, Pakistan and India are US$ 1350, 1475 and 1700 respectively. An average Chinese is more than five times prosperous his counterpart, in stark contrast to what it was in 1947.
Perhaps, what Chinese economy is today, is the best economic indicator of what the people of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh have lost since 1947 in terms of opportunity cost. Without doubt, a very large part of this has been lost, directly or indirectly, due to the partition that was unleashed on them in 1947, and which continues to haunt them, at least economically.
This is the real cost of partition of India ….. even if most people suffering from it do not even realize it!
Governor dela Torre's rule over the Philippines brings liberal minds amongst our citizens. And when this new ideals were harassed and censored by his successors (Gov.-General Izquierdo), the dawn of the Filipino unity and revolution begins.
Ancient Indian society had succeeded in orienting the lifestyle, expectations and duties of its people in accordance with their vocation or profession. This helped in achieving greater vocational specialization and gave rise to four classes of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras.
Kerala before 1956 was a group of sovereigns. Read about the important kingdoms here..
Thanks. You are right. An undivided India would be what China is trying is trying to be today, the next superpower. The difference of course, would have been that Indian civilization, with people at the centre instead of the political rulers would have made the world more peaceful. Pakistan would also not have been what it is today!reply 0
The undivided India would have been quite a dream for today's generation. I liked the way you showed that map upfront, which gives us a fair bit of idea of what things would have been. Another thing is that I had read that Pakistan and Bangladesh were also a part of undived India. Please correct me if I am wrong. But it would have been a big power today. And there would have been no those political or any other issues that we are facing today. Moreover, there would not have been those enmities and the picture would have looked quite different. As far as these figures are concerned, they are some awesome that you mentioned in the end. The GDP is one thing that I don't understand a lot, but yes, the figures speak for themselves. A very good and nicely written article that I read after quite a few days.reply 0 | 2,924 | ENGLISH | 1 |
warm and light their huts with seal oil; the basis of their food is seal meat, fish and shell-fish only serving to give variety to it; they wear a full dress of seal-skin sewed with seal tendons, with needles of seal bone; their boots are of seal leather, and their baby-clothes are also made of seal-skin; and that substance constitutes the sheathing to their boats. They are able to travel on land, or snow and ice, in sledges drawn by their dogs. With the conditions of existence thus fairly well assured to them, they have proved themselves accessible to a certain degree of civilization, and have been taught to read and write, and to submit themselves to religious restraints. Yet they are liable to sufferings in seasons of extreme severity which they might escape if, instead of the wild seal, they had some domestic animal on which they could depend for the supply of their food and economical wants.
The reindeer is to the Laplander all that the seal is to the Eskimo, and more. It gives him its skin for clothing, its flesh for food, its horns and bones for tool-making. It furthermore gives milk, and is a pack and draught animal. To these it adds the capital advantage over the seal of being a real domestic animal, so that the Laplander is rarely deprived of necessaries. The dog is also an auxiliary. The Laplander has, therefore, two domestic animals. He has made a corresponding advance in civilization beyond what has been accomplished by the Eskimo.
The Spanish conquerors found two countries in America which had a civilization of ancient date—Peru, where there were two domestic animals, the dog and the llama; and Mexico, which, with no domestic animal but the dog, had an advanced and very productive agriculture. Everywhere else the Spaniards found savages, of whom the Caribs were the most famous. These are represented now by the Galibis and other tribes in Guiana, who exist in a primitive condition, without domestic animals. On his second voyage to America, in 1493, Columbus brought over some European domestic animals, which became the property of the Indians who had intercourse with the whites. The half-breeds of these Indians, the Gauchos and the Araucanians, became in less than two centuries pastoral and agricultural peoples, while other tribes, retiring from the whites, fell into a state of decline.
America, poor in domestic animals and having few cultivated plants at the time of the arrival of the Spaniards, from being able to support only a primitive and sparse population, has by the aid of these elements of civilization become populous and wealthy. The same that has been accomplished in America in three centuries has been done in Australia in fifty years.
From this review of primitive life we draw the conclusions that, wherever he may be found, man is condemned perpetually | <urn:uuid:fc28b6e9-ed7a-42b2-9567-ec3f7fdbcab0> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Popular_Science_Monthly_Volume_38.djvu/691 | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251696046.73/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127081933-20200127111933-00511.warc.gz | en | 0.982099 | 593 | 3.453125 | 3 | [
-0.11673084646463394,
0.028826050460338593,
0.423925518989563,
0.32621315121650696,
0.09171853959560394,
-0.37776899337768555,
0.24317386746406555,
0.15708822011947632,
-0.223674476146698,
0.1376122683286667,
-0.15232974290847778,
-0.5419384241104126,
0.42942896485328674,
0.134351819753646... | 1 | warm and light their huts with seal oil; the basis of their food is seal meat, fish and shell-fish only serving to give variety to it; they wear a full dress of seal-skin sewed with seal tendons, with needles of seal bone; their boots are of seal leather, and their baby-clothes are also made of seal-skin; and that substance constitutes the sheathing to their boats. They are able to travel on land, or snow and ice, in sledges drawn by their dogs. With the conditions of existence thus fairly well assured to them, they have proved themselves accessible to a certain degree of civilization, and have been taught to read and write, and to submit themselves to religious restraints. Yet they are liable to sufferings in seasons of extreme severity which they might escape if, instead of the wild seal, they had some domestic animal on which they could depend for the supply of their food and economical wants.
The reindeer is to the Laplander all that the seal is to the Eskimo, and more. It gives him its skin for clothing, its flesh for food, its horns and bones for tool-making. It furthermore gives milk, and is a pack and draught animal. To these it adds the capital advantage over the seal of being a real domestic animal, so that the Laplander is rarely deprived of necessaries. The dog is also an auxiliary. The Laplander has, therefore, two domestic animals. He has made a corresponding advance in civilization beyond what has been accomplished by the Eskimo.
The Spanish conquerors found two countries in America which had a civilization of ancient date—Peru, where there were two domestic animals, the dog and the llama; and Mexico, which, with no domestic animal but the dog, had an advanced and very productive agriculture. Everywhere else the Spaniards found savages, of whom the Caribs were the most famous. These are represented now by the Galibis and other tribes in Guiana, who exist in a primitive condition, without domestic animals. On his second voyage to America, in 1493, Columbus brought over some European domestic animals, which became the property of the Indians who had intercourse with the whites. The half-breeds of these Indians, the Gauchos and the Araucanians, became in less than two centuries pastoral and agricultural peoples, while other tribes, retiring from the whites, fell into a state of decline.
America, poor in domestic animals and having few cultivated plants at the time of the arrival of the Spaniards, from being able to support only a primitive and sparse population, has by the aid of these elements of civilization become populous and wealthy. The same that has been accomplished in America in three centuries has been done in Australia in fifty years.
From this review of primitive life we draw the conclusions that, wherever he may be found, man is condemned perpetually | 586 | ENGLISH | 1 |
To conduct their research, the scientists attached recording devices to humpback calves, something that had never been done before. The recorders used suction cups to stick the devices to the calves’ skin. They would stay on for approximately one day before falling off.
“Vocalisations between mother and calf, which included very weak tonal and grunting sounds, were produced more frequently during active dives than suckling dives, suggesting that mechanical stimuli rather than acoustic cues are used to initiate nursing,” the researchers wrote in their report, which was published in Functional Ecology on Tuesday.
"It's like a squeaky sound, and some of them are really like grunting sounds," researcher Simone Videsen told NPR.
Scientists previously assumed that the young whales made noise when they were hungry, but now theorize that the sounds allow their mothers to keep track of them as they travel through the ocean.
Interestingly, the sounds are very quiet, which the scientists say may be to avoid being heard by dangerous predators who feed on calves, such as orca whales.
"There are lots of killer whales in the area which are predating on these calves," Videsen said, "and they can use these sounds between mother and calf as like homing cues."
While mother whales are capable of being quite loud, the scientists found that they will also often “whisper” back to their calves.
The researchers noted that if the calves are in fact whispering to avoid predators, it may mean that the species possesses greater intelligence than previously believed. | <urn:uuid:307cad5d-b15e-487e-ac72-e71027730e3c> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://sputniknews.com/environment/201704281053087974-humpback-whale-calves-whisper/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251700675.78/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127112805-20200127142805-00500.warc.gz | en | 0.986661 | 319 | 3.5 | 4 | [
0.20044434070587158,
-0.045078132301568985,
0.2273770272731781,
-0.24141956865787506,
0.09367973357439041,
-0.12056758999824524,
-0.06392232328653336,
0.035261958837509155,
0.2945195138454437,
0.15534965693950653,
-0.20364975929260254,
-0.5580587983131409,
-0.05372990667819977,
0.028540523... | 3 | To conduct their research, the scientists attached recording devices to humpback calves, something that had never been done before. The recorders used suction cups to stick the devices to the calves’ skin. They would stay on for approximately one day before falling off.
“Vocalisations between mother and calf, which included very weak tonal and grunting sounds, were produced more frequently during active dives than suckling dives, suggesting that mechanical stimuli rather than acoustic cues are used to initiate nursing,” the researchers wrote in their report, which was published in Functional Ecology on Tuesday.
"It's like a squeaky sound, and some of them are really like grunting sounds," researcher Simone Videsen told NPR.
Scientists previously assumed that the young whales made noise when they were hungry, but now theorize that the sounds allow their mothers to keep track of them as they travel through the ocean.
Interestingly, the sounds are very quiet, which the scientists say may be to avoid being heard by dangerous predators who feed on calves, such as orca whales.
"There are lots of killer whales in the area which are predating on these calves," Videsen said, "and they can use these sounds between mother and calf as like homing cues."
While mother whales are capable of being quite loud, the scientists found that they will also often “whisper” back to their calves.
The researchers noted that if the calves are in fact whispering to avoid predators, it may mean that the species possesses greater intelligence than previously believed. | 304 | ENGLISH | 1 |
August 9, 1974: Gerald Ford succeeds Nixon as president
Following the Watergate scandal that led to Richard Nixon’s official resignation from the presidential seat, the vice president, Gerald Ford, was sworn into office to take his place. The line of succession was established to streamline the placement of a new leader in the event something happened higher up the chain of command. Although things proceeded as intended, the circumstances under which Ford took office were quite unusual.
The succession of a vice president to the presidential seat has occurred nine times in the history of the United States. Eight of those nine instances were the result of a sitting president’s death. Half of those successions followed an assassination. Only one of them, however, was the result of a president resigning from office and leaving, bearing double peace signs, on a helicopter bound for California. That resignation was of Richard Nixon, whose vice president, Gerald Ford, took office and served out the remaining 895 days of Nixon’s would-have-been presidency.
While Ford’s story of succession may not seem like an unusual case, there is more to the story than meets the eye. Richard Nixon’s original running mate was Spiro Agnew. Ford became the vice president only after Agnew had been forced to resign in light of condemning evidence during the Watergate scandal. Disgraced, he stepped down from his position as vice president and Gerald Ford was appointed in his place. Following Nixon’s resignation, Ford became one of the few vice presidents to assume presidential responsibilities, as well as the first serving president to have been appointed rather than elected.
Gerald Ford was sworn in as the 38th president of the United States minutes after Nixon and his family departed in a helicopter. In his first address, given over television shortly after his swearing-in, Ford said, “My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare is over.” In September of 1974, Ford pardoned Nixon of his crimes committed while in office, hoping to end the political division caused by the Watergate scandal. | <urn:uuid:90987b80-1801-47ed-96cc-166f9851e917> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.history101.com/august-9-1974-gerald-ford-succeeds-nixon-president/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251728207.68/warc/CC-MAIN-20200127205148-20200127235148-00385.warc.gz | en | 0.985707 | 420 | 3.40625 | 3 | [
0.05784241110086441,
0.1611161082983017,
0.508115828037262,
-0.020763777196407318,
-0.057001736015081406,
0.5374548435211182,
0.34836453199386597,
0.19291898608207703,
0.4668973982334137,
0.21153834462165833,
-0.14851057529449463,
0.45405805110931396,
-0.05592339113354683,
0.36641174554824... | 6 | August 9, 1974: Gerald Ford succeeds Nixon as president
Following the Watergate scandal that led to Richard Nixon’s official resignation from the presidential seat, the vice president, Gerald Ford, was sworn into office to take his place. The line of succession was established to streamline the placement of a new leader in the event something happened higher up the chain of command. Although things proceeded as intended, the circumstances under which Ford took office were quite unusual.
The succession of a vice president to the presidential seat has occurred nine times in the history of the United States. Eight of those nine instances were the result of a sitting president’s death. Half of those successions followed an assassination. Only one of them, however, was the result of a president resigning from office and leaving, bearing double peace signs, on a helicopter bound for California. That resignation was of Richard Nixon, whose vice president, Gerald Ford, took office and served out the remaining 895 days of Nixon’s would-have-been presidency.
While Ford’s story of succession may not seem like an unusual case, there is more to the story than meets the eye. Richard Nixon’s original running mate was Spiro Agnew. Ford became the vice president only after Agnew had been forced to resign in light of condemning evidence during the Watergate scandal. Disgraced, he stepped down from his position as vice president and Gerald Ford was appointed in his place. Following Nixon’s resignation, Ford became one of the few vice presidents to assume presidential responsibilities, as well as the first serving president to have been appointed rather than elected.
Gerald Ford was sworn in as the 38th president of the United States minutes after Nixon and his family departed in a helicopter. In his first address, given over television shortly after his swearing-in, Ford said, “My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare is over.” In September of 1974, Ford pardoned Nixon of his crimes committed while in office, hoping to end the political division caused by the Watergate scandal. | 415 | ENGLISH | 1 |
$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
This paper begins with a brief description of the battle that takes place in Homer's "The Iliad" and then goes on to describe the differences in the characters of Achilles and Hector, as well as their very different motives for fighting. More specifically, the paper explains that while Achilles fights for glory, Hector fights for his family, his country, and his ideals. The paper further notes that Hector places himself in harm's way knowingly in service to his city, whereas Achilles sulks in his tent because of his own pride, rather than out of concern for his country.
From the Paper:"Warriors in Ancient Greece were men who demonstrated immense strength, honor, and great courage during battle. In Homer's The Iliad, both Achilles and Hector are depicted as great warriors, but they are also depicted in different ways. They both have certain strengths and weaknesses and different leadership qualities. They also have different motives for fighting and behave in different ways according to their characters. Achilles is beset by the sin of pride, which colors his judgment and causes him to commit an offense against decency after he defeats Hector. Hector acts more nobly and is defeated honorably in battle, and Achilles is also defeated, his vaunted vulnerability having been a flaw that becomes his downfall."
Cite this Book Review:
"The Iliad" (2006, September 06) Retrieved January 24, 2020, from https://www.academon.com/book-review/the-iliad-68722/
""The Iliad"" 06 September 2006. Web. 24 January. 2020. <https://www.academon.com/book-review/the-iliad-68722/> | <urn:uuid:5bd0885e-6782-4860-80d1-ae764634fa83> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.academon.com/book-review/the-iliad-68722/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250624328.55/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124161014-20200124190014-00198.warc.gz | en | 0.98377 | 358 | 3.734375 | 4 | [
-0.3881025016307831,
0.1904589980840683,
-0.07160710543394089,
0.11116211116313934,
-0.2693403959274292,
-0.45264214277267456,
-0.029641026630997658,
0.6174221634864807,
0.10556764155626297,
0.08374058455228806,
-0.054606977850198746,
-0.2477675825357437,
-0.014506497420370579,
0.536130309... | 1 | $19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
This paper begins with a brief description of the battle that takes place in Homer's "The Iliad" and then goes on to describe the differences in the characters of Achilles and Hector, as well as their very different motives for fighting. More specifically, the paper explains that while Achilles fights for glory, Hector fights for his family, his country, and his ideals. The paper further notes that Hector places himself in harm's way knowingly in service to his city, whereas Achilles sulks in his tent because of his own pride, rather than out of concern for his country.
From the Paper:"Warriors in Ancient Greece were men who demonstrated immense strength, honor, and great courage during battle. In Homer's The Iliad, both Achilles and Hector are depicted as great warriors, but they are also depicted in different ways. They both have certain strengths and weaknesses and different leadership qualities. They also have different motives for fighting and behave in different ways according to their characters. Achilles is beset by the sin of pride, which colors his judgment and causes him to commit an offense against decency after he defeats Hector. Hector acts more nobly and is defeated honorably in battle, and Achilles is also defeated, his vaunted vulnerability having been a flaw that becomes his downfall."
Cite this Book Review:
"The Iliad" (2006, September 06) Retrieved January 24, 2020, from https://www.academon.com/book-review/the-iliad-68722/
""The Iliad"" 06 September 2006. Web. 24 January. 2020. <https://www.academon.com/book-review/the-iliad-68722/> | 374 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Philip II’s foreign policy was to affect much of Europe. In many senses Philip II had too many responsibilities and not enough financial clout to respond to his foreign problems. Philip’s foreign policy went from grand successes, such as defeating the Turks at Lepanto, to humiliating defeats as happened in 1588 with the failure of the Spanish Armada.
Spain’s main enemy in the Mediterranean was the Turks. For centuries the Muslims had been known as the “Devils from the East” and any attempt by any monarch in Spain to remove this threat would have received full public support. Turkish pirates were a problem but the real danger to Spain lay in the threat Turkey posed to Spain if she conquered Italy. From there she could easily move into Spain. This is why most of the major sea battles took place between the narrows of Tunis and Sicily.
Unlike Charles V, Philip adopted a defensive policy against the Muslims especially as the 1550’s were such a bad year for the Spanish in the Mediterranean e.g. the Knights of St. John were expelled from Tripoli and a Turkish force got into Minorca. Philip wanted a barrier across the central Mediterranean to block out the Turks and because of this plan he needed to recapture Tripoli.
In 1560, the island of Drjeba was taken as an advance base for a larger Spanish force but this was in a very exposed place and the Turks attacked it. The Spanish lost 28 galleys and 10,000 men were forced to surrender after being stranded. This was a great loss to Spain’s prestige and a freak storm in 1562 destroyed 25 more galleys and lost 4,000 men leaving the navy nearly halved in strength in the space of two years.
Time and money was spent in repairing the damage and in this time, Muslim pirates attacked Spain itself – raids which the Spanish were powerless to stop. Granada was a prime target for attack and in one raid in 1561, 4,000 prisoners were taken.
By 1564, Spain had 100 galleys which were needed when in May 1565, the Turks attacked Malta. 25,000 men attacked the Knights of St. John but they managed to hold out until help came. This gave Christianity in the western Mediterranean some breathing space which was helped by the death of Suleiman I in September 1566.
During this respite, Philip could concentrate on the Spanish Netherlands. Troops were taken from the Mediterranean region to northern Europe. When the Turks attacked again in 1570, the Spanish were far from prepared. The Turks took Tunis and Cyprus. There was now a real threat that Italy and Spain could be threatened and old enemies grouped together to cope with this threat. A Holy League of Spain, Venice and the Papal States was formed. Spain paid half the money that was needed for this force. Don John of Spain, a famed military leader, was appointed to command the League.
On October 7th 1571, he led the League to a great naval victory at Lepanto – the last great galley battle fought off the coast of Greece. The Turkish navy – vital to success in the Mediterranean – was destroyed. Out of 230 galleys, only 35 survived. 30,000 Turks were killed or wounded. The League lost just 12 galleys. The defeat all but ended Turkey’s power in the western Mediterranean and it did a great deal to boost Philip’s status throughout western Europe.
The Turks set about building a new navy and by 1574 they had a larger and more modern navy. However, Lepanto was a massive blow to her prestige (rather like the 1588 Armada was to be for Spain) and Turkey’s campaign post-Lepanto was one of disengagement. The Turks tried to co-ordinate a campaign between themselves, the Dutch and the Moriscans – a curious combination and impossible to organise.
The Holy League – all but freed from the fear of the Muslims – fell out. Venice made a separate peace treaty with the Turks. Philip’s bankruptcy in 1575 left Spain with minimal military presence in the region. However, military activity had left all sides weak and secret diplomacy took over from military conflict. In 1578, a truce between the Turks and Spain was declared and this became a formal armistice in 1580.
Philip had not eradicated the Turkish threat in the Mediterranean, but the Turks now concentrated on trying to expand east as this was the easiest option for them. The Turkish claim that they re-took Tunis in 1574 and this was a sign of their potential power has to be countered against the fact that Spain had already abandoned the region. Therefore the Turks only needed to occupy Tunis – not fight for it.
|“Philip’s policy had not defeated the Turks menace but it had been contained and peace was eventually secured.” (Lotherington)|
In 1578, the king of Portugal – Sebastian – and many Portuguese noblemen were killed at the Battle of Alcazar while Portugal was at war with Morocco. He had no children. He was succeeded by a cardinal – Henry – who was elderly and did not present himself as a strong leader. Portugal was not part of Spain at this time and Philip saw a golden opportunity for Spain to take over the country. One great advantage that Philip had was that the Portuguese army had been badly beaten at Alcazar.
Philip adopted a two-fold policy.
1) he sent ministers to Portugal to build up support for him being king which would have meant Spain absorbing Portugal into her kingdom. He also paid the ransom demanded by the Moroccans for the release of the captured Portuguese noblemen.
2) he assembled a very large army.
Therefore he adopted a strategy of diplomacy backed with the threat of military force if required. The powerful noblemen of Portugal supported Philip. The lower classes supported Philip’s two main rivals (the Duchess of Braganza and Dom Antonio, prior of Crato) as they were fearful of the way they would be treated with the general example of the way Castilian peasants were treated. There was also a general dislike of Castille within Portugal. Those nobles who backed Philip clearly hoped for rewards if he was successful in his claim.
In 1580, Henry died. He had no children and he had not appointed a successor. Supporters of Dom Antonio seized Lisbon, the royal arsenals and the crown treasury. The commoners proclaimed him king. Philip gave him a simple ultimatum which Dom Antonio ignored. In June 1580, Spanish troops crossed into Portugal and met little resistance. Lisbon quickly fell and Portugal was absorbed into the kingdom of Spain. In December 1580, Philip entered Lisbon in triumph.
How did he govern his new territory? Philip was very astute in this aspect. He effectively left Portugal to govern itself in an effort to minimise opposition to his rule. Portugal administered herself as “an autonomous country under a foreign king.” How did Spain benefit from this ? Portugal had a large fleet. Their combined navies totalled over 250,000 tons while England at this time could only muster 42,000 tons. Portugal’s overseas colonies could be found in Africa, Brazil, India and the Moluccas. By 1598, Portugal was part of Spain but essentially apart from her.
Relationships between both countries throughout the C16 had been strained due to the prolonged Habsburg-Valois Wars. Henry II had considered the ailing Charles V and the new and inexperienced Philip II as easy targets and he allied himself to Pope Paul IV in an anti-Spanish alliance which targeted Spanish territory in northern Italy. French success in battle lead to a hastily concluded peace in 1556 at Vaucelles which lead to a five year truce. Spain was saved from damaging terms as France was in dire financial circumstances and despite her military success in north Italy, could not afford a long term campaign. Paul IV was not pleased with the French response. He was from Naples and wished to see Spanish power in the area around Italy reduced and preferably removed. Naples was a Spanish possession. Paul tried to encourage Henry II to invade Naples with Papal support.
Rather than wait to be attacked, Philip decided on a pre-emptive strike on the Papal states. In September 1556, 12,000 men lead by the Duke of Alva, marched into the Papal states and camped just 40 kms from Rome. France could not help the pope. The Duke of Guise attempted an invasion of Milan but by 1557 he had to retreat back to France having failed in his attempt to take Civitella. Philip treated the Papal States with generosity which won him much favour in the major Italian states. There were no financial or territorial demands in return for peace.
The episode in the Papal States was, in fact, secondary to Philip’s main intention – to prove he was at least equal to Henry II. Philip secured an alliance with England in 1557 to allow him use of the Channel unhindered by the English. With this guarantee he ordered the Duke of Savoy to launch a major offensive against the French. He had an army of 70,000 men drawn from Spain and her territories. In August 1557, the French army was severely beaten in battle with 10,000 casualties. Philip himself lead his troops triumphantly into St. Quentin in northern France.
By December 1557, the French had reorganised themselves. Henry attacked and besieged Calais which was held by the English at this time. In January 1558, Calais surrendered. By marriage, Philip was king of England and the loss of Calais was a serious blow to his prestige so soon after becoming king. The French victory at Calais did a lot to boost their confidence, and they attacked Spanish possessions in the Netherlands. Spain had only just reorganised her forces by July 1558 when the French were defeated at Gravelines. Effectively this introduced a stalemate as neither side was capable of sustaining a long term campaign. Spain had only just been declared bankrupt and the French monarchy was spending far more than it could afford. Peace talks were already underway at Cateau-Cambresis to end the Habsburg-Valois Wars.
The problem here was that both kings were prepared to accept territorial concessions but neither king was willing to lose their reputations. Eventually France declared that she would end all claims to Italy but that she would retain Calais. The key issue of Savoy was resolved. France ended her demand for it. The Treaty of Cateau-Cambresis was signed in April 1559. Philip married Henry’s sister Elizabeth (Mary Tudor had died in 1558). France would not fight for Italy until 1797. Philip was personally delighted by the treaty.
After 1559, Philip tried to keep out of French affairs. On a few occasions he expressed his concern to the Catholic Catherine de Medici about the growth of the Huguenots in France – but that was all. The Huguenots made much of the meeting held between Catherine and the Duke of Alva at Bayonne in 1565……….but nothing came from this meeting and its importance was only in the minds of the Huguenots.
While France was involved in the French Wars of Religion, she was not a direct threat to Spain.
However, there were two occasions when Philip believed that France was attempting to assess the strength of Spain and her reactions to certain situations. Relations between Philip and France took a turn for the worse when Elizabeth died and rather than marry her sister, Marguerite, Philip married Anne of Austria. The Huguenots besieged Perpignan in Spanish Navarre which was very close to Spain. Philip heard of a plan by Coligny for the French to invade the Spanish Netherlands and then partition it between England, France and the Holy Roman Empire. Catherine de Medici ended this scheme and the Massacre of St. Bartholomew’s (August 1572) was greeted with jubilation by Philip especially as it lead to another outbreak of fighting in France so that their attentions were directed internally rather than internally.
Two people in France gave Philip cause for concern :
1) Henry of Navarre – later Henry IV. He lead the French Protestants and had a claim to Spanish Navarre.
2) Francis, Duke of Anjou. He was the brother of Henry III and he was known to be a maverick and unpredictable with regards to his behaviour. He spent 6 years assisting the Dutch rebels until he died of TB in 1584.
The death of Anjou made the Protestant Henry of Navarre the legal heir to the French throne. It was in Philip’s own interest to stop Henry becoming king. In 1584, Philip joined the Catholic League with the Guises. He provided troops and 50,000 crowns a month to finance it. He got a promise of France not interfering in a Spanish war against the English. However, there was growing resentment in France of Spanish troops being on French soil. France did not allow Philip to use a deep water port for the Armada. The use of Gravelines made the task of the English a lot easier.
The total failure of the Armada, gave the French a lot more hope and Henry III ordered to assassination of Henry, Duke of Guise. Philip became the senior member of the rapidly weakening Catholic League. Henry III’s death in1589, meant that Henry of Navarre was now legally the king of France. Philip decided that the only course of action left to him was to intervene directly. Three million ducats were sent to the remaining members of the Catholic League and the Duke of Parma was ordered to leave the war in the Netherlands and help defend Paris from Henry of Navarre.
In 1590, Parma invaded Paris. The Duke of Savoy occupied eastern France and Spanish troops landed in Italy. There appeared to be a chance that if Henry of Navarre did not survive this attack, Philip’s daughter, Isabella, might become the next French monarch. This potential upset both the French who were highly suspicious of Philip’s intentions (which are still not clear to this day) and the pope, Clement VIII, who believed that Philip was attempting to create a Catholic super state at the Vatican’s expense.
In April 1592, Parma died from wounds sustained defending Amiens. His death was a major blow for Philip as Parma was recognised as an able general. Henry’s conversion to Catholicism in 1593 all but ended Philip’s plans in France. The people of France, the nobles and the Papacy accepted Henry as the rightful king of France.
Despite this, Philip tried to challenge Henry’s right to the throne. The standing of Spain in France was dealt a major blow when the Spanish ambassador in France announced to the Estates-General that Isabella would be queen of France and that she would marry the future Holy Roman Emperor or, if the French preferred, the Duke of Guise. The French were furious and Henry was crowned a Catholic king in 1594 and he declared war on Spain. War was the last thing Spain could afford at this time. Henry was to be helped by the United Provinces and England. Against all the odds and despite the force they were up against, the Spanish did well to start with. They captured Calais in 1596 and Amiens in 1597. However, bankruptcy made Philip realise that he needed peace and in 1598, the Treaty of Vervins was signed. France recovered Calais, Languedoc and Brittany. By 1598, Spain was in a much weaker state than France.
Logic would dictate that two things would have developed during the reign of Philip with regards to Spain’s relations with England :
1) while married to the Catholic Mary Tudor, relations would have been good and positive.
2) while Elizabeth was on the throne, relations would have been poor if only because of the Protestant faith of the English monarch.
However, the relations between Philip and England were not as simple as the above scenario would suggest.
Philip’s marriage to Mary (1554 to 1558) was a typically political one. The Spanish councillors of Charles V realised that the growing power of France was a direct threat to the Netherlands. A marriage between Philip and Mary, both ardent Catholics, would create what was effectively a new super-state in western Europe : England, Spain and the Netherlands. This as a combined unit would be inherited by the heirs of Philip and Mary and would present France with a much more severe challenge to European supremacy than England and Spain did on an individual basis. Neither Philip nor Mary were consulted as to the plan or to the future marriage.
The marriage was far from a success. Philip only visited England on two occasions (July 1554 to August 1555 and March to July 1557). There were no children from the marriage and therefore no heirs to the super-state. However, Philip did see England as a valuable counterweight to the French. The Habsburg-Valois Wars were in their final days and any obvious advantage over the French could sway peace negotiations. Philip did his best to be ‘English’ on his visits – even drinking English ale – but his efforts were greeted with apathy by the people. Anti-Spanish literature appeared and despite his efforts, Philip simply was not accepted by the English people. The obvious dislike the people had for him was matched by his obvious disdain for the English. Philip considered them ungrateful, untrustworthy and quarrelsome.
The marriage that should have brought England and Spain closer did not work. The death of Mary in 1558, caused Philip little pain. However, the accession to the throne of the Protestant Elizabeth was a problem for Philip. The peace talks at Cateau-Cambresis were at a vital and delicate stage in 1558. Spain had to retain England’s alliance to off-set the Guise influence in Scotland (Mary, Queen of Scots, was married to the Guise Francis, who in 1559 became King of France) and advisors to Philip started to advocate a marriage between Philip and Elizabeth.
Elizabeth also had a need to court good relations with Philip and the Vatican had declared her illegitimate and if this was seen to be true, the legal heir to the throne would be Mary, Queen of Scots, who was married to Francis II of France. Therefore, Elizabeth needed the support of Philip for her accession. Philip also could not allow France to get a toe hold in England as the threat to the Netherlands would become even greater. Philip also remained hopeful of returning England to Catholicism. So here was a “Defender of the Faith” (as Philip liked to style himself) considering an alliance with Protestant England. So just how much of Philip’s policies were religiously orientated ? How many of his policies were simply practical and pragmatic ?
Philip did offer himself for marriage in 1559 (though he considered himself “a man under sentence of death”) but Elizabeth turned down his offer. Philip married Elizabeth of Valois instead.
Between 1559 and 1567, England and Spain enjoyed reasonably good relations in view of their religious differences. Both had a vested interest in not angering the other. Spain had to monitor the French Wars of Religion and the start of the troubles in the Netherlands. England, likewise, had to monitor the Guises in France and Scotland. It was not a relationship born out of trust but it was one that at that moment in time benefited both countries. As such, Philip personally persuaded the Vatican not to excommunicate Elizabeth as he feared that this would spark off a Catholic rebellion in England which the French Catholics might exploit. Even the growing Dutch revolt did not disturb the harmony though in this case, Philip used his guile to claim that the revolt was not a religious issue but a challenge to his monarchical authority and one other monarchs would have viewed with sympathy as they could hardly have voiced support for the rebels if it might have encouraged political rebels in their home state. One point in Spain’s favour at this time, was the popularity with Elizabeth of the Spanish ambassador – Guzman de Silva.
After 1567, relations between Spain and England got worse. How did this happen ?
The Netherlands was the issue on which both countries clashed. If Philip did put down a Protestant revolt (one taking place very near to the shores of England) then was there a guarantee that he would not try to put down the Protestant faith in England. England was not in a military position to help the Dutch but she could hinder the Spanish maritime supply lines of Spain. In 1567, the Spanish replied by seizing ten ships of John Hawkins based in San Juan de Ulua. This event sparked off a wave of anti-Spanish sentiment in England and confirmed that Philip was not to be trusted.
Elizabeth responded by seizing five Genoese silver ships carrying £40,000 worth of bullion bound for the Netherlands. An Anglo-Dutch trade embargo was imposed in 1568 by the Spanish which provoked Elizabeth into ordering the seizure of forty Spanish ships harboured in England. Philip responded by ordering that all English ships in Spain were to be seized. That all had got out of hand so quickly is indicative that ‘good’ relations with Spain were only paper thin and that the so-called ‘good’ years were far from that. Trading relations were only normalised in 1573 but the damage had been done.
Eleven expeditions to South America took place between 1572 and 1577. Elizabeth claimed that they were unofficial and did not have her blessing. She specifically disowned Drake’s raid on Nombre de Dios in 1573. Philip believed that Elizabeth was behind the raids and his belief was strengthened when Raleigh tried to establish a settlement in Roanoke, Virginia in 1584 which directly threatened Spanish shipping lines.
In May 1585, Philip ordered the confiscation of all English goods and shipping in Iberian waters. Elizabeth responded by granting merchant ship captains the right to plunder any Spanish ships to make up any loss that they may have made.
However, it was England’s apparent involvement in the Netherlands that most provoked Philip. In 1572, a Dutch privateer was ordered to leave Dover. When William, Baron of Lumey de la Marck, landed in Flushing, he triggered off a major rebellion which historians consider the start of the rebellion as such as opposed to previous skirmishes. Philip believed that Elizabeth had planned this and that logically if William had not been expelled from English waters, the rebellion would not have taken place. There is no evidence that this is true and that it was nothing more than a coincidence and that Elizabeth considered William’s presence in Dover provocative to Spain – hence why he was ordered to leave.
From 1572 to 1585, Elizabeth tried to keep out of the rebellion. This changed in 1585 when the rebels looked extremely vulnerable and by the Treaty of Nonsuch, Elizabeth agreed to send 6,000 men under the Earl of Leicester and £126,000. In return, Elizabeth demanded Flushing, Brill and Rammekens. There was a general agreement amongst her advisors that if the Dutch fell, the position of England would be greatly threatened. It seems that this continuing problem involving the Netherlands and the attacks by Drake, pushed Philip into the plan for the Armada as early as 1585.
Philip himself was not innocent of provocative acts. His position centred around Mary, Queen of Scots. In the early years of her imprisonment in England, Philip had taken a neutral position and he had done nothing to provoke Elizabeth. Philip’s involvement in the 1571 plan to invade England at the time on the Ridolfi Plot was swiftly dropped when it became apparent that the control of the North Sea was way beyond the capability of the Spanish Navy and that the 10,000 soldiers available was far below the figure needed for a successful attack on England.
In the 1580’s, Philip became convinced that Mary Stuart was a desirable choice for England’s monarch. He saw her as a potential puppet who would allow his influence to be considerably expanded throughout Europe. The power of the Guises had been weakened in France and Francis was now dead – so the link between the Guises and Mary no longer existed from Philip’s viewpoint. In 1583, Philip was directly implicated in a plot to kill Elizabeth – the Throckmorton Plot – which involved the Jesuits and the Spanish ambassador Mendoza. It was Mendoza who admitted Philip’s part in the plot.
Philip had a number of reasons for ordering the Armada :
1) England’s control of the English Channel impeded Spain’s ability to supply her troops in the Netherlands. As a result, Spain had to rely on a land based supply route that was both slow and open to attack.
2) Philip assumed that if the English knew about the Armada, she would have to engage in heavy expenditure to modernise her navy. If Elizabeth could not afford to do this, then she could sue for peace on terms favourable to Spain.
3) England could be re-converted to Catholicism. The Armada carried 180 clerics, and 24 Jesuits were waiting in Flanders to be picked up and transported to England and Cardinal Allen (an English born missionary) was ready to take over the new Catholic state.
The Armada was not only a religious crusade – though the people of Spain interpreted it as being so. Philip was almost certainly more concerned with giving the campaign in the Netherlands a boost though he did order that if the invasion was partially successful, the Duke of Parma had to demand toleration in England for Catholics. He was not convinced that there was sufficient support for Catholicism in England and that their ability to support the Armada would be minimal. “There is no evidence that he intended the conquest of England.” (Woodward) At best, he wanted to take south-east England and use it as a bargaining counter to improve the lives of Catholics in England.
The first plan for an armada, was put forward by Santa-Cruz, Captain-General of the Ocean Sea. He wanted a force of 560 ships and 94,000 men to sail from Lisbon. He estimated that it would cost 3.5 million ducats. The Duke of Parma had an alternate idea : transport 30,000 men from the Spanish bases in the Netherlands using light boats. As these boats were vulnerable to attack, it would be Santa Cruz’s responsibility to clear the Channel of English warships. Parma estimated that such a venture would cost 150,000 ducats a month.
Philip liked Parma’s plan. Philip was trying to persuade Pope Sixtus V that the Armada would benefit the Catholic faith in general. Sixtus was convinced of the importance of supporting the Armada when news of the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots reached him. Philip did not need the news of Mary’s execution to persuade him as he had already decided to invade. However, her execution did give the Armada an image of being more like a religious crusade. Sixtus promised one million ducats once a military force had landed.
Philip attempted to change Parma’s plan. Philip wanted to increase the size of the Armada and re-enforce the Spanish forces in the Netherlands at the same time as invading England. Parma did not support the changes to his plan as he feared that they would over stretch Spain’s military power.
The appointment of Medina-Sidonia as the commander of the Armada did not surprise contemporaries as he was the most important nobleman in Castille. Therefore, his position as Castille’s first grandee would give the Armada more respect among the rich of Castille. Medina-Sidonia was also very wealthy and Philip anticipated that he would pay for some of the cost of the fleet – given that the Armada was essentially viewed by the Spanish public as a crusade against heresy and Medina-Sidonia was a devout Catholic. Philip also knew that Medina-Sidonia was also very respectful of the king and he would never dare challenge a royal order. He had never fought at sea but he was known to be a formidable naval administrator. Surprisingly for Philip, Medina-Sidonia did ask Philip not to appoint him as he felt that he was not up to the position. Philip ignored the plea and Medina-Sidonia took up the position.
The Armada had a poor start. It first sailed in May 1588 and ran into a storm. Five ships out of 130 were lost. Medina-Sidonia asked Philip to call off the mission. Philip refused saying that God wished it to continue – thus giving the Armada even more of a religious status. He was also aware that Europe knew that his fleet had sailed and he could not tolerate the thought of the world’s largest navy being bottled up in port giving the impression that it was scared to sail. “To leave our fleet bottled up and ineffective would be a disgrace.” (Philip)
The journey up the Channel was remarkably successful for the Armada. Only three ships were lost and 122 reached Calais. This was due to the fact that the Spanish kept rigidly to their plan which was to defend itself and not to initiate attacks. It was at Gravelines (Calais) where disaster struck. The fire ships associated with Drake split up the formation and for the Spanish ships it became a case of each for their own. As the Channel was blocked, the only route the Spanish ships could use to return to Spain, was to pass north of the Scottish coast line, sail down the west side of England and then pass west of Catholic Ireland to safety. The weather devastated those ships not destroyed by the fire ships. Those ships that landed in Ireland expecting help, were attacked by the Irish as invaders.
Ironically, it was Parma who believed that the plan would not work. He had remained convinced that the changes to his plan were fatal but he went along with Philip’s changed plan out of loyalty to the king. Medina-Sidonia had also expressed the view that it would not work before it had even sailed. In Paris, bookmakers offered 6 to 1 against it surviving.
Philip made it clear that the weather had defeated the Armada but the phrase “it was God’s will” was frequently heard in Spain. Spain ordered an enquiry and only one man was found guilty – Diego Flores de Valdes who was the chief nautical officer who ordered ropes to be cut as the fire ships entered Calais harbour. He was sent to prison for a year. “Yet if one person was to blame, it was Philip.” (Woodward)
no plans had been made to co-ordinate Parma’s moves with Medina-Sidonia Santa Cruz had originally asked for 40 to 50 galleys to accompany the main force but only four actually sailed up the Channel. Don Francisco de Bobadilla, commander of the soldiers being carried by the Armada, considered this a mistake Philip knew that his fleet was vulnerable to fire power from the English and that close encounters could prove fatal. Regardless of this, he ordered Medina-Sidonia to prepare for hand-to-hand fighting which by its very nature would necessitate both fleets closing on one another. Medina-Sidonia chose to ignore this tactic.
The Armada, of course, destroyed any chance of a reconciliation between England and Spain. The success of the organisation behind the Armada has always been cited as an example of how effective Philip’s bureaucracy was when it had a common purpose to aim at. That it failed was due to the “armchair” knowledge Philip had of military strategy.
The position of Parma in the Netherlands was also weakened and the Armada’s failure encouraged the Dutch to counter-attack the Spanish. It also encouraged Drake and others to go on more expeditions as the Spanish were seen as being unable to defend themselves. Between 1589 and 1598, there were over 100 expeditions against the Spanish – all endorsed by Elizabeth. In 1596, the port of Cadiz was attacked by an English fleet.
Regardless of this position, Philip had too much pride to engage in peace talks with Elizabeth. That would require new monarchs in a new century.
- Philip II of Spain - a timeline Years of Crisis 1557 : first bankruptcy 1560 : second bankruptcy 1566 : first stages of Revolt in…
- The foreign policy of Mary I, Mary Tudor, followed an expected pattern. Even before being crowned queen, Mary was known to be supportive of the…
- When Elizabeth became Queen in 1558 on the death of her half-sister Mary, England had a decent relationship with Spain. Mary’s marriage to Philip of… | <urn:uuid:1ae7cb24-0d59-4250-8a22-9c7ded299342> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/spain-under-phillip-ii/foreign-policy/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250592261.1/warc/CC-MAIN-20200118052321-20200118080321-00262.warc.gz | en | 0.987789 | 6,795 | 3.765625 | 4 | [
0.015836350619792938,
0.5045307874679565,
0.10233862698078156,
-0.13363531231880188,
-0.13927172124385834,
-0.38854163885116577,
-0.007544882595539093,
0.46709173917770386,
0.2600858509540558,
0.06203687936067581,
0.09557698667049408,
-0.32253673672676086,
-0.026110103353857994,
0.30298534... | 11 | Philip II’s foreign policy was to affect much of Europe. In many senses Philip II had too many responsibilities and not enough financial clout to respond to his foreign problems. Philip’s foreign policy went from grand successes, such as defeating the Turks at Lepanto, to humiliating defeats as happened in 1588 with the failure of the Spanish Armada.
Spain’s main enemy in the Mediterranean was the Turks. For centuries the Muslims had been known as the “Devils from the East” and any attempt by any monarch in Spain to remove this threat would have received full public support. Turkish pirates were a problem but the real danger to Spain lay in the threat Turkey posed to Spain if she conquered Italy. From there she could easily move into Spain. This is why most of the major sea battles took place between the narrows of Tunis and Sicily.
Unlike Charles V, Philip adopted a defensive policy against the Muslims especially as the 1550’s were such a bad year for the Spanish in the Mediterranean e.g. the Knights of St. John were expelled from Tripoli and a Turkish force got into Minorca. Philip wanted a barrier across the central Mediterranean to block out the Turks and because of this plan he needed to recapture Tripoli.
In 1560, the island of Drjeba was taken as an advance base for a larger Spanish force but this was in a very exposed place and the Turks attacked it. The Spanish lost 28 galleys and 10,000 men were forced to surrender after being stranded. This was a great loss to Spain’s prestige and a freak storm in 1562 destroyed 25 more galleys and lost 4,000 men leaving the navy nearly halved in strength in the space of two years.
Time and money was spent in repairing the damage and in this time, Muslim pirates attacked Spain itself – raids which the Spanish were powerless to stop. Granada was a prime target for attack and in one raid in 1561, 4,000 prisoners were taken.
By 1564, Spain had 100 galleys which were needed when in May 1565, the Turks attacked Malta. 25,000 men attacked the Knights of St. John but they managed to hold out until help came. This gave Christianity in the western Mediterranean some breathing space which was helped by the death of Suleiman I in September 1566.
During this respite, Philip could concentrate on the Spanish Netherlands. Troops were taken from the Mediterranean region to northern Europe. When the Turks attacked again in 1570, the Spanish were far from prepared. The Turks took Tunis and Cyprus. There was now a real threat that Italy and Spain could be threatened and old enemies grouped together to cope with this threat. A Holy League of Spain, Venice and the Papal States was formed. Spain paid half the money that was needed for this force. Don John of Spain, a famed military leader, was appointed to command the League.
On October 7th 1571, he led the League to a great naval victory at Lepanto – the last great galley battle fought off the coast of Greece. The Turkish navy – vital to success in the Mediterranean – was destroyed. Out of 230 galleys, only 35 survived. 30,000 Turks were killed or wounded. The League lost just 12 galleys. The defeat all but ended Turkey’s power in the western Mediterranean and it did a great deal to boost Philip’s status throughout western Europe.
The Turks set about building a new navy and by 1574 they had a larger and more modern navy. However, Lepanto was a massive blow to her prestige (rather like the 1588 Armada was to be for Spain) and Turkey’s campaign post-Lepanto was one of disengagement. The Turks tried to co-ordinate a campaign between themselves, the Dutch and the Moriscans – a curious combination and impossible to organise.
The Holy League – all but freed from the fear of the Muslims – fell out. Venice made a separate peace treaty with the Turks. Philip’s bankruptcy in 1575 left Spain with minimal military presence in the region. However, military activity had left all sides weak and secret diplomacy took over from military conflict. In 1578, a truce between the Turks and Spain was declared and this became a formal armistice in 1580.
Philip had not eradicated the Turkish threat in the Mediterranean, but the Turks now concentrated on trying to expand east as this was the easiest option for them. The Turkish claim that they re-took Tunis in 1574 and this was a sign of their potential power has to be countered against the fact that Spain had already abandoned the region. Therefore the Turks only needed to occupy Tunis – not fight for it.
|“Philip’s policy had not defeated the Turks menace but it had been contained and peace was eventually secured.” (Lotherington)|
In 1578, the king of Portugal – Sebastian – and many Portuguese noblemen were killed at the Battle of Alcazar while Portugal was at war with Morocco. He had no children. He was succeeded by a cardinal – Henry – who was elderly and did not present himself as a strong leader. Portugal was not part of Spain at this time and Philip saw a golden opportunity for Spain to take over the country. One great advantage that Philip had was that the Portuguese army had been badly beaten at Alcazar.
Philip adopted a two-fold policy.
1) he sent ministers to Portugal to build up support for him being king which would have meant Spain absorbing Portugal into her kingdom. He also paid the ransom demanded by the Moroccans for the release of the captured Portuguese noblemen.
2) he assembled a very large army.
Therefore he adopted a strategy of diplomacy backed with the threat of military force if required. The powerful noblemen of Portugal supported Philip. The lower classes supported Philip’s two main rivals (the Duchess of Braganza and Dom Antonio, prior of Crato) as they were fearful of the way they would be treated with the general example of the way Castilian peasants were treated. There was also a general dislike of Castille within Portugal. Those nobles who backed Philip clearly hoped for rewards if he was successful in his claim.
In 1580, Henry died. He had no children and he had not appointed a successor. Supporters of Dom Antonio seized Lisbon, the royal arsenals and the crown treasury. The commoners proclaimed him king. Philip gave him a simple ultimatum which Dom Antonio ignored. In June 1580, Spanish troops crossed into Portugal and met little resistance. Lisbon quickly fell and Portugal was absorbed into the kingdom of Spain. In December 1580, Philip entered Lisbon in triumph.
How did he govern his new territory? Philip was very astute in this aspect. He effectively left Portugal to govern itself in an effort to minimise opposition to his rule. Portugal administered herself as “an autonomous country under a foreign king.” How did Spain benefit from this ? Portugal had a large fleet. Their combined navies totalled over 250,000 tons while England at this time could only muster 42,000 tons. Portugal’s overseas colonies could be found in Africa, Brazil, India and the Moluccas. By 1598, Portugal was part of Spain but essentially apart from her.
Relationships between both countries throughout the C16 had been strained due to the prolonged Habsburg-Valois Wars. Henry II had considered the ailing Charles V and the new and inexperienced Philip II as easy targets and he allied himself to Pope Paul IV in an anti-Spanish alliance which targeted Spanish territory in northern Italy. French success in battle lead to a hastily concluded peace in 1556 at Vaucelles which lead to a five year truce. Spain was saved from damaging terms as France was in dire financial circumstances and despite her military success in north Italy, could not afford a long term campaign. Paul IV was not pleased with the French response. He was from Naples and wished to see Spanish power in the area around Italy reduced and preferably removed. Naples was a Spanish possession. Paul tried to encourage Henry II to invade Naples with Papal support.
Rather than wait to be attacked, Philip decided on a pre-emptive strike on the Papal states. In September 1556, 12,000 men lead by the Duke of Alva, marched into the Papal states and camped just 40 kms from Rome. France could not help the pope. The Duke of Guise attempted an invasion of Milan but by 1557 he had to retreat back to France having failed in his attempt to take Civitella. Philip treated the Papal States with generosity which won him much favour in the major Italian states. There were no financial or territorial demands in return for peace.
The episode in the Papal States was, in fact, secondary to Philip’s main intention – to prove he was at least equal to Henry II. Philip secured an alliance with England in 1557 to allow him use of the Channel unhindered by the English. With this guarantee he ordered the Duke of Savoy to launch a major offensive against the French. He had an army of 70,000 men drawn from Spain and her territories. In August 1557, the French army was severely beaten in battle with 10,000 casualties. Philip himself lead his troops triumphantly into St. Quentin in northern France.
By December 1557, the French had reorganised themselves. Henry attacked and besieged Calais which was held by the English at this time. In January 1558, Calais surrendered. By marriage, Philip was king of England and the loss of Calais was a serious blow to his prestige so soon after becoming king. The French victory at Calais did a lot to boost their confidence, and they attacked Spanish possessions in the Netherlands. Spain had only just reorganised her forces by July 1558 when the French were defeated at Gravelines. Effectively this introduced a stalemate as neither side was capable of sustaining a long term campaign. Spain had only just been declared bankrupt and the French monarchy was spending far more than it could afford. Peace talks were already underway at Cateau-Cambresis to end the Habsburg-Valois Wars.
The problem here was that both kings were prepared to accept territorial concessions but neither king was willing to lose their reputations. Eventually France declared that she would end all claims to Italy but that she would retain Calais. The key issue of Savoy was resolved. France ended her demand for it. The Treaty of Cateau-Cambresis was signed in April 1559. Philip married Henry’s sister Elizabeth (Mary Tudor had died in 1558). France would not fight for Italy until 1797. Philip was personally delighted by the treaty.
After 1559, Philip tried to keep out of French affairs. On a few occasions he expressed his concern to the Catholic Catherine de Medici about the growth of the Huguenots in France – but that was all. The Huguenots made much of the meeting held between Catherine and the Duke of Alva at Bayonne in 1565……….but nothing came from this meeting and its importance was only in the minds of the Huguenots.
While France was involved in the French Wars of Religion, she was not a direct threat to Spain.
However, there were two occasions when Philip believed that France was attempting to assess the strength of Spain and her reactions to certain situations. Relations between Philip and France took a turn for the worse when Elizabeth died and rather than marry her sister, Marguerite, Philip married Anne of Austria. The Huguenots besieged Perpignan in Spanish Navarre which was very close to Spain. Philip heard of a plan by Coligny for the French to invade the Spanish Netherlands and then partition it between England, France and the Holy Roman Empire. Catherine de Medici ended this scheme and the Massacre of St. Bartholomew’s (August 1572) was greeted with jubilation by Philip especially as it lead to another outbreak of fighting in France so that their attentions were directed internally rather than internally.
Two people in France gave Philip cause for concern :
1) Henry of Navarre – later Henry IV. He lead the French Protestants and had a claim to Spanish Navarre.
2) Francis, Duke of Anjou. He was the brother of Henry III and he was known to be a maverick and unpredictable with regards to his behaviour. He spent 6 years assisting the Dutch rebels until he died of TB in 1584.
The death of Anjou made the Protestant Henry of Navarre the legal heir to the French throne. It was in Philip’s own interest to stop Henry becoming king. In 1584, Philip joined the Catholic League with the Guises. He provided troops and 50,000 crowns a month to finance it. He got a promise of France not interfering in a Spanish war against the English. However, there was growing resentment in France of Spanish troops being on French soil. France did not allow Philip to use a deep water port for the Armada. The use of Gravelines made the task of the English a lot easier.
The total failure of the Armada, gave the French a lot more hope and Henry III ordered to assassination of Henry, Duke of Guise. Philip became the senior member of the rapidly weakening Catholic League. Henry III’s death in1589, meant that Henry of Navarre was now legally the king of France. Philip decided that the only course of action left to him was to intervene directly. Three million ducats were sent to the remaining members of the Catholic League and the Duke of Parma was ordered to leave the war in the Netherlands and help defend Paris from Henry of Navarre.
In 1590, Parma invaded Paris. The Duke of Savoy occupied eastern France and Spanish troops landed in Italy. There appeared to be a chance that if Henry of Navarre did not survive this attack, Philip’s daughter, Isabella, might become the next French monarch. This potential upset both the French who were highly suspicious of Philip’s intentions (which are still not clear to this day) and the pope, Clement VIII, who believed that Philip was attempting to create a Catholic super state at the Vatican’s expense.
In April 1592, Parma died from wounds sustained defending Amiens. His death was a major blow for Philip as Parma was recognised as an able general. Henry’s conversion to Catholicism in 1593 all but ended Philip’s plans in France. The people of France, the nobles and the Papacy accepted Henry as the rightful king of France.
Despite this, Philip tried to challenge Henry’s right to the throne. The standing of Spain in France was dealt a major blow when the Spanish ambassador in France announced to the Estates-General that Isabella would be queen of France and that she would marry the future Holy Roman Emperor or, if the French preferred, the Duke of Guise. The French were furious and Henry was crowned a Catholic king in 1594 and he declared war on Spain. War was the last thing Spain could afford at this time. Henry was to be helped by the United Provinces and England. Against all the odds and despite the force they were up against, the Spanish did well to start with. They captured Calais in 1596 and Amiens in 1597. However, bankruptcy made Philip realise that he needed peace and in 1598, the Treaty of Vervins was signed. France recovered Calais, Languedoc and Brittany. By 1598, Spain was in a much weaker state than France.
Logic would dictate that two things would have developed during the reign of Philip with regards to Spain’s relations with England :
1) while married to the Catholic Mary Tudor, relations would have been good and positive.
2) while Elizabeth was on the throne, relations would have been poor if only because of the Protestant faith of the English monarch.
However, the relations between Philip and England were not as simple as the above scenario would suggest.
Philip’s marriage to Mary (1554 to 1558) was a typically political one. The Spanish councillors of Charles V realised that the growing power of France was a direct threat to the Netherlands. A marriage between Philip and Mary, both ardent Catholics, would create what was effectively a new super-state in western Europe : England, Spain and the Netherlands. This as a combined unit would be inherited by the heirs of Philip and Mary and would present France with a much more severe challenge to European supremacy than England and Spain did on an individual basis. Neither Philip nor Mary were consulted as to the plan or to the future marriage.
The marriage was far from a success. Philip only visited England on two occasions (July 1554 to August 1555 and March to July 1557). There were no children from the marriage and therefore no heirs to the super-state. However, Philip did see England as a valuable counterweight to the French. The Habsburg-Valois Wars were in their final days and any obvious advantage over the French could sway peace negotiations. Philip did his best to be ‘English’ on his visits – even drinking English ale – but his efforts were greeted with apathy by the people. Anti-Spanish literature appeared and despite his efforts, Philip simply was not accepted by the English people. The obvious dislike the people had for him was matched by his obvious disdain for the English. Philip considered them ungrateful, untrustworthy and quarrelsome.
The marriage that should have brought England and Spain closer did not work. The death of Mary in 1558, caused Philip little pain. However, the accession to the throne of the Protestant Elizabeth was a problem for Philip. The peace talks at Cateau-Cambresis were at a vital and delicate stage in 1558. Spain had to retain England’s alliance to off-set the Guise influence in Scotland (Mary, Queen of Scots, was married to the Guise Francis, who in 1559 became King of France) and advisors to Philip started to advocate a marriage between Philip and Elizabeth.
Elizabeth also had a need to court good relations with Philip and the Vatican had declared her illegitimate and if this was seen to be true, the legal heir to the throne would be Mary, Queen of Scots, who was married to Francis II of France. Therefore, Elizabeth needed the support of Philip for her accession. Philip also could not allow France to get a toe hold in England as the threat to the Netherlands would become even greater. Philip also remained hopeful of returning England to Catholicism. So here was a “Defender of the Faith” (as Philip liked to style himself) considering an alliance with Protestant England. So just how much of Philip’s policies were religiously orientated ? How many of his policies were simply practical and pragmatic ?
Philip did offer himself for marriage in 1559 (though he considered himself “a man under sentence of death”) but Elizabeth turned down his offer. Philip married Elizabeth of Valois instead.
Between 1559 and 1567, England and Spain enjoyed reasonably good relations in view of their religious differences. Both had a vested interest in not angering the other. Spain had to monitor the French Wars of Religion and the start of the troubles in the Netherlands. England, likewise, had to monitor the Guises in France and Scotland. It was not a relationship born out of trust but it was one that at that moment in time benefited both countries. As such, Philip personally persuaded the Vatican not to excommunicate Elizabeth as he feared that this would spark off a Catholic rebellion in England which the French Catholics might exploit. Even the growing Dutch revolt did not disturb the harmony though in this case, Philip used his guile to claim that the revolt was not a religious issue but a challenge to his monarchical authority and one other monarchs would have viewed with sympathy as they could hardly have voiced support for the rebels if it might have encouraged political rebels in their home state. One point in Spain’s favour at this time, was the popularity with Elizabeth of the Spanish ambassador – Guzman de Silva.
After 1567, relations between Spain and England got worse. How did this happen ?
The Netherlands was the issue on which both countries clashed. If Philip did put down a Protestant revolt (one taking place very near to the shores of England) then was there a guarantee that he would not try to put down the Protestant faith in England. England was not in a military position to help the Dutch but she could hinder the Spanish maritime supply lines of Spain. In 1567, the Spanish replied by seizing ten ships of John Hawkins based in San Juan de Ulua. This event sparked off a wave of anti-Spanish sentiment in England and confirmed that Philip was not to be trusted.
Elizabeth responded by seizing five Genoese silver ships carrying £40,000 worth of bullion bound for the Netherlands. An Anglo-Dutch trade embargo was imposed in 1568 by the Spanish which provoked Elizabeth into ordering the seizure of forty Spanish ships harboured in England. Philip responded by ordering that all English ships in Spain were to be seized. That all had got out of hand so quickly is indicative that ‘good’ relations with Spain were only paper thin and that the so-called ‘good’ years were far from that. Trading relations were only normalised in 1573 but the damage had been done.
Eleven expeditions to South America took place between 1572 and 1577. Elizabeth claimed that they were unofficial and did not have her blessing. She specifically disowned Drake’s raid on Nombre de Dios in 1573. Philip believed that Elizabeth was behind the raids and his belief was strengthened when Raleigh tried to establish a settlement in Roanoke, Virginia in 1584 which directly threatened Spanish shipping lines.
In May 1585, Philip ordered the confiscation of all English goods and shipping in Iberian waters. Elizabeth responded by granting merchant ship captains the right to plunder any Spanish ships to make up any loss that they may have made.
However, it was England’s apparent involvement in the Netherlands that most provoked Philip. In 1572, a Dutch privateer was ordered to leave Dover. When William, Baron of Lumey de la Marck, landed in Flushing, he triggered off a major rebellion which historians consider the start of the rebellion as such as opposed to previous skirmishes. Philip believed that Elizabeth had planned this and that logically if William had not been expelled from English waters, the rebellion would not have taken place. There is no evidence that this is true and that it was nothing more than a coincidence and that Elizabeth considered William’s presence in Dover provocative to Spain – hence why he was ordered to leave.
From 1572 to 1585, Elizabeth tried to keep out of the rebellion. This changed in 1585 when the rebels looked extremely vulnerable and by the Treaty of Nonsuch, Elizabeth agreed to send 6,000 men under the Earl of Leicester and £126,000. In return, Elizabeth demanded Flushing, Brill and Rammekens. There was a general agreement amongst her advisors that if the Dutch fell, the position of England would be greatly threatened. It seems that this continuing problem involving the Netherlands and the attacks by Drake, pushed Philip into the plan for the Armada as early as 1585.
Philip himself was not innocent of provocative acts. His position centred around Mary, Queen of Scots. In the early years of her imprisonment in England, Philip had taken a neutral position and he had done nothing to provoke Elizabeth. Philip’s involvement in the 1571 plan to invade England at the time on the Ridolfi Plot was swiftly dropped when it became apparent that the control of the North Sea was way beyond the capability of the Spanish Navy and that the 10,000 soldiers available was far below the figure needed for a successful attack on England.
In the 1580’s, Philip became convinced that Mary Stuart was a desirable choice for England’s monarch. He saw her as a potential puppet who would allow his influence to be considerably expanded throughout Europe. The power of the Guises had been weakened in France and Francis was now dead – so the link between the Guises and Mary no longer existed from Philip’s viewpoint. In 1583, Philip was directly implicated in a plot to kill Elizabeth – the Throckmorton Plot – which involved the Jesuits and the Spanish ambassador Mendoza. It was Mendoza who admitted Philip’s part in the plot.
Philip had a number of reasons for ordering the Armada :
1) England’s control of the English Channel impeded Spain’s ability to supply her troops in the Netherlands. As a result, Spain had to rely on a land based supply route that was both slow and open to attack.
2) Philip assumed that if the English knew about the Armada, she would have to engage in heavy expenditure to modernise her navy. If Elizabeth could not afford to do this, then she could sue for peace on terms favourable to Spain.
3) England could be re-converted to Catholicism. The Armada carried 180 clerics, and 24 Jesuits were waiting in Flanders to be picked up and transported to England and Cardinal Allen (an English born missionary) was ready to take over the new Catholic state.
The Armada was not only a religious crusade – though the people of Spain interpreted it as being so. Philip was almost certainly more concerned with giving the campaign in the Netherlands a boost though he did order that if the invasion was partially successful, the Duke of Parma had to demand toleration in England for Catholics. He was not convinced that there was sufficient support for Catholicism in England and that their ability to support the Armada would be minimal. “There is no evidence that he intended the conquest of England.” (Woodward) At best, he wanted to take south-east England and use it as a bargaining counter to improve the lives of Catholics in England.
The first plan for an armada, was put forward by Santa-Cruz, Captain-General of the Ocean Sea. He wanted a force of 560 ships and 94,000 men to sail from Lisbon. He estimated that it would cost 3.5 million ducats. The Duke of Parma had an alternate idea : transport 30,000 men from the Spanish bases in the Netherlands using light boats. As these boats were vulnerable to attack, it would be Santa Cruz’s responsibility to clear the Channel of English warships. Parma estimated that such a venture would cost 150,000 ducats a month.
Philip liked Parma’s plan. Philip was trying to persuade Pope Sixtus V that the Armada would benefit the Catholic faith in general. Sixtus was convinced of the importance of supporting the Armada when news of the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots reached him. Philip did not need the news of Mary’s execution to persuade him as he had already decided to invade. However, her execution did give the Armada an image of being more like a religious crusade. Sixtus promised one million ducats once a military force had landed.
Philip attempted to change Parma’s plan. Philip wanted to increase the size of the Armada and re-enforce the Spanish forces in the Netherlands at the same time as invading England. Parma did not support the changes to his plan as he feared that they would over stretch Spain’s military power.
The appointment of Medina-Sidonia as the commander of the Armada did not surprise contemporaries as he was the most important nobleman in Castille. Therefore, his position as Castille’s first grandee would give the Armada more respect among the rich of Castille. Medina-Sidonia was also very wealthy and Philip anticipated that he would pay for some of the cost of the fleet – given that the Armada was essentially viewed by the Spanish public as a crusade against heresy and Medina-Sidonia was a devout Catholic. Philip also knew that Medina-Sidonia was also very respectful of the king and he would never dare challenge a royal order. He had never fought at sea but he was known to be a formidable naval administrator. Surprisingly for Philip, Medina-Sidonia did ask Philip not to appoint him as he felt that he was not up to the position. Philip ignored the plea and Medina-Sidonia took up the position.
The Armada had a poor start. It first sailed in May 1588 and ran into a storm. Five ships out of 130 were lost. Medina-Sidonia asked Philip to call off the mission. Philip refused saying that God wished it to continue – thus giving the Armada even more of a religious status. He was also aware that Europe knew that his fleet had sailed and he could not tolerate the thought of the world’s largest navy being bottled up in port giving the impression that it was scared to sail. “To leave our fleet bottled up and ineffective would be a disgrace.” (Philip)
The journey up the Channel was remarkably successful for the Armada. Only three ships were lost and 122 reached Calais. This was due to the fact that the Spanish kept rigidly to their plan which was to defend itself and not to initiate attacks. It was at Gravelines (Calais) where disaster struck. The fire ships associated with Drake split up the formation and for the Spanish ships it became a case of each for their own. As the Channel was blocked, the only route the Spanish ships could use to return to Spain, was to pass north of the Scottish coast line, sail down the west side of England and then pass west of Catholic Ireland to safety. The weather devastated those ships not destroyed by the fire ships. Those ships that landed in Ireland expecting help, were attacked by the Irish as invaders.
Ironically, it was Parma who believed that the plan would not work. He had remained convinced that the changes to his plan were fatal but he went along with Philip’s changed plan out of loyalty to the king. Medina-Sidonia had also expressed the view that it would not work before it had even sailed. In Paris, bookmakers offered 6 to 1 against it surviving.
Philip made it clear that the weather had defeated the Armada but the phrase “it was God’s will” was frequently heard in Spain. Spain ordered an enquiry and only one man was found guilty – Diego Flores de Valdes who was the chief nautical officer who ordered ropes to be cut as the fire ships entered Calais harbour. He was sent to prison for a year. “Yet if one person was to blame, it was Philip.” (Woodward)
no plans had been made to co-ordinate Parma’s moves with Medina-Sidonia Santa Cruz had originally asked for 40 to 50 galleys to accompany the main force but only four actually sailed up the Channel. Don Francisco de Bobadilla, commander of the soldiers being carried by the Armada, considered this a mistake Philip knew that his fleet was vulnerable to fire power from the English and that close encounters could prove fatal. Regardless of this, he ordered Medina-Sidonia to prepare for hand-to-hand fighting which by its very nature would necessitate both fleets closing on one another. Medina-Sidonia chose to ignore this tactic.
The Armada, of course, destroyed any chance of a reconciliation between England and Spain. The success of the organisation behind the Armada has always been cited as an example of how effective Philip’s bureaucracy was when it had a common purpose to aim at. That it failed was due to the “armchair” knowledge Philip had of military strategy.
The position of Parma in the Netherlands was also weakened and the Armada’s failure encouraged the Dutch to counter-attack the Spanish. It also encouraged Drake and others to go on more expeditions as the Spanish were seen as being unable to defend themselves. Between 1589 and 1598, there were over 100 expeditions against the Spanish – all endorsed by Elizabeth. In 1596, the port of Cadiz was attacked by an English fleet.
Regardless of this position, Philip had too much pride to engage in peace talks with Elizabeth. That would require new monarchs in a new century.
- Philip II of Spain - a timeline Years of Crisis 1557 : first bankruptcy 1560 : second bankruptcy 1566 : first stages of Revolt in…
- The foreign policy of Mary I, Mary Tudor, followed an expected pattern. Even before being crowned queen, Mary was known to be supportive of the…
- When Elizabeth became Queen in 1558 on the death of her half-sister Mary, England had a decent relationship with Spain. Mary’s marriage to Philip of… | 6,937 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Wyatt's Rebellion and the Battle of Wrotham
Queen Mary came to the throne in 1553 after the death of her young brother, Edward VI. While he had been a Protestant, Mary followed her mother's faith of Catholicism. Shortly after she became queen she announced her intention of marrying King Philip of Spain.
This was a very unpopular decision to a great many English people, and there was no shortage of conspirators who wanted Mary to change her mind.
Sir Thomas Wyatt of Allington Castle, near Maidstone, was one. His father, also named Thomas, had been a celebrated poet who had died in 1542, leaving his son to inherit his estates. Thomas the younger showed a wild streak from an early age. In 1543 he was briefly imprisoned for taking part in a London street riot. He later travelled a lot throughout Europe and had taken part in various military campaigns while abroad.
By 1549 he was back in Britain and put forward plans for a special military force which could quell civic disturbances. This particular scheme didn't reach fruition, but in 1551 he was made Sheriff of Kent and began to lay the foundations of his own personal militia.
On the accession of Queen Mary, he supported her cause despite the efforts of the Duke of Suffolk to place his daughter-in-law Lady Jane Grey on the throne. Wyatt proclaimed his support for Mary at Rochester.
But with Lady Jane Grey still in the Tower, Mary's betrothal to Philip of Spain became public knowledge and Wyatt began to change his allegiance. The conspirators met at the Duke of Suffolk's house in the capital. Wyatt didn't attend the first two meetings since, pre sumably, he may still have been considered to be one of Mary's supporters, but he was invited to the third meeting.
It was originally planned that insurrection should break out simultaneously in Leicestershire, the Welsh borders, the South West, and Kent. In the event, the plot was discovered and only Wyatt in Kent, with his own special forces, was in any way successful.
We are indebted to Peter Mayer and the Friends of Hartley Countryside for the following account of the local action, as well as the account of a contemporary figure, John Proctor, who was a school master at Sir Andrew Judde's School in Tonbridge - the present Tonbridge school. Proctor brought out an 'official' version of the rebellion in January 1555. This meant, naturally, that he supported the Queen.
The rebellion began in Kent on January 25. Wyatt proclaimed his cause at Maidstone on that day, but then moved his forces to Rochester. He waited for reinforcements in the shape of Sir Henry Isley and Anthony and William Knevett and their supporters in the west of the county. Isley and the Knevetts were in Tonbridge with 500 men, having raided the armoury of Sir Henry Sidney - a loyalist - at Penshurst Place. They wanted to march straight to Rochester, but were impeded by the queen 's forces, headed by Lord Abergavenny and the then Sheriff of Kent, Sir Robert Southwell, who were camped at Mailing. Instead the rebels marched on Saturday January 27 to Sevenoaks, where they roused the townsfolk and enlisted more support before moving towards Rochester.
Meanwhile, Abergavenny and his forces - who included George Clarke of Ford Place, Wrotham - were at Mailing, and had received a message in the middle of Saturday night that Isley and the Knevetts intended to meet up with Wyatt at Rochester, and that they also intended to burn George Clarke's house at Wrotham en route. Early on Sunday morning Abergavenny's forces marched to Wrotham Heath, and thence to Borough Green, where he sent out spies or scou ts to see if he could deter mine the whereabouts of the rebels.
When the scouts returned with news that the rebels were near at hand, Abergavenny sought to arrange his troops in battle order. Unfortunately for him, the rebels seem to have got wind of this, and turned left up towards Wrot ham Hill.
'The first sight that the Lord Abergavenny could have of them after they forsook their proposed way, was as they ascended Wrotham Hill directly over Yaldam, Mr Peckam's house, where they, thinking to have great advantage by the winning of the hill, displayed their engines bravely, seeming to be in a great ruffe. But it was not longer after or their courage abated, for Lord Abergavenny, the sheriff, and the rest of the gentlemen ... overtook the rebels at a field called Blackesoll Fielde in the parish of Wrotham, a mile distant from the very top of the hill, where the Lord Abergavenny, the Sheriff, the gentlemen aforesaid, and other of the Queen's true and faithful subjects handled them so hot and so fiercely that after a small shot with long bows by the traitors, and a fierce bragge shewed by some of the horsemen, they took their flight as fast as they could. Yet of them were taken prisoners above three score. In this conflict Warram Sentleger who brought with him a good company of soldiers, and always a serviceable gentleman) also George Clarke, Anthony Weldon and Richard Clarke with others did very honestly behave themselves.'
From this account it would appear t hat only 36 out of the estimated 500 rebels were taken prisoner. The rest appear to have escaped to take cover in Hartley Wood four miles further on. They were pursued there by the queen 's forces and there was another skirmish. More were taken prisoner- and some possibly killed. Edward Hasted in his 18th century History of Kent states that many rebels were killed in Hartley Wood and that about 60 were taken prisoner. Those who died on the battlefield were buried there, but enough men escaped under the leadership of Anthony Knevett and arrived at Rochester that night. Hasted and Proctor also state that Sir Henry Isley himself escaped and fled to Hampshire, where he was subsequently captured.
Meanwhile the Duke of Norfolk headed the queen's forces at Gravesend. At 10 pm that night he heard about the day's events, and the next day marched on Rochester. Unfortunately, his leadership doesn't appear to have been very popular, because on arrival at Rochester many of his soldiery decamped to Wyatt.
Wyatt set out for London on January 29. He took the usual rebels' route to Blackheath and encamped there. Queen Mary addressed the citizens of London at the Guildhall on February 1. She asked them for support and also offered a pardon to any of Wyatt's forces who would give themselves up. It was said that 20,000 men came to her aid. Whatever the exact number, the insurgents were forced to a halt at that usual rebels' stumbling place- London Bridge. Unable to cross over into the city there, they tried to circle the capital and enter it from the west at Kingston-upon-Thames. But the Earl of Pembroke was waiting there and, thoroughly disheartened, the rebellion crumbled.
Lady Jane Grey was executed in the early days of February, and Wyatt met the usual rebel's end on April111554- hanged, drawn and quartered. His limbs were distributed at various points around the city.
The future Good Queen Bess had cause to be grateful to him, how ever. While he was in the Tower awaiting death, various attempts were made to persuade him to implicate the young Princess Elizabeth, who was also imprisoned there at that time. Despite everything that his captors did to him, he steadfastly refused to implicate her. | <urn:uuid:063005b6-2ecd-4c9f-99bb-119bd0a4ec43> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.wrothamhistorical.org.uk/profile-event/wyatts-rebellion-and-the-battle-of-wrotham-7.php | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579251690379.95/warc/CC-MAIN-20200126195918-20200126225918-00033.warc.gz | en | 0.987491 | 1,592 | 3.578125 | 4 | [
-0.17021271586418152,
0.06504185497760773,
0.3180530369281769,
-0.0197866540402174,
-0.19124308228492737,
0.033247508108615875,
-0.0918993353843689,
-0.21695426106452942,
0.1900576651096344,
-0.053089652210474014,
-0.4756024479866028,
-0.5633897185325623,
-0.07800975441932678,
-0.073415793... | 3 | Wyatt's Rebellion and the Battle of Wrotham
Queen Mary came to the throne in 1553 after the death of her young brother, Edward VI. While he had been a Protestant, Mary followed her mother's faith of Catholicism. Shortly after she became queen she announced her intention of marrying King Philip of Spain.
This was a very unpopular decision to a great many English people, and there was no shortage of conspirators who wanted Mary to change her mind.
Sir Thomas Wyatt of Allington Castle, near Maidstone, was one. His father, also named Thomas, had been a celebrated poet who had died in 1542, leaving his son to inherit his estates. Thomas the younger showed a wild streak from an early age. In 1543 he was briefly imprisoned for taking part in a London street riot. He later travelled a lot throughout Europe and had taken part in various military campaigns while abroad.
By 1549 he was back in Britain and put forward plans for a special military force which could quell civic disturbances. This particular scheme didn't reach fruition, but in 1551 he was made Sheriff of Kent and began to lay the foundations of his own personal militia.
On the accession of Queen Mary, he supported her cause despite the efforts of the Duke of Suffolk to place his daughter-in-law Lady Jane Grey on the throne. Wyatt proclaimed his support for Mary at Rochester.
But with Lady Jane Grey still in the Tower, Mary's betrothal to Philip of Spain became public knowledge and Wyatt began to change his allegiance. The conspirators met at the Duke of Suffolk's house in the capital. Wyatt didn't attend the first two meetings since, pre sumably, he may still have been considered to be one of Mary's supporters, but he was invited to the third meeting.
It was originally planned that insurrection should break out simultaneously in Leicestershire, the Welsh borders, the South West, and Kent. In the event, the plot was discovered and only Wyatt in Kent, with his own special forces, was in any way successful.
We are indebted to Peter Mayer and the Friends of Hartley Countryside for the following account of the local action, as well as the account of a contemporary figure, John Proctor, who was a school master at Sir Andrew Judde's School in Tonbridge - the present Tonbridge school. Proctor brought out an 'official' version of the rebellion in January 1555. This meant, naturally, that he supported the Queen.
The rebellion began in Kent on January 25. Wyatt proclaimed his cause at Maidstone on that day, but then moved his forces to Rochester. He waited for reinforcements in the shape of Sir Henry Isley and Anthony and William Knevett and their supporters in the west of the county. Isley and the Knevetts were in Tonbridge with 500 men, having raided the armoury of Sir Henry Sidney - a loyalist - at Penshurst Place. They wanted to march straight to Rochester, but were impeded by the queen 's forces, headed by Lord Abergavenny and the then Sheriff of Kent, Sir Robert Southwell, who were camped at Mailing. Instead the rebels marched on Saturday January 27 to Sevenoaks, where they roused the townsfolk and enlisted more support before moving towards Rochester.
Meanwhile, Abergavenny and his forces - who included George Clarke of Ford Place, Wrotham - were at Mailing, and had received a message in the middle of Saturday night that Isley and the Knevetts intended to meet up with Wyatt at Rochester, and that they also intended to burn George Clarke's house at Wrotham en route. Early on Sunday morning Abergavenny's forces marched to Wrotham Heath, and thence to Borough Green, where he sent out spies or scou ts to see if he could deter mine the whereabouts of the rebels.
When the scouts returned with news that the rebels were near at hand, Abergavenny sought to arrange his troops in battle order. Unfortunately for him, the rebels seem to have got wind of this, and turned left up towards Wrot ham Hill.
'The first sight that the Lord Abergavenny could have of them after they forsook their proposed way, was as they ascended Wrotham Hill directly over Yaldam, Mr Peckam's house, where they, thinking to have great advantage by the winning of the hill, displayed their engines bravely, seeming to be in a great ruffe. But it was not longer after or their courage abated, for Lord Abergavenny, the sheriff, and the rest of the gentlemen ... overtook the rebels at a field called Blackesoll Fielde in the parish of Wrotham, a mile distant from the very top of the hill, where the Lord Abergavenny, the Sheriff, the gentlemen aforesaid, and other of the Queen's true and faithful subjects handled them so hot and so fiercely that after a small shot with long bows by the traitors, and a fierce bragge shewed by some of the horsemen, they took their flight as fast as they could. Yet of them were taken prisoners above three score. In this conflict Warram Sentleger who brought with him a good company of soldiers, and always a serviceable gentleman) also George Clarke, Anthony Weldon and Richard Clarke with others did very honestly behave themselves.'
From this account it would appear t hat only 36 out of the estimated 500 rebels were taken prisoner. The rest appear to have escaped to take cover in Hartley Wood four miles further on. They were pursued there by the queen 's forces and there was another skirmish. More were taken prisoner- and some possibly killed. Edward Hasted in his 18th century History of Kent states that many rebels were killed in Hartley Wood and that about 60 were taken prisoner. Those who died on the battlefield were buried there, but enough men escaped under the leadership of Anthony Knevett and arrived at Rochester that night. Hasted and Proctor also state that Sir Henry Isley himself escaped and fled to Hampshire, where he was subsequently captured.
Meanwhile the Duke of Norfolk headed the queen's forces at Gravesend. At 10 pm that night he heard about the day's events, and the next day marched on Rochester. Unfortunately, his leadership doesn't appear to have been very popular, because on arrival at Rochester many of his soldiery decamped to Wyatt.
Wyatt set out for London on January 29. He took the usual rebels' route to Blackheath and encamped there. Queen Mary addressed the citizens of London at the Guildhall on February 1. She asked them for support and also offered a pardon to any of Wyatt's forces who would give themselves up. It was said that 20,000 men came to her aid. Whatever the exact number, the insurgents were forced to a halt at that usual rebels' stumbling place- London Bridge. Unable to cross over into the city there, they tried to circle the capital and enter it from the west at Kingston-upon-Thames. But the Earl of Pembroke was waiting there and, thoroughly disheartened, the rebellion crumbled.
Lady Jane Grey was executed in the early days of February, and Wyatt met the usual rebel's end on April111554- hanged, drawn and quartered. His limbs were distributed at various points around the city.
The future Good Queen Bess had cause to be grateful to him, how ever. While he was in the Tower awaiting death, various attempts were made to persuade him to implicate the young Princess Elizabeth, who was also imprisoned there at that time. Despite everything that his captors did to him, he steadfastly refused to implicate her. | 1,629 | ENGLISH | 1 |
“They put the old valley to sleep,” one worker claimed during the transformation of the Sacandaga River Valley into the Great Sacandaga Lake in the 1920s.
It was a time when people thought they could do anything, when they believed they had power over nature and the elements, when they thought anything was possible.
In the late 1800s, the Hudson River flooded nearly every year, leaving death, disease and damage in its wake. In Albany, where the effects of this flooding were felt most, the lawmakers decided to do something about it.
To Control the Flow
They sent surveyors into the Adirondack Mountains to find out if there was a way to control the water. These surveyors discovered many rivers and creeks that emptied into the Hudson could be dammed.
Originally, the plan was conceived to create nearly 30 dams throughout the region to change the runoff pattern. The biggest of these was to be in a little hamlet called Conklingville, the narrow place where the Sacandaga River turned east to flow into the Hudson. After it was dammed, the need for the other dams was deemed unnecessary.
The surveyors mapped every inch of the valley to find out how high the water would rise when dammed. The state formed the Hudson River Regulating District and put the project in its hands.
A Peaceful Valley
The Sacandaga Valley was a peaceful place. It had many farms and hamlets where residents cut lumber, built furniture and went about their lives. There were several bridges. Those at Osborn Bridge and Fish House were covered bridges. There was the Great Vlaie where everyone from Sir William Johnson to author Robert W. Chambers fished and hunted. There was an amusement park owned by the Fonda, Johnstown and Gloversville Railroad, a popular getaway.
This didn’t matter because people downstate needed to stop the flooding. The local electrical power company could use the control of the river to generate electricity and income.
In the 1920s, the district began buying homes and businesses. Owners had no choice under eminent domain. They could buy their homes back for $1 and move them if they chose.
It wasn’t just homes, businesses and churches that had to go or be moved. Gravesites had to be moved. Workers located the graves, dug them up and moved them to other cemeteries.
The district had to move roads out of the water’s path. Workers had to pull down trees and burn them. All the while, the dam project was under way.
Some towns would lose much of their land. Other settlements disappeared under the water entirely. Some people always would hate the district.
The Sacandaga Reservoir could have been opened before March 27, 1930. One organization was powerful enough to fight. The FJ&G Railroad brought a lawsuit to keep its tracks and to keep Sacandaga Park open. The company lost and began tearing up the railroad to move it.
According to Edinburg Town Historian Priscilla Edwards, “By the early 1920s the handwriting was on the wall, a dam was to be built and the valley to be flooded, many more people moved away knowing they would lose their homes anyway. On March 27, 1930 the gates on the Conklingville Dam were closed and by 1931 what had once been a beautiful river valley with the many communities along its banks was lost forever as the Sacandaga Reservoir was created.”
Later, the reservoir became a tourist attraction and today little thought is given to the hamlets beneath the water. That is until the water is low and some of the ghostly streets become visible. | <urn:uuid:d0255964-dfbf-406c-a2fd-03c5104eae86> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://worldhistory.us/american-history/flooding-of-sacandaga-valley.php | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250626449.79/warc/CC-MAIN-20200124221147-20200125010147-00381.warc.gz | en | 0.987928 | 763 | 3.34375 | 3 | [
-0.2154887467622757,
0.2249036431312561,
0.20667454600334167,
0.37843042612075806,
-0.11400370299816132,
-0.21514064073562622,
0.1138976663351059,
0.008752601221203804,
-0.5186296701431274,
0.1406998336315155,
-0.003342205658555031,
0.06994645297527313,
0.07757450640201569,
0.1096977740526... | 5 | “They put the old valley to sleep,” one worker claimed during the transformation of the Sacandaga River Valley into the Great Sacandaga Lake in the 1920s.
It was a time when people thought they could do anything, when they believed they had power over nature and the elements, when they thought anything was possible.
In the late 1800s, the Hudson River flooded nearly every year, leaving death, disease and damage in its wake. In Albany, where the effects of this flooding were felt most, the lawmakers decided to do something about it.
To Control the Flow
They sent surveyors into the Adirondack Mountains to find out if there was a way to control the water. These surveyors discovered many rivers and creeks that emptied into the Hudson could be dammed.
Originally, the plan was conceived to create nearly 30 dams throughout the region to change the runoff pattern. The biggest of these was to be in a little hamlet called Conklingville, the narrow place where the Sacandaga River turned east to flow into the Hudson. After it was dammed, the need for the other dams was deemed unnecessary.
The surveyors mapped every inch of the valley to find out how high the water would rise when dammed. The state formed the Hudson River Regulating District and put the project in its hands.
A Peaceful Valley
The Sacandaga Valley was a peaceful place. It had many farms and hamlets where residents cut lumber, built furniture and went about their lives. There were several bridges. Those at Osborn Bridge and Fish House were covered bridges. There was the Great Vlaie where everyone from Sir William Johnson to author Robert W. Chambers fished and hunted. There was an amusement park owned by the Fonda, Johnstown and Gloversville Railroad, a popular getaway.
This didn’t matter because people downstate needed to stop the flooding. The local electrical power company could use the control of the river to generate electricity and income.
In the 1920s, the district began buying homes and businesses. Owners had no choice under eminent domain. They could buy their homes back for $1 and move them if they chose.
It wasn’t just homes, businesses and churches that had to go or be moved. Gravesites had to be moved. Workers located the graves, dug them up and moved them to other cemeteries.
The district had to move roads out of the water’s path. Workers had to pull down trees and burn them. All the while, the dam project was under way.
Some towns would lose much of their land. Other settlements disappeared under the water entirely. Some people always would hate the district.
The Sacandaga Reservoir could have been opened before March 27, 1930. One organization was powerful enough to fight. The FJ&G Railroad brought a lawsuit to keep its tracks and to keep Sacandaga Park open. The company lost and began tearing up the railroad to move it.
According to Edinburg Town Historian Priscilla Edwards, “By the early 1920s the handwriting was on the wall, a dam was to be built and the valley to be flooded, many more people moved away knowing they would lose their homes anyway. On March 27, 1930 the gates on the Conklingville Dam were closed and by 1931 what had once been a beautiful river valley with the many communities along its banks was lost forever as the Sacandaga Reservoir was created.”
Later, the reservoir became a tourist attraction and today little thought is given to the hamlets beneath the water. That is until the water is low and some of the ghostly streets become visible. | 768 | ENGLISH | 1 |
The Salem witch trials were a dark moment in our nation's history. It was a time when innocent people were accused of practicing witchcraft, and those who didn't confess to this, they were hanged. This horrible tragedy of 1600's Salem was captured brilliantly by playwright Arthur Miller in his critical success, "The Crucible." In his play, he successfully chronicles the hysteria that overtook this small village, and through it's dialogue, demonstrated just how far people may go to protect their morals and beliefs. .
Some of the accused were so persecuted and tormented that began to believe they were actually guilty of practicing witchcraft and went so far as to confess to their "crimes." Others held onto the knowledge that they were innocent and these individuals were executed; and died with integrity. In Miller's play, "The Crucible," the words of John Proctor, Rebecca Nurse, and Elizabeth Proctor demonstrate how far a man or woman with integrity will go to defend their innocence. .
John Proctor is the husband of Elizabeth Proctor, who is condemned to death for the accusation of witchcraft. Miller explains through this novel that there are false accusations and terrible situations that happen every day. People must get involved right away and should not have to be forced into the situation to protect others from falsehood. Individuals should stand up for what they believe in and should be proud to tell the truth. .
The death scene of John Proctor illuminates this theme that Miller has illustrated. Whenever the witch trials initially began Proctor did not want to get involved with the proceedings, even though he had information that could have dismissed all the accusations of witchcraft. When Proctor's wife is accused of witchcraft this is when he becomes involved in the trials. He does everything in his power to deny the claims that his wife practices witchcraft. He goes too far when Mary accuses him of wanting to overthrow the court and so Danforth throws Proctor in jail. | <urn:uuid:0c9b89aa-9313-4c54-a522-b1b23ec69161> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | https://www.exampleessays.com/viewpaper/201529.html | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250610919.33/warc/CC-MAIN-20200123131001-20200123160001-00421.warc.gz | en | 0.989318 | 391 | 3.328125 | 3 | [
-0.2391975224018097,
0.5588675737380981,
0.09437602013349533,
0.12644325196743011,
-0.1342061311006546,
0.26810571551322937,
0.6725637316703796,
0.04932175576686859,
-0.029744818806648254,
-0.20691366493701935,
-0.3627876341342926,
0.12744273245334625,
-0.49623408913612366,
0.3714717626571... | 2 | The Salem witch trials were a dark moment in our nation's history. It was a time when innocent people were accused of practicing witchcraft, and those who didn't confess to this, they were hanged. This horrible tragedy of 1600's Salem was captured brilliantly by playwright Arthur Miller in his critical success, "The Crucible." In his play, he successfully chronicles the hysteria that overtook this small village, and through it's dialogue, demonstrated just how far people may go to protect their morals and beliefs. .
Some of the accused were so persecuted and tormented that began to believe they were actually guilty of practicing witchcraft and went so far as to confess to their "crimes." Others held onto the knowledge that they were innocent and these individuals were executed; and died with integrity. In Miller's play, "The Crucible," the words of John Proctor, Rebecca Nurse, and Elizabeth Proctor demonstrate how far a man or woman with integrity will go to defend their innocence. .
John Proctor is the husband of Elizabeth Proctor, who is condemned to death for the accusation of witchcraft. Miller explains through this novel that there are false accusations and terrible situations that happen every day. People must get involved right away and should not have to be forced into the situation to protect others from falsehood. Individuals should stand up for what they believe in and should be proud to tell the truth. .
The death scene of John Proctor illuminates this theme that Miller has illustrated. Whenever the witch trials initially began Proctor did not want to get involved with the proceedings, even though he had information that could have dismissed all the accusations of witchcraft. When Proctor's wife is accused of witchcraft this is when he becomes involved in the trials. He does everything in his power to deny the claims that his wife practices witchcraft. He goes too far when Mary accuses him of wanting to overthrow the court and so Danforth throws Proctor in jail. | 397 | ENGLISH | 1 |
At the bottom of the feudal system were the common people, who neither had the extensive right to own properties nor a voice in feudal society. They lived around and, in most cases, worked for the manor. These common folks were alternately called peasants and a number of them toiled the fields of the nobility. Because of the harsh conditions they were often subjected to, it was not uncommon for peasants to rebel against their owners. Although not all peasants were in abject misery and some were relatively freer than the others, for the most part, Medieval peasants led difficult and brutish lives.
A medieval serf had no rights and was a low level peasants who worked on a Barons Land, Medieval serfs did not own any land and could be sold with the Barons land that they were working on. Read more about the Medieval Serf >>
A medieval Villein was very poor, in a similar peasantry class to medieval serf. Villeins had no rights and worked very hard, if land was sold the Villein would be sold with it. Read more about the Medieval Villein >>
The Medieval yeoman was a large social class of such peasants who rose in social influence through the acquisition of large tracts of land. Typically, a yeoman owned at least 100 acres or more of land. Read more about the Medieval Yeoman >>
Serfdom refers to the practice of common people becoming beholden to a feudal lord and necessitated to pay him in labour or cash in return for his protection and land Read more about the Serfdom >>
What were Medieval Peasants?
The difference between Medieval Slaves, Serfs and Freemen?
What Types of work did Medieval Peasants do?
How many medieval people were classed as peasantry and what were their jobs?
Did some medieval peasants have more rights than other medieval peasants?
Slaves, Serfs and Freemen
Historians divided peasants into three categories
Each category of peasant differs from the other in the sense that while some enjoyed a considerable amount of freedom, others were more underprivileged or had more duties to attend to.
Slaves were the most disadvantaged population. They were treated as properties of the nobility they served and were frequently bought or sold like common goods. They worked hard for their masters, who owned not only the land under their feet but also the fruits of their labour. Slaves and serfs could not marry as they please. Marriage would only be valid if the landlord gave his approval.
Serfs were common people. Though not as badly treated as slaves, they likewise did not enjoy a sufficient amount of freedom. Moreover, they needed the permission of their lord to be able to travel from one place to another. If in more than a year they managed to escape without getting caught, serfs could eventually become freemen. Small business owners may fall under this category.
As the name itself would imply, a freeman was also a kind of peasant. What set him apart from slaves and serfs was that he had no master and was free to live his life. Freemen were not beholden to a lord or worked in his manor. In effect, they were free to enter and exit lands whenever they wanted to.
“A peasant becomes fond of his pig and is glad to salt away its pork. What is significant, and is so difficult for the urban stranger to understand, is that the two statements are connected by an and not by a but” – John Berger Peasant
Medieval Peasants dancing to Medieval Music
Medieval Peasants – Medieval Serfs
Though they seem to fall under the same category, in reality peasants and serfs have different conceptual foundations in the Medieval vocabulary. All serfs were peasants but not all peasants were serfs. In other words, “peasant" was an umbrella term used to define the common people in the Middle Ages while a serf was one of three types of peasants, the others being slaves and freemen.
Serfs exhibited similarities with slaves but unlike the latter, they could neither be bought nor sold. They had to ask permission from their local lord to be able to leave their land. The noble owned both the fields and their harvests. Serfs could also take on a variety of jobs and there were jobs that they had to complete in a fixed period of time such as ploughing the fields. Law and custom demanded that they work on their master’s fields, consequently harvesting and gathering the crops that grew there. Peasants were also required to collect firewood, winnow grains and mow and stack hay in their home. One point that causes some confusion is that serfs could be sold on with the land they worked on but not sold like slaves.
From farmer, blacksmith and tax collector to carpenter and baker, a serf may assume any of these stations in accordance with the lord’s instructions. To some extent, as cited above, serfs were permitted to buy their freedom. Rarely could serfs actually free themselves through this method in view of their disadvantaged circumstances. Since they were mostly uneducated and untrained, serfs had to escape and hide their whereabouts for more than a year so they could return as freemen. Freemen were not tied to manors so they could come and go as they pleased. Some even managed to set up shop and become business owners in due time.
There were three groups of Peasantry categories in medieval times serfs, slaves and freemen
Serfs could not be sold but could be sold as a package with the lords land but slaves could be sold directly.
Serfs were better of than slaves and freemen were better off than Serfs
A Serf had more rights than a peasant slave and some were allowed to buy their freedom
A Serf could become a freeman by hiding for a year but would be severely punished if caught
Medieval Peasants Busy Working On a Farm
The Life of Medieval Peasants
The nobility exerted a vast amount of power over lay men and women, in England and throughout Europe. Peasants were made to swear an oath of fealty to their local lord and, thus, beholden to him in every aspect of their lives. The most important job for peasants which they had to complete at a fixed period of time was ploughing. Law and custom demanded that they work on their master’s fields, consequently harvesting and gathering the crops that grew there. Peasants were also required to collect firewood, winnow grains and mow and stack hay in their living quarters.
Life of a Peasant, Taxes “The Tithe”
The life of a peasant was riddled with tax payments. Besides paying rent to the lord, who regularly levied taxes, peasants also had to pay another type of tax “The Tithe". The tithe required peasants to pay 10 percent of their annual farm yield to the church. To complete the terms and conditions of the tithe, peasants may remit cash or send the fruits of their labour to the church. Many peasants dreaded the day they had to pay this tax, which reduced a great chunk of their income and benefited only a privileged few.
Daily Life of a Medieval Peasant
Peasants generally got up just before sunrise to say their morning prayers. The reeve, otherwise known as the manor supervisor, would then assign tasks for the day. Wives mostly stayed at home, tending to the chores (e.g. milking cows, cooking, washing, feeding livestock, weeding the garden, picking vegetables, weaving cloths or getting water from the well). Peasant children worked with their mothers and school was out of the question.
At a certain age, boys would have to join their fathers on the fields or wherever their stations were. Typical dinner consisted of stew, black bread and, every now and then, cheese. Peasants resided in wooden houses, plastered with wattle and daub, called Cruck houses, these humble peasant abodes were built by adding straw, mud and manure to a sturdy wooden frame. The life of a peasant did have its fair share of challenges. Peasants still played a vital role in the feudal system despite their apparent marginalisation. They were merely victims of an inflexible system that unfortunately lasted for many centuries. By becoming freemen, they were able to redeem themselves and raise their status in life.
Medieval Peasants under the watch of a Medieval Reeve
Medieval Peasants Work
Medieval Peasants worked the land and were classed as medieval farmers, some medieval peasants were fortunate enough to own a small parcel of land but most medieval peasants were just labourers. Medieval peasants were a large part of the medieval population. There were many lower class people in medieval times that made up the bulk of the population and most of them had different roles in medieval society. Some medieval peasants would have a large plot of land to cultivate for themselves such as Villeins who would usually pay his dues and offer his services to the medieval lord. Medieval Serfs on the other hand would not be granted their own land and would have to work on the Lords land usually 3 days a week and longer during busy times of the year such as harvest and when cultivating the land.
Peasants had to swear an oath of fealty to a Lord which was a pledge of his allegiance to the Lord
Ploughing the lords fields was the main job of the medieval peasant and they usually had to work to set time limits
Peasants although they were not wealthy had to pay many taxes called a”Tithe”.
The Tithe had very strict terms that insisted that a medieval peasant also give cash or produce to the church as a taxation
Most Medieval peasants lived in mud and straw houses that, they were plastered with wattle and daub and called Cruck houses
Medieval Serfs were peasants who worked his Lord’s land and paid him certain dues in return for the use of land, the possession (not the ownership) of the land. The dues were usually in the form of labour on the lord’s land. Medieval Serfs were expected to work for approximately 3 days each week on the lord’s land as. A serf was one bound to work on a certain estate, and thus attached to the soil, and sold with it into the service of whoever purchases the land.
Medieval Peasants in Anglo Saxon Times Ploughing a Field
Serfs usually lived in manors (small communities) and did a wide range of jobs that helped to improved and maintain the manors, most medieval peasants in Medieval times could be classed as Serfs. As with other lower level people in Medieval Times they answered to the Lord of the Manor and were under the Lord’s control, if they wanted to leave the Manor or get married for example they would only be allowed to do so if they got authorisation from the Lord of the Manor.
Medieval peasant Serfs were semi free peasants just like Villeins who worked on a wide range of jobs in the Manor and could be men, women and children, they worked very hard often together in the fields and provided all the essentials needed for daily life such as firewood, food, clothes etc. They maintained the buildings too, they would share the workload and use their different skills to get the job done. Serfs were also allocated small land holdings which they could work and were able to buy their freedom if they were able to save enough money, one of the greatest achievements of a Serf was to become a Freeman.
Serfs if they stayed in favour with the Lord and worked his land well could inherit the use of the land which could be passed down to sons and daughters, however they would not own the land but would have the rights to work the land. A Serf was similar but better off than a Medieval slave as he had to give around 3 days of labour every week to work a Lords land this was called a “Corvee”.
Medieval Serfd were frowned upon by upper levels in the Feudal system like Commoners, they were usually uneducated, unsophisticated unread people such as farm labourers and as a result of their lack of education and standing in society, medieval Peasant families usually became trapped in the medieval Peasant category.
Medieval peasants were medieval farmers who were granted land to cultivate by the a medieval Lord
Most Medieval Peasants were called serfs or Villeins and worked in medieval manors and villages
Medieval Peasants had to provide free labour, some of his produce or both to the Lord for use of this land
Under the Feudal system in European peasants were divided into three classes according to there social status: slave, serf and freeman
Medieval peasants were not well educated and were usually born in slavery, just as the nobles were born into nobility.
Medieval serfs had an opportunity to improve their status and could become freemen in medieval society
The Black death that killed a large portion of the population led to the decline of slaves and serfdom as there was not so many peasants to choose from
Because of a lower supply of peasants due to the black death. peasants had more choice of who they worked for and their standards of living improved.
Villeins were at the top of the hierarchy of medieval peasants and were classed as partially free men under the Feudal system, they could own large plots of land 40 acres or more . A Villein was quite wealthy by Medieval peasant standards and could own several large plots of land which they were allowed to cultivate. Medieval Villeins had to serve the lord but apart from this they were free people with all the privileges of free men.
Cottagers – Medieval Peasants
Cottagers were medieval peasants who were deemed to be of a lower class, Cottagers did not have any land but they did have somewhere to live – a cottage – which is where the name cottager came from.
The Commoner – Medieval Peasant
Considered to be one of the lowest class of people in Medieval Times, a Commoner medieval peasant would typically own land jointly with other commoners and because they did not belong to any Nobility they were often frowned upon by other people at a higher level in the Feudal system.
Other Medieval People within the Peasantry Class
Medieval Steward’s & Medieval Peasants
Stewards had very important jobs in Medieval times and were very well paid important people as they were in charge of running a castle in the absence of a Lord, the Steward was basically what we would call a deputy manager and took overall control for the efficient running of a Castle. A Lord would need to have a lot of trust in a Steward as they had to organise any work in a Castle and were also in control of the Estates money in the Lords absence.
A Medieval Bailiff’s Role
Bailiffs were also quite powerful people who owned their own land and as such were known as freeholders. The role of a Bailiffs was one of delegation like the Stewards, but they were in charge of allocating jobs to different peasants, looking after livestock and maintaining the buildings by hiring the correct craftsmen for the problem that needed fixing, they were pretty much like modern day estate managers.
A Reeve – The Bailiffs Enforcer
Working along side the bailiff a Reeve was the representative of the villager peasants and acted as a go between. Usually a tough and intimidating character with a white stick a Reeve would make sure that work began on time and was also entrusted with keeping an eye on the workers and making sure that nothing was stolen from the Lord.
Other Medieval Peasant Workers
Burgess Medieval Peasant – A Freeman of the Borough
Was a freeman of a borough which meant that he owned land or a property within a borough. The name came from the Old French Word Burgeis which just meant the inhabitant of a town.
Labourers – Medieval Peasants
Unskilled workers who usually had physical jobs usually classed as Serfs.
Hinds – Medieval Peasants who worked the Farm
Medieval Farm workers who had important roles in growing food but where not very high in the Feudal system (See Serfs)
Medieval Peasants – Maids
There were various maids in Medieval Times such as a Scullery maid or a ladies Maids. A lady’s maid’s had to be available more or less all of the time for her mistress, usually from the time that the maid woke, the maid would help to dress and get the Lady ready for the day, she also needed to keep the Lady’s rooms and personal items clean and in good repair. The maid was basically the Lady’s servant and would usually be young, unmarried and female.
Medieval Peasants Scullery Maid is plucking a Pheasant bird
Medieval Peasants – Scullery Maid
A scullery maid had quite a hard life in that they were expected to do all the hard physical jobs in an important households kitchen, they helped the Kitchen maids and were usually the youngest members of the kitchen staff given such wonderful jobs as scouring floors, pots and dishes amongst other items .
The scullery maid would report to the Main Chef or Cook and was always required to stay in the kitchen area to keep an eye on the food and to make sure there was plenty of fresh clean vegetables available and to do other menial jobs such as scaling fish, the Scullery maid was even expected to eat in the Kitchen in fact a major portion of her life would have been spent in a busy demanding Kitchen.
Medieval Peasants – Cook
The Cook had an important role in the household and prepared and cooked the food for the Lord, Lady and people depending on the situation the Cook was in, there was not much in the way of convenience foods at the time so everything had to be cooked from scratch and cooking meals was a very labour intensive job.
Medieval Peasants – Servants
Servants were also classed as peasants, they would often work in the Manor House and carry out any duties that were needed by the Lord of the Manor Cooking, cleaning, laundering, and many different household chores were completed by servants.
In conclusions life would have been fairly good if your were a Peasant in the Middle ages if you were a higher class of peasant such as a Villein or a Bailiff as you would have had some land and a decent standard of living, however not all people in Peasantry had it so good and if you were a slave like a labourer life could have been pretty tough. We hope you enjoyed reading this article on medieval peasants, if you would like to learn about medieval peasants in even more detail please click on the images at the top of this medieval peasants page, or click the links below on medieval serfs, slaves, villeins etc | <urn:uuid:51d28597-f2aa-46e6-8589-535e1a195d68> | CC-MAIN-2020-05 | http://www.medievalchronicles.com/medieval-people/medieval-peasants/ | s3://commoncrawl/crawl-data/CC-MAIN-2020-05/segments/1579250599718.13/warc/CC-MAIN-20200120165335-20200120194335-00011.warc.gz | en | 0.989525 | 3,944 | 3.953125 | 4 | [
-0.21089854836463928,
0.29293665289878845,
-0.2775643467903137,
-0.0866604894399643,
0.1901531219482422,
-0.20571959018707275,
0.07041117548942566,
-0.46343356370925903,
0.04387257248163223,
0.033509451895952225,
-0.19626280665397644,
-0.18925386667251587,
0.4632728695869446,
0.15416212379... | 5 | At the bottom of the feudal system were the common people, who neither had the extensive right to own properties nor a voice in feudal society. They lived around and, in most cases, worked for the manor. These common folks were alternately called peasants and a number of them toiled the fields of the nobility. Because of the harsh conditions they were often subjected to, it was not uncommon for peasants to rebel against their owners. Although not all peasants were in abject misery and some were relatively freer than the others, for the most part, Medieval peasants led difficult and brutish lives.
A medieval serf had no rights and was a low level peasants who worked on a Barons Land, Medieval serfs did not own any land and could be sold with the Barons land that they were working on. Read more about the Medieval Serf >>
A medieval Villein was very poor, in a similar peasantry class to medieval serf. Villeins had no rights and worked very hard, if land was sold the Villein would be sold with it. Read more about the Medieval Villein >>
The Medieval yeoman was a large social class of such peasants who rose in social influence through the acquisition of large tracts of land. Typically, a yeoman owned at least 100 acres or more of land. Read more about the Medieval Yeoman >>
Serfdom refers to the practice of common people becoming beholden to a feudal lord and necessitated to pay him in labour or cash in return for his protection and land Read more about the Serfdom >>
What were Medieval Peasants?
The difference between Medieval Slaves, Serfs and Freemen?
What Types of work did Medieval Peasants do?
How many medieval people were classed as peasantry and what were their jobs?
Did some medieval peasants have more rights than other medieval peasants?
Slaves, Serfs and Freemen
Historians divided peasants into three categories
Each category of peasant differs from the other in the sense that while some enjoyed a considerable amount of freedom, others were more underprivileged or had more duties to attend to.
Slaves were the most disadvantaged population. They were treated as properties of the nobility they served and were frequently bought or sold like common goods. They worked hard for their masters, who owned not only the land under their feet but also the fruits of their labour. Slaves and serfs could not marry as they please. Marriage would only be valid if the landlord gave his approval.
Serfs were common people. Though not as badly treated as slaves, they likewise did not enjoy a sufficient amount of freedom. Moreover, they needed the permission of their lord to be able to travel from one place to another. If in more than a year they managed to escape without getting caught, serfs could eventually become freemen. Small business owners may fall under this category.
As the name itself would imply, a freeman was also a kind of peasant. What set him apart from slaves and serfs was that he had no master and was free to live his life. Freemen were not beholden to a lord or worked in his manor. In effect, they were free to enter and exit lands whenever they wanted to.
“A peasant becomes fond of his pig and is glad to salt away its pork. What is significant, and is so difficult for the urban stranger to understand, is that the two statements are connected by an and not by a but” – John Berger Peasant
Medieval Peasants dancing to Medieval Music
Medieval Peasants – Medieval Serfs
Though they seem to fall under the same category, in reality peasants and serfs have different conceptual foundations in the Medieval vocabulary. All serfs were peasants but not all peasants were serfs. In other words, “peasant" was an umbrella term used to define the common people in the Middle Ages while a serf was one of three types of peasants, the others being slaves and freemen.
Serfs exhibited similarities with slaves but unlike the latter, they could neither be bought nor sold. They had to ask permission from their local lord to be able to leave their land. The noble owned both the fields and their harvests. Serfs could also take on a variety of jobs and there were jobs that they had to complete in a fixed period of time such as ploughing the fields. Law and custom demanded that they work on their master’s fields, consequently harvesting and gathering the crops that grew there. Peasants were also required to collect firewood, winnow grains and mow and stack hay in their home. One point that causes some confusion is that serfs could be sold on with the land they worked on but not sold like slaves.
From farmer, blacksmith and tax collector to carpenter and baker, a serf may assume any of these stations in accordance with the lord’s instructions. To some extent, as cited above, serfs were permitted to buy their freedom. Rarely could serfs actually free themselves through this method in view of their disadvantaged circumstances. Since they were mostly uneducated and untrained, serfs had to escape and hide their whereabouts for more than a year so they could return as freemen. Freemen were not tied to manors so they could come and go as they pleased. Some even managed to set up shop and become business owners in due time.
There were three groups of Peasantry categories in medieval times serfs, slaves and freemen
Serfs could not be sold but could be sold as a package with the lords land but slaves could be sold directly.
Serfs were better of than slaves and freemen were better off than Serfs
A Serf had more rights than a peasant slave and some were allowed to buy their freedom
A Serf could become a freeman by hiding for a year but would be severely punished if caught
Medieval Peasants Busy Working On a Farm
The Life of Medieval Peasants
The nobility exerted a vast amount of power over lay men and women, in England and throughout Europe. Peasants were made to swear an oath of fealty to their local lord and, thus, beholden to him in every aspect of their lives. The most important job for peasants which they had to complete at a fixed period of time was ploughing. Law and custom demanded that they work on their master’s fields, consequently harvesting and gathering the crops that grew there. Peasants were also required to collect firewood, winnow grains and mow and stack hay in their living quarters.
Life of a Peasant, Taxes “The Tithe”
The life of a peasant was riddled with tax payments. Besides paying rent to the lord, who regularly levied taxes, peasants also had to pay another type of tax “The Tithe". The tithe required peasants to pay 10 percent of their annual farm yield to the church. To complete the terms and conditions of the tithe, peasants may remit cash or send the fruits of their labour to the church. Many peasants dreaded the day they had to pay this tax, which reduced a great chunk of their income and benefited only a privileged few.
Daily Life of a Medieval Peasant
Peasants generally got up just before sunrise to say their morning prayers. The reeve, otherwise known as the manor supervisor, would then assign tasks for the day. Wives mostly stayed at home, tending to the chores (e.g. milking cows, cooking, washing, feeding livestock, weeding the garden, picking vegetables, weaving cloths or getting water from the well). Peasant children worked with their mothers and school was out of the question.
At a certain age, boys would have to join their fathers on the fields or wherever their stations were. Typical dinner consisted of stew, black bread and, every now and then, cheese. Peasants resided in wooden houses, plastered with wattle and daub, called Cruck houses, these humble peasant abodes were built by adding straw, mud and manure to a sturdy wooden frame. The life of a peasant did have its fair share of challenges. Peasants still played a vital role in the feudal system despite their apparent marginalisation. They were merely victims of an inflexible system that unfortunately lasted for many centuries. By becoming freemen, they were able to redeem themselves and raise their status in life.
Medieval Peasants under the watch of a Medieval Reeve
Medieval Peasants Work
Medieval Peasants worked the land and were classed as medieval farmers, some medieval peasants were fortunate enough to own a small parcel of land but most medieval peasants were just labourers. Medieval peasants were a large part of the medieval population. There were many lower class people in medieval times that made up the bulk of the population and most of them had different roles in medieval society. Some medieval peasants would have a large plot of land to cultivate for themselves such as Villeins who would usually pay his dues and offer his services to the medieval lord. Medieval Serfs on the other hand would not be granted their own land and would have to work on the Lords land usually 3 days a week and longer during busy times of the year such as harvest and when cultivating the land.
Peasants had to swear an oath of fealty to a Lord which was a pledge of his allegiance to the Lord
Ploughing the lords fields was the main job of the medieval peasant and they usually had to work to set time limits
Peasants although they were not wealthy had to pay many taxes called a”Tithe”.
The Tithe had very strict terms that insisted that a medieval peasant also give cash or produce to the church as a taxation
Most Medieval peasants lived in mud and straw houses that, they were plastered with wattle and daub and called Cruck houses
Medieval Serfs were peasants who worked his Lord’s land and paid him certain dues in return for the use of land, the possession (not the ownership) of the land. The dues were usually in the form of labour on the lord’s land. Medieval Serfs were expected to work for approximately 3 days each week on the lord’s land as. A serf was one bound to work on a certain estate, and thus attached to the soil, and sold with it into the service of whoever purchases the land.
Medieval Peasants in Anglo Saxon Times Ploughing a Field
Serfs usually lived in manors (small communities) and did a wide range of jobs that helped to improved and maintain the manors, most medieval peasants in Medieval times could be classed as Serfs. As with other lower level people in Medieval Times they answered to the Lord of the Manor and were under the Lord’s control, if they wanted to leave the Manor or get married for example they would only be allowed to do so if they got authorisation from the Lord of the Manor.
Medieval peasant Serfs were semi free peasants just like Villeins who worked on a wide range of jobs in the Manor and could be men, women and children, they worked very hard often together in the fields and provided all the essentials needed for daily life such as firewood, food, clothes etc. They maintained the buildings too, they would share the workload and use their different skills to get the job done. Serfs were also allocated small land holdings which they could work and were able to buy their freedom if they were able to save enough money, one of the greatest achievements of a Serf was to become a Freeman.
Serfs if they stayed in favour with the Lord and worked his land well could inherit the use of the land which could be passed down to sons and daughters, however they would not own the land but would have the rights to work the land. A Serf was similar but better off than a Medieval slave as he had to give around 3 days of labour every week to work a Lords land this was called a “Corvee”.
Medieval Serfd were frowned upon by upper levels in the Feudal system like Commoners, they were usually uneducated, unsophisticated unread people such as farm labourers and as a result of their lack of education and standing in society, medieval Peasant families usually became trapped in the medieval Peasant category.
Medieval peasants were medieval farmers who were granted land to cultivate by the a medieval Lord
Most Medieval Peasants were called serfs or Villeins and worked in medieval manors and villages
Medieval Peasants had to provide free labour, some of his produce or both to the Lord for use of this land
Under the Feudal system in European peasants were divided into three classes according to there social status: slave, serf and freeman
Medieval peasants were not well educated and were usually born in slavery, just as the nobles were born into nobility.
Medieval serfs had an opportunity to improve their status and could become freemen in medieval society
The Black death that killed a large portion of the population led to the decline of slaves and serfdom as there was not so many peasants to choose from
Because of a lower supply of peasants due to the black death. peasants had more choice of who they worked for and their standards of living improved.
Villeins were at the top of the hierarchy of medieval peasants and were classed as partially free men under the Feudal system, they could own large plots of land 40 acres or more . A Villein was quite wealthy by Medieval peasant standards and could own several large plots of land which they were allowed to cultivate. Medieval Villeins had to serve the lord but apart from this they were free people with all the privileges of free men.
Cottagers – Medieval Peasants
Cottagers were medieval peasants who were deemed to be of a lower class, Cottagers did not have any land but they did have somewhere to live – a cottage – which is where the name cottager came from.
The Commoner – Medieval Peasant
Considered to be one of the lowest class of people in Medieval Times, a Commoner medieval peasant would typically own land jointly with other commoners and because they did not belong to any Nobility they were often frowned upon by other people at a higher level in the Feudal system.
Other Medieval People within the Peasantry Class
Medieval Steward’s & Medieval Peasants
Stewards had very important jobs in Medieval times and were very well paid important people as they were in charge of running a castle in the absence of a Lord, the Steward was basically what we would call a deputy manager and took overall control for the efficient running of a Castle. A Lord would need to have a lot of trust in a Steward as they had to organise any work in a Castle and were also in control of the Estates money in the Lords absence.
A Medieval Bailiff’s Role
Bailiffs were also quite powerful people who owned their own land and as such were known as freeholders. The role of a Bailiffs was one of delegation like the Stewards, but they were in charge of allocating jobs to different peasants, looking after livestock and maintaining the buildings by hiring the correct craftsmen for the problem that needed fixing, they were pretty much like modern day estate managers.
A Reeve – The Bailiffs Enforcer
Working along side the bailiff a Reeve was the representative of the villager peasants and acted as a go between. Usually a tough and intimidating character with a white stick a Reeve would make sure that work began on time and was also entrusted with keeping an eye on the workers and making sure that nothing was stolen from the Lord.
Other Medieval Peasant Workers
Burgess Medieval Peasant – A Freeman of the Borough
Was a freeman of a borough which meant that he owned land or a property within a borough. The name came from the Old French Word Burgeis which just meant the inhabitant of a town.
Labourers – Medieval Peasants
Unskilled workers who usually had physical jobs usually classed as Serfs.
Hinds – Medieval Peasants who worked the Farm
Medieval Farm workers who had important roles in growing food but where not very high in the Feudal system (See Serfs)
Medieval Peasants – Maids
There were various maids in Medieval Times such as a Scullery maid or a ladies Maids. A lady’s maid’s had to be available more or less all of the time for her mistress, usually from the time that the maid woke, the maid would help to dress and get the Lady ready for the day, she also needed to keep the Lady’s rooms and personal items clean and in good repair. The maid was basically the Lady’s servant and would usually be young, unmarried and female.
Medieval Peasants Scullery Maid is plucking a Pheasant bird
Medieval Peasants – Scullery Maid
A scullery maid had quite a hard life in that they were expected to do all the hard physical jobs in an important households kitchen, they helped the Kitchen maids and were usually the youngest members of the kitchen staff given such wonderful jobs as scouring floors, pots and dishes amongst other items .
The scullery maid would report to the Main Chef or Cook and was always required to stay in the kitchen area to keep an eye on the food and to make sure there was plenty of fresh clean vegetables available and to do other menial jobs such as scaling fish, the Scullery maid was even expected to eat in the Kitchen in fact a major portion of her life would have been spent in a busy demanding Kitchen.
Medieval Peasants – Cook
The Cook had an important role in the household and prepared and cooked the food for the Lord, Lady and people depending on the situation the Cook was in, there was not much in the way of convenience foods at the time so everything had to be cooked from scratch and cooking meals was a very labour intensive job.
Medieval Peasants – Servants
Servants were also classed as peasants, they would often work in the Manor House and carry out any duties that were needed by the Lord of the Manor Cooking, cleaning, laundering, and many different household chores were completed by servants.
In conclusions life would have been fairly good if your were a Peasant in the Middle ages if you were a higher class of peasant such as a Villein or a Bailiff as you would have had some land and a decent standard of living, however not all people in Peasantry had it so good and if you were a slave like a labourer life could have been pretty tough. We hope you enjoyed reading this article on medieval peasants, if you would like to learn about medieval peasants in even more detail please click on the images at the top of this medieval peasants page, or click the links below on medieval serfs, slaves, villeins etc | 3,864 | ENGLISH | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.